'N ' -4 1,-F f: R~~~~~~~~~ `;r] ,.

P.AKIS"IAN~

DRAINAGE SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'

-NATIONAIL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

CONCEPT FRAMEWORKNATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

JUNE 1993UM I. sm. y

NATIONAL ENGINEERING MottSERVICES PAKISTAN (PVT) ) ) 1 MacDonald

DRAINAGE SERVICES Limited

-i NTINIMLTDRANG .11 jIneratonl imto

41 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _ __!_' ,_,_ _ __.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN

WATER A POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT

PAKISTAN

DRAINAGE SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

- NATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

MAIN REPORT: VOLUME 2

CONCEPT FRAMEWORKNATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

JUNE 1993

NE E NATIONAL ENGINEERING MottSERVICES PAKISTAN (PVVT) 1 1 1 MacDonald

1 LIM1TED J Intcrnational Limitcd

PAKISTANDRAINAGE SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

-NATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

(LIST OF VOLUMES)

VOLUME I - PAKISTAN DRAINAGE SECTOR ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT

VOLUME 2 - CONCEPT FRAMEWORKNATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

VOLUME 3 - SUPPLEMENTARY REPORTS

VOLUME 4 - DATA (WATER, SOIL & AGRICULTURE)

PAKISTAN-DRAINAGE SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT- NATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

LIST OF CONTENTS

PageNr.

List of Contents i

List of Tables iv

List of Figures v

Abbreviations vi.

Local Terms x

Conversion Table xi

Soil and Water Quality Definitions xi

VOLUME 2

CONCEPT FRAMEWORK NATIONAL DRAINAGEPROGRAMME

CHAPTER 9 NATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

9.1 Objectives of the Programme Approach 9-1

9.2 Justification or the Programme Approach 9-1

9-2.1 Problems with Large Projects 9-19.2.2 Advantages of the Programme Approach 9-39.2.3 Economic Justification of the Programme Approach 9-3

i

9.3 Concept Framework for the Drainage Programme 9-9

9.3.1 Goals and Objectives 9-99.3.2 Continuity and Dependency of Schemes 9-109.3.3 Proposed Concept Framework 9-11

9A Preliminary Costing and rimetable ° 2

9.4.1 Drainage Interventions to be Costed 9-129.4.2 Budget and Timetable 9-15

9.5 Investments in Drainage Sector 9-16

APPENDIX - IX

CHAPTER 10 FUTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAMME APPROACH

10.1 Introduction 10-1

10.2 Projects and Programmes in the Drainage Sector 10-1

10.3 Programme Preparation 10-2

10A Development of a Participatory Approach 10-3

10.5 Preparation of the National DrainageProgramme Outline Terms of Reference 104

10.6 Monitoring and Research 10-6

10.6.1 Major Issue 10-610.6.2 Monitoring and Research Needs 10-710.6.3 Data Requirements 10-810.6.4 Research Needs 10-9

10.7 Operation and Maintenance 10-10

10.8. Drainage Cess 10-11

CHAPIER 11 ROLE FRAMEWORK FOR INSTITUTIONS AND GUIDELINES FORACTION (including reference to social aspects)

11.1 Introduction 11-1

11.1.1 Towards a Role Franework 11-111. 1.2 Policy, Standards and Legislation 11-211.1.3 Planning 11-2

..

11.1.4 Monitoring and Evaluation 11-411. 1.5 Recurrent Physical Monitoring and Analysis 11-411.1.6 Implementation 11-5

11.2 Existing Situation 11-5

11.2.1 General Constraints 11-511.2.2 Deficiencies and Gaps in Responsibilities 11-711.3.3 Drainage Operation and Maintenance 11-8

11.3 Guidelines ror Action 11-9

11.3.1 Defining a Role Framework 11-911.3.2 Environmental Assessment 11-1311.3.3 Monitoring and Evaluation 11-1311.3.4 Physical Monitoring and Analysis 11-1411.3.5 Drainage Management and Finance 11-15

CHAPTER 12 TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

12.1 Introduction 12-1

12.2 Background 12-1

12.2.1 Previous Findings 12-I12.2.2 Current Training Programmes 12-2

123 Training Needs Assessment 12-4

12.3.1 Specific Areas for Training 12-412.3.2 Institutions and Staff 12-6

12.4 Recommended Training Programmes 12-8

12.4.1 Seminars and Workshops 12-812.4.2 In-country Training Programmes 12-912.4.3 Out-of-country Training 12-12

12.5 Conclusions and Future Action 12-12

APPENDIX - Xn

...

LIST OF TABLES

Table Nr. Page Nr.

9.1 Comparison of Projects and Programmes 9-4

9.2 Comparison of Projects and Programmes 9-6

9.3 Eftect of Delay on Equivalent Projects andPrograrvmes 9-7

9.4 Economic Gains of the Programme Approach 9-8

9.5 Concert Framework for the National DrainageProgramme 9-13

9.6 Preliminary Budget and Timetable for theNational Drainage Programme (Rs M at 1993 prices) 9-17

9.7 Anticipated Drainage Sector Investments 9-18

Appendix-lXComparison of Projects and ProgrammesI Large Project Delayed (Establishment Trimmed)2 Large Project Delayed (Establishment Maintained)3 Equivalent Programme Delay (Establishment Trirmmed)4 Equivalent Programme Delay (Establishment Maintained)5 Analysis of Equivalent Projects and Programmes

11.1 Categories for Key Environmental Activities inDevelopment Planning and Implementation 11-1

11.2 Irrigation. Drainage and the EnvironmentProposed Institutional Responsibility Chart 11-10

12.4 Seminars on Environmental Assessment in the Drainage Sector 12-10

12.5 Four Week Intensive Course on Environmental Assessment andthe Drainage Sector 12-11

12.6 Training for Farmer Participation Workshops(Training for Trainers) 12-13

Appendix-XII1 Recommendations/Activities from First Workshop on Environmental Impact

Assessment in Drainage Sector in Lahore - April 19922 Recommendations/Activities from Two-day Seminar in Lahore

- September, October 19923 Recommendations/Activities from Two-day Seminar in Karachi

- October 1992

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Nr.

9.1 Comparison of Projects and Programmes

11.1 Canal Revenues and O&M Costs

11.2 Balochistan Irrigation and Power Department Key ElementsHighlighting Drainage O&M

11.3 Sindh Irrigation and Power Deparanent Key ElementsHighlighting Drainage O&M

11.4 WAPDA: Key Elements of Proposed Organization to strengthenPlanning and Environment

12.1 Short-term In-Country Training Programmes

v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

A

Ac AcreACE Associated Consulting Engineer (Pvt) LimitedADBP Agricultural Development Bank of PakistanADB Asian Development BankADP Annual Development ProgrammeAPCC Annual Plan Coordination CommitteeAXEN Assistant Executive Engineer

B

Bcm Billion cubic meterBM&E Benefit Monitoring and EvaluationBMIAD Balochistan Minor Irrigation and Agriculture Development

C

CAA Civil Aviation AuthorityCDWP Central Development Working PartyCE Chief Engineercfs Cubic feet per secondCSU Colorado State UniversityCWM Command Water Management

D

d dayDRIP Drainage and Reclamation Institute of PakistanDSEA Drainage Sector Enviromnental Assessment

E

EAD Economic Affairs DivisionEC Electrical ConductivityECNEC Executive Committee for National Economic CouncilEIA Environmental Impact AssessmentEPA Environmental Protection AgencyEPC Envirommental Protection Council

F

FFC Federal Flood CommissionFGW Fresh Ground WaterFIDIC Federation Internationale des Ingenieurs- Conseils

vi

G

g grammeGDP Gross Domestic ProductGIS Geographical Information SystemsGM General ManagerGW gigawatt

H

h hourha hectarehm hectare-meterhmi3 cubic hectometre

I

IBM Indus Basin ModelIBMR Indus Basin Model (Revised)IBWR Indus Basin Water AuthorityIDA International Development AssociationIDC Interest during constructionIFAD International Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentIRA Indus River AuthorityISM Irrigation System ManagementISRP Irrigation System Rehabilitation ProjectIWASR. International Waterlogging and Salinity Research Institute

K

kg kilogrammekm kilometrekm2 square kilometrekt kilotonnekw kilowattkwh kilowatthour

L

LBOD Left Bank Outfall Drain

M

M Millionm metreM2 square metrem3 cubic metreMa million acreMha Million bectareMaf million acre feetM&E Monitoring & Evaluation

vii

ME&R Monitoring Evaluation and Review CellMhim million hectare metermm millimetermm2 square millimetreMMI Mott MacDonald International Ltd, (UK)Mt million tonneMW megawatt

N

NCA National Commission on AgricultureNCS National Conservation StrategyNDP National Drainage ProgrammeNEC National Economic CouncilNESPAK National Engineering Services Pakistan (Pvt) LimitedN/K Net Benefit Investment RatioNPV Net Present ValueNWFP North West Frontier Province

0

ODA/UK Overseas Development Administration of UKOFWM On Farm Water ManagementOMR Operation, maintenance & replacementO&M Operation & maintenance

P

PAD Provincial Agriculture DepartmentPBME Project benefit monitoring and evaluationPC Planning CommissionPCW Punjab Cotton WheatPC-I to PC-V Planning Commission Proforma(s)PDWP Provincial Development Working PartyPHED Public Health Engineering DepartmentPEPO Pakistan Environmental Protection OrdinancePEA Punjab Engineering AcademyPEPC Pakistan Environmental Protection CouncilPID Provincial Irrigation & Power DepartmentPWD Public Works DepartmentP&D Planning and DevelopmentPMW Punjab Mixed WheatPRW Punjab Rice WheatPSW Punjab Sugarcane Wheat

R

RSC Residual Sodium CarbonateRAP Revised Action PlanRBMP Right Bank Master PlanRBOD Right Bank Outfall Drain

viii

s

s secondSAR Sodium Adsorption RatioSCARP Salinity Control and Reclamation ProjectSCWN Sindh Cotton Wheat NorthSCWS Sindh Cotton Wh.!at SouthSE Superintending EngineerSGW Saline Ground WaterSMO SCARP Monitoring Organisation (WAPDA)SRWN Sindh Rice Wheat NorthSRWS Sineh Rice Wheat South

T

t tonne

U

USAID United States Agency for Intemational Development

w

W wattWAPDA Water and Power Development AuthorityWASA Water and Sanitation AgencyWh watthourWRP Water Resources PlanningWSIPS Water Sector Investment Planning StudyWUA Water User Association

x

XEN Executive Engineer

y

y year

ix

DESCRIPTlON OF LOCAL TERMS

Bandat Eardhen embankment corstructed along the contour forming rectangular ponds

Barani Rainfed areas

Bosi Winter crop grown largely on residual moisture for summer crops but which has oneirrigation.

Bunds Earthen embankments

Chak An area served by a watexcourse

Dubari Winter crop grown using the residual moisture from the summer crops

Gur Crude sugar prepared at farm from the sugar cane

Gandas Local name for earthen embankments constructed alongthe contour to hold water

Hari Sharecropper

Karez A horizontal hand excavated gravity flow well generally used to obtain irrigationwater in Balochistan

Kharif Summer cropping season, Ist April to 30th September

Mogha Uncontrolled outlet from parent canal to watercourse

Pattan Tribe name

Pancho Water Water drained from rice fields during the periodic replacement of standing water

Rod kohi Traditional system of flood irrigation from hill torrents debouching to plains

Rabi Wintar cropping season, Ist October to 31st March

Riwaj-e- Set of rules for diverting water for irrigationAbpashi from flows in a natural channel

Sui Gas Natural gas obtained from Sui fields in Balochistan

Wah Local term for hill torrent

Zam Local term for hill torrent

Zamindar Large Landowners

x

CONVERSION TABLE

English Units Metric Units1 inch Oin) = 25.4 millimetres (mm)1 foot (ft) = 30.5 centimetres (cm)1 yard (yd) = 0.915 meters (m)1 mile (mi) = 1.609 kilometres (km)1 acre (ac) = 0.405 hectares (ha)1 square mile (sq.mi) = 259 haI pound (lb) = 0.454 kilograms (kg)I long ton (lg ton) = 1.016 metric tons (t)1 cubic foot/second (cfs) - 0.0283 cubic meterslsecond (m3/sec)

= 28.32 litres/second (1/see)I acre foot (AF) = 1 233.5 cubic meters(m3)I parts per million (ppm) I I milligramllitre (mg/I)

= 0.00156 millimbo/cm (mmhoJcm)= 0.00156 decisemenlmeter (dSWm)

SOIL AND WATER QUALITY DEFINITIONSSoils

Description Class ECe SAR(dslm)

Surface SalinitvNon saline Si < 4Slightly saline S2 4-8Moderately saline S3 8-15Highly saline S4 > 15

Soils SalinitvJSodicityNonsaline-Nonsodic NS-NS < 4 < 13Saline Nonsodic S-NS > 4 < 13Saline-Sodic SS > 4 > 13Nonsaline-Sodic NS-S < 4 > 13

Prrrl:e Classification (0-180 cm)No salinity or sodicity at any depth: NS-NSSalinity present but no sodicity at any depth: S-NSSalinity and sodicity present at any depth: SSNo salinity but sodicity present at any depth: NS-S

WaterDescription EC*106 EC SAR RSC

(micro- (dSJm)mhos/cm)

Fresh (usable) < 1500 < 1.5 <10 <2.5Marginal 1500-3000 1.5-3 10-S18 2.5- 5Hazardous 3000+ 3+ 18+ 5+

xi

CHAPTER 9

NATIONAL DRAINAGE PROGRAMME

9.1 Objectives of the Programme Approach

The programme approach to drainage is understood here to mean the implementation ofdrainage by mean of a series of interventions in the form of schemes (structural intervention)and changes in water management practices (non-structural interventions), coming under the'umbrella' of a standardised set of procedures for their selection, financing andimplementation.

The prinmary objectives of the programme approach derived from the Terms of Reference are:

a) To overcome the perceived shortcomings of the normal project approach andparticularly the time taken in starting up and completing individual projects;

b) That the projects tend to be area-specific and thus concentrate investment in favouredareas whereas, the greatest need for drainage is now in small a'reas rather than inproject-scale blocks.

c) Affording GOP and Provincial officials flexibility in taclding disaster problem areaswithout the rigidities of projects;

The desire for a different approach is based on the reasonable view that the time taken overprojects is too long and that by allowing priority to be given to the small areas, it may bepossible to improve the economic returns to investment in drainage and also reduce adverseenvironmental impacts. A properly focused programmne approach could therefore, improvethe overall efficiency and acceptability of drainage investment.

There are, however, special constraints in applying the programme approach to the drainagesector. In contrast to On Farm Water Management (OFWM) and Irrigation SystemRehabilitation (ISR) programmes, which relate to rehabilitation and improvement of existingfacilities, in drainage sector major new facilities may have to be created particularly when itcomes to the disposal of very saline drainage water, and these constraints need to be identifiedand examined objectively.

9.2 Justification of the Programme Approach

9.2.1 Problerms with Large Projects

The basic objective of the progranune approach derives from its perceived comparativeadvantage over projects. Large projects looking for funding by external donor agencies, gothrough a very long gestation of 2-3 years, often much longer, before construction begins.The problem does not end there as these require large resources in terms of manpower,

9-1

offices, equipment and above all, finances. The competition for finances results inunderfunding and large projects taking much longer to complete than technically feasible. Thisincreases costs and reduces their viability (by delaying benefits as well as increasing costs).

Such projects should restrain further investment but because of the socio-political pressure fornew projects in new areas, more and more projects are started with the result that there iseffectively a block on anything being completed.

One solution has been to stage projects, completing those components and areas which canbe completed and postponing the others to a late stage. However, the freedom to convert anon-going project into what is, in affect, a programme of staged development is usually verylimited. Drainage pumps must be provided with electricity (the usual source of power) anda means of disposing of saline water, and in this way, each component drags along the others,no matter how late they may be.

Once one or two contracts have been started, projects are rarely divisible although sometimesit is possible to leave out part of the area. However, this concentrates the project on a smallerarea and in practice, this is done only where there are reasons other than financial stringencyto justify omission of part of the area (for example, unit H of SCARP VI because it has freshgroundwater, or area C of South Rohri because of private tubewell development).

More often completion of large projects is held up by one or two components, often those thatappear least critical at the start of the project but run into contractual difficulties (eg thesurface drains for Mardan SCARP, and the same for Nawabshah sub-project of LBOD).These difficulties are particularly likely with contracts made large enough to attractinternational contractors but too large for the local contractors who often win them, toresource adequately. The programme approach might provide a continuum of smallercontracts which although more costly to supervise, would provide the opportunity to identifyand build up more capable local contractors.

Another problem with large projects is the uneven loading they place on the implementationagencies, and this is only partly overcome by the use of consultants. This uneven loading isincreased by the separation that occurs between the efforts and thinking that goes into settingup the project, and that which goes into construction, with quite different people beinginvolved in the two activities.

When it becomes necessary to modify the project during construction in order to get itcompleted, it is unlikely that the changes will be decided by criteria completely consistentwith those used in the original project formulation. It is rare for agricultural practices andeconomics to be considered once the project has been started. Also it is unlikely that therewill be much feedback from construction to the formulation of the next project. Thus, bothplanners and constructors live in separate worlds, each blaming the other or that third force,the operators, for the project's shortcomings.

The different perception of these shortcomings are revealing because they tell us much aboutthe problems of large projects. Whereas planners ternd to grumble that the contractors andoperators of drainage projects favour expediency at the expense of benefits and extra costs,conators and operators often complain the projects are unnecessarily complicated andexpensive to build and operate. In part, these are both aspects of the same problem, namelythat extra resources and effort are required to hold large projects on course and responsiveto their original objectives. Also, with increasing demands on resources, particularly finance,

9-2

the WSIPS has shown that it is not reasonable to expect these resources to be easy to comeby. A new more flexible approach is required with more divisible investment able to makemore efficient use of resources as these become available.

9.2.2 Advantages of the Progrnane Approach

The preceding section on the problems with large projects has pointed to several potentialadvantages of a programme approach which include:

- divisibility of investment, enabling a more flexible response to available resources andevolving needs;

- continuity (if not constancy) of effort, enabling a closer relationship between planningand construction;

- sharper focusing on areas of greatest need (for exanple pockets of high waWrtableand impeded surface drainage);

- wider distribution of such areas giving the flexibility to deal with problems on aregional scale, not just within a particular project area;

- quicker gestation of individual schemes once the programme framework has been setup;

- smaller parcels of work with less risk of one contact holding up others, and theopportunity to rectify problems before allowing weak contractors to participate infurther schemes.

9.2.3 Economic Justification of the Pogranmme Approach

The economic advantage of a programme approach is illustrated by an analysis similar to thatcarried out by the WSIPS (Main Report, Section 5.2.4) to show the impact of delays due tounderfunding on large projects. Table 9.1 analyses the finances and economics of a projectsimilar to that analysed by the WSIPS. Under the ideal oDnditions assumed at the projectinception, this project was expected to take four years to construct at a cost allowing for priceinflation, of Rs 4 billion. If interest during construction ([DC) is charged at the full compoundrate, then this cost rises to Rs 4.93 billion. Either way, the economic return would yield anet benefit investment ratio (N/K ratio) of 1.40 (12% discount rate) and an internal rate ofreturn MRR) of 16.2%. This is reasonably representative of the return which might beexpected from a drainage project of this size.

It is, however, a large project to resource fully within four years and the WSIPS has givenexamples of large projects which typically take twice as long to complete as they shouldbecause of intatable constraints on funding and other resources. Changing the parametersin Table 9.1 models what happens when the same project is delayed so that as well as takingsomewhat longer to start, it also takes double the time to construct as was originallyenvisaged. The results are given in Appendix IX. These show that even if the supervisionestablishment is trmed to take account of the lower level of activity, price inflation pushesthe cost of the project up from Rs 4 billion to Rs 5.1 billion. If IDC is added, then the

9-3

TABLE 9.1

Compariso of Procs and Progam_m

A. LARGE PROJECT UNDER IDEAL CONDMONS

Basic mpinsStat of Conscio (year) 4 Incrcmna Bancfit with Projed (Rs Wyear) 682rTm for Project Prepratio (as) 1.5 Build-up of B8neft (years) 2.0rTm for Project Approval (yars) 1.5 O&M Costs (% bas cost of woks) 3.0%Period of Consruction (ars) 4.0 Foreign Exchng Conte (% of cot of works) 50%Preparation Costs (% total cost of works) 3.0% Ecomic Conversin Factor (Rupec coats only) 0.9Supervion Costs (% of cost of works) 7.5% Discount Rate 12.0%Ilteret During Construcion 12.5%5Year Base Cost (Rs M) Coat iad Inflation Economic Cost Benefits ( M) Discounted* Negtive Positive

Nr Works Estab Rs M IDC O & M Total Grss Net Costs Benefits Strm StmI 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 0.0 25.0 27.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 04 625.0 46.9 862.6 53.9 0 641 0 -641 407 0 -407 05 625.0 46.9 936.7 166.4 0 641 0 -641 364 0 -364 06 625.0 46.9 1.017.9 288.5 0 641 0 -641 325 0 -325 07 625.0 46.9 1.106.2 421.3 75 716 0 -716 324 0 -324 08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 341 266 30 138 0 1079 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 27 246 0 21910 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 24 220 0 1951 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 22 196 0 17412 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 19 175 0 15613 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 17 156 0 13914 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 15 140 0 12415 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 14 125 0 III16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 12 Ill 0 9917 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 11 99 0 8818 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 10 89 0 7919 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 9 79 0 7020 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 8 71 0 6321 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 7 63 0 5622 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 6 56 0 5023 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 6 50 0 .4524 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 5 45 0 4025 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 40 0 3626 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 36 0 3227 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 32 0 2828 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 29 0 2529 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 25 0 2330 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 23 0 20

2500 263 44001 930 1800 4363 15345 10983 1681 2243 -1419 1982Tota Cost (at constant prices) 2.763 NIK = 1.40 NPV 563Total Cost (ic inflaodC) 4.931 BIC Ratio = 1.33 IRR 16.2%Notes: * excluding costs of initial preparation and IDC

** costs and benefits discounted to year IhIflation assumed as for the WSIPS (7.5% on Rupcc coats. circa 10% on forcign costs)IDC calculated on cumulative costs (at current prices) up to currets half year

9-4

funding requirement goes up from Rs 4.93 billion to Rs 7.46 billion, thus making it verydifficult to complete the project without reducing its scope. Even if the project is completedin fill, benefits are delayed with the result that the N/K ratio is reduced from a respectable1.40 to a marginal 1.02 (IRR 12.2%).

In reality, it is likely that the establishment (staff, offices, vehicles etc) retained forsupervision of the delayed project will be very similar to that required for the original projectand in this case the cost of the delayed project will rise to Rs 5.54 billion or Rs 7.98 billionwith IDC and the economic return represented by the NIK ratio, will fall to 0.95. That meansthat the project no longer remamins economically viable.

An equivalent programme on the other hand would probably be more expensive to superviseand loose some of the economies of scale of a well run large project, but it should be ableto generate higher benefits by sharper focusing on real needs. Table 9.2 models a programmeof similar size to the project shown in Table 9.1. For ease of comparison it is assumed thatthe progranmme takes as long to prepare as the project, but the costs would be lower as someof the effort (eg feasibility studies of individual schemes) is transferred to programmesupervision (the costs of which are therefore increased). The costs of initial preparation areincluded in the financial cost stream (as the establishment costs in years 1-2) fur both theproject (Table 9.1) and the equivalent programme (Table 9.2) to give a consistent comparisonof total costs. However, following the usual practice, the initial preparation costs are notincluded in the economic analysis which is affected far more significantly by the fundamentaladvantages of the programme approach, namely

- the ability to complete the first schemes early in the programme and start building upbenefits (albeit with some O&M costs) well before the alternative project shows anyreurn; and

- the ability to increase the scale of the benefits by sharper focusing on areas of realneed (a 10% increase in benefits has been assumed, the conditions for which arediscussed later).

Table 9.2 assumes that under ideal conditions the first schemes could be evaluated, designed,tendered and constructed within two years of the start of the project. As in the case of theproject, the build up of benefits after completion of the works should be very rapid (withintwo years). This is because drainage benefits derive mainly from alleviating existing losses.

Comparison of the programme (Table 9.2) with the original project (Table 9.1) show thatthe programme approach is expected to produce a NIK of 1.87, whereas that of the projectwas 1.40. This represents a Rs 501 M or 89% gain in net present value (NPV) from theadvantages of the programme approach.

Another benefit of the programme is that IDC should be greatly reduced by handing overindividual schemes as they are commissioned. Although this has no impact on the economiccomparisons, it reduces the perceived funding requirement of the project shown in Table 9.1from Rs 4.93 billion, to Rs 4.50 billion (Table 9.2). It would be nice to believe that thiswould nuake it easier fur fill funding to be maintained, however, the opposite is more likelysince, as it will be shown below, the programme is able to withstand cut backs in fundingwith less damage than projects.

9-5

TABLE 9.2

Comparison of Prtjects nd Pmgrammes

B. EQUIVALENT PROGRAMME

Basc assumptionsS5t of Programme (year) 4 Incremcant Bcnefit with Programme (Rs M/year 750rime for Project Preparation (years) 1.5 Timc to Completion of First Scheme (years) 2.0Time for Project Approval (years) 1.5 Build-up of Benefits (years) 2.0Duration of Programme (years) 4.0 O&M Costs (% base cost of works) 3.0%Preparation Coats (% total cost of works) 2.0% Forcign Exchangc Conent (% of comt of works) 50%Supervision Coas (% of cost of work.s) 10.0% Economic Conversion Factor (Ru.pee costs only) 0.9Interest During Construction 12.5% Discount Rate 12.0%Year Base Cost (Rs M) Cost incl Inflation Economic Cost Bcncfits (Rs M) Discounteod* Negative Positive

Nr Works Estab Rs M IDC O & M Total Gross Nct Costs Bcnefits Strcam StreamI 0.0 33.3 33.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 0.0 16.7 18.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 625.0 62.5 882. 6 55.2 0 656 0 -656 417 0 -417 05 625.0 62.5 958.5 115.1 0 656 0 -656 372 0 -372 06 625.0 62.5 1.041.6 125.0 56 713 188 -525 361 95 -266 07 625.0 62.5 1.131.9 135.8 75 731 375 -356 331 170 -161 08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 563 488 30 227 0 1979 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 27 270 0 243

10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 24 241 0 21711 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 22 216 0 19412 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 19 l93 0 17313 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 17 172 0 15514 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 15 153 0 13815 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 14 137 0 12316 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 12 122 0 11017 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 11 109 0 98IS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 10 98 0 8819 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 9 87 0 7820 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 8 78 0 7021 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 7 69 0 6222 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 6 62 0 5623 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 6 55 0 5024 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 7S 750 675 5 49 0 4425 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 44 0 4026 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 o75 4 39 0 3527 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 35 0 3228 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 31 0 2829 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 28 0 2530 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 25 0 23

2500 300 4066 431 1856 4481 17625 13144 1743 2807 -1217 2281Total Coat (at constant priccs) 2.800 N/K = 1.87 NPV 1 .064Total Cost (me inflahionl11C) 4.497 B/C Patio = 1.61 IRR = 20.5%Notes: excluding costs of initial preparation and IDC

0* costs and beaefits discounted to year IInflation assumed as for the WSIPS (7.5% on Rupee cots. circa 10% on foreign costs)IDC calculated on costs (at current prices) in prcvious fnaucial year only

9-6

Indeed, in the current economic climate, one of the main justifications for a programmeapproach is its resilience to cut backs when, as usually happens, resources are limited andprojects and programmnes suffer underfunding. Both types of investment will suffer extra costdue to lower utilisation of the original establishment, but the programme type of investmentshould be able to complete schemes, save IDC and start earning benefits. Moreover, if thereduced level of funding is likely to last for sometime, or is anticipated in the first place, theprogramme could be made to adjust its targets accordingly and reduce its establishment tolevel required for the lower level of output.

Table 9.3 and Figure 9.1 summarise the impact of a range of delays on the economics of theproject and programme approaches presented in Table 9.1 and Table 9.2. Examples of theresults for 100% delay (to 8 years duration), with and without associated trimming of thesupervision establishment, are given in Appendix IX.

TABLE 9.3

Effect of DeLay on Equivalent Projects and Prograi_es

Project Approach Pror_ramme ApproachDelay Start Duration ---------------------------- -----------------------------

Year (years) Cost Rs N Cost Rs M N/K Ratio Cost Rs N Cost Rs N N/K Ratioexcl IDC incl IDC excl IDC incl IDC

0Z 4 4 4.001 4,931 1.40 4,066 4,497 1.8750X 5 6 4,900 6,563 1.15 5,037 5,597 1.92

1001 5 a 5,541 7,976 0.95 5,752 6,407 1.931501 5 10 6.275 9.621 0.78 6,575 7,330 1.89

Notes: 1. Costs are at current prices tie inctuding inflation)2. The annual costs of supervision are assumed to be the same in aLL

cases (ie establishment maintained)3. Graphs in Figure 9.1 assume a start in year 5 for all cases

(including no delay)

Figure 9.1 shows the very great increase in costs which delay causes, especially with projectsif IDC is applied. The application of IDC was criticised by the WSIPS because it had theeffect of reducing the real rate of funding and thereby holding up project completion, the veryopposite of what it was intended to do. It is also applied in different ways and the calculationused here is probably conservative. All that can be said is that the programme approach, ifefficiently managed, should incur less IDC and that real costs Cie without IDC) will be onlyslighdy more than an equivalent project.

The small amount extra real costs ascribed to the programme approach (allowing for thesavings in preparation effort) are necessary because the success of programmes (relative toprojects) is critically dependent on the quality of scheme selection, appropriateness of thedesign, speed of approval and tendering and thoroughness of contract supervision. If thesequalities are achieved then the extra effort should be repaid by a quicker, higher level ofbenefits. But it would be all too easy for these qualities to be neglected, resulting-ininappropriate schemes in the wrong places, poor construction and a large establishmentconsuming most of the investment and providing much of the rigidity of large project withmuch less clarity of purpose.

However, given the extra effort which the small increase in costs imply, it is assumed thata programme could generate 10% more benefits than an equivalent investment in a largeproject mainly because the programme could concent.ate on lower cost interventions andareas of maximum need.

9-7

N/I Ratio (Estahbishment Matntailrd) , Inflation in Costs

9- , .

.. .w., ; ,,

, , , ,, , , , , ,. I'. r . # n~~~*,.-

ai Si i > * 0 g 1t {i :1 feXX \" ; f ; S X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* SCl

sg~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1. .. , tH f . *,.

.4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..' '; '

Ii:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:CD

5~~~~ 5* SS. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c

The lower part of Figure 9.1 shows the NIK ratio for the project and for the equivalentprogramme with and without the extra benefits discussed above. The graph shows that if thereis a delay in the compietion, the economic return of both the project and the equivalentprogramme declines, but at a greater rate for the project.

The calculation of the programme benefits assumes that if the whole programme is delayedthe time to the completion of the first scheme is also delayed by half the amount (inpercentage terms) as the programme as-a whole. Thus, for a programme delayed to take 8years rather than 4 years Wt complete (100% delkyed),\the tine to completionr of the firstscheme is assumed to be 3 years rather than 2 years (50%, delayed).

. . . ~ ~~~- . '% .- . * C

In these cirmstances and assuming the establishment is not trimmed, the programme willshow some loss of return if delayed but it will remain viable even if extended over more thantwice its original duration. Even without the extra benefits from the progranmme'sconcentration on lower cost- interventions and areas of mitimum need, the programmeapproach would be economically more resilient than equivalent investment in a large project,simply because of earlier commissioning of individual schemes and thus, earlier generationof benefits.

Table 9.4 shows the gains in NPV represented by the above comparisons. These gains arevery considerable and illustrate the economic advantage of the programme approachparticularly when resources are limited and underfunding causes significant delays in thecompletion of investment.

TAME 9-4Econmic Gains of the Programe Ap2roacl

Programne Approach

Project Approach W Witb 102 Extra Benefits" Without Extra Benefits"

DeLay Duration N/K NPW l/K NPV IPV W/K NPV NPV(years) Ratio Rs N Ratio Rs N Gains Ratio Rs 1N Gain*

Rs 1 'RS li02 4 1.38 484 1.86 829 446 1.64 705 221502 6 1.15 181 1.81 710 529 1.57 514 333100l 8 0.95 -53 1.64 493 546 1.41 325 378150Z 10 0.78 -233 1.49 336 569 1.27 190 423

Notes: 1. * indicates a comparison relative to the equivalent investment in a largeproject delayed by similar amount

2. Figures are all for a start in year 5, with returns discountedat 12% per annum to year 1.

Of course not all drainage investment is capable of conversion to programme approach. Thelarge increments of investmnent needed to construct spine drains for safe disposal of largeamounts of saline drainage effluent cannot be broken down into viable small schemes. A verylage investment is needed before significant benefits can be generated. There are however,an increasing number of smaller scale interventions which could be taken up under theprogramme approach leaving a smaller number of projects to deal with those interventionswhich are unavoidably large. In the case of the smaller scale interventions, the switch to aprogramme approach appears justified.

9-8

9.3 Concept Framework for the Drainage Programme

9.3.1 Goals and Objectives

Whereas, the overal goal of the Drainage Programme might be said to be:

- to improve the economic and environmental performance of drainage investment,

there are a number of more specific objectives which can be identified along the routetowards achieving that goal and defining the content of the programme. The positiveobjectives, still in very general terms, would include:

i) Private sector involvement by increasing the participation and contribution ofbeneficiaries in drainage,

ii) Real needs by targeting government investment on areas in greatest need of drainage(and conversely, avoiding drainage and associated environmental hazards where theseare not justified),

iii) Appropriate technologies by targeting investment on cost effective drainagetechnologies appropriate to the particular area and the prevailing environmentalconstraints,

iv) Quicker returns by targeting drainage investment on smaller scale, quicker yieldinginterventions appropriate for inclusion within the programme approach to drainage,

v) Improved continuity to build up, by means of internal monitoring and feedbackunder the programme, the capability to select, design and construct cost effective andappropriate drainage interventions,

vi) Learning from the past by appropriate modification or rehabilitation of existingdrainage to increase its cost effectiveness and reduce adverse environmental impacts(and also provide an important feedback to the design of new schemes, and operationand maintenance).

Private sector involvement is placed first because it is the most easily neglected objective,requiring special ingenuity and discipline on the government side if the beneficiaries are totake on any part of the cost of drainage. The recent history of charging for irrigation andother water supplies shows that it is very difficult for the government to recover costs,particularly from farmers, and that as far as possible, government must find ways of gettingout of spending money where the private sector might be expected to invest or provideinvestment in labour, land and materials.

Although this and several of the other objectives might be taclded by projects, it is doubtfulif they could match a programme in providing the flexibility or opportunity for better returnsto government investment. Nor would a project provide the same continuity to developimproved capability and receive the feedback from previous interventions.

9-9

93.2 Continuity and Dependency of Schemes

It is important here to differentiate between the continuity of effort discussed above and thespatial continuity nornmally associated with drainage projects. The latter arises where it isnecessary to link up schemes in order to provide a means of disposing of saline effluent. Forexample, a surface drainage scheme preceding a series of sub-surface drainage schemes sothat the first provides the means of disposing of saline water from the sub-surface system.

Continuity in the programme context matters more where it is necessary to generate betterunderstanding and technical capability. Tbis will be done by putting resources into a seriesof schemes focused for example, on interceptor drains. These schemes would not be in thesame area but would be distributed to give the maximum benefit and make best use of theresources. These resources would include the presence of private sector contractors and theirequipment, who may have worked already on similar schemes and/or will have reasonableexpectation of working on future ones.

Even simple technologies such as surface drain schemes would also benefit from thecontinuity under a programme to pickup the lessons from the past and carry forward thesuccessful methodologies.

It is not, however, possible to have it both ways. Either the progranmme looks to continuityof effort or it compromises this in order to link together different kinds of schemes within oneparticular area (eg sub-surface drainage following surface drainage). However, there are realdangers in this latter approach as it is the interdependence of components which preventsprojects being quick yielding, and this needs to be avoided in programmes by keepingschemes apart.

Therefore, it is proposed as a matter of principle, that the programme should avoidinterdependence of schemes and the danger that completion of one scheme might hold up theother.

Indeed, each scheme should be capable of being completed and generating its benefits withoutany intervention from another scheme, unless that scheme is already completed. For example,a drainage scheme could make use of existing capacity in a downstream system, but not ina system which is still to be built.

As well as preventing one scheme holding up another, this also disposes of the question ofwhether evaluation of the first scheme should allow for any benefits of providing an oudetfor a later scheme. Given the present state of public funding and the possibility that thesecond scheme may not materialise for many years, and probably not in the form envisagedat the time to first scheme is being put together, it would not be proper to attribute the firstscheme with benefits of any later schemes. Better that the later scheme is able to treatfacies provided by earlier schemes as sunk costs, even if logically this leads to the firstscheme being trimmed of any spare capacity for later extensions. It makes little sense tospend money on spare capacity which may not be used for many years whilst otherdevelopment is being held up for lack of funds.

As things stand at present, there is a fair amount of spare capacity in drain systems whichcould be taken up by new schemes provided the bottlenecks are removed. Therefore, it shouldnot be too difficult to put together a programme wbich provides the desired continuity ofeffort without making schemes dependent on each other.

9-10

933 Proposed Concept Framework

The conclusion of the above discussion is that the Drainage Programme should:

i) not provide structural interventions in those aspects of drainage which can reasonablybe encouraged through private sector action (eg sub-surface drainage in freshgroundwater areas);

ii) ficus its structural interventions on small schemes serving areas normally not greaterthan say 5000 ha, where such interventions are economically and environmentallyjustified;

iii) concentrate sub-surface drainage interventions on areas underlain by SGW, thepre-monsoon depth to watertable is consistently within Im (3 ft) and where there isan environmentally acceptable solution for the disposal ofdrainage effluent;

iv) concentrate surface drainage interventions on areas where this is economically andenvirommentally justified by the risk of stormwater danage or the irrigation process(eg for rice), or where this is a part of (i) or (iii) above;

v) give special attention to structural and non-structural interventions which couldimprove the economic and environmental performance of completed projects andalready existing facilities, including

- involvement of the beneficiaries in implementing enhancements and takingappropriate responsibility for future O&M,

- -reassessing needs and utilising capacity more effectively by eliminatingbottlenecks and reallocating capacity on the basis of present economic andenvironmental needs, eliminating 'over drainage' and bringing in new areasin real need of drainage, as appropriate;

vi) generate a continuity of approach with closer links of understanding between theselection, design, construction and operation of drainage technologies mostappropriate to the programme approach, including a series of investments promoting:

private sector action in drainage and land reclamation by structural andnon-structural interventions (eg electricity distribution for tubewe'ls anddrainage pumps in waterlogged areas, rippers for sub-soiling, gy-psum forsodic waters and soils, land levelling equipment) using existing agencieswherever possible, but within the framework of a more focused and rigorousevaluation of the drainage objectives;

small scale surface drainage schemes (eg provision of culverts, new draininlets, small scale collector and stormwater drainage systems, regrading andunblocking of existing systems) selected as economically and environmentallyjustified,

schemes to control canal seepage in selected reaches (eg cut-offs, interceptordrains, skimming wells, tree planting) again selected as economically andenvironmentally viable,

9-11

TABLE 9.5

Concept Framework for the Natonal Drainage Programme

Initiative Type of Scheme Execution (f NDP InputI |not NDP direct)

A. Private Sector 1. TlwelIs In FGW Farmers at own Extension messagesInvolvement agric. areas cost on drainage aspects

for ext serlvceimedia delivery.

2. Watercourse lining Farmers at owr Edxtension messagesin FGW areas cost for ext. serivCe

OFWMWmedia deivery.

3. Land reclamationa) Sub-soiling . Farmers at own -' -

costeOFWMb) Sodlcity Control -. - - -

c) Land levelling _ -_

4. Watercourse lining Farmers through - -

in SGW areas OFWM

5. 'On-farm' drainagea) culvertMnlet - - Advice and.

construction consideration forassistance under S.

b) surface drains - ' - - N -

c) buried pipe drainage - - Advice & consider-ation under D.

6. Pump electrification WAPDA SCARP Scheme selection.only in waterlogged Electrification specification andareas/SCARP transition fRnance.

7. Rehabilitation of Ifigation Dept Partial financialtributary/sub-drains with farmers assistance.

assistance.

B. Surface Drainage 1. Culverts for Highway Board. Scheme selection.drainage impeded by Railways etc. specification androads etc. finance

2. Inlet to existing Irrigation Deptt: - -

drains

3. R&I of existingbranch & main drains

9-13

small scale sub-surface drainage schemes to deal with pockets of acute needor : to pi-dviuc a tiwuusiraiiun w generate interest in privatesector involvement (simple well schemes and small scale 'tile' drainage),particularly where this cannot reasonably be provided by the landowners (egin urban and peri-urban areas, in productive areas suffering from excessiveseepage or runoff from adjacent canals, drains, storage reservoirs etc) againselected on the basis of proper economic and environmental evaluation,especially with regard to the disposal of the sub- surface drainage effluent.

v) avoid committing the programme to concurrent interventions in the same area, whichare dependent on each other for successful completion.

9.4 Preliminary Costing and Timetable

9.4.1 Drainage Interventions to be Costed

The last section identified four types of intervention in drainage, which could be taken up inthe first phase of the Drainage Programme and include:

A. private sector involvement and government intervention to encourage this,B. small scale surface drainage schemes,C. schemes to control canal seepage,D. sub-surface drainage of pockets of acute need.

Although there may be some overlap between these, it is proposed that these should beresourced as separate initiatives so that one does not tend to take over the others and that noinitiative is completely neglected (particularly A.)Table 9.5 sets out the types of schemes envisaged under each of these initiatives andidentifies the need for programme finance for:

- technical assistance and monitoring of all the initiatives and schemes,

- electrification for drainage pumps (including tubewell pumps) in waterlogged areas,

- electrification/subsidy for transition of one or group of SCARP wells in FGW areato private sector, as and when their useful life is over;

- culverts, inlets and small scale surface drainage schemes (including therationalisation, rehabilitation and extension of existing schemes) for agricultural andperi-urban lands and for wetland improvements,

- interceptor drains and skimming wells for control of canal seepage,

- small scale sub-surface drainage (well or 'tile' drainage) of waterlogged pockets ofagricultural land and rural setdements (mcluding rehabilitation and extension ofexisting SGW SCARPs),

- mitigation of environmental effects of SGW SCARPs through relocation of drainagefacilities or change of drainage technology,

9-12

- small scale improvements to the disposal systems for the above drainage and thatfrom industrial and commercia' facilities.

All these schemes require systematic evaluation of their economic and enviromnental viabilityparticularly with regard to effluent disposal. Several of the schemes require evaluation basedon whether the area can be considered waterlogged and whether the area can be considereda fresh groundwater area.

These and other aspects will certainly require site investigation and this investigation will haveto be linked into monitoring of the medium term position, especially with regard to rainfall,irrigation supplies, watertable depth and existing drain flows, and the quality of canal anddrain water. It is therefore, proposed that the National Drainage Programme should make asubstantiai investment in:

- restoring raingauges in rural areas, particularly district headquarters,

-- introducing more reliable measurement of flows in selected canals and drains, andalso monitoring chemical parameters on a long term basis,

- infilling the gaps in the existing WAPDA SMO network of observation -wells,levelling in the gauges to national datum, and providing a sample of wells withrecorders,

- a GIS to store and process the data, particularly on rainfall and watertable depth.

9.4.2 Budget and Timetable

The size of the Drainage Programme depends partly on how quicldy each of the fourinitiatives and the investment in medium/long term monitoring outlined above can be gotmoving. Even with a substantial investment in external technical assistance it would probablytake a year or so before the first schemes could be initiated and at least 2 years before thewhole programme would be 'up to speed'. At this point the size of the project will bedetermined by the flow of viable schemes and what can be financed, in addition to othercommitments, under each year's Annual Development Programme (ADP).

The WSIPS indicated that it is the ADP which will be limiting but that this limitation will rotbe the same in every province. Indeed, the WSIPS financial projections suggest that there willbe no spare funds in the Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan ADPs (and particularly in the'accelerated programme') until at least the second half of the decade. Even in Punjab,experience with past projects suggests that it would be very difficult to sustain at 1988 prices,an annual investment in excess of say Rs 750 M per year (the size of the ISRP-II requirementand twice that of OFWM-]r), possibly much less. The preliminary budget given in Table 9.6is based on a maximum spending in Punjab of just Rs 300 M/year (equivalent to Rs 490M/year at today's prices), but the effect on the total price is given in the notes for ratesranging from Rs 250 M/year to Rs 750 M/year (the ISRP n level).

An annual spending of Rs 300 M in Punjab would support perhaps six schemes runningconcurrendy in categories B, C and D, costing an average of Rs 75 M and lcking two yearsto implement, with Rs 75 Mlyear reserved for schemes in category A. Using this as theyardstick, it is proposed that at this stage the Punjab drainage progranmme could be designedto handle a maximum at any one time of 12 schemes comprising 6 in category A, 3 in

9-15

TABLE 9.5 (Contd..)

Concept Framework for the National Drainage Programme

Initiative Type of Scheme Execution rif NDP Inputnot NDP direct)

4. Rationalising/extending - -

edsting schemes

5. Small scale new schemes WAPDA (or -' -Irrigation Dept)

6. Wetland developmant Fisheies DeptL - -

schemes (or WAPDA onagency basis)

C. Canal Seepage 1. Canal lning/remodellng Irrigation Dept Technical advicesControl monitoring of

drainage issues

2. Tree planting Irrigation Dept -' -

a Interceptor drains/ WAPDA (or Scherne selection,skimming wells Irrigation Dept) specification and

finance.

D. Sub-surface 1. Drainage of WAPDADrainage wat edlogged Pockets

2. Drainage of urban and PHED (or WAPDA on Scheme selection,per i-urban areas agency basis) ciion and

posstble finance

a Drainage of Owner (or WAPDA/ Technical adviceindustial and PHED on agency and considerationcommercial facilities basis for assistance with

off-site works

4. RationalisingAimproving Irrigation DepL Technical advice &existing SCARPs in (or WAPDA on monitoring ofFGW areas agency basis) drainage issues.

5. Rationarising/improving -'- Scheme selecion,existing SCARPs in specfication andSGW areas finance.

9-14

category B, 2 in category C and I in category D. Programmes in the other provinces wouldfollow as finances permit, on the assumption that it would be better to have a lag in theprogrammes than start building up the establishment before there is sufficient money to payfor the actual work. The lag would also allow resources to be concentrated on sorting out themethodologies in one province before moving to the rest. Increasing lag would reduce thepeak in funding requirements in 1998-99.

Table 9.6 assumes the first phase programme would run for no more than 6 years with theprovincial shares of the programme according to the shares in the present 'acceleratedprogranune for anti-waterlogging and salinity control'. This gives a total programme (DP)of Rs 3.81 billion at 1993 prices or Rs 5.78 billion including inflation. Increasing themaximum rate of spending in Punjab to Rs 750 M/year (1988 prices) would increase theoverall cost of the programme to Rs 9.59 billion at 1993 prices or Rs 14.55 billion includinginflation. This would make it a very large programme and perhaps not readily 'bankable' andcertainly more vulnerable to upset due to problems with funding and in maintaining the flowof schemes to be implemented. For this reason a more modest programme has been proposedat this stage.

9.5 Investments in Drainage Sector

In formulating the concept framework for National Drainage Programme, in addition toancilliary measures, in surface and sub-surface drainage attention was mainly focussed onsmall interventions for areas where drainage infrastructure either exists or is not required andthe intervention was capable of generating quick benefits without dependence on any otherscheme or schemes. This involved the choice of development modes that are divisible andwhich could be accomodated within the constraints of resource availability.

While the implementation of such a programme can fulfill the needs in the drainage sectorto a large extent, it cannot provide an overall framework for a balanced developmentrequiring measures intimately related to the programme. These measures are largelyrepresented by major infrastructural developments such as, intra/inter- provindal drainagelinks and outfall drains for safe disposal of saline drainage effluent, outside the system, fromcomponent drainage units or areas where interim disposal options may have adopted.

For orderly development of the drainage sector it is therefore, necessary that implementationof infrastructural projects should proceed simultaneously with National Drainage Programme.Keeping this in view an attempt has been made to identify the overall investment needs in thedrainage sector and these are brought out in Table 9.7. During 6th and 7th Plan periods theapproximate expenditure was 10 to 12 billion ruppees per plan. Keeping in view the resourceconstraints, it is estimated that total layout upto end of I 1th Plan (2013), inclusive of NationalDrainage Programme, would be 63 to 64 billion ruppees.

9-16

TABLE 9.6

Preliminary Budget and Timetable for theNational Drainage Programme (Rs M at 1993 prices)

Year Punjab NWFP Sindh Balochistan Federal Total

1993/4 -start of programme preparation- 45 451994/5 -start of approval/funding process- 25 251995/6 -approval and consultant selection- -1996/7 3D - - - 10 401997/8 260 10 30 0 25 3251998/9 490 80 260 10 45 8851999/0 490 170 430 60 A!5 11952000/1 260 170 430 60 35 9552001/2 0 80 220 30 10 340Total 1530 510 1370 160 240 3810Shares 43% 14% 39% 4% - 100%Totalincl 1958 867 2330 280 345 5780inflation

Notes: 1. Estimate based on maximum implementation capacity (Punjab) of Rs 300M/year at 1988 prices, equivalent to Rs 490 Mlyear at 1993 prices.

2. Inflation estimated according to factors used for WSIPS assuming 50%foreign exchange cnsts.

3. Provincial shares based on shares under 'tccaeratd Programme forAnti-Waterlogging and Salinity Control.

4. Supervision costs are split between the provincial and federal budgets.5. Effect of varying base rate

Base Rs M/year (1988) - Total Programme Rs M -1993 Prices With inflation

200 2560 38833OO (used above) 3810 5780500 6440 9770750 (ISR-II) 9590 14548

9-17

TABLE 9.7Anticipated Drainaze Sector Investments

Drainage Area |Total Expend: lAh 9th lath 11th SpDJS.Nr. Name orfoject Pln PaCast uptoit Plan pbn Plan

(Ma) (Mini (RLMiII) 1993 |h1993-98 1998-03 203-0 2008-13PUNJAB

1. Drainae Pgram 1370 260 1.110

11. Drainae Projectsi) On-Going

Sub-Surface Drainage1. Gojra-Khewra-U 0.120 0.49 308 202 1062. Drainage-1V 0.130 0.053 2.000 1.400 6003. SXKamalia (Saitne) 0.036 0.073 339 186 1534. Khushab 0.058 0.024 1.160 343 817

Surface Drainage5. Eastern-SadiqiaPhase-I 0.618 025 1.511 850 6616. Upper Recchna(Deg) 0.468 0.189 265 150 1157. Sukh Nai Outrfal Dr 0.000 0.000 400 262 138

Sub-Totalt(1-i) 25590ii) New

Sub-Surface Dra& Eastern-Sadiqia Phase-lI 0.326 0.132 4.00 900 2.200 9009. Eastern-Sadiqia (rem) 0130 0.053 975 500 47510. CBDC (rem) 0.105 0.043 340 34011. D.GJChan (saline) 0229 0.093 1.1W 1.10012. SCARPTr.JPTW 2500 800 1.100 70013. Indus-Munda unit o].o 0.021 383 38314. Chashma CAD-111 0.070 om8 525 52515. SCARP Greater Tbal 0.300 0.121 23W 400 1.540

Surface Draiae16. Sukh Beas (rem) 0.813 0.329 2.5W 1.300 1.20017. Upper Rcchna (rem) 0390 0.158 2.0 40 1.60018. Trans Punjab Drainage Link 10.0W 1.500 4.000 4.500

Sub-Total (11-ii) 3.200 5.183 6,565 7.215

Ill. Project Pltnnng 1300 250 300 350 4D0Total (- ni ab): 3.864 1.565 35.316 3.393 6300 6.593 6.915 7.615 4.500

SINDH

I. Drainage Programme 1230 30 1200

11. Drainage Projectsi) On-Going

Surface cum Sub-Surface Draage1. LBOD5Stage-l 1.019 0.413 12.000 4,600 3600 3D00 800

(Noah SbahSanghar.Mirpur Khas)

Surface Drainage2. ICotri Surfce Drainage 1,407 98 809 500

*-i) NewSurfacc cum Sub-Surface Dranage

4. LBOD5Stage-11 S.450 3.00D 2.7664-1 _SKbairpur 0.328 Q1334-2 ..Mo 0.095 0.0384-3 _Digri 0.274 0.1114-4 _TTando Adam Q.484 0.196 (2684) 1.084 1.6004-S _Tando M. Kban 0Q330 0.1344-6 .Tando Bhago 0D90 0.0365. Khipro 0.370 0.150 100 L5006. Farast 0.339 0.137 2.600 500 2.1007. Umarkst 0.300 0.121 2.300 2300& SCARPTransitIonikPTW 1000 500 5009. Gboltki Sale 0.429 0.174 1.011 210 800 0

Surface drainageImproementt Euiat: Dr.

I Lar:Shikar(Dul3.17) 0227 0.09_ 329 32910-1 Razodero (Du 14) 0205 0.063 593 59310-2 SKot-Miro(DulS.16) 0301 0.122 261 26110-3 Tajodero(Du23) 007 0.011 79 7911. North Dadu (Du 2122) 0.478 0.194 731 100 631

12. RBODStage-I12-1 Ext MNVD(M'roKhan) 341 34112-2 lndus Link (MNVD-lIdus) 609 60912-3 Remodel: MNVD as RBOD 436 436

Kandkot'cul Shadadkot13. Begari-Frontier(DuS.6) 0.482 0.195 1.725 .200 525

South Dadu14. Dokri (Du-24) 0.120 0.048 504 144 360 015. Wanab. (Du-20) 0.129 0.052 392 392

9-18

TABLE 9.7Ant icipated Drainae Sector ivvestments

Draina4 Are Total Ei&pend: 8th 9th 10th 11th SpillS.Nr. Name at Project Cost |uploiun4 a Hln Pl 9 te

(MaR D| (Mla) (RlMilMla 1993 1993-98 199S-03 2003-08 2008-1RBOD_. Suage-Ill

16. Rea nt Rr 01BOD(Hairdin) 2.721 2.000 721Kadkot-Trbul Shaadkot

17-1. Siltnkot(Du-1l) 0248 (100 1.066 400 66617-2 ------- (Du-7&9) 0387 0.157 13.9 84 1514

RBOD- Stge-111Kandkot l'ul Shadadkot

17-3 Ghaui khairo (Du- 12) 0.312 0126 1.067 1.06717-4 Mauladad (Du-10) 0.120 0.049 356 356I. Johi (Du-25) 0.148 0.060 653 653

RBOD.. Stage- IVKandkot Thul Shadadkot

19. SaifuDah Magi (Du- 18) 0.164 0.066 499 49920. South Dadu (DU-26) 0.276 0.112 1.403 1.403

Ill. Project Planning 760 160 180 200 220

Total (Sindbi: 7.682 3.110 46,391 4,698 63s58 63514 7.146 7,316 14.158

NWFP

1. Drainage Programme 460 10 450

11. Drainage Prectsi) On-GoingSub-Surface Drainage

1. Swabi SCARP 0084 0.034 3.620 157 1.603 JIm60 0i) NewSub-Surface Drainag

r YafurDebri-l1 0.013 0OOS 270 10 2603. Chasha CAD-11 0030 0.012 98 984. Pchur SCARP 0.046 QO019 230 20 2105. Bannu-11 0.064 0.026 200 50 3506. Doaha Dandzai SCARP 00D89 0.036 480 4807. Peshawar SCARP (rem) 300 ISO 150

1l1. Project Planning 580 130 140 ISO 160

Total CNWFP1: 0325 0.132 6.238 237 2.513 2.698 630 160

BALOMHISTAN

1. Drainage Programme 140 140

11. Draina Prjects) On-GoingSurface Dr_ge

1. Pat Feeder Com: (Du23.4) 03503 0.204 1340 240 600 500ii) NewSub -Surface Drainage

2. Intercepting Dr.(Pat)Surface Drainage

3. Kirthar Cana (DU-19) 0.192 o078 72 383 3424. Lesbcla Canal Com: 3W0 200 1005. Other Are 225 195 30

Ill. Proect Planning 230 50 55 60 65

Total (Balochistan): 0.695 0.281 2.960 240 1.428 1.167 60 65 0Grand Total (Pakistan) 123566 5.088 9005 8.568 16.799 16.972 14.751 15.1S6 1S.6SS

Area which may require drainge aiter canal construction/remodelling&

9-19

AppendiXiDTABLE IX-1

Comparison of Projects and ProgrammesAl. LARGE PROJECT DELAYED (ESTABLISHMENT TRIMMED)

Basic -suapinStart of Construction (year) 5 Increments Benefit with Project (Rs year) 682rme for Projed Prepaation (Ys) 1.5 Build-up of Benft (yers) 2.0rime for Project Approval (ycars) 2.5 O&M Costs (% base ca of works) 3.0%Period of Construton (yrs) 3.0 Forcign Exchang Coacnt (% of cobt of works) 50%

Preparaio Costs (* total cost of works) 3.0% Economi Converson Factor (Itapee cows ony) 0.9Supervision Costs (% of cost of works) 7.5% Discount Rate 12.0%hfntrest During Construction 12.5%Year Base Cost (Rs NI) Cost ini Inflation Economic Cost* Bcncfls (Rs MI) Discounted* Negative Positive

Nr Works Estab Rs M IDC O & M Total Grocs Net costs Be_efts stream StramI 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 0.0 25.0 27.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 312.5 23A 468.4 29.3, 0 320 0 -320 182 0 -182 06 312.5 23.4 508.9 90A 0 320 0 -320 162 0 -162 07 312.5 23.4 553.1 156.7 0 320 0 -320 145 0 -145 0a 312.5 23.4 601.1 223.9 0 320 0 -320 129 0 -129 09 312.5 23.4 653.4 307.3 0 320 0 -320 116 0 -116 0

10 312.5 23.4 710.3 392.5 0 320 0 -320 103 0 -103 011 312.5 23.4 772.2 485.2 0 320 0 -320 92 0 -92 012 312.5 23.4 839.7 585.9 75 395 0 -395 101 0 -101 013 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 341 266 17 78 0 6114 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 15 140 0 12415 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 14 125 0 III16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 12 111 0 9917 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 11 99 0 as18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 10 89 t0 7919 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 6507 9 79 0 7020 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 8 71 0 6321 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 7 63 0 5622 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 6 56 0 5023 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 632 607 6 50 0 4524 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 5 45 0 4025 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 632 607 4 40 0 3626 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 36 0 3227 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 632 607 4 32 0 2828 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 29 0 2529 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 25 0 2330 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 23 0 20

2500 263 5184 2276 1425 3988 11935 7948 1170 1191 -1030 1051Total Cost (at constnt prices) 2.763 NIK = 1.02 NPV = 21Total Cost (ic inflation/iC) 7.460 B1C Ratio = 1.02 IRR = 12.2%Notes: * exluding costs of initial prepaation and IDC

** costs and benefits dscounted to year IInlation assmed as for the WVSIPS (7.5% on Rupee costs. circa 10% on foreign costs)IDC calculaed on cost (at current prices) up to haf year

1

Ap~ie. DC

Comparison of Projects and Programmes TABLE KC-2

A2. LARGE PROJECT DELAYED (ESTABUSHMENT MAINTAINED)

Basic assumptionsStart of Construction (year) 5 I Benet with Project (Rt Mlyer) 682rTmc for Project Preaatio (years) 1.5 Build-up of Bcnfits (years) 2.0Time for Project Approval (yers) 2.5 O&M Cos (% base cos of works) 3.0%Period of Consuction (ycars) 8.0 Foreign Exchange Conent (% of coat of works) 50%Preparation Costs (% totl cost of works) 3.0% Economic Covesion Factor (Rupee cots only) 0.9Supervision Coas (% of cost of works) 15.0% Discount Rate 12.0%Interest During Construction 12.5%Year Base Cost (Rs M) Cost ind Inflation Economic Cost* Benefits (Rs M) Discountod" Neptivc Poitive

Nr Works Estab Rs M IDC O & M Total Gross NIet Costs Benfts Stream StreamI 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 02 0.0 25.0 27.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 312.5 46.9 501.0 31.3 0 344 0 -344 195 0 -195 06 312.5 46.9 544.5 96.7 0 344 0 -344 174 0 -174 07 312.5 46.9 591.7 167.7 0 344 0 -344 155 0 -155 08 312.5 46.9 643.1 244.8 0 344 0 -344 139 0 -139 09 312.5 46.9 699.0 328.7 0 344 0 -344 134 0 -124 010 312.5 46.9 759.9 419.9 0 344 0 -344 111 0 -111 01 1 312.5 46.9 826.1 519.0 0 344 0 -344 99 0 -9 012 312.5 46.9 898.2 626.8 75 419 0 -419 107 0 -107 013 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 341 266 17 78 0 6114 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 15 140 0 12415 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 14 125 0 11116 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 12 111 0 9917 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 11 99 0 8818 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 10 89 0 7919 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 6S2 607 9 79 0 7020 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 8 71 0 6321 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 7 63 0 5622 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 6 56 0 5023 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 6 50 0 4524 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 5 45 0 4025 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 40 0 3626 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 36 0 3227 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 4 32 0 2828 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 29 0 2529 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 25 0 2330 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 682 607 3 23 0 20

2500 450 5541 2435 1425 4175 11935 7760 1244 1191 -1104 1051Total Cost (at constan prics) 2.950 N/IK = 0.95 NPV = (53)Totl Cost rCd inflstion/IDC) 7.976 B/C Ratio = 0.96 IRR= 11.5%Notes: * excluding cost of initia preparation n IDC

** costs and benefits discounted to year IInflation assumed as for the WSIPS (7.5% on Rupee costs, circa 10% on foregn costs)IDC calcdated on costs (at current prices) up to half year

Appnfixi D

Comparison of Projects and Progranunes TABLE IX-3

B1. EQUIVALENT PROGRAMME DELAYED (ESTABUSHMENT TRIMMED)

Boasc asuunptimmStart of Prgme (yer) S Incremental Beneft with Pgran (Rs MIyer 70Time for Project Preparation (years) 1.5 rTm to Completion of First Sdchme (year) 3.0r for Project Approval (yrs) 2.5 Build-up of Beaefits (years) 2.0Duraton of Progrmm (yea) 8.0 O&M Costs (% base cost of works) 3.0%Prepartion Costs (% total cost of works) 2.0% Foreign Excang Coatnt (% of coat of works) 50%Supervision Costs (% of cost of works) 10.0% Economic Conves Factor (Rupee costs ony) 0.9nktrect Durin, Consruction 12.5% Discount Rate 12.0%Year Base Cost (Rs M) Cost mid Inflation Economic Cost Bnefits s MI) Discounted" Negaive. Positivc

Nr Wodrs Eab Rs M IDC O &M Total Gross Nct Cosls Bencfits Stream Stream1 0.0 33.3 33.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 0.0 16.7 18.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0S 312.5 31.3 479.3 30.0 0 328 0 -328 186 0 -186 06 312S 31.3 520.8 62.5 0 328 0 -328 166 0 -166 07 312.5 31.3 566.0 67.9 0 328 0 -328 148 0 -148 08 312.5 31.3 615.1 73.8 38 366 107 -258 148 43 -104 09 312.5 31.3 668.6 80.2 47 375 214 -161 135 77 -58 0

10 312.5 31.3 726.8 87.2 56 384 321 -63 124 103 -20 011 312.5 31.3 790.2 94.8 66 394 429 35 113 123 0 1012 312.5 31.3 859.2 103.1 75 403 536 133 103 138 0 3413 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 643 568 17 147 0 13014 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 15 153 0 13815 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 14 137 0 12316 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 12 122 0 11017 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 11 109 0 9818 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 10 98 0 8819 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 9 87 0 7820 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 8 78 0 7021 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 7 69 0 6222 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 6 62 0 5623 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 6 55 0 SO24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 5 49 0 4425 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 44 0 4026 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 39 0 3527 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 35 0 3228 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 31 0 2829 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 28 0 2530 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 25 0 23

2500 300 5277 600 1631 4256 O1500 10744 1264 1856 -683 1276Totl Cost (at constan priecs) 2.800 NIK = 1.87 NPV = 592Totl Cost (me inflation/lC 5.877 BIC Ratio= 1.47 IRR= 18.3%Notec: * exludig costs of initil prparation an IIDC

** c and benefits discounted to year Infation amed as for tbh WSIPS (7.5% on Rupee costs, cira 10% on foreign cost)IDC calulated on costs (at currnt prices) m previous funcid yer ody

3

Appndix IX

Comnparison of Projects and Programmes TABLE IX-4

52. EQUIVALENT PROGRAMME DELAYED (ESTABLISHMENT MAINTAINED)

Baskc asumptions

Stut of Progrmme (year) 5 1ncrmntal Benefit with Progamme (lb M/Year 750Timc for Projeat Prepartion (ye) 4.5 rime to Compition of First Scheme yars) 3.0Time for Project Approval (yars) 2.5 Budd-up of Bnefift (yeas) 2.0Duration of Programme (yeas) 8.0 O&M Costs (% bse cast of wor 3.0%Prepaation Costs (% totl cost of works) 2.0% Foreign Exhge Coecent (% of cest of works) 50%Supevision Costs (% of cost of works) 20.0% Econonzic Conversion Factor (Rupec costs only) 0.9Interest During Co_ 12.5% Discount Rate 12.0%Year Base Cost (Rs M) cost Melnfation Economic Cost Benefits (Rs M) Disoountod* Ncgative Positive

Nr Works Estab Rs M IDC O & M Total Gross Net Cost Benefts Stram Stream1 0.0 33.3 33.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 0.0 16.7 18.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 312.5 62.5 522.8 32.7 0 359 0 -359 204 O -204 06 312.5 62.5 568.1 68.2 0 359 0 -359 182 0 -182 07 312.5 62.5 617.4 74.1 0 359 0 -359 163 0 -163 08 312.5 62.5 671.0 80.5 38 397 107 -290 160 43 -117 09 312.5 62.5 729.4 87.5 47 406 214 -192 146 77 -69 0

10 312.5 62.5 792.9 95.1 56 416 321 -94 134 103 -30 011 312.5 62.5 862.0 103.4 66 425 429 4 122 123 0 112 312.5 62.5 937.3 112.5 75 434 536 101 III 138 0 2613 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 643 568 17 147 0 13014 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 15 153 0 13815 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 14 137 0 12316 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 12 122 0 !1017 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 11 109 0 Q818 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 10 98 0 8819 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 9 87 0 7820 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 8 78 0 7021 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 7 69 0 6222 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 6 62 0 5023 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 6 55 0 5S24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 5 49 0 4425 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 44 0 4026 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 39 0 3527 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 4 35 0 3228 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 31 0 2829 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 i5 750 675 3 28 0 2530 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 750 675 3 25 0 23

2500 5SO 5752 654 1631 4506 15X0 10494 1362 1856 -765 1259Totad Cast (at consta prices) 3.050 NIX = 1.64 NPV = 493Totd Cast (md inflation/11C) 6.406 B/C Ratio = 1.36 IR = 16.9%Notes: * xcxudig cost of inital preparation and IDC

** coss and benefits diunted to year IInflation assumed as for the WSIPS (7.5% on Rupee eosts. circa 10% an forei coats)IDC caulated On coats (at current prices) n previous final year oly

4

Appendix IXTABLE IX-5

Analysis of Equivalent Projects and ProgrammesCosts in Rs M

Project (estab maintained)

Duration % Delay Cost incl lnlation N/K NPV(yeas) _- -ex IDC- - incl IDC -

4 start 4 4001 4931 1.404 0% 4340 1.00 5351 1.00 1.38 4845 25% 4611 1.06 5934 1.11 1.26 3236 50% 4900 1.13 6563 1.23 1.15 1817 75% 5210 1.20 7242 1.35 1.05 568 100% 5541 1.28 7976 1.49 0.95 -539 125% 5895 1.36 8767 1.64 0.86 -149

10 150% 6275 1.45 9621 1.80 0.78 -233

Progamme (estab nimWined)Costs in Rs M

Duration % Dely Cost inci Inflation N/K NPV NPV(years) -ex IDC - - inci IDC - Gain

4 start 4 4066 4497 1.874 0% 4414 1.00 4882 1.00 1.86 930 4465 25% 4715 1.07 5229 1.07 1.86 829 5066 50% 5037 1.14 5597 1.15 1.81 710 5297 75% 5382 1.22 5988 1.23 1.74 598 5428 100% 5752 1.30 6406 1.31 1.64 493 5469 125% 6149 1.39 6854 1.40 1.59 420 569

10 150% 6575 1.49 7333J 1.50 1.49 336 569

Pr_oaame (estb nairtined no extra benefits)CoStr in Rs M

Duration % Delai Cost incl Inflation N/K NPV NPV(years) |__ - ex IDC - - inil DC - Gain

4 start4 4066 44974 0% 4414 1.00 4882 1.00 1.64 705 2215 25% 4715 1.07 5229 1.07 1.63 619 2966 50% 5037 1.14 5597 1.15 1.57 514 3337 75% 5382 1.22 5988 1.23 1.50 417 3618 100% 5752 1.30 6406 1.31 1.41 325 3789 125% 6149 1.39 6854 1.40 1.36 263 412

10 150% 6575 1.49 7333 1.50. 1.27 190 423

Pmogamre nder ideal conditionsCosts in Rs M

Duration % Delay Cost incl Inflation N/K | NPV NPV(years) _ |ex IDC- | - incl IDC - | __ |_Gain.

___s_t14 402469 47 1.87 943 620

5

CHAPTER 10

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAMMEEAPPROACH

10.1 Introduction

The previous chapter outlined -the objectives, advantages and concept framework for theNational Drainage Programme. It showed that there are significant economic advantages tobe gained from the programme approach through

its increased flexibility to match available resources to needs, and developnew technologies and approaches identified as uecessary mitigatory measuresby the Environment Impact Assessment,

- its capability to focus on points of greatest need, distributed widely to dealwith problems wherever they occur, not just in particular project areas,

- its potential for quick implementation (once the framework is set up) and thelower risk of one scheme holding up another.

However, the programme would not be an arbitrary collection of small schemes but ac*ampaign to gradually improve technologies and sustainability by a mixture of structural andnon-structural interventions intended to maximise participation by the beneficiaries.

10.2 Projects and Programmes in the Drainage Sector

The programme approach is not able to, or intended to, replace the role of the project inproviding the large increment of investment needed to ennstruct a major outfall system orprovide complete coNer of a whole area (both requiring and justifying the investment in theoutfall). Indeed, a strong case has been made for avoiding an area-based approach under theprogramme, especially where this might tie the programme to a particular area and cause itto quicldy degenerate into the situation typical of many projects, where the benefits from onescheme depend en completion of work in an adjacent are,.

The programme approach offers significant advantages * ver the project approach whichshould not be jeopardised by bringing projects under the programme. While it may bepossible for the programme to make certain interventions in support of, or instead oT,particular project components, the programme approach is bound to be quite different fromthat of the project. The rogramme will be sharply focused on the most deserving schemesand emphasise programme, rather than project objectives. In this respect, the programme isexpected to be far ahead of the project in terms of the development of new technologies,participatory development of a national environmental strategy.

The progranmme should not be burdened at its outset by simply bringing existing low priorityand problem projects under the programme. Instead, the projects should be either completed

10-1

as planned, or closed, so that the programme would then consider what interventions, if any,can be made under the programme approach to add value and improve the sustainability oeprevious investment.

10.3 Programme Preparation

Table 9.5 gives some fairly specific examples of the types of schemes envisaged under theprogramme. These include both structural and non-structural interventions with a heavyemphasis on the latter.

However, it has already been noted that there is a strong bias, not only amongst engineers,which tends to favour structural schemes. Yet the Drainage Sector Environmental Assessmenthas shown time and time again that structural interventions are not enough to achieve the fullbenefits of drainage and indeed may result in adverse impacts, environmental and otherwise.Examples given in Volume 1 of this report include the apparent continued accumulation ofsalts in areas drained by surface drains, tile drains and tubewells even where, as in the lastcase, drainage water is fresh enough to be reused to increase leaching and avoid theaccumulation of salts observed in the root zone. Inspite of the inadequacies of the data, it isclear that there have been failures of water management and this has prevented full realisationof the benefits which should have come from drainage. Indeed the failure to introduce non-structural changes to complement the structural work is jeopardising the sustainability of thewhole system.

A programme comprised only of structral interventions carries great dangers. It is likely thatit schemes are chosen purely because they would tackle an area of high watertable (assumingit is not a rice area), it is very likely that money will be spent unnecessarily dealing with aproblem which may need to solved at least partially through more careful water management.Indeed, if water management is not attended too it is possible that the scheme will not workand more seriously, it will impact adversely on the overall drainage strategy.

The overall drainage strategy set forth in Volume 1 of this report is based on the twinobjectives of

i) achieving a balance of water and salt in the root zone and appropriate controlof the watertable depth; and

ii) achieving as a first step towards sustainability for the Indus basin as a whole,a balance between the salinity coming into the system and that disposed of tothe sea.

This second objective will not be achieved immediately and in the interim will require salinityto be temporarily added to storage in the saline aquifer and ponds provided for the purpose.However, it means that even where there is no method at present of disposing of the salinityto the sea, great caution should be exercised in mobilising salinity already in comparativelysafe storage in deep groundwater.

This places a severe constraint on the selection of sub-surface drainage schemes to beincluded under the programme, especially as such drainage in fresh groundwater areas is tobe left to the private sector pumping of groundwater for irrigation. It suggests that theemphasis of the programme will be much more on measures which are preventative, or

10-2

mitigate or reverse harmful impacts of existing schemes.

However, the programme approach offers the flexibility to taclde some very acute drainageproblems which so far have been largely ignored by projects.

The development of irrigated agriculture has not only led to drainage problems in the croppedareas, but also to increases of populalion and rural infrastrucLure which have encroached onagricultural land and now suffer similar drainage problems. The source of the problem is theextra water which has come into the area for irrigation and the network of canals, roads andrailways which have blocked old drainage paths. The programme approach with its flexibilityto focus on points of greatest need should certainly look to tackling this problem.

The public health benefits of using land drainage technology to relieve waterlogging invillages and peri-urban areas on former agricultural land is likely to be very significant. Manysettlements have grown up in a way which makes it very difficult to install street drains orsewers, and to prevent these being blocked with solid waste. Drainage by tubewells mightoffer practical solution and allow use of latrines where otherwise this would be impossible.However, there are environmental implications in providing such drainage which requirecareful assessment and where necessary mitigation measures. The present practices of PHEDsin discharging untreated wastes into open channels indicate the need not only to enact therelevant legislation controlling such discharges, but also to take a more global view. It isconsidered that this would be an appropriate function of the National Drainage Programmewhich would contribute to the design and possibly part- of the finance.

The further preparation of the National Drainage Programme will need to give particularattention to the sharing of costs and the institutional responsibilities for implementation, forwhich preliminary recommendations are made in Table 9.5.

10.4 Development of a Participatory Approach

A participatory approach is one in which the potential beneficiaries of a scheme are given anopportunity to participate in the selection and construction (for example, by contributing theland or labour) and carry a large part or all of its running and maintenance costs. Theapproach is intended to create sustainability by generating a sense of ownership andresponsibility.

It will not be easy to develop such an approach in the drainage sector, but a start has to bemade by involving the communities in the selection of schemes. This should be much easierwith the small schemes proposed under the programme approach than with projects.

The proposal is that the programme team should visit selected communities and after touringthe area, make presentation of the problems which could be tackled, the probable sources ofthese problems and the action which could be taken to deal with them. Some examples wouldbe prepared to illustrate the costs of different solutions and in discussion, these would besubjected to screening using the checldist of impacts developed in Chapter 4 of this report.Additional measures to mitigate the negative impacts would be identified and the positiveimpacts would be used as a basis for discussing who should pay for the proposed action, whowould take responsibility for its sustained effectiveness and how might the financial cost bereduced by community participation.

10-3

The level of subsidy and technical support which is necessary to achieve this approach willhave to be evaluated by the team and built into the programme budgets. The contributionexpected from other govermment agencies and how this is to be financed will also have to bedetermined.

10.5 Preparation of the National Drainage ProgrammeOutline Terms of Reference

The Terms of Reference for the detailed preparation of the first phase of the NationalDrainage Programme to 2000/1 are

i) to build on the existing concept framework covering

A. private sector involvement and government intervention to encourage this,

B. small scale drainage schemes.

C. schemes to control canal seepage,

D. sub-surface drainage of pockets of acute need.

ii) to develop a portfolio of such interventions which

- snmaximise private sector action by designing appropriate non-structuralinterventions to encourage wider participation in improving the economic andenvironmental performance of drainage and its sustainability,

- identify structural interventions under the programme for small independentdrainage schemes (normally not greater than 5000 ha) and evaluate the costs,benefit and environmental impacts of each intervention together withmeasures to mitigate or reverse adverse impacts,

identify structural and non-structural interventions which would significantlyimprove the economic and enviromnental performance of completed projectsand already existing facilities and evaluate the costs and benefits of theproposed interventions, giving particular attention to the sustainability ofO&M, eliminating drainage bottlenecks and reallocating capacity to eliminateover drainage and bring in new areas of real need,

- identify small scale surface drainage schemes such as new culverts, draininlets and channel works, and evaluate the costs and benefits from improveddrainage of crops and rural infrastructure and from measures to mitigate orreverse adverse impacts on wetlands and the environment in general,

- identify schemes which can be implemented independently of other newdrainage infrastructure to control seepage including line plantations, cut-offs,interceptor and drains and skimming wells and evaluate the costs and benefitsand environmental impacts of each scheme together with measures to mitigateor reverse adverse impacts,

10-4

design schemes to monitor and fully evaluate the effectiveness of tree plantingto lower or prevent high watertables by biological abstraction.

identify small scale sub-surface drainage schemes to deal with pockets ofacute need particularly affecting human settlements. cultural properties.essential infrastructure and factories as well as potentially productiveagricultural land. and evaluate the costs and benefits of preventative measuresand necessary drainage works and the environment impacts especially withregard to the disposal of the sub-surface drainage effluent.

design an institutional framework for sharing the cost of schemes andmaximising the sustainability of their future O&M.

develop an institutional capability to sustain the programme approach bytraining in public and government agency participation in the identificationand implementation of potential schemes and in their future O&M. and bygiving emphasis to sustainability through small scale and non-structuralinterventions.

design interventions for improving the monitoring of rainfall. river. canal anddrain discharges and water quality. increasing the density and utility ofgroundwater observations. including the development of a GIS andhydraulic/water quality compute model of the river and main stem drainage.

iii) The portfolio of interventions to be developed for Phase I of the National DrainageProgramme is expected to cost no more than Rs. 5 billion over seven years.distributed betweeni the provinces according to the agreed shares. A preliminarybreakdown giving emphasis to encouraging private sector involvement andrecognising the environmental and other constraints to sub-surface drainage. envisagesthat schemes running concurrently in categories A, B. C and D in Section i) abovewill be in the ratios: 6:3:2:1 but because the cost to the programme of schemes incategory A will be much less than in the other categories the costs to the programmewill be in the ratios 1:1.5:1:0.5. The portfolio for Phase I of the National DrainageProgramme is expected to total some 60-70 schemes in category A (csting anaverage of Rs 18 M per scheme) and about 50 schemes total in categories B. C andD (costing about Rs 75 M per scheme). The preparation of the Phase I programmewill prepare sufficient schemes to produce a viable portfolio for the first year ofprogramme implementation comprising not less than 10 schemes in Category A. 3schemes in category B, 2 schemes in category C and 1 scheme in category D- Noneof these schemes will be taken from on-going or already planned projects unless thoseprojects are to be closed or curtailed and the programme's able to identifyinterventions which qualify according the programme is own criteria and priorities'

iv) Not all the cost of the programme will be met by funding under the 'acceleratedprogramme of antiwaterlogging and salinity control', some will be met by privatesector contributions, very often in kind through provision of labour and land etc. orby other government agencies (eg CAA for drainage of rural airporus). The actualshare will depend on the exact nature of the works, the attitude of the potentialbeneficiaries and the amount which they can contribute. In many cases, it may be feltthat the costs should be shared with those causing the problem rather than those

10-5

benefitting from its solution. The preparation of the Phase I programme will examinesuch issues and recommend suitable criteria for financing action under the programmeto remedy matters which are beyond the power of the beneficiaries to rectifythemselves. The preparation of the Phase I programnme will evaluate what proportionof the total cost of the programme is to be met under the 'accelerated programme',by the beneficiaries and other sources of budget.

10.6 Monitoring and Research

10.6.1 Major Issue

The major issues in the drainage sector are the estimation of quantity and quality of drainageeffluent and its sustainable disposal. What quantity of effluent would be generated from anarea depends upon the planning objectives ie; the level at which the watertable is to bemaintained and the accuracy with which the drainable surplus can be estimated.

To define the planning objectives and establish drainage need, data on crop losses and itsrelationship with depth to watertable under various soils, climate and shallow groundwaterquality is required. Similarly; what percent of losses due to drainge deficiency can berecovered with various drainage technologies. As each technology itself or through its misusemay have enviromental impacts which may question its sustainability. yet another issue tobe explored.Since water is the carrier of salts, the issue of water balance cannot be divorced. To estimatedrainable surplus, instead of current practice of taking support of empirical coefficients, thereis need to provide a sound research support to these values.

The disposal methods for drainage effluent currently in use include:

A. Re-cycling

- Re-use within the drained area when effluent is disposed in watercourses suchas in case of tubewell drainage of FGW areas;

- Re-use within the same canal command when effluent is disposed direcdyinto canals such as in case of tubewell drainage of SGW areas;

- Re-use in another canal command when the effluent is pumped into canalssuch as in case of surface drainage of rice areas of Right Bank Indus;

- Re-use in other distant canal commands when effluent disposed into rivers isdiverted into canals at downstream barrages; and

- Re-use in riverain areas through tubewell irrigation when effluent disposedis allowed to seeD into groundwater reservoir.

B. Evaporation Ponds

- Disposal of saline effluent outside the canal command boundary with noirrigated areas downslope such as in case of SCARP-VI;

10-6

Disposal of saline effluent ouside the canal command boundarv with irrigatedareas on the downslope such as in case of Eastern Sadqia project;

Disposal of saline effluent in natural depressions within the canal commandedareas such as Hairdin pond in Pat Feeder canal.

C. Disposal into Lakes

- Tenporary disposal of saline effluent into lakes such as Miro Khan draininginto Hammal lake and MNV into Manchar lake.

D. Disposal into Sea

- Disposal of saline drainage effluent into sea through carrier drains passingthrough irrigated areas such as LBOD.

All these disposal methods will have environmental effect on natural resources and habitat.

Re-cycling of drainage effluent, in any form it may take, will result in recycling andredistribution of salts. In areas where recycling result in export of salt improvement can beexpected. But in areas where recycling is within the drained area or where salts are imported,salt concentration is likely to increase. What effect it has on the resource depends upon wherethese salts accumulate. To determnine absorption capacity of soils for these salts, soil salinityneeds to be related with crop response under our own management conditions.

Creation of evaporation ponds, in pervious areas, adjoining or within the canal commandboundary is expected to result in rise of watertable in adjoining areas; on upstream side dueto obstruction of normal groudwater flow and on downstream side due to increased recharge.

Saline drainage effluent disposal into lakes may result in effecting the flora and fauna. Carrierdrains taking saline effluent to sea if passing through FGW zones may pollute the reservoir.

10.6.2 Monitoring and Research Needs

The monitoring data and research needs fbr the drainge sector environmental assessmentstems out of the issues discussed above or may be many more as one moves alongwithmonitoring and research. The basics is that emphasis be laid on collection of vital data andunderstanding processes and mechanisms for better future prediction.

The resources involved are; water which carries the salts and other pollutions and waterbodies (lakes, rivers & canals), soils and groundwater which are the recipients. In order tomonitor the salts and other pollutions following data will be required:

the quantity and quality of drainage effluent entering canals, drains, lakes,evaporation ponds and rivers;

salinity build-up, its causes and variation in lakes, ponds and grounwater(both shallow and deep);

periodic monitoring of salinity status of the soil profiles upto root zone andbeyond;

10-7

In addition, monitoring of watertable behaviour near pond areas, evaporation rates and otherpond operational data would be required.

10.63 Data Requirements

During DSEA study it was observed that the data required was not only scanty andintermittent but also scattered and not readily available. It is therefore, proposed that a systemto collect environmental data, its storing and retrival be established. From point of view ofDSEA following types of data would be required:

A. Surface Water

Outflows from all major surface drainage systems into canals, rivers, lakesand ponds;

IDaily river flows at all barrages, headworks and at intermediate pointsconsidered necessary;

Chemical quality of outflows from major surface drainage systems into waterbodies and river water quality at all barrages, headworks and intermediatepoints be observed at least once a month. Three water samples during periodof October to April should also be tested for public health parameters, traceelements and pesticides.

B. Groundwater

Quantity of tubewell drainage effluent directly pumping into watercourses andcanals to be continuosly monitored.

Chemical quality of tubewell drainage effluent may be tested. Frequency oftesting to be adjusted keeping in view the changes recorded.

Shallow groundwater quality, in FGW zones, to be periodically monitored.Few samples may also be tested for public health parameters, trace elementsand pesticides.

C. Soils

Profile salinity of the root zone in irrigated areas to be repeated once every10 years in the first instance.

Based on the results, the frequency of observation may be increased for area!where salinity is building up to find the remedy, and may be reduced forareas not showing any increasing trend.

In cotton-wheat zone and orchards few profiles may be selected at random todetermine pesticide and fertilizer pollution of the soil at different depths.

10-8

D. Biological Monitoring

- Biological monitoring in rivers and lakes be introduced.

10.6.4 Research Needs

It may be difficult to identify at this time the detailed research needs for DSEA. As theevaluation proceeds, the unknowns may elaborate further requirements. In the followinghowever, an attempt has been made to broadly define the areas of research.

A. Recharge from Conveyance Systefn

Water is the carrier of salts in the system and unless accurate water budgeting can be doneno meaningful salt budgeting is possible. Losses from the system can be broadly divided intotwo portions ie; a) above the mogha ie; in canals and distributaries; b) below the mogha ie;in watercourses, farmer's channels and fields.

Whereas, losses above mogha and its fraction which recharges the groundwater reservoir isrelatively better known, the fraction of losses below mogha which recharge the reservoir areany body's guess.

It is therefore, necessary that a fresh look on the whole subject of water losses and rechargebe made to understand the mechanism of loss from the conveyance system and the part whichrecharges the groundwater reservoir and its variation with depth to watertable.

B. Sub-sirrigation/Evaporation

Percent of cropwater requirement met with from the shallow groundwater and its variationwith depth to watertable and type of crop needs to be determined to estimate salt contributionto the soil from groundwater. Similarly, evaporation from groundwater, as fraction of panevaporation, is required to determine inflow of salt from groundwater into soils.

C. Mechanism of Salt Movement in Soils

Salts present in the soil and those brought in by the water move as a result of percolation ofwater through the soils. What fraction of the salt is retained in the soils and that leached intothe shallow groundwater needs to be determined alongwith their variation with depth towatertable and soil texture.

D. Salt Balance Studies

In the report an attempt has been made to determine salt balance for various drainagetechnologies. The preliminary observations ihdicate that salts in tubewell irrigated areas areaccumulating in the soils. Similarly, doubts have been created regarding efficacy of tile drainsin controlling soil salinity in areas underlain by brackish groundwater, under prevailingirrigation practices. This calls for controlled studies to draw firm conclusions for futureguidance.

10-9

E. Crop Yield and Deth to Watertabk

Response of various crops to depth to watertable will be different and will also depend uponthe chemical quality of the shallow groundwater. This knowledge is necessary to estimate theoptimum depth to watertable in various agroclimatic zones for drainage design and disposal.

F. Crop yideld and Soil Salinity

Level at which salinity starts affecting various crops in our environments needs to bedetermined to estimate the salt storage capacity of the soils.

G Operational Hazards of Ponds

Disposal of saline effluent into ponds is a relatively new method in Pakistan. Controlledinvestigation and research data needs to be collected of all operational aspects to understandthe environmental implications.

10.7 Operation and Maintenance

Drainage facilities include surface and subsurface drainge systems. The surfcace drainagesystems are mosty gravity flow except rice areas in Sindh where pumped drainage isprovided. Sub-surface drainage systems include FGW & SGW tubewells and tile drains.

Sustainability problems of sub-surface drainage system are already discussed in Sec:3.1.6(Vol-1). Nearly 45% of PiD's budget is spent on their operation and only 16% of O&M costis recovered. PID's are finding it difficult to live with this situation and efforts are afoot toprivatise FGW tubewells. However, as tile drains and SGW tubewells will continue to beoperated by PID's, the financial constraints are likely to continue affecting operation.

Sample information for a drainge circle in Punjab indicate that of the total budget of Rs. 26m, 63% is spent on regular establishment, 21% for flood embankment maintenance (1 18miles) and 16% for surface drainage maintenance. The total catchment area for the surfacedrains is 3 Ma which have 608 miles of main drains, 388 miles of branch drains and 131miles of tributary drains. The estimated expenditure of drainage circle is Rs.9 per acre, ofwhich, Rs. 1.5 per acre is spent on drains maintenance.

The analysis given above indicates a large proportion of budget spent on establishment. Everdeteriorating maintenance of drains suggest that huge contigents of Mates and Beldarsappointed to maitain certain lengths of drains so far have been unable to cope with thesituation. There is a need to evolve some more efficient way of maintaining the drains.Experiments can be done to let out the maintenance of one complete system upto outfallthrough a contractor.

The bugetary position of drainage divisions is also poor and there is litde hope forimprovement unless more fuids are generated.

10-10

10.8 Drainage Cess

The current practice of drainge cess is that area provided with drainage facility should pay.In view of reservoirs and inter river links water from one place is carried long distances toirrigate areas. Link channels carrying water on their way create drainage problems where asthe benefit from this water is obtained by another area. For example Shorkot-Kanmia salineproject became necessary because of seepage from TS link which carries water for use inBhawal canal; BRBD and MR link cause water logging on their way while most of their wateris used in CBDC and Upper Dipalpur canals and so on.

In view of this situation the concept of levying drainage cess needs to be reviewed. It isproposed that a uniform drainage cess per acre in canal irrigated areas be levied irrespectiveof whether drainge facility in that area is required or not. This option has the advantage notonly of generating more funds but also the burden would be shared by a large section of thefarming community. To avoid burdening small land owners it can be limited to holdings ofmore than 12.5 acres.

10-11

CHAPTER 11

ROLE FRAMEWORK FOR INSTITUTIONSAND GUIDELINES FOR ACTION

11.1 Analysis of Basic Requirements

11.1.1 Towards A Role Framework

In establishing a role framework for institutions the key activities with reference to theenvironment are listed in Table 11.1.

TABLE 11.1

Categories for key eavironmental activitiesin development planning and implementation

Category Key Activity

Policy and Legal: - policy formulation- macro environmental assessment- setting of quality standards- derive legislation- ensure enforcement mechanisms

Planning: - establish environmental strategies- environmental impact assessment- economic (environmental) appraisal- modify programme and project design- incorporate monitoring and evaluation

(environmental and socio-economic)

Implementation: - activate enhancement measures- implement preventative measures- implement mitigative measures- invoke legal action

Monitoring andEvaluation: - environmental impact monitoring and evaluation

- socio-economic monitoring and evaluation- recurrent monitoring of key variables

Il-i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

11.1.2 Policy, Standards and Legislation

In the context of irrgation and drainage, there is an urgent need to establish ambient waterquality standards embracing not only variables related to industrial effluent finding its wayin irrigation and drainage channels, but also the presence of salinity, toxic metals, bacteriaand other organisms particularly in the context of crops, human and animal health.

Since different standards would apply for different uses of water, it would not be appropriateto set legally rigid universal standards. While national ambient standards would provide ayardstick, there would need to be clear definition of how and where different local qualitystandards would be applied. Even where irrigation or drainage water is not directly consumedby humans, there is a need to ensure that pollutants or harmful organisms are prevented fromentering the food chain and standards need to cater for this aspect.

At the Federal level, the Federal EPA together with the Ministry of Water and Power,supported by WAPDA, the Ministry of Health and other concerned bodies, should evaluateProvincial proposals and set National quality standards, especially for water. Local variationsin specific quality standards should be permitted and Provincial legislation should be drawnup to cater for these.

At Provincial level this would require, as a minimum, the participation of the following keyinstitutions:

- Environmental Protection Agencies (EPA)- Planning and Development Departments (P&D)- Provincial Irrigation Departments (PID)- Public Health Engineering Departments (PHED)- Agricultural and Fisheries Departments.

Detaied legislation and suitable delegation of enforcement powers to Provincial EPAs isessential if quality standards are to be met

11.1.3 Planning

A. Environmental Strategy

In addition to environmental strategies at Nationa! and Provincial level there may be a needfor an additional specific focus on preparation of local or sectoral strategies.

The Provincial Planning and Development Departments (P&D) would be suitable agencies tobe responsible for this task, with assistance from the EPAs. Local and sectoral strategieswould assist in determining when environmental impact assessment is required and inindicating its required scope. Such strategies could be adopted from those currently used by,for example, the World Bank (Operational Directive No:4) or the Asian Development Bank.

B. Environmental Impact Assessment

Line Deparnments would be expected to ensure that environmental impact assessment (EIA)is undertaken where policy guidelines and environmental strategy dictate a need. There is a

11-2

basic requirement for a minimal but adequate in-house expertise to appreciate the technicaland disciplinary scope applicable to each EIA and to ensure that EIA field activities areundertaken to an adequate standard.

It would be costly and wasteful of scarce manpower resources for any single Departnent tomaintain a suitable range of resident EIA specialists. This could be either with a centralisedgovernment agency or through consultants.

C. EIA Field Services

If Government were to provide EIA field services, then these should be centralised, probablyunder a specialised wing of the Federal EPA. However,it would be consistent with GOPpolicy to promote development of this capability in the private sector. Government's owndirect role in EIA would then be regulatory and supervisory.

However, Federal and Provincial line Departments will need the capability to be involved inrequisite data collection, monitoring and analysis to feed into ElAs and the planning processgenerally.

D. Environmental Economics

Although methodology is still evolving, economics may be applied to many environmentalparameters. This can be especially valuable when:

- -the results of EIA are ambiguous and trade-offs occur

- economic analysis lends weight to the environmentalists' conclusions, whetherpositive or negative.

The latter is especially important in helping to influence senior decision makers.Environmental economics is relatively new and there is need to impart specific training todevelop this capability.

E. Provinciai Contributions

In the short term, recognising the shortage of manpower, Provincial EPAs might assist atlocal level for smaller projects or components by participating on a collaborative basis withline Departments in supervising selected ETAs and they might thereby offer on-the-jobtraining. However, as essentially watch dog agencies, it would not be appropriate for themto be officially responsible for provision of EIA field services.

P&Ds would be expected to screen project proposals to ensure adequate consideration ofenvironmental aspects, as they do for technical and economic aspects at present. They.therefore require environmental divisions.

For project screening to be carried out effectively, EPAs will require analysed data obtainedlargely from the line Departments who will have main responsibility for regular technicalmonitoring (see below).

11-3

F. Veto Powers in Project Screening

Screening of projects and powers of veto are exercised by Provincial Development WorkingParties (PDWPs), Central Development Working Party (CDWP) and by ECNEC for differentlevels of projects.

Federal and Provincial EPAs, with their responsibility for standards and legal requirements,should as a minimum be involved on an advisory basis in the screening process and toexercise powers of veto, through their adequate representation on the PDWPs, the CDWP andECNEC.

11.1.4 Monitoring and Evaluation

Environmental M&E have several objectives:

- indicating required adjustments to projects under implementation

- revealing needs for implementing mitigative, preventative or enhancementmeasures

- verifying the pre-project environmental assessment in order to improve thequality of future assessments

- feeding information back into the planning process.

It is a cross-sectoral and relatively comprehensive exercise, requiring recurrent physicalmonitoring and analysis of key variables. Individual implementing line institutions should notnecessarily be expected to undertake comprehensive M&E although they should be requiredto perform regular sampling and analysis of selected variables.

Within the water sector, WAPDA is likely to be the appropriate overseeing agency for M&Eat Federal level, while P&Ds should in future have main responsibility at Provincial level.Field services are likely to be contracted out. The EPAs must have sufficient expertise toassist in the design of M&E exercises, evaiuating the results and undertake spot check-s in thefield to collect and analyse their own sample data to "evaluate the evaluators".

11.1.5 Recurrent Physical Monitoring and Analysis

Regular monitoring and analysis of key variables, such as water quality, should normally bethe responsibility of the implementing or operating institutions. It would also be theirresponsibility to take remedial action or, if outside their operational scope, to lodge acomplaint with the EPA against the concerned institution. The EPAs' role, as watch dogs,would be to carry out spot checks on a sample basis to ensure that monitoring to a requiredstandard is being carried out and also that corrective measures are being implemented. Forthis the EPAs need a field capacity and adequate laboratory facilities.

Comprehensive monitoring and analysis of surface water quality in rivers, canals, drains,lakes, ponds and affected coastal zones, as well as monitoring of groundwater, is seen as anessential activity. A network of key monitoring points needs to be established, involvingclose coordination between several concerned Departnents and agencies.

11-4

The key coordinating institutions are likely to be the EPAs together with the P&Ds whilethose collecting and analysing water samples would include PIDs, WAPDA, PHEDs,Agriculture and Fisheries Departments.

Water quality monitoring should cover industrial effluent and related chemicals, salinity andsodicity, agricultural chemicals, silt, harmful organisms and water borne disease agentsgenerally. Evaluation of the results of analysis would be needed in terms of direct effects onagricultural production. human and livestock health, fisheries, wildlife and vegetationgenerally. The scope of monitoring and evaluation would need to be sufficient to assessrelated aspects such as re-use of drainage effluent and risks of pollutants progiessing throughthe food chain. etc.

1I .1.6 Implementation

While implementation of corrective measures would be the responsibility of each lineDepartment. in this case particularly the PIDs, there is a basic requirement for all relevantinstitutions to be aware of relevant legislation which might be invoked. It is also essentialfor legal powers of enforcement to be delegated to the Provincial EPAs.

11.2 Existing Situation

11.2.1 General Constraints

A. Overview

Many technical, financial and managerial constraints on effective and sustained developmentof irrigation and drainage systems are in fact inextricably related to broader (pan-sectoral)issues of poor public sector management and budgetary and financial deficiencies. This isespecially critical at Provincial level since line Departments are the main executing agenciesfor development and are also responsible for recurrent activities such as operation andmaintenance and provision of services.

Evaluation reports of programmes and projects have tended to emphasis short term physicalbenefits whilst, in many cases, under-emphasising or completely omitting discussion of:

- the short lived nature of physical and economic benefits

- the failure to actually recover financial contributions from beneficiaries

- the increased strain on establishment overheads, recurrent finance and manpower,often due to creation of new sections/wings under development programme auspices

- the tendency for Departments to propose development projects to get around recurrentfinance constraints.

It is important to recognise that these wider problems need to be overcome as a pre-requisiteto the planning and achievement of effective and environmentally sustainable development.

The recommendations arising out of the workshops conducted during the study (Chapter 12)underlined the issue of poor internal management, lack of incentives etc; in public sector

11-5

departments. The need to conduct a form of internal management and procedures audit wasrecognised.

B. Planning and the Environment

Although four Provincial EPAs have been established, as yet no Provincial EnvironmentalProtection Ordinances have been issued. These are still under scrutiny at Federal level. Thereis no coordination of environmental policies or programmes Federally or Provincially.Development strategy is influenced mainly by economic objectives. There are no specificenvironmental strategies and little allowance for environmental aspects generally, althoughthis situation is likely to change soon.

A fundamental problem is that planning at Federal and Provincial levels, and by agencies suchas WAPDA, is generally undertaken on a project by project basis, such that apparentstrategies or plans often do no more than reflect the balance of projects proposed, rather thanthe other way around.

An integrated approach to planning programmes or projects has rarely been implemented.This is unsatisfactory from both environmental and economic viewpoints where cross sectoraleffects and linkages exist.

Provincial planning activities are geared mainly to prioritising Five-year and AnnualDevelopment budget allocations on the basis of projectsubmissions determined autonomouslyby the respective line institutions. Thus, while P&Ds are involved in approval procedures,they can only play a limited role in determining the scope and range of projects put forward.Hence, they only partly influence strategies and the balance between subsectors.

C. Organisation and Managanent

Almost all govermment institutions are managed on rigidly hierarchical and autonomous linesof command, horizontal linkage are often weak and even discouraged. In general, this inhibitseffective coordination or integration of activities between lines of command at any level.

Tendency to create new institutions needs to be curbed, as it creates new lines of commandand further reduces co-ordination and also increase budgetary constraints. Instead, periodicalevaluation and restructuring the existing ones may achieve the same objectives economically.

This has particular implications for the organisation and management of irrigation anddrainage systems. Co-ordination will only be achieved through actual integration of irrigationand drainage functions at all levels within the establishment hierarchy, with particular regardto utilising and delegating responsibilities between existing lines of command.

D. Recurrent Finance

PIDs, suffer from recrnt budget constraints which are perceived to particularly affect

- operation, maintenance and repair of existing equipment, canals, drains, buildings,etc

purchase of replacement equipment, machinery, etc

11-6

Budget examples for Sindh Province, given in the Right Bank Master Plan (RBMP 9, 1991),suggest that in real terms the overall recurrent budget allocation remained more or lessconstant between 198687 and 1990-91, although establishment staffing increased and newinstitutions were created. The effect was proportionate reduction of funds for replacementequipment and repairs and maintenance generally.

Recurrent budget deficiencies are due largely to poor revehue structures, relatively highProvincial debt repayment commitments, and weak political and legal control which inhibitsboth raising of taxes and actual revenue collection. A well known example is water charges.These have not been increased since 1981 and, as the ACE study (1990) confirned, chargesdue are in any case under assessed.

Canal related revenue-expenditure gaps for 1988-89 are illustrated in Figure 11.1.

Another problem is that funding of the Development Budget is seen as largely a Federal orinternational concern for which Provincial Government is only pardy accountable. Hencethere is little interest in evaluating the benefit impact of development programmes or projects,let alone recouping even a small proportion of the costs from the beneficiaries.

E. Expertise

Since it will take time to build up an environmental cadre in Pakistan, it would beinappropriate in the foreseeable future to expect line Departments ;o each employenvironmental specialists. Proposals for environmental institutional strengthening shouldprobably therefore be limited to EPAs, P&Ds and key Federal agencies such as WAPDA inthe short term.

11.2.2 Deficiencies and Gaps in Responsibilities

A. Monitoring and Evaluation

The Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) cells of Provincial P&D Departments have no fieldcapacity and therefore do not undertake either economic benefit or environmental impactevaluation. Their role is limited to pre-project physical implementation monitoring and actualexpenditures on the basis of data received from the executing institution.

-This approach is inadequate from an economic viewpoint and is of no relevance to M&E ofcross-sectoral environmental impact. No Provincial capability to provide the necessaryfeedback to improve either future economic planning or pre-project enviromnental impactassessment thus exists.

The PC-Is (and subsequent PC's) do not cuurrently embody any specific environmentalaspects. Modification of the PC documents to include environmental considerationswould bea relatively straight forward procedure and could be readily carried out.

B. Recurrent Physical Monitoring

Recurrent monitoring of water quality should be seen as a major focus for attention.Currently, no regular water quality monitoring programme exists and the data available is notonly limited but also intermittent and sporadic.

11-7

Fig. 11.1

Canal Revenues and O&M Costs(Rupees per CCA Acre: 1988189)

a.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 /o ... .. .... ........... ........ ..................................... ..........

1 4 0 - ................ .................. .. ...._...... .......................................

140-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .............. ........................................ .......

1 w ..... ............/............. .......................................... .................. ....

j1X -/ / _ , _ ...........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. .....CLC 80- / . __ ......... ------------------------aa : ..... . .. ._......... ........

2 0- / _ ... ._

Sindh Punjab Balochistan NWFPSource of Data: ACE Study, 1990

WAPDA monitors periodically the soil salinity and depth to water table in canal irrigatedareas and selected SCARPs. Intermittent measurements are also available of river waterquality and at selected drain outfalls.

PIDs generally do not monitor water quality in canals and only rarely in rivers, pond *rlakes. EPAs have so far had little involvement in water quality monitoring although Pun XEPA has done a little in the Ravi River in the context of industrial pollution.

PHEDs undertake some monitoring of water but only to check on treatment in their ownwater supply schemes, although it is well known that people in rural areas often take theirwater from canals or other sources. They do no monitoring of water borne diseases.Laboratory facilities are extremely limited and Sindh PHED has none.

Soils on farms have rarely been analysed for anything other than fertility. It would bedesirable to regularly monitor soils for changes in salinity and sodicity and for agriculturalchemicals.

To fill the gaps, a coordinated approach involving several institutions will be required,sufficient not only to ensure comprehensive monitoring and analysis but also to enableevaluation of matters such as critical linkages in the food chain.

11.2.3 Drainage Operation and Maintenance

A major cause of poor drain operation and maintenance (O&M) is lack of integration ofcontrol into the overall irrigation system's management and organisational structure. Arelated cause is lack of priority accorded to drainage by both farmers and PIDs alike.

Since many drains do not operate properly due to poor operation and maintenance, farmersare least likely to appreciate benefits of drainage. However, both farmers' and PIDs concernwith drainage varies with circumstances and is understandably highest where they are awareof land going out of production due to waterlogging or salinity and perceive that appropriatedrainage can enable reclamation.

O&M of irrigation and drainage is co-ordinated at the level of XENs in NWFP andBalochistan, so that the potential for improved integration and coordination exists.

In Lahore, Faisalabad and Sargodha zones in Punjab and Kotri barrage command in Sindhthe co-ordination is at the level of CEs but even in this case responsibility is divided atSuperintendent Engineer level. Drainage in Guddu and Sukkur barrage commands are underChief Engineer (DEV) at Hyderabad and are therefore operated and maintained separatelyfrom the irrigation system.

Meanwhile, the Director of Land Reclamation, based in Hjderabad, independendy controls,via an XEN, some non- SCARP drainage operation and also collection of depth-to- watrtabledata within the same vicinity of Sukkur barrage command. Neither the Chief Engineer ofSukkur barrage nor his subordinates have any control over these drainage activities and theyare not even coordinated between themselves.

Another limitation in Sindh is that the only Mechanical Circle controlled by theSuperintendent Engineer (Mechanical) is under the auspices of Chief Engineer, SukkurBarrage. Equipment is hired out to other divisions including to SCARP drainage divisions.

11-8

However, there tends to be competition for access and often equipment is not available at theright moment.

Fragmentation of responsibilities within geographic areas reduces efficiency and inhibitsrealisation of economies of scale.

Where constraints on budget, equipment or manpower exist, maintenance of canals isiviably given priority over surface drains, even when under the auspices of the sameExecutive Engineer (XEN) and when similar staff and equipment might sometimes be used.Recurrent budget constraints limit the availability of mechanical spare parts and replacementof equipment.

Considering the range of difficulties cited above, it is understandable that incentives andenthusiasm for drainage operation and maintenance are generally low.

11.3 Guideines for Action

113.1 Defining a Role Framework

A. Outline

Environmental impacts and effects of any physical development intervention, tend to crossseveral sectors, such that concerned institutions inevitably will have broad interests. Althoughthe DSEA study must consider all impacted sectors and institutions relevant to them,recommendations cannot be made in isolation or without recognition of yet widerresponsibilities of environmental and development planning institutions generally.

In view of the above, and considering the environmental expertise shortages and financialconstraints, there would be substantial benefits in exploiting existing institutional structuresas far as possible, avoiding duplication and ensuring that institutional recommendations blendwith proposals emanating from other sources.

Table 11.2 outlines a suggested framework for institutional responsibilities, with particularreference to drainage development and the environment. In addition to filing responsibilitygaps by indicating the range of institutions which should be concerned with each activity, theTable implies that action may be required to allocate certain responsibilities betweenWAPDA, the PlDs and other key institutions.

B. PlDs and WAPDA

In the medium to long term an enviromnental capability should be introduced in each PID toenable consideration of environmental aspects and, where applicable, overseeingenvironmental impact assessment. It would be appropriate for this to be incorporated intoexisting Planning and Monitoring Cells. Such a capability must be sufficient for specifyingthe range of disciplines required for ElAs in different circumstances but it would not beappropriate or necessary for individual line institutions to have their own EIA field capacity.This work would be contracted out.

In the short term, the main environmental capability with regard to the water sector shouldlie with WAPDA, which should be strengthened accordingly.

11-9

TABLE 1.12

Irrigation, Draimac and the linvirbnment:Proposed Institutional Rcsponsibility

Actiny or Rcsponsiboility. -PrnIpa Oversceing or I Oithcr Concerned

Policy and Legal Aspcets

National Environmental Policy formulation EPC FPCFederal l.PA

Macro Environmental Assessment WAPDA Federal EPA

National Water Quality Slandards Federal EPA WAPDA: Mins. of(Proposed IBWA?) Water, Health,

Agric. Misheries

Provincial and Local Watcr Provincial I}PAs P&Ds: IPDs: PHIEDs:Quality Standards Agric & Fishcries

Legislation Fcderal and Provincial Ministry of lawEPAs (Proposed IBWA?) Law Departments

Ordinances and Enforcement Powers Federal and Provincial Ministry of LawCabinets Law Departments

Programmc and Project Planning

National Environmental Strategy Federal EPA WAPDAFPC

Provincial Environmental Strategy P&Ds Provincial E-PAs

National Drainage Programme WAPDA IPDs: P&Ds

Environmental Impact Assessment WAPDA IPAs: P&DsIPDs

Proiect Appraisal/Review WAPDA EPAsP&Ds FPC

Design and Construction

National and Inter-Provincial WAPDA IPDsDrainage Network Design EPAs

Provincial and Local Design IPDs WAPDA; EPAs

Construction IPDs WAPDA

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

Environmental Impact M&E WAPDA Federal E-PAP&Ds Provincial EPAs

Socio-economic M&E WAPDA IPDsP&Ds

Physical Monitoring and Analysis

Water Quality Monitoring Masterplan WAPDA FPCFederal EPA (Proposed IBWA?)

Provincial Water Quality Monitoring P&Ds IPDs: PHEl}s; AgricEPAs Fisheries

Soil Quality Monitoring Depts Agriculture WAPDA: EPAs

Groundwater Monitoring on Farm Depts Agriculture IPDs: IPAs

Implementation of Correctivc Measures Operating or implementing EPAsinstitutions

11-10

WAPDA should assume greater responsibility for programme and system planning, economicappraisal, environmental assessment and monitoring and evaluation of both environmental andsocio-economic impact.

It is therefore recommended that WAPDA should undertake the following:

- strategic drainage network planning

- macro environmental assessment and identifying key effects and impacts

- propcsing strategies for the water sector which take these into account

- overseeing environmental impact assessment of major undertakings

- appraisal of programmes and projects from both social cost- benefit andenvironmental viewpoints

- socio-economic M&E

- ovepseeing environmental impact M&E

- drafting legislation concerning groundwater abstraction and tubewell development

- coordinating a National master plan for irrigation water and drainage effluent qualitymonitoring and analysis.

It is strongly recommended that WAPDA should be strengthened to undertake the abovetasks. This should include promoting the powers and status of both environmental andeconomic planning units. It is therefore recommended that there should be a ChiefEnvironmentalist who should be the same grade and status as the Chief Engineer for WaterResources Planning. as should the Chief Economist.

These three Chiefs and their constituent divisions would make up the core for all WAPDA'splanning and evaluation activities and so might be called the "Planning and EvaluationGroup". All three should expect to liaise closely and to report directly to the GM Planning.This proposed set up is illustrated in Figure 11.2.

C. Other Concerned Institutions

Environmental Protection Agencies

The Federal and Provincial EPAs will have essentially coordinating, advisory and watchdogroles. They will be responsible for overseeing preparation of quality standards (both ambientand site specific), drafting legislation, preparing guidelines for EIAs and for spot checkingor sample monitoring of pollution, etc.

They should have sufficient expertise to play a major role in ensuring monitoring and analysisof key variables, such as water quality, where several sectors or institutions are involved.For this they would also need adequate laboratory facilities and some field capacity.

11-11

WAPDA: Key Elements of Proposed Organisationto strengthen Planning and Environment

Member/M.D. Water

G.M Planning

Chief Environmental Chie Economist Chief Engineer (WRP) j Ohe Chiefs + Directrs

Enviromenta Diviion F Planning and Ten ietr

Er___ronmer___D ___n Evaluatron DivsionTehiaDrcts

ProposedIPlanning and Evaluat(on Group| | ~Pmpopsed Planning and Evaluation Group

The EPAs should not be expected to undertake ElAs but they should have the capacity toprovide technical advice for them and appraise their quality. Fieldwork for ElAs would bethe responsibility of the line institutions. Likewise, most monitoring activities aimed atchecking that standards are being met would be undertaken by the implementing agencies,including self-monitoring by private industries. The EPAs' role will be to spot or samplecheck to ensure that the various institutions are fulfilling legal requirements.

It is clearly essential for the necessary legislation to be drawn up at both Federal andProvincial levels and for EPAs to be granted powers to take legal action and ensureenforcement.

Plannin! and Development Institutions

For strategic planning within the water sector, there will be a need to identify priorityenvironmental issues between sectors and prepare specific environmental strategies. Thesewould place water and drainage sector issues in their proper context at both Federal andProvincial levels.

The Federal Planning Commission (FPC) with its attached agencies is the most appropriateauthority to undertake this task at Federal level, in liaison with WAPDA, and the P&Ds atProvincial level, in liaison with EPAs.

At present the FPC and the :'&Ds have main responsibility for screening project proposals,from both technical and economic viewpoints but it would be appropriate for environmentalscreening to be added to the project appraisal process.

The National Conservation Strategy recommends that the ECNEC should have its mandatebroadened to include the environment, which would imply strengthening the FPC accordingly.

It is strongly recommended that each P&D should have an Environmental Division toundertake preparation of enviro; mental strategies, screen projects and ensure that EIAs wereundertaken to an adequate standard. These divisions would liaise with the EPAs and takeadvice from thern when needed.

It is further recommended that P&Ds, as the senior technical institutions at Provincial level,should take the lead in establishing a suitable coordinating body or committee for waterquality monitoring and analysis. The EPAs would also play a major role in this.

Agicultural Departments

The Departments of Agriculture provide advisory services in the field of agriculture extensionand on farm water management. They should ensure judicial use of agricultural chemicals toprevent these entering into drains or polluting groundwater and drinking water supplies, etc.

Public Health Engineering Departments (PHEDs)

PHEDs oversee water supplies and sanitation in rural areas and smaller towns but they dolittle monitoring. Where monitoring does take place, it is only of PHEDs own water supplyschemes. A comprehensive approach is required, covering all sources of drinking water used,water borne diseases, etc.

11-12

PHEDs need data on water quality, pollution and disease problems, and their relationship tohealth in specific locations. By participating in monitoring and evaluation, and regularphysical monitoring, it should be possible to build a clearer picture of these problems in ruralareas and to identify where pollutants may be passing through the food chain.

PHEDs should therefore actively participate in a much wider range of activities than they doat present. For this, they should also have improved laboratory facilities and additional fieldstaff for physical monitoring purposes.

Fisheries Departments

Their main role, with reference to the drainage sector and the environment, should be toclosely monitor all waters, especially rivers and lakes, where drainage from irrigated areasmay be affecting fish production and aquatic life generally. Like the PHEDs, they shouldundertake monitoring and laboratory analysis in sufficient detail to include identification ofpollutants passing through the food chain.

113.2 Environmental Assessment

Although ultimately each Provincial line Department will be responsible for environmentalassessment, and should have its own environmental personnel within Planning and MonitoringCells, in the short to medium term it will be only the EPAs, WAPDA and the P&Ds who willhave any significant environmental expertise. Unfortunately even this is likely to beengir.eering based, which is of only marginal relevance to the issues in hand.

The EPAs' role, together with the P&Ds, will be to stipulate under what circumstances EIAswill be required, to provide advice and to assist P&Ds in screening EIA quality.

Future assessments will have to be contracted out and expatriate and local expertise,particularly environmentalists with natural science backgrounds. will be required in theforeseeable future.

Establishment of centralised Government EIA field services is not recommended. In the longterm it will be more efficient to exploit the private sector and research and academicinstitutions.

1133 Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation of water sector projects and programmes should be the mainresponsibility of WAPDA at Federal level, and the P&Ds at Provincial level, supportedtechnically by the EPAs. Self monitoring and evaluating by line institutions should beminimised and in any case they will not have adequate expertise in the foreseeable future toundertake comprehensive environmental impact or socio-economic M&E.

Although in the past P&Ds have been reluctant to engage in field activities, as the seniortechnical institutions at Provincial level, it would be appropriate for them to do so in thefuture. This would also help to improve the quality of planning and ensure the M&E iscarried out objectively.

11-13

The P&Ds need substantial manpower and budgetary strengthening to incite them to developa field capacity for both socio- economic and environmental impact monitoring, especially asthey have multi-sectoral responsibilities. Even if internal manpower were insufficient, theyshould be allocated sufficient budget to ensure services can be contracted out.

Similar arguments apply to WAPDA but if most M&E is undertaken at Provincial level,WAPDA might be involved less frequently. WAPDA should therefore expect to focus onM&E of projects implemented under the auspices of PIDs in order to reduce the burieai onP&Ds.

Collaboration and coordination between WAPDA, P&Ds and the EPAs would be essentialfor each water sector related M&E exercise.

113.4 Physical Monitoring and Analysis

WAPDA could take the lead in devising a National water quality monitoring master plan, inparticular liaising with the Provincial P&Ds, PIDs and the EPAs. The main purpose of themasterplan would be to define the precise responsibilities of PID staff and the technical andfinancial requirements to establish an effective network of monitoring points and suitablelaboratory facilities. This would be partly in recognition that PIDs are likely to play aleading role in actually collecting samples since they have vast numbers of canal staff alreadyin the field in suitable locations.

In the Provinces, P&Ds should take the lead in establishing coordination committees to assistin agreeing localised water quality standards and to help organise comprehensive water qualitymonitoring. The EPAs would have a major role to play in this. The committees and theEPAs would have a duty to ensure that there are no gaps and that all interested parties aresatisfied. Although PIDs staff are likely to collect the majority of water samples, otherconcerned institutions, such as PHEDs, Fisheries Departments, etc, will also wish to do theirown sampling and analysis.

Although to a large extent Departnents will be responsible for their own self-monitoring,analysis and implementation of corrective measures, each line Departmnent should, as far aspossible, monitor the activities of the others. For example:

- Fisheries Department could monitor effluents discharges by PIDs into lakes andrivers,

- PHEDs could monitor water, from the health viewpoint, from any known potablesource and also from where diseases might emanate, such as mosquito breeding areas

- Agricultural Departments could monitor water in watercourses

- PlDs could monitor water at key system entry points and near relevant industrial andsewerage outlets or other sources of pollution

- The EPAs should provide additional support with sample spot checks.

There will be an associated need to identify suitable laboratory facilities for each concernedinstitution and to provide the necessary budget for monitoring to commence. The monitoring

11-14

programme should be sufficiently comprehensive to be able to trace water borne chemicalsand pollutants through the food chain and evaluate the implications.

Complaints would be channelled through the EPAs who would determine the need to takelegal action, if any.

113.5 Drainage Management and Finance

A. Organisation of Operation and Maintance

Effective integration of irrigation and drainage activities is only likely to be achieved if O&Mof both canals and drains is contained within the lines of command of the relevant field basedofficers, starting from Executive Engineers (XENs) downwards. This would facilitatecoordinated use of manpower and equipment.

It is necessary to ensure that equipment is available to be used at the right moment, whichcould be better coordinated under single and localised lines of command.

In most PID structures, the existing setup is conducive to integrated drainage and irrigationO&M, of surface drains at least. However, in Sindh the situation needs rectifying. Sindh PIDshould be required to restructure control of drainage systems, reallocating responsibilities sothat lines of command start with Chief Engineers of respective barrages and pass through theXENs, who are currently only concerned with canals.

B. Career and Training Initiatives

Experiences of SCARP tubewells, Sindh drainage arrangements and also of Command WaterManagement pilot projects (see Betts et al, 1989), suggest that if personnel are diverted awayfrom the main lines of command, then their promotion and hence career prospects are limited.This applies particularly at more junior levels, below XEN grades.

There may be a case for a specific corps of drainage specialists for planning and designpurposes, at relatively senior levels. However, even at this level, it is likely that no morethan specific "adjustment" training of existing irrigation engineers will be needed.

Developing a separate cadre of drainage specialists with separate lines of command is notrecommended, particularly as this would make it more difficult to integrate drainage operationinto a comprehensive water management strategy.

Training initiatives aimed at improving operation and maintenance of irrigation and drainagesystems generally were presented in the Water Sector Investment Plan (WSIP, Vol 3, 1990).Also, a number of training programmes were implemented under the second IrrigationSystems Rehabilitation Project (ISRP2).

It should be noted that the benefits of such training programmes have not been evaluated indetail by any agency and as such no firm recommendations can be made within the contextof this study.

11-15

C. Cost Recovery and Drainage Cess

It would not be realistic to expect drainage cess to cover even direct O&M of drainage untilsuch time as water charges are raised and revenue assessment and actual collection areimproved. Indeed, drainage charges, where they exist at all, are minimal, which is indicativeof the current situation. Even if there was political will to significantly increase charges,there is no immediate likelihood of a reasonable proportion being collected. Any discussionof a rational and equitable approach to cost recovery and drainage cess is, at this stage,hypothetical.

It appears that only Sindh Province has so far implemented any drainage cess charges. Thestated objective is to recover 25% of direct O&M costs. The charges, which have recentlybeen revised, are applied only in selected areas as follows:

- Rs 32Jacre in fresh groundwater areas where there are tubewells and tile drainage

- Rs 5/acre in other areas for surface drainage.

The Board of Revenue is responsible for collection.

Success in collection depends largely on farmers' perception of the need for drainage. Forexample, in the wet-foot rice growing areas of the Right Bank of Sindh, most farmersconsider drainage unnecessary. For the Larkana-Shikarpur area, the RBMP (1991) reportindicates the following:

Desireable IPD recurrent expenditure (drainage): Rs 90/acreActual IPD recurrent expenditure (drainage): Rs 42/acreOfficial drainage cess charge: Rs 5/acre

Actual collection as percent of cess due: 13%Actual collection as percent of actual expenditure: 2%Actual collection as percent of desirable expenditure: 1%

Farmers are more likely to agree to pay drainage cess where the benefits are obvious, suchas when land is reclaimed, or seen to be going out of production in the absence of adequatedrainage. It is possible that the farmers in Larkana-Shikarpur have good reason not to pay:many of the drains are blocked and, depending on the crop grown, the benefits of operationaldrainage might in any case be negligible.

Most officials agree that drainage cess should be incorporated into overall charges forirrigation water and drainage because this will greatly simplify assessment and collectionprocedures. The most rational and equitable approach is seen by PID staff to be one which*relates drainage cess to the type and cost of service provided rather than, say, scalingdrainage cess in proportion to irrigation charges for different crops.

The implied rationale is related dosely to the engineers' perception of benefit of drainage,which appear to be linked to technical complexity and installation cost, although these mightnot correlate with farmers' willingness to pay or with benefits realised.

11-16

This could mean, for example, differentiating drainage cess charges in ascending order, asfollows:

- flood alleviation drainage- other surface drainage- tile drainage- tubewell drainage in FGW areas- tubewell drainage in SGW areas.

It is preferable, in theory, to determine type of drainage installation, and drainage cess,according to cost-benefit criteria rather than on grounds of technical 'need' or feasibility.Cost-benefit analysis should of course include valuation of crop output benefits and not bebased only on the cost of providing drainage facilities. Farmer's willingness to pay is likelyto correlate with their perception of benefits arising from improved agricultural production,which may have little relationship to cost.

The existing crop water charges, being based on crop water requirements, do not necessarilycorrelate well with an optimal cost-benefit relationship since the financial or economic valueof the crop is not taken into consideration.

The drainage cess shoulu, ideally, be related to both the cost of service vrovided and thevalue of benefits for dominant crops of the area conceried. There is a need to assess farmerswillingness and ability to pay which would also provide indicators of benefits, and this lendsweight to the argument that farming communities should be consulted before design andconstruction of drainage schemes.

Under present arrangements there are water charge differentials, although modest, not onlybetween Provinces but also between seasons and between some canals. These offer aprecedent for implementing differential drainage charges between localities and croppingzones, etc.

it is concluded that a theoretical cost-benefit approach to determining drainage cess must betempered by practical realities with the objective of optimising actual revenue collection,whilst taking account of the present social and political climate.

11-17

CHAPTER 12

TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

12.1 Introduction

In relation to training the Terms of Reference for this study stipulate that it should:

"Develop and carry out a training programme for GOP and Provincial Officialsrelated to water sector planning and development with special emphasis on drainageand environmental related matters;

i) Prepare training programme, including training materialsii) Carry out training programme, i.e. on-the-job, seminars, workshops etc."

(Clause 4.14)

These duties were implemented in two discrete phases. The first phase was concerned withan assessment of the training needs of staff in the various relevant agencies. It included thepreparation and provision of a Two-day Workshop in Environmental Awareness in theDrainage Sector. The second phase was principally concerned with developing and carryingovit one-day and two-day Training Seminars in Lahore and Karachi. These seminars aredescribed in detail in Appendix XII.

Specific training needs and proposals to meet these are described in Section 3 herein. Therecommended training programmes are briefly described in Section 4 and Section 5 containsConclusions and Future Action.

12.2 Background

12.2.1 Previous Findings

A country wide and comprehensive evaluation of Training Requirements in the Water Sectorwas carried out as part of the Water Sector Investment Planning Study (WSIP 1991). Thisstudy reviewed previous reports and studies relating to training. It also set out to assesstraining capabilities in the various Government agencies and in appropriate educationalinstitutions in Pakistan. The report identified a wide spectrum of training needs, noting"..training is required for almost all staff in WAPDA, the PID's and the PAD's, and for thisreason a permanent in-house training capability needs to be established in each organisation".

Ile WSIP study identified eight main areas where training would be targeted towards skillsand standards. These are:

- basic academic and professional standards- project planning- project design- project implementation and supervision- system operation and water management- system maintenance

12-1

- water management by farmers- project benefit evaluation

In recognition of the major training input that would be needed to cover such a wide spectrumof needs, the study stressed that the training effort must be weighted toward improved watermanagement and operation and maintenance procedures as these areas are the most likely toresult in increased agricultural production.

The WSIP study also recognised even in the three selected areas that the "training investmentwill have to be massive if any tangible results are to be realised"

As the WSIP study was programme, rather than project, orientated its assessment of trainingneeds in such broad areas can be anticipated. Other recent studies have generally been of amore project orientated nature and have accordingly identified specific training needs relatedto particular projects (ISMP 1986, ISMP 1988). A comprehensive bibliography is given inthe WSIP study and is not repeated herein.

12.2.2 Current Training Programmes

The principal in-country training programmes are run by ai limited number of traininginstitutes. Although these institutes have not been reviewed in detail by this study, a briefoverviev% is presented below.

The academic institutes mainly concerned with training in-service staff from WAPDA, thePID's and PAD's are listed below:

The Punjab Engineering Academy (PEA)The Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Engineering, University ofEngineering and Technology, Lahore-WAPDA Administrative and Management Staff College.

The Punjab Engineering Academy runs regular pre-service and in-service training courses forengineers, most of whom come from the PID's.

The pre-service course is:

General Engineering Training for Sub-Divisional Officers and Assistant Executive Engineerson their first appointment in the Engineering Departments. This course is of four monthsduration and covers a wide range of subjects including engineering, accountancy, projectplanning, management, computer orientation, government department rules and regulations.

The in-service courses are:

a) Seminar Management Course for Superintending and Chief Engineer grades of oneweek's duration.

b) Senior Level Training Course in Management of one month's duration for Executiveand Superintending Engineers.

c) Engineer Training Course in Engineering and Management of 2 month's duration forSub-Divisional Officers and Executive Engineers.

12-2

In addition to the above regular 'service training courses the Academy runs regular coursesin Computers and in Management. Also a series of short courses sponsored under theIrrigation System Management Programme (ISM-US AID) covering Surveying, Design,Construction, Contract Administration and Operation and Maintenance have also been given.

The Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Engineering is a semi-autonomous FederalInstitute within the University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore. It essentially conductspostgraduate degree programmes for diplomas, MSc, MPhil and PhD in Water ResourcesManagement and Hydrology. The Centre also conducts short courses in a variety of topics.These are generally related to topics taught in the Master's programme or to ongoing researchactivities. For example, short courses being conducted in 1992 are:

a) Micro-Computer Simulation of Regional Saline Water Movement in response toPumping: this is a two week course largely directed towards computer familiarisationand applications in modelling saline and fresh water aquifers as exist in SCARPareas.

b) Micro-Computer Applications in Monitoring, Evaluation and Management of WaterResource Projects; this is a series of three week courses dealing with computerprogramming and applications in water resources, agricultural development andmanagement.

The Centre intends to host, in April 1993, an international seminar on EnvironmentalAssessment and Management of Irrigation and Drainage Projects for Sustained AgriculturalGrowth.

The WAPDA Admin.strative and Staff Management College has centres in Lahore; the StaffCollege and Distribution Training Institute. in the Tarbela Academny and in the FaisalabadAcademy. The college and its associated Academies and Training Institute run a series of pre-service and in-service courses. These are briefly listed below.

The pre-service courses are:

a) Integrated Course for Junior Engineers of 6 months duration.

b) Junior Management Course of 6 months duration.

The in-service courses are:

a) Management Development Course of 10 weeks duration for Executive Engineers.

b) Senior Management Course of 20 weeks duration for Executive Engineer grade upto Chief Engineer grade.

c) Project Management Course of 4 weeks duration for Executive Engineers and above.

Various technical courses are also run on topics in the fields of civil and electrical engineeringboth at Faisalabad and Lahore.

Other institutes which might be relevant to the future conduct of in-country training coursesin the environmental and drainage fields are listed below:

12-3

Institute of Environmental Engineering and Research, University ofEngineering and Technology, Karachi

NWFP University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar

Rural Academy, NWFP, Peshawar

Government Polytechnic Institute, Quetta

Agricultural Training Institutes, Quetta and Peshawar.

12.3 Training Needs Assessment

12.3.1 Specific Areas for Training

There is a wide spectrum of areas in the Water Sector for which important training needs canbe identified. Many of these areas have been assessed in the WSIP report as noted in above.There are also many recent and on-going programmes which have significant trainingcomponents.

The Irrigation System Management Programme (ISMP-I) covered, during the period 1984-1988, both overseas training and in-country short courses. The Punjab Engineering Academywas upgraded under this programme and ran a series of short courses in surveying, design,construction, management, computer skills and so on. ISMP-II, starting in 1991 and fundedby USAID has also an ambitious multi-subject training programme (WSIP 1991).

To deal effectively and equally with all perceived training needs would require themobilisation of unrealistically large resources, both financial and technical. It is unlikely thatserious consideration would ever by given to any large or all-embracing training programmes.A specific targeted programme, limited both in scope and duration, will have a significantlybetter chance of attracting funds and of being implemented. As the current study is concernedprincipally with the Enviromment and with the Drainage Sector it has concentrated its effortin assessing training needs in these related sectors only.

This assessment is carried out through a combination of report reviews, interviews anddiscussions, a questionnaire and, principally, through the Workshops and Seminars conductedduring the course of this study. These seminars are discussed in more detail in Section 12.4.1.

The principal areas identified for training, within the framework of the Drainage SectorEnvironmental Assessment Programme, are listed below:

a) Environmental Impact Assessment; purpose, uses and methods. This appears to bethe single mIost important target area, both in general EIA and in its specificapplication in the water sector.

b) Drainage Technologies in the Indus Basin; the nature, mechanisms, water and soilchemistry of drainage methods. This would be aimed at those directly or peripherallyinvolved in the irrigation and drainage sectors. This area of training can be given attwo levels of intensity which are;

12-4

(i) General awareness of drainage and its environmental implications, and

(ii) Intensive drainage and EIA course.

The former could be achieved in a relatively short number of training hours. Thelatter course could require several weeks. Indeed many accredited training coursesin drainage management and technology are of several months duration. This detailedcourse would apply to those engineers and agriculturalists actually working in theirrigation and drainage sectors.

c) Training for Participative Field Workshop (Farmers Participation)

An essential recommendation of this study is that farmers, as the prime producers inthe irrigation and drainage sector, should be actively involved in the planning,implementation, operation and maintenance of irrigation and drainage projects. Thisis not the case at present and there is a communication and understanding gapbetween the farmers and the professional agriculturalists and engineers involved inirrigation and drainage. The perceptions of these groups are often seen to be polesapart and yet it is the farmers' perceptions which influence his actions and productioncapacity, not the perception of the professionals. This topic is elaborated under theInstitutions section of this report. The role of agriculturalists and engineers in thiscontext would be to explain technical options to the farming communities and to seekthe farmers' opinions on drainage matters. Such communications could be establishedthrough participative workshops. The training need relates to developing skills tocommunicate with farmers and to conduct these workshops in an effective manner.Skills to be acquired would be essentially communication and presentation skills andhow to apply these in developing and running workshops in the field. This coursewould thus be a "training-of-trainers", requiring about one week at each locationwhich includes field practice.

d) Indus Basin Drainage Information (Travelling) Seminar

This National Drainage Programme study has prepared a series of recommendationsrelating to water management, drainage issues and sustainability of the Indus BasinIrrigation and Drainage systems. These are covered elsewhere in this report. Manyof the associated concepts and issues are complex and would require a significantexpenditure of time from those who need to or wish to understand these concepts.This study, in recommending that all these professionals who are directly or evenperipherally involved in the drainage sector should have a good understanding ofthese- aspects, proposes a Travelling Seminar to disseminate this information. Thisseminar should be mobile, a "roadshow", and be presented to participants in all fourprovinces, particularly those in the concerned agencies.

12-5

123.2 Institutions and Staff

The principal institutions directly involved in environmental matters and in the drainage sectorare:

o Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)o Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA)o Provincial Irrigation Department (PID)o Provincial Agriculture Department (PAD)o Planning and Development Department (P&D)o Public Health Engineering Department (PHED)o Fisheries Department

It is noted elsewhere in this report that environmental expertise is virtually non-existent inPakistan and that the limited number who work in environmental units are generally engineersby training. Additionally, and appropriately perhaps, the emphasis in environmental mattershas been in the public health engineering sector. Environmental expertise in the irrigation,drainage and agricultural sector has, when required for EIA preparation, been largelycontracted out to foreign consultants. This matter is, to a limited degree, being addressed byoverseas longer term training, that is, I year or more at postgraduate degree level, ofPakistani nationals who are in post in EPAs and elsewhere. Within Pakistan the Institute ofEnvironmental Engineering and Research in Karachi is also helping to redress the balancealthough its emphasis lies strongly in the public health engineering sector. This is alsoappropriate in view of the extreme importance of this latter sector in Pakistan.

It is considered likely, in the short term at least, that the provision of non-engineeringenvironmentalists will continue to be from outside the country. However "adjustment'training of those staff in post in the relevant institutions is perfecdy appropriate. This refersto equ':pping those staff, predominantly engineers, with new skills and capabilities to matchthe new rernents of their posts and of their parent institutions.

The existing and recommended proposed institutional arrangements are discussed elsewherein this report. The EPAs have major roles to play as setters of quality standard, as"watchdogs' in enforcing such standards and as advisers to other instituitions in the theory andpractice of EIA in many sectors. In connection with the drainage sector, taken herein asincluding irrigation, the EPA staff will need to become at least broadly acquainted with theenvironmental implications of irrigation, drainage and flood control projects and programmes.

WAPDA, as the main authority currently involved in the planning and design of majorprogramnmnes and projects, needs an in-house environmental capability in order to carry out,or at least supervise the execution of, EIAs where such are required. In recognition of thisWAPDA has created an Environmental Unit. Currently this unit is small and understaffed anda recommendation has been made elsewhere in this report that it is strengthened. It also lacksexpertise in the drainage sector. Existing staff in this unit, and new staff when recruited,would benefit from training in all four primary target areas identified in Section 12.3.1.Awareness training in EIA and in drainage technologies, courses (a) and (bii) above, shouldalso be given to others involved in the water and planning sectors, including Chief Engineer,Senior and Executive Levels.

12-6

The forthcoming Asian Development Bank's Technical Assistance Project for WAPDA'sEnvironmental Cell will of course provide invaluable on-the-job training for the staff of theCell. This project is scheduled to start in early 1993.

The PIDs have historically been responsible for the operation and maintenance of surfacewater delivery and drainage disposal systems and are also," to a limited extent, involved inplanning and design of new and rehabilitation irrigation projects. As the principal institutioninvolved in field activities the PIDs have much influence on the success or otherwise of theirrigation and drainage sector in Pakistan. The operation and maintenance of drainageschemes including the extensive SCARP schemes comes under their control. It is thusfundamentally important that PID staff possess the expertise necessary to effectively monitorand manage all such schemes. Drainage theory and technology is not necessarily complicatedbut does require the acquisition of some specialised knowledge and skills as in, for example,the fields of soil and water chemistry, watertable control, crop response to water table andsalinity levels and so on. Ic is not recommended that cadres of drainage specialists be trainedup, with lines of command separate from those of the PID field engineers. However, theexisting trained irrigation engineers of Executive and assistant grade would be provided withthe specific 'adjustment" training referred to above. This training, Course bQii) (Section12.3.1), would include the environmental implications of drainage.

The more senior staff in the PID would benefit from the shorter training in the aspects of ageneral awareness of drainage and its environmental implications [Course b(i) Section 12.3.11.

The Planning and Development Departments will clearly have a significant role to play inevaluating and approving the environmental impact assessment aspects of proposeddevelopment projects. This would be an addition to their current responsibility to appraise thetechnical and economic aspects of such projects. The NWFP P&D have an EnviromnentalDivision and it is understood that the other provincial P&D Departments will also haveEnvironmental Divisions sometime in 1993. Doubtless the staff of such divisions will havesome background in envirommental matters. This could be built upon by their participationin the identified short training courses, [(a) and b(i) Section 12.3.1]. Other additional trainingneeds should be assessed to accord with their expected duties but this lies outside the scopeof the current study.

Staff of the Public Health Engineering Departments are amongst those most familiar withenvironmental matters, largely relating to water quality, pollution, diseases and watertreatment. The principal training areas, listed as (a) and b(i) above, would both broaden theirstaffs' awareness of the important linkages with the irrigation and drainage sector and providea technical link of common understanding with these staff in WAPDA and the PIDs who aremore directly involved in these sectors. Such an understanding would facilitate the essentialcommunication and liaison between these institutions.

Finally, but by no means least importantly, the PADs have a significant role to play inenviromnental and technical aspects of drainage. Apart from the obvious, but not extensive,aspect of agricultural chemicals causing direct or indirect adverse consequences, the entirethrust of the government's objective is to achieve greater productivity at field level. ThePADs are wholly concerned with this aspect and thus with the associated aspects of watersupply, drainage removal, salinity and sodicity control. The participation of PAD staff inthose same courses proposed for PID field staff is recommended. Where differences intechnical backgrounds exist the courses can easily be adapted to accommodate these.

12-7

12.4 Recommended Training Programmes

12.4.1 Seminars and Workshops

A total of eight days of Workshops and Seminars were conducted during this study asfollows:

(i) Two-Day Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment in the DrainageSector; Lahore 8, 9 April 1992.

(ii) One-Day Seminars on the Role of EIA in Project Planning, Implementationand Operation; Lahore 29 September 1992 and Karachi 4 October 1992.

(iii) Two-Day Seminars/Workshops on Environmental Impact Assessment in theDrainage Sector, Lahore 30 September, I October 1992, and Karachi 5 and6 October 1992.

These were conducted principally by the Consultants staff together with invited guestspeakers. The number of delegates attending each session averaged about 25 such that a totalof some 125 staff attended.

The initial Workshop carried out in Lahore presented four topics as follows:

- Environmental Impact Assessment- Environmental Legislation and Policies- Checklist Approach in Sectoral EIA- Choice of Sectoral EIA Formats for Pakistan.

The participants applied. as a case study, the ICID draft checklist to the SCARP-I tubewellproject. The latter part of the workshop was concerned with the identification by theparticipants of important issues in the environmental and drainage sectors. This was conductedas a form of 'scoping' session using a 'key-words on cards" technique. The participantsinitially identified a large number of major issues. Then concentrating, in teams, on a limitednumber of these issues, the participants prepared the list of Recommendation and Activities(See Table 1, Appendix XII). I

The seminars conducted during the second training phase in September and October 1992were divided into a 1 day seminar series for senior managerial staff and a two day series formiddle level management staff.

The one day se-i.nar series covered aspects of:

- Drainage Issues in Pakistan- Environmental Impact Assessment- Environmental Legislation and Policies- Environmental Assessment Formats.

For the two-day seminars both the content and the degree of detail were increased to cover;

- The Need for Drainage- Drainage Issues in Pakistan

12-8

Environmental Impact AssessmentEnvironmental Assessment FormatsChecklist for Environmental Impact IndicationEnvironmental Assessment of Drainage in Pakistan.

Similarly to the first workshop in Lahore, the latter part of the two day seminar series wasdedicated to a form of "scoping* session in which the participants identified issues andconstraints relevant to their jobs and to the organisations in which they worked (See Tables2 & 3, Appendix XII).

Evaluations of the Workshops and Seminars were carried out using a questionnaire issued tothe participants. The returns were generally very favourable indicating that the session werewell received. Some comments will prove useful for future training exercises. Further detailsof the seminars are given in Appendix XII to this Report.

The seminars also proved useful in assisting the assessment of training needs and thesefindings have been taken into account in formulating the contents of the recommendedtraining courses.

12.4.2 In-Country Training Programmes

Based on the training needs areas identified in Section 3 and on the target beneficiary groups,a number of short in-country training programmes is recommended.

These are illustrated in Figure 12.1. Three specific courses are proposed. These are describedbelow:

Seinar on Environmental Assessmentin the Drainage Sector

This would be a three day course similar in its content and scope to the Seminar/Workshopspresented during this study. Subject areas to be covered are given in Table 12.1 Targetgroups for training would be from the principal entities involved directly or peripherally inthe Drainage Sector. This will be a fairly intensive course and accordingly the staff chosento attend must be properly selected so that they wil participate actively and obtain themaximum benefit from the course. A selected case study would be included and to allow this,the course duration proposed is three days rather than the two days allocated to the'Seminarsalready conducted. The maximum number of participants should not exceed forty at theseSeminars. This course could be presented in-house in the training or conference rooms of thevarious departments or using the facilities of local provincial training centres.

Four Week Intensive Course on EnvironmentalAssessment in the Drainage Sector

This course would provide the fairly detailed coverage of drainage required by thoseengineers and agriculturalists actively working in the drainage (and irrigation) sectors. Thecourse is not intended to produce subject matter specialists but rather to provide an insightinto the various elements of drainage and in particular sub-surface drainage. Theenvironmental component of the course would famliarise participants with EA methodologiesand their applications. Course details are given in Table 12.2

12'-9

Short Term In-Country Training Programmes

. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e~~~~~ee~~~~~~~~..% %. . .... ...

EIAcomnctos ~~~~ ~~rinage Technologies ................ ,........

Aprlation .. Prrecntai

.. .. .. .. . ..... ..... ......

.................

................... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~....*.....*..

Seiaro EA inntensive Course on EA

....... .,,.....,..,...oerto)Iinn

P~~~~~~~Sco tf fedSco tf andldPaDWAPDA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~A

........................ PHEDPAPD

EPA

. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*.*.*.*.*.*.*..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

.~~~~~~~............... . '.1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TABLE 12.1

Proposed Content of Seminars on EnvironmentalAssessment in the Drainage Sector

(Duration = 3 days)

Drainage

Crop response to high water tables and salinityNeed for drainage and priority areasMethods of drainage; surface, subsurface tubewell/tiles, naturalMethods of disposal of saline waterSalinity, sodicity and soil reclamationSalt balance in irrigated areasEnvironmental impacts of drainage

National Drainage Programme

Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Legislation and Policies

Check-list Approach in Sectoral EIA

EIA Formats for Pakistan

12-10

TABLE 12.2Proposed Content of Four Weckc Itensivc Course on Environmental

Assessment and the Drainage SectorProposed

Topic Scope Duration(days)

1. Technical Aspects of - Crop yield response to 5Drainage and Waterlogging and salinityIrrigated Agriculture - Assessment of drainage needs and

priorities- Methods of drainage; surface,

tubeweiLI tile and natural drainage- Disposal of drainage water- Salinity, sodicity and soil

reclamation- Salt balance in irrigated areas

2. Operation and - Responsibilities, institutional 2Maintenance of frameworkDrainage Systems - Costs and budgets

3. Environmental - 3Assr ssment andEnvironmentalPlanning

4. Environmentaly - Existing legislation, planning 1relatedLegislation and regulatory frameworks,and Policies legislative enactment and

enforement

5. Institutional - Responsibilities for EIA IFramework preparation and EIA approval,

monitoring and evaluation.

6. Role of Funding - EA requirements, policies and 1Agencies conditions

7. Checklist Approach - EA requirements of checklists,. 2in Sectional EIA the ICID checklist

8. Drainage disposal - Constraints on disposaL 0.5options in the Indus environmental consequencesBasin provincial drainage needs.

9. National Drainage - Outline of its scope and .05Programme implications

10. Site Visits - Visits to projects and areas of 3particular relevance.

11. Course Assessment - Course work to be completed by 1participants and assessed bytrainers.

Total 20

12-11

The course would be conducted at one or more of the appropriate training institutes so thatit is available to participants from all provinces. The course should be residential.

Of particular importance is the selection of appropriate participants; staff should be activelvengaged in field activities or directly associated with such. The course would thus beespecially relevant to field (or planning) staff in SCARP drainage projects, both tubewell andtile. The course could be considered as an essential component of the training requirementsof such staff. Participants would be assessed on completion of the course.

One Week Training for FarmerParticpation Workshops

The rationale for this course has been explained in Section 12.3.1. This course aim is toprovide simple communication and presentation skills to those involved in project planningand in project operation and maintenance. Participants who successfully complete the coursewould be able to plan, organise and run workshops in the field in which local farmers andothers involved in agricultural developments would be present. Through the skills acquiredin the training course the participants will be able to present their plans and proposals in acoherent form to the invited audiences. More importantly, they will be able to develop andencourage participation from the audience so that the views and perceptions of the farmersare understood and incorporated into the planning, operation and maintenance processes.

The course is essentially formulated to train those who will in turn be,come trainers andconduct field workshops. A proposed course outline is given in Table 12. 3

12.4.3 Out-of-Country Training

Previous studies have confirmed the poor uptake from Pakistan for out-of-country trainingcourses (WSIP 1991 etc). Such courses can be very effective but all suffer a commondisadvantage; they are expensive. Whilst not denying the validity and value of such traininginitiatives, this study is not recommending that a funding commitment be made to suchtraining. Rather that the limited funding which might be made available to training should belargely dedicated to reaching the largest target groups with broadly coverage. This can onlybe achieved in-country, using external training expertise to complement that available locally.A secondary benefit is that the capability of the local training institutes will be enhanced byconducting courses using, at least initially, foreign expertise and gradually replacing thisexpertise with national trainers.

12.5 Condusions and Future Actions

Previous studies indicate that a wide spectrum of training needs have been identified in thewater sector. Many of these recur in the drainage sector and will ultimately have to geade-essed to improve the chances of success of current and future projects in this sector.

This study proposes a pragmatic view of training; simply that the most practical approach isto concentrate on a limited range of topics and to introduce these to a large number of staffin the relevant institutions.

12-12

TABLE 12.3

One-Week Training for Farmer Participation Workshops(Training of Trainers)

Topic Scope Duration

1. Presentation Skills - Purpose of presentations- Audience- Preparation requirements- Presentation techniques- Visual Aids 2 days

2. Conducting Effective - Organising, Logistics and StructureWorkshops - Participative Communication Techniques

- Managing discussion groups- Keeping records- Need for Feed -back to participants- Commitments 2 days

3. Field Practical Application 2 days

12-13

The training effort is directed towards developing a sound awareness of EnvironmentalAssessments and of the nature, mechanisms and chemistry of drainage methods in the IndusBasin. It is not directed towards the production of experts in either of these associated fields.A limited number of in-country training courses are proposed to achieve these ends. Thesecourses have been outlined (Section 12.4.2). The future actions required are to prepareproposals for funding such courses so that these can be considered by potential donoragencies as well as by the Government of Pakistan.

12-14

APPENDIX - XII

TRAINNG WORKSHOPS AND SEMINARS CONDUCTEDDURING THE STUDY

1. Introduction

1. A total of eight days of Workshops and Seminars were conducted as follows:

i) Two-Day Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment in the DrainageSector; Lahore 8, 9 April 1992

ii) One Day Seminars on the Role of EIA in Project Planning, Implementationand Operation; Lahore 29 September 1992 and Karachi 4 October 1992.

iii) Two Day Seminars/Workshops on Environmental Impact Assessment in theDrainage Sector, Lahore 30 September, 1 October 1992, and Karachi 5 and6 October 1992.

2. These Workshops and Seminars were conducted principally by the Consultants staff;Team Leader, Principal Environmental Specialist and Training Specialist. Invitedguest speaks also contributed as follows:

Mr. M. A. Saleemi, Director General, Punjab Environmental Protection Agency;Lahore 8 April, 29 September and 30 September.

Eng A. R. Memon, Former General Manager WAPDA, Lahore 9 April.

Mr. T. A. Jafri, Chief (Planning), Planning and Development Dept., Government ofSindh; Karachi, 4 October.

Mrs. Mahtab Akbar Rashdi, Director General, Sindh Environmental ProtectionAgency; Karachi, 4 and 5 October.

3. Opening and closing addresses were carried out by:

Mr. Shamsul Mulk, Member Water, WAPDAMr. Javed Saleem Qamar, General Manager (Planning) WAPDAMr. Nayar Bari, Secretary, Housing Town Planning and

Environment Department, Government ofSindh, Karachi

Mr. Richard Birch, Director, Mott MacDonald International,Karachi

2. First Two-Day Workshop lahore 8, 9 April 1992

4. The Workshop given in Lahore on 8 and 9 April combined a training element in thepresentations and discussions given on the first day with a workshop element in whichthe participants produced a set of recommendations on the second day. It wasformulated partly to provide information and guidance on the use of EIA in the

1

Drainage Sector and pardy to serve as a means of assessing further training needs.

5. The format adopted was the presentation of four topics, each within a 40 minute slot,including discussion and questions. The topics were:

- Environmental Impact Assessment: its purpose, methods and applications.

- Environmental LeBislation and Policies: with particular reference to thePakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance No. 37 (1983) and otherrelevant legislation in Pakistan.

- Checklist Approach in Sectoral EIA: The use of checklists as a workingtool in assessing the environmental effects of new or existing projects withparticular reference to the ICID Draft Checklist for Environmental ImpactIndication (Hydraulics Research 1991).

- Choice of Sectoral EIA Format for Pakistan: illustrating the application of;the Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance 1983, the World BankOperational Directive on Environmental Assessment and the UK OverseasDevelopment Administration Manual of Environmental Appraisal.

6. The Workshop participants applied, in an outline format, the ICID draft checklist tothe SCARP-I Tubewell Project in order to provide an initial indication of the overallenvironmental impact of that project. The results of this exercise proved to beremarkably consistent despite the diverse backgrounds of the participants. The projectwas judged to generally have favourable enviromnental impacts and was allowed toproceed to the next phase', using the ICID guideline criteria. Of particular interestwas the frequent invocation of the item in the checklist which indicated that additionalexpertise would be required before a judgement could be made. This aptly illustratedthe need, in an Environmental Appraisal or at an EIA stage, to ensure that theappropriate expertise is available. It allowed the participants to recognise whereparticular gaps existed in the expertise available.

7. Invited guest speakers also gave valuable presentations. These were Mr. M. A.Saleemi, Acting Director General of Punjab EPA, who spoke on EnviromnentalLegislation and Eng A R Memon, former General Manager, WAPDA, who spoke onEnvironmental Water Sector and Drainage Issues.

8. The latter part of the Workshop was dedicated to the identification, by theparticipants, of important issues in the environment and drainage sectors and theassessment of recommendations and points for action relating to these issues. Thegroup identified a total of twelve significant issues as listed below.

- Legislation - Ecology- Public Awareness - Funding- Pollution - Salinity & Water Tables- Policies - People- Training - Agriculture- Agencies - Various Specifics

(Monitoring andEvaluation)

2

9. Six of these issues, comprising those on the left above, were debated by discreteteams of participants and subsequently in a plenary session by all participants.

10. The Recommendations and Activities shown on Table 1 were formulated by thegroup. Many of the recommendations made are not specifically related to training andwhere relevant in other aspects of this study, have been or will be taken into account.

11. Two manuals were issued to participants at the Workshop. These were:

(i) Workshop Document; containing notes on:

- Environment Impact Assessment- Checklist for Environmental Impact Indication- Environmental Assessment Formats

o Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance 1983o World Bank Operational Directive on Environmental

Assessmento UK Overseas Development Administration: Manual of

Environmental Assessment

(ii) Enviromnental Effects of Irrigation Drainage and Flood Control Projects,Checklist for Environmental Impact Assessment, Prof. Dr. Ing J F Mock andDr. P Bolton, International Commission.on Irrigation and Drainage, ReportOD/TN 50, February 1991 HR Wallingford UK.

12. An evaluation of the Workshop was carried out using a questionnaire issued to theparticipants. The returns indicated that the Workshop was very well received by theparticipants and judged to be of value of them in their professional careers.

13. The format adopted in the Lahore Workshop successfully served its purposes inassisting the assessment of training needs, amongst the other elements noted aboveand in Table 1.

3. Second Series of Seminars/Workshops,September/October 1992

3.1 Structure of Seminars/Workshops

14. This series of Seminars, which was given in Lahore and in Karachi, was divided intotwo parts. Each part was to be attended by a different group of delegates.

15. The first of these was a self-ontained I day seminar to which were invited seniormanagerial staff of Director General and Chief Engineer levels in the variousdepartments and concerned Ministries. This seminar focused on the need for andapplication of EIA in Project Planning, Implementation and Operation.

16. The second two-day seminar was directed towards seminar staff of grades 18/19level. It provided a more detailed appreciation of EIA procedures, illustrating theirapplication in the drainage sector in Pakistan. The seminar also covered the need fordrainage as well as drainage technologies and priorities relevant to Pakistan.

3

3.2 One Day Seminars on the Role of EIA in Project Planning, Implementationand Operation; Lahore 29 September and Karachi 4 October 1992

17. This seminar series covered the following aspects:

- Drainage Issues in Pakistan- Environmental Impact Assessment- Environmental Legislation and Policies- Environmental Assessiment Formats

18. In the Lahore seminar the delegates participated in a sructured discussion sessionusing a 'key-words on cards' technique' to identify .najor issues and constraintsrelating to Environmental matters and to Project Planning and Implementation inPakistan. Major issues/constraints identified were as follows:

- Legislation and Enforcement (principally the lack of)- Inadequate Training and Education- Institutional Constraints and Iiiadequacies of Inter-Institutional

Liaison- Need for Public Awareness and Information Dissemination- Need for Guidelines to identify projects requiring EIA in Pakistan.

19. Similar discussions conducted during the Karachi Seminar placed emphasis on thedeficiencies of internal management in the various organisations, both in theirmanagement structure and, more importantly, in internal operational procedures.

3.3 Two-Day Seminars on Environmental Impact Assessment in the DrainageSector. Lahore and Karachi

20. This seminar series covered the following aspects:

- The Need for Drainage: crop response to high watertables and salinity.surface flooding, status of land drainage, drainage developments to date.future requirements.

- Drainage Issues in Pakistan: drainage technology, salt balance issues.disposal of drainage water, opportunities for impact mitigation.

- Environmental Impact Assessment: purpose, need, data handling, publicperceptions, measuring impacts, EIA methodology, sectoral planning. publicparticipation.

- Environmental Assessment Formats

i) Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance 1983; function,powers, format, EIA quality standards, relationship with other EIAformats

Based on the Metaplan Method of Communication Tools for Planning and Learning Groups,Metaplan Series No. 7, Metaplan GmbH.

4

ii) World Bank Operational Directive on Environmental Assessment;purpose and nature of EA, types, institutional aspects, EA procedures

iii) UK, ODA, Manual of Environmental Appraisal; EA steps, screening,appraisal, environmental impact assessment, monitoring andevaluation.

- Checkrist for Environmental Impact Indications; background, checklist,data sheets, method of operation, interpretation and evaluation.

- EEnvironmental Assessment of Drainage in Pakistan; Using EIA check-listfor project planning, project failures, EA of drainage in Pakistan,collaboration - a planning team using EIA.

21. The latter part of the seminar was allocated to a Workshop session on the themes ofIssues and Constraints in Pakistan, again using the "key-word on cards" techniquereferred to earlier. This was conducted along the lines of a 'scoping' session ascommonly applied in EIA. The delegates thus because familiar and participated in ascoping session as well as practicising rapid communication techniques.

22. In the second seminar conducted in Lahore, the delegates applied the ICID check-listto the SCARP-I tubewell project. The average 'score' attributed to the project wasI80 thereby, judging it to have generally favourable environmental effects. Asignificant number of issues, averaging about 10 in the total check-list of 53 itemswere identified as well as a recognition of the need for expertise other than thatrepresented by the various professionals attending the seminar. The results of thisexercise were then used to determine the disciplines to be represented, and theirrelative inputs, in a proposed preparation study for SCARP-1, embodying an EIAcomponent. The check-list approach proved, from the results returned, to be a usefultool for assessing expertise requirements for project preparation studies.

23. The 'scoping' session conducted in Lahore identified a number of major issues andconstraints influencing the effectiveness of the public sector organisations and projectsrepresented by the delegates. These were:

(i) Internal Bureaucracy(Ii) Inadequate trainingCiii) Technical constraints(vi) Poor (unfair) job incentives(v) Women's rights(Vi) Inter-sectoral weaknesses(vii) Political interferences(viii) Financial constraints(Lx) Inadequate environment law enforcement

24. The first seven items of the above list were debated by discrete teams of participantsand subsequently in a plenary session. Despite the diversity of topics therecommendations arrived at by the delegates were relatively polarised. In particularthe wide disaffection with organisational internal bureaucracy and with the lack of amerit orientated system in the government posts was notable. The specificrecommendations derived are listed in Table 2.

5

25. In the Karachi seminar the ICID check-list was applied by the delegates to theLarkana-Shikarpur Surface Drainage Project. The resulting score sheets indicated theproject to be generally favourable with few adverse impacts. The disposal of therelatively saline drainage flows was singled out as being potentially a significantadverse impact on downstream users.

26. The 'scoping' session conducted in Karachi identified five major issues andconstraints. These were:

(i) Lack of inter-agency coordination(ii) Poor Internal Management/Bureaucracy(iii) Public Awareness, Education and Training(iv) Need for protection of Natural Resources(v) Inadequate legislation and enforcement.

27. Six teams, of four to five participants per team, debated the first four items on theabove list. In a plenary session the recommendations listed in Table 3 were prepared.The aspect of poor internal management was again singled out as being a majorconstraint in the delegates organisations.

4. Participants Evaluation of Seminars

28. A seminar review questionnaire was issued to all participants to,complete at the endof the two day seminars. The questionnaire comprised a scoring system under variousheadings as well as requesting written commenms. The returns indicated that theseminars were generally very well received, with some notable exceptions.

29. The participants were required to indicate whether the seminar topics were relevantor not to their own jobs/careers. Interestingly those who considered the topicsrelevant to their job invariably returned high favourable scores. Conversely severalof those who considered the topics irrelevant to their jobs were more critical of theseminar. The participation of delegates for whom the topics had apparently norelevance aptly illustrates one of the principal recommendations of the seminarsregarding training; that often staff are inappropriately selected for training and thusthe training effort, whether good or bad, is largely wasted.

30. Some other points which emnerged from the questionnaire were:

i) Longer duration; several suggested that the seminar programme wastoo intensive and would have preferred a 4 or 5 day seminar.

ii) Several returns suggested that the use of a case study to illustrate EIAprocedures would have enhanced their understanding.

iii) Several requested that the seminar handouts should have been issuedseveral days in advance of the seminar in order to provideopportunity for pre-study.

vi) Several participants considered the workshop element to be irrelevantto the theme of EIA procedures.

6

31. Such review comments as noted above are of value in formulating further trainingcourses and programmes. These have been taken into account in relation torecommendations ansing out of this element of the study.

7

TABLE I

R.eoinomdatiau.IAetivities frm First Workshop on Eviroumetal lmpsct Assetsis the Draime Sector (Labors 8ad 9 April 1992)

Reeommendation/Actitity Impkmentg Other Schedule CommentIskitutions coerned for

I Institutio CmnpleCton

L Enfoie Pakan Pakitn - Top Priorif Te PEPC formed under this OrdinanceEnvironeta Environmental (1983) ha never mel tocamy out itsProtection Ordinance 37 Protection pime function; toensue enoreemen

Councl (PEPC) of the Ordinance. There e manybotteewbwhich only the PEPCcanremove in order to make the Ordinanceeffective.

2. Mae a legal obligation PEPA All developers After I above The objective is to inform the publitopublkie prwed of al propoed projects so that theyd Pmeheat projtIs can partipate support object etc.

I Ctegorie projects (i) Aid Agenries - (i) Already A screeningteategorisation procedurerequiring EIA automatic similar to World Bank Operatinal

(ii) PEPAs - (ii) aster 1 Directive 4.0 couldbe used.above

(iii) P&D Depts. - (iii) Afier See Comment 5-below.July92

4. Prepare bctter defimed PEPA Provincial After I above This should be an ongoing procesLervironmewal laNS EPA's

S. P&D should ren ElAs P andD Provincal AfterJuly92 This date refers to time bywhichEPA's and the Environmental Units within P and D'sDepts should be operational

6. Who should monitor EPA's Line Depts and Afier ! above EPAcould provide WAICHDOG role.polution? Developes

7. Strengben Environmental EPA/P&D WAPDA Private Sector - Unitscurrently under-staffed and ladUnits Consultants expertis coverage.

L Determine strict EPA PHEngDepm/ OngoingEnvironmental Q,uarity PMWAPDAstandard

9. Select aport staff AU approprite - Within months List of staffwill be published in thisfor training Institutions study if made amilabl.

10. Development of Consultants All appropriate Within months To appear in proj ectrcports.profesiora couex And Institutions

IL Development of, Consultants AU appropriate Within months (i) lnstitutions appear tohave noon-the-job training Institutions froral on-the-job training proceduresformats (ii) To appear in project rpor

12. EPAs should project EPA NGCsuMedia Ongoing EPA hzve some budgetary alloetion forpoativehmage an tbitrget schook and mediafor pubric mane.

8

TABLE2

Recommc,dations/Activities from Two-day Seminarin IAhore-30 September. I October 1992

RecommendationlActivity Implementing CommentsAgency

1. Institute proper procedures in WAPDA. PID. To introduce coherent and consistentorganisation to ensure fairness PAD. EPA. PHED. policies and procedures inand uniformity of standards, staff P&D. Other organisations would require theconditions. responibilities. preparation and enforcemnent of apromotions etc. 'buiness pla and the application of

an internal management and structurePreparae business plan and apply auditing procedure. mhe intenal auditinternal management and procedures document should be pubrished within theaudits. organisation and ils recommendations

enforced.

2. Training initiatives Although a widesprcad need for training(i) Select appropriate staff only All was recognised the selection offor training. not favoured staff. inappropriate staff M a reward or perkand rather than a need was criticised- Also -(ii) Ensure trained staff are the subsequent posting of trained stiffenabled to practice acquired to positions not requiring their(trained) sikils. specircally acquired skills was noted. .

3. Public Awarens and All - using he lack of information relating toparticipation: the publication in Press. Radio Governments plans to develop prqectsthe media of information relating and Television. was perceived as a major constraint into proposed projects and preventing the active participation Ofdevelopments. NGOOs the public. 'This particularly so in

projects with signifiant potentialenvironmental effects

4. Adverse Politica Influence in Media As with 3 above.a legal requirement toProject Formulation lo be reduced. NGO's publish proposed project details would

Donor Agencies allow public participation anddiscourage adverse politicalinfluences. External donor agenciescould also play a role by adhering totheir policy guidelines such asensuring public pai ik pation in EIA.etc.

5. Women's Rights through Education in schools to change current(i) Education perceptions is seen to be single mostim) Equa rights opportunities in important means of enhancing womens

Public Sector role in society.

9

N~~~~~~~~~Eo*111~~~I .in

A

1 *~~~ j.d dJ~~~j [:1 1i''1I~~A

$LJh'1 114 t

'8

j a ~I

L~ ~ ~ 1 idai

[liii 1~~41 .i