Published August 19, 2024
DAWN
AS the climate crisis continues to escalate, the pressure to implement sectoral policies will also increase. It is often said that climate change is multi-sectoral therefore making it difficult to implement policies after the 18th Amendment. However, beyond that no mention is made of how to bridge the gap between policy and implementation, affix responsibility, monitor progress and make systemic functions robust and accountable. It has become common practice to identify problems and attribute inaction to lack of finance, capacity and technology without examining the core issues responsible for slow progress or taking action to make policy implementable.
All the major sectors affected by climate change have a policy that serves as the guiding document for coping with emerging threats. The National Climate Change Policy 2021, National Water Policy 2018, National Food Security Policy and Disaster Risk Reduction Policy are comprehensive documents that outline the challenges and provide a roadmap for action. The implementation frameworks provide targets and timelines but fall short of sharing means of implementation or any mechanism for monitoring, reporting and verification.
The institutional arrangement in climate governance after the 18th Amendment raises many questions. The fundamental question of responsibility stands diluted. Every province has developed its own climate change policy with place-based and people-centred priorities. While ostensibly sub-national policies feed into the National Climate Change Policy, there is no mechanism under which the centre can demand timely implementation from the provinces.
The Pakistan Climate Act, 2017, was designed to strengthen the technical capacity of the Ministry of Climate Change and Environmental Coordination, build capacity of provincial stakeholders and provide a forum for discussion between the centre and the provinces for coordinated action. After a delay of seven years, the notification for operationalising the Climate Authority was done at the behest of the Supreme Court but questions about procedural due diligence still remain.
The country can no longer afford inaction on climate.
The lack of human capital and short-changing the system in procurement are two big hurdles. Recruitment routinely ignores merit. This has caused a steady decline in functions and now reached a point where we are confronted with a critical capacity crisis. In climate governance, the world has moved into a domain where technical qualification, subject specific knowledge and quality research is needed to address challenges. This was the fundamental objective of creating a provision for setting up a ‘Climate Authority’ under the Climate Act. However, if roles are not assigned on merit, it will become another white elephant providing people with high salaries for low performance.
In order to improve coordination, build consensus, and enhance transparency and accountability, developing a customised model of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change would be useful. An annual COP in the country will bring all stakeholders together to discuss country climate issues and how best to agree on an agenda of solutions. The Paris rule book can serve as the toolkit for steering the process.
The modalities and responsibilities of the parties can be developed once the concept is actualised and representative bodies identified. Hosting an annual COP in Pakistan will allow for a systemic review of policies and compliance with ‘Pro-vincially Determined Contributions’ that feeds into the Nationally Determined Contributions. The issues of mitigation, adaptation, finance and means of implementation can also be discussed at this annual convening, making the process both tra-nsparent and accountable with ‘Com-mon but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities’ for developing an equitable and inclusive roadmap that leaves no one behind.
In 2016, Pakistan had also signed the Open Government Partnership at the Paris Summit but that agreement, too, fell by the wayside. The OGP offered the perfect tool for strengthening good governance by co-creating policies with agreement on priority actions between civil society and sector-specific government agencies. This parti-
cipatory approach to development would have made it possible to create collective ownership and a transparent mechanism for monitoring progress.
However, with mounting threats, the cou-ntry can no longer afford inaction on climate.
The judiciary in Pakistan has always taken a proactive stance on climate justice, upholding human rights. The best way forward is to enhance parliamentary oversight and increase judicial vigilance to ensure that the system is not derailed by vested interest groups.
The writer is chief executive of the Civil Society Coalition for Climate Change.
aisha@csccc.org.pk
Published in Dawn, August 19th, 2024
AS the climate crisis continues to escalate, the pressure to implement sectoral policies will also increase. It is often said that climate change is multi-sectoral therefore making it difficult to implement policies after the 18th Amendment. However, beyond that no mention is made of how to bridge the gap between policy and implementation, affix responsibility, monitor progress and make systemic functions robust and accountable. It has become common practice to identify problems and attribute inaction to lack of finance, capacity and technology without examining the core issues responsible for slow progress or taking action to make policy implementable.
All the major sectors affected by climate change have a policy that serves as the guiding document for coping with emerging threats. The National Climate Change Policy 2021, National Water Policy 2018, National Food Security Policy and Disaster Risk Reduction Policy are comprehensive documents that outline the challenges and provide a roadmap for action. The implementation frameworks provide targets and timelines but fall short of sharing means of implementation or any mechanism for monitoring, reporting and verification.
The institutional arrangement in climate governance after the 18th Amendment raises many questions. The fundamental question of responsibility stands diluted. Every province has developed its own climate change policy with place-based and people-centred priorities. While ostensibly sub-national policies feed into the National Climate Change Policy, there is no mechanism under which the centre can demand timely implementation from the provinces.
The Pakistan Climate Act, 2017, was designed to strengthen the technical capacity of the Ministry of Climate Change and Environmental Coordination, build capacity of provincial stakeholders and provide a forum for discussion between the centre and the provinces for coordinated action. After a delay of seven years, the notification for operationalising the Climate Authority was done at the behest of the Supreme Court but questions about procedural due diligence still remain.
The country can no longer afford inaction on climate.
The lack of human capital and short-changing the system in procurement are two big hurdles. Recruitment routinely ignores merit. This has caused a steady decline in functions and now reached a point where we are confronted with a critical capacity crisis. In climate governance, the world has moved into a domain where technical qualification, subject specific knowledge and quality research is needed to address challenges. This was the fundamental objective of creating a provision for setting up a ‘Climate Authority’ under the Climate Act. However, if roles are not assigned on merit, it will become another white elephant providing people with high salaries for low performance.
In order to improve coordination, build consensus, and enhance transparency and accountability, developing a customised model of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change would be useful. An annual COP in the country will bring all stakeholders together to discuss country climate issues and how best to agree on an agenda of solutions. The Paris rule book can serve as the toolkit for steering the process.
The modalities and responsibilities of the parties can be developed once the concept is actualised and representative bodies identified. Hosting an annual COP in Pakistan will allow for a systemic review of policies and compliance with ‘Pro-vincially Determined Contributions’ that feeds into the Nationally Determined Contributions. The issues of mitigation, adaptation, finance and means of implementation can also be discussed at this annual convening, making the process both tra-nsparent and accountable with ‘Com-mon but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities’ for developing an equitable and inclusive roadmap that leaves no one behind.
In 2016, Pakistan had also signed the Open Government Partnership at the Paris Summit but that agreement, too, fell by the wayside. The OGP offered the perfect tool for strengthening good governance by co-creating policies with agreement on priority actions between civil society and sector-specific government agencies. This parti-
cipatory approach to development would have made it possible to create collective ownership and a transparent mechanism for monitoring progress.
However, with mounting threats, the cou-ntry can no longer afford inaction on climate.
The judiciary in Pakistan has always taken a proactive stance on climate justice, upholding human rights. The best way forward is to enhance parliamentary oversight and increase judicial vigilance to ensure that the system is not derailed by vested interest groups.
The writer is chief executive of the Civil Society Coalition for Climate Change.
aisha@csccc.org.pk
Published in Dawn, August 19th, 2024
No comments:
Post a Comment