ii - redd+ pakistan

iv

Table of Contents

S.No. Topic and Sub-topic Page No. Table of Contents iv List of Acronyms

Preface

vi vii

1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Forests and Ecosystem Services of Forests 1 1.1.1 Mangrove Forests Ecosystem Services 1 1.1.2 Temperate Forests Ecosystem Services 2 1.2 REDD+ and Forests 2 1.3 Payments for Environmental Services and Forests 11 1.4 Definition of Forests for REDD+ 17 1.5 Special Considerations for Designing PES Agreements 17 2. PES AND FOREST CARBON ACCOUNTING AND ACCOUNTING

GOOD PRACTICE 18

3. FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS FOR ESTABLISHING A REDD+ PES SCHEME

21

4. ESTABLISHING BENCHMARKS FOR PES SCHEMES AND GUIDANCE ON ESTABLISHING BENCHMARKS

23

4.1 Establishment of a Forest Carbon Scheme Benchmark/Forest Reference Emissions Level/Forest Reference Level

23

4.2 Establishment of Biodiversity Benchmark 24 4.3 Establishment of Benchmark for Watershed Services 25 4.4 Establishment of Benchmark for Coastal Protection and Shoreline

Protection 30

4.5 Establishment of Benchmark for Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs)

31

4.6 Establishment of Benchmark for Ecotourism 36 5. MONITORING AND METHODOLOGICAL GUIDANCE ON

MONITORING 40

5.1 Concepts for monitoring and assessing conditions and outcomes 40

5.2 Current Issues with PES Monitoring 40 5.3 Purposes/Rationales Monitoring 41 5.4 Types of Indicators to Use 41 5.5 Selection of Indicators for Monitoring 42 5.6 Monitoring of changes in biodiversity outcomes 42 5.6.1 Use of Species as Monitoring Indicators 42 5.6.2 Monitoring Changes in Biodiversity Outcomes 43 5.7 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN WATERSHED SERVICES 44 5.8 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN COASTAL PROTECTION AND

SHORELINE STABILIZATION SERVICES 45

5.9 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN NON-TIMBER FOREST PRODUCTS 46 5.10 MONITORING OF CHANGE IN ECOTOURISM 46 6. FIELD MEASUREMENTS 47 6.1 Pre-requisites for M&E system 47 6.2 Tools for participatory monitoring and evaluation 47

v

7. DATA REQUIRED, ANALYSIS AND SUMMARIZATION 50 8. DATA QUALITY ASSESSMENT/ASSURANCE (DQA) 53 9. DATA REPORTING 55 10. GLOSSARY OF TERMS

REFERENCES 56

60

vi

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AD Activity Data

EF Emission Factor

ES Ecosystem Services

FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

FREL Forest Reference Emissions Level

FRL Forest Reference Level

INDC Intended Nationally Determined Contributions

NTFPs Non-Timber Forest Products

PAM Policies and Measures

PES Payments for Environmental/Ecosystem Services

REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation of Forests, Conservation of

Forest Carbon Stocks, Sustainable Forest Management and Enhancement of Forest

Carbon Stocks

R-PP Readiness Preparation Proposal

UNCBD United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UN-REDD+ United Nations REDD+ Program

VCM Voluntary Carbon Market

VCS Voluntary Carbon Standard

WHTF Western Himalayan Temperate Forests

vii

PREFACE

After the adoption of Cancun Agreement in 2010, the Government of Pakistan took several

measures to implement this agreement at the national, provincial and district levels. Reducing

Emissions form Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) process was initiated by Ministry of

Climate Change, Government of Pakistan in 2010 with consultative workshops and awareness

raising.

In 2013, Pakistan was selected as a REDD+ Country Participant in the Forest Carbon Partnership

Facility (FCPF) of the World Bank. The participant Committee of the FCPF through its Resolution

PC/16/2013/8 decided to allocate grant funding to Pakistan to enable it to move ahead with

preparation for readiness. Pakistan received a grant of US $ 3.8 million during June 2015 under

REDD+ Readiness Preparation Proposal (RPP). Under R-PP Pakistan is working on four main

components i.e. (i) REDD+ Policy Analysis, (ii) REDD+ Technical Preparation, (iii) Readiness

Management Arrangements and (iv) Designing and Testing REDD+ Payments for Environmental

Services.

Pakistan Forest Institute, being the prime public sector organization in forestry research and

education, was awarded a study by the National REDD+ Office, Ministry of Climate Change for

“Designing REDD+ Payment for Environmental Services” in the two selected ecosystems of the

country in 2018. One of the main components of this consultancy assignment was to prepare

awareness raising material on the following topics in English & Urdu.

What is REDD+. A Guide for Local Communities

Risks and Benefits of REDD+

Climate Change and the Role of Forests – A Community Guide

A community guide for REDD+ PES monitoring

A Manual to measure forest carbon stock.

This Community Guide has been prepared by Pakistan Forest Institute under the study “Designing

REDD+ Payment for Environmental Services”. This document is designed to educate and build the

capacity of the community members, practitioners, resource managers, researchers, students and

other stakeholders to monitor interventions of the projects on “Payment for Environmental

Services”. The document has mainly relied on the available literature from different national and

international sources as well as the information collected during the study on “Designing REDD+

Payment for Environmental Services” in Mangroves Forests of Sindh and Balochistan and Moist

Temperate Forests of Kaghan.

Syed Mahmood Nasir National Project Director (REDD+) Ministry of Climate Change Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.

1

REDD+ PES MONITORING- A COMMUNITY GUIDE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Forests and Ecosystem Services of Forests

Forests are a significant portion of the Earth and climate system and are crucial for human survival

and prosperity. Although classified as a low forest cover and high deforestation rate country,

Pakistan due to its marked topographic and edaphic variability has a wide range of forest

ecosystems and biodiversity. It has one of the world's highest mountain forest ecosystems, a large

expanse of arid region mangrove forests, the so-called living fossils juniper forests, temperate

forests, sub-tropical forests and tropical thorn forests. This wide diversity of forest ecosystems is

characterized by equally varied ecosystem services that the forests of Pakistan provide. Broadly

speaking, services of forests can be categorized into provisioning services, regulating services,

supporting services and cultural services. The major ecosystem services provided by the mangrove

forests and temperate forests of Pakistan are elaborated in the following section.

1.1.1 Mangrove Ecosystem Services

Mangroves like other forest ecosystems provide a number of valuable ecosystem services that

contribute to human wellbeing. These ecosystem services fall into the above mentioned four broad

categories and are tabulated below:

Table 1.1: Mangrove Forests Ecosystem Services

Provisioning Services Regulating Services Informational and Cultural Services

Supporting Services

Timber/Wood Air Quality Aesthetic Values Primary Production Fuelwood Buffering against Extremes Effects on Social

Interactions Soil Formation

Fodder Noise Abatement Iconic Landscapes/Seascapes

Habitat –breeding, spawning and nursery habitat for numerous fish, shrimps and other species

Biochemical, Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Products

Carbon Sequestration and Climate Regulation

Inspiration Biodiversity conservation

Food Products like Honey Protection form floods and tsunami

Knowledge Systems Nutrient Cycling

Genetic Resources Storm and Erosion Control Recreational Opportunities Ornamental Resources Prevention of Salt Water

Intrusion Sense of Place

Transport Infrastructure Pollination Spiritual and Religious Values

Water Reducing Pests and Diseases

Therapeutic Services

Fishes, Shrimps and Other Marine Products Production

Water Purification Non-use and Existence Values

2

1.1.2 Temperate Forests Ecosystem Services

Temperate forests are the water towers of Pakistan because of their location in the catchment area

of river Indus and Jhelum which provide irrigation water as well as are a source of hydropower for

the country. In the following table we list the major categories and their component ecosystem

services which contribute to human well-being. These are listed below:

Table 1.2: Ecosystem Services of Temperate Forest Ecosystem

Provisioning Services Regulating Services Informational and Cultural Services

Supporting Services

Timber/Wood Air Quality Aesthetic Values Primary Production

Fuelwood Buffering against Extremes

Effects on Social Interactions

Soil Formation

Fodder Noise Abatement Iconic Landscapes/Seascapes

Habitat –breeding, feeding and protection for numerous terrestrial species

Biochemical, Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Products

Carbon Sequestration and Climate Regulation

Inspiration Biodiversity conservation

Food Products like Honey

Protection from floods and snow avalanches

Knowledge Systems Nutrient Cycling

Genetic Resources Storm and Erosion Control

Recreational Opportunities

Ornamental Resources Prevention of Land Slides Sense of Place Transport Infrastructure

Pollination Spiritual and Religious Values

Water Reducing Pests and Diseases

Therapeutic Services

Fishes and Other Forest Products Production

Water Purification Non-use and Existence Values

The forest ecosystem services mentioned in the above categories are neither exhaustive nor

discrete as the services provided by forests in Pakistan span a wide spectrum and cover ecological,

environmental, economic, social, cultural and political considerations and processes. Because of

this multiplicity and diversity in services provision, the management of forest ecosystems is not a

simple technical or mechanical process. Instead, it incorporates a variety of competing views,

interests and considerations. This also requires that multi-stakeholder participatory planning,

implementation, monitoring and evaluation approaches need to be employed for effective

management of forests.

1.2 REDD+ and Forests

Depending on how forests are managed, forests can act as vast carbon sinks as well as a source of

carbon emissions into the atmosphere. They can also provide adaptation benefits, through their

rich biodiversity, and social benefits to those whose livelihoods are dependent on the forests.

REDD+ stands for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, plus the role of

conservation, sustainable forest management, and enhancement of carbon stocks. REDD+ is an

3

incentive based mechanism that has been developed by the world community to reward those

developing countries which protect and conserve their existing forests as well as develop new

forests to mitigate climate change. Deforestation and forest degradation, counted together, is the

second leading cause of global warming, after energy generation. This sector is responsible for

about 17 percent of carbon emissions worldwide. GHG emission sources as per Pakistan Intended

Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) 2016 Report submitted to UNFCCC are listed in Table

1.3.

REDD+ is a financing model for incentivizing developing countries to reduce carbon emissions

resulting from deforestation and forest degradation. It is divided into three phases, which are

broadly associated with readiness, piloting, and large scale implementation for result-based

payments. The REDD+ program is thus implemented through a phased approach comprising of

three phases as depicted below:

Figure 1.1: Phases of REDD+ (Source: Henrik et al., 2011)

4

The four requirements that need to be met to pass through the Readiness Phase include:

Preparation of a REDD+ Strategy and Action Plan; Development of a National Forest Reference

Emission Level (FREL) and/or Forest Reference Level (FRL); Designing National Forest Monitoring

System and Monitoring, Reporting and Verification System; and Designing REDD+ Safeguards

Information System.

CoP 19 of UNFCCC, which took place in Warsaw, Poland from 11-22nd November 2013, adopted the

‘Warsaw Framework for REDD+’. The Warsaw REDD+ Framework makes REDD+ a reality and

enables countries to move forward with the implementation of REDD+ activities. It comprises of a

series of decisions. These decisions are referred to as the ‘REDD+ rulebook’ on how REDD+ must be

implemented. The decisions constitute the International Requirements for REDD+ implementation

and are meant to provide clarity regarding the ‘requirements’ developing country Parties must

fulfill when implementing REDD+. In addition, these also provide guidance, support, and/or

relevant institutional arrangements available to developing countries when implementing REDD+.

Following are the seven decision areas that comprise the ‘REDD+ Rulebook’ include:

1.2.1 Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Pakistan

According to a report prepared by WWF Pakistan (2007) quoted in the draft National REDD+

Strategy of Pakistan, following are the major drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in the

country and their degree of severity.

5

Figure 1.2: Drivers of Deforestation in Pakistan (Source: WWF-Pakistan, 2007)

The following direct and indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation have been

identified by the draft National REDD+ Strategy and its implementation Framework for Pakistan.

Direct Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation:

i. Demand and consumption of Products

a. Timber demand

b. Fuelwood demand due to local community dependence on forests

c. Fodder demand due to local community dependence on forests

d. Grazing pressure due to local community dependence on forests

e. Timber smuggling

f. Over-exploitation

ii. Land Use change

a. Mining

b. Infrastructure

c. Encroachment by locals

d. Agriculture expansion

6

iii. Natural or manmade hazards

a. Droughts

b. Floods

c. Landslides

d. Diseases

e. Forest Fire

Indirect Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation:

Heavy dependence of local communities on forest resources and lack of alternatives

Population growth

Poverty

Lack of Awareness and land use planning

Shortages of Energy Sources

Political interference in forest management

Lack of financial resources

Unemployment

Weak governance and policies

Revenue based forest management

Urbanization and unwise use of timber and fuelwood

1.2.2 Controlling Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation

To bring about a real impact, a thorough analysis of the agents, drivers, underlying causes of

deforestation and forest degradation in the selected ecosystems has been carried and based on this

analysis appropriate Policies and Measures (PAMs)have been proposed to tackle the drivers of

deforestation and degradation. Table 1.4 summarizes these drivers, underlying causes, driving

agents and proposed PAMs.

7

Table 1.4: Drivers of Deforestation and Degradation, Underlying Causes, Agents and PAMs Major Drivers of Deforestation and Degradation of Forests

Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Degradation of Forests

Category of Driver

Driving Agent Proposed Policies And Measures (PAMs)

Excessive cutting of Trees for Energy/Fuelwood Purposes.

Lack of Alternative Energy Sources in Rural and Forested Areas.

Direct driver of degradation

Local Community

Alternative Energy Sources and Energy Efficiency Measures

Lack of investments in forestry sector and use of forests as a source of revenue for the government.

Government Authorities and Policy Makers

Sensitize Government Authorities and Policy Makers for positive actions.

Lack of Awareness and Capacity about Environmental Services rendered by Forest Ecosystems.

Local Communities and Forestry Professionals

Develop and implement awareness creation and capacity building programs.

Excessive Population growth in Hilly Areas.

Local Community and Religious Leaders

Implement awareness creation programs.

Cumbersome Judicial Process.

Judiciary Take steps to simplify the adjudication process.

Excessive cutting of Trees for Constructional Timber and Other Domestic Use Purposes.

Lack of Wood Substitutes/Alternative Building Materials for Construction Purposes.

Direct driver of degradation

Local Community and Government Authorities.

Awareness Creation. Regulatory Changes. Provision of Alternatives.

Excessive and wasteful use of wood.

Local Community, Private Sector and Civil Society.

Awareness Creation. Regulatory Changes.

8

Excessive use of wood in different ceremonies such as marriages and funerals.

Local Community, Private Sector and Civil Society.

Awareness Creation. Regulatory Changes.

Natural Hazards like Earthquakes, and Climate Change Effects resulting in Floods, Droughts and Extreme Events causing damages to buildings.

Nature as well as Anthropogenic

Implement Disaster Risk Reduction Measures.

Illegal cutting of Trees by Timber Smugglers for Profit Making Purposes.

Greed Based Orientation of Timber Smugglers.

Direct driver of degradation.

Timber Smugglers and Conniving Forest Owners.

Incentives and PES Schemes for owners. Regulatory Measures for Smugglers.

Prolonged Ban on Commercial Harvesting of Timber.

Government Authorities.

Rationalize Forest Management.

Grazing of Livestock in Forest Areas and Using Forests as Grazing Areas.

Excessive number of Livestock which is beyond the Carrying Capacity of Grazing Lands and In-appropriate Grazing Management Practices.

Direct driver of degradation.

Livestock Owners.

Develop and introduce appropriate grazing systems.

Clearing of Forest Land for Agriculture Purposes.

Lack of Alternative Livelihood Sources in Hilly and Forested Areas.

Direct driver of deforestation

Local Community

Land Use Planning. Regulatory Measures.

Lack of Employment Opportunities in Mountainous Areas.

Indirect driver of deforestation and degradation.


Implement Area Development Projects in Mountainous Areas.

Land Tenure Problems. Indirect driver.


Tenure Improvement.

Political Influencing. Indirect driver.

Politicians. Awareness Creation.

9

Lack of Productive Agricultural Lands and low Agricultural Productivity.

Indirect driver.


Implement Agriculture Productivity Enhancement Measures.

Clearing of Forest Land for Road Construction and Other Infrastructure Purposes.

Excessive Demand for Road Construction by Local Communities and Elected Representatives.

Direct driver of deforestation.


Appropriate Land Use Planning.

Lack of Land Use Planning.




Lack of Awareness. Indirect driver.


Implement Awareness Creation Measures.

Excessive Population Growth.

Indirect driver.

Local Communities and Government Authorities.

Implement Awareness Creation Measures.

Clearing of Forest Land for Making of Settlements.

Non-availability of Other Land for making Settlements in Hilly Areas.


Local Community. Private Sector. Government Authorities.


Lack of Land Use Planning.



Land Tenure Problems. Government Authorities.

Streamline Tenure Issues.

Weak Law Enforcement.


Improve Law Enforcement.

Excessive Population Growth.

Local Community and Government Authority

Create Awareness.

10

Clearing of Forest Land for Mining Purposes.

Lack of Coordination between Mines and Minerals Department and Forest Department.


Government Authorities. Private Sector.

Improve coordination between Forest Department and Mining Department. Revise Laws.

Inappropriate Policies. Government Authorities.

Develop and implement better policies.

Lack of Proper Land Use Planning.


Introduce Land Use Planning.

Poor Forest Governance and Problems in Forest Laws Enforcement.

Lack of Human and Other Resources for Effective Implementation of Laws.

Indirect driver of deforestation and forest degradation.


Increase human and other resources for better forest protection.

Cumbersome Judicial Process.


Simplify forest offence cases adjudication.

Lack of investments in forestry sector and use of sector as a source of revenue for the government.


Increase forest sector allocations. Proper valuation of forest ecosystem services and educate policy makers about the values of standing trees and intact forests.

Lack of Awareness and Capacity about Environmental Services rendered by Forest Ecosystems.


Implement awareness creation and capacity building measures.

11

Forest Fires. Slash and burn type intentional fires by farmers to clear the forest area for agriculture purposes.

Direct driver. Local Communities.

Awareness creation. Regulatory measures.

Forest fires by grazing community to create openings for grass growth.

Livestock Owners.


Girdling of Trees Intentional girdling to kill a tree so that it can be cut.

Local Communities/ Forest Owners.


Diseases, insect pests and other epidemics

Climate change is exacerbating these epidemics related damages.

Nature and Anthropogenic Actors.

Awareness creation. Problem solving research measures.

Forest Degradation on account of Tourism Activities.

Lack of Coordination between Tourism Department and Forest Department.

Indirect driver.


Promote Nature based Tourism. Awareness Creation.

Inappropriate Policies. Government Authorities.

Promote Nature based Tourism. Rationalize Policies.

Lack of Proper Land Use Planning.


Promote Nature based Tourism. Rationalize Land Allocation Decisions.

General Law and Order Situation.

The insurgency wave in Pakistan created a general law and order situation in the country.

Indirect driver.

Civil Society. Government Authorities.

Awareness Creation. Improve Law Enforcement.

Source: KP Province REDD+ Strategy, 2018

Working with the key agents of deforestation and forest degradation and controlling the above

identified drivers of deforestation and forest degradation is a key element in REDD+. For this to

happen, the proposed PAMs will have to be made use.

12

In addition to controlling deforestation and forest degradation, attention has to be paid to

increasing forest sinks through natural forests rehabilitation and restoration as well as

implementing large-scale forest plantations program under a landscape approach. Budgetary

requirements for increasing forest cover from 6 percent to 10 percent are estimated to be in the

tune of US$ 3.74 billion.

1.3 Payments for Environmental Services and Forests

Having the characteristics of public goods (non-exclusion from use and non-rivalry in consumption),

most of the forest ecosystem services do not have functioning markets and suffer from “market

failure”. People, organizations and entities not paying for these ecosystem services cannot be

excluded from enjoying the service and hence there are “free rider problems”. Examples of non-

exclusion include climate change mitigation ecosystem services and habitat and watershed

protection services of forests. Similarly, the consumption of the good or service by someone does

not in any way affect the consumption of someone else such as the scenic beauty of a forest

landscape. Due to these two characteristics, it is difficult to charge price for these ecosystem

services. As a result, there is little incentive for private sector to provide these ecosystem services

and the services are under supplied by the market system. Not only that, forests are also generally

undervalued in both private and public decision because some of their key values (like watershed

protection, biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation, aesthetic values, etc.) are ignored

ad not considered in decision making because of this lack of information and understanding. Unless

there is full information on the total economic value of forest ecosystem services that can be easily

and directly compared with the economic value of alternative public investments, the values of

forests will tend to be underestimated and hence economic decision making based on partial and

asymmetric information (Gandapur, 2018)

To circumvent the above market-failure problems, Payments for Environmental Services (PES)

schemes have been devised, which seek to support positive environmental externalities through

innovative financing mechanisms. As part of the PES scheme the beneficiaries of environmental

services pay the providers of these services under certain terms and conditions. Like any other

scheme, PES schemes too have their strengths and limitations. There are certain conditions that

need to be met for PES schemes to be successful. It is therefore important to search for, identify,

highlight and publicize PES mechanisms and experiences that could emerge as best practices.

These best practices are meant to maximize the positive impacts of PES schemes both in terms of

environmental and socioeconomic outcomes.

PES schemes are premised on the principle that resource owners and communities who provide

ecosystem services should be compensated for provision of these services by those communities

and agencies who benefit from these services. Given the wide variety of PES schemes implemented

in the world, there is no commonly agreed definition of PES schemes. A series of classifications and

typologies are being used. These are based on the type of environmental services being traded, the

geographical scope of the PES scheme, the structure of the market, or the types of payments

involved.

13

1.3.1 International Experiences and Lessons Learnt from PES schemes

Internationally, PES schemes have been implemented in different countries involving different

services, geographical scales, structuring of contracts, and performance and payments mechanisms.

A number of empirical studies have analyzed these schemes and documented initial lessons,

emerging best practices and lessons learned about those PES schemes. Based on this international

research, it can be said that a number of PES models exist, each with their own strengths and

weaknesses. So far, no single one has emerged as a standard. Further, these PES schemes are

context specific and have been developed and function under very specific conditions and involve

different ecosystem services such as water regulation, watershed protection, biodiversity

conservation, carbon sequestration, land stabilization and ecotourism. The success of PES schemes

to a great extent depends on pre-existing institutional and property rights conditions. Generally,

PES schemes work best under the following conditions:

PES services are visible and are based on clear and robust evidence linking land uses and

land management activities to the provision of environmental services or for which market

mechanism can be created;

Both PES services buyers and providers have reasonable access to resources, are well

organized and structured;

The ecosystem services being provided are significant and have high value for the

beneficiaries but the cost of provision of these services is low;

Design program activities in such a way to ensure active involvement of local communities

and other stakeholders at a minimum cost while allowing for other productive activities to

occur alongside the PES scheme;

Property rights are clear and secure and explore options for resolving tenure issues and

barriers to participation;

Strong and enforceable legal frameworks exist;

The duration of PES contract is based on the mutual agreement between buyers and sellers

and the necessity for supply of the desired ecosystem services;

Payments should be made conditional and linked with delivery of ecosystem services;

PES contracts and payments are flexible, on-going, open-ended and allow adjustments to

adapt to changing conditions

The transaction costs do not exceed the potential benefits;

PES revenues come from multiple sources that are sufficient and sustainable in time;

Incorporate and implement robust and transparent guidelines for monitoring and

verification.

Provide clear, transparent and enforceable sanctions for non-compliance,;

Assess interactions and trade-offs with other developmental policies and programs;

Explicitly consider multiple or co-benefits in evaluating outcomes;

Incorporate credible monitoring of social outcomes and impacts alongside environmental

outcomes;

Adequate investments are made in human capital, institutional building and capacity

development at both “ends” of the payment;

14

PES schemes ensure diversification of sources of revenues for communities involved in

forest conservation such as enhancement of non-timber forest products, supply of organic

food and promotion of ecotourism;

Ensuring community participation and building their capacity are the major strategies to

successfully implement PES schemes and generate benefits for marginalized communities;

and

PES schemes differ tremendously in the above mentioned characteristics. PES schemes may also

face the following limitations:

PES schemes are usually based on general conclusions and not supported by empirical data;

Sometimes PES schemes are implemented in a manner which is not cost-effective approach

to attain the established goals;

There is not proper identification of the ecosystem services, or service providers and users;

Monitoring or control mechanism are either not appropriate or adequate;

The prices are set and agreed for environmental services in an arbitrary manner and do not

correspond to and reflect ground realities and economic valuation of the resource;

Their design is not context specific and is not based on proper feasibility studies or previous

socioeconomic or biophysical studies;

They may cause un-intended negative consequences and offer perverse incentives to land

users, or may lead to displacement of environmental problems or unsustainable land uses

to surrounding areas;

They may heavily depend on unsustainable or external financial resources;

Poor communities, which are most dependent on the land for their livelihoods, are

excluded from the system;

Needed awareness raising is not done and programs and activities are poorly disseminated

amongst the concerned stakeholders and the local population.

Efforts need to be made to integrate local populations and extend the benefits of PES schemes to

them. A number of strategies can be made use of to minimize the marginalization of poor

communities and maximizing benefits to them. These inter alia include the following:

Clarification and strengthening of their rights to PES schemes related resources;

Reduction of transactions costs for them through various mechanisms including creation or

strengthening of cooperative institutions;

Agreeing on and making use of cost-effective and flexible payments mechanisms;

Providing flexibility in eligible land uses and enhancing chances for their participation;

Facilitating their networking and access to start-up financing and other resources; and

Investing in and proper capacity-building and awareness creation amongst the

communities.

1.3.2 Monetary valuation of ecosystem services

The monetary value of various forest ecosystems have been estimated by a number of studies

employing various value estimation methods and techniques. Given the fact that they are all

15

context, therefore the values insights provided by them is only generic. The table given below

reproduces some estimates of forest ecosystem services values.

‘N.A.’ means Not Available.

‘NM’ means Non-Marketable.

‘M’ means Marketable.

‘M, NM” means both Marketable and Non-Marketable.

1.4 Special Considerations for Designing PES Agreements

There are a number of special considerations for PES contracting, which can pose potential

challenges as given in Table 1.6. These will have to be kept in mind while designing PES contracts.

Table 1.6: Special Considerations in PES Program and their Potential Challenges

Consideration Potential Challenges Multiple seller, community sellers Coordination, benefits distribution, project governance Monitoring Balancing cost vs. need for accurate measurements and

monitoring Verification Selecting the standard, body, time and cost Long-term Obligations Unforeseen ecosystem disruptions, sellers’ successors Consequences of default Small-scale seller inability to pay damages, buy replacement

credits, etc. Role of Intermediaries Both governments and communities are at time averse to the

16

role of intermediaries which may pose problems for PES schemes development

Disputes over Tenure Disputes over tenure may arise at later stages of the agreement

Long duration of PES Agreements PES agreements, particularly those for carbon credits tend to be of longer duration

Opportunity and Other Costs Opportunity, transactions, validation, verification and implementation costs be too high and thus affect the financial viability of PES scheme

Diverse Costs and Risks Allocation

There are diverse costs and risks associated with PES agreements which need to be allocated equitably

Lack of existing Policies, Legal and Institutional Framework

Existing policies, laws and institutional frameworks lack provisions with regard to PES and ecosystem services

Lack of Awareness There is an over-all lack of awareness about ecosystem services and PES

Lack of Capacity Capacity in all parties to the PES agreement tends to be low.

2. GODD PRACTICE FOR PAYMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (PES)

ACCOUNITNG

The following three types of forest carbon or PES accounting will be done: stock accounting, emissions accounting and project emission reductions accounting.

Stock accounting:

PES/Forest carbon stock accounting is meant to establish the stock or state of an ecosystem service of a particular territory or geographical areas at a given point in time. It is the starting point for

ecosystem service and/or project-level accounting. Stock accounting helps in prioritizing particular areas in the PES scheme.

Ecosystem Service Flow Provision or Carbon Emissions accounting:

Ecosystem Service Provision or Carbon Emissions accounting is done for assessing the level of provision of a particular ecosystem service or carbon emissions accounting from a particular forest

type. It also is necessary to assess the scale of ecosystem services from a particular forest ecosystem as well as carbon emissions from the forestry sector relative to other sectors. Besides, it

aids in realistic goal-setting for the provision of various ecosystem services including the setting of

GHG emissions targets.

PES Project Ecosystem Services Provision or Project Emission Reductions accounting:

PES Project Ecosystem Services Provision or Carbon accounting for forestry project emission

reductions is required for PES projects. In the case of REDD+ PES projects, it applies to projects undertaken under both the compliance market mechanism and the voluntary carbon markets. Both

types of carbon projects necessitate good carbon accounting to ensure that ecosystem services provision or carbon emissions reductions are real, permanent and verifiable. For projects to

generate tradable ecosystem services and carbon emission reductions, accounting methods have to follow standardized accounting approaches.

17

Accounting good practice: Accounting of ecosystem service provision or emission reductions

should be based on good practice promoted by the international community. There are several principles for carbon and non-carbon ecosystem services accounting that will have to be followed.

Adherence to good practice results in transparency, accuracy, legitimacy and trust in the PES accounting system, which are critical for both market and public acceptance of the accounting

results. These are:

Accurate and Precise: These are two statistical concepts. Ecosystem service estimates

need to be both accurate and precise. Accuracy implies how close the estimates are to the true value. Accurate estimates are free from bias and systematic error. Precise estimates on

the other hand show how the repeated measurements are close to each other. Precise estimates have lower random error. Both accuracy and precision are desirable in ecosystem

services accounting. Accuracy can be increased through removal of bias and precision through reduction in uncertainty.

Comparable: Comparable estimates implies that the data, methods and assumptions used ecosystem service accounting should be in line with those agreed internationally and which

also allow comparisons between different regions of the world.

Complete: Completeness of the estimate implies that accounting should cover all relevant categories of the ecosystem services in question. In case of carbon accounting, it must

include all sources and sinks and gases. If certain carbon pools or gases are excluded, then proper justification is needed.

Conservative: At times particular ecosystem service accounting relies on assumptions, values and procedures with high uncertainty. In such situations, the most conservative

option in the ecosystem service range should be chosen so as not to overestimate the provision of the ecosystem service. In the case of carbon accounting, conservative carbon

estimates can also be achieved through the omission of carbon pools.

Consistent: A consistent estimate means that accounting estimates for different years, different services, gases and categories reflect real differences in ecosystem service

provision rather than differences in methods. Relevance : The estimates need to be relevant for the intended use of the information.

Since, trade-offs have to be made in accounting as a result of time and resource constraints; therefore, the data, methods and assumptions used must be appropriate to the intended use

of the ecosystem service estimate. Transparent: Transparency of the ecosystem service estimate implies that the integrity of

the reported results can be easily confirmed by a third party or external actor. For this to

happen, there has to be sufficient and clear documentation of the accounting process to be available so that credibility and reliability of the ecosystem service estimates can be

assessed and reported.

Following are the International Requirements/Principles for Carbon Inventory as per Sourcebook of GOFC-GOLD Sourcebook (2010):

Relevance: The accounting system should produce estimates that are relevant for their intended use.

Comprehensiveness: The accounting system is comprehensive in that it meets international requirements and standards for the estimate in terms of inclusiveness and applicability at

various levels-national, sub-national and project level.

18

Consistency: The accounting methods are consistent with the internationally acceptable

standards like the IPCC methods and with current provisions on reporting under the UNFCCC, UNCBD or other convention relevant to the ecosystem service.

Efficiency: The accounting system allows cost-effective and timely implementation, and support early actions.

Robustness: The accounting system is robust in the sense that monitoring activities undertaken under the system provide appropriate results which are based on sound

scientific principles and international good practice. Transparency: The accounting system should be properly documented, open and readily

available for use by third party independent reviewers and the methodology should be

replicable.

3. FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS FOR ESTABLISHING A REDD+ PES SCHEME

3.1 Requirements for A REDD+ PES Project

To foster an environment in which REDD+ program can get institutionalized and REDD+

transactions can occur and to turn REDD+ into an incentive mechanism for driving investments into

forest protection, an understanding of strategic, policy, legal and institutional readiness options for

REDD+ is critical. Therefore, there is a need for developing an analytical framework for assessing

strategic, policy, legal and institutional readiness for REDD+ program implementation in the

province. In the following, we have adopted and made use of the Analytic Framework developed by

the Katoomba Group (Hawkins, 2011).

This analytical framework is divided into three levels, based on how critical the element is and the

timing and order of addressing the issues, keeping in view investors’ considerations for entering

into REDD+ agreements. These are classified into Level-1 or Threshold Conditions, Level-2 or

Essential Aspects to be developed in parallel with REDD+ , and Level-3 or Conditions for

Streamlining REDD+. These are given in table 3.1.

19

Table 3.1: Framework Conditions for PES Scheme

Given that these frame conditions for a PES project contribute to their successful implementation,

therefore a PES monitoring scheme will have to collect relevant data about these frame conditions

to ensure that a PES scheme has the necessary framework infrastructure put in place and working.

3.2 UNFCCC Cancun Safeguards and World Bank Environmental and Social

Safeguards Operational Policies

Parties to the UNFCCC agreed in Cancun, Mexico in 2010 on seven broad safeguard principles for

the implementation of REDD+ addressing transparency, participation of stakeholders, protection of

biodiversity and ecosystem services, and respect for rights of indigenous and local communities.

One year later, in Durban, the Parties to UNFCCC reached another agreement that parties

undertaking REDD+ activities should provide a summary of information on how the Cancun

safeguards are being addressed and respected.

The World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) has also adopted Operational Policies

towards Social and Environmental Safeguards.

The Cancun Safeguards and the relevant World Bank Operational Policies are given in the following

table 3.2:

20

Table 3.2: UNFCCC REDD+ Safeguards and the World Bank Safeguard Policies

21

The UNFCCC Cancun Safeguards and World Bank Policies are binding if Pakistan is to have access to

international funding. These will, therefore, have to be properly understood; addressed in relevant

policies and laws; respected on ground; and reported on to the relevant forums through an

appropriate safeguards information system.

The consortium of Climate, Law and Policy and Hagler Baily Pakistan have done an analysis of these

safeguards and made recommendations to the Government of Pakistan regarding these safeguards.

A web link to full report is as under:

https://www.redd-pakistan.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Interim-progress-report_CLP-and-

HBP.pdf

During any PES monitoring, monitoring with respect to the above safeguards will have to be done.

https://www.redd-pakistan.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Interim-progress-report_CLP-and-HBP.pdf

https://www.redd-pakistan.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Interim-progress-report_CLP-and-HBP.pdf

22

4. ESTABLISHING BENCHMARKS FOR PES SCHEMES AND GUIDANCE ON

ESTABLISHING BENCHMARKS

Benchmark or baseline is a stock-take of what is present at a point in time. Monitoring, which is

discussed in the next chapter establishes how the inventory changes with time and follows the

processes that produce that change. To be able to do both establish the benchmark and to do

continuous monitoring, an understanding of certain concepts, tools, methods, approaches,

institutional arrangements and capacities are needed. These are discussed in the following

paragraphs.

4.1 Establishment of a Forest Carbon Scheme Benchmark/Forest Reference

Emissions Level/Forest Reference Level:

4.1.1 Definition of Forests for REDD+

Government of Pakistan (2017) has adopted the following definition of forest under the REDD+

program at the national level: “A minimum area of land of 0.5 ha with tree crown cover of more

than 10% comprising trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2 meters.”

As per Pakistan R-PP submitted to World Bank FCPF, different provinces in the country can have

their own forest definition. Provinces are therefore considering developing their own forest

definition which suits their prevailing conditions. The province of Sindh, for example, is

considering the adoption of a separate definition for its mangrove areas along the following lines:

Given the above forest definition (Minimum Area of 0.5 hectares (ha), Minimum Crown Cover of 10

%, and Minimum Tree Height at Maturity of 2 meters.), the country will have to establish a Forest

Carbon Scheme benchmark/FREL/FRL using Activity Data and Emission Factors Data using the

above parameters of forest definition. Activity includes any operation, development, works or

conduct and in the context of carbon accounting activity. Activity data in the context of carbon

accounting means data on the magnitude of human activity (i.e., land use and land use changes

related to forests) resulting in emissions or removals of carbon during a given period of time.

Emission Factor means the amount of carbon emissions or removals associated with a landuse

activity such as deforestation or afforestation. Emission factors are derived from inventory data

23

quantifying biomass or carbon stock for a particular landuse and the change in biomass or carbon

stock resulting from a particular activity.

Using the five components of REDD+, the national FREL/FRL is to be based be on Activity Data

which includes emissions from deforestation, emissions from forest degradation, conservation and

enhancement of forest carbon stocks through sustainable forest management (i.e., growth of

existing forests) and afforestation/reforestation. The Activity Data can be collected from a variety

of sources including Remote Sensing Data as well as based on data collected from field

measurements. The best approach is to use a combination of remote sensing and field data.

4.2 Establishment of Biodiversity Benchmark

Biodiversity benchmark or baseline provides quantitative information about the state and trends of

the biodiversity indicators and different ecosystem components. Any PES monitoring scheme at the

community level will need to involve local communities, multiple government agencies (Forests,

Wildlife, Fisheries, Agriculture and Livestock) and central coordination by Forest Department.

Provincial Forest and Wildlife Departments being custodian of the forests in Pakistan have a key

role in PES monitoring and, and any biodiversity assessment framework developed is to involve

and consider agencies, communities and actors with different types of conservation roles and

responsibilities.

The primary goal of biodiversity conservation and management is to maintain ecological integrity

of the area. The ecosystem assessment should include all biotic and abiotic factors, natural

processes and a mix of long-term indigenous dominance; potential occupation by different flora and

fauna; and full environmental representation of ecosystems, which can be measured at different

scales ranging from species to populations and ecosystems.

Biodiversity monitoring frameworks should include the following nine community level

biodiversity conservation objectives. The progress towards sustainable biodiversity conservation

and management outcomes can be judged through measurement of these objectives (Gandapur,

2018).

According to Schneider (1997), biodiversity inventory and monitoring systems should be able to

meet the following rationale:

24

To provide data and information about biodiversity management and formulation of an

effective policy for biodiversity conservation;

To assess outcomes of the biodiversity conservation interventions;

To meet national and international reporting obligations; and

To obtain product compliance guarantees, such as forest certification, that confirms that

biodiversity values have not been affected.

For establishment of biodiversity benchmarks at the three levels of biodiversity (ecosystem, species and genetic) we proposed to use the following indicators: Ecosystem level diversity

Historical trends in landuse and cover Area of forest land by forest type Extent of forest land by forest type and age class or successional stage Extent of areas by forest type in protected area categories as defined by IUCN Fragmentation of forest types

Species diversity

Number of forest-dependent species Status of threatened and endangered species

Genetic diversity

Number of forest-dependent species that occupy a small portion of their former range Population trends in wildlife species.

4.3 Establishment of Benchmark for Watershed Services

4.3.1 Awareness raising about and use of Version 2 of Revised Universal Soil

Loss Equation (RUSLE-2)

Soil erosion, landslides and land degradation are extremely important issues in Pakistan and

therefore need to be factored into watershed related PES schemes and awareness created about

through various models such as the RULE-2. Version 2 of Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation

(RUSLE-2), an empirically based model, is widely used globally for erosion and landslides

prediction and control. The general Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation is as follows:

A = R x K x LS x C x P

Where:

A is average annual soil loss (tons per hectare per year;

R is the Rainfall and Runoff erosivity index (in MJ mm/ha/ hr/yr);

K is the soil Erodibility factor (in tons/MJ/mm);

25

LS is the Slope and Length of Slope Factor;

C is the Cropping Management Factor;

P is the supporting conservation practice factor.

From the above equation, it is clear that climate, soil, topography, and land use are the four major

factors which determine rates of soil erosion and landslides. In the RUSLE-2 equation, erosion and

landslides are directly related to the forces applied to the soil by erosive agents in relation to the

soil's resisting forces regardless of the land use.

RUSLE-2 model can be applied to any type of land where soil erosion is occurring and land

stabilization is important for ecosystem conservation. It can be used in the case of deforested or

degraded forest lands, range lands, croplands, wetlands, abandoned mining sites, construction sites,

reclaimed land, landfills, and any land where mineral soil is exposed to the direct forces of water

erosion and surface runoff generated by heavy intensity rainfall events.

4.3.2 Overview of Major Factors of RUSLE-2

Climate: Amongst the climate variables, rainfall erosivity is the most important variable used by

RUSLE-2. It is related to the amount of rainfall amount (how much it rains) and the intensity of

rainfall (how hard it rains). Temperature is the next important climatic variable after precipitation

as it determines the productivity and longevity of biological materials like crop residue and mulch

which are used to control erosion. Since climate varies by location; therefore choosing a location in

RUSLE-2 chooses the erosivity, precipitation, and temperature values needed to apply RUSLE-2 at a

particular site.

Soils: Different types of soil have different potentials for erodibility which can be measured

through a standard test involving a "unit plot." A unit plot is 72.6 feet (22.1 meters) long on a 9%

slope and is maintained in continuous tilled fallow (no vegetation) using periodic tillage up and

down slope to leave a "seedbed-like" soil condition. There are different soil erodibility values for

different landuses such as cropland, rangeland, forestland, etc. which are applied to RUSLE-2 model.

Topography: Slope length, steepness, and shape are the topographic characteristics that affect soil

erosion and landslides. Site-specific values are entered for these variables also in RUSLE-2 model.

Land Use: Land use is the most important factor which affects runoff and soil erosion because land

use and land cover type can be easily changed to reduce excessive erosion. RUSLE2 uses the

combination of cover-management (cultural) practices and support practices to describe land use.

Cover-management: The cover-management factor in the RUSLE2 model represents the effect of

vegetation cover on soil erosion. Soil erosion is basically a function of erosivity of the erosion

causing agents relative to the erodibility of the soil. Both of these factors are affected by the

management of soil cover. Improvement in soil cover reduces the erosivity of raindrops and

decrease surface run off.

26

Support practices: Support practices include cultural practices which affect soil erosion such as

terracing, contouring, vegetative strips and barriers, diversion channels. These practices

significantly reduce soil erosion and landsliding.

4.3.3 Data Collection and Consultations

Capacities will be built in the characterization of watershed. For this purpose questionnaires will

be developed for data collection in the field with respect to various aspects that are important from

the perspective of erosion, landslides, climatic variable, socio-economic variables, land cover and

land use variables, and those that are important form the perspective of RUSLE-2 and the

establishment of the watershed benchmark. For example, there will be field data collection on,

consultations and research for why landslides are a growing hazard, identification of hotspots of

landslides, prioritization of areas requiring land stabilization, and types of land stabilization

measures and such like topics:

Why soil erosion and landslides are a growing hazard?

Identification of hotspots of soil erosion and landslides.

Prioritization of areas requiring soil erosion control and land stabilization works.

Types of soil erosion control and landslide stabilization measures needed.

Institutional and governance arrangements for implementation arrangements of various

soil erosion control and landslide stabilization measures.

Awareness creation needs and communication strategy.

Training and capacity development needs and training and capacity development plan.

Financing arrangements.

Monitoring and Evaluation arrangements.

4.3.4 Technical Intervention Areas

Soil erosion and landslides occur on all types of lands (forest lands, range lands, crop lands, mined lands, road construction sites, etc. Different land stabilization measures are needed in these land types. Table 4.1 gives a description of the various potential soil erosion control and landslide stabilization interventions on these lands.

27

Table 4.1: Technical Intervention Areas Activity Forestry

and Range Lands

Crop Lands

Mined Lands

Road Construction Sites

Miscellaneous Measures

Preparation of Detailed Sub-watershed Level Plans and Selection of Sites for various Land Stabilization Measures

X X X X

Structural Measures Gully plugs, gabions and check dams

X

Cur-off drains and diversion channels

X

Retention ditches X Infiltration ditches X Water retaining trenches and pits

X

Check dams/Stone Check Dams X Contour Terraces X Waterways and Grassed Waterways

X

Conservation Ponds X Small dry and subsurface dams X Storage of water harvested (tanks)

X

Small rock stacked structures, waterbars, armored ditch, lead out ditches at dip key points, etc.

X

Retention Walls X Water distribution systems X X X Bio-engineering Measures Bamboo/Vegetation Fencing X Brush Layering X Brush Mattress X Fiberschine X Jute Netting X Live Crib Walls X Live Fascines X Palisades X Wattle Fence X Live Brush Sills X Bush Trenches X Brush Spurs X Land Stabilization on Agricultural or Cultivated Lands

28

Establishment of Fruit Orchards

X

Distribution of Fruit Plants for planting on agricultural lands

X

Agroforestry and Alley Cropping

X X

Bench Terraces X Broad bed and Furrow X Conservation Tillage X Hedgerows X Graded Soil Bunds X Level Soil Bunds X Grass Strips X Mulching X Trash Line X Vetiver Plantings X Farmers Training in Conservation Agriculture and Land Stabilization on Agricultural Lands

X

Land Stabilization Measures on Rangelands/Grasslands

Livestock and range management

X X

Controlled Grazing X X Area Closures X X Livestock Farmers Trainings on Land Stabilization Measures

X

Land Stabilization on Forest Lands

Controlled Grazing in Forests X Hillside Terraces X Micro-basin X Trees, Shrubs and Bushes Planting

X

Area Closures X Trenches X Water Harvesting X Live spurs X Land Stabilization on Minded Lands

Land Stabilization Works on Mined Lands

X

Land Stabilization along Road Construction Sites

Land Stabilization along Road Construction Sites

X

Transportation

29

Gravel Access Trails X X X Improved Access Trails X X X X Training and Capacity Building

Training of various stakeholders in Land Stabilization Measures on various types of lands

X X X X

Communication and Awareness Creation

Use of Radio Programs X X X X X Use of Mobile Phones and Messages

X X X X X

Use of Printed Material and Print Media

X X X X X

Use of Electronic Media X X X X X Source: Gandapur, 2017

4.4 Establishment of Benchmark for Coastal Protection and Shoreline Protection

Coastal protection and hazards management in the coastal areas of Pakistan is a serious issue of

national importance due to the high cost of developmental activities in the coastal areas and

location of high value assets in these areas. The coastal protection is also becoming a significant

issue due to increasing trend for people to live at the coast, particularly fishermen folks, tourist

infrastructure, and people working in coastal areas. Coastal areas are already facing high risks due

to increase in the frequency of sea storms and other extreme events. Sea level rise and increase in

the frequency and intensity of sea storms as a result of climate change are now adding to the

existing risks.

The main objective of coastal and shoreline protection is to decrease the physical risk from coastal

hazards. Establishment of the baseline will help identify Areas Sensitive to Coastal Hazards. For

this purpose, based on international research and experience, a set of indicators is proposed for use

that on coastal erosion risk. Three categories of indicators are proposed for establishment of

baselines of coastal protection which are described below (Dougall, 2005):

Foundation indicators

F1 – identification of coastal hazard zones on the planning maps

F2 – presence of rules to support the hazard zones and decrease physical risk of coastal hazards

F3 - policies to ensure that any building or community within the coastal hazard zones is subject to

controls to mitigate risk such as relocation and relocation plans

Baseline Indicators

B1 - Average building setback for residential dwellings in the “primary” hazard zone.

30

B2 - Number of residential dwellings in the “primary” or “secondary” hazard zones.

B3 - Number of residential lots in the “primary” or “secondary” hazard zones at a date close to the

most recent survey of coastal areas.

Trend Indicators

The third level of coastal hazard indicators focus on measuring changes in the total physical risk

based on consent approvals. These are:

T1 - Number of residential communities and populations living in the coastal hazard zones.

T2 - Number and area of residential building in coastal hazard zones

T3 - Number and area other buildings in the coastal hazard zones.

T4 - Number of population working in coastal hazard zones.

T5 - Number of existing coastal protection facilities in coastal hazard zones.

T6 –Number of new coastal protection facilities getting developed in the coastal hazard zones.

T7 – Number of existing coastal erosion monitoring facilities.

T8–Number of new coastal erosion monitoring facilities.

T-9 Number of awareness raising and capacity building sessions already held for people living in

coastal hazard zones along with the number of participants in those awareness raising and training

sessions.

T – 10- Number of new awareness raising and capacity building sessions proposed for people living

in coastal hazard zones along with the number of participants in those awareness raising and

training sessions.

4.5 Establishment of Benchmark for Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs)

Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) constitute an important resource source of raw material for

different pharmaceutical, herbal and culinary industries and as a source of livelihood for the local

communities. These include medicinal and aromatic plants, mushrooms, honey, wild fruits, nuts,

etc. Many rural people earn their livelihood or add to their income by collection and sale of these

NTFPs.

The diversity, quality, and availability of many species of NTFPs in Pakistan are decreasing. This

situation has serious consequences for the industries using these products, people dependent on

these for their livelihoods or livelihoods supplementation and for the biodiversity of the forest and

grassland ecosystems in the valley.

The PES project therefore proposes to take various measures so as to reverse this negative trend by

working and interacting with the collectors, producers, traders, processors, manufacturers as well

31

as with policy makers, implementers, promoters and researchers of NTFPs in the valley so as to

ensure their protection and sustainable management.

4.5.1 Indicators for NTFPs

Based on Kathryn et al. (2004), Table 4.2 gives monitoring measures (condition indicators,

pressure indicators, and human response indicators) for establishing NTFPs benchmarks.

Table 4.2: Conditions Indicators used for measurement of NTFPs

Condition Indicator Verifiers Unit of Measurement Methods Diversity of plants species

No. of young/mature plants

No. of species Field surveys, sample plots, transect walks

Density by species No. of young/mature plants

Number per ha Resource inventory

Size-class structure by species

No. of young/mature plants

Number per ha Resource inventory

Biomass of herbs by species

Utilizable biomass Kg per ha Monitoring of Sample plots

Growth and yield of selected NTFP species

Tree diameter growth

mm per year Monitoring of Sample plots

Shrub height growth

cm per year Monitoring of Sample plots

Utilizable biomass growth

Kg/ha/year Monitoring of Sample plots

Product yield Kg/ha/year Monitoring of Sample plots

NTFP Regeneration by species

Young growth 4 point ordinal scale Resource inventory

Seed production by species

Occurrence of seed

Qualitative

Focus group discussions, transect walk

Quantitative Experimental plot (mean kg/ha; % germination)

Table 4.3: Pressure Indicators Relevant for NTFPs Measurement

32

Pressure Indicator Verifiers Unit of Measurement Methods Biomass Removal Timber Volume/ha/year Continuous

Monitoring and Records

Fuelwood Volume/ha/year Continuous Monitoring and Records

Poles and Posts Volume/ha/year Continuous Monitoring and Records

NTFP Species Weight/ha/yea NTFP harvester & buyer records

Grazing Area Ha. Records Livestock Units No./ha/year Records, Transect

walks Period Months per year Focus Group

Discussions Land Conversion Forest to Crop Land Ha./year Continuous

Monitoring and Records

Forest to Settlement Ha./year Continuous Monitoring and Records

Forest to Roads Ha./year Continuous Monitoring and Records

Forest to Other Non-forest land use

Ha./year Continuous Monitoring and Records

NTFP Harvesting Practices

Season Degree of Appropriateness

Focus Group Discussions

Tools Used Degree of Appropriateness


Methods/Techniques Degree of Appropriateness


Fire Area M2/ha/year Records, Transect Walks

Frequency No./year Records, Transect Walks

Type Crown, ground, surface

Records, Transect Walks

Cause Natural, Prescribed, Incidental


Socio-economic Pressures

Price Rs./unit Records, Producers Surveys, Market Surveys, Focus Group Discussions

33

Unemployment Rate Economic Surveys

Out-migration No. young people continuing extractive activities

Interviews, Focus Group Discussions

Table 4.4: Human Response Indicators Relevant for NTFPs Measurement

Human Response Indicator

Verifiers Unit of Measurement Methods

Promotion of Natural Regeneration

Timber Ha/year reseeded, planted or managed for natural regeneration

Records

NTFP species Describe various techniques

Interviews, Focus groups

Conflict Stakeholders List each group Interviews Focus groups Ethnographic fieldwork

Frequency No. per year Issue Describe conflict Resolution Facilitation,

negotiation, mediation, arbitration, litigation, coercion

Perceptions Of nature Describe, categorize Ethnographic fieldwork Participant observation Interviews Focus groups

Of value of NTFPs to livelihood, quality of life Of land management Of conservation Of I & M efforts Of regulations

Resource Management Regulations

Forest Department NTFP related regulations

Describe, categorize Records Interviews or focus groups with managers and policymakers

Law Enforcement Frequency No. of Incidences/year Law enforcement records.

Types Describe Incidences Law enforcement records Interviews

4.5.2 Sampling Designs, Plot Configurations and Enumeration Methods for NTFPS

34

Beside the selection of indicators for inventory and monitoring, decisions are also needed for using

the most appropriate sampling design, frequency of inventory and plot configuration for the given

objectives and indicators. Such decisions are made based on the life-form of the NTFPs, the type of

information needed, time and financial constraints, and overall project goals and objectives. Wong

et al. (2001) provide a valuable overview of inventory approaches relevant for NTFPs. Wong (2000)

has described enumeration methods of 126 NTFPs studies. The following three tables are based on

a slightly modified form of Wong (2000). These tables illustrate the range of possibilities for NTFPs

inventory and monitoring possibilities.

Table 4.5: Sampling Designs for Monitoring of NTFPs

Sampling Design Description Examples of Previous Applications

Census 100% enumeration of small area All useful plants Simple random sampling

Selection of plots using random number tables (probability of sampling any plot equal)

Useful plants, plants in general

Systematic sampling

Location of plots on a fixed grid, normally with randomly selected origin for grid.

Trees, mushrooms

Line-plot sampling- plots located at fixed distances along a transect line

Perennial herb, saplings

Stratified sampling Area divided into strata and sampling undertaken independently in each strata

Bamboo

Multi-stage sampling Hierarchy of nested sample plots: sample of largest plots selected with further selection of smaller plots within chosen plots.

Shrubs, rattan

(Adapted from Wong, 2000)

Table 4.6: Possible Plot Configuration Methods

Plot Configuration Description Examples of Previous Applications

Measured plots with fixed dimensions

Square Insects larvae Rectangular Herbs Circular Perennial herbs 2-D plane at fixed height from ground or oriented vertically

Liana

Fixed volume Liana Plotless sampling Point-centered quarter method

Trees, palms Trees, palms

Sample fixed number of individuals Shrubs

35

closest to sample point or within sample area Individuals sampled within timed walk from house

Palms

Cluster sampling Systematic group of sub-plots in fixed pattern used at each plot location

Mangroves

Point and line transects (variable width transects)

Observations are made while standing on the point or walking along the line. Perpendicular distance from point or line to observed individuals measured.

Mammals

Line-intercept transects

Observations made of intercepts (plant clumps) with a line or plan projected above line.

Large mammal (single species)

Distance sampling Record distance from observation point to target and use of Fourier analysis to estimate target population.

Birds

Strip transects Narrow, very long transects treated as a fixed sample area.

Mammals, game animals

Torus Strip arranged around geometric shape (e.g. square) -space inside not enumerated).

Tree (single species)

(Adapted from Wong, 2000)

Table 4.7: Example Product Enumeration Methods

Method Description Examples of Previous Applications Presence/absence Record occurrence in plot (Y/N). Useful plants Tally Counts of individuals in plot. Useful plants Size measurement Measure size of all individuals in

plot (height, diameter). Herb (single species)

Cover Record percentage of plot covered by species of interest.

Herb (single species)

Subjective scores Score features of species into subjective classes

Tree bark (single species)

Weight Measure weight of all individuals in plot or harvested

Mushrooms

Volume Measure volume produced Tree syrups, Resin (Adapted from Wong, 2000)

36

4.6 Establishment of Benchmark for Ecotourism

Tourism is an untapped resource in Pakistan. Given the wide variety of touristic spots available in

the country, the potential to develop this as a source of livelihood for the local communities and

earning of foreign exchange for the country are vast. The key point, however, is to promote pro-

poor and pro-environment tourism that does not cause any cultural, social, economic or

environmental problems. Tourism Concern (1991) has listed the following principles for

responsible ecotourism:

Reducing over-consumption and waste: Tourists often over-utilize material and generate a lot of

waste from their activities which put huge pressure on the ecosystem. Decrease in the

consumption and waste will reduce the cost of environmental restoration and will enhance the

quality of tourism.

Using resources sustainably: Natural, social and cultural resources of any ecosystem are scarce

and should be used with care and caution so that the future generations are also able to benefit

from these resources.

Maintaining biodiversity: A sustainable and responsible tourism should maintain and promote

natural, social and cultural diversity of an area. This will create a resilient base for the tourism

industry.

Integrating tourism into planning: The long term sustainability of tourism could be improved

through integration of tourism development into national and local strategic planning framework

and which should also include environmental impact assessment.

Supporting local economies: Tourism that supports a wide range of local economic activities and

which has low environmental cost not only results in the socio-economic improvement of the area

but also takes care of conservation of the natural resources.

Involving local communities: The full participation of local communities in the tourism industry

will not only benefit these communities and the environment but will also improve the quality of

the ecotourism.

Consulting stakeholders and the public: Close coordination and consultation between the

tourism industry and local communities, governmental and non-organizations and institutions

working in the tourism sector is essential for ecotourism and resolution of conflicts.

Training staff: There is a need to build the capacity of people working in the tourism industry

regarding environmental issues and sustainability. They should be aware of the reduce, recycle and

reuse principles to reduce the ecological foot-print of the tourism industry.

Marketing tourism responsibly: Marketing is an important component of tourism industry.

Responsible marketing provides tourists with full and reliable information about the natural, social

and cultural environments of different destination areas and the facilities available for tourists. This

enhances customer satisfaction and results in the improvement of tourism industry.

37

Undertaking research: Modern ecotourism should be backed up by meaningful research. This

involves monitoring by the industry using effective data collection and analysis to help solve

problems and to bring benefits to destinations, the industry and consumers.

4.6.1 Proposed Ecotourist Activities and Indicators for Ecotourism in two pilot areas

Proposed eco-tourist activities in the mangrove forest areas

Campsite in the Mangroves and Creeks sites. Season: September through April

Mangroves Watch. Season: August through May

Coastal Wildlife Sighting. Season: Throughout the year

Discover Marine Life. Season: Throughout the year

Recreational Marine Fishing. Season: September through April

Sailing/Boating Trips. Season: September through April

Cultural Gatherings and Festivals. Season: Throughout the year

Proposed Ecotourism Activities in Kaghan Valley

Campsites in the valley. Season: May through October

Forests and Alpine Areas Watch. Season: May through October

Mountain Wildlife Sighting. Season: Throughout the year

Discover Naran and Mountain Life. Season: Throughout the year

Recreational Coldwater Fishing. Season: May through September

Lake Saiful Maluk Trips. Season: Throughout the year

Cultural Gatherings and Festivals. Season: Throughout the year

Proposed ecotourism related indicators for setting baseline and monitoring progress over time fall

in the following categories:

Table 4.8: Indicators for Monitoring of Ecotourism

Category of Indicator Indicator Socio-Cultural Scope Indicators Land Property No. of tourism facilities of which property is owned by and title

held by local people Access Roads No. of kilometers of paved roads Trainings No. of trainings conducted

Types of trainings conducted No. of people trained

Loss of local identity and values No. of local festivals held No. of complaints by local people about loss of local identity

and values Adhesion of the community to the tourism

No. of community people who adhere to tourism as an economic activity

Economic Scope Indicators Economic activities No. of persons or families that carry out tourism Visitation No. of visitors monthly/annually Travel agencies No. of tour operators working in the industry

38

No. of trips sold Types of activities offered

Accommodation No. and square feet of properties currently existing No. and square feet of properties being developed annually

Gastronomy No. of restaurants and kiosks opened No. of dishes including tradition food Sale levels measured in Pakistani Rupees

Household income Increased household income measured in Pakistani Rupees Percentage of household income from tourism

Basic resources No. of basic resources and facilities that are available Quality of available resources and facilities

Transportation No. of modes of transport available Quality of transport facilities Environmental Scope Indicators Solid waste generation Kilograms of garbage generated per month in peak season Energy used Megawatts of energy used in high season Water supply Liters of water used per month in high season

No. of water bodies getting contaminated Biodiversity Impacts No. of plant species getting affected

No. of animal species getting affected Sighting species with conservation problems

Landscape/Seascape Impacts No. of landscape/seascape impacts Type of landscape/seascape impacts

5 MONITORING AND METHODOLOGICAL GUIDANCE ON MONITORING

39

5.1 Current Issues with PES Monitoring

Following are some of the current issues with PES monitoring:

Inadequate or improper use of the log-frame

Inadequate, poor or missing linkages

Inadequate or non-integration of reporting system with the monitoring systems

Use of inappropriate methodologies

Insufficient or irrelevant information collection

Poor targeting of the information collected in the monitoring program

Neglect of certain key elements of monitoring such as species or ecosystems in a biodiversity monitoring program

Inadequate and only minimal quality control

Data handling and storage is inadequate and compromised

Insufficient attention paid to human and institutional development aspects of the M&E

system. 5.2 Purposes/Rationales of Monitoring

Monitoring is an important function to judge the performance of an actor, the output of an input

and to identify what action might yield the best results, and how successful past actions have been.

To develop and implement sound environmental policies, data are needed that measure the

performance of environmental systems and changes in their functioning (US National Academy of

Sciences, 2000).

Ecosystem monitoring have usually three separate monitoring purposes:

Monitoring for changes in ecological status and integrity: This type of monitoring is generally aimed

at seeking answer to the question: Are things changing and to what extent? It provides the requisite

data for reporting on the state of environment, policy development and organizational audit. The

main risks are spending too much effort in collecting data that have little intrinsic value, are not

used for policy, but look credible in reports.

Monitoring for management action. This type of monitoring provides answers to the questions such

as: When should we intervene? What actions are required when? Have our interventions been

successful? What are the alternate options? These types of questions provide basic information for

audit purposes. The main risk associated with this sort of monitoring is failing to adequately

analyze the data and report the results, and thus overlooking them in decision making.

40

Monitoring for fundamental understanding. This type of monitoring attempts to answer the

questions: Do we understand what is going on? How can we predict the future? Can we apply this

knowledge to biodiversity management? These types of questions help in achieving multiple

objectives and the collection of data for long term monitoring. Main risks associated with this type

of monitoring are sustainability and funding.

5.3 Types of Indicators to Use

International agreements such as Convention on Biodiversity (CBD. 1999) and national

requirements suggest three types of indicators to cover the range of issues:

Forest and biodiversity status: those that seek to determine biotic change of important

environmental components at scales from species to whole landscapes, in particular those with

policy relevance

Conservation effort: those that deal with the steps taken to improve biodiversity, the resources

allocated, and how efficient the measures are

Socio-economic impact: those that document impact on society and societal response.

5.4 Selection of Indicators for Monitoring

Following are some of the factors that will be considered in the selection of indicators (Bockstaller

& Girardin, 2003; Bossel, 2001; Dale & Beyeler, 2001; Jackson et al., 2000).

General importance of the indicator

Interpretability of the indicator

Policy relevance and suitability of the indicator

International compatibility of the indicator

An indicator having strong conceptual basis

An indicator having good statistical properties

An indicator that is robust and reliable

An indicator that is compatible with other elements of the M&E system

An indicator that provides the needed flexibility

An indicator that is cost effective to collect data on

An indicator that has the needed geographical or spatial variability as well as sufficient

temporal variability so that changes can be easily detected in a relatively small area and in

relatively short periods of time

An indicator that provides timely data

The indicator can be easily integrated with the rest of the system

5.5 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN BIODIVERSITY

5.5.1 Use of Species as Monitoring Indicators

41

Use of Key categories of species for biodiversity monitoring, using the terminology of Noss (1990)

and Andelman & Fagan (2000), are:

Umbrella Species: Widespread taxa that require such an area of habitat that their presence ensures

that of others.

Ecological indicators, proxies or surrogates: Taxa that reliably stand in for many others.

Biodiversity Indicators: Taxa whose presence indicates the presence of high species richness

(biodiversity indicators)

Keystone Species: Taxa ecologically essential to the functioning of an ecosystem.

Flagship or Charismatic Species: Culturally important taxa.

Vulnerable or Canary Species; Taxa sensitive to anthropogenic changes.

5.5.2 Monitoring Changes in Biodiversity Outcomes

For monitoring changes in biodiversity outcomes, we propose the following framework and nine

outcome objectives (Lee et al., 2005):

Table 5.1: Monitoring Changes in Biodiversity Outcomes

Higher Level Outcome

Targeted Level Outcomes

Outcome Objectives

Maintaining Ecological Integrity

Indigenous Dominance

1. Maintaining ecosystem processes 8. Sustainable use 2. Reducing exotic spread and

dominance 9. Community in conservation

3. Limiting environmental pollutants

Species Occupancy

4. Preventing extinctions and declines

5. Maintaining ecosystem composition

Environmental Representation

6. Ecosystem representation 7. Climate change and variability

Since sustainable use of indigenous ecosystems and species, and working with local

communities to fulfill conservation goals, are relevant to all the targeted biodiversity outcomes,

and are accordingly segregated from the others in the table above.

5.6 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN WATERSHED SERVICES

Watersheds management is a complex and involves intricate linkages and causal chains.

Therefore, monitoring of changes in watershed will be done through monitoring of variables in

42

the Drivers, Pressures, States, Impacts and Response (DPSIR) Framework. Drivers in this

framework are the root cause factors that lead to pressures or underlying causes of

deforestation and forest degradation. Deforestation and forest degradation result in a degraded

watershed state. This degraded watershed state has negative impacts on the ecosystem

services and human welfare. The resulting impacts may lead to certain policy responses. In the

context of watershed, following are the root factors and their underlying causes of deforestation

and forest degradation:

Table 5.2: Root Factors and Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation

S.No. Root Factor Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation

Resulting Watershed State

1. Economic Commodity markets prices +/- Investments +/- Urbanization + Unemployment -

2. Social Poverty - Livelihoods +/- Conflicts - Gender +/- Awareness/Education +

3. Demographic Population - Migration +/- Resettlement +

4. Political Equity +/- Resource Allocation +/-

5. Cultural Attitudes +/- Values and Beliefs +/-

6. Governance and Institutional

Policy-Forest Policy and Land Use Policy

+/-

Institutional Structure +/- Law Enforcement +/- Benefits sharing +/- Tenure and use rights +/- Corruption - Sectoral synergy + Capacity +

Source: Gandapur, 2018b

Depending on their trend, these root factors can have positive/negative impact on controlling

deforestation/forest degradation or exacerbating it. Accordingly, their impact on the

watershed will be positive if deforestation and forest degradation are controlled or negative if

they contribute to deforestation/forest degradation. These therefore act either as stressors or

enablers. Two major stressors in watershed are land use change and climate change. Therefore,

these will be closely monitored. Other stressors in the watershed include: harvesting of

biological resources and increase of invasive species. For proper monitoring of changes in

43

watershed, it is proposed that individual components of the watershed are adequately

monitored over time. These individual components, among others, include:

Forest Management Component

Soil and Land Management Component

Water Management Component

Crop Management Component

Afforestation and Reforestation Component

Pasture/Fodder Development Component

Livestock Management Component

Rural Energy Management Component

Other Farm and Non-Farm Management Component

Community Development Component

Also, skills in surveying, staking and nurseries raising need to be developed in addition to the

skills in inter-personal relations, social mobilization and management of village based

organizations.

5.7 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN COASTAL PROTECTION AND SHORELINE STABILIZATION SERVICES

Coastal protection and shoreline stabilization are the crucial ecosystem services provided by

mangroves forests. Changes in coastal areas and shoreline are brought about by the natural

processes of erosion and accretion by the ocean waves. These changes may be for short time

such as storm, regular wave action, sea tides and winds or long term events such as tectonic

activities which result in subsidence or emergence of land mass and changes in sea levels.

Cycles of erosion and accretion are common feature of the ecological character of coastal areas.

The loose sand and soils in the coastal area are often disturbed and shifted by wind, waves and

sea currents which result in rapid changes in the position of the shoreline.

Besides these natural processes, human activities are also happening along the coasts which

disturb their ecological and hydrological behavior such as land reclamation, port development,

shrimp farming, river damming and diversion in the catchment areas and dredging and sand

mining. Both these natural and anthropogenic activities often exacerbate coastal erosion in

many places and endanger prospects for coasts to fulfill their socio-economic and ecological

roles in the long term at a reasonable societal cost.

Development within coastal areas has brought the attention of policy makers and development

actors to control erosion in the coastal areas. Different measures are being applied to manage

coastal erosion and to restore the capacity of coastal systems to adapt to these changes. The

erosion problem becomes worse whenever the remedial measures applied are ineffective and

poorly designed due to lack of sufficient knowledge about the coastal processes and the nature

of coastal systems.

44

There is a need to develop and implement an operational strategy for monitoring of changes in

coastal protection and shoreline stabilization services. The key elements of this operational

strategy are shown in the following figure (Kumar et al. 2017).

Figure 5.1: Elements of operational strategy for monitoring of changes in coastal protection

Source: Kumar et al., 2017

5.8 MONITORING OF CHANGES IN NON-TIMBER FOREST PRODUCTS

45

For proper monitoring of the conservation, sustainable development and business enterprises

promotion related to NTFPs, different standards have been developed. These standards apply the

following six internationally accepted principles for sustainable collection, management and

enterprises development of MAPs (Gandapur, 2015):

Principle 1: Maintaining Wild MAP Resources

Principle 2: Preventing Negative Environmental Impacts

Principle 3: Complying with Law, Regulations and Agreements

Principle 4: Respecting Customary Rights

Principle 5: Applying Responsible Management Practices

Principle 6: Applying Responsible Business Practices

5.9 MONITORING OF CHANGE IN ECOTOURISM

There are a number of challenges to monitoring changes and measuring the impacts of tourism

(Bucley, 2008): Some of these include the following:

The difficulty of establishing a credible baseline against which change could be measured.

The difficulty of separating human-induced changes from natural processes

Spatial and temporal connections between cause and effect

The complexity of environmental interactions—primary impacts induce secondary impacts

and tertiary impacts and so on.

There are other challenges too, but those are more specific to tourism and include:

The diversity of activities performed

The diversity of environments in which tourism occurs

The mobility of tourists so that their impacts change from place to place

Cumulative impacts

There are three main methods by which impact assessments are undertaken:

After-the-fact analyses

Monitoring of change through time

Simulation

A broad perspective involving economic, environmental, and social-cultural indicators as given the

benchmark establishment section is proposed for adoption under this PES project.

6. FIELD MEASUREMENTS

6.1 Pre-requisites for M&E system

46

Field measurements are needed on the different variables identified for the various PES scheme components. For this purpose, it is recommended to develop a proper M&E system. Following are the pre-requisites for this M&E system:

Good information system Mechanisms for review & reflection Effective links between information system and decision-making system Commitment to legitimacy of making changes to what and how

In the proposed participatory M&E system under this PES scheme, M&E will be done by project communities with the help of Forest Department and other stakeholder groups. This participatory M&E intends to ensure:

Support information gathering and analysis by primary users Link this to decision making forum or opportunities Develop optimal information flows between groups of users and Decision makers at different levels The participatory monitoring and evaluation process will be carried out at all levels across

the organization and project involving all the stakeholders. Therefore, the feedback and learning flows across at different levels.

6.2 Tools for participatory monitoring and evaluation There are several set of tools used in participatory monitoring and evaluation under a PES scheme. The key however, lies in how they are applied. In conventional monitoring system an external interviews selected groups or households through interview schedules or questionnaires. Then the data is analyzed outside the project area and a report is developed. In contrast, a participatory project monitoring and evaluation process provides scope for the watershed community to understand the process and incorporate the learning on regular basis. More as mentioned above, the community empowered to reflect on its strengths and weaknesses. It provides platform for marginalized and other weaker sections to voice their opinion. Participatory learning and action methodologies are widely in use to monitor the projects. Following are the tools for participatory monitoring and evaluation.

Focus group discussion Key person interviews

Household surveys Topical meetings Informal meetings Mapping Transect walks Matrix and ranking/scoring Triangulation Case studies Secondary records

47

The information/ data collected through these tools is correlated and analyzed to derive quantifiable as well as qualitative information on project. Who can participate in participatory monitoring and evaluation? All the project stakeholders can participate in the PME process. However, watershed association, use groups, and other interest groups participate in the process. Based on the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (DFID, 2000) as depicted in Figure 6.1 below, indicators could be developed to monitor the progress.

Figure 6.1: Sustainable Livelihoods Framework Each village institution could work out its goals and desirable objects. During the course of the PES project, these objectives / goals are monitored collectively by the project teams. It is important to note that certain interest groups involvement need to be ensured in the process, if needed with additional focus and assertion. Otherwise such groups (women, widows, landless, asset less, etc.) get neglected in the process. How to devise monitoring and evaluation indicators: This process could be carried out with project groups with the help of an outsider. Communities could come out with various indicators that reflect the project progress and impact on livelihoods. These indicators then need to be divided into qualitative and quantitative. Periodicity of monitoring and evaluation could also be derived through collective meetings. This will ensure greater involvement of project community in assessing the project and its progress. Members could be identified to maintain certain needed records. They could be trained to take up various project monitoring related activities. For example a village animator could collect the data on number of trees planted in common land, type of plants, survival rates etc. The information could be made available to the village through display at common place. Regular monitoring of such progress would ensure success of activity and desired outcome could be envisaged.

48

Steps in a multi-party Monitoring

Figure 6.2: Steps in Multi-party Monitoring (Source: www.cifor.org)

7. DATA REQUIRED, ANALYSIS AND SUMMARIZATION

Hold Multiparty Meeting-Identify common goals and monitoring concerns for the project. Construct communications framework outlining information transfer between project stakeholders.

Develop Monitoring Plan-Describe indicators to measure change built on reliable data collection methods. Specifically address, where, when and how data will be collected.

Gather Data-Collect baseline data on the status of various ecosystem services, data on project activities implementation, data on status of various ecosystem services under the project scenario and compare.

Analyze Results-Conduct simple and reliable caluclations on data from local, regional and national perspectives. Schedule multiparty team meetings to discuss and interpret results.

Share Results-Keep process transparent, adaptive and flexible. Suggest tangible prescriptions when new information becomes available. Report results illustrating both success and failure.

49

The following tables show the type of data that would be needed for mangrove forests PES scheme

in Sindh and Balochistan provinces and the WHTF PES scheme in Kaghan valley, KP province.

Table 7.1: Mangrove Forests: The identified main ecosystem services with the respective method of economic valuation.

Identified main

ecosystem services

Actual economic benefit analyzed and

valuated

Valuation technique Data required

Protection of fish and shrimp spawning sites

Fishery and fish/shrimp spawning site value

Calculation of actual fish/shrimp landing value as share of total national catches, market prices for each part of fishery sector

Recent reports, official statistics, fish and shrimp market prices and extrapolation of long-term trends

Fishery related other community wage labour

Other labour services in market prices that relate to fishing sector in nearby communities

Official labour statistics on monthly wages and community interviews

Coastal zone and habitat protection

Cleaning of waste water pollution with mangroves

Assessment of mangrove waste water cleaning potential & cost avoidance approach

Numerous Pakistani and international reports with pollution amounts, mangrove mitigation potential & official waste water treatment costs for Sindh/ Balochistan

Cyclone & tsunami mitigation with mangroves

Assessment of mangrove cyclone and tsunami damage mitigation potential & cost avoidance approach

Assessment of recent historic cyclone and tsunami events & data on previous damage costs, inflation rates, population growth, and mangrove coverage

Biodiversity conservation & promotion of ecotourism

Ecotourism Actual current numbers of eco-tourists at market price

Community survey and tour operator information from Karachi

Education and research activities in mangroves

Actual current numbers of education & research activities at market prices

Community survey and previous valuation work

Wood and Carbon Sequestration

Community wood and NTFPs

Calculation of community wood and NTFP use of mangroves at market price

Community survey/interviews

Mangrove carbon sequestration

Assessment of mangrove carbon sequestration potential and carbon market price

Measurement of mangrove growth in PES area & carbon sequestration calculations / carbon market price

Shoreline stabilization &

Land erosion prevention

Assessment of current mangrove land erosion prevention & opportunity

Recent report on subject using satellite images and GIS

50

prevention of sea intrusion

cost Land stabilization Overlapping with previous Same

Table 7.2: WHTF in Kaghan Valley: Identification of Ecosystem Services, Valuation Technique and

Data Requirements Identified main ecosystem services

Actual economic benefit analyzed and valuated

Valuation technique Data required

Watershed protection

Annual water production in Kaghan Valley

No water market price exists. Thus, the water price will be derived with replacement cost or cost avoidance methods.

Assessment of total annual run-off in Kaghan Valley & determining of a price for mountain water from reports.

Habitat conservation for future generations

Replacement cost for out planting of seedlings and spreading of herb seeds.

Planting and seeding costs per hectare of slopes from DFO Office.

Land stabilization and prevention of landslides and other erosion

Cost avoidance for reduced need of expansion of new hydropower capacity (landslides) and prevention of erosion on steep slopes by planting/seeding.

Recent hydropower reports on dam sedimentation and cost of construction of new hydropower capacity upstream. For erosion also planting & seeding cost per ha from DFO Office.

Biodiversity conservation and promotion of ecotourism

Mainstream ecotourism Travel cost method Recent statistics on annual eco-tourists numbers and tourist survey conducted by PFI

Hunting tourism Travel cost method Recent statistics on annual eco-tourists numbers and average trophy hunting prices

Provisioning Services and REDD+ related

Timber harvesting in Kaghan Valley

Log market prices per species Statistics on type of tree species and cubic meter per species & market prices

Fuelwood harvesting and collection

Fuelwood market prices per species

Statistics on type of tree species and cubic meter per species & market prices

Carbon sequestration in Kaghan Valley

Annual growth of plantations and restored forest areas & carbon sequestration

Annual growth of plantations and restored forest areas & international carbon sequestration market price

Promotion of Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs)

Free-grazing fodder for livestock

Replacement cost/shadow pricing using total livestock sector annual sales

Statistics of Kaghan livestock populations and various livestock product prices

Medicinal plants collection

Market price estimates at commercial sales point.

Government Records

Commercial fish production

Fish production at market price

Official statistics of the KFD

Gems and precious stones collection

Annual estimate for gems/ precious stone sales in Pakistan

Maps and reports.

8. DATA QUALITY ASSESSMENT/ASSURANCE (DQA)

51

Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) are must to ensure reliability and accuracy of the measurement and monitoring of ecosystem services and to meet minimum measurement and analysis standards. The QA/QC provisions are an integral part of ecosystem services monitoring and include procedures for QA/QC related to: (1) field measurements; (2) laboratory procedures; and (3) data entry and analysis techniques.

At the end of every data collection exercise in the field, the data sheets should be checked by the team leader to identify if there is any shortcoming in the data. Once satisfied with the quality of the data, the team leader should put his signature on the sheets along with his name and date of checking. He must also record the issues that were noticed during the checking, so they can be avoided in the future. Similar checks should also be performed after data entry into computer systems and their analysis and tabulation.

If any laboratory measurement are involved, then it is advisable that the laboratory analysis process should also be checked by expert reviewer to ensure accuracy of the results.

9. DATA REPORTING

52

Data are the facts of the qualitative or quantitative variable and individual figures in the raw form.

We can only derive and generate information after we compile and analyze the data. This

information is used for reporting and decision-making. Thus every PES scheme will need data to

track progress of a plan, monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the project, analyze the context

and reach an evidence based decision-making process. Data collected under PES scheme will pass

through different stages before reaching the senior project management via the different tiers in

the project management.

Any data is first collected at the source before being recorded, transported, processed, and

analyzed. Finally, information is derived from the data and reported to the senior management and

funding agencies. Like any other project, the data in a PES project are recorded at the field level,

then transported to the Forest Division at the district level, from where it goes to the Forest Circle

and Forest Regions levels. Finally, it reaches the Administrative Department, Planning and

Development Department levels. The responsibility of compiling, analyzing and reporting the

information to the donor agencies, lies with the Planning and Development Department. The key

point to be noted is that it is essential to maintain quality of the data throughout the entire process.

The tool that is used to examine the quality of data during the process is the Data Quality

Assessment/Assurance (DQA).

Thus, DQA is the systematic approach to assess and ensure the quality of data over all time and

levels. DQA is the scientific and statistical evaluation of PES data to determine if they meet the

planning objectives of the PES project, and thus are of the right type, quality, and quantity to

support their intended use. In other words, DQA can be termed as a data quality audit as it verifies

the data across the levels going through the details for data verification. DQA reassures that the

data fits well with six dimensions of quality as depicted below. However, the special focus is given

on accuracy, validity, precision, reliability and integrity during the assessment.

The following diagram presents the different dimensions of data quality assessment.

53

Figure 9.1: Data Quality Assessment (Source: Byrnes, 2008)

Dimensions of Data Quality

Assessment

Integrity

Accuracy

Reliability

Validity

Timeliness

Precision

54

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Note: The explanation of terms in this glossary is aimed at facilitating understanding of climate

change mitigation and adaptation in the forestry sector of Pakistan including REDD+. Therefore,

the glossary also includes terms which have not been used in this PES Monitoring Manual but given

their importance for enhancing understanding of REDD+ at the national, provincial and local levels

have been included in this glossary. Also, an effort has been made to use agreed text to the extent

possible. However, many terms defined here may have other definitions than the ones given in this

glossary. Many definitions given in this glossary have been derived (adapted) from different

sources, including CIFOR (2009) and Green Capony Porgramme (2008).

3E+

The 3E+ criteria refer to effectiveness, efficiency, equity and co-benefits and are used in the climate

debate to assess proposed options and their expected outcomes or to evaluate actual outcomes.

Afforestation

Afforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of land that has not been forested for a period

of at least 50 years to forested land, through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced

promotion of natural seed sources.

Additionality

Additionality is the requirement that a REDD+ activity or project should generate benefits, such as

reduced emissions or increased removals that would not have happened without the activity (i.e.

the BAU scenario).

Baseline

This term is used in different ways. In REDD+, it typically represents the projected anthropogenic

changes in forest carbon stock that would occur in the absence of the proposed project activity or

policy intervention. See also BAU and reference level. In project evaluations, baseline can refer to

pre-project conditions (e.g. a baseline study involves collecting socioeconomic and ecological data

before a project starts, implicitly assuming that any change is due to the project).

Benefit sharing

The distribution of direct and indirect net gains (monetary and nonmonetary benefits) from the

implementation of REDD+.

Business as usual (BAU)

A policy neutral reference to future emissions or removals, estimated using projections of future

emission or removal levels without any REDD+ activity. The term is also used in a political economy

sense to mean the continuation of policies and practices consistent with the status quo in the pre-

REDD+ political economy of a country.

55

Carbon market

A market in which carbon emission reductions are traded, usually in the form of carbon credits

(verified or certified emission reductions). Carbon markets take the form of: (i) a voluntary market

(where emission reduction targets are not regulated), or (ii) a compliance market (where carbon

credits are traded to meet regulated emission reduction targets). The largest carbon market is the

EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS).

Carbon offset

A reduction in emissions or an increase in removals made to compensate for an emission made

elsewhere. Carbon offsets are measured in metric tons (t) of CO2e.

Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA)

Partnership of international NGOs with a mission to stimulate and promote land management

activities that mitigate global climate change, improve the well-being and reduce the poverty of

local communities, and conserve biodiversity.

Co-benefit

Benefits arising from REDD+ in addition to climate mitigation benefits, such as enhancing

biodiversity, enhancing adaptation to climate change, alleviating poverty, improving local

livelihoods, improving forest governance and protecting rights.

Compulsory/compliance/mandatory markets

Markets created and regulated by mandatory national or international climate regimes. They

allocate or auction GHG emission limits (quotas or caps) to countries, subnational units or

companies and allow them to buy carbon credits to meet their cap, or sell them if they emit less

than their cap (i.e. trade, also known as cap and trade).

Conference of Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC

The governing body of the UNFCCC. It meets once a year.

Deforestation

The permanent conversion of land from forest to non-forest. In the Marrakesh Accords,

deforestation is defined as “the direct human induced conversion of forested land to non-forested

land.” FAO defines deforestation as “the conversion of forest to another land use or the long-term

reduction of the tree canopy cover below the minimum 10% threshold.”

Degradation

Degradation refers to changes within the forest that negatively affect the structure or function of

the forest stand or site, and thereby lower its capacity to supply products and services. In the

context of REDD+, degradation can be measured in terms of reduced carbon stocks in forests that

56

remain as forests. No formal definition of degradation has yet been adopted, because many forest

carbon stocks fluctuate due to natural cyclical causes or management practices.

Forest

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defines forest as having minimum

canopy cover of 10%, minimum tree height in situ of 5 m, minimum area of 0.5 ha, and where

agriculture is not the dominant land-use. The UNFCCC allows for a more flexible forest definition:

minimum canopy cover 10–30%, minimum tree height 2–5 m and minimum area 0.1 ha. Individual

countries have their own definitions.

Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC)

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) upholds the rights of

indigenous people to grant or withhold their FPIC for: activities affecting the lands they have

traditionally owned, occupied, or used; any proposed relocation and; any legal or administrative

measures affecting them. FPIC implies that consent has been obtained without coercion in advance

of project authorization and commencement, and that the affected parties fully understand the

scope, duration and potential impacts of the activities. In the context of REDD+, proponents seek

the consent of all local stakeholders, not just indigenous peoples.

Implementation costs

The costs of setting up a system and putting into place the necessary policies and actions to achieve

REDD+

Indigenous peoples

There is no universally agreed definition of indigenous people, although some international legal

instruments provide definitions. According to the United Nations, rather than define indigenous

people, the most useful approach is for them to identify themselves according to the fundamental

right to self-identification set out in declarations of human rights.

Jurisdictional REDD+

REDD+ initiative encompassing a government administrative unit at the district level or higher.

Leakage

In the context of climate change, carbon leakage happens when interventions to reduce emissions

in one area (subnational or national) lead to an increase in emissions in another area. The official

UNFCCC term is ‘displaced emissions.’

Local communities

There is no universally agreed international definition of local communities, although the term has been defined in certain international legal instruments. With respect to a particular activity commonly the term refers to communities within the activity’s area of influence.

57

Measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV)

MRV is a series of procedures associated with the communication of all mitigation actions of

developing countries. Measurement refers to the quantification of (i) anthropogenic forest-related

emissions by sources and removals by sinks; (ii) forest carbon stocks; and (iii) changes in forest

carbon stocks and forest area resulting from the implementation of REDD+ activities. Reporting

refers to communication to the international community following the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change best practices guidelines. Verifying refers to checks on the accuracy of the

estimation by UNFCCC designated entities.

Mitigation

In the context of climate change, a human intervention to reduce the sources of emissions or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases.

Net deforestation

Reduction of forest area during a specified time period.

Net REDD emissions

For REDD, a method for estimating emissions from gross deforestation that considers both the carbon stocks of the forest being cleared and the carbon stock of the replacement land use.

Opportunity cost

In the context of REDD+, this refers to forgone profits from the most profitable alternative use of

forest land.

Payment for ecosystem/environmental services (PES)

A buyer who values environmental services pays the provider or manager of the land use that

supplies those services; in return, the seller continues to deliver them. In REDD+, PES refers to a

results-based system in which payments are made for reduced emissions or increased removals

relative to an agreed reference level.

Participation

For REDD, inclusion in key processes, inter alia, decision making, implementation, benefits sharing, and evaluation.

Performance-based remuneration

An incentive system wherein the international contribution to support REDD implementation is contingent on meeting pre-agreed benchmarks.

58

Permanence

The longevity of a carbon pool and the stability of its stocks, given the management and disturbance environment in which it occurs.

Performance metric

A set of indicators and benchmarks against which REDD actions and activities are evaluated, including but not limited to emissions and removals against reference levels.

Policies and measures (PAMs)

In REDD+, PAMs are nationally enacted policies and actions that countries undertake to reduce

carbon emissions or increase removals.

Readiness

REDD+ country actions – including capacity building, policy design, consultation and consensus

building, and testing and evaluation of a REDD+ national strategy – that are taken prior to the

comprehensive implementation of REDD+.

REDD+ SES

The REDD+ Social & Environmental Standards initiative aims to build support for government-led

REDD+ programs that make a significant contribution to human rights, poverty alleviation and

biodiversity conservation.

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) and enhancing forest

carbon stock in developing countries (REDD+)

The term ‘REDD+’ is used in many ways. A broad definition, based on the official COP13

terminology, holds that REDD+ comprises local, subnational, national and global actions whose

primary aim is to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhance forest

carbon stocks (increase removals) in developing countries. A narrower definition is that

REDD+ also includes results-based or conditional payments, which was a core idea when REDD+

was first launched. From another perspective, REDD+ may not only refer to actions: it may refer to

the overall idea, the objective of reduced emissions and increased removals, the set of policies or

actions necessary to achieve that objective, the outcome as measured in reduced emissions and

increased removals or the process involving all of these elements. REDD (without the plus) is used

to refer only to reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and does not include

forest carbon stock enhancement.

Reference level (REL)

Two distinct meanings and different uses may be distinguished for reference levels. First, the

reference level is used for the BAU scenario or baseline for changes in carbon stocks, which is used

59

as a benchmark for measuring the impact of REDD+ policies and actions and to define emission

reductions. In this sense, reference level can refer to gross emission levels from deforestation and

forest degradation, and to net emission levels from all emissions and removals from deforestation,

forest degradation, conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest

carbon stocks. Second, in a result-based system, the reference level is used as a benchmark for

estimating payments to countries, subnational units or projects for emissions reductions.

Reforestation

Reforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of non-forested land to forested land,

through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources on land

that was forested, but that has been converted to non-forested land.

Sequestration

The process of increasing the carbon content of a carbon pool other than the atmosphere.

Shifting cultivation

An agricultural system in which plots of land are cultivated temporarily, then abandoned when the

soil loses its fertility or weeds become dominant. The plot of land is then left to be reclaimed by

natural vegetation.

Sink

A pool (reservoir) that absorbs or takes up carbon released from other components of the

carbon cycle, with more carbon being absorbed than released. Any process or mechanism which

removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol, or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere. A

given pool (reservoir) can be a sink for atmospheric carbon if, during a given time interval, more

carbon is flowing into it than is flowing out.

Smallholder

A farmer of a relatively small plot of land (a smallholding), where he or she produces in relatively

small volumes, either for subsistence alone or subsistence and sale, often depending wholly or

largely on family labor. The size of smallholdings varies significantly across regions, but their

defining characteristic is that they are small relative to the land area used by commercial producers

in the same region.

Source

A pool (reservoir) that absorbs or takes up carbon released from other components of the carbon cycle, with more carbon being released than absorbed. Source is opposite of sink.

Subnational activity

60

Activities implemented at the subnational level as part of a country’s REDD strategy. Subnational activities can be implemented by governments, local authorities, NGOs, or private entities. They may be embedded in a national or international crediting mechanism.

Swidden agriculture

An agricultural practice that involves cutting and burning of forests or woodlands to create fields,

typically part of a shifting cultivation system (also referred to as slash and burn agriculture).

Tier level

Applying the IPCC Good Practice Guidance LULUCF, countries are provided with options to estimate GHG emissions. Tiers represent levels of methodological complexity where Tier 1 is the most basic estimation methodology, Tier 2 is intermediate, and Tier 3 is most demanding in terms of complexity and data requirements.

Ton (t)

One ton is equivalent to 1000 kg (also referred to as a metric ton).

Transaction costs

A cost that is incurred when making an economic exchange. It includes costs related to search and

information, enforcement and monitoring. Transaction costs sometimes refer to all costs of REDD+

except opportunity costs.

UNDRIP

UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A comprehensive statement addressing the human rights of indigenous peoples, adopted at the UN General Assembly in 2007, with 144 countries voting in support, 4 voting against, and 11 abstaining. It is a non-legally binding instrument.

UN REDD

A Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries, the UN-REDD Program brings together the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in the development of a multi-donor trust fund (established July 2008) that allows donors to pool resources and provides funding to activities of this programme.

Validation

Independent third-party assessment of a project plan or design against defined standards, e.g. to

determine eligibility for CDM or certify by VCS.

61

Verification

Independent third-party assessment of the actual emissions reductions and co-benefits of a

particular mitigation activity.

Voluntary market

Markets that function alongside compliance markets. Buyers are companies, governments, NGOs

and individuals who are voluntarily buying verified emissions reductions, e.g. to offset their own

emissions.

Verified Carbon Standard (VCS)

This is one of the world’s most widely used carbon standards for voluntary carbon offset industry.

Carbon emission reductions generated in line with VCS are called Verified Emission Reductions

(VERs).

62

REFERENCES

Andelman S.J. and Fagan W.F. 2000. Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates or

expensive mistakes? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97: 5954–5959.

Bockstaller, C., Girardin, P., 2003. How to validate environmental indicators. Agric. Syst. 76,

639–653.

Bossel, H., 2001. Assessing viability and sustainability: a systems-based approach for

deriving comprehensive indicator sets. Conserv.Ecol. 5, 12.

Bucley, R. (2008). Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism. Ecotourism series n2.International Centre for Ecotourism Research.389 pages.

Byrnes, E. 2008. Data Quality Assessment: Field Sampling Methods for Remedial Investigations, Second Edition 2nd Edition

CBD, 1999.Development of Indicators of Biological Diversity. Nairobi: Convention on

Biological Diversity, subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice.

Report No. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/12, 14 pp.

CIFOR. 2009. REDD+ on the Ground: Glossary of REDD+ Terms.

Constanza, R., Arge, R., Rudolf G., Farber, S., Gasso, M. 1997. The value of the world's

ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature volume387, pages 253–260.

Dale, V.H., Beyeler, S.C., 2001.Challenges in the development and use of ecological

indicators. Ecol. Indicators 1, 3–10.

DFID, 2000. Sustainable Livelihood Guidance Sheets.

Dougall G., 2005. Pilot Report of Proposed Coastal Hazard Indicators.

Gandapur, A. K., 2015. Non-Timber Forest Products Rules for Gilgit-Baltistan.

Gandapur, A. K., 2017. Project Document. KuramTangi Dam Watershed Management

Project-Kurram Agency, FISP-USAID.

Gandapur, A. K., 2018. Biodiversity Impact Assessment of Billion Trees Afforestation

Project. IUCN Pakistan. (Draft)

Gandapur, A. K., 2018b. Land Stabilization Project Proposal for AJK. IUCN Pakistan. (Draft)

Gandapur, A. K., 2018c. Key Environmental Information Collection under Sustainable

Forest Management Project for Kaghan and Siran Valleys of KP Province . IUCN Pakistan.

(Draft)

63

Global Canopy Programme. 2009. REDD+ Glossary of Terms.

GOFC-GOLD, 2010, A sourcebook of methods and procedures for monitoring and reporting anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and removals caused by deforestation, gains and losses of carbon stocks in forests remaining forests, and forestation. GOFC-GOLD Report version COP16-1, (GOFC-GOLD Project Office, Natural Resources Canada, Alberta, Canada).

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2018. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s REDD+ Strategy.

Planning and Monitoring Circle, KP Forest Department, Peshawar.

Government of Pakistan, 2014. Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP). Ministry of Climate Change, Islamabad, Pakistan. Available at https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/pakistan

Government of Pakistan, 2016. Pakistan’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution

(PAK-INDC). Available at http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry

Government of Pakistan 2017.Notification No. 1-1/2016/NRC/WG. Islamabad the 14th

September 2017.

Government of Pakistan, 2018. Draft REDD+ Strategy of Pakistan. Ministry of Climate

Change, Government of Pakistan.

Henrik, L., Aronsen, I., Bråten, K.G and Gleinsvik, A. 2011. Experiences with benefit sharing:

issues and options for REDD-plus. Management Consulting, Norway.

Jackson, L.E., Kurtz, J.C., Fisher, W.S., 2000. Evaluation Guidelines for Ecological Indicators. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Report No. EPA/620/ R-99/005, 110 pp. Kurtz, J.C., Jackson, L.E., Fisher, W.S., 2001. Strategies for Evaluating Indicators Based on

Guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and

Development Ecological Indicators 1, pp. 49–60.

Lee, W., McGlone, M. and Wright, E., 2005. Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring: A review

of national and international systems and a proposed framework for future biodiversity

monitoring by the Department of Conservation. Landcare Research Contract Report:

LC0405/122, Department of Conservation, Wellington

Kathryn, L., Jones, E. T. and McLain, R. 2004. Non-timber Forest Product Inventorying and

Monitoring in the United States. Washington, D.C.: National Commission on Science for

Sustainable Forestry. Available at http://www.ifcae.org/projects/ncssf1

http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry

http://www.ifcae.org/projects/ncssf1

64

Noss, R. F., 1990. Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach. Conservation

Biology. Volume 4, Issue 4, 355-364.

Schneider, R. 1997: Ecological diversity monitoring framework. Draft for Discussion (#6).

Department of Ecology, University of Alberta, Canada.

Tourism Concern, 1991. Action and Principles for Ethical Tourism.

US National Academy of Sciences, 2000. Ecological indicators for the Nation. National

Academy Press, Washington D.C.

Wong, J. L.G., 2000. The Biometrics of Non-timber Forest Product Resource Assessment: A

Review of Current Methodology. Report commissioned under the ZF0077 pre-project of the

Forest Research Programme of the United Kingdom Department for International

Development.

Wong, J. L.G., Kirsti, T and Baker, N., 2001. Resource Assessment of Nonwood Forest

Products: Experience and Biometric Principles. Nonwood Forest Products 13. Rome: FAO.

ii - redd+ pakistan

Documents