evaluation of fao’s contribution to the islamic …country programme evaluation series evaluation...

OFFICE OF EVALUATION

Country programme evaluation series

Evaluation of FAO’s contribution to the

Islamic Republic of Pakistan

2012-2017

November 2017

COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION SERIES

Evaluation of FAO’s contribution to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

2012-2017

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONSOFFICE OF EVALUATION

November 2017

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Office of Evaluation (OED)

This report is available in electronic format at: http://www.fao.org/evaluation

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO.

© FAO 2017

FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded and printed for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the source and copyright holder is given and that FAO’s endorsement of users’ views, products or services is not implied in any way.

All requests for translation and adaptation rights, and for resale and other commercial use rights should be made via www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request or addressed to [email protected].

For further information on this report, please contact:

Director, Office of Evaluation (OED)Food and Agriculture OrganizationViale delle Terme di Caracalla 1, 00153 RomeItalyEmail: [email protected]

Cover photo credits: @FAO/ FAO Pakistan, ©FAO/Farooq Naeem (4th picture top to bottom)

http://www.fao.org/evaluation

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


iii

Contents

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................viAcronyms & Abbreviations .........................................................................................................................vii

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................1

1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................7

1.1 Purpose of the evaluation ............................................................................................7

1.2 Scope and objective of the evaluation .....................................................................7

1.3 Evaluation questions ......................................................................................................8

1.4 Methodology ...................................................................................................................9

1.5 Limitations ......................................................................................................................11

1.6 Structure of the report ................................................................................................11

2. FAO in Pakistan ...................................................................................................................12

2.1 Pakistan context ...........................................................................................................12

2.2 FAO’s programme in Pakistan ................................................................................. 20

2.3 FAO’s Country Programming Framework ............................................................. 22

3. Assessment of FAO’s strategic positioning .............................................................. 24

3.1 FAO’s Strategic relevance ...........................................................................................24

3.1.1 Policy support .......................................................................................................24

3.1.2 Institutional support and devolution ............................................................25

3.2 Partnership and coordination ...................................................................................27

3.2.1 Operational partnerships .................................................................................27

3.2.2 Strategic partnerships .......................................................................................28

3.2.3 United Nations partnerships ...........................................................................28

3.3 Normative dimensions of FAO’s work .................................................................... 30

3.3.1 Support to poor and vulnerable populations ............................................ 30

3.3.2 Support to rural women ...................................................................................31

3.4 FAO’s comparative advantage ..................................................................................33

3.4.1 Mandate to act ....................................................................................................33

3.4.2 Position to act.................................................................................................... 34

3.4.3 Capacity to act ................................................................................................... 34

4. Assessment of FAO’s contributions ............................................................................ 36

4.1 FAO’s contributions to Cluster A .............................................................................. 36

4.1.1 Food security monitoring and assessment ................................................. 36

4.1.2 Coordination of nutrition programmes (SUN) ............................................37

4.1.3 Zero Hunger Programme ................................................................................. 38


iv

4.2 FAO’s contributions to Cluster B ................................................................................ 38

4.2.1 National and provincial policy development ............................................. 38

4.2.2 Sustainable Development Goals ................................................................... 39

4.2.3 Sector-wide and thematic reports and assessments .............................. 39

4.2.4 Integrated natural resource management ................................................ 40

4.2.5 Irrigation and water management ............................................................... 40

4.3 FAO’s contributions to Cluster C ...............................................................................41

4.4 FAO’s contributions to Cluster D ............................................................................. 46

4.5 FAO’s contributions to Cluster E .............................................................................. 50

4.5.1 Transboundary Animal Diseases.....................................................................51

4.5.2 Livestock support in emergency and rehabilitation ................................ 54

5. Conclusions and recommendations ........................................................................... 56

5.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 56

5.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 58

6. Appendices ......................................................................................................................... 60

Appendix 1. People interviewed ...................................................................................... 60

Appendix 2. Agro-ecological zones in Pakistan ........................................................... 66

7. List of Annexes ................................................................................................................... 68


v

Figures and Tables

Figures

Figure 1: Number of people undernourished ................................................................17

Figure 2: FAO Pakistan Resource Partners .....................................................................21

Tables

Table 1: Outcome Clusters ...................................................................................................10

Table 2: Old and new federal ministries ..........................................................................13

Table 3: Summary of Pakistan’s development indicators ...........................................14

Table 4: Estimated provincial GDPs and related indicators, 2014-15 ......................16

Table 5: FAO Field Programme Approvals and Delivery .............................................21

Table 6: FAO Projects by Strategic Objective 2012-17 ................................................ 22

Table 7: Government policy interventions vs. structural challenges .......................25

Table 8: Summary of local organizations and service providers ...............................43

Table 9: Distribution of organized beneficiaries across the Project area .............. 44

Table 10: Number of Farmer Marketing Collectives across six districts ..................45

Table 11: Challenges, Government and FAO actions and results in TAD control in Pakistan .................................................................................................................52


vi

Acknowledgements

The FAO Office of Evaluation would like to thank all those who contributed to this evaluation. The evaluation team, led by Omar Awabdeh, Evaluation Officer, consisted of Dr Tariq Husian (Economist and Rural Development expert), Dr Sajidin Hussain (Agriculture and Climate Change expert), Ms Umm e Zia (Gender and Livelihoods expert); the team was ably supported by Mr Mikal Khan, Evaluation Analyst. Special thanks go to Mr Patrick Evens, who was FAO Representative during most of the evaluation process, and Ms Mina Dowlatchahi, the new FAO Representative, Mr Francisco Gamarro, the Deputy FAO Representative, and Mr Nasar Hayat, the Assistant Representative – Head of Programme. They always warmly welcomed and supported the evaluation despite our many visits and data requests and provided invaluable insights, knowledge and advice.

We would also like to acknowledge key stakeholders from the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, particularly H.E. Mr Sikandar Hayat Khan Bosan, Federal Minister for National Food Security and Research and the ministry team, in addition to all the Secretary Chiefs, Director Generals and Project Officers in all Provinces for their generosity, openness and valuable insights.

We cannot acknowledge here all those from FAO Pakistan who contributed to this evaluation but would like to express our particular gratitude to: Mr Zabeeh Ahmed, Assistant FAO Representative (Administration) and his team, Mr Raffaele Del Cima and his team in Peshawar and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Mr Marcel Stallen and his team in Balochistan, Mr Banaras Khan and his team and Mr Asif Ali Shah, the Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist.

Many FAO staff at headquarters and the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) supported the evaluation process, sharing material and information and taking the time for in interviews and workshops. Our appreciation is extended in particular to Mr Daniel Shallon, the Regional Country Programming Coordinator in the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) for his coordination role to align the Country Programme Evaluation with the Country Programme Framework formulation process.

The evaluation team is also grateful for all the logistics and administrative support provided by Ms Sarah Jaff, who makes the impossible happen and still with a smile on her face.


vii

Acronyms & Abbreviations

AusABBA Australian Assistance to Agricultural Development in Balochistan Border Areas

BAP Balochistan Agriculture Project

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FATA Federally Administered Tribal Areas

FIRST Food and Nutrition Security Impact, Resilience, Sustainability and Transformation

FMD Foot and Mouth Disease

FSN Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition

HLV Hazard, Livelihoods and Vulnerability

INFORMED Information on Food Security, Nutrition and Resilience for Deci-sion Making project

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

PPR Peste des Petits Ruminants

SPA Strategic Priority Area

SUN Scaling Up Nutrition

SUPARCO Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission

TAD Transboundary Animal Disease


viii


1

Executive Summary

Introduction

1 This evaluation represents the first comprehensive, independent evaluation of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ (FAO’s) country programme in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The evaluation was conducted at the request of the Federal Minister for National Food Security and Research, with the support of FAO’s Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.

Purpose

2 The purpose of the evaluation is to provide inputs to the FAO country office and the Government of Pakistan to better orient FAO’s approach, strategy and programme in Pakistan, and to align FAO’s approach to the needs of the country. The evaluation supports FAO accountability to the government and non-government partners, communities and resource partners in the country, as well as all member countries, by assessing FAO’s contribution to Pakistan’s achievement of its development goals. It will also draw lessons and make recommendations for FAO’s future engagement in the country.

3 The evaluation provides advice to FAO management and staff at the national, regional and headquarters levels on how to improve the impact and relevance of the Pakistan programme. The evaluation also identifies potential areas for the next Country Programme Framework (CPF 2018-2022) in line with FAO’s comparative advantages.

Key findings

4 Strategic relevance: For the period 2012–2017, FAO’s programme addressed challenges that were important to small-scale farmers and contributed to government priorities, particularly on shifting from subsistence to market-oriented farming and safeguarding agriculture production in areas affected by floods. FAO’s contribution to the institutional, regulatory and policy challenges was less evident.

5 Partnership and coordination: In Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan, Balochistan and the flood-affected districts in Sindh, FAO’s approach of direct implementation in collaboration with provincial departments has leveraged FAO’s quality and timely assistance but there is a need for provincial level partnerships that are broader than project-level scope.

6 Comparative advantages of FAO: FAO’s activities to promote agricultural development followed an extension agent approach – with projects engaged directly with farmers and government extension departments. While this approach yielded good short to medium-term results, there is a need to focus more on the upstream enabling environment through agribusiness investment planning and sector-wide analysis.

7 Normative work: FAO’s Balochistan projects were balanced equally among the largest ethno-linguistic groups of Balochistan (the Baloch and the Pashtuns). In Sindh, FAO worked with resource-poor, food-insecure and vulnerable farming households affected by recurring floods, with equal treatment of men, women and minorities. In FATA, FAO supported unregistered temporarily displaced persons.

8 Normative work: FAO’s women-focused activities in Sindh, Balochistan and FATA (e.g. kitchen gardening, poultry and livestock) empowered vulnerable women by increasing their purchasing power, and contributed to improving their socio-economic status and increased nutritional status of the family.


2

9 Programme contributions: FAO’s interventions on food security were limited in scope and coverage. FAO’s interactions within the One UN Nutrition Network were isolated from project designs and implementation.

10 Programme contributions: FAO’s policy-oriented interventions followed a very informative and consultative process. Their impact was limited, however, as the supported national and provincial policies were not linked to earmarked national/provincial budget allocations. Although there was an abundance of studies, analyses and assessments for evidence-based policy-making in Pakistan, they were underutilized by decision-makers.

11 Programme contributions: FAO’s interventions in Balochistan developed and refined a strong production model over time – stronger for crops than livestock – which led to higher incomes and more resilient livelihoods on a significant scale. This enabled beneficiaries to to embark on agribusinesses and market development.

12 Programme contributions: FAO’s approach to restoring agriculture-based livelihoods in FATA and flood-affected areas contributed to improved absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacities. FAO has not yet integrated responses to climate change into its programme.

13 Programme contributions: FAO’s interventions on transboundary animal diseases were effective and efficient, and Pakistan is on track to eradicate the Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR). Further research, awareness raising and strategies are needed.

14 Programme contributions: Key factors in the programme’s outcome level results included: an emphasis on organizing men and women into community organizations for market-oriented agriculture; promoting integrated natural resource management (iNRM) as a guiding principle for sector-wide management; and applying the human security framework for agriculture rehabilitation.

Conclusions

Conclusion 1. The devolution process has introduced new challenges and opportunities to FAO in terms of its responsiveness and delivery mechanisms.

15 FAO has not yet fully understood the cost of operating under the devolution. FAO’s collaboration with the provincial Governments has been good and institutionally diverse in the implementation of field programmes. There was less collaboration at the policy level, especially in Punjab, which is the largest agricultural producer. FAO’s efforts at grassroots development were also more effective and widespread in Sindh, Balochistan and FATA than in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).

16 Although FAO is still predominantly centered in Islamabad, almost all other United Nations agencies have opened sub-offices in each province to support the new devolved ministries and the related service delivery. In line with the constitutional amendment, provincial governments strategize, plan and manage their own resources autonomously from the federal government, including food security and nutrition that are also nationwide issues. Each provincial government has its own plan or vision and is actively working on policy development and implementation.

17 FAO’s devolution in Pakistan is necessary in order to work more closely with the counterparts that have the mandate and resources. So far, FAO has project offices in three locations (Quetta, Peshawar and Multan), and recently closed an office in Sukkur (Sindh) upon completion of the project. Opening and sustaining provincial offices will allow FAO to provide systematic technical support and influence decision-making although it requires some resources for sustaining office structure.


3

Conclusion 2. FAO worked toward improving the livelihoods of small-scale farmers. It should also work to modernize regulations and policies to create an enabling environment for sustainable agricultural development in Pakistan.

18 FAO’s approach in Pakistan has been dominated largely by an extension agent approach to agriculture modernization and value chain development, rather than sector investment planning and economic analysis (with the exception of the recent activities in Balochistan). Investment planning, supply-chain strengthening and market development are particularly important given that FAO is striving to facilitate a shift in Pakistan from subsistence farming systems to market-oriented agriculture. The key challenges facing small-scale farmers in accessing quality markets and engaging effectively in value-addition are related to the enabling environment (e.g. public infrastructure, regulations, policies and political interest). The evaluation found that many partners perceived the FAO programme in Pakistan as opportunistic and driven by donor interests. However, there were many critical needs and areas of specialization in Pakistan’s agriculture for which FAO is best suited to take the lead, and that are overlooked by both donors and governments.

19 The programme addressed challenges that were important to small-scale farmers and the regions in which FAO worked, particularly in shifting from subsistence farming to market-oriented farming, and safeguarding and restoring agriculture production in areas affected by floods. The programme considered some of the most significant local needs and responded with suitable interventions for good agriculture practices, irrigation development, input supply and new crop varieties. Despite being well-positioned to engage in more strategic agriculture-related sectors, FAO has yet to incorporate into its programme key structural challenges in the agriculture sector such as agriculture subsidies, trade, industries, rural transformation, land tenure and market development (as well as the more persistent issue of FATA reform and the possible merge with KP). While recognizing FAO’s excellent track record in supporting grassroots development (small-scale farmers), FAO would need to transform and expand its partnerships and delivery mechanisms, build on its core competencies and address institutional and regulatory structurally important challenges.

Conclusion 3. Throughout its programme, FAO assisted the most vulnerable districts and communities, and emphasized impartiality with ethno-linguistic groups, minorities and unregistered temporarily displaced persons. The organization also supported and empowered rural women, but did not effectively target youth.

20 Rural youth in Pakistan plays a very important role in the political, economic and social development of the country. Despite FAO’s global knowledge in empowering youth through agriculture, however, FAO Pakistan does not have a programmatic focus on engaging youth in agriculture.

Conclusion 4. Pakistani policymakers are presented with many studies, assessments and reports on the agriculture sector. FAO is the organization best suited to synthesize the findings and recommendations on vulnerabilities and SDG tracing for policymakers.

21 On an annual basis, dozens of agriculture-related studies and assessments are published by national and international partners, some with conflicting messages. The Pakistani policymakers have expressed their frustration and the challenge they face in extracting reliable evidence to inform policy formulation.

22 FAO actively participated in various needs assessments and action plans (at the regional, provincial and national levels) and introduced a methodology for a Hazard, Livelihoods and Vulnerability (HLV) baseline. The HLV is a useful tool for district governments, United Nations agencies, NGOs and civil society for effective disaster response. It could contribute directly to district DRM planning, and act as a baseline for contingency planning during the post-emergency response and recovery. The evaluation team found that numerous national and international partners produced numerous diverse HLV assessments, which varied in scope and quality. This made it difficult for the Government to absorb the material and act appropriately.


4

23 FAO has a strong mandate in relation to the SDGs. It is a custodian agency for 21 SDG indicators1, for which it is responsible for compiling data from countries while also supporting national capacities for data collection. FAO’s work directly contributes to 25 SDG indicators while providing indirect contributions to several others. There are seven SGDs directly related to agriculture and natural resource management (e.g. SDG 1, 2, 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15), plus another four addressed as cross-cutting (SGD 5, 7, 8, and 17). FAO has been active within a One UN umbrella, as well as the SDG consultations in Pakistan. However, the organization has not found the best approach to supporting federal and provincial governments to articulate targets and indicators, with clear plans of action for the many SDGs that fall under the purview of FAO’s mandate. UNDP, however, has assumed responsibility for improving the capacity development of SDG projects throughout the country. During the CPE visit to Karachi, UNDP had organized an awareness raising workshop on SDGs. FAO was invited, but missed the opportunity to participate in the workshop.

Conclusion 5. Climate change is a pressing issue for Pakistan, and FAO’s work on climate change is post-disaster focused, less on prevention and adaptation. More expert inputs on climate change and a broader partnership framework are needed.

24 The most significant hazards in Pakistan are climate change-related floods, followed by droughts and cyclones. Earthquakes are also considered hazards, though they are relatively rare in Pakistan. In addition, the northern mountainous regions are threatened by high frequency but low impact events such as flash floods, landslides and avalanches. The World Bank/Asian Development Bank flood and damage needs assessment estimated that the flooding in 2010 alone affected over 20 million people and caused estimated losses of over USD 10 billion2.

25 Forging effective partnerships to address the challenges posed by climate change is essential. FAO’s apex partner in Pakistan is the Ministry of National Food Security and Research. However, other key partnerships at federal level were weak and focused around protocol, such as the Ministry of Climate Change (the coordinating authority for Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF)), the Planning Development and Reform Department, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Industries and Production, as well as Prime Ministers’ office and Parliamentarians. Each of these ministries present FAO with new opportunities, platforms and avenues to increase and improve the organization’s technical assistance.

Conclusion 6. A strong foundation has been laid for control of transboundary animal diseases in Pakistan. Further progress toward eradication will require an increased understanding of these diseases (epidemiology) and substantial planning (including budgetary), in addition to a regional approach with neighbouring countries.

26 The transboundary animal diseases in Pakistan, other than FMD and PPR, are not fully covered at present. These include hemorrhagic septicemia in large ruminants, and sheep and goat pox and contagious caprine pleuropneumonia in small ruminants. Activities to control FMD and PPR present valuable opportunities to collect more data on and provide control of these other TADs, as well as endemic diseases such as brucellosis. A broad approach to TADs control also improves capacity to respond quickly to new TADs that threaten or invade the country’s livestock, such as Lumpy Skin Disease, which has recently emerged from Africa to infect West Asia and Southwest Europe, as well as Rift Valley Fever in the Arabian Peninsula.

27 Disease control is just one component of a healthier and more economically successful livestock sector, which farmers, livestock professionals and others agree is beset by numerous other constraints. Only a well-informed Federal Animal Health Commissioner’s office will be able to convince the Provincial and Regional Directors of Livestock and Dairy Development Department to agree on and drive forward policies in line with a national vision. It is also well recognized that such visions and policies need to be built on livestock data in order to build evidence-based planning and budgeting for long-term national goals. It should be noted that the Government of Punjab has recently published a livestock policy for the province, and one is being prepared in KP.

1 FAO and the SDGs, 2017 (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6919e.pdf )

2 GoP/ADB/WB (2010): Pakistan Floods 2010 Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment

http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6919e.pdf


5

Recommendations

Recommendation 1:

FAO should explore options for establishing effective partnerships and delivery mechanisms to position its programme and operations in response to the devolution.

Suggested actions:

• Convert the existing project offices to permanent provincial level offices, while learning from similar experiences of other United Nations agencies;

• Explore the possibility with provincial governments or donors to fund provincial level offices;

• Facilitate inter-provincial cooperation and exchange initiatives for government technical staff;

• Establish periodic consultation sessions with the provincial governments chaired by the FAOR.

Recommendation 2:

FAO, together with the Ministry of National Food Security and Research, should include in the next CPF, a programmatic response to the key structural challenges in the agriculture sector, such as agriculture subsidies, trade, industries, rural transformation, land tenure and market development (and the more persistent issue of the FATA reform and the possible merge with KP).

Suggested actions:

• Pilot the iNRM approach and actively advocate with provincial governments to adopt iNRM as the sector-wide management approach;

• Initiate a dialogue and advocate for a comprehensive update and reform of the outdated acts and regulations that govern the agriculture sector (such as seeds, land tenure, fertilizer, trade and water pricing), with the goal of increasing production sustainably and bringing socio-economic benefits;

• To gain more influence in policy reforms, expand partnerships with the Planning Development and Reform Department, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Industries and Production, Bureau of Revenue, Prime Ministers’ Office and Parliamentarians;

• Make better use of the relevant FAO global products and services in Pakistan, such as the VGGTs, Codex, statistics and climate smart agriculture.

Recommendation 3:

In the next CPF, FAO should support providing rural youth with entrepreneurial opportunities in agriculture by creating a conducive environment for the value addition of agriculture products.

Suggested actions:

• Partner with the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund, universities and NGOs to provide capacity development, incubation services and small grants to youth groups, in order to engage them in agricultural development.

Recommendation 4:

In order to present well-informed and evidence-based policy options, in the next CPF FAO should focus on its core competencies, including policy analysis and synthesis of the various assessments conducted by national and international partners.

Suggested actions:

• Undertake micro-climatic studies and update the profile and status of Pakistan’s agro-ecological zones;


6

• Synthesize the multiple Hazard, Livelihoods and Vulnerability (HLV) assessments to identify development trends and appropriate response plans;

• Integrate SDG-focused interventions into the national development plans.

Recommendation 5: To FAO

In the next CPF, FAO should have a long-term programme on livestock development and animal health, with the aim of creating synergies among existing interventions and exploring new areas of work, including inter-country collaboration.

Suggested actions:

• FAO and the Government should develop a ten-year or longer programme to build on the successes of recent TADs projects and to maintain delivery of the technical components;

• Establish an epidemiology and economics “Strategy Unit” to help develop and drive the national strategies for FMD and PPR;

• Explore a partnership with FAO Afghanistan to jointly work on border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan, as these areas are known livestock corridors.

• Broaden the consultations for livestock interventions beyond animal health stakeholders to include production, feed and marketing actors and partners.


7

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose of the evaluation

1 The purpose of the evaluation was to provide inputs to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) country office and the Government of Pakistan to better orient FAO’s approach, strategy and programme in Pakistan, making FAO more relevant to the needs of the country. It assists in gauging FAO’s work in terms of its accountability to the government and non-government partners, communities and resource partners in the country, as well as all member countries, by assessing FAO’s contribution to Pakistan’s achievement of its development goals. The evaluation seeks to draw lessons and make recommendations for FAO’s future engagement in the country. In addition to providing lessons specifically on FAO’s work in Pakistan, the evaluation also enriches FAO’s synthesis of findings and guidance for its country-level support.

2 The evaluation provides advice to FAO management and staff at the national, regional and headquarters levels on how to improve the impact and relevance of FAO’s programme, and identifies potential areas for the next Country Programme Framework (CPF 2018-2022) in line with FAO’s comparative advantage.

3 The main audience for the evaluation, to which most of the lessons and recommendations are addressed, are the FAO Representative and the representation staff. Other important users of the evaluation and possible recipients of recommendations are the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) and the relevant divisions in headquarters. To a lesser extent, other country offices and FAO as a whole could also benefit and build on lessons learned and good practices. Further users of the evaluation are FAO’s partners within the broader development community, including resource partners, non-governmental organization (NGOs), implementing partners and other United Nations agencies, in particular those with whom strategic interventions were identified in the context of the third One UN Programme. Although not a target group for the evaluation report itself, the evaluation also aspires to provide elements to assess accountability with respect to rural farming communities in Pakistan that FAO has sought to assist.

4 Since the adoption of the Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness, the international community has given increasing attention to country ownership of the development process. In this spirit, the evaluation focused on the participation of national partners, in particular the Government at provincial and federal levels, to ensure the appropriation of the evaluation results by the relevant national institutions.

1.2 Scope and objective of the evaluation

5 The evaluation assessed the totality of the Organization’s assistance provided to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, irrespective of the source of funding. This included activities funded through the regular programme as well as extra-budgetary resources; national, regional and global projects and initiatives; and emergency and development interventions. The Country Programme Evaluation (CPE) will not focus on single projects, but rather assess FAO’s overall contribution to development changes in Pakistan, in particular (but not only) in the priority areas defined in the CPF including advocacy, partnership mobilization and governance.

6 The evaluation examined five main clusters of the FAO Pakistan work programme, namely:

i the One UN Joint Programmes, focusing on outcomes from the Strategic Priority Areas (SPAs) on food security assessments, Scaling Up Nutrition, monitoring and sector coordination;

ii support on agricultural policies, strategies and systems (national and provincial);

iii resilience and emergencies (climate change and disaster risk reduction) focusing on early warning systems, prevention and mitigation measures;


8

iv support for the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods focusing on the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Balochistan and Sindh;

v animal health and veterinary services.

7 Further, the evaluation carried out within the scope of Pakistan’s national priorities on agriculture, as outlined in the 11th Five Year Plan (2013-2018) and FAO’s Strategic Objectives (SO) and Core Functions. As the objectives and activities carried out by FAO in Pakistan are relevant to all five Strategic Objectives, the evaluation will pay particular attention to strategic alignment with and possible contribution to these Strategic Objectives, and to the way they interact in practice.

8 The specific objectives of the CPE are to:

• assess the strategic relevance of FAO’s contributions and interventions in responding to the country’s needs and national development goals;

• assess the strategic relevance of the CPF (FAO’s country strategy) and the impact of the CPF on FAO’s ability to deliver a stronger contribution to change in the country;

• assess the strategic relevance and possible contributions of FAO’s work and role in Pakistan over the past five years vis-a-vis FAO’s global Strategic Framework;

• assess achievements of the work programme in terms of results identified in the CPF under the four priority areas;

• identify lessons learned as well as causes of successes and failures;

• identify gaps or weaknesses in FAO’s country strategy and programme and potential areas of future work.

1.3 Evaluation questions

Strategic positioning: Are we doing what is needed?

Strategic relevance• Has FAO been addressing the most acute and structurally important challenges in

Pakistan in line with the areas of FAO’s competence?

• To what extent is FAO’s programme aligned with relevant national development plans, strategies and policies - in particular with the Government’s ability to achieve its development goals? Are there any gaps or missed opportunities?

• In view of the Devolution, with agriculture, food security and nutrition and water management being included in the regional/provincial mandate, how effective has the FAO representation in Pakistan been in responding to the needs of both federal and provincial authorities under this new government structure? How does this affect FAO’s work in Pakistan vis-à-vis staffing, funding, procedures? What are the constraints and opportunities this creates?

Partnership and coordination• How effectively did FAO engage in partnerships and to what extent were these

partnerships complementary and synergetic? And to what extent has FAO contributed to the capacity development of community organizations and non-state actors?

• Has participation in the One UN joint programmes, Food Security Cluster/working groups and Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) contributed toward enhancing FAO’s capacity to achieve the desired results? To what extent has FAO supported the coordination of actors working in the agricultural development and food security and nutrition sectors?

Normative values• To what extent has FAO taken into account UN normative values and principles such as

equity, human rights and targeting the most vulnerable communities and localities in the design of its programme and during the implementation?

• To what extent have FAO beneficiaries (men and women) accepted, adopted and


9

upscaled any of the innovations developed?

• To what extent has FAO contributed to women’s economic empowerment along the value chain?

• How has FAO succeeded in equally improving the livelihoods of men and women?

Comparative advantage• What role has FAO played vis-à-vis other development actors (national and local

government, civil society, the private sector, and other international development partners) and did it draw from its own comparative advantages?

Programme contribution: Are we making a difference?• What were FAO’s contributions to the support on agricultural policies, action plans and

information systems (national and provincial)?

• What were FAO’s contributions to resilience building and emergency response (climate change and disaster risk reduction) focusing on early warning systems, prevention and mitigation measures?

• What were FAO’s contributions to support the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods, focusing on the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, Balochistan and Sindh?

• What were FAO’s contributions to improving animal health and veterinary services?

• What were FAO’s contributions to the agriculture sector’s productivity and profitability (income generation and value addition)?

Sustainability of results• To what extent have the changes that were generated been sustainable?

• To what extent were the results owned by beneficiaries?

• Have livelihoods been affected by results in the medium- and long-term, and how?

Coherence and synergies• To what extent have FAO’s global and regional initiatives provided coherent and/or

complementary support in view of achieving the CPF results?

• To what extent has FAO headquarters and the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) represented an added value, particularly in terms of technical support?

• Has FAO’s knowledge base (normative products, guidelines, publications, etc.) been effectively used at country level in the areas of FAO’s comparative advantage?

1.4 Methodology

9 The Country Programme Evaluation sought to assess the broad relevance of FAO: whether or not it played its role in a strategic manner; and the extent to which its programme was coherent with national needs. It also sought to examine closely the links between lessons learned from the programme at project, strategic and policy levels. The evaluation reviewed the results, partnerships forged at federal and provincial levels, and the degree of capacity development and resilience achieved.

10 To gather information, the team developed a comprehensive stakeholders’ mapping identifying outcome-level stakeholders, output-level stakeholders and the direct beneficiaries.3 Following the stakeholder mapping, a full-scale data collection plan was implemented via semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions and key informants, using open-ended question sets developed based on the evaluation questions.

11 The evaluation team comprised two Office of Evaluation (OED) staff as team leaders and evaluation managers, and three senior national consultants (experts in policy development, climate change and disaster risk reduction, and resilience and livelihoods).

3 The stakeholders’ mapping was extended to include non-beneficiaries, stakeholders from outside the agriculture sector and other institutions that support rural development, trade and community mobilization.


10

12 The team undertook comprehensive field visits in Islamabad (20 days), Sindh (14 days), Panjab (6 days), KP/FATA (11 days) and Balochistan (6 days), meeting over 100 stakeholders and 300 direct and indirect beneficiaries in various villages and districts. A full list of interviewees and field visits is available in Appendix 1.

13 The team reviewed secondary data including past FAO evaluations,4 One UN programme evaluation and reviews,5 donor assessments and evaluations.6

14 The evaluation team could not use the CPF exclusively as an evaluation framework: although the CPF rightly identified the broad areas of work for FAO in Pakistan, the programmatic focus was not clear. For example, food insecure situations were under two separate CPF priority areas (chronic and acute). Hence, for the output level assessments the evaluation team used thematic clusters based on the FAO project portfolio, and for the outcome contribution assessment the evaluation team used a combination of long-term outcomes from the Pakistan Five Year Plan7 and the FAO Strategic Objective structure. As this evaluation framework deviated from the CPF priority areas, it was discussed and validated with the FAO country office.

15 The evaluation team constructed six Outcome Clusters to be used as the evaluation framework. Moreover, the evaluation team analysed the relevant macro country level changes and collected evidence and causal linkages to attribute the changes to the FAO programme contributions. Table 1 describes the five Outcome Clusters:

Table 1: Outcome Clusters

Cluster Outputs (FAO project portfolio)

Outcomes (FAO Strategic Objectives)

Contributions (National Priorities)

Cluster A One UN, focusing on outcomes from the SPAs on food security assessments, SUN, monitoring and sector coordination

SO1 (Outcome 1 – Outputs 1 and 2)

Achieve self-reliance in essential food commodities.

Cluster B Support on agricultural policies, strategies and systems (national and provincial)

SO2 (Outcome 1 – Outputs 1 and 2)

Improve quality of growth by adopting a strategy which is pro-poor, pro-small farmer and pro-environment.

Cluster C Balochistan projects SO4 (Outcome 2 – Outputs 1 and 3)

Expand exports and agro-business potential.

Average growth rate of 4%-5% per annum to support overall growth strategy of the government.

Cluster D Resilience and emergencies (climate change and disaster risk reduction) focusing the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods focusing on FATA, Balochistan and Sindh

SO5 (Outcome 1 and 3) Improve resilience against climatic changes and shocks.

Cluster E Animal health portfolio 50% SO2 and 50% SO5 Strengthening Animal and plant health inspection system.

16 In an attempt to measure resilience qualitatively, the evaluation team used a capacity development approach to assess the programme impacts around absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacity.

4 FAO Earthquake Response Evaluation 2009, FAO Flood Response Evaluation 2011 and the FMD Project Evaluation.

5 UN OP-II Review 2016 and ILO project evaluation of OSRO/PAK/206/UNO - Livelihood Restoration and Protection and Sustainable Empowerment of Vulnerable Peasant Communities in Sindh Province (2016).

6 USAID and AusAid Balochistan projects’ assessments (2016) and Department for International Development-funded Livelihood Recovery Interventions in Areas Affected by 2012 Floods (2015).

7 Extracted from the Pakistan Five Year Plan (http://pc.gov.pk/web/yearplan).

http://pc.gov.pk/web/yearplan


11

17 At the core of FAO’s strategic positioning was FAO’s comparative strength and strategic relevance in Pakistan; to assess the strategic positioning the Country Programme Evaluation team identified three key drivers:

• mandate to act, drawn from FAO’s global knowledge and core competencies;

• position to act, drawn from FAO’s past experiences and strategic partnerships;

• capacity to act, drawn from FAO’s delivery capacity (human and financial).

1.5 Limitations

18 The evaluation team could not gain access to multiple locations in FATA and Balochistan due to security concerns. The team conducted focus group discussions in Peshawar with the FATA stakeholders and in Quetta with the Balochistan stakeholders.

19 The evaluation team could not undertake quantitative studies (household surveys) as a national census was ongoing in early 2017; thus other household surveys were prohibited.

1.6 Structure of the report

20 The report follows the template of the Office of Evaluation (OED) and contains four key sections: Chapter 1 is the Introduction, which covers the evaluation purpose, scope, objectives, methodology and limitations; Chapter 2, FAO in Pakistan, covers the country context and FAO programme; Chapter 3 addresses the assessment of FAO’s strategic positioning and covers strategic relevance, partnerships, normative work, women’s empowerment and comparative advantage; and; Chapter 4 addresses the assessment of FAO’s contributions.


12

2. FAO in Pakistan

21 FAO has been working with Pakistan since it became a member country just three weeks after partition in 1947. FAO’s work in the country focuses on supporting improvements in agricultural policy analysis, strengthening institutions, enhancing integrated area development and expanding participation of marginalized and vulnerable communities in sustainable development, as well as emergency response, post-crisis recovery and resilience building. A wide range of capacity development has been provided in support of individual farmers, community organizations, service providers and government staff. The Organization’s activities in Pakistan are aligned and contribute to the national priorities outlined in the National Five Year development plan, Pakistan Vision 2025, Pakistan Scaling Up Nutrition documents, multi-sectoral Policy Guidance Notes, National Zero Hunger Programme, sustainable livelihood and Nutrition framework, and National Agriculture and Food Security policy.8

22 The main technical counterpart for FAO in Pakistan is the Ministry of National Food Security and Research, which also pays all assessed contributions and attends FAO Council, Conference and the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) Ministerial meetings. Furthermore, the FAO offices are hosted on the premises of the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, which answers to the Ministry of National Food Security and Research and also interacts with the Ministries of Planning and of Science and Technology. The Pakistan Agricultural Research Council is the apex national organization for agricultural research, working in close collaboration with other federal and provincial institutions in the country9 on a number of research areas. The Pakistan Agricultural Research Council and FAO have frequent interactions and have collaborated on several projects, including work on soil conservation and seed sector development. Furthermore, the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council is a key stakeholder in the agricultural sector landscape and is involved in the development of national and provincial agricultural policies. FAO has also assisted the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council in the development of its business plan for the period 2013-2018.10

2.1 Pakistan context

23 The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is a lower middle-income country located in south Asia, bordering India, China, Afghanistan, Iran and the Indian Ocean. It is the sixth most populous country, with an estimated population of around 195 million,11 and the second most populous Muslim country. The official languages are Urdu and English, with several other languages and dialects spoken by the several ethnic groups.

24 Pakistan is a federation with a parliamentary form of government. The state consists of four provinces (Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Punjab and Sindh), which are the federating units, while FATA, Gilgit-Baltistan, Islamabad, and Azad Jammu and Kashmir are administered by the Federal Government. A far-reaching constitutional amendment in 2010 devolved major responsibilities for service delivery to the provinces and realigned Pakistan’s multi-level governance at the federal, inter-provincial and provincial level. The state is now a predominantly decentralized federation. While 17 federal ministries or divisions were devolved and eight new federal ministries were created, the pace of change has varied across provinces and sectors, and some of the federal-provincial issues, particularly in inter-provincial coordination and reporting on international obligations, remain to be resolved. Table 2 shows old and new federal ministries under the 18th Amendment12

8 In 2013, The Federal Ministry of National Food Security and Research formulated a Draft National Agriculture and Food Security Policy, but it is still not adopted.

9 These include the National Agriculture Research Centre (Islamabad), Southern-Zone Agricultural Research Centre (Karachi), National Sugarcane Research Institute (Thatta, Sindh), Balochistan Agricultural Research and Development Centre (Quetta), Arid Zone Research Centre (D.I. Khan, KP), National Tea and High Value Crops Research Institute (Mansehra, KKP), Summer Agricultural Research Station (Kaghan, KP), Mountain Agricultural Research Centre (Gilgit).

10 Available at http://www.parc.gov.pk/files/parc_pk/BP_FINAL-22-10-13.pdf

11 Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2015-16 (available at www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_16/02_Agriculture.pdf). A population census is ongoing in 2017.

12 Available at: http://www.cabinet.gov.pk/cabinet/userfiles1/file/YearBook-2014-15.pdf

http://www.parc.gov.pk/files/parc_pk/BP_FINAL-22-10-13.pdf

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_16/02_Agriculture.pdf

http://www.cabinet.gov.pk/cabinet/userfiles1/file/YearBook-2014-15.pdf


13

Table 2: Old and new federal ministries

Devolved ministries Non devolved ministries New federal ministries/divisions

Food and Agriculture Commerce National Food Security and Research

Local Government and Rural Development

Communications Climate Change

Livestock and Dairy Defence Capital Administration and Development Division

Environment Finance Human Resource Development

Education Foreign Affairs Inter-Faith Harmony

Health Human Rights National Heritage

Social Welfare and Special Education

Housing and Works National Health Services, Regulation and Services

Population Welfare Industries and Production Education and Professional Training

Youth Affairs Information Technology and Telecommunication

Sports Interior and Narcotics Control

Culture Law and Justice

Labour and Manpower Petroleum and Natural Resources

Minorities Planning Development and Reform

Tourism Ports and Shipping

Women’s Development Railways

Special Initiatives Science and Technology

Zakat and Usher Textiles, Water and Power

25 The government’s long-term development strategy is outlined in the ‘Vision 2025’ (prepared in 2014), which aims at transforming Pakistan into an upper middle-income country by 2025, with a focus on the energy sector, economic growth and private sector development, education and combating extremism. Further efforts to address poverty and food insecurity include initiatives such as the Zero Hunger Programme launched in 2012, the Pakistan Integrated Nutrition Strategy of 2013, and several water, sanitation and nutrition programmes. Also, social protection programmes such as the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund and the Benazir Income Support Programme constitute major government initiatives and directly target the poor and vulnerable parts of the population. The Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund’s programmes and partnerships focus on social mobilization of communities, institutional development of partners, livelihoods and enterprise development, water and community infrastructure, and health and education. The Benazir Income Support Programme’s main focus is direct cash transfers, which reached around 5.3 million families in 2016. Similarly, a large network of Rural Support Programmes (National and Provincial) implements poverty reduction and rural development projects with national and international resource partners using a community-based participatory approach.

26 The Government has fully internalized the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and is incorporating the targets in the major policy and planning documents mentioned above. Given the multi-sectoral and cross-sectoral nature of many of the SDGs, their effective implementation requires coordination among ministries and departments, especially at the provincial level where implementation will take place. Furthermore, the monitoring, reporting and evaluation requirements which the SDGs entail is recognized both as a challenge and an opportunity for the country’s statistical and monitoring institutions. Pakistan had not met the targets for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) related to hunger and poverty between 1990 and 2015; therefore the achievement of the SDGs, which set rightfully ambitious targets, will prove challenging. FAO globally has a strong mandate in relation to the SDGs. It is a custodian agency for 21 SDG indicators,13 for which it is responsible to compile data from countries while also supporting national capacities for data collection. FAO’s work directly contributes to 25 SDG indicators while providing indirect contributions to several others. A summary of Pakistan’s development indicators is available in Table 3.

13 FAO and the SDGs, 2017 (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6919e.pdf ).



14

Table 3: Summary of Pakistan’s development indicators

*Income group: Lower middle-income

**HDI ranking: 146/187 **Gender Inequality Index ranking: 127/187

1990-1992 2000-2002 2014-2016

food

sec

urity

& n

utrit

ion

Dietary energy supply (kcal/capita/day) 2 325 2 255 2 434

Number of people undernourished (millions) ( 3 year average)

28.7 34.4 41.4

Prevalence of undernourishment (%) ( 3 year average) 25.1 23.4 22.0

Stunting, children under 5 (%) 42.7 41.5 45.0

Obesity, adults (M/F, %)*** n/a n/a 3.7/7.3

Access to improved water sources (% of population) 85.9 88.9 91.4

soci

o-ec

onom

ic

Total population (estimated, thousands) 113 616 144 272 192 827

Rural population (% of total) 71.2 68.7 60.3

Life expectancy at birth (M/F)* 61/63 64/65 66/68

Rural poverty headcount ratio at national poverty lines (%)*

n/a 39 n/a

Value added for agriculture, forestry and fishing (% of GDP)

26.4 23.4 25.1

Employment distribution, agriculture (M/F, %) 38.4/9.9 32.6/9.5 26.8/16.9

COUNTRY SPECIFIC STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE’S INDICATORS 2014 2015 2016

SO 1 - Contribute to the eradication of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition

Food insecurity

Prevalence of moderate and severe food insecurity (source: FAO)

44.20

Hunger Prevalence of undernourishment (3-year average) (source: FAO)

22.00 22.00

SO 2 - Increase and improve provision of goods and services from agriculture, forestry and fisheries in a sustainable manner

Production and Productivity

Fish production per capita (kg/cap) (both capture and aquaculture) (source: FAO)

3.37

Roundwood production per capita (m3/cap) (source: FAO) 0.17

SO 3 - Reduce rural poverty

Rural health Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1 000 live births) (source: WHO)

83.30 81.10

Maternal mortality ratio (modelled estimate, per 100 000 live births) (Source: UN Inter-Agency Group)

184.00 178.00

Rural malnutrition

Depth of the food deficit (kcal/cap/day) (3-year average) (constant 2005 US$) (source: FAO)

171.00 172.00

SO 5 - Increase the resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises

Dependence on food aid

Cereal food aid shipments per capita (kg/cap) (source: WFP-FAO)

0.18

Exposure to risk

Risk Index (3-Yr Trend) (source: OCHA-ECHO) 6.50 6.10 6.70

Source: FAOSTAT; *World Bank; **UNDP; ***WHO


15

27 Pakistan’s economy has grown slowly in most of the recent years, with the annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate in the range of 3.7 percent to 4.1 percent between 2011-12 and 2014-15, increasing to 4.7 percent in 2015-16.14 The services sector contributed the most to GDP growth during this period and agriculture the least, the latter growing at less than 3 percent. An annual population growth rate of 1.9 percent suggests that per capita GDP growth has been small. The per capita GDP was USD 1 560 (2016).15

28 Long-term trends indicate that Pakistan’s economy is evolving from an agricultural base to services, largely bypassing industry.16 The economy is agricultural in terms of employment (agriculture’s share is 44 percent) and a service economy in terms of the structure of output (59 percent of the GDP is from services).17 Growth in services labour productivity has been lower than in agricultural and industrial labour productivity, which has constrained the economic growth because of the large share of services in the GDP.18

29 The country has a relatively young population, as 53 percent are below the age of 25 and 37 percent are between 25 and 54 years old. Approximately 61 percent of the population lives in rural areas. The literacy rate for the population 10 years and above is 60 percent (76 percent in urban areas, 51 percent in rural areas; 70 percent for men and 49 percent for women). Inter-provincial disparities are also evident, with the literacy highest in Punjab and lowest in Balochistan.

30 In 2013, China and Pakistan finalized the arrangements to establish the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. This is a framework of regional connectivity that will benefit China and Pakistan and impact the entire region. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor’s vision is to improve economic collaboration by building an economic corridor promoting bilateral connectivity; explore potential bilateral investment and trade; improve logistics; and facilitate regional connectivity. It includes: integrated transport and IT systems (e.g. road, rail, port, air and data communication channels), energy cooperation, spatial layout, functional zones, industries and industrial parks, agricultural development and poverty alleviation.

31 Poverty measures generally show a declining trend in poverty levels in the country, with differences in the percentage of people living in poverty, which currently ranges between 30 percent and 40 percent depending on the measure. Based on the national poverty line, the share of people living in poverty has gone from 52 percent to 30 percent between 2004 and 2014, while in the same period according to the Multidimensional Poverty Index the rate has dropped from 55 percent to 39 percent. Pakistan is ranked 147th (low) according to the Human Development Index (score of 0.538). Poverty is more prevalent in rural areas.

32 The Planning Commission of Pakistan, in support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), has recently introduced the Multidimensional Poverty Index of Pakistan (GoP-UNDP 2016),19 which reflects the deprivations people experience with respect to health, education and standard of living. According to the Multidimensional Poverty Index report, nearly 39 percent of Pakistanis lived in multidimensional poverty in 2015, with the highest rates of poverty in FATA and Balochistan. Poverty in urban areas is 9.3 percent as compared to 54.6 percent in rural areas. Disparities also exist across provinces. The report found that over two-thirds of people in FATA (73 percent) and Balochistan (71 percent) live in multidimensional poverty. Poverty in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa stands at 49percent, Gilgit-Baltistan and Sindh at 43 percent, Punjab at 31 percent and Azad Jammu and Kashmir at 25 percent.

33 There are economic differences across the four provinces, some of them pronounced, that reflect differences in population, natural endowment and location, the historical pattern of

14 Asian Development Outlook 2016 (https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/197141/ado2016-update.pdf).

15 FAO FAPDA Country Fact Sheet 2016 (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6054e.pdf).

16 Asian Development Outlook 2015 (https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/154508/ado-2015.pdf).

17 Ministry of Finance, Pakistan Economic Survey 2014-15, Statistical Appendices (http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1415.html), Table 12.11 for employment share and Table 1.2 for GDP.

18 “A Note on Competitiveness and Structural Transformation in Pakistan;” Asian Development Bank.

19 Multidimensional Poverty in Pakistan, Government of Pakistan in collaboration with United Nations Development Programme, 2016.

https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/197141/ado2016-update.pdf

https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/154508/ado-2015.pdf

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1415.html

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1415.html


16

investment and growth, and other factors. The most recent (2015) estimates of provincial GDPs and related indicators showed provincial contributions to the national GDP that ranged from 3 percent (Balochistan) to 54 percent (Punjab), with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh in between (Table 4). Per capita GDP estimates showed Balochistan in the last position, Sindh in the first, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab close together in between. The share of agriculture in the provincial GDP was highest in Balochistan and lowest in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh (approximately equal).

Table 4: Estimated provincial GDPs and related indicators, 2014-1520

Economic indicator Balochistan KP Punjab Sindh

Provincial GDP (PKR billion at constant prices of 2005-06)

314 1 381 5 757 3 193

Share of provincial GDP in national GDP 3% 13% 54% 30%

Per capita GDP (PKR 000) 31.4 53.5 54.7 69.4

Provincial per capita GDP as percentage of national per capita GDP

55% 94% 96% 122%

Ratio of income share of top 20% households to income share of bottom 20% households (2013)

3.4 3.9 5.3 4.2

Share of agriculture in provincial GDP 29% 17% 24% 16%

34 Formal female labour force participation is generally low. In 2007, 18.7 percent of women were economically active.21 Women were significantly concentrated in the agricultural sector, which employed 59 percent of all economically active women in 2007.22 The same year, women accounted for 27.5 percent of the entire agricultural labour force.23 Women are major contributors to crop production, livestock production and cottage industry.24.Nearly 36 to 38 percent of economically active rural women work on their own family farms.25

35 Land ownership is highly concentrated: 5 percent of large landholdings comprise 64 percent of the total farm land.26 More than four million family farms have an average plot of 4.7 ha, while 25 percent of farmers have less than 1 ha.

36 Food security remains a major issue as the country has not made progress in the Millennium Development Goals related to hunger and undernourishment. In 2015 the proportion of the population considered undernourished was estimated at 22 percent, and 43 percent of children under five years of age are stunted. Food and nutrition insecurity in the country are primarily attributable to limited economic access to an adequate and diverse diet for the poorest and most vulnerable. Levels of hunger are still serious or alarming in 50 countries in which Pakistan is at number 11 in the 2016 Global Hunger Index (IFPRI 2016)27 and six out of ten Pakistanis are food insecure (WFP 2016).28

20 “Growth of the Provincial Economies,” Pakistan Institute for Policy Reforms (http://ipr.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/GROWTH-OF-PROVINCIAL-ECONOMICS-.pdf).

21 FAO. FAOSTAT: PopStat (available at http://faostat.fao.org/site/452/default.aspx).

22 United Nations. Demographic Yearbook (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/dyb/dybsets/2006%20DYB.pdf).

23 FAO Gender and Land Rights Database (http://www.fao.org/gender-landrights-database).

24 Convention on the Elimination of All Form of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) – Pakistan.

25 Asian Development Bank Country Briefing: Women in Pakistan.

26 IFAD. Rural Poverty Portal.

27 IFPRI (2016), International Food Policy Research Institute. 2016 Global Hunger Index http://www.ifpri.org/publication/2016-global-hunger-index-getting-zero-hunger

28 WFP (2016), World Food Programme https://www.wfp.org/stories/10-facts-about-hunger-pakistan

http://ipr.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/GROWTH-OF-PROVINCIAL-ECONOMICS-.pdf

http://ipr.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/GROWTH-OF-PROVINCIAL-ECONOMICS-.pdf

http://faostat.fao.org/site/452/default.aspx

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/dyb/dybsets/2006%20DYB.pdf

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/dyb/dybsets/2006%20DYB.pdf

http://www.fao.org/gender-landrights-database

http://www.ifpri.org/publication/2016-global-hunger-index-getting-zero-hunger

http://www.ifpri.org/publication/2016-global-hunger-index-getting-zero-hunger

https://www.wfp.org/stories/10-facts-about-hunger-pakistan


17

Figure 1: Number of people undernourished

37 Pakistan joined the Scaling Up Nutrition29 Movement in April 2013. The Chief of Nutrition is the SUN Focal Point and deals with technical and operational matters related to the Movement. His efforts are in line with the Pakistan Vision 2025 and guidance is provided by the Members, Secretary and Minister for the Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform. The SUN Movement in Pakistan is currently working under the direction of the Planning Commission of Pakistan, the government body that regulates almost all programmes and proposals related to federal and provincial departments. A SUN Core Group (or National Nutrition Committee) has been formed which is the equivalent of the SUN multi-stakeholder platform, consisting of 15 key members of development partners and ministries who steer the process forward in the country. In addition, six specific networks (Government, UN, Donor, Civil Society Alliance, Business Network and Academia and Research) have been formed for streamlined efforts to scale up nutrition in the country.

38 Agriculture is a key sector of the national economy, generating about 20 percent of GDP and 47 percent of jobs. It is also important for foreign exchange earnings, as it consists of 11 percent of exports. Furthermore, it provides inputs to the country’s other export industries (mostly textiles) and therefore accounts for around 80 percent of export earnings, both directly and indirectly. However, the sector has been experiencing declining productivity, and especially low water productivity which, compounded with climate change risks, pose a serious challenge to farmers.

39 Crops contributed 37 percent of the agricultural GDP, livestock 59 percent, forestry approximately 2.5 percent and fishing 1.5 percent. Irrigated agriculture, fed by the Indus Basin Irrigation System and groundwater, contributes 90 percent of the total crop production. Five major crops – wheat, rice, cotton, sugarcane and maize – accounted for 66 percent of the value added by crops. Farming systems show a high degree of diversity across the country due to differences in agro-climatic and soil conditions and the availability of irrigation. Wheat is the major winter crop in all regions of the country, and rice, cotton and maize are grown in summer where conditions are suitable. Rape and mustard are the major oilseeds. Coarse grains such as sorghum, millet and barley are important sources of livestock and poultry feed and fodder. Pulses are a major source of protein for the poor, with gram (chickpea) accounting for most of the area planted to pulses.

40 Pakistan has a large livestock and dairy sector, which contributes around 11 percent to national GDP and over the past decades has become the major agricultural sub-sector in terms of value (from 30 percent of agricultural GDP in the 1990s to around 59 percent today). The sector is composed mostly of small ruminants, whose national stock is estimated at around 96 million heads, of which 67 million are goats and 29 million sheep. Large ruminants are estimated at around 75 million heads, of which 35 million are buffaloes and 40 million cattle; and poultry at around 785 million heads.30 It is estimated that over half of

29 SUN Joint-Assessment 2016 http://docs.scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Pakistan-Joint-Assessment-2016.pdf

30 FAOSTAT, 2014.

http://docs.scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Pakistan-Joint-Assessment-2016.pdf

http://docs.scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Pakistan-Joint-Assessment-2016.pdf


18

rural households own livestock. With virtually all production consumed within the national borders, the sector is extremely significant for employment, livelihoods, nutrition and food security.

41 Transboundary Animal Diseases (TADs) such as Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR), and in the past, rinderpest, are economically damaging throughout Pakistan. Given the low coverage of disease monitoring, it is difficult to estimate the full extent of the diseases and therefore their economic impact; however it is very clear from the existing research that both these diseases are considered endemic and highly damaging to livelihoods across the country. A case of FMD generally causes a temporary decrease in milk production of large ruminants, which can be estimated at around USD 110 (a loss of 220 litres at USD 0.5 per litre), which is around 10 percent of the value of a live buffalo and can be a large shock for rural households. On the other hand, PPR generally causes the loss of a small ruminant, whose value can be estimated at between USD 100 and 200. If PPR reaches an unvaccinated flock, the effects can be devastating as the disease spreads rapidly. Besides FMD and PPR, many other TADs affect Pakistan’s livestock and poultry, including sheep and goat pox, contagious caprine pleuropneumonia, and avian influenza. In addition, there are endemic diseases of high consequence with which the farmer must cope, such as haemorrhagic septicaemia, black-quarter, tick-borne diseases (Theileriosis, Rickettsiosis and Babesiosis) of large ruminants and enterotoxaemia of small ruminants, all of which can be lethal, plus several zoonoses including brucellosis of both large and small ruminants.

42 A variety of fruit, vegetables and spices constitute the horticulture sub-sector. Citrus, mangoes, dates and apples dominate fruit production at the national level. Large-scale farmers are involved in the production of mangoes and kinnows (mandarins), often for export, and a large number of smallholders maintain small orchards that contribute to household income. Also, a large number of smallholder farmers are involved in vegetable production due to short production cycles and regular contribution to household income. Important vegetables and spices include potato, onion, tomato, chillies, garlic and a large variety of leafy, root and other crops.

43 Pakistan has very low forest cover (4.34 million hectares, 5.01 percent of its area) but a variety of forests reflecting the country’s physiographic and climatic diversity. Most of the forest area is in the northern part of the country, mainly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which accounts for 42 percent of the country’s forests. The forest and woodland types include littoral and swamp forests, tropical dry deciduous forests, tropical thorn forests, sub-tropical broadleaved evergreen forests, sub-tropical pine forests, Himalayan moist temperate forests, Himalayan dry temperate forests, sub-alpine forests, and alpine scrub. Coniferous forests predominate, and man-made plantations are an important wood source.

44 The fishing sector is a minor sector overall but a crucial food security provider in the coastal areas of Balochistan and Sindh; many of the fisheries-dependent communities near the coastline are among the poorest and most food insecure. Pakistan’s marine fishery sector accounts for approximately 80 percent of the country’s total fish production. Marine fisheries are an important source of food, income and foreign exchange for approximately one million people in the coastal areas of the country. Over 400 000 people, including inland fishers, are employed in the harvest sector, while the secondary sector provides employment and income to another 400 000 individuals.

45 The agriculture sector faces several challenges which are affecting the sector’s productivity, and constitute a significant challenge to farmers. These include low water productivity, which compounded with climate change risks pose a serious challenge to farmers. The State Bank of Pakistan, the country’s central bank, in its most recent report has highlighted the role of low international prices and weather-related problems in explaining the problems of agriculture in recent years.31 It observed that the World Bank price index for agricultural commodities decreased by more than 23 percent during the five years ending in June 2016, and that the country had been “facing small but punitive weather-related shocks, practically every year” between 2011 and 2015, since the major floods of 2010. The report also tracks the failure of export subsidies to promote wheat exports during a period when the government support price for wheat has been significantly above international prices, resulting in growing wheat stocks. Similarly, the support price for sugarcane has

31 State Bank of Pakistan Annual Report, 2015-16, (http://www.sbp.org.pk/reports/annual/arFY16/Chapter-02.pdf).

http://www.sbp.org.pk/reports/annual/arFY16/Chapter-02.pdf


19

been higher than international prices and resulted in growing stocks.32

46 The Government’s most recent assessment of the agriculture sector’s performance33

identifies several problem areas, including the slow rate of technological innovation, limited adoption of new farming techniques, problems with the quality, quantity and timeliness of input supply, limited investment in construction and maintenance of infrastructure, marketing and trade restrictions, pest and livestock disease problems, and limited amounts of credit for agricultural production and processing. The Government is cognizant of the low returns to farmers because of the increased cost of production and considers value addition at the farm level and industrial linkages as solutions.

47 Pakistan is also highly vulnerable to climate change and natural disasters. Pakistan is highly diverse because of varying topographical, ecological and climatic conditions. The country has been broadly classified into seven agro-ecological zones. These are: (i) humid and sub-humid Himalayan mountains; (ii) western dry mountains of Hindu Kush; (iii) semi-arid sub-mountain rain-fed plains; (iv) semi-arid irrigated plains; (v) Suleman hill torrent plains; (vi) sandy deserts; and (vii) coastal zone. The livelihoods patterns vary in these diverse agro-ecological regions. These patterns, along with climate change vulnerabilities are briefly discussed below (also see Appendix 2 for more details).34

48 Safeguarding agricultural production has proven especially crucial in the context of emergencies, which have increased in frequency and scale over the past decade, including two major earthquakes (2005 and 2007), four severe floods (2007, 2008, 1010 and 2011) and continued conflict and displacement in the north since 2001. The country is ranked number eight in the 2014 assessment of the Global Climate Risk Index.35 In terms of exposure, the country has been experiencing a variety of natural hazards reflecting the diverse geophysical and climatic conditions of the country. The most significant hazards in Pakistan are climate change-related floods followed by droughts and cyclones. Given their potential destructiveness and severity of impact, earthquakes, though by nature comparatively rare events, have to be added to the list of the most important hazards in Pakistan. In addition, the Northern mountainous regions are threatened by high frequency but low impact events such as flash floods, landslides and avalanches. The World Bank/Asian Development Bank flood and damage needs assessment estimated that the flooding in 2010 alone affected over 20 million people and caused estimated losses of over USD 10 billion.36

49 The losses from disasters have increased over the past 40 years and efforts to build resilience have not kept pace.37 Globally, the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) has estimated annual economic losses from disasters at between USD 250 billion and USD 300 billion, extrapolating from a study of nationally-reported disaster losses.38 According to Pakistan Meteorological Data, an average increase in temperature of 0.93 ºC during the last two decades has been recorded in Pakistan.39 Future increases in temperature will be much higher in the country. On the other hand, mean precipitation in the dry region (includes Pakistan) will likely decrease, becoming more erratic and intense.40

50 Agriculture and its sub-sectors are highly vulnerable to climate change and natural disasters. Climate change can alter bio-physical relationships by changing the growing periods of crops, altering scheduling of cropping seasons, increasing crop stresses (thermal and moisture stresses), changing irrigation water requirements, altering soil characteristics and increasing the risk of pests and diseases, thereby negatively affecting agricultural productivity. Livestock productivity will be equally affected by heat stresses, low fodder availability and increased incidence of disease.

32 Rice and cotton, however, do not receive support prices.

33 Ministry of Finance, Pakistan Economic Survey 2015-16 (http://www.finance.gov.pk), chapter 2 (Agriculture).

34 Pakistan Agriculture Research Council. Also, see http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5460e/y5460e06.htm

35 German Watch (2016), “GLOBAL CLIMATE RISK INDEX 2016” Who Suffers Most From Extreme Weather Events?

36 GoP/ADB/WB (2010): Pakistan Floods 2010 Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment.

37 GFDRR (2014): Global Fund for Disaster Risk Resilience (GFDRR), Country Programme Update, 2014.

38 UNISDR/CRED (2016): The Human Cost of Weather-Related Disasters 1995-2015.

39 “Glaciers and Glacial Lakes under Changing Climate in Pakistan”, Pakistan Journal of Meteorology, Vol 8, Issue 15.

40 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, 2014. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/

http://www.finance.gov.pk

http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5460e/y5460e06.htm

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/


20

51 To deal with frequent multi-disasters, the government of Pakistan has taken some serious steps to strengthen institutional capacities in disaster risk management, through an autonomous body attached to the Ministry of Climate Change. Pakistan had a disaster response strategy predominantly centred on an “Emergency Response Paradigm”. The post-2005 earthquake promulgation of the National Disaster Management Ordinance 200641 and the National Disaster Risk Management Framework42 are reflective of the initial steps by the country to move toward a pre-emptive and pro-active approach for disaster management. On the global front, the HFA 2005-2015 and the Sendai Framework 2015-2030 have informed the process to which Pakistan is signatory.

52 The National Disaster Management Authority is the lead agency at federal level for dealing with disasters. The National Disaster Management Commission under the leadership of the Prime Minister has been established as a multi-sectoral platform and the policymaking institution on disaster risk management, while the National Disaster Management Authority serves as its executive arm. At the decentralized level are the Provincial Disaster Management Authorities and District Disaster Management Authorities.

53 The Cluster Approach43 was applied for the first time following the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan. Nine clusters were established within 24 hours of the earthquake. As per the official announcement of the Government, the 2010 floods early recovery phase ended on 31 December 2011. After the 2010 early recovery phase, the ‘cluster system’ was changed to ‘sector working group coordination mechanism’ in February 2011, based on a decision of the National Disaster Management Authority. FAO and the World Food Programme (WFP) formed the Agriculture and Food Security Working Group following a merger of the Agriculture and Food Clusters. The number of cluster members today exceeds 300, although less than 100 are active.

54 According to estimates of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), as of January 2017 about 3.2 million people were in need of humanitarian aid. Furthermore, OCHA data indicates that around 504 000 people (approximately 74 000 families) remain displaced within the FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, due to recurrent insecurity. These populations rely mainly on humanitarian assistance, including food aid and healthcare.

2.2 FAO’s programme in Pakistan

55 Pakistan is one of the eight UN Delivering as One pilot countries and FAO’s programme is aligned with the One UN Programme Second Phase (OP-II). The national priorities formed the basis for the OP-II. The United Nations Country Team has identified Outcome level results that are grouped within six Strategic Priority Areas:

1 Vulnerable and marginalized populations have equitable access and use of quality services;

2 Inclusive economic growth through the development of sustainable livelihoods;

3 Increased national resilience to disasters, crises and external shocks;

4 Strengthen governance and social cohesion;

5 Ensure gender equality and social justice; and;

6 Food and nutrition security for the most vulnerable groups.

56 Each Strategic Priority Area comprise a set of joint Outcomes and Outputs. There is a working group for each of the six Strategic Priority Areas. These groups are responsible for providing strategic guidance and coordination of activities being carried out in the achievement of the Strategic Priority Area’s Outcomes and Outputs. FAO is contributing to SPA2, SPA3 and SPA4, and co-chairing SPA6.

41 GoP (2006): National Disaster Management Ordinance 2006, Governmental of Pakistan, Islamabad.

42 GoP (2007): National Disaster Management Framework, National Disaster Management Authority.

43 http://fscluster.org/pakistan

http://fscluster.org/pakistan


21

57 A large number of organizations are members of the Food Security Cluster in various capacities, including international, national and local non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government authorities of National and Provincial Disaster Management Authorities and line departments, including Agriculture and Livestock and Dairy Development Department, donors and UN agencies.

58 Against this background, the FAO project portfolio in Pakistan between 2012 and 2017 included 50 projects, of which 44 were country projects (88 percent) and six were inter-regional (12 percent). The portfolio for national projects amounts to USD 125 972 246. FAO Pakistan benefited from six projects funded by the Government worth USD 20 024 547, making the Government the second largest donor following USA.

Figure 2: FAO Pakistan Resource Partners44

59 FAO has its main office in Islamabad and project offices in Quetta (Balochistan), Hyderabad (Sindh), Multan (Punjab), Peshawar (KP) and FATA, with total office personnel of 265 people of which only 11 are staff (i.e. FAO regular programme funds).

Table 5: FAO Field Programme Approvals and Delivery45

Approvals (USD) Delivery (USD)

2014 2015 2016 2014 2015 2016

Total 2 780 587 21 522 375 5 079 150 20 751 067 16 501 488 15 403 140

Funded through TCP

50 165 911 020 213 000 354 927 479 751 296 018

Funded through voluntary contributions

2 730 422 20 611 355 4 866 150 20 396 140 16 021 737 15 107 122

(of which UTF) 140 962 1 222 770 0 964 598 1 217 900 124 375

of which technical cooperation

230 062 10 060 203 150 000 12 282 554 12 299 277 10 381 200

of which emergency assistance

2 500 360 10 551 152 4 716 150 8 113 586 3 722 460 4 725 922

60 The FAO programme is highly diversified, covers a broad spectrum of thematic areas and spans from field level implementation to national policy support. Geographically, the FAO interventions cover all provinces through both area-based development projects and national-level overarching projects. In the period between 2012 and 16, FAO has delivered an average of around USD 18.5 million per year in project activities, with a generally declining trend as new approvals have diminished since the large emergency response operations in the early years of the Country Programme Framework. Furthermore, the

44 As at January 2017.

45 As at 23/11/2016; source: FPMIS.


22

programme is experiencing a shift away from emergency (SO5) and tending towards value chain development (SO4) and sustainable productivity increase (SO2); however resilience-building remains a major component.

61 In 2016, Pakistan was selected to benefit from two FAO global flagships supporting the food security and nutrition sector, namely, FIRST46 and INFORMED.47

Table 6: FAO Projects by Strategic Objective 2012-17

FAO Strategic Objective No. of projects (main SO)

Budget to each SO (USD)

% of Budget

SO1: Contribute to the eradication of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition

5 6 623 965 5%

SO2: Increase and improve provision of goods and services from agriculture, forestry and fisheries in a sustainable manner

12 23 336 815 19%

SO3: Reduce rural poverty 0 62 519 0%

SO4: Enable more inclusive and efficient agricultural and food systems

3 37 850 017 30%

SO5: Increase the resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises

28 55 640 352 44%

SO6: Technical quality, statistics and cross-cutting themes

2 2 458 579 2%

Total 50 125 972 246 100%

2.3 FAO’s Country Programming Framework

62 The Pakistan CPF for the period 2012-2017 was formulated to bring a new focus to FAO’s field programme for the country, in particular, realigning the Organization’s development support to the Government’s revised priority programmes, while contributing to the implementation of FAO’s global Strategic Framework 2010-19.

63 The Pakistan CPF for 2012-2017 identifies four priority areas for cooperation:

Priority area 1. Support to the National Zero Hunger Action Plan for Enhanced Food and Nutrition Security.

1.1. Effective functioning of Food and Nutrition Security networks for synergetic outcomes.

1.2. Food and nutrition programmes - targeted at the poor and most vulnerable - effective in chronic food insecure situations.

Priority area 2. Support to Pakistan New Growth Strategy through Sustainable Agricultural Economic Growth.

2.1. Provincial and District sustainable agricultural investment programmes developed and implemented effectively, including value addition to large infrastructure projects.

2.2. Public and private sector agricultural service providers able to support sustainable intensification.

46 Food and Nutrition Security Impact, Resilience, Sustainability and Transformation (FIRST) is an FAO and European Union partnership programme with the purpose of providing a policy assistance mechanism for improved food security, nutrition and sustainable agriculture.

47 Information for Nutrition, Food Security and Resilience for Decision Making (INFORMED) is an FAO and European Union partnership programme which aims at strengthening resilience of vulnerable people’s livelihoods and at reducing food insecurity and malnutrition through better informed and evidence-based decision making processes.


23

Priority area 3. Disaster Risk Reduction and Emergency Response.

3.1. Government, civil society and United Nations partners of the agriculture sector at the national, provincial, district and community levels able to prepare for and respond to emergency situations.

3.2 Effective agricultural responses to emergencies.

3.3. Food and nutrition programmes - targeted at the poor and most vulnerable - effective in acute food insecure situations.

3.4: Vulnerable populations benefit from improved sustainable environmental management practices, including climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Priority area 4. Capacity Development for Agriculture Sector under Devolution.

4.1. Structures and mechanisms in place at federal and provincial-levels for agriculture policy development following devolution of the Ministries of Food and Agriculture and Livestock and Dairy Development and establishment of Ministry of National Food Security and Research.

4.2. The capacity of Pakistani stakeholders of the agriculture sector effectively involved and appropriate international standards and best practices are enhanced.


24

3. Assessment of FAO’s strategic positioning

3.1 FAO’s Strategic relevance

Finding 1. During the period 2012–2017, FAO’s programme generally addressed challenges that were important to small-scale farmers and contributed to government priorities, particularly on shifting from subsistence farming to market-oriented farming and safeguarding agriculture production in areas affected by floods. FAO’s contribution to the institutional, regulatory and policy challenges was less evident.

64 On the whole, the programme addressed challenges that were important to small-scale farmers and the regions in which FAO worked, particularly in terms of shifting from subsistence farming to market-oriented farming and safeguarding and restoring agriculture production in areas affected by floods. The programme took into account some of the most significant local needs and responded with suitable interventions for good agriculture practices, irrigation development, input supply and new crop varieties. Despite being well-positioned to engage in more strategic agriculture-related sectors, FAO has yet to programmatically incorporate key structural challenges in the agriculture sector, such as agriculture subsidies, trade, industries, rural transformation, land tenure and market development, as well as the more persistent issue of the FATA reform and the possible merge with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. While recognizing FAO’s excellent track record in supporting grassroots development (small-scale farmers), FAO would need to transform and expand its partnerships and delivery mechanisms, build on its core competencies and address institutional and regulatory structurally important challenges.

3.1.1 Policy support

65 The government’s agricultural policies so far have been mostly production-oriented, and generally promote measures to increase productivity in the main staples and the export crops. The interventions resulting from these policies aim at lowering the cost of inputs through subsidies and tax breaks, with the aim of decreasing the gap between potential and actual yields. While these measures bring some benefits, especially to large farms, they often do not sufficiently take into account the diversity of Pakistan’s agro-climatic zones, soil fertility levels, water availability, tenure arrangements and access to markets. Despite improvements in the past years in transport infrastructure, many rural producers still have limited access to markets and information. Table 7 outlines the government policy interventions in the 2016-2017 federal budget,48 all of which disproportionately benefit large-scale commercial firms. The government policy interventions will need to focus on diversification into high value products, agro-processing and better integration in supply chains while taking into account the potential and limitations of the country’s diverse areas. For the poor to benefit, increases in productivity should be reflected in lower food prices, higher employment and rural wages. At the same time the research and extension system needs to be revised towards more demand-driven delivery of services, while also taking advantage of the potential for public-private partnerships.

48 http://www.finance.gov.pk/fb_2016_17.html

http://www.finance.gov.pk/fb_2016_17.html


25

Table 7: Government policy interventions vs. structural challenges

66 Following the 2010 floods, FAO mobilized its capacities for emergency response to support vulnerable communities, especially to safeguard and restore agriculture production following emergencies. FAO made a commendable effort not to be engaged in prolonged emergency mode; rather, it has been successful in the rehabilitation of production systems and strengthening the resilience of vulnerable communities to cope with future shocks and adapt to climate change. As part of its rehabilitation interventions FAO introduced practices and technologies which will allow communities to be more productive and resilient in the long-term. Examples include the introduction of flood-resistant varieties, laser land levelling, composting and multiple copping. In addition, better links were established between small-scale farmers and markets, which resulted in sustainable increases in incomes.

3.1.2 Institutional support and devolution

67 FAO was involved in institutional processes following devolution, as it supported the creation of the new Federal Ministry of National Food Security and Research by advocating for its coordination role and helping shape its mandate. However, the FAO programme was not designed to address institutional challenges arising directly from the devolution process. The programme instead focused on grassroots development and some capacity development activities for government staff, as part of the technical requirements of the FAO projects. It’s worth noting that the FAO CPF was formulated in 2011/2012 in the wake of a devastating flood and the full implications of the devolution process were not yet clear (especially for agriculture and food security in Pakistan).

68 At the strategic level, FAO has yet to grasp the cost of operating under the devolution. FAO’s collaboration with the Provincial Governments has been close and institutionally diverse in the implementation of field programmes but to a lesser extent on the policy level, especially in Punjab which is the largest agricultural producer. FAO’s efforts at grassroots development have also been stronger and more widespread in Sindh, Balochistan and FATA than in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

69 FAO has benefited from a number of Unilateral Trust Funds funded by the Government totalling around USD 20 million in the CPE period, which reflects the level of trust in FAO technical and executional capacity. In some cases, the Unilateral Trust Fund resulted from a World Bank loan to the Government, which in turn engaged FAO to provide project management services. In this case, in addition to project management services there is potential for FAO to use the Unilateral Trust Fund as a vehicle to extend FAO’s technical support to the Government. The federal and provincial governments have the financial resources to fund projects of United Nations agencies in Pakistan and the CPE believes that FAO Pakistan should actively pursue Unilateral Trust Funds as a driving modality as part of its resource mobilization strategy.


26

70 FAO is predominantly centred in Islamabad while almost all other United Nations agencies opened sub-offices in each provinces to support the devolved ministries and the related service delivery. The CPE found that, in line with the constitutional amendment, provincial governments strategize, plan and manage their own resources autonomously from the federal government, even on food security and nutrition (which are nationwide issues). Each provincial government has its own plan or vision and is actively working on policy development and implementation. Hence, FAO’s devolution in Pakistan is necessary in order to work closer with the counterparts who now have the mandate and resources. So far, FAO has project offices in three locations: Multan, Peshawar and Quetta, and has recently closed an office in Sukkur (Sindh) upon completion of the project. Opening and sustaining permanent provincial offices to provide systematic technical support and influence decision-making is very much dependent on the availability of financial resources.

71 At the strategic level, the assistance provided by FAO to the development of the FATA Agriculture Action Plan was a practical and relevant response to the immediate rehabilitation of agriculture following the military operation and the return of internally displaced persons to the region. Furthermore, the FATA Agriculture Policy 2016-2549 was drafted by FAO and is in line with the Government’s FATA Sustainable Return and Rehabilitation Strategy (FATA SRRS). If enacted effectively, this Agricultural Policy can make a strong contribution to long-term agriculture development in the region. In this regard, the incorporation of integrated natural resource management as a guiding principle is highly likely to play a significant role as it has already been tested in FATA and can promote coordinated planning and enable the various sub-sectors to draw upon complementarities. The integrated natural resource management is an innovative and comprehensive approach to effectively and efficiently manage the agriculture sub-sectors (i.e. crops, irrigation, livestock, fisheries and forestry) under one vision. This approach is neither institutionalized nor operational in other provinces, where multiple departments under different ministries manage each sub-sector.

72 In Balochistan FAO projects have focused on rural poverty and agricultural development in the sensitive border districts of the province. These areas had seen a large influx of Afghan refugees over the years, and are the more deprived districts with the highest rates of poverty. Large parts of these regions have suffered from prolonged drought, which has adversely affected lives and livelihoods for long periods. The FAO projects have emphasized crop and livestock productivity and water resources development, which are drivers of agricultural and rural economic growth. In response to constraints that are widely acknowledged in the province, FAO has introduced new agricultural technologies as well as new techniques for improving marketing and increasing the returns to producers. FAO’s emphasis on organizing men and women in Community Organizations is consistent with the best practices in community-based development in the country, especially for the kind of small, isolated and often neglected rural communities with which FAO has been working. Training and operational support for the government’s agricultural and livestock extension workers has been a source of strength for these resource-deprived services.

73 The evaluation of the Balochistan Agriculture Programme (BAP)50 commissioned by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) found that the project’s focus on community mobilization and agricultural development was highly relevant to the needs to the remote and arid zones of intervention. The evaluation concluded that the project had focused and adapted interventions to the needs of Community Organizations’ members, rural entrepreneurs and the government. The evaluation team also found that skill development (training and capacity development) and improved inputs (seeds, plants, and poultry chicks) were very relevant and useful.

74 Similarly to BAP, the assessment of the Australian Assistance to Agricultural Development in Balochistan Border Areas (AusABBA) by the donor broadly affirmed the relevance of project interventions to the target group’s livelihood needs and opportunities. Beneficiaries highlighted several aspects of the project: the promotion of collective thinking and action, leadership development, business development for agricultural and livestock

49 The policy has been reviewed by the Office of the Governor and pending formal enactment.

50 The BAP GCP/PAK/113/USA – is the largest FAO programme and the longest “Balochistan Agriculture Project (BAP) Final Evaluation,” prepared for USAID by Management Systems International, October 2016.


27

products (through grading, packing and market information, among interventions), income generation, modern agricultural methods, water resources development, livestock disease control and treatment, improved skills, and enhanced linkages with government departments and markets.

3.2 Partnership and coordination

Finding 2. FAO’s approach of direct implementation in collaboration with provincial departments in FATA, Balochistan and the flood-affected districts in Sindh has leveraged the Organization’s quality and timely assistance. However, there is a need for provincial level partnerships that are broader than project-level scope.

75 Forging effective partnerships is at the heart of FAO’s mission and key for its delivery mechanisms. FAO’s apex partner in Pakistan is the Ministry of National Food Security and Research; however, other key partnerships at federal level were weak and focused around protocol, such as the Ministry of Climate Change – the coordinating authority for Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF); the Planning Development and Reform Department; Ministry of Finance; Ministry of Commerce; Ministry of Industries and Production; as well as the Prime Ministers’ Office and Parliamentarians. Each of these could add to FAO’s influence in the country, and offer new opportunities, platforms and avenues for technical assistance.

3.2.1 Operational partnerships

76 FAO’s approach of direct implementation in FATA, Balochistan and the flood-affected districts in Sindh has been highly relevant given the unique implementation context of a ‘complex emergency’. The uncertain security situation and critical timeliness demanded close coordination with stakeholders on the ground, including the Pakistan Army (in the case of FATA), Government line departments, suppliers and contractors, and target communities. Adopting the direct implementation approach has facilitated timely delivery of agricultural inputs, which was crucial given the seasonality of production. While directly implementing its activities, FAO collaborated closely with both federal and provincial organizations. There were extensive operational partnerships focused on specific projects with the provincial agriculture and livestock departments at the district level, whereby FAO provided the operational resources and technical expertise to extend government outreach and make it more effective. Thus, most of the project activities were implemented through or in consultation with the departments concerned.

77 At the field level in FATA, FAO has a strong working relationship with the Pakistan Army, the entity with the most direct local presence and most active coordination role in the ongoing rehabilitation activities in different sectors. This collaboration has facilitated FAO’s work in many crucial areas, including security, targeting of areas and beneficiaries, and access to the agencies. FAO has strategically placed three experts at the FATA Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Unit (RRU) to guide the implementation of the FATA Agriculture Action Plan and facilitate the development and approval of the FATA Agriculture Policy.

78 Field visits and discussions with FATA stakeholders confirmed that FAO’s activities were highly relevant to the needs of the people and are critical for the rehabilitation of agricultural livelihoods. Also, FAO has developed a strong and positive reputation and has effectively built trust with its partners. The focus on the key drivers of agricultural recovery, as identified by local beneficiaries, has ensured the effective rehabilitation of critical livelihood assets, thereby encouraging the return and settlement of Internally Displaced Persons back to their former areas of residence. The priority issues on which the FAO programme focused were the rehabilitation of irrigation schemes and of agricultural land, and access to good quality seed, as they address the most immediate needs and can generate results in a few months.

79 FAO also worked with at least 14 provincial, national and international NGOs. This collaboration covered several areas, including nutrition, health and hygiene, education and training, provision of electricity, women’s empowerment and kitchen gardens and irrigation. FAO has entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Pakistan Poverty


28

Alleviation Fund, the largest apex organization for community-driven development in the country, for channelling resources to community organizations that need assistance after the closure of the FAO programme in certain districts. At the district level, FAO organized district coordination committees with the participation of the NGOs working in the district.

80 In some of the projects in Sindh, FAO implemented its activities through NGOs and local organizations. These implementing partners brought empathy, local knowledge, managerial skills and a degree of technical expertise. FAO also developed the capacity of community organizations in Sindh for agricultural and value chain development. While in Sindh FAO worked with several national and international NGOs during the CPF period, this was not the case in Punjab, where FAO had a more limited field presence and mostly implemented projects through the government departments.

81 In addition to occasional collaboration for specific purposes, FAO worked with a large number of commercial organizations on a regular basis. This kind of partnership has served farmers’ needs in a number of fields, including plant nurseries, livestock and poultry feed, veterinary services, sheep shearing and poultry incubators on a sustainable basis through regular market channels. On a programmatic level, FAO conducted a study in partnership with the private sector: Soil Fertility Management for Sustainable Intensification in Pakistan.

3.2.2 Strategic partnerships

82 Strategically, FAO has engaged in joint planning with key stakeholders operating in FATA, including the FATA Secretariat, Pakistan Army, UN agencies (UNDP and the World Food Programme (WFP)).51 and local communities. For instance, beneficiary sites and households were selected in collaboration with the military authorities, political administration and FATA directorate, and were mainly based on the level of returnee population status provided by the Fata Disaster Management Authority.

83 The FAO programme also engaged the following federal organizations:

• Pakistan Agriculture Research Council and the Balochistan Agricultural Research and Development Centre provided its staff for the implementation of various project interventions, including establishment of greenhouses, bulking up of seed and other applied research technologies.

• The Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, through its senior members and researchers, has consistently helped FAO in policy level issues.

• The National Agricultural Research Centre provided assistance for the baseline and master trainers for Farmer Field School as well as support in organizing agriculture and livestock conferences.

• The Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited (the national agricultural development bank) and the General Post office worked closely with FAO for the establishment of community saving bank accounts for the community organizations in Balochistan.

3.2.3 United Nations partnerships

84 The One UN Programme (OP-I 2008-2012) is generally considered to have been successful in creating a more coordinated and synergistic approach to planning by the UN system agencies, and in avoiding duplication and encouraging joint work. However, this did not result in greater collaboration at implementation stages. In terms of resource mobilization, the One UN Programme has been less successful. Total funds raised by the One Fund over the period amounted to USD 63 million (USD 85 million including RAHA52), of which FAO’s share amounted to USD 2.08 million (USD 5.87 million including RAHA) due to the reluctance of donors to contribute to the Multi-donor Trust Fund in the case of Pakistan.

51 WFP and UNDP are the only two other UN agencies having some focus on agriculture and livelihoods.: UN (2015), Joint Proposal by FAO, UNDP, UNICEF and WFP Community Resilience and Recovery Support to FATA’s Returning Internally Displaced Persons 9 Sept 2015.

52 Refugees Affected and Hosting Areas (RAHA) is the UN response to the Afghan refugee influx.


29

85 While the successes of OP-I are still significant, the scope and targets were over-ambitious, which, combined with inadequate emphasis on resource mobilization, led to significant funding gaps and under achievement. Integration and synergy across Joint Programmes, as well as among different Joint Programme Components (within a single Joint Programme), was weak and this led to fragmented results. Security concerns and multiple humanitarian crises adversely affected the performance of OP-I; the new programme (OP-II) emphasized disaster risk mitigation and disaster risk management, including emergency preparedness at provincial and district level including FATA.

86 The One-UN programme II (OP-II 2013-2017) was designed on the basis of lessons learned and more aligned with the country Framework for Economic Growth, which was launched in July 2011 and provided a firm basis for UN engagement with emerging national development priorities in Pakistan. On the basis of lessons learned, in late-2011 the United Nations Country Team initiated the preparation of a more streamlined One UN Programme (OP-II). The United Nations Country Team has identified six Strategic Priority Areas: 1) vulnerable and marginalized populations have equitable access and use of quality services; 2) inclusive economic growth through the development of sustainable livelihoods; 3) increased national resilience to disasters, crises and external shocks; 4) strengthen governance and social cohesion; 5) ensure gender equality and social justice; and 6) food and nutrition security for the most vulnerable groups. Around twenty outcomes have been defined and these are being refined by UNCT. The timing of the current FAO CPF preparation is closely tied in with the discussions related to the OP-II, which ensured close complementarity while also benefiting from province level consultations on development priorities.53

87 A stronger emphasis was placed in OP-II on provincial capacity development and technical support. In response, the majority of UN agencies established programme offices in the provincial capitals to better support and advice provincial governments.

88 FAO participated in a number of Strategic Priority Areas and was the convener of the OP-II SPA 6 “Food and Nutrition Security for the most Vulnerable Groups”. According to the OP-II Operational Review conducted by the UN Resident Coordinator Office in 2016, it found that SPA 6 was the best performer in terms of consistency, regular updates and coordination. In addition to the OP-II SPA 6, FAO led the Agriculture Development Partner Forum to foster partnerships within the development partners.

89 The Livelihood Restoration and Protection and Sustainable Empowerment of Vulnerable Peasant Communities in Sindh Province was an exemplar joint UN initiative, in which FAO participated. The project was implemented in the wake of the floods of 2010 and 2011 using the Human Security framework. This provided an excellent framework to address immediate issues of rehabilitation and improved livelihoods, and to then address a range of structural factors that could potentially adversely affect vulnerable hari.54farmers. This Human Security framework is unique for FAO and it provides a model which could be replicated widely.

90 Under the OP-II, four UN agencies (WFP, FAO, UNICEF and WHO) provided technical support for Scaling up Nutrition based on the technical expertise of each participating agency; results and activities were defined and planned accordingly. At the provincial level, the agencies provided direct technical support and human resources to the SUN secretariats: FAO supported Balochistan, WHO supported Sindh, UNICEF supported Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and WFP supported Gilgit-Baltistan and the federal level.

91 Under the Food Security Working Group, formally the Food Security Cluster, FAO and WFP jointly coordinated the food security-related interventions, and developed stakeholders’ capacity for preparedness and response activities in nutrition and disaster risk reduction/resilience. In addition to conducting a number of strategic and informative assessments, including a Detailed Livelihood Assessment in 2011; a Livelihood Recovery Appraisal in

53 Pakistan One UN Programme II: 2013-17.

54 “Hari” as defined in the Sindh Tenancy Agreement 1950 and its amendments, means a ‘tenant’ farmer, or one who tills the land of another, but who has occupancy rights and thus has control over how the land use cropped. This is distinct from ‘sharecroppers’ who are employed to the land according to the land-owners direction.


30

2012 and 2013; a Detailed Food Security Assessment in 2012 for Balochistan, Punjab and Sindh, and in 2013 for KP/FATA; a Sindh Drought Need Assessment; and a Household Economy Analysis in 2015.

92 A large number of organizations are members of the Food Security Cluster in various capacities, including international, national and local NGOs; government authorities (National Disaster Management Authority, the co-chair until 2013, and Provincial Disaster Management Authorities); line departments, including the Agriculture and Livestock and Dairy Development Departments; donors; and UN agencies. The number of cluster members today exceeds 300, although less than 100 are active.

93 The CPE team found the Food Security Working Group a very useful platform for coordination and exchange of knowledge and partnerships, in addition to the production of timely and high-quality assessments and studies. However, the Food Security Working Group needs a communication and outreach strategy for its products and to re-engage the National Disaster Management Authority to better influence national plans.

3.3 Normative dimensions of FAO’s work

3.3.1 Support to poor and vulnerable populations

Finding 3. FAO’s Balochistan projects focused equal attention on the largest ethno-linguistic groups of Balochistan (the Baloch and the Pashtuns), between which there is a sensitive relationship requiring balance. In Sindh, FAO worked with resource-poor, food-insecure, vulnerable farming households affected by recurring floods. The Organization treated men and women equally, as well as minorities.

94 FAO projects in Sindh and Balochistan pursued poverty alleviation through a variety of interventions, aiming to lift the rural poor out of poverty. However, neither project adopted a method for using the official poverty line or any other approach for targeting, monitoring and assessment. At the community level, investments in public goods (e.g. water reservoirs) are usually inclusive and beneficial for the poor in terms of participation and benefits; however, interventions designed for households and individuals cannot be assumed to benefit the poor unless they are designed for and delivered to those identified as poor, which is why a number of projects by government and other agencies have adopted the Poverty Score Card approach55 for targeting the poor.

95 FAO’s Balochistan projects reflected equal attention on the largest ethno-linguistic groups of Balochistan (the Baloch and the Pashtuns), between which there is a sensitive relationship that requires balance across the groups. These projects also targeted the poorer and neglected districts, as well as several of the food insecure ones. Their overall approach included systematic attention on women, and opportunities for enhancing women’s incomes and status through interventions that were culturally appropriate in the rural communities of the project districts.

96 FAO chose to work with flood affected vulnerable districts that were frequently affected by drought and sometimes by flooding. Both the flood emergency projects in Sindh and Balochistan worked with affected communities (vulnerable men and women, haris and small-scale landlords). Among the flood-affected population, the project planned to prioritize smallholder farmers, tenants/sharecropping families and marginalized groups such as women-headed households.

97 The review of the two flood emergency projects in Sindh indicated that FAO has worked with resource-poor, food insecure, vulnerable farming households affected by recurring floods. The Organization treated men and women equally, as well as minorities. For example, in Doulatpur Minor, Mirpurkhas, 40 percent are minority Hindus who were proportionately included among the beneficiaries.

55 This is now the standard targeting approach for identifying poorer administrative units within a district and categories of poor and non-poor within villages in IFAD-assisted projects in Balochistan, southern Punjab and Gilgit-Baltistan.


31

98 The FAO response to the 2005 earthquake in northern Pakistan was one of the very few cases where a livelihoods-based approach was used consistently from damage and needs assessment to programming and coordination, with good results. As a result, the FAO response included a well-funded and relevant rehabilitation programme.56

99 With reference to FAO’s work in FATA, where most of the social and productive infrastructure in the militant-affected parts of the region were destroyed, only the poorest and low income internally displaced persons are opting to return to their places of origin. This is especially true for areas where displacement has been most prolonged (as long as nine years), since those with better financial status can opt to live in large cities where the available social and economic opportunities are far better. Since the livelihoods and food security of the poorest returnees are directly linked to agriculture, all internally displaced persons returnees were equally treated irrespective of tribes and ethnic groups. A degree of flexibility was applied in the identification of returnees in order to ensure that unregistered vulnerable communities57 were not left out. Most of the farmers in the affected areas have small plots of land (less than an acre), and in areas where irrigated cultivation was possible, all farmers were supported in rehabilitating their lands and in providing wheat seed/vegetable packages and fruit trees. Moreover, field interviews ascertained that pre-established beneficiary selection criteria were followed by FAO field staff to ensure fair targeting and selection. To ensure inclusive support, in cases where the required identification documents were not available, FAO field staff relied on various alternative methods of beneficiary verification, with certification by local elders and the military as the last resort.

100 Rural youth in Pakistan play an important role in the political, economic and social development of the country. Despite FAO’s global knowledge in empowering youth through agriculture, FAO Pakistan does not have a programmatic focus on engaging the youth in agriculture.

3.3.2 Support to rural women

Finding 4. FAO’s women-focused activities in Sindh, Balochistan and FATA, such as kitchen gardening, poultry and livestock, empowered vulnerable women by increasing their purchasing power, and contributed to improving their socio-economic status.

101 There is a general perception that due to the traditional purdah system, women in rural Pakistan have a limited role in farming. However, discussions and field visits revealed that in many areas women from poor households actively work in the fields in almost all aspects of crop production. Moreover, across the region, poultry and small ruminants are a highly valued asset of poor households, with small household flocks and herds primarily managed by women. Additionally, women are wholly responsible for grain storage and food processing (e.g. pickle making, sun drying and food preparation).

102 Major challenges in women-focused programming include low literacy levels and the community’s reluctance in allowing women to interact with development organizations. However, once established, such programming can result in far reaching benefits for household food security and the community’s overall welfare.

103 FAO emphasized the mobilization of village men and women as the basis for their empowerment. The Organization deployed female social mobilization teams and women staff for working with village women, developed Woman Field Schools, and helped women in homestead gardening, fruit nursery development and post-harvest management practices.

56 Evaluation of the FAO Response to the Pakistan Earthquake, February 2009.

57 The majority of international partners only cater to registered internally displaced persons, while the most vulnerable are not registered.


32

3.3.2.1 Women in FATA

104 Women in FATA play a key role in ensuring household food security. This includes managing livestock, tending vegetable gardens, basic food processing and, in some cases, participation in all crop production activities. Women-headed households among the internally displaced persons make up between five and seven percent of households, and more in some areas where many men leave to seek work outside of the region.58 Almost half of the total internally displaced person population comprises women and girls.59

105 It is worth noting that more than 100 Women Open Schools have been organized under the FATA projects.60 This is a significant accomplishment in an area where access to women is culturally difficult and even impossible at times. In such circumstances, women groups have been formed through consultation with and the consent of community elders.

3.3.2.2 Women in emergency and rehabilitation interventions

106 With the implementation of two emergency projects in flood-affected areas in Sindh, female beneficiaries reported an increase in self-confidence and self-respect owing to economic independence (according to the post-distribution/harvest survey for poultry and kitchen gardening). They expressed feeling confident in making decisions regarding their families and having freedom of choice in buying food and other necessary items. With yields of vegetables exceeding normal production by 12 to 15 percent, women Farmer Field School participants were encouraged to sell their produce in large, well-established markets in Jacobabad, which increased their earnings by around 10 percent.

107 FAO introduced the concept of woman collective farming at eight locations in flood-affected areas in Sindh, where multiple community members were encouraged to share a collective garden. The collective farming interventions were successful and well-received by the woman for various reasons, including reduced administrative and management pressure, greater flexibility, shared risk, economies of scale, greater access to capital and enhanced learning opportunities.

108 FAO provided the women’s groups with technical support related to best practices in vegetable production, and assisted the groups with marketing their produce by helping members establish linkages with local markets.

3.3.2.3 Women in agri-business and income generation

109 A recent study commissioned by FAO61 showed that there is a standard division of labour between men and women in the production and marketing of wheat, vegetables, fruit and fodder: men undertake most of the heavy labour such as land preparation and skilled work such as pesticide application, while women are responsible for extensive labour such as planting and weeding, and both are engaged in harvesting. Men are in charge of marketing of fresh products and keep the income, while women may generate income by pre- (seedling) or post- (processing) production activities. In livestock production, men are owners and beneficiaries of the large animals, which require high investment and yield relatively high cash return. Women own and look after smaller animals, which normally yield benefits for household consumption and nutrition. Women are also active in two types of handicraft production, embroidery and stitching, and wool products.

58 FATA Agriculture Action Plan - FATA Sustainable Return and Rehabilitation.59 The Crises of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in FATA and their Impact on Pashtun Women by Zakia Rubab

Mohsin.

60 The schools have focused on key learning needs of women including kitchen gardening, livestock management and backyard poultry management.

61 Dai Peters, “Women’s Economic Empowerment in Balochistan,” September 1, 2016.


33

110 The Balochistan Agriculture Project evaluation concluded that the project created economic opportunity for women, which led to their economic empowerment, manifested through increased income and financial decision-making at the household level. Regarding economic empowerment, increases in income and control over decisions related to assets and expenditures showed the greatest increase. Women-specific project activities were focused on home-based income generation rather than access to markets and enterprise development. These included traditional and subsistence-oriented activities, such as kitchen gardens, poultry and livestock. Mobility-related economic opportunities (access to markets and the ability to work outside the home) showed much less of an increase.

111 In connection with the women’s component of AusABBA, a study was conducted for the project describing the project’s potential for engaging women in production and marketing. The key findings and recommendations of the study have been reflected in the project’s proposal for Empowering Baloch Women, which proposes to develop women’s enterprises and related value chains for seven product lines (sheep fattening, seedling production, wool processing, egg and poultry production, fruit and vegetable drying, milk production and saffron). The proposal also provides reason for caution in pursuing milk production (very profitable but requires high upfront investment) and saffron production (profitable and suitable for Balochistan’s agro-ecological conditions, but needs more preparatory investigation). It was not clear to the evaluation team what will be gained during the short project period by experimenting with difficult production lines, rather than concentrating on those with greater likelihood of success. If the intention of the project is to test new approaches that can be scaled up by AusABBA II and other initiatives, as the proposal suggests, then the priority should be to develop product lines whose impact can be demonstrated, not only presumed, during the pilot project period.

3.4 FAO’s comparative advantage

Finding 5. FAO’s activities to promote agricultural development mostly followed an extension agent approach, as projects engaged directly with farmers and government extension departments. While this approach yielded good short- and medium-term results, there is a need for more focus on the upstream enabling environment through agribusiness investment planning and sector-wide analysis.

112 Regarding FAO’s comparative strength and strategic relevance in Pakistan, the CPE team identified three interlinked factors:

• mandate to act, drawn from FAO’s global knowledge and core competencies;

• position to act, drawn from FAO’s past experiences and strategic partnerships;

• capacity to act, drawn from FAO’s delivery capacity (human and financial).

3.4.1 Mandate to act

113 At country level, the corporate mandate of development organizations has limited relevance, as often development agencies with no or limited mandate in agricultural development rush to unilaterally deliver projects on food security, nutrition, on-farm water management and agriculture extension just to expand the field project portfolio and achieve resource mobilization goals.

114 In Pakistan, FAO is technically self-reliant and has upheld FAO’s global mandate in the country. While the country office has benefited from good backstopping from the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP) and headquarters, this support has the potential to grow and improve. Compared with the large size and scope of the Pakistan programme, however, the modest regional and headquarters resources prioritize smaller or emerging country programmes. As of 2016, Pakistan is part of FIRST and INFORMED – global projects coordinated at headquarters. The former suffered from extensive delays in hiring the FIRST Policy Officer, but is now on track. In addition, FAO Pakistan receives support from the SP5 team on resilience issues.


34

115 FAO Pakistan did not fully utilize FAO’s normative products and services, such as climate-smart agriculture Guidelines, Codex,62 VGGT63 64 and statistics – all of which are very pertinent to Pakistan and could inform existing projects. Some of the conservation agriculture practices introduced by FAO fall under the larger umbrella of climate-smart agriculture, although they were not mentioned as such. Such practices can shape the extension approach of the agriculture departments and are a valuable instrument and example of climate change adaptation. Furthermore, Codex codes and standards are very relevant for Pakistan food safety and trade potential, and the VGGTs are very much linked to FAO’s work on land tenancy in Sindh and can influence a number of Acts.

3.4.2 Position to act

116 FAO Pakistan has an excellent track record in supporting and developing grassroots agriculture and is well experienced in rehabilitation response, but lagging in filling a strategic gap in upstream agriculture-related challenges preventing agriculture in Pakistan to reach its full potentials such as (reference can be made to paragraph 64 of this report) agriculture subsidies, trade, industries, rural transformation, land tenure, social protection, rural finance and market development (and the more persistent issue of the FATA reform and the possible merge with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa).

117 To a large degree, FAO’s approach in Pakistan has been dominated by an extension agent approach to agricultural modernization and value chain development – with the exception of the recent activities in Balochistan - rather than sector investment planning and economic analysis. Investment planning, supply-chain strengthening and market development are particularly important given that FAO is striving to facilitate a shift in Pakistan from subsistence farming systems to market-oriented agriculture. The key challenges facing the small-scale farmer to access quality markets and engage effectively in value-addition are more related to the enabling environment, e.g. public infrastructure, regulations, policies and political interest. The evaluation found that many partners perceived the FAO programme in Pakistan as opportunistic and driven by donor interests. There are so many critical needs and areas of specialization in Pakistan’s agriculture sector in which FAO is best suited to take the lead and which are neglected both by donors and governments.

118 FAO is the lead international partner in Pakistan on Transboundary Animal Diseases and the lead partner (if not the only one) on agricultural development in FATA and Balochistan with direct access to local communities and direct contact with the provincial/district technical departments. This is a significant achievement and provides a strong basis for further programme development.

119 As discussed in section 3.1, FAO needs to adapt to the new realities of the devolution like the other UN agencies. Provincial governments expect and need targeted customized support from FAO that starts with joint planning and consultations. Many of the outstanding FAO results in FATA and Balochistan can be attributed to having a physical presence in both regions. Having sub-offices rather than project offices gives FAO the opportunity to leverage its position to engage in policy reforms, institutional development and inter-provincial exchange and collaboration between line departments in two or more provinces.

3.4.3 Capacity to act

120 FAO Pakistan’s staff are highly qualified, committed and professional. For example, the TADs project manager is the most senior and respected Animal Health Expert in Pakistan and a senior Water Expert joined the office from headquarters. Despite having more than 250 staff, some key functions are missing, such as Agriculture Economist, Food Security Expert, Climate Change Expert and other sub-sector specialists in seeds, forestry, agriculture

62 The Codex Alimentarius, or “Food Code” is a collection of standards, guidelines and codes of practice adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission –Pakistan has a Codex focal point in Ministry of Health.

63 The VGGT refers to the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security promote secure tenure rights and equitable access to land, fisheries and forests.

64 FAO in collaboration with the National Centre for Rural Development (NCRD) organized a national workshop on the VGGT in Pakistan in 2014 but no follow-up actions were taken.


35

investment and fisheries – some functions can be filled by medium-term consultants and with the size of the Pakistan programme this is financially feasible.

121 Some key managerial and technical activities need to be better streamlined, such as monitoring and evaluation, communications and Farmer Field Schools. The evaluation found that these teams don’t collaborate much with their peers under other FAO projects or in different locations in Pakistan. Even though the FATA and Balochistan teams work for the same office, they rarely exchange experiences, lessons learned or plans. The evaluation also noticed that the office is facing some human resource management issues in terms of awarding stable contracts, career development and on-job training opportunities, which has caused some frustration among the staff.


36

4. Assessment of FAO’s contributions

4.1 FAO’s contributions to Cluster A

Cluster A

Outputs (FAO project portfolio)

Outcomes(FAO Strategic Objectives)


The One UN, focusing on outcomes from the SPAs on food security assessments, SUN, monitoring and sector coordination

SO1 (Outcome 1 – Outputs 1 and 2) Achieve self-reliance in essential food commodities

Finding 6. FAO’s interventions on food security were limited in scope and coverage, and the Organization’s interactions within the One UN Nutrition Network were isolated from project design and implementation.

122 Cluster A is comprised of interventions addressing reduced household food insecurity and malnutrition in rural and urban areas, including technical and financial support for food security assessments, support and coordination for the Pakistan Integrated Nutrition Strategy via SUN, implementation of the National Zero Hunger Programme; and the roll-out of the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification initiative.

123 Under the leadership of the Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform, the Government launched the Vision 2025 framework in 2014, a document which outlines a broad strategy to achieve the status of middle-income country by 2030. With regard to achieving food security, the vision follows a twin-track approach involving i) direct action to immediately tackle hunger for the most vulnerable; and ii) longer-term, sustainable activities focusing on smallholders and their right to food, increasing income and ensuring adequate nutrition. In the short-term, Pakistan aims at protecting the most food-insecure segments of its population through relief measures, while the long-term goal is to create and invest in an efficient and diversified agriculture sector that can provide nutritious products to the country’s’ population and strengthen the economy through exports and the provision of inputs to industry.

124 The evaluation found that the food security component of the FAO programme accounts for less than 5 percent of the total programme budget, although the work under this cluster is the core mandate of FAO globally.

4.1.1 Food security monitoring and assessment

125 An important part of FAO’s work in this cluster is its role in coordinating and providing technical and financial support to the monitoring of food security through the Integrated Phase Classification. The Integrated Phase Classification was introduced in Pakistan in 2012 with the specific objective of strengthening evidence-based food security coordination and analysis for improved programming. So far, two rounds of Integrate Phase Classification Acute analysis were conducted at district level, involving more than 400 professionals/government officials from more than 15 different departments. The methodology of the Integrated Phase Classification analysis for chronic food insecurity was reviewed by the joint FAO-WFP Global Support Unit, which concluded during its workshop in December 2016 that additional indicators were needed in order to strengthen the analysis and enable the Integrated Phase Classification to provide more accurate data. After consensus was reached among major stakeholders, additional outcome indicators such as Starchy Staple Ratio, Starchy Staple Expenditure Ratio, Prevalence of Undernourishment, Food Consumption Score and percentage of cash expenditure spent on food were prepared at district level. These indicators were prepared with the technical support of the Integrated Phase Classification Global Support Unit and FAO Statistics Division.


37

126 Some federal stakeholders would like to consider the Integrated Phase Classification Chronic as a pilot, rather than endorsing it as a conclusive analysis. The evaluation found that due to lack of coordination at the design stage, the Ministry of National Food Security and Research did not provide ownership and institutionalization of the Integrated Phase Classification at government level. While the provincial Integrated Phase Classification Chronic analysis for Sindh was successfully completed in late 2016, the process of validation and the finalized Integrated Phase Classification Chronic products (maps and reports) are still pending due to limited availability of key data. The Integrated Phase Classification Technical Working Group agreed to limit the focus of the Chronic analysis to one province (Sindh) rather than several provinces for comprehensive food security analysis. Focusing on Sindh has also come in conjunction with pressure from the European Union to advance key Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN) policy work in Sindh.

127 In general, the Integrated Phase Classification process was instrumental in creating awareness of the importance of having an efficient Food and Nutrition Information System. There is, however, no coordinated mechanism to process the information through a food and nutrition security lens in order to inform policies and stakeholders.

4.1.2 Coordination of nutrition programmes (SUN)

128 A high level National Nutrition Committee at the Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform oversees nutrition planning and implementation across sectors and ensures multi-sectoral implementation of nutrition interventions. The National Nutrition Committee is the highest national level decision-making committee headed by the Minister of Planning, Development and Reform, and includes participation of all of the secretaries of the key ministries to foster a multi-sectoral approach to address nutrition by overseeing policy, strategy and monitoring.

129 The One UN Nutrition Network: FAO, UNICEF, WFP and WHO supported the Scaling Up Nutrition Initiative in Pakistan based on an integrated and multi-sectoral package of nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive interventions. The network supported the Government in updating the 2005 National Food-based Dietary Guidelines.

130 In 2016, the One UN Nutrition Network conducted a Joint-Assessment of the National Multi-Stakeholder Platform to assess the progress made against the SUN global processes and goals, which concluded that impressive progress and strategic gains were made in Pakistan. The coordination of SUN activities at provincial level was headed by a different agency according to the province, with FAO taking the lead in supporting the Balochistan SUN Secretariat. The evaluation found that Balochistan achieved the most prominent progress among the other provinces in terms of implementation of nutrition sensitive interventions, and while this cannot be attributed entirely to FAO, a plausible contribution in terms of coordination was noted.

131 The evaluation team found that most FAO projects had a very limited focus on nutrition sensitive agricultural interventions; even the projects in Balochistan have not incorporated the work of the Balochistan SUN Secretariat into its plans.

132 In 2016, Pakistan was selected to benefit from two FAO global flagships (FIRST and INFORMED) supporting the food security and nutrition sector. Due to various delays in implementation, very limited activities had taken place at the time of the CPE; however, the evaluation team noted that it is highly likely that through INFORMED, Pakistan stakeholders will be able to generate and analyse quality data for evidence-based FSN policies. Also, through FIRST, Pakistan stakeholders, specifically in Sindh where the programme has greater focus, will be able to articulate, prioritize and roll-out quality policies which address FSN issues. Both projects can effectively contribute to the SDGs in Pakistan; given their global focus, these initiatives can expose Pakistan to the global platform and networks on FSN.


38

4.1.3 Zero Hunger Programme

133 The National Zero Hunger Programme was launched in March 2012 in Pakistan. However, at the time of the evaluation the initiative was still at the stage of formulating concrete project proposals for federal funding and no national operational budget had been attached to the programme.

4.2 FAO’s contributions to Cluster B

Cluster B




Support on agricultural policies, strategies and systems (national and provincial)

SO2 (Outcome 1 – Outputs1 and 2) Improve quality of growth by adopting a strategy which is pro-poor, pro-small farmer and pro-environment

Finding 7. FAO’s policy-oriented interventions followed a very informative and consultative process. Impact was limited, however, as the supported national and provincial policies were not linked to earmarked funds. Although there was an abundance of studies, analyses and assessments for evidence-based policymaking in Pakistan, they were underutilized by decision-makers. Pakistan is committed to adopting and eventually achieving the SDGs.

Finding 8. Emphasis on organizing men and women in Community Organizations for market-oriented agriculture; the promotion of the integrated natural resource management as a guiding principle for sector-wide management; and the Human Security framework for agriculture rehabilitation were the key contributors to outcome level results.

134 This Cluster included support for agriculture and agriculture-related national and provincial policies and action plans; support for the SDG agenda; studies and analytical reports; integrated natural resource management; and irrigation and water resource management.

135 The Government’s Vision 2025 focused on inclusive growth, along with food and nutrition security, under its fourth pillar. The five objectives to achieve food security are: (i) protect the most food-insecure segments of the population; (ii) create a modern, efficient and diversified agriculture sector that can ensure a stable and adequate provision of basic food supplies for the country’s population; (iii) optimize the production and supply mix in line with current and projected needs; (iv) ensure that the entire supply-chain related to food security is geared towards provision of stable and affordable access to adequate, nutritious and safe food for a healthy life; and (v) use the resource base in an efficient and sustainable manner.

4.2.1 National and provincial policy development

136 At the federal level, there is no Food and Nutrition Security Policy. A Draft National Agriculture and Food Security Policy was formulated in 2013 by the Ministry of National Food Security and Research but still has to be approved by the Cabinet. The Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa prepared an agriculture policy in 2015, while Balochistan’s draft policy is awaiting government approval and Sindh has initiated plans to formulate a policy. Punjab prepared an agriculture sector plan and a Livestock Policy in 2015.

137 FAO has provided direct technical support or revisions and inputs to all above-mentioned policies. FAO also supported the FATA Agriculture Action Plan (draft), FATA Sustainable Return and Rehabilitation Strategy (2015), Multi-Sector Assessment for FATA, Assessment for Integrated Natural Resource Management for FATA, and the Livelihood and Food Security Assessment for Temporary Displaced Persons and Returnees.


39

138 The evaluation team found that the various federal and provincial agriculture policies and plans are of high quality and FAO’s inputs were valued by all stakeholders. In particular, the broad consultations and workshops held during the formulation stages of these policies, and the comprehensive stocktaking and situation analysis were particularly valuable given their multi-stakeholder approach. Nevertheless, the majority of policies lose relevance with time as these policies don’t come with earmarked resources and do not get translated or reflected in the Annual Development Plans.

4.2.2 Sustainable Development Goals

139 Globally, FAO has a strong mandate in relation to the SDGs. It is a custodian agency for 21 SDG indicators,65 for which it is responsible to compile data from countries while also supporting national capacity for data collection. FAO’s work directly contributes to 25SDG indicators while providing indirect contributions to several others. There are seven SGDs directly related to agriculture and natural resource management (e.g. SDG 1, 2, 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15), plus another four addressed as cross-cutting (SGD 5, 7, 8, and 17). FAO has been active within a One UN umbrella, as well as the SDG consultations in Pakistan. However, the Organization has not found the best approach to supporting federal and provincial governments to articulate targets and indicators, with clear plans of action for the many SDGs that fall under the purview of FAO’s mandate. UNDP, however, has assumed responsibility for improving the capacity development of SDG projects throughout the country. During the CPE visit to Karachi, UNDP had organized an awareness raising workshop on SDGs. FAO was invited, but missed the opportunity to participate in the workshop.

4.2.3 Sector-wide and thematic reports and assessments

140 FAO actively participated in various needs assessments/action plans (regional/provincial and national level) and produced several studies and assessments which contributed to results in this cluster area. In most cases, these informed the design of recovery and emergency projects and at the same time contributed to the preparation of disaster risk management plans by the government agencies. FAO, within the resilience portfolio, introduced a methodology for Hazard, Livelihoods and Vulnerability (HLV) baseline and contingency planning by incorporating Agriculture Stress Index System and Shock Impact Modelling System for hazard and vulnerability assessments. Prior to the CPE period, in 2007-2009 FAO piloted five HLV assessments under TCP funding, and this work was later extended to prepare ten more HLVs in hazard-prone districts of the country. FAO has planned HLVs in four target districts under the Department for International Development-funded project “Building Disaster Resilience Programme (BDRP)”.

141 The HLV is useful tool for district governments, United Nations agencies, NGOs and civil society for effective disaster response, and has contributed directly to district disaster risk management plans. The tool provides baseline information for contingency planning during post-emergency response and recovery. The evaluation team found that numerous national and international partners produce a large number of diverse HLV assessments, which varied in terms of scope and quality. This is a challenge for government agencies as they need to absorb and act based on dozens of HLV assessments.

142 As part of the Food Security Cluster FAO contributed to a number of assessments which informed large response operations, led jointly by the Government and several United Nations agencies. These include: the 2013 Livelihoods Recovery Appraisal of households affected by flooding in 2012 in Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan; the Recovery Needs Assessment and Action Framework 2014-16 in response to the 2014 floods (joint team of the National Disaster Management Authority and UN agencies-FAO, International Labour Organization (ILO), UNDP, UN Habitat and WFP); the Sindh Drought Needs Assessment in 2016; the Household Economy Analysis and Pre-Crisis Market Assessment (PCMA).

65 FAO and the SDGs, 2017 (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6919e.pdf ).



40

4.2.4 Integrated natural resource management

143 The structure of agriculture sector governance at the provincial level generally places agricultural research and extension within the departments of agriculture. The Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa follows a different administrative structure which represents the most integrated administration of sectors, in that the department of agriculture is also responsible for livestock, fisheries and cooperatives, with only forestry as a separate department. In Sindh, livestock and fisheries are grouped in the same department, whereas in Punjab forestry and fisheries are together, while cooperatives are managed through a separate department. Cooperatives in Balochistan are under the agriculture department, while livestock, forestry and fisheries are separate departments.66 In all provinces the agriculture and livestock departments have a presence at the district level, which is the basic unit of administration in the country, and also down to the union council, which is the smallest administrative unit.

144 FATA, with the support of FAO, has planned the integrated natural resource management. FATA has included piloting integrated natural resource management in the Annual Development Plan, and FAO has already completed six assessments for potential integrated natural resource management work in hotspot areas of FATA. This will also help in establishing and strengthening coordination mechanisms among the various line departments. With the merger of FATA with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, there is potential for the positive lessons of the integrated natural resource management approach to be replicated and expanded.

145 During the CPF cycle, FAO supported a number of initiatives targeting natural resource management, including the marine fisheries appraisal – funded by the Federal Government – that provided the technical foundations and some of the essential capacity required for long-term planning, informed positions vis-à-vis international rights and obligations, and sustainable management of marine fisheries. The evaluation found that the project has influenced the provincial fisheries policies of Balochistan and Sindh provinces.

146 To address key issues of rangeland management in Pakistan, FAO conducted a comprehensive study on the status of rangelands to review key issues related to the sustainable development of rangelands and come up with recommendations for future action and planning. Rangelands cover 52.3 million hectares of land in Pakistan, approximately 60 percent of the total geographic area.67 These are already under heavy pressure due to overgrazing beyond its carrying capacity, lack of rangeland policy, unclear land tenures and user rights, lack of understanding of upstream and downstream interactions, frequent hazards and climate change. The study was well-received by the stakeholders, however the findings and recommendations were not widely disseminated and FAO is not addressing some of the root causes of the degradation of rangelands. These include the institutional arrangement of rangelands in Pakistan, where in some provinces rangeland is managed by forestry departments and in other provinces by the environment and wildlife departments.

4.2.5 Irrigation and water management

147 Within the World Bank-assisted Sindh Agricultural Growth Programme, a portion of the loan, under a Unilateral Trust Fund modality, was awarded to FAO to assist in project management, procurement and contract management. This was formalized through the Sindh Water Sector Improvement Project that includes the management of civil works for rehabilitation and improvement of the irrigation and drainage network, institutional strengthening and community development, conducting detailed diagnostic studies to address the modernization of irrigation systems, as well as the floods and drainage issues of the province. After a water expert recently joined FAO Pakistan from headquarters, FAO was able to better mobilize and provide technical inputs on the reports and plans produced by the consultants, thereby improving its contribution to the project.

66 Sources: https://www.balochistan.gov.pk, https://www.kp.gov.pk, https://www.punjab.gov.pk and https://www.sindh.gov.pk

67 FAO (2016): Rangelands of Pakistan: Current status, threats and potential, FAO, Islamabad, 2016.

https://www.balochistan.gov.pk

https://www.kp.gov.pk

https://www.punjab.gov.pk

https://www.sindh.gov.pk

https://www.sindh.gov.pk


41

148 FAO conducted a study, in partnership with the private sector, on Soil Fertility Management for Sustainable Intensification in Pakistan that provided a baseline atlas of current soil fertility practices, disaggregated by farm size and cropping systems, district-level fertilizer use and soil fertility data, to help understand soil fertility management changes required for sustainable agricultural intensification.

149 FAO introduced an agricultural information system for crop forecasting and reporting, based on the integral use of remotely sensed data in Punjab and Sindh. Functional operational units were established in the provincial crop reporting service of Punjab and Sindh to provide agricultural crop statistics based on the integral use of geospatial information. The methodology was tested in the field in Punjab and Sindh during the rabi (winter) and kharif (summer) seasons 2012-13 and 2013-14. Key staff of Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), Crop Reporting Service and Provincial Food and Agriculture Department were trained in statistics, remote sensing, GIS and mobile data collection to improve crop acreage and yield information, and to improve the capability of provincial Crop Reporting Services for producing crop estimation and forecasts for planning and early warning reporting about crop situation in the two provinces.

150 It was anticipated that the technology developed would prove very beneficial to the involved organizations, including provincial Crop Reporting Services, the University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam, SUPARCO and the Ministry of National Food Security and Research. The geospatial systems developed could be extended to various national and provincial departments in the fields of environment, rural development, agricultural research, extension services and academia.

151 Spatial information about any crop in digital form can be effectively used to formulate and implement appropriate risk management strategies with regard to food insecurity, biodiversity and environmental sustainability. Studies of floods, flood-damaged crops and the losses occurred can be easily and accurately assessed. This can also provide baseline information for identifying drastic changes in any area or period of time.

152 SUPARCO, in collaboration with FAO, undertook the land cover mapping of Pakistan, starting with Punjab, Sindh and KPK-Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) to assess the land cover situation in Pakistan. Land cover maps were produced following the international land cover diagnostic criteria and using the FAO classification systems (LCCS). This is an important component of FAO’s land cover initiative designed to create a harmonized and extensive representation of land cover features of a single country and between countries. The atlases of Punjab, Sindh and KPK-FATA illustrating land cover information at district level are available in aggregated and cartographic form, along with tabular statistics per district. Work on the next phase includes the land cover mapping of Balochistan and Gilgit-Baltistan, in progress at the time this report was written.

153 The evaluation team found that while the systems and tools in the two provinces are established and functional, the department in Sindh is still using the conventional method for crop reporting due to a lack of capacities and staff. The Crop Reporting Service in Punjab is better staffed and funded and is able to make better use of FAO’s support. Moreover, its crop information is available publicly through its website (http://crs.agripunjab.gov.pk/reports), which is not accessible from SUPARCO.

4.3 FAO’s contributions to Cluster C

Cluster C




Balochistan projects SO4 (Outcome 2 – Outputs 1 and 3) SO2 (Outcome 1 – Outputs 1 and 3)

Expand exports and agro business potential

Average growth rate of 4%-5% per annum to support overall growth strategy of the government

http://crs.agripunjab.gov.pk/reports

http://crs.agripunjab.gov.pk/reports


42

Finding 9. FAO’s interventions in Balochistan developed and refined a strong production model over time – stronger for crops than livestock – that led to increases in incomes and more resilient livelihoods on a significant scale, enabling beneficiaries to embark on agribusinesses and market development.

154 This Cluster included support for agriculture productivity with a focus on FAO’s Balochistan project portfolio. The FAO programme in Balochistan consists of the Balochistan Agriculture Project, which started in 2009 and closed in December 2016, and the ongoing AusABBA, which started in 201268 and is currently in a no-cost extension phase (this will be followed by a second phase of the project, starting in July 2017 and is expected to last nine years (in a 3+3+3 phasing)). The BAP budget was USD 32 million and the AusABBA budget was USD 11 million.

155 Agricultural problems faced by marginal and smallholder farmers in Balochistan can be summarized as: i) crop and livestock productivity levels are generally low, and partial or complete crop failures are common; (ii) limited access to water supplies, inefficient use of the water that is available, and low levels of on-farm water management; (iii) poorly managed, overgrazed and degraded rangelands resulting in low levels of livestock production, increasing soil erosion and reduced water storage; (iv) weak research and extension systems with very limited outreach capacity; (v) high post-harvest losses and weak and underdeveloped value chains; (vi) off-farm employment opportunities in rural areas are limited and seasonal migration, particularly of male household members, is common; (vii) most poor rural households are in a food deficit, and devote as much as 80 percent of household expenditure to food items (at the same time, there is considerable scope to increase household incomes by raising agricultural production); and (vii) continuing increases in food prices to unprecedented levels create both risks and opportunities for resource poor marginal and smallholder farmers.

156 The primary FAO Strategic Objective for BAP was SO469 (Enable more inclusive and efficient agricultural and food systems); for AusABBA it was a combination of SO4 and SO2 (Increase and improve provision of goods and services from agriculture, forestry and fisheries in a sustainable manner). Both projects contribute to multiple SOs.

157 At the level of goal/impact, both projects pursued poverty reduction. They also focused on increases in income, including women’s income, crop and livestock productivity, and water resources development. AusABBA also emphasized food security and nutrition among its expected results, focused more on agribusiness and value chains, and initiated a women’s empowerment project based on value chain development. The evaluation team found an interesting progression in FAO’s work in Balochistan in terms of the shift from supporting rural poverty reduction (SO3) to a more market-oriented agribusiness approach (SO4), although value addition (processing agriculture produce) is still at early stages.

158 Both projects worked through a participatory approach, the foundation for which was the mobilization of rural men and women through community organizations. Both promoted marketing through collective efforts based on groups organized with the help of the community organizations and linked to local, provincial and national markets; and both worked with the Government of Balochistan on policy and regulatory issues, with AusABBA focusing on an agriculture sector policy and strategy for the province.

159 Both projects’ designs did not include interventions targeted towards resilience building and emergency response. There were no interventions for early warning systems, prevention and mitigation. However, a number of the interventions have contributed to more resilient livelihoods. These include irrigation schemes, the addition of cultivated area, introduction of appropriate crop varieties, veterinary services and market-based linkages for input supply and product marketing.

68 AusABBA lost a considerable amount of time because of the security situation prevailing in the project area and worked with an actual implementation period of approximately one and a half to two years.

69 The CPE team believes that the design and objectives of the BAP was more linked to SO3 (rural poverty).


43

160 The programme aimed to introduce a very large number of innovations, several of them through the Farmer Field School approach and many more through new crop varieties and value chain development, but did not show adequate appreciation for the circumstances and known adoption patterns of resource poor farmers. Moreover, the programme did not systematically track the extent of adoption of innovations and draw lessons for course corrections during implementation.

161 At the community level, BAP and AusABBA established Men’s Community Organizations, and Women’s Community Organizations and higher-level organizations for marketing on a large scale. It also provided various forms of capacity building assistance, including training in managerial skills, infrastructure operation and maintenance, and various aspects of crop and livestock production and marketing. BAP organized more than 900 community organizations in eight districts and benefitted 17 000 households; it also organized Farmer Marketing Collectives and Mutual Marketing Organizations. AusABBA organized approximately 11 000 households in 593 community organizations (358 for men and 235 for women) in its six target districts, as well as 37 Famer Marketing Collectives and eight Mutual Marketing Organizations.70 The number of community organizations reflects the approach adopted by the project – organizing approximately 100 community organizations in each district, 60 for men and 40 for women. More than half the AusABBA Farmer Marketing Collectives engage in marketing onions (12 Farmer Marketing Collectives) and dates (10 Farmer Marketing Collectives), and seven focus on wool. The Farmer marketing Collectives benefit 450 people. FAO expects that some of the Farmer Marketing Collectives will emerge as small companies to serve, in particular, the marketing needs of the area.

162 AusABBA has helped establish and nurture community organizations, Farmer Marketing Collectives, Mutual Marketing organizations and Business Support Service Providers. Community organizations of men and women are small, informal groups of individuals, each representing a household in a village or a settlement in the village. Community organizations take responsibility for all community-level activities, implementing most of them directly and facilitating and monitoring others. The Farmer Marketing Collective is an organization owned and operated by a group of farmers producing similar products who get together for marketing their products. Mutual Marketing Organizations are formed from relatively mature Farmer Marketing Collectives and can be legally registered under the Cooperatives Act of 1925. Business Support Service Providers are community members trained in management who provide services to Farmer Marketing Collectives. The Table below reports the distribution of these entities across the project area.

Table 8: Summary of local organizations and service providers

District WCOs MCOs FMCs MMOs

# WCOs # WCOs members

# MCOs # MCOs members

#FMCs # female FMC

members

# male FMC

members

#MMOs

Killa Saifullah 50 1,009 100 1,776 10 - 155 2

Loralai 56 1,308 85 2,086 11 - 124 3

Mastung 79 1,495 104 1,928 12 13 135 2

Musakhail 10 168 60 943 10 95 -

Pishin 35 593 50 818 10 - 141 -

Quetta 55 1,089 41 791 9 10 105 1

Sherani 21 347 60 929 3 - 41 -

Zhob 46 774 63 1,108 4 - 46 1

70 Appendix 1 also describes the nature of the community organizations mentioned here.


44

163 The initial role of community organizations,71 which are comprised of around 25 families, was to act as a social group with the immediate objective of addressing food availability. Their hallmarks were self-help and strict cost sharing from the community members themselves. Early priority issues were water supply and management, land levelling, access to improved seed, plant protection, animal health, and feed and fodder. The distribution of villagers mobilized through community organizations is given in the following Table.

Table 9: Distribution of organized beneficiaries across the Project area

District Tehsils Number of Organized Beneficiaries

Percent Distribution

Male Female Total Male Female District

Chagai Chagai, Dalbandin, Taftan 1 233 774 2 007 61% 39% 18%

Kech Buleda, Turbat, Dasht 1 070 566 1 636 65% 35% 15%

Kharan Kharan 1 119 920 2 039 55% 45% 18%

Nushki Nushki 1 100 863 1 963 56% 44% 17%

Panjgur Gowargo, Panjgur 1 100 652 1 752 63% 37% 16%

Washuk Shaogeri, Washuk 1 040 829 1 869 56% 44% 17%

Total 6 662 4 604 11 266 59% 41% 100%

164 A Farmer Marketing Collective is an organization owned and operated by a group of farmers producing similar products who join together in partnership to gain the advantages of economies of scale and to gain more control and bargaining power in marketing their products. Its members are interested individuals from several neighbouring community organizations who volunteered to create a new type of organization that was focused on commercializing production and marketing. Farmer Marketing Collectives may be formally established business organizations or informal associations that may contribute varying amounts of capital for the successful operation and management of the shared enterprise. It is distinguished from other businesses by the three principles: i) user-owner where the people who own and finance the Farmer Marketing Collective are those who use it; ii) user-control principle where control of the Farmer Marketing Collective is by those who use it; and iii) user-benefits where the benefits of the Farmer Marketing Collective are distributed to its users on the basis of their use.

165 It is recognized that these broad principles are the same for agricultural cooperatives. It is also recognized that the rationale for setting up a Farmer Marketing Collective is very much the same for a cooperative, such as bulking supply to gain efficiencies of scale in transportation and market penetration, and increasing bargaining power for the purchase of inputs and the prices received for products.

166 Five basic principles separate a cooperative from a Farmer Marketing Collective. First, no credit can be given. This is because in Pakistan and especially in Balochistan, many farmer cooperatives failed because the farmers were given a loan which was not repaid. As a Farmer Marketing Collective’s goal is to make a profit and to give the farmers better prices for their farm products, Farmer Marketing Collectives do not give loans. Second, Farmer Marketing Collective members accept that business is not for free. Those members who own the business have to raise the initial capital to enable the Farmer Marketing Collective to pay for the things required to run the business, such as arranging for packaging material and transport, and paying for business support services.

167 Third, Farmer Marketing Collectives have ongoing support from Business Support Service Providers. Balochistan’s unfortunate experience is that donor-supported farmers’ groups mostly failed after a year or so when project support was withdrawn. The people providing these services come from the community where they work, so they know the customs and language, and are trusted more readily. They are trained to give support in bookkeeping,

71 The descriptions of Community Organizations and Farmer Marketing Collectives that follow are taken from A. J. Essa, “Marketing Organizations: what traditional Value Chain analysis does not tell you,”.


45

management and community audits. The FAO project initially pays for 50 percent of the Business Support Service Provider’s costs, which is then reduced to zero over three years. Any member at any time can request the Business Support Service Provider to come with them to review and explain the Farmer Marketing Collective’s books and records, thus addressing the power disparities that can occur between literate and numerate members over their less literate membership.

168 Fourth, the requirement to have community audits recognizes that financial mismanagement has also been a cause of failure of farmer groups. Therefore, regular monitoring and transparent reporting is important. It involves checking the books of account and records by a group of Farmer Marketing Collective members, with the support of a Business Support Service Provider who can explain and respond to their questions. Finally, a Farmer Marketing Collective can only be established after a value chain study has been performed. This is to ensure that the group seeking the Farmer Marketing Collective is fully aware of what they have to do in order to improve returns to the members.

169 The following Table reports on the distribution of Farmer Marketing Collectives across the project area.

Table 10: Number of Farmer Marketing Collectives across six districts

Commodity Districts Total

Quetta Mastung Killa Saifullah

Loralai Zhob Pishin Musakhel Sherani

Apple 2 1 3 1 1 1 9

Grape 1 1 1 2 5

Apricot 1 1 2 1 2 1 8

Peach 1 1

Almond 1 1

Pine Nuts 1 1

Mulberries 1 1

Melon 1 1 2

Carrot 1 1 1 3

Tomato 2 1 2 1 1 7

Potato 1 1

Cauliflower 1 1 2

Capsicum 1 1

Onion 1 1 1 1 1 5

Garlic 1 1

Chili 1 1 1 3

Cumin 1 1

Wheat 1 1 1 3

Mash 3 3

Milk 1 1

Wool 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 11

Total 10 12 11 11 4 10 9 3 71

170 The Balochistan Agriculture Project’s community development approach, which operated in remote and difficult environments and within restrictive social arrangements, was highly relevant and effective in ensuring local support. Capacity building, training and ensuring that women were equally part of the development process was a successful approach in terms of encouraging full community involvement and greater empowerment.


46

171 The BAP evaluation’s survey of community organization members asked respondents whether the project had increased the capacity of their community to collectively identify their needs and problems, and to seek assistance from government and other partners to resolve these problems. Eighty-six percent of respondents (90 percent of 473 men and 79 percent of 220 women) reported that the project has increased their community’s capacity to identify needs and problems. Somewhat fewer respondents (77 percent overall, 78 percent of men, and 76 percent of women) said their capacity to seek external assistance to solve problems had improved.

172 The evaluation team found that both BAP and AusABBA projects developed and refined a strong production model over time that led to increases in incomes and more resilient livelihoods on a significant scale. An exemplary case is a stakeholder who started as a project beneficiary and was trained on seed production; after a few years, he has become a major seed producer in Balochistan and FAO started to procure seeds from his company. Other Farmer Marketing Collective members became major producers of fruits and vegetables with market links in Islamabad and Karachi (e.g. one Farmer Marketing Collective started exporting apples to the Gulf countries).

173 Livestock production activities have focused on the wool value chain and feed production in Balochistan and have been delivered through the livestock components of the FAO projects. The projects’ main focus was on horticultural high-value crops, improved cereal varieties and seed production, however opportunities for wool value addition and feed production were identified and pursued with positive impacts as well as positive externalities for the broader livestock rearing activities in the province. These projects were also the only ones in the FAO programme with a specific focus on livestock value-chain and agribusiness development.

174 The projects made effective use of the Eid livestock markets (Mandis), where most of the annual sale of farmers’ livestock takes place. The FAO projects were successful in enabling farmers to bring a better product to the market and ensure better prices. Furthermore, the markets were used as hubs for the provision of animal health services and awareness raising for diseases and good practices. Livestock markets are generally regarded as potentially very good entry points for vaccinations campaigns, however care must be taken not to disrupt business activities.

175 The FAO experience in Balochistan is very relevant to FAO’s current/future work in FATA and Sindh; however, the evaluation found minimal interactions between the two FAO teams in Balochistan and FATA.

176 At a strategic level, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor framework presents an opportunity to boost agriculture-driven economic growth. While more than 50 Memorandums of Understanding have been signed under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor , the agriculture sector has yet to feature in any China-Pakistan Economic Corridor programme, though cooperation for agricultural development is one of the potential areas for inclusion in the project. FAO’s technical capacity at global and regional level can be leveraged for a thoughtful engagement of the federal and provincial green sector ministries for inclusion of agriculture sector development in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

4.4 FAO’s contributions to Cluster D

Cluster D




Resilience and emergencies (climate change and disaster risk reduction) focusing on the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods focusing on FATA, Balochistan and Sindh

SO5 (Outcome 1 and 3) Improve resilience against climatic changes and shocks


47

Finding 10. FAO’s approach to restoring agriculture-based livelihoods in FATA and flood-affected areas contributed to improved absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacities. FAO has yet to programmatically respond to climate change.

177 This Cluster included the work of FAO Pakistan for resilience building to climate change, disaster risk reduction and emergency response during 2012–2016, which was framed under the FAO SO5 (Increase resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises) and clearly defined the Pakistan CPF under Priority Area 3 (disaster risk reduction/management and emergency response including natural resource management). Major interventions included response to emergencies, preparedness and strengthening resilience of vulnerable communities to future shocks.

178 In assessing resilience building, the evaluation team used a capacity development approach to assess the programme impacts around absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacity.

179 Absorptive capacity refers to the ability of a system to prepare for, mitigate or prevent negative impacts, using predetermined coping responses in order to preserve and restore essential basic structures and functions. This includes coping mechanisms used during periods of shock.

180 Improving absorptive capacity was a core focus of FAO’s work in Pakistan during the 2012-2016 period, with several interventions aimed at strengthening rural communities’ livelihoods and resilience to shocks. These projects strengthened the ability of communities to promptly restore agricultural production in the event of a negative shock, by focusing both on community level capacities and infrastructure as well as institutional and coordination mechanisms.

181 During this period, FAO contributed to the 2012 and 2014 flood responses in four vulnerable districts of Sindh and one in Balochistan. In addition, FAO proactively implemented three emergency projects in FATA covering Khyber, Kurram, North and South Waziristan and Orakzai Agencies.

182 Given that the people are regularly exposed to natural and complex disasters, which place already poor and vulnerable communities at risk, FAO considered it essential to integrate disaster risk reduction measures into all project activities for flood-affected communities in Sindh and Balochistan. FAO aimed to not only support their agriculture-based emergency needs (provision of inputs) but also helped them in building back better for strengthening their resilience to withstand future shocks.

183 In Pakistan, agricultural production has proven crucial in the context of emergencies given the dependency on agriculture as the primary source of livelihood in rural Pakistan. FAO’s timely distribution of quality seed packages in flood-affected target districts for three consecutive seasons enabled farmers to achieve crop production sufficient for six to 12 months. In addition, farmers were able to save some of the quality seeds for next season. The improved seed has the potential to yield 15 to 40 percent more than traditional varieties. For sustainability, FAO also supported some farmers on seed multiplication.

184 The One UN joint programme72 was a unique model project that successfully carried out all interventions to restore livelihoods of flood-affected communities in selected districts of Sindh. The three United Nations agencies (FAO, ILO and UN Women) used their technical capacities in an integrated way for sustainable empowerment of vulnerable peasant communities in Sindh province, covering both farm and non-farm livelihoods improvement. The project worked effectively with both men and women, addressing the human security needs, and not only restoring but improving on the pre-existing situation.

72 OSRO/PAK/206/UNO.


48

185 The joint programme effectively built on the comparative advantages and expertise of each organization. FAO contributed to improving agriculture-based livelihoods through rehabilitation of water resources, capacity development in conservation agriculture and provision of inputs. This empowered farmers’ organizations, water user associations and women groups to enhance their natural resource base. UN Women complemented FAO in women-based livelihoods interventions, and ILO provided non-farm skills training to community (including women and youth). The network of partnerships added value to FAO’s interventions while aligning responses with priority needs.

186 The interventions under the One UN joint programme helped the communities to minimize the impact of future disasters through the construction of raised bed platforms, tree plantations along embankments, distribution of flood-tolerant rice seed varieties, Cash for Work activities for lining of water channels, rehabilitation/development of drainage schemes in six villages and livestock vaccination. Through the introduction of conservation technologies, improved irrigation technologies, multiple cropping and flood-resistant rice varieties, the income of vulnerable communities was enhanced and their resilience strengthened to future shocks.

187 In FATA, through support from the Department for International Development, USAID and Japan International Cooperation Agency, FAO has been providing support in agriculture rehabilitation across four agencies since June 2015, including Khyber, Kurram, North Waziristan, and South Waziristan. The total portfolio in FATA under these donors is USD 15.7 million. At the time of the CPE, 227 727 households across the four Agencies have benefited from activities in: i) agriculture (land rehabilitation and distribution of wheat, maize, fodder and vegetable seeds, orchards and plant nurseries establishment); ii) livestock (vaccination, deworming, provision of mineral supplements and distribution of some poultry and small ruminants); iii) irrigation (rehabilitation of two minor canals and support to on-farm water management); and iv) trainings (Farmer Field Schools, Farmer Business Schools and Women Open Schools).

188 Field visits and interviews revealed that support provided by FAO in FATA has been timely and effective. FAO Pakistan demonstrated operational excellence, as in under two years FAO established a fully staffed office and delivered on average USD 1 million per month worth of assistance in FATA. Of all the packages provided to beneficiaries, the communities most appreciated the support to land rehabilitation and provision of wheat seed. An example of the benefit of these interventions, based on the Rabi 2015 post-harvest survey, is that the recipient households had an availability of four months of wheat stocks available.73

189 Irrigation is also a critical area for rehabilitation. However, FAO’s activity in this domain has been focused on secondary and tertiary irrigation systems (i.e. water channels and on-farm systems) with no focus on the rehabilitation of primary sources (e.g. diversion structures in areas with perineal sources and canals and head works in canal fed agriculture) given that rehabilitation of primary sources requires massive investments. As the primary sources are still in need of rehabilitation, the work on secondary and tertiary sources has not fully benefited the communities. For instance, a post-harvest survey undertaken by FAO revealed that almost 34 percent of crop seed beneficiaries had either no irrigation water or had water available to meet only (up to) 25 percent of their irrigation needs for Kharif crop. Although FAO has worked on two minor canals, rehabilitation of large-scale primary irrigation sources is beyond the Organization’s capacity.

190 FAO has provided some support to livestock rehabilitation, which is further elaborated in the section below (Cluster E). The most notable support in this area has been the livestock vaccination campaigns that helped in curtailing the spread of diseases and increased awareness within livestock farmers about the importance of vaccination. Moreover, through participation in the campaigns, the capacity of the field staff of the local Livestock and Dairy Development Department has also improved. However, as observed by the evaluation team, livestock rehabilitation, a primary source of resilience for poor farm households has not been given extensive consideration. Interviews and

73 Post-harvest Survey Report – Rabi 2015-16, Early Recovery Program FATA, August 2016.


49

field observations concluded that before the displacement, 70 to 80 percent households had one to three cows, 95 percent households had two to six goats/sheep, and almost 99 percent households had three to ten poultry birds. However, after coming back home, only 20 percent have cattle and the proportion of households and number of animals per household have also considerably reduced in the case of poultry and small ruminants.

191 Some of the rehabilitation measures implemented by the FAO projects, also contribute to greater resilience in FATA. For instance, the provision of highly productive, drought resistant seed varieties; the introduction of new products in areas where they were not widely produced before (e.g. providing cherry orchards in Kurram and maize in some areas of South Waziristan); and the support to livestock vaccinations to prevent disease outbreaks. Such an approach is extremely relevant and important in areas such as FATA which are highly prone to natural disasters and have limited access to major cities and markets.

192 Adaptive capacity refers to the ability of a system to adjust, modify or change its characteristics and actions to moderate potential future damage and to take advantage of opportunities, so that it can continue to function without major qualitative changes in function or structural identity.

193 After the first year of emergency support, FAO had strengthened local capacities to adapt to climatic changes by introducing conservation agriculture practices (improved adaptive capacity) in Sindh and FATA. The evaluation team found this advancement from pure emergency operations to more rural development interventions is unique and noteworthy. FAO’s role in the joint United Nations multi-year consortium (2015-19) – a United Kingdom-funded programme which pre-positions funds for emergency response and establishes a coordination structure and division of responsibilities – is an excellent example of preparedness. The programme provided assistance for the development of intuitional capacities, support in risk assessments, contingency planning and improving early warning systems, and helped to build transformative capacity.

194 FAO’s activities under adaptive capacity included infrastructure, extension and provision of inputs. The irrigation systems were well repaired and delivered an estimated 20 to 30 percent more water. When combined with improved practices (introduced through Farmer Field School extension approaches) crop yields increased very significantly by 50 to 100 percent.74 Such changes are transformational, as they allow the farmers to pay off debts, market their crops and, in the case of more entrepreneurial minded farmers, start considering a significant expansion of market-oriented production. Within about a year from the implementation of these activities there was a doubling in the number of farmers applying the practices, confirming that the results are compelling and the practices viable. Application of these improved practices has the potential to impact on agriculture throughout the province.

195 The impact evaluation study of the Department for International Development indicates that knowledge and adoption of disaster risk reduction practices have increased among beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The largest overall improvements in knowledge and adaptation were recorded among the communities using flood-tolerant crop varieties (with the percentage of beneficiaries using these varieties increasing from 8.6 to 24.1 percent). Meanwhile, adoption of Raised Bed Platforms increased by 20 percent among non-beneficiaries. Farm families were able to generate income through the sale of surplus production, helping them to cover household expenses and purchase agricultural inputs for the following season. The consumption of highly nutritious foods (vegetables, eggs, dairy products) also increased, with beneficiaries’ overall dietary diversity increasing by 10 percent. The evaluation of the Department for International Development also reported that beneficiaries’ reliance on the purchase of staple foods declined, reducing their vulnerability to price shocks. Training improved their technical skills, promoted effective decision-making, contributed to increased yields and income generation and enhanced communities’ capacity to cope with the impacts of future natural hazards on agriculture.

74 The impact evaluation study of the Department for International Development.


50

196 The introduction of conservation agriculture technologies (such as laser land levelling, zero tillage, direct seeded rice, wheat/rice cultivation on ridges, mulching/composting and multiple cropping/intercropping) were well received by beneficiary farmers and also taken up by non-beneficiary farmers in other villages. Farmers reported that now three crops are harvested due to intercropping (sugarcane, onion and wheat). Farmers also mentioned that they have now learned about the importance of seed quality, choice of varieties and through pest scouting training they have reduced the use of pesticides. Laser land levelling technology has been well taken by all farmers in areas where they face water shortages, such as Dadu and Mirpur Khas. The owner of the laser equipment, who rents the service to other farmers, mentioned that he can barely meet the demand for the service and is considering purchasing an additional machine.

197 According to the project monitoring and evaluation reports (which the evaluation team did not verify but agreed with the overall findings), through adopting conservation agriculture techniques, the farmers claimed that crop productivity has increased up to 40 percent. It has been reported that there was a 25 percent decrease in the utilization of commercial fertilizer and pesticides. Farmers found conservation agriculture technologies and practices helpful in conserving soil moisture and fertility, in order to decrease the cost of production and to increase farm income, which benefited both peasants/hari people and landowners.

198 FAO interventions helped the vulnerable communities immediately resume the agricultural production cycle, through the provision of inputs critical for the production of food and cash crops. Indirectly, these activities increased access to a diversified and nutritious diet for beneficiaries and prevented further deterioration of the nutritional status of children, women and women-headed households living in the most severely flood-affected areas.

199 Transformative capacity refers to the ability to create a fundamentally new system, in which beneficiaries can absorb the effects of shocks and return to their previous level of livelihood activities and living standards. Such a transformation is needed when ecological, economic or social structures make the existing system untenable.

200 FAO’s programme supported the National Disaster Management Authority in mainstreaming disaster risk management into the agriculture sector in 2012. FAO, under the One UN DRM Joint Programme, worked with the ministerial working group (formed by the National Disaster Management Authority) to provide technical assistance to Ministry of National Food Security and Research for the development of technical guidelines on disaster risk assessment and risk reduction, and to mainstream disaster risk reduction into its development planning and programmes. An institutional assessment for integrating disaster risk management into the agriculture sector was the main output which was followed by capacity development of the Ministry of National Food Security and Research in mainstreaming disaster risk management in development planning and disaster risk management.

201 The evaluation team agrees with the finding of the FAO Global Evaluation of SO5. Disaster risk reduction/disaster risk management has been a significant component of FAO programmes in Pakistan since 2011. The policy component supports different levels of government, including strong contributions to the National Agriculture and Food Security Policy, an institutional assessment for integrating disaster risk management into the agriculture sector, and a number of contingency plans at provincial, district or agency level. New technologies relevant to disaster risk reduction were also successfully promoted (e.g. sunflower cultivation in Sindh, new rice varieties, direct seeding of rice, mixed cropping, ridge cultivation).

4.5 FAO’s contributions to Cluster E

Cluster E




Animal health portfolio 50% SO2 and 50% SO5 Strengthening animal and plant health inspection systems


51

Finding 11. FAO’s interventions on Transboundary Animal Diseases have been effective and efficient, and Pakistan is on track to eradicate FMD and PPR. Further research, awareness raising and strategies are needed.

202 This Cluster included the work of FAO Pakistan on Transboundary Animal Disease control. The evaluation team decided to assess the Pakistan animal health portfolio as a standalone cluster, as FAO is in a good position to expand this area of work to be a programme area under the next CPF.

203 Within the CPF period, the FAO contributions to the animal health and livestock sector can be broadly classified into three categories: i) contributions to Transboundary Animal Disease control through directly targeting animal health and veterinary services, which constitute the majority of FAO’s interventions in the livestock sector; ii) those related to livestock support in emergency and rehabilitation interventions; and iii) those developing livestock value chains and agribusiness (already mentioned in section 4.3). In each of these areas there is evidence that FAO’s programme is producing positive outcome level changes and impacts, with some minor programmatic issues that need to be addressed, and FAO is well positioned to do so. Given the large size of the various projects, the broad geographic coverage and the often short deadlines against which the work needs to be delivered, the various livestock interventions worked to a great extent independently of each other. This is a missed opportunity, as a greater coordination and synergy can potentially lead to better impacts. Furthermore, given the expertise and experience that FAO has acquired in the livestock sector in Pakistan and the strong needs in other livestock sectors, FAO is in a unique position to assist the federal and provincial government to build on the enormous potential of this sector and propose interventions in new areas.

4.5.1 Transboundary Animal Diseases

204 FAO’s TAD control interventions have focused on two of the major viral diseases affecting the country: Foot and Mouth Disease and Peste de Petit Ruminants. They are mainly delivered through three projects: Progressive Control of Peste Des Petits Ruminants in Pakistan, Support to Increase Sustainable Livestock Production, and Development of National Control Program for Foot and Mouth Disease Control in Pakistan.

205 These projects have followed very similar approaches, design principles and implementation modalities, building upon the experiences and lessons learned from the previous joint FAO-Government TAD control programmes, which since 1992 have established a strong collaboration and which led to the eradication of rinderpest, confirmed in 2007. These approaches were effective in delivering outputs and achieving outcomes and, most importantly, worked through the national veterinary services thereby strengthening capacity, introducing good models for diseases control and establishing a strong national awareness for the need for progressive control and eradication of FMD and PPR.

206 Pakistan was a key member of the FAO Regional Project “Controlling Transboundary Diseases in Central Asian Countries” (2004-2012) that assisted the final confirmation of rinderpest eradication in Pakistan, and an enthusiastic participant in the ensuing follow up programmes for global progressive control and eradication of FMD and PPR. Table 11 looks at the many similar issues and a few differences between the control of rinderpest, FMD and PPR in Pakistan. The Table aims to highlight how similar the critical issues are between all three diseases and how the activities that proved effective with rinderpest are now being focused on the other two diseases.


52

Table 11: Challenges, Government and FAO actions and results in TAD control in Pakistan

Rinderpest FMD PPR

The original problem

(1) 1992 Disease not offi-cially reported but sus-pected in Karachi.

(2) Disease unknown to veterinary staff and farmers in many areas.

(3) Disease spreads from Karachi to other parts of the country.

Cattle plague in Gilgit-Baltis-tan kills 50 000 bovines.

(4) Nationally produced vaccine appears to be ineffective some or all the time.

(5) National disease sur-veillance systems too weak for control and eradication.

(1) Disease widespread and frequently reported but no national control pro-gramme in place.

(2) Disease known to veter-inary staff and farmers in many areas – but of-ten ignored because of poor control measures.

(3) Disease is prevalent throughout country. It is endemic in Karachi and other dairy colonies from where it spreads to other locations. Economic losses can be severe.


(5) National disease sur-veillance systems too weak for control and eradication.

(1) Disease confirmed in 1990s but no national control programme in place

(2) Disease unknown to veterinary staff and farmers in many areas.

(3) Disease moves through-out country after first confirmation in Punjab in 1994. Losses can be extreme, usually affect-ing the poorest farmers.


(5) National disease sur-veillance systems too weak for control and eradication

Actions taken (1) 1992 FAO mission collects samples and confirms rinderpest at World Reference Labo-ratory.

(2) FAO provides imported quality assured vaccine.

(3) National vaccine is assessed outside Pa-kistan at OIE and FAO recognized laboratory and found to be inferior quality.

(4) FAO improves produc-tion of local vaccine with technical advice, equip-ment and training.

(5) FAO assists Govern-ment of Pakistan with improved laboratory di-agnosis, disease surveil-lance and reporting, and increased awareness.

(1) 2014/15 FAO project collects samples and confirms FMD at World Reference Laboratory.



(4) FAO improves produc-tion of local vaccine with technical advice, equip-ment and training


(1) 1994 FAO mission collects samples and confirms PPR at World Reference Laboratory.



(4) FAO improves produc-tion of local vaccine with technical advice, equip-ment and training.


Results (1) Imported high quality vaccine fully protects against the disease.

(2) Quality of locally pro-duced vaccine raised to meet international stan-dards and is effective in the field.

(3) Disease diagnosis and surveillance was im-proved.

(4) Rinderpest was progres-sively controlled and eradicated

(1) Imported high quality vaccine fully protects against the disease.

(2) Quality of locally pro-duced vaccine should meet international stan-dards and is effective in the field.


(4) FMD should be progres-sively controlled and eradicated.

(1) Imported high quality vaccine fully protects against the disease.

(2) Quality of locally pro-duced vaccine should meet international stan-dards and be effective in the field.


(4) PPR should be progres-sively controlled and eradicated.


53

207 The close fit between the history of rinderpest control and of the other two diseases is strong. The steps taken so far by FAO and the Government working together on FMD and PPR virtually parallel those taken for the successful eradication of rinderpest. However, although this might encourage anticipation of similar successful outcomes there are caveats. Both FMD and PPR were and are much more widespread in Pakistan than rinderpest was from 1992 until its eradication. There is continuing low awareness of the identity, diagnosis and control of PPR, whereas rinderpest (with the exception of Gilgit-Baltistan) was better known. For FMD there is the additional challenge of vaccine being more difficult to produce and more expensive to procure. Nevertheless, the Table shows the key elements behind the strategic approach to controlling these diseases.

208 The evaluation team found that as a result of the FAO projects, laboratory diagnosis was established and was working well in all designated laboratories, and was monitored and managed through annual refresher training courses as well as other problem solving interventions from senior project staff. The FMD viruses circulating in Pakistan were sub-typed at the World Reference Laboratory, Pirbright, United Kingdom, allowing changes to be made to the formulation of the imported vaccine being procured by the project for its use in the country. The success of this vaccine is discussed further below. The enormous effort put into awareness raising and training about FMD among front line veterinary staff and livestock owners has been rewarded with increased reporting of the disease and follow up investigations.

209 Furthermore, the efficacy of effective vaccination against FMD has been amply demonstrated by the FAO interventions. The visits to the Landhi Dairy Colony in Karachi confirmed the area as a source of FMD virus and revealed that the intensive surveillance and diagnosis provided by the project through the establishment of an FMD Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) diagnostic laboratory within the colony had positive results in terms of drastically fewer outbreaks. Whether the lack of reported disease equates with the complete disappearance of the virus is immaterial at this stage; the result is a measure of outstanding progress in the control of FMD in Pakistan. Similar results were reported by livestock owners and Dairy Cooperative Officers in Nagori Dairy Farm in Karachi and from dairy colonies in Hyderabad, Lahore and Peshawar, which constitute some of the major aggregations of large ruminants, providing dairy products to the large population centres. When interviewed by the evaluation team, nearly all dairy farmers that had experienced the FAO vaccination agreed that if they could be sure of always having such an effective vaccine then they would be prepared to pay for it – possibly at full market price. Nevertheless, some farmers in each location remained sceptical about FMD vaccination because of their experience using vaccines purchased from the open market, which was not effective; there is also a false believe that vaccinating animals will affect fertility. Thus, additional awareness raising activities are needed about what can be achieved with quality vaccines.

210 In addition to the evaluation team’s observations of progress with FMD control, there are some independent measures of the impact the control is having in Pakistan. Commercial importations of the same imported FMD vaccine used by the project have increased steadily from 21 600 doses in 2012 to 409 075 in 2016,75 which illustrates how there is both greater awareness of the disease and proactive actions to undertake vaccination. In terms of research, a scientific paper on the safe and efficacious use of this vaccine in yaks has been published in an international journal.76

211 FMD vaccination is expensive and needs to be administered throughout an animal’s lifetime; it is crucial to ensure its purchase and use is continued if the Progressive Control Pathway and eradication are to be successful. Many farmers and institutions are concerned about what they see as government interference in the marketing of their products through the enforced price capping of milk and meat. It is possible that if the government was to cease manipulating their profit margins, farmers might be more inclined to take part in cost recovery or pay for vaccine and vaccine delivery at market prices instead of attempting to get something for free from the authorities.

75 Details provided by Messrs Mustafa Brothers, Faisalabad. Courtesy of Dr M. Hussain.

76 Evaluation of Foot and Mouth vaccination for Yak (Bos grunniens) in Pakistan. Tropical Animal Health and Production 49, 691-695.


54

212 The evidence gathered by the evaluation team indicated that, as a result of FAO’s work, laboratory diagnostic capacity for PPR is now widely available, disease awareness and surveillance in the field has improved, and demonstrations of vaccine efficiency in selected field sites have been highly successful. The project focusing on PPR was well managed, delivered most outputs on or before time and achieved its main objectives.

213 Independent correlation from a third source of the impact of the project is less easy to find than for FMD. However, the provincial veterinary authorities partnering with the project have been convinced of the positive use of surveillance and vaccination. The Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Sindh funded the project with USD 300 000 to extend its vaccine demonstration site in Tharparkar District to an additional 1 million animals, and is looking for extra funds for further immunizations. The Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Sindh has also forward purchased PPR vaccine from the Veterinary Research Institute in Lahore (which was supported by FAO for production of PPR vaccine); recognizing the importance of quality vaccine, they will only take receipt after it has received quality assurance from independent testing being carried out by the project. In parts of Sindh where the project operated successfully, the farmers have asked for PPR vaccination, specifically with the “FAO” vaccine.

214 The Livestock and Dairy Development Department in Punjab, which has strong current leadership, is converted to the idea of protective vaccination following its close, positive involvement with the project (and also with the FMD control project). It has signed an agreement with FAO for an 11-month unilateral trust fund project worth USD 8.9 million to immunize large ruminants against FMD and small ruminants against PPR. In addition, the Department has significant plans to use its own funds and resources for widespread vaccination against these two diseases and others, in order to establish defined “Disease Control Compartments” throughout Punjab. Such developments demonstrate how confidence in vaccine quality and correct delivery can bring quick and welcome change.

215 The evaluation team noted the criticisms and areas for improvement mentioned by field and laboratory staff: the main issue raised, in Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, was that the cold chain could be strengthened in the field for better storage and use of vaccines. Punjab is using a new and sophisticated cold chain system for storing and delivering vaccines, including tracking the routes and times taken by delivery vans. The system is an example of what can be done and a model for other provinces/regions in Pakistan and other countries. The evaluation team believes that FAO’s direct support on cold chain systems is not feasible and requires major investment by the Government.

4.5.2 Livestock support in emergency and rehabilitation

216 The evaluation team found that FAO’s emergency project design was developed within the scope and recommended activities and objectives of LEGS77 and implemented effectively. Many of the projects operate in areas of the country where access is sometimes difficult because of the protracted insecurity, thereby making implementation more challenging. The livestock components of emergency projects have demonstrated a generally good level of coordination with the animal health projects.

217 Training of trainers courses in livestock emergency interventions held by FAO were a step towards sustainability in this area, but only if followed up and supported to extend the message as far as possible. Training of trainers courses for raising awareness were also carried out under the TAD projects but reportedly difficult to build on or sustain. The usual aim of a training of trainers course is not to produce service providers, but more trainers who themselves would train the needed service providers. More than once the impression was gained that training of trainers and technical training courses were, if not used interchangeably, at least conflated or confused. The Mid-term Evaluation of the FMD project recommended that in the future the project should carry out a training needs assessment before training. There was no evidence of changes in the project’s training approach in line with this recommendation.

77 Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards. http://www.livestock-emergency.net/about-legs/

http://www.livestock-emergency.net/about-legs/


55

218 The TAD officers within the provincial Livestock and Dairy Development Departments have been very effective in raising awareness and providing information on TADs and the correct response and monitoring procedures. Nonetheless, considering the vast amount of awareness raising that lies ahead, which would benefit from real training of trainers approaches, these are issues that FAO must address. In some situations, the FAO projects have provided training through non-governmental organizations and community-based organization. This is also an area to be expanded for future awareness raising and to be considered in FAO’s training methodologies. There are thousands of private veterinarians in Pakistan, a small fraction of whom were trained under the FMD projects. More involvement of the private veterinary sector, possibly contracted as trainers after suitable training of trainers courses, could promote FMD and PPR awareness in order to drastically reduce the cases of PPR being misdiagnosed by veterinarians as an allergic reaction, or as mixed infections of pneumonia and enterotoxaemia.

219 There are other TADs besides FMD and PPR in Pakistan, such as haemorrhagic septicaemia in large ruminants, and sheep and goat pox and contagious caprine pleuropneumonia in small ruminants, but these are not being fully covered at present. Activities to control FMD and PPR present unmissable opportunities to collect more data on and provide control of these other TADs and also endemic diseases such as brucellosis. A broad approach to TADs control also provides capacity to respond quickly to new TADs that threaten or invade the country’s livestock such as Lumpy Skin Disease, which has recently emerged from Africa to infect West Asia and Southwest Europe, and in the recent past, Rift Valley Fever in the Arabian Peninsula.

220 Disease control is just one component of a healthier and more economically successful livestock sector, which all farmers, livestock professionals and others agree is beset by numerous other constraints. Many of these, such as feeding, marketing and breeding, are being handled at provincial level but there does not seem to be a clear national overview or policy for these key issues. Yet this is needed because some degree of national management and direction is important for long-term development (e.g. genetic improvement to preserve local breeds and increase productivity). Only a well-informed Federal Animal Health Commissioner’s office will be able to convince the Provincial/Regional Directors of the Livestock and Dairy Development Departments to agree on and drive forward policies in line with a national vision. It is also well recognized that such visions and policies need to be built on livestock data in order to build evidence-based planning and budgeting for long-term national goals. It should be noted that the Government of Punjab has recently published a Livestock Policy for the Province and one is being prepared in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

221 FAO and the Government have jointly implemented three projects that have successfully laid the technical foundations for Progressive Control of FMD and PPR in Pakistan. There are sufficient commonalities in the control of FMD and PPR to allow their management and implementation to be combined. This will also develop preparedness for other TADs when these arise. The progressive control and eradication of both FMD and PPR from Pakistan will take at least a decade. This would be better addressed through a long-term joint programme with appropriate planning and budgeting than through shorter-term projects. This joint FAO-Government initiative on TAD control in Pakistan must continue if it is to sustain the vital technical progress that was achieved under previous projects (diagnostics, virus typing, surveillance, vaccine production) and to scale-up awareness raising and training about these diseases.


56

5. Conclusions and recommendations

5.1 Conclusions

Conclusion 1. The devolution process has introduced new challenges and opportunities to FAO in terms of its responsiveness and delivery mechanisms.

222 FAO has not yet fully understood the cost of operating under the devolution. FAO’s collaboration with the provincial Governments has been good and institutionally diverse in the implementation of field programmes. There was less collaboration at the policy level, especially in Punjab, which is the largest agricultural producer. FAO’s efforts at grassroots development were also more effective and widespread in Sindh, Balochistan and FATA than in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).

223 Although FAO is still predominantly centered in Islamabad, almost all other United Nations agencies have opened sub-offices in each province to support the new devolved ministries and the related service delivery. In line with the constitutional amendment, provincial governments strategize, plan and manage their own resources autonomously from the federal government, including food security and nutrition that are also nationwide issues. Each provincial government has its own plan or vision and is actively working on policy development and implementation.

224 FAO’s devolution in Pakistan is necessary in order to work more closely with the counterparts that have the mandate and resources. So far, FAO has project offices in three locations (Quetta, Peshawar and Multan), and recently closed an office in Sukkur (Sindh) upon completion of the project. Opening and sustaining provincial offices will allow FAO to provide systematic technical support and influence decision-making although it requires some resources for sustaining office structure.

Conclusion 2. FAO worked toward improving the livelihoods of small-scale farmers. It should also work to modernize regulations and policies to create an enabling environment for sustainable agricultural development in Pakistan.

225 FAO’s approach in Pakistan has been dominated largely by an extension agent approach to agriculture modernization and value chain development, rather than sector investment planning and economic analysis (with the exception of the recent activities in Balochistan). Investment planning, supply-chain strengthening and market development are particularly important given that FAO is striving to facilitate a shift in Pakistan from subsistence farming systems to market-oriented agriculture. The key challenges facing small-scale farmers in accessing quality markets and engaging effectively in value-addition are related to the enabling environment (e.g. public infrastructure, regulations, policies and political interest). The evaluation found that many partners perceived the FAO programme in Pakistan as opportunistic and driven by donor interests. However, there were many critical needs and areas of specialization in Pakistan’s agriculture for which FAO is best suited to take the lead, and that are overlooked by both donors and governments.

226 The programme addressed challenges that were important to small-scale farmers and the regions in which FAO worked, particularly in shifting from subsistence farming to market-oriented farming, and safeguarding and restoring agriculture production in areas affected by floods. The programme considered some of the most significant local needs and responded with suitable interventions for good agriculture practices, irrigation development, input supply and new crop varieties. Despite being well-positioned to engage in more strategic agriculture-related sectors, FAO has yet to incorporate into its programme key structural challenges in the agriculture sector such as agriculture subsidies, trade, industries, rural transformation, land tenure and market development (as well as the more persistent issue of FATA reform and the possible merge with KP). While recognizing FAO’s excellent track record in supporting grassroots development (small-scale farmers), FAO would need to transform and expand its partnerships and delivery mechanisms, build on its core competencies and address institutional and regulatory structurally important challenges.


57

Conclusion 3. Throughout its programme, FAO assisted the most vulnerable districts and communities, and emphasized impartiality with ethno-linguistic groups, minorities and unregistered temporarily displaced persons. The organization also supported and empowered rural women, but did not effectively target youth.

227 Rural youth in Pakistan plays a very important role in the political, economic and social development of the country. Despite FAO’s global knowledge in empowering youth through agriculture, however, FAO Pakistan does not have a programmatic focus on engaging youth in agriculture.

Conclusion 4. Pakistani policymakers are presented with many studies, assessments and reports on the agriculture sector. FAO is the organization best suited to synthesize the findings and recommendations on vulnerabilities and SDG tracing for policymakers.

228 On an annual basis, dozens of agriculture-related studies and assessments are published by national and international partners, some with conflicting messages. The Pakistani policymakers have expressed their frustration and the challenge they face in extracting reliable evidence to inform policy formulation.

229 FAO actively participated in various needs assessments and action plans (at the regional, provincial and national levels) and introduced a methodology for a Hazard, Livelihoods and Vulnerability (HLV) baseline. The HLV is a useful tool for district governments, United Nations agencies, NGOs and civil society for effective disaster response. It could contribute directly to district DRM planning, and act as a baseline for contingency planning during the post-emergency response and recovery. The evaluation team found that numerous national and international partners produced numerous diverse HLV assessments, which varied in scope and quality. This made it difficult for the Government to absorb the material and act appropriately.

230 FAO has a strong mandate in relation to the SDGs. It is a custodian agency for 21 SDG indicators78, for which it is responsible for compiling data from countries while also supporting national capacities for data collection. FAO’s work directly contributes to 25 SDG indicators while providing indirect contributions to several others. There are seven SGDs directly related to agriculture and natural resource management (e.g. SDG 1, 2, 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15), plus another four addressed as cross-cutting (SGD 5, 7, 8, and 17). FAO has been active within a One UN umbrella, as well as the SDG consultations in Pakistan. However, the organization has not found the best approach to supporting federal and provincial governments to articulate targets and indicators, with clear plans of action for the many SDGs that fall under the purview of FAO’s mandate. UNDP, however, has assumed responsibility for improving the capacity development of SDG projects throughout the country. During the CPE visit to Karachi, UNDP had organized an awareness raising workshop on SDGs. FAO was invited, but missed the opportunity to participate in the workshop.

Conclusion 5. Climate change is a pressing issue for Pakistan, and FAO’s work on climate change is post-disaster focused, less on prevention and adaptation. More expert inputs on climate change and a broader partnership framework are needed.

231 The most significant hazards in Pakistan are climate change-related floods, followed by droughts and cyclones. Earthquakes are also considered hazards, though they are relatively rare in Pakistan. In addition, the northern mountainous regions are threatened by high frequency but low impact events such as flash floods, landslides and avalanches. The World Bank/Asian Development Bank flood and damage needs assessment estimated that the flooding in 2010 alone affected over 20 million people and caused estimated losses of over USD 10 billion79.

232 Forging effective partnerships to address the challenges posed by climate change is essential. FAO’s apex partner in Pakistan is the Ministry of National Food Security and Research. However, other key partnerships at federal level were weak and focused around

78 FAO and the SDGs, 2017 (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6919e.pdf )

79 GoP/ADB/WB (2010): Pakistan Floods 2010 Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment



58

protocol, such as the Ministry of Climate Change (the coordinating authority for Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF)), the Planning Development and Reform Department, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Industries and Production, as well as Prime Ministers’ office and Parliamentarians. Each of these ministries present FAO with new opportunities, platforms and avenues to increase and improve the organization’s technical assistance.

Conclusion 6. A strong foundation has been laid for control of transboundary animal diseases in Pakistan. Further progress toward eradication will require an increased understanding of these diseases (epidemiology) and substantial planning (including budgetary), in addition to a regional approach with neighbouring countries.

233 The transboundary animal diseases in Pakistan, other than FMD and PPR, are not fully covered at present. These include hemorrhagic septicemia in large ruminants, and sheep and goat pox and contagious caprine pleuropneumonia in small ruminants. Activities to control FMD and PPR present valuable opportunities to collect more data on and provide control of these other TADs, as well as endemic diseases such as brucellosis. A broad approach to TADs control also improves capacity to respond quickly to new TADs that threaten or invade the country’s livestock, such as Lumpy Skin Disease, which has recently emerged from Africa to infect West Asia and Southwest Europe, as well as Rift Valley Fever in the Arabian Peninsula.

234 Disease control is just one component of a healthier and more economically successful livestock sector, which farmers, livestock professionals and others agree is beset by numerous other constraints. Only a well-informed Federal Animal Health Commissioner’s office will be able to convince the Provincial and Regional Directors of Livestock and Dairy Development Department to agree on and drive forward policies in line with a national vision. It is also well recognized that such visions and policies need to be built on livestock data in order to build evidence-based planning and budgeting for long-term national goals. It should be noted that the Government of Punjab has recently published a livestock policy for the province, and one is being prepared in KP.

5.2 Recommendations

Recommendation 1:

FAO should explore options for establishing effective partnerships and delivery mechanisms to position its programme and operations in response to the devolution.

Suggested actions:

• Convert the existing project offices to permanent provincial level offices, while learning from similar experiences of other United Nations agencies;

• Explore the possibility with provincial governments or donors to fund provincial level offices;

• Facilitate inter-provincial cooperation and exchange initiatives for government technical staff;

• Establish periodic consultation sessions with the provincial governments chaired by the FAOR.

Recommendation 2:

FAO, together with the Ministry of National Food Security and Research, should include in the next CPF, a programmatic response to the key structural challenges in the agriculture sector, such as agriculture subsidies, trade, industries, rural transformation, land tenure and market development (and the more persistent issue of the FATA reform and the possible merge with KP).

Suggested actions:

• Pilot the iNRM approach and actively advocate with provincial governments to adopt iNRM as the sector-wide management approach;


59

• Initiate a dialogue and advocate for a comprehensive update and reform of the outdated acts and regulations that govern the agriculture sector (such as seeds, land tenure, fertilizer, trade and water pricing), with the goal of increasing production sustainably and bringing socio-economic benefits;

• To gain more influence in policy reforms, expand partnerships with the Planning Development and Reform Department, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Industries and Production, Bureau of Revenue, Prime Ministers’ Office and Parliamentarians;

• Make better use of the relevant FAO global products and services in Pakistan, such as the VGGTs, Codex, statistics and climate smart agriculture.

Recommendation 3:

In the next CPF, FAO should support providing rural youth with entrepreneurial opportunities in agriculture by creating a conducive environment for the value addition of agriculture products.

Suggested actions:

• Partner with the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund, universities and NGOs to provide capacity development, incubation services and small grants to youth groups, in order to engage them in agricultural development.

Recommendation 4:

In order to present well-informed and evidence-based policy options, in the next CPF FAO should focus on its core competencies, including policy analysis and synthesis of the various assessments conducted by national and international partners.

Suggested actions:

• Undertake micro-climatic studies and update the profile and status of Pakistan’s agro-ecological zones;

• Synthesize the multiple Hazard, Livelihoods and Vulnerability (HLV) assessments to identify development trends and appropriate response plans;

• Integrate SDG-focused interventions into the national development plans.

Recommendation 5: To FAO

In the next CPF, FAO should have a long-term programme on livestock development and animal health, with the aim of creating synergies among existing interventions and exploring new areas of work, including inter-country collaboration.

Suggested actions:

• FAO and the Government should develop a ten-year or longer programme to build on the successes of recent TADs projects and to maintain delivery of the technical components;

• Establish an epidemiology and economics “Strategy Unit” to help develop and drive the national strategies for FMD and PPR;

• Explore a partnership with FAO Afghanistan to jointly work on border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan, as these areas are known livestock corridors.

• Broaden the consultations for livestock interventions beyond animal health stakeholders to include production, feed and marketing actors and partners.


60

6. Appendices

Appendix 1. People interviewed

Name Position Institution/Organization Location

Mr Neil Buhne UN Resident Coordinator One-UN Coordination Islamabad

Mr Zarar KhanStrategic Coordination Officer (M&E) One-UN Coordination Islamabad

Mr Ayaz Muhammad

Program Manager, Office of Economic Growth and Agriculture USAID Islamabad

Mr Rajab Ali Khan Baoch

Federal Parliamentary Secretary (MP)

Ministry of National Food Security and Research Islamabad

Mr Shoaib Tayyab Senior Program Manager, Economic Growth and Trade Australian High Commission Islamabad

Mr David Preston First Secretary Australian High Commission Islamabad

Mr Alamgir Ahmad Khan

Joint Secretary, heading the National Zero Hunger Programme


Mr Muhammad Waseem Azhar

Section officer, National Zero Hunger Programme


Mr Razi LatifResilience and climate Change Adviser DFID Islamabad

Mr Amir Irshad Chief Of AgricultureMinistry of Planning, Development and Reform Islamabad

Mr Amir Zamir Ahmad Khan

Directory General, Monitoring and Evaluation

Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform Islamabad

Mr Syed Zahoor Ali shahChief Monitoring Officer, Monitoring and Evaluation


Mr Finbarr Curran Country Director WFP Islamabad

Mr Irfan Ahmed Malik Head of Programme WFP Islamabad

Mr Arshad Ayyub Jadoon Programme Officer WFP Islamabad

Ms YamaguchiSenior Representative (Operations) JICA Islamabad

Mr Nagasawa Roberto Shinji Representative JICA Islamabad

Mr Illango Patchamuthu Country Director World Bank Islamabad

Mr Stephen Davies Program Leader IFPRI Islamabad

Ms Donneth WaltonUnit Head, Project Administration Asian Development Bank Islamabad

Mr Aslam ShaheenChief of Nutrition (SUN Focal Point)


Mr Amaury Hoste

First Secretary, Rural Development and Economic Cooperation European Union Delegation Islamabad

Mr Georges Dehoux

First Secretary, Development Advisor for Rural Development and Nutrition European Union Delegation Islamabad

Mr Ahmad KamalMember Disaster Risk Reduction

National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) Islamabad

Mr Qaim Shah Country Programme Officer IFAD Islamabad

Mr Abdul Fattah Tunio Chief of AgricultureSindh Planning and Development Department Karachi


61

Mr Mazhar Ali Khamisani

Programme Manager, Nutrition Support Programme (SUN Focal Point)

Sindh Health Department / WFP Karachi

Mr Syed Salaman Shah Director GeneralSindh Provincial Disaster Management Authority Karachi

Mr Fateh Muhammad Marri

Project Coordinator (WSIP project), Project Coordination and Monitoring Unit

Sindh Planning and Development Department Karachi

Mr Jameel Hussain Junejo Program Manager Fisherfolk Forum (NGO) Karachi

Mr Waseem Khan Director General

Sindh Ministry of Ports and Shipping, Marine Fisheries Department Karachi

Mr Muhammad Moazzam Khan

Senior Technical Advisor, Marine Fisheries World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Karachi

Mr Ali Akbar Soomro Director General Sindh Livestock Department Karachi

Ms Niveen Qadri Program Officer UNDP - Sindh Karachi

Mr Naveed Serwar Bhuto Program Officer

Sindh Health Department / Nutrition Cell Karachi

Mr Abdul Jabur Ghazi Conservator Sindh Forestry Department Karachi

Mr Mohammed Khan Jarwa Director General, Extension

Sindh Agriculture Department Hyderabad

Various

Farmers (15), implementing partners, local government officials Field Visit (2 Villages) Mirpur Khas

Various

Farmers (20), implementing partners, local government officials Field Visit (2 Villages) Jacobabad

Various Program Staff

Goth Sengaar Foundation (NGO - Implementing Partner) Sukkur

Various Program Staff

Centre for Peace and Development (NGO - Implementing Partner) Sukkur

Mr Muhammad Mahmood Secretary Agriculture

Punjab Agriculture Department Lahore

Mr Khalid Sherdil Director GeneralPunjab Provincial Disaster Management Authority Lahore

Mr Ather Ashraf

Project Director (FERRP) Flood Emergency Reconstruction and Resilience Project

World Bank (Hosted in PDMA) Lahore

Muhammad Ashraf Chief of AgriculturePunjab Planning and Development Department Lahore

Mr Ashraf Project Director

Punjab Planning and Development Department, Coordination Unit for Asian Development Bank Projects Lahore

Mr Chatta Director GeneralPunjab Department of Fisheries Lahore

Mr Qurban Ali

Animal Husbandry Commissioner and Chief Veterinary Officer


Various

Commercial Dairy Farmers (10), veterinarians (3) and representatives of farmer associations

Field Visit: Landhi Cattle Colony Karachi

Mr Naimat Ullah Khan Head of Program WFP - KP and FATA Peshawar


62

Mr Abdallah al-Laham

Program Manager: FATA Transition and Recovery Program UNDP - KP and FATA Peshawar

Mr Tareq Talahma Head of Sub-Office UNOCHA - KP and FATA Peshawar

Col Adeel Colonel Projects Pakistan Army Peshawar

Mr Sanaullah Director General Projects FATA Secretariat Peshawar

Various

Farmers (20), Members of Farmer Marketing Cooperatives and local businesses Field Visit

South Waziristan (FATA)

Various

Farmers (20), Members of Farmer Marketing Cooperatives and local businesses Field Visit Kurram (FATA)

Dr Sher Muhammad Director General, Extension KP Livestock Department Peshawar

Dr Ahmed Naveed Director General, Research KP Livestock Department Peshawar

Dr Ghulam Hussain Jaffar Director General

Balochistan Livestock Department Quetta

Dr Abdul Hanan Director GeneralBalochistan Agricultural Research Centre (Federal) Quetta

Various

Farmers (20), Members of Farmer Marketing Cooperatives and local businesses n/a Quetta

Mr Sharaf-Ud-Din Khan Tareen Zonal Chief

ZBTL (National Agricultural Bank) Quetta

Mr Attaullah Mengal Director

Balochistan Provincial Disaster Management Authority Quetta

Ms Rehana Bibi Khilji Program Officer UNWOMEN - Balochistan Quetta

Mr Abdul Qayyum Project Coordinator UNDP - Balochistan Quetta

Mr Naimatullah Jan Miryani Senior Manager

Balochistan Rural Support Program (NGO - Implementing Partner) Quetta

Mr Baber Shah Khan Chief Executive Officer

Participatory Integrated Development Society (NGO - Implementing Partner) Quetta

Mr Ihtram Majeed Chief Executive Officer

Balochistan Rural Development and Research Society (NGO - Implementing Partner) Quetta

Ms Deborah HamiltonInternational Program Specialist

USDA, Office of Capacity Building and Development Islamabad

Mr Asmat Raza Senior Agricultural SpecialistUSDA, Foreign Agricultural Service Islamabad

Dr Qurban Ali

Animal Husbandry Commissioner and Chief Veterinarian Officer, Ministry of National Food Security and Research

Animal Husbandry Commissioner and Chief Veterinarian Officer, Ministry of National Food Security and Research Islamabad

Dr Muhammad Javid Arshad

Senior Scientific Officer – National Veterinary Laboratory

Senior Scientific Officer – National Veterinary Laboratory Islamabad

Dr Mehmood Rasheed

Assistant Director, Sohan Veterinary Hospital and TAD Officer

Assistant Director, Sohan Veterinary Hospital and TAD Officer

Islamabad rural area: Sohan

VariousFarmers, Veterinary officers and veterinary assistants

Farmers, Veterinary officers and veterinary assistants

Islamabad rural area: Sohan


63

Dr Nasrullah PanwherNational Field Officer (FMD), Sindh

National Field Officer (FMD), Sindh Karachi, Sindh

Dr Madan Lal

Deputy Director Livestock and Dairy Development Department

Deputy Director Livestock and Dairy Development Department Karachi, Sindh

Dr Manzoor Asif

Head of ELISA lab in Landhi: Assistant Research Officer, Animal Husbandry Laboratory, Landhi Cattle Colony Karachi

Head of ELISA lab in Landhi: Assistant Research Officer, Animal Husbandry Laboratory, Landhi Cattle Colony Karachi Karachi, Sindh

Mr Muhammad Shakir Umer

President, Dairy and Cattle Farmers Association

President, Dairy and Cattle Farmers Association Karachi, Sindh

VariousVeterinary officers of Landhi colony

Veterinary officers of Landhi colony Karachi, Sindh

Various Two farmers in Landhi Two farmers in Landhi Karachi, Sindh

Dr Ali Akbar Soomro Director General – Livestock Director General – Livestock Hyderabad, Sindh

Dr Khadim Hussain Soomro Sindh TAD Officer Sindh TAD Officer Hyderabad, Sindh

Dr Mushtaque Hussain Jokhio

Director Animal Husbandry Sindh

Director Animal Husbandry Sindh Hyderabad, Sindh

Dr Ghulam Sarwar Shaikh

Co-Director, JICA projects in Sindh

Co-Director, JICA projects in Sindh Hyderabad, Sindh

Farmers, veterinary officers, veterinary assistants Hyderabad ‘old’ cattle colony Hyderabad ‘old’ cattle colony Hyderabad, Sindh

Mr Muhammad Zaman Narejo

Deputy Commissioner, Tharparkar

Deputy Commissioner, Tharparkar

Mithi, Tharparkar, Sindh

Dr SonoKhangharani

Chief Executive Officer, Thardeep Microfinance Foundation (NGO), Sindh

Chief Executive Officer, Thardeep Microfinance Foundation (NGO), Sindh


Dr Jamoon Mal

Additional Director, Central Veterinary Diagnostic Lab (Person in charge of CVDL, Sub Centre Mithi laboratory)

Additional Director, Central Veterinary Diagnostic Lab (Person in charge of CVDL, Sub Centre Mithi laboratory)


Various

Staff of laboratory, veterinary officers and stock assistants of Mithi Veterinary Hospital

Staff of laboratory, veterinary officers and stock assistants of Mithi Veterinary Hospital


Various

Veterinary officers and Stock assistants of Islamkot Veterinary Hospital

Veterinary officers and Stock assistants of Islamkot Veterinary Hospital

Islamkot, Tharparkar, Sindh

Various Village visit: farmers Village visit: farmers

Jan. Mohammed Noon and MithrioSoomro villages, Islamkot Tehsil, Tharparkar, Sindh

Dr Nobat Khan

Deputy Director Livestock/Animal Husbandry, Tharparkar

Deputy Director Livestock/Animal Husbandry, Tharparkar


Various

Village visit farmers, veterinary officers, veterinary assistants


Khari Pasayo and Phator villages, Diplo Tehsil, Tharparkar, Sindh

Various



Jam Khan Lund village, Kaloi Tehsil, Tharparkar, Sindh

Dr Baz Muhammad Junejo

Ex- Secretary Livestock and Fisheries Department, Government of Sindh

Ex- Secretary Livestock and Fisheries Department, Government of Sindh Hyderabad


64

Various

Veterinary officers, dairy farmers and dairy farmer association president

Veterinary officers, dairy farmers and dairy farmer association president

Nagori Cattle Colony, Karachi, Sindh

Dr urban Hussain

Directory General (extension) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Punjab

Directory General (extension) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Punjab Lahore, Punjab

Dr Farhat AwanPerson in charge of Provincial Diagnostic Lab

Person in charge of Provincial Diagnostic Lab Lahore, Punjab

Dr Abdul Rauf

Directory General (research) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Punjab and head of Veterinary Research Institute (VRI)

Directory General (research) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Punjab and head of Veterinary Research Institute (VRI) Lahore, Punjab

Various Staff of DG Research office Staff of DG Research office Lahore, Punjab

Dr Talha FarooqPerson in charge of vaccine production, VRI

Person in charge of vaccine production, VRI Lahore, Punjab

Dr Abeera MubarakPerson in charge of vaccine quality control, VRI

Person in charge of vaccine quality control, VRI Lahore, Punjab

Dr Sajjad HussainAdditional Director for FMD diagnostic Lab, VRI

Additional Director for FMD diagnostic Lab, VRI Lahore, Punjab

VariousFarmers, veterinary officers and veterinary assistants

Farmers, veterinary officers and veterinary assistants

Rak Chandra Rae Dairy Colony, Lahore, Punjab

Ms Sumreen Kausar

Assistant disease investigation officer (in charge of the district diagnostic lab)

Assistant disease investigation officer (in charge of the district diagnostic lab) Sahiwal, Punjab

Various

Village visit and meeting with farmers, veterinary officers and veterinary assistants

Village visit and meeting with farmers, veterinary officers and veterinary assistants

Village 1: DadraBalla, UC Dadra Balla. Village 2: Noor shah, U.C Noor shah.

Dr Munir Ahmed

Director of Faisalabad District, Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Punjab

Director of Faisalabad District, Livestock and Dairy Development Department of Punjab

Faisalabad, Punjab

VariousStaff of Faisalabad diagnostic lab

Staff of Faisalabad diagnostic lab

Faisalabad, Punjab

Mr Irfan Khalid

Deputy Secretary Livestock and Dairy Development of Punjab

Deputy Secretary Livestock and Dairy Development of Punjab Islamabad

Mr Ruken Niaz khan

In charge of socio-economic impact assessment of PPR project (Brainbox)

In charge of socio-economic impact assessment of PPR project (Brainbox) Islamabad

Dr Sher Muhammad

Director General (extension) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of KP

Director General (extension) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of KP Peshawar, KP

Dr Ahmed Naveed

Director General (research) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of KP

Director General (research) Livestock and Dairy Development Department of KP Peshawar, KP

Dr Ziauddin TAD officer of FATA TAD officer of FATA Peshawar, KP

Various

Staff of FMD and PPR diagnostic lab (under DG research)

Staff of FMD and PPR diagnostic lab (under DG research) Peshawar, KP

VariousStaff of diagnostic lab (under DG extension)

Staff of diagnostic lab (under DG extension) Peshawar, KP


65

Dr Ihsanullah khan TAD officer of KP TAD officer of KP Peshawar, KP

Dr Laeeq ahmed

Assistant Director Livestock and Dairy Development Department, in charge of Jhelum district

Assistant Director Livestock and Dairy Development Department, in charge of Jhelum district Jhelum, Punjab

Dr Qazi khuram NawazPerson in charge of Jhelum district diagnostic lab

Person in charge of Jhelum district diagnostic lab Jhelum, Punjab

Various

Veterinary officers and veterinary assistants in Jhelum

Veterinary officers and veterinary assistants in Jhelum Jhelum, Punjab

Various

Village visits with farmers, veterinary officers and veterinary assistant and random visits

Village visits with farmers, veterinary officers and veterinary assistant and random visits

Village 1: Pin Swekha. Village 2: Toba Village 3: Urban area. District Jhelum, Punjab

Dr Rehman GhaniFAO Staff in head office: Livestock Officer

FAO Staff in head office: Livestock Officer Islamabad

Dr Qasim Raza

1FAO Staff: National Livestock Expert in Balochistan projects[1]

2FAO Staff: National Livestock Expert in Balochistan projects[1]

Quetta, Balochistan

Dr Yassa Khan FAO Staff: Livestock Associate FAO Staff: Livestock AssociateQuetta, Balochistan

Dr Farhat Abbas

Professor in Virology and in charge of viral vaccine production (including PPR), Centre for Advanced Studies in Vaccinology and Bio-technology (CASVAB)

Professor in Virology and in charge of viral vaccine production (including PPR), Centre for Advanced Studies in Vaccinology and Bio-technology (CASVAB)

Quetta, Balochistan

Dr Shakeel Baber

Professor in Biotechnology, Centre for Advanced Studies in Vaccinology and Bio-technology (CASVAB)

Professor in Biotechnology, Centre for Advanced Studies in Vaccinology and Bio-technology (CASVAB)

Quetta, Balochistan

Dr Essa Kakar TAD officer Balochistan TAD officer BalochistanQuetta, Balochistan

Dr Abdul Rehman

In charge of ELISA lab, Disease Investigation Lab (DIL), Livestock Department

In charge of ELISA lab, Disease Investigation Lab (DIL), Livestock Department

Quetta, Balochistan

VariousTwo staff of ELISA diagnostic lab (DIL)

Two staff of ELISA diagnostic lab (DIL)

Quetta, Balochistan

Dr Mahmood Bilal

Director, Disease Investigation Lab (DIL), Livestock Department

Director, Disease Investigation Lab (DIL), Livestock Department

Quetta, Balochistan

Dr Ghulam Rasool Taj

Deputy Director, Quetta District Veterinary Hospital, Livestock Department

Deputy Director, Quetta District Veterinary Hospital, Livestock Department

Quetta, Balochistan

Various

Five veterinary officers and stock assistants of Quetta District Veterinary Hospital

Five veterinary officers and stock assistants of Quetta District Veterinary Hospital

Quetta, Balochistan

Dr Abdul Hanan

Director General of Balochistan Agricultural Research and Development Centre

Director General of Balochistan Agricultural Research and Development Centre

Quetta, Balochistan

Various

Nine representatives of Farmer Marketing Cooperatives from districts: Kilasefula, Nushki, Chari, Mastung, Loralai and Quetta.

Nine representatives of Farmer Marketing Cooperatives from districts: Kilasefula, Nushki, Chari, Mastung, Loralai and Quetta.

Quetta, Balochistan


66

Appendix 2. Agro-ecological zones in Pakistan

Agro-ecological zones

Geographical coverage

Physical/Climatic conditions

Livelihoods

(i) Himalayan humid and sub-humid mountains

• NA (Gilgit Balthistan)• AJK (Kashmir)• Eastern parts of KP (Hazara areas and some Malakand areas)

• Fragile Himalayan mountains• Humid and sub-humid• Cool winter and mild summer• Rainfall in both summer monsoon and winter (1700 mm/ year)• Peaks covered by Glaciers• Snow fall also in valley bottoms

• Mainly depend on natural resources (forest and non-timber forest products• Small land holdings with intensive cultivation• Main crops: Maize, rice, wheat, onion, tomatoes in lower areas; maize and potatoes in upper areas along with off-season vegetables; • Fruits (apple, peach and apricot in valley bottom).• Livestock: both small and large ruminants• Few off-farm income opportunities

(ii) Western dry mountains of Hindu Kush

• Hindu Kush rugged mountains bordering Afghanistan stretching from Gilgit-Balthistan, some districts of KP (Chitral Upper Dir), FATA and Western parts of Balochistan

• Temperate/arid/hyper arid • Mostly dry with meagre rainfall only in the winter season (as low as 30 mm/year in Balochistan part)• Poor vegetation, wild olives and bushes• Snow fall in winter only at peaks

• Mainly depend on natural resources (forest and non-timber forest products• Small land holdings; main crops: maize and red beans, tomatoes, potatoes, onions); High value fruits (apple, grapes etc.)• Livestock: Goats and sheep• Few off-farm income opportunities

(iii) Semi-arid sub-mountain rainfed plains

• Sub-mountain areas of KP in the south and east and Northern and southern Punjab• Include Pothwar and salt range

• Semi-arid• Hot in summer and cold in winter• Rainfall both monsoon and winter rains

• Mainly depend on off-farm sources (services and wage labour)• Crops: wheat and rapeseed in winter and some summer season fodder crops (sorghum)• Ground water suitable for irrigation (in patches)

(iv) Semi-arid central irrigated plains

• Central Punjab and Sindh• Some districts of Southern Punjab and Sindh (on the eastern part of Indus river), and eastern districts of Balochistan (Nasirabad etc.)

• Semi-arid• Hot in summer and cold in winter• Rainfall both summer monsoon and winter• Large canal irrigation network

• Agriculture is the main source of livelihood- food basket of Pakistan• All farm sizes but mainly medium farms; Tenants on 50% share basis; Crops: Wheat, sugarcane, rice, cotton; oranges in Punjab and mangoes in southern districts of Punjab, and Central districts of Sindh• Livestock: Large concentration of stall fed buffaloes

(v) Suleman hill torrent plains

• Along the western side of Indus river, stretching from north to south, includes southern districts of KP; southern districts of Punjab; southern districts of Sindh and eastern districts of Balochistan

• Semi-arid• Hot in summer and cold in winter• Rainfall mainly in winter but some monsoon rains• Canal irrigation network close to Indus river on both sides

• Agriculture is the main source of livelihood based on “Rodh Kohi” systems of hill torrents water harvesting from Suleman mountains• Some land is canal irrigated with other land along the side of Indus basin “Katcha Area”• Large land holdings with tenants on 1/8th share basis.• Irrigated crops: Wheat, sugarcane, rice, cotton, oranges and mangoes• Rodh Kohi rainfed crops: Wheat, rapeseed, pulses and summer fodder (sorghum)• Livestock: Mainly stall fed buffaloes in irrigated part, goats in rainfed parts • The rainfed households also work off-farm in cities


67

Agro-ecological zones

Geographical coverage

Physical/Climatic conditions

Livelihoods

(vi) Sandy deserts • Eastern border of India (Cholistan desert in Punjab and Thar abd Khirthar deserts in Sindh

• Semi-arid, very hot in summer and mild in winter• Meagre rainfall mainly in summer (monsoon)• Sandy lands with low organic matter and low moisture absorption capacity

• Mainly livestock based farming (mostly Cows and some goats).• Crops depend on monsoon rains. Main crops are millets, pulses and guar (fodder)

(vii) Coastal area • Stretching from Balochistan Gwader all along Sindh coastal till Badin district

• Semi-arid, sub-tropical• Hot in summer and mild in winter• Meagre rains (mainly monsoon)• Soils are saline• High ground water table but brackish

• Fishing based livelihood for households along the coast.• Faming is practiced on saline land but less productive (crops: Rice and sugarcane)• Far from the coast: mainly agriculture with land holdings (Crops: Wheat, rice, sugarcane, tomatoes, chilies, and new crop sunflower• Few households work off-farm in cities/towns.

Source: Adapted from Area Development and Management Consulting (ADMC) PK - Food Security and Climate Change Assessment in Pakistan-paper drafted for South Asia Bureau, Oxfam Novib February 2010.


68

7. List of Annexes

Annexes available at http://www.fao.org/evaluation/en/

Annex 1. Terms of Reference

OFFICE OF EVALUATIONwww.fao.org/evaluation

evaluation of fao’s contribution to the islamic …country programme evaluation series evaluation...

Documents