Country Report

1|Page
The content of this report may be used for furthering research and development on climate
smart rice with proper citation in favour of the authors and organizations involved © 2022.

Recommended citation

Nizami, A., Khan, S., Sheikh IA., Goheer, A., Ali, J. and Mian IA. 2022. Country Report –
Climate Rice Production. Promoting Global Best Practices and Scaling of Low Emissions
Technologies by Engaging the Private and Public Sectors in the Paddy Rice Sector. UNEP Asia
Pacific Office and Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation

© CCAC 2022
Country Report

This study was financed by Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) initiative https://www.ccacoalition.org/en

Author
Arjumand Nizami, PhD
Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation
[email protected]
https://www.helvetas.org/en/switzerland

With contribution from

Shahrukh Khan
National Coordinator WAPRO, Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Pakistan
[email protected]

Ali Imran Sheikh

Sourcing Manager
Galaxy Rice Mills Pakistan
[email protected]

Arif Goheer
Senior Scientific Officer
Global Change Impacts Studies Centre (GCISC), Ministry of Climate Change, Islamabad
[email protected]

Jawad Ali, PhD

Country Rep Helvetas Germany /Water and Climate Change Specialist
Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation
[email protected]

Irshad Ali Mian

Knowledge Management Specialist
Helvetas Swiss Interooperation
[email protected]

Institutional Support
Makiko Yashiro
Programme Officer/Regional Coordinator for Ecosystem Management Sub-Programme
UN Environment’s Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (ROAP)

W. Wyn Ellis, PhD

Executive Director,
Sustainable Rice Platform (SRP)

Jens Soth, PhD

Senior Advisor Commodity Projects,
Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Switzerland

Members of Advisory Committee

Anjum Buttar, PhD
Director General, Agriculture Extension Department, Government of Punjab

Shahid Tarar
Managing Director, Galaxy Rice Mills Pakistan

Nihaluddin Marri, PhD

Director Sugarcane Research Institute, Agriculture Department Sindh

Dr. Fazal Khan

Medical practitioner / Progressive farmers

Designing and graphics

Salman

Photos
Tahir Saleem, Arjumand Nizami

3|Page
Table of Contents
Acronyms ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 8
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 9
1.1 Objectives of the report ....................................................................................................... 9
1.2 Agriculture as a major economic sector of Pakistan ........................................................... 9
1.3 Importance of rice for Pakistan ......................................................................................... 11
1.4 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 18
2. Climate Chang and Rice ............................................................................................................ 20
2.1 Perceptions regarding climate change impact on the agriculture sector especially the rice
crop 20
2.2 Impacts of rice cultivation on environment .............................................................................. 21
3. Current Farm Management Practices in Rice Production ......................................................... 23
3.1 Managing crop calendar .......................................................................................................... 23
3.2 Selection of variety .................................................................................................................. 24
3.3 Levelling the fields ................................................................................................................... 24
3.4 Land preparation ..................................................................................................................... 24
3.5 Planting methods & timeframe ................................................................................................ 26
3.6 Weed management ................................................................................................................. 26
3.7 Nutrient management .............................................................................................................. 27
3.8 Water management ................................................................................................................. 30
3.9 Insect & diseases control ........................................................................................................ 32
3.10 Time of maturity ..................................................................................................................... 34
3.11 Harvest management practices in rice .................................................................................. 35
3.12 Residue management ........................................................................................................... 36
4. Major sustainability challenges faced along the rice value chain .............................................. 37
4.1 Farm management challenges ................................................................................................ 37
4.2 Economic challenges .............................................................................................................. 39
4.3 Environmental challenges related to rice production .............................................................. 41
4.4 Social challenges .................................................................................................................... 47
5. Policy and Actors Framework to Manage Climate Impacts on Rice Cultivation ........................ 49
5.1 Policy landscape on adaptation and mitigation ................................................................. 49
5.1.1 National policies/strategies ...................................................................................49
5.1.2 Provincial policies/strategies .................................................................................51
5.2 Policy analysis – opportunities and gaps .......................................................................... 52
5.3 Barriers to policy implementation ...................................................................................... 57
5.4 Actors’ analysis and perspectives in Pakistan’s rice sector .............................................. 59
5.4.1 Farmers .................................................................................................................59
5.4.2 Public sector duty bearers .....................................................................................59
5.4.3 Private sector ........................................................................................................62
5.4.4 Academia and research actors .............................................................................64
5.4.5 International development actors ..........................................................................65
5.5 Actors’ participatory initiatives in the field ......................................................................... 66
5.5.1 Water productivity in commercial agriculture (WAPRO) .......................................66
5.5.2 Prime Minister’s initiative on productivity enhancement of rice.............................66
5.5.3 Transforming Indus basin with climate resilient agriculture & water management
66
5.5.4 Initiatives to improve irrigation infrastructure ........................................................67
5.5.5 GRAISEA ..............................................................................................................67
5.6 Lessons learned from different initiatives .......................................................................... 68
6. Future of Mitigation and Adaptation Actions in Rice Sector ................................................... 69
6.1 Multi-stakeholder engagement and joint collaboration ...................................................... 69
6.2 Research needs to support mitigation and adaptation ...................................................... 70
6.3 Public private participation ................................................................................................ 70
6.4 Mitigation actions for reduced GHG emission ................................................................... 71
6.5 Adaptation options in rice value chain ............................................................................... 72
6.6 Digital monitoring, verification and reporting system ........................................................ 73
6.7 Global alliance for meeting mitigation & adaptation challenges........................................ 74
6.8 Potential project strategy to support for NAMA / Adaptation Plan of Action ..................... 76
Country Report

6.9 Feasibility analysis of SLCP packages ............................................................................. 78

6.10 Financing strategies /mechanisms to support the envisaged packages ........................... 79
Literature Reviewed ....................................................................................................................... 83

List of Tables
Table 1: Variety wise provincial rice production ............................................................................................ 14
Table 2: Top ten trade partners for Pakistani Basmati and Coarse Rice .................................................. 16
Table 3: Nutrient content of various organic materials, Rice knowledge Bank......................................... 28
Table 4: Insects and diseases assessment chart ......................................................................................... 32
Table 5: Key opportunities in available national / provincial policies for GHG emission mitigation and
adaptation in agriculture .................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 6: Why should stakeholders adopt or encourage the SRP Standard? ........................................... 75

List of Figures
Figure 1: Agriculture's share in employment .................................................................................... 9
Figure 2: Women and men’s employment by sector .................................................................... 10
Figure 3: Women /men’s employment in agriculture sector by province ................................... 10
Figure 4: Area (million hectares) under major crops .................................................................... 11
Figure 5: Sub -sector share (%) in GDP ......................................................................................... 11
Figure 6: Timeline of provincial rice area (000 hectares) ............................................................. 12
Figure 7: Timeline of provincial rice production (000 tonnes) ..................................................... 12
Figure 8: Rice Production Map of Pakistan (1 dot = 5000 ha) .................................................... 13
Figure 9: Global milled rice yield (MTs per Hectares) .................................................................. 14
Figure 10: A Typical Rice Value-Chain for Domestic Marketing in Pakistan ............................ 15
Figure 11: Pakistan's Rice Export (US$ 000) .................................................................................. 16
Figure 12: Pakistan's Agriculture Export (US$ 000) ....................................................................... 16
Figure 13: Map indicating Pakistan rice export markets .............................................................. 17
Figure 14: Share in GHG emission by major sectors in Pakistan............................................... 17
Figure 15: Survey findings, major impacts of climate change on rice ........................................ 20
Figure 16: Survey findings, Major farm management challenges in rice................................... 21
Figure 17: Agricultural activity and its contribution to methane emission.................................. 21
Figure 18: Survey findings, Major contributing factors to GHG emissions in rice .................... 22
Figure 19: Survey findings, Major environmental challenges in rice .......................................... 22
Figure 20: Farm management practices......................................................................................... 23
Figure 21: Crop calendar with phases of crops and expected dates of field activities ............ 24
Figure 22: Weed control Methods In Rice ...................................................................................... 27
Figure 23: Stages of weed control and its effectiveness .............................................................. 27
Figure 24: Fertilizer application at different crop stages .............................................................. 29
Figure 25: Leaf Color Chart used for assessment of crop need for nitrogen ............................ 30
Figure 26: Potassium cycle............................................................................................................... 31
Figure 27: Insect pest control in rice ............................................................................................... 33
Figure 28: Major pests, diseases, and weeds in rice .................................................................... 34
Figure 29: Percentage of methods used for disease control in rice ........................................... 34
Figure 30: Farmers (%) harvest their crops based on maturity indicators ................................ 35
Figure 31: Degree of challenges in determination of residual moisture .................................... 35
Figure 32: Farm management challenges...................................................................................... 37
Figure 33: Environmental challenges .............................................................................................. 41
Figure 34: Exposure to heatwaves (billion person-days per year) ............................................. 42

5|Page
Figure 35: Major climate change impacts on rice farming ........................................................... 43
Figure 36: Map showing regions with rising temperature ............................................................ 43
Figure 37: Climate changing scenario ............................................................................................ 45
Figure 38: Major factors of GHG emissions reported by % respondents .................................. 45
Figure 39: Solutions recommended by % respondents for mitigating GHG emissions .......... 46
Figure 40: Social challenges in rice farming reported by % respondents ................................. 47
Figure 41: Barriers to policy implementation as reported by the respondents ......................... 57
Figure 42: Major implementation barriers to adaptation and mitigation measures .................. 58
Figure 43: Mitigation options with adaptation benefits reported by the respondents .............. 72
Figure 44: Factors, as reported by respondents, reducing effects of climate change in rice . 72
Figure 45: Options for increased resilience /improved adaptation in rice value chain ............ 73
Figure 46: Linkages and networks among stakeholders .............................................................. 75
Figure 47: Entry points for SLCP interventions ............................................................................. 77
Figure 48: Indicative SLCP Packages and Interventions ............................................................. 77
Figure 49: Potential barriers to be considered in rice sector and future interventions ............ 78
Figure 50: Financial estimates for implementing Intervention Packages .................................. 81
Figure 51: Organizational framework to take the country report to the next steps .................. 82
Country Report

Acronyms
ATP Adenosine Triphosphate
AWD Alternative Wetting and Drying
BCI Better Cotton Initiative
BTR Biennial Transparency Report
BUR Biennial Updated Report
CARF Climate Adaptation Resilience Fund
CCAC Climate and Clean Air Coalition
COVID-19 Corona Virus Diseases 2019
CSA Climate Smart Agriculture
DG Khan Dera Ghazi Khan
DNA Deoxyribonucleic Acid
DSR Direct Seed Rice
ETL Economic Threshold Level
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations
FYM Farmyard manure
GCF Green Climate Fund
GCISC Global Change Impact Studies Centre
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GEF Global Environment Fund
GHG Green House Gases
GPES Global Program Food Security
GRAISEA Gender Transformative and Responsible Agribusiness Investment in South-East Asia
HKH Hindukush – Karakoram – Himalaya
IAIP Irrigated Agriculture Improvement Project (KP)\
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IRRI International Rice Research Institute
IRS Indus River System
IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management
KP Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
LCC Leaf Color Chart
LLL Laser-controlled land leveling
MOCC Ministry of Climate Change
MRL Minimum Residue Level
MRV Monitoring, Reporting and Valuation
MT Metric Tons
NAMA Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action
NARC National Agriculture Research Centre
NCCP National Climate Change Policy
NDC Nationally Determined Contributions
NFMS National Forest Monitoring System
NWP National Water Policy
OFWM On-Farm Water Management
PARC Pakistan Agriculture Research Council
REAP Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan
REDD+ Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
RNA Ribonucleic Acid
ROAP UN Environment’s Regional Office for Asia and Pacific
RPL Rice Partners Limited
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
SIAPEP Sindh Irrigated Agriculture Productivity Enhancement Project
SLCPs Short-Lived Climate Pollutants
SRP Sustainable Rice Platform
UAE United Arab Emirates
UK United Kingdom
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
USA United States of America
USDA United Stated Department of Agriculture
VSR Van Sillevoldt Rijst (Sustainable Rice Platform)
WAPDA Water and Power Development Authority
WAPRO Water and Productivity (a multi stakeholder initiative to improve water efficiency in agriculture)
WASH Water, Sanitation and Health Hygiene

7|Page
Executive Summary

As party to the international climate change policy regime, Pakistan has made serious commitments on
mitigation and adaptation and worked towards its resolve for a greener future. Agriculture remains a
critical component of Pakistan’s strategy to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change. Methane
emissions reduction from agriculture sector are thus a high priority mitigation option for Pakistan as
reflected in the Nationally Determined Contributions submitted under the Paris Agreement (GoP, 2021).

This document is an in-country study to identify capacity barriers, gaps and needs for a successful
development and implementation Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) for the rice paddy
sector in Pakistan. The study is a result of intensive stakeholder consultations across the agriculture
sector. This study makes an in-depth analysis of the policy landscape for mitigation of climate impacts
on the rice sector. The study aims to bridge gap between scientific and technical aspects of climate
change mitigation in the agriculture sector and policy making. The study concludes with
recommendations of actions that must be taken and capacities that could be developed to support the
development and implementation of NAMAs in Pakistan.

This effort has not only brought into account past and ongoing projects and policies to come up with a
future road map for mitigation and adaptation strategies for agriculture sector but has also given
immense importance to perceptions and concerns of farmers, agro-businesses, government and
associated stakeholders. In doing so the final document is a comprehensive assessment of gaps that
exist in the present framework of efforts and policies employed to combat climate change and measures
that need to be taken for Pakistan to meet its national and international commitments regarding climate
change.

The study discusses the paddy sector in detail and identifies perceptions, capacities and readiness of
farmers and policy makers to deal with challenges and opportunities in the rice paddy sector. The
analysis is based on three survey tools that assess farmers’ knowledge on a variety of parameters that
can be involved in mitigation and adaptation practices such as farm management practices, input
application, water management, pest management etc. The study establishes that farmers as well as
policy makers are well aware of the risks and opportunities surrounding climate change impacts on the
rice paddy sector. Given the rice incentives and road map, there is immense potential for mitigation and
adaptation measures to be successful.

The study also provides future roadmap for NAMAs that policy makers can employ to successfully
achieve their commitments with the international climate policy regime. The study reviews the National
Water Policy 2018, Climate Change Policy 2012 and Climate Change Act 2017, National Food Security
Policy 2019, and other national and provincial policies to identify gaps and opportunities to prepare
context specific NAMAs including a national Monitoring, Reporting and Verification system to account
for emissions from the rice sector.

Based on this analysis, the report concludes Intervention packages that revolve around technology
transfer, capacity development, technical assistance for data management, climate mitigation finance
and research and development. A feasibility analysis has also been conducted to provide pointers for
affirmative action to reduce Short-Lived Climate Pollutants, such as methane.
Country Report

1. Introduction
1.1 Objectives of the report
This report aims at building a better understanding of the rice paddy sector in terms of how it is impacted
by climate change and also its contributions to the climate change scenario particularly with regards to
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. Rice paddies emit methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide(N2O) that are
Short Lived Climate Pollutants (SLCPs) and contribute to global warming. According to some estimates,
around 12% of global annual methane emissions come from rice paddies (World Economic Forum,
2019). Flooding paddy fields is the most common cultivation method for rice producers and is the
primary cause for methane emissions.

This report aims at identifying approaches and interventions leading to reduce GHG emissions from
paddy sector in Pakistan and contribute to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.

The study analyzes the scope and objectives of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA)
against baseline scenario of related greenhouse gas emissions for rice sector in the context of
management challenges, the systemic barriers, institutional arrangements and capacity of
stakeholders. It is an attempt to identify entry points within national, and subnational policies and
practices directed at transformational change within the rice sector. Furthermore, the report aims to
present a road map for the next steps to concretely formulate implementation plan for intervention
packages which include introduction of enabling technologies, financing, and capacity-building to
achieve reduced emissions against 'business as usual' emissions in 2020, the baseline as per NDC of
Pakistan in 2021.

The study draws upon extensive consultations, field research and analysis of literature and polices.
Proposed actions aim to strengthen individual and institutional capacities of relevant ministries and
other national institutions of Pakistan, in multiple areas relevant to rice paddy, particularly to strengthen
the monitoring, reporting and valuation system (MRV) to track emissions. It also explores avenues of
private sector collaboration to strengthen NAMA implementation through, for example, investment in
green technology development. Furthermore, the effort aims to strengthen the regulatory framework for
sustainable agricultural practices particularly for the rice sector by mainstreaming climate change
mitigation actions into policies. Lastly, the document will serve as a guide for public and private sector
partners to develop the project proposals for green financing solutions for adaptation to climate change
to reduce vulnerabilities of farmers and the value chain, and NAMAs in the rice sector.

1.2 Agriculture as a major economic sector of Pakistan

Agriculture in Pakistan is one of the most
sensitive economic sectors to climate
change threats combined with growing
population, cycles of low productivity due to
the dwindling quality and quantity of 2019-20
resources such as water, and ever-
increasing cost of production for farmers. Agriculture
36% 37%
Agriculture is critical for Pakistan not only 38%
because it is a major economic sector but 2000-01 43% Manufacturing
also because it is Pakistan’s socio-cultural
and political backbone. Majority of Services
Pakistan’s poor population is directly or 21%
indirectly dependent on agriculture. 63% of
Pakistan’s total population reside in rural
23%
areas hence the importance of Pakistan’s
agriculture sector cannot be stressed less1.
Agriculture thus not only has a strong Figure 1: Agriculture's share in employment
economic role for Pakistan but also directly
impacts Pakistan’s society. Over the years, with the growth and diversification of economy, agricultural

1
World Bank, Rural Population (% of Total Population) Pakistan, www.data.worldbank.org.

9|Page
contribution to Pakistan’s GDP has declined from 43% in 1960 to 23% in 2020 (World Bank,2020).
Agriculture sector growth has seen cycles of boom and bust over the course of the country’s existence.
Yet the overall trend has been towards a decline due to a host of reasons. Even today the agriculture
sector generates 37% of Pakistan’s total employment as shown in Figure 12. Furthermore, many other
employment avenues are also directly or indirectly associated with the agriculture sector. These include
agro-industry such as processing, input supplies, agro-machinery and various value chain services.
Climate change aggravates challenges faced by Pakistan’s agriculture sector making it difficult to
increase growth rates and improve agricultural systems to ensure secure value chains, food security,
livelihoods, and sustainability.

Agriculture is also one of the major employers of female labour force in Pakistan3. It has a higher
percentage of women workforce when compared to other sectors and the national average.
Outmigration of men to other more secure employment opportunities in manufacturing and service
sectors is a leading factor for women getting more involved in farming activities. At the moment, as
shown in the charts below, 67.9% of workforce employed in agriculture is women, whereas national
average of women in workforce is only 21.4%4. Many household incomes and food provision depend
on female participation in the agriculture sector. Each province has more than 30% of its labour force
engaged in the agriculture sector as depicted in Figure 2 & 35. Agriculture thus is one of the main drivers
of poverty reduction in Pakistan.

EMPLOYMENT BY PROVINCE (%) E M P L O Y M E N T B Y S E C T O R ( %)

Agriculture Non-Agriculture Male Female

71.6
67.9

62.5 61 63.6 59.9

68.2

32.1
28.4

37.4 39 36.5 40.1

31.8

P A K IS T A NP UNJA B SINDH K P KB A L O C H I S T A N AGRICULTURE NON-AGRICULTURE

Figure 3: Women /men’s employment in agriculture sector Figure 2: Women and men’s employment by sector
by province

As shown in Figure 46, wheat is the largest crop with 8.8 million hectares, followed by rice at the second
position with 3.0 million hectares under cultivation. Cotton is grown at 2.5 million hectares, maize at 1.4
million hectares and sugarcane at 1.1 million hectares 7.The area under cultivation for each of these
crops marginally changed on a year-to-year basis, but the overall trend shows a gradual increase in the
cropped area for rice and maize, whereas area under cotton has been on a decline during the last
decade. Major crops under Pakistan’s agriculture system have remained the same over the years. Low
rate of crop diversification is also one of many challenges that Pakistan’s agriculture sector has to deal
with in the face of drastic climate change.

Livestock is a leading subsector in agriculture, making the highest contribution in agriculture GDP of
Pakistan (Figure 5). It is followed by the crop sector that holds second position among the subsectors.

2
World Bank Open Data Source, www.data.worldbank.org
3
Planning Commission of Pakistan, 11th Five Year Plan, Chapter 21 Agriculture and Food Security www.pc.gov.pk
4
Pakistan Labor Force Survey 2021, www.pbs.gov.pk
5
Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, Labour Force Survey 2020-2021, www.pbs.gov.pk
6
Economic Survey of Pakistan 2019-2020, http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey
7
ibid
Country Report

Livestock’s share in agriculture GDP is 60.7% whereas crops sector contributes 35.1% in the agriculture
GDP8. Over the years the share of livestock subsector is increasing, while the share of crops sector has
been on decline. Livestock sector is also the major employer of female led agri-businesses. The crop
sector is further divided into major crops and other crops. Major crops include wheat, rice, cotton, maize
and sugarcane. Other crops include fruits, vegetables, fodder, floriculture, etc. Fish and forest
subsectors contribute around 4% combined9.

2012-13 2018-19
2011-12 2019-20
8,805

60.7%
8,650

55.6%
27.9%
23.8%
3,034

2,835

12.3%
11.3%
2,571

2,517

4.2%
4.2%
1,404

1,101
1,087

1,058

MAJOR OTHER LIVESTOCK FOREST

CROPS CROPS AND
WHEAT RICE COTTON MAIZE SUGARCANE FISHERIES

Figure 4: Area (million hectares) under major crops Figure 5: Sub -sector share (%) in GDP

One of the major reasons Pakistani farmers shy away from adopting new crops is lack of established
markets, information asymmetries and lack of a reliable capital lending system. Similarly, technology
adoption among farmers has been dismal. Limited affordability, understanding, availability, and lack of
tangible benefits have been some of the factors that have stunted technological adoption trends in
Pakistan. Furthermore, this situation is exacerbated by poor investments in research and development
particularly related to the seed sector which has led to failure in varietal development with improved
resilience to changing weather patterns.

Despite Pakistan’s long history with agriculture and its inherent cultural and societal importance,
Pakistan’s ability to develop a comparative advantage to boost its agricultural sector and make it more
resilient has been limited. In the coming decades Pakistan will require to improve agricultural
productivity and incomes for farmers in order to remain food secure. Pakistan’s vulnerability to climate
change is alarming. Adverse impacts of climate change are already being felt, in the form of increasing
temperatures, seasonal variability, shifting agroecosystem boundaries, invasive crops and pests, and
more frequent extreme weather events. Climate change is reducing crop yields, the nutritional quality
of major cereals, and lowering livestock productivity. In Pakistan’s case substantial investments in
adaptation and mitigation will be required to maintain current yields and to achieve production and food
quality increases to meet demand of an increasing population. Sectoral and sub-sectoral strategies are
needed for mitigation and adaptation actions targeting specific crops. One such critical crop is rice
paddy, which is essential for local livelihoods and country’s revenues.

1.3 Importance of rice for Pakistan

Rice is one of the most important staple crops feeding billions of people globally. It is also the second
staple food crop of Pakistan, after wheat and it is the second largest earner of foreign exchange after
cotton, therefore, rice fields have been a major concern for climate scientists.

Pakistan is the 11th largest rice producing country, with 8% share in world’s production, and 10% share
in world’s trade of rice (USDA,2021)10.

8
Pakistan Economic Survey 2019-2020, www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_20/02_Agriculture.pdf.
9
Pakistan Economic Survey 2019-2020.
10
United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Services, Global Market Analysis, 2021 https://apps.fas.usda.gov

11 | P a g e
As shown in Figures 7 and 811, Pakistan produces an average 7.2 million tonnes of rice annually (with
some variations from year to year), cultivated over an area of 3 million hectares. Punjab has the highest
area under rice cultivation, followed by Sindh. 90% of the total rice production comes from these two
provinces. Punjab produced 4.14 million tonnes of rice, which was cultivated on 2 million hectares.
Sindh produced 2.37 million tonnes of rice cultivated on 0.77 million hectares. Rice production in
Balochistan was 0.5 million tonnes, cultivated on 0.17 million hectares, and KP produced 0.15 million
tonnes cultivated on 0.06 million hectares.

An analysis of history suggests that Punjab and Sindh competed for top position in rice production from
1947 to 1998, but Punjab’s production of rice exponentially took-off in the 2000s, and it has maintained
a leading position for rice production ever since. Punjab now has 2.6 times more area under rice
cultivation.

4,500 4,144
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000 2,374
1,500
1,000
500 535
153
-
1959-60
1947-48
1950-51
1953-54
1956-57

1962-63
1965-66
1968-69
1971-72
1974-75
1977-78
1980-81
1983-84
1986-87
1989-90
1992-93
1995-96
1998-99
2001-02
2004-05
2007-08
2010-11
2013-14
2016-17
2019-20
Punjab Sindh KhyberPakhtoonkhaw Balochistan

Figure 7: Timeline of provincial rice production (000 tonnes)

2,500
2,029
2,000

1,500

1,000 776

500
173
- 63
1998-99
1947-48
1950-51
1953-54
1956-57
1959-60
1962-63
1965-66
1968-69
1971-72
1974-75
1977-78
1980-81
1983-84
1986-87
1989-90
1992-93
1995-96

2001-02
2004-05
2007-08
2010-11
2013-14
2016-17
2019-20

Punjab Sindh KhyberPakhtoonkhaw Balochistan

Figure 6: Timeline of provincial rice area (000 hectares)

Rice is grown in five production zones in Pakistan (Figure 9) 12. Zone one constitute the northern high
mountainous areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where rice is grown in Swat and Mansehra districts; zone
two is in the central Punjab comprising Sialkot, Sheikhupura, Narowal, Gujranwala, Hafizabad,
Nankana Sahib and Lahore districts; zone three is in South Punjab which includes Multan, DG Khan,
Sahiwal and Bahawalpur districts; zone four is in upper Sindh and Balochistan with Larkana, Jacobabad

11
Agricultural Marketing Information System, amis. www.pk/Agristatistics/Data /
12
Recreated from www.ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/cropview/comm_chartview.aspx
Country Report

districts in Sindh, and Nasirabad and Jaffarabad districts in Balochistan; and zone five is in lower Sindh
constituting of Badin and Thatta districts.

Zone 1: North KP
Types of Rice: JP-
5, Kashmir
Nafees, Swat-I,
Swat-II, Dilrosh-
97, Fakher- e-
Zone 3: South Malakand
Punjab

Types of Rice: IR- Zone 2: Central

6, DR- 82, DR-83, Punjab
DR-92, Sada Types of Rice:
Zone 4: North Super Basmati,
Hayat, Sarshar,
Sindh and Basmati 370,
Shahkar and rice
Balochistan Basmati Pak,
hybrids Basmati 385,
Types of Rice: IR- Basmati 2000,
6, DR-82, DR-83, Shaeen Basmati,
DR-92, Sada Basmati 515, PS-
Hayat, Sarshar, 2,KS-282, KSK-
133, NIAB IR- 9,
Shahkar and rice
and rice hybrids.
hybrids

Zone 5: South Sindh

Types of Rice: IR-6,

Shadab, Shua-92,
Khushboo-95 and
hybrids

Figure 8: Rice Production Map of Pakistan (1 dot = 5000 ha)

Rice grown in Pakistan may be classified in aromatic Basmati and coarse rice varieties. Basmati is a
variety of long, slender-grained aromatic rice, which is traditionally grown in parts of India, Nepal and
Pakistan. Basmati is considered a premium rice which is mostly consumed in developed market and
fetches a higher price compared to coarse rice varieties. Central Punjab (zone two), because of its agro-
climatic and soil conditions, is more suitable for Basmati rice cultivation. Kalar bowl area, which refers
to a type of soil suitable for Basmati production, is famous for producing Basmati rice and is between
the river Ravi and Chenab in Punjab. Coarse rice verities, including IRRI and hybrid, are grown in central
and south Punjab and rest of the country’s rice producing areas.

Challenge of low yield in rice cultivation

Pakistan’s yield of milled rice per hectare is often comparable within the region with India and Nepal. In
comparison, Australia, USA, Brazil and China are among the top performing nations (Figure 10)13. Rice
yields per hectare in comparison to the top performing countries is problematic due to the fact that
aromatic rice varieties, such as the indigenous Basmati, are generally low yielding when compared to
non-fragrant varieties14. Nonetheless localized comparison of yields within Basmati regions in the
country and in south Asia suggests that productivity may still be increased through improved agronomic
practices.

Pakistan’s low rice yield is mainly an outcome of a combination of factors, which among others include:

- Outdated production technologies;

- Use of poor-quality seeds;

13
www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?commodity=milled-rice&graph=yield
14
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331968296
Environmental and Experimental Botany, Volume 69, Issue 2, November 2010, www.sciencedirect.com

13 | P a g e
 - Poor access to mechanization services;
- Low plant population because of poor labour skills;
- Water shortage and poor water management;
- Low access to bank loans for improved farm mechanization;
- Limited knowledge and skills among farmers on modern production technique;

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Australia Turkey, USA Egypt, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Thailand, Madagaskar, Mozambique,
Morocco, Peru China, EU-24 Mexico, Russia Iran, Ukrain Malaysia, Myanmar, Burkina Cameroon
Nepal Combodia

Figure 9: Global milled rice yield (MTs per Hectares)

Introduction of hybrid varieties has increased average yields for Sindh and Balochistan, where these
varieties are more popular among the farmers. Punjab continues to be flagship of Basmati rice, which
has a low average production. Average yield of Basmati is 1,989 Kgs per hectare, which is 35% less
than IRRI grown in Punjab, and half the average yield of hybrid rice being grown in Sindh. The higher
economic return of Basmati compensates this gap, yet an increasing number of farmers are shifting to
high yield IRRI and hybrid varieties, which poses a threat to the future of Basmati cultivation in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s rice statistics by provinces are given in Table 1:

Table 1: Variety wise provincial rice production15

Variety Punjab Sindh KP Balochistan Total
Pakistan
Basmati 1,416.4 - - - 1,416.4
Area (000 IRRI 134.8 351.6 - - 486.4
hectares) Others 289.7 476.7 61.6 169.8 997.8
Total 1,840.9 828.3 61.6 169.8 2,900.6
Basmati 2,816.6 - - - 2,816.6
Production
IRRI 362.5 878.3 - - 1,240.8
(000
tonnes) Others 718.9 1,972.2 147.5 553.8 3,392.4
Total 3,898.0 2,850.5 147.5 553.8 7,449.8
Basmati 1,989 - - - 1,989
Yield (Kgs.
IRRI 2,689 2,498 - - 2,735
Per
hectare) Others 2,482 4,137 2,394 3,261 3,428
Total 2,117 3,441 2,394 3,261 2,568
*the data is for year 2017-18

15
Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, Statistical Yearbook 2019, www.pbs.gov.pk
Country Report

Rice value-chains
Rice is fully developed and matured sector with functional value-chain. It is dominated by private players
with a limited role of the government. The government is only involved in regulating input quality,
carryout R&D for new crop varieties, provision of small grants to farmers for purchase of farm
technologies, and provision of extension services to the farmers. The rice value-chains constitutes an
extensive network of input suppliers, rice growers, grain traders (artis), rice millers, distributors,
wholesalers and retailers for local marketing, and exporters for international trade of rice. A typical rice
value-chain for domestic market of Pakistan16 is given in Figure 11:

Figure 10: A Typical Rice Value-Chain for Domestic Marketing in Pakistan

According to Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan, there are over 750 rice millers operating across
Pakistan. Rice millers are modern enterprises, operating modern technologies in rice processing, and
have implemented advanced quality management systems to operate their rice mills. Managerial staff
of these companies is mostly skilled, educated, and trained resources. A significant volume of rice being
produced in Pakistan is sold as a commodity or without being labeled or branding. Wholesale channel
is used for sale of non-branded rice in low-end markets, restaurants, or eateries purchase.

Few of the rice millers also owns well-known and established local brands of rice. They sell branded
rice in the domestic markets, catering mainly to mid to high-end consumers. These brands are
distributed by company operated networks that reach customers via grocery stores of major
metropolitan cities in Pakistan. Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan (REAP) is an organized and
influential association that represents the private sector from rice value-chains. REAP members are
mainly the millers and exporters of rice, so it addresses issues pertaining to the international trade of
rice as the primary agenda.

Pakistan’s export of rice

Rice is the leading export item among the agriculture products grown in Pakistan. Rice worth US$2.1
million was exported from Pakistan in 2019-20, which at the moment constitute 45% Basmati rice and
55% coarse varieties17. Pakistan was the third largest exporter of rice in 2021 following India and
Thailand18. Basmati export from Pakistan was US$1.37 billion in 2008 and it has been on a decline ever
since as shown in the following figures19. Export of Basmati got as low as US$395 million in 2016, and
then it recovered gradually. The decline in export of Basmati is mainly because of lower total production
in Pakistan. Many farmers from central Punjab (the Basmati rice belt) are turning to growing coarse
varieties, for convenience in cultivation, higher yields and better returns.

Basmati traditionally requires flooding and tilling the paddy fields and manual planting of seedlings. This
operation is quite costly and manual transplantation results in lack of precision with respect to plant
density and subsequently low yields. However, through mechanization of rice transplantation, improving
Basmati varieties through R&D, provision of certified seeds to the farmers, and making advisory support
available, etc. the yields for Basmati may be increased, which will restore farmers’ preference for
growing Basmati again.

16
www.pacra.com/sector_research/Rice%20Sector%20PACRA_1604759631.pdf
17
Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan, Export History 2011-2021, https://www.reap.com.pk/exporthistory
18
Daniel Workman, World’s Top Rice Exporters, 2021, https://www.worldstopexports.com/rice-exports-countrys
19
Agricultural Marketing Information System, Government of Punjab, www.amis.pk/Import

15 | P a g e
 2,277 1,600,000
2,101
1,942 1,400,000

1,200,000

1,000,000
900
800,000
416 373 419
254 260 311
152 88 111 231 120 123 600,000

400,000

200,000

2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2009-10 2019-20 Coarse Rice Basmati Rice

Figure 12: Pakistan's Agriculture Export (US$ 000) Figure 11: Pakistan's Rice Export (US$ 000)

Gulf (including UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman) and European countries, UK and USA make up the bulk of
Basmati export from Pakistan. Coarse rice varieties are exported mainly to China, Afghanistan,
Malaysia, Yemen and several African nations. China and UAE. China is the leading buyer for coarse
rice from Pakistan, and it also imports Basmati in significant volume. Similarly, UAE is a leading buyer
for Basmati rice from Pakistan, and it also imports coarse rice is significant volume. Top 10 importing
countries for Basmati and Coarse rice varieties are given20 in Table 2:

Table 2: Top ten trade partners for Pakistani Basmati and Coarse Rice

Top 10 Trade Partners for Basmati Rice Top 10 Trade Partners for Coarse Rice
Sr.
Import Partner Value US$ 000 Import Partner Value US$ 000
1 UAE 195,047 China 213,300
2 Saudi Arabia 73,337 Kenya 153,755
3 Oman 49,150 Mozambique 84,727
4 Yemen 44,240 Afghanistan 57,949
5 China 33,811 Tanzania 52,638
6 UK 33,504 Madagascar 40,106
7 Kazakhstan 29,251 Benin 37,680
8 USA 28,830 UAE 33,969
9 Kenya 24,217 Philippines 29,531
10 Italy 21,263 Somalia 29,451

20
Pakistan Credit Rating Agency Limited, www.pacra.com/sector_research/Rice
Country Report

The following map21 leading markets for Pakistan’s basmati and coarse rice export:

Figure 13: Map indicating Pakistan rice export markets

Rice thus is one of the most strategic crops for Pakistan in terms of food security and foreign exchange
earnings.

Energy sector in Pakistan

contributes a huge amount of Pakistan's GHG Emissions by Sector
GHG i.e., 47%. Agriculture
contributes to a total of 44% GHG 5% 4%
emissions in Pakistan22 to the
overall emission in the country.
Shares in GHG emission by
different sectors in Pakistan23 are 47%
reflected in Figure 6.
44%
Due to high demand for water for
production, and growing
international demand for
sustainable rice, this crop has
also acquired an important space
in the discussion on climate Energy Agriculture Industrial Processes Solvents Waste Others
change. There is a great potential
for Pakistan to tap potential in
modern sustainable agronomic Figure 14: Share in GHG emission by major sectors in Pakistan
practices in rice for better
adaptation and mitigation.

21
Rice Exporters Association Pakistan, https://reap.com.pk/riceimportingcountries
22
Emissions Summary for Pakistan, 2015 https://di.unfccc.int.
23
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, www.di.unfccc.int/ghg_profiles/

17 | P a g e
1.4 Methodology
This study was conducted using multiple qualitative research tools including digital surveys, focus group
discussions, in depth interpersonal interviews and field observations. Extensive review of literature was
also conducted to develop a robust mix of primary and secondary data analysis. A total of 167
participants participated in three surveys including xx rice experts / private sector players / researchers
/ decision makers, xx field practitioners, and xx farmers. Most of the respondents came from Punjab
and Sindh provinces.

The survey assessed participant understanding and perceptions on the subject of climate change and
greenhouse gas emissions in the rice sector. The survey also explored farm management challenges
that contribute to GHG emissions in rice. Furthermore, the survey assessed NAMA options in rice,
barriers to implantation and remedial measures.

An Advisory Group was established by UNEP to regularly meet and deliberate on the methodology,
identify data needs, review initial findings and provide feedback at every stage till the final report. the
group presented Agriculture department, government of Punjab and Sindh, private sector and farming
community.

Extensive rounds of collective multi-stakeholder workshops were also conducted in Punjab, Sindh and
at national level to clarify each stage of data obtained and analyze to acquire joint understanding and
consensus on NAMA and Adaptation packages (List of stakeholders engaged in the consultation
process is given in Annex 1).
Country Report

19 | P a g e
2. Climate Chang and Rice
2.1 Perceptions regarding climate change impact on the agriculture sector
especially the rice crop
Promoting climate-resilient agriculture, including implementing climate mitigation and adaptation
strategies, requires farmers and other agricultural stakeholders to first acknowledge climate change
and its impacts in agricultural systems. Despite scientific evidence regarding adverse changes in the
agriculture sector triggered by climate change, there are segments of stakeholders debating factual
evidence, extent, and real causes of these changes. Most farmers in Pakistan acknowledge erratic
changes in hydrometeorological patterns, shifts in of growing season, and prevalence of new diseases
and insect pests. They, however, do not associate these patterns to global climate change causing local
impacts in various ways. This is not only true for Pakistan. Many among the general public globally, let
alone farmers, do not consider the link between anthropogenic activities and climate change 24. Lack of
consensus hinders a successful implementation of scientific interventions related to climate change
mitigation and adaptation. Hence the shift towards climate resilient agriculture and sustainable food
systems is alarmingly slow. This was supported by the responses of survey participants all of whom
recognized climate change as a serious threat to agriculture.

Pakistan had to bear total of US$3792.52 million losses from 1999 to 2018 due to climate change 25.
Most farmers recognized multiple ways in which climate change impacted rice crop. Yet most farmers
failed to adopt to the reported changes due to a number of reasons discussed subsequently.

The most significant impact noted by farmers include water shortage, changes in soil health, lower
yields, invasive pest and disease attacks, erratic weather events such as floods and droughts (Figure
15). In total 38% farmers reported drop in yields whereas 31% stated that they had losses at harvesting
time (e.g. due to lodging of crop from strong winds or torrential rain just before harvesting).

80% 73%
70%
60% 51%
50% 41%
39% 37%
40%
27% 27%
30%
20% 15%
10%
0%
Water shortage Insects & Disruption in Sterility Flood and Soil Poor quality Variety specific
diseases sowing drought degradation grain impact
outbreak /harvest time

Figure 15: Survey findings, major impacts of climate change on rice

Subsequent discussions with stakeholders revealed that these threats had not translated or deployed
into any adaptative strategies by the farmers due to lack of knowledge and capacities regarding
appropriate measures. One of the examples is to use appropriate harvesters that are suited to harvest
lodged crops to minimize losses. Another example is to determine best varieties that withstand storms
and do not lodge. Early maturing varieties is also an answer. None of these solutions are generalized
ones and may have to be used in specific conditions. It is, however, clear that the farmers do not have
information or requisite capacities to automatically resort to these solutions.

24
Menalled et.al, Climate Change Perceptions and Observations of Agricultural Stakeholders in the Northern
Great Plains,2018, https://waferx.montana.edu/documents
25
Elahi et.al., Farmer Perceptions of Climate Change, Observed Trends and Adaptation of Agriculture in Pakistan,2019,
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30341722/
Country Report

Farmers were asked about major constraints in switching to adaptive solutions or how they could
prevent yield losses. They reported as follows:

• Lack of access to mechanization (to enhance water efficiency, make harvesting more
efficient, manage residue)
• Non-availability of or access to quality inputs (most notably seed)
• Inability to manage to grow despite water shortage
• Lack of knowledge regarding modern agronomic practices
• Lack of research & development on seed varieties particularly

A summary of farm management challenges that hinder farmers adopting mitigation and adaptation
measures is summarized in Figure 16. Awareness regarding climate change was thus critical for
farmers to establish a causal relationship between climate change and farming challenges.

80% 72%
70%
57%
60%
50% 43%
38%
40% 33% 30% 28% 28%
30% 21%
20%
10%
10%
0%
Limited / poor Conventional Water Availability of Research & New seed Insect pest Awareness on Lodging Lack of
mechanization planting shortage quality inputs development varieties outbreak options infrastructure
method

Figure 16: Survey findings, Major farm management challenges in rice

2.2 Impacts of rice cultivation on environment

The atmosphere concentration of methane has more than doubled from the pre-industrial era to
nowadays values, varying from around 700 ppb to 1800 ppb 26. It has a 25 times greater global warming
impact than carbon dioxide over a 100-year time period. According to the Project Drawdown estimates,
10% of the global methane emissions are contributed by flooded rice fields 27. Shifting from traditional
rice cultivation practices would thus have significant impact on reducing methane emissions. Aspects
of traditional farming practices that contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions include use of

Residue burning
2%

Rice cultivation
36%

Enteric fermentation
51%
Manure management
11%

Figure 17: Agricultural activity and its contribution to methane emission

26
Rodriguez et.al, American Journal of Plant Sciences, Environmental Impacts of Rice Cultivation, 2015, https://file.scirp.org
27
Lisa Elaine Held, What You Need to Know about The Environmental Impact of Rice Production, 2021, https://foodprint.org/blog

21 | P a g e
 rice varieties which are poor in resource optimization, unbalanced nutrient application, improper tillage
and excessive use of water28. General agricultural practices, also associated with rice cultivation, further
exacerbate methane emissions that ultimately have a warming effect on the planet. Figure 17 provides
a snapshot of the scenario29. Similarly, rice production also produces nitrous oxide since nitrogen is an
essential nutrient for plants. One of the most common sources for nitrous oxide is nitrogen from fertilizer
application. Nitrous oxide has a greater global warming potential than methane. It is estimated that this
gas is 300 times more potent to cause greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide over a 100-year time
period. Globally, 40% of nitrous oxide emissions come from human activities, agricultural soil
management is the largest contributor to global nitrous oxide emissions. In the United States 74% of
nitrous oxide emissions are associated with agricultural soil management due to the ever-increasing
use of fertilizers30. As shown in Figure 18 and 19, the survey findings revealed that most stakeholders
were aware of these facts.

100%
81% 76%
80% 72%

60% 48%
40% 28%
20%
3%
0%
Residue burning GHG emissions Water High agro-chemical Environmental Other
scarcity/inefficiency safeguards

Figure 19: Survey findings, Major environmental challenges in rice

3 Continuous flooding /standing water

Rice residue burning
2
Puddling method of rice cultivation
2
Unlevelled rice fields

1 Type/method of fertilizer application

Long duration rice varieties
1
Poor plant population
0

Figure 18: Survey findings, Major contributing factors to GHG emissions in rice

Recognition of the impacts of processes and practices in rice production is the first step in ensuring
implementation of adaptation and mitigation actions. Though this recognition was seen to be less
convincing for farmers, the discussions led to the conclusion that for adaptation and mitigation
measures to work they needed to be paired with tangible incentive measures. Otherwise for example
in a country like Pakistan where water is a free resource, farmers would not be willing to put in extra
efforts to use water efficient techniques such as alternate wetting and drying.

28
Paul Hawken, Drawdown Project, 2017, https://drawdown.org/solutions/improved-rice-production
29
https://file.scirp.org/pdf/AJPS_2015082514031710.pdf
30
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#nitrous-oxide
Country Report

3. Current Farm Management Practices in Rice Production

This chapter is an outcome of a survey conducted with rice agronomists, field staff of agricultural
advisory services operated by Punjab and Sindh Agriculture Extension departments and major rice
companies. The purpose of the survey was to take stock of current farm management practices in rice
production in Pakistan and see opportunities and challenges for improved adaptation and GHG
emissions reduction.

Rice landscapes are crucial for food security and livelihoods, but are threatened by climate change and
resource degradation, while imposing large environmental impacts such as greenhouse gases, high
water use footprint, and influx of agrochemicals. Around 90% of the world’s rice is produced in
fragmented, low-productivity, high-risk value chains by smallholder producers who lack assets, land
tenure security, and access to
finance and to the markets –
which translates into high
transaction costs for financial
services. Financial investment in
rice has been minimal, giving
generally low margins, high
complexity, and uncertain returns.
Operating a farm for maximum
production and profit draws on
agricultural economics. Decision
making is largely influenced by
access to information on prices,
markets, agricultural policy, and
economic institutions such as
leasing and credit. Good farm
management practices optimize
inputs such as fertilizer, water,
and other equally important
resources to significantly reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from
rice fields. It is one of the most
important aspects of successful
rice production. It is a process of
execution of multiple
interdependent parameters in a
systematic way to improve
resource efficiency and Figure 20: Farm management practices
productivity. It comprises best
management practices at various
stages in a crop cycle (Figure 20).

Based on the feedback from the respondents, the following sections describe the key ingredients of
farm management practices and challenges faced in the field.

3.1 Managing crop calendar

A crop calendar, as shown below, is a written plan and schedule of the cropping season from land
preparation to crop establishment and maintenance, to harvest and storage. A crop calendar allows
farmers to plan for input purchase and use, determine labor requirements, organize contractors, and
other aspects of farm management. A written crop calendar is developed in advance for each cropping
season. If needed, it is updated to adapt to changing circumstances 31. A crop calendar shows the
expected dates of field activities and the actual dates of implementation of those activities.

31
Weather, pest pressures

23 | P a g e
Figure 21: Crop calendar with phases of crops and expected dates of field activities

3.2 Selection of variety

Selection of suitable rice varieties is crucial in achieving high yields and it is even more important in
context of climate resilience and resistance against insect pest and diseases outbreak. Unregistered
varieties are more susceptible to climate change, insect pest and diseases and low yields. Factors
affecting crop management, such as soil type, planting method (e.g., some varieties are better for direct
seeding), fertilizer efficiency, amount and timeliness of rainfall, potential diseases and control
measures, should also be considered in selecting varieties. Few additional factors may also favour
selection of varieties, e.g., better resistance to climatic factors (such as drought) and lodging. Use of
registered varieties results in the following benefits:

• Optimum growth and yield potential in specific rice agro-ecology

• Resilience against known pests
• Predictable growth duration (maturity length) to match the season
• Tolerance against abiotic stresses (i.e., drought and flood) in local context

3.3 Levelling the fields

Unevenness of rice field has a major effect on crop management and crop yield. Farmers reportedly
had better incomes from even fields. Unlevelled fields have uneven water distribution, plant
establishment, and growth. It takes additional time to irrigate the fields. Unlevelled fields have a higher
weed burdens and uneven maturity of crops. These factors contribute to reduced yield and quality,
which reduces the potential income from the crop. Effective land leveling improves crop establishment,
reduces the amount of water intake and effort required to manage the crop, harmonizes maturity time,
resulting in increased grain quality and yields.

Laser land leveling is a mechanical process of grading and smoothing the land to a precise and uniform
plane surface at grade or no grade (zero slope) with variation of less than ±20 mm (2cm). Laser land
leveling involves earth movement with bucket type soil scrapers and tractor mounted rear blades, but it
is laborious and expensive to finish the land surface to the exact grade.

3.4 Land preparation

Land preparation or soil tillage is one of the most expensive and critical operations conducted on a farm
each season. The primary reason for tillage is to prepare the soil so that a crop can be established.
The type of seedbed prepared depends on the crop to be planted and available equipment. Land
preparation covers a wide range of practices from zero‐tillage or minimum tillage, which minimizes soil
disturbance, to a totally ‘puddled’ soil, which actually destroys soil structure. Land preparation may
include land leveling and embankment construction used to retain water and establish crop. The
objectives of land preparation include:

- Decrease clod size to give good seed soil contact for plant establishment
- Remove, incorporate, or modify plant residue
Country Report

- Manage soil water (both wetting and drying)

- Control weeds
- Mix and incorporate soil amendments such as lime and basal fertilizer
- Control or destroy insects, their eggs, larvae, and breeding places
- Reduce wind and water erosion by leaving a rough and broken surface

Land preparation normally includes some form of tillage irrespective of the farming system. Tillage is
normally classified as primary or secondary tillage. Primary tillage is the first working after the last
harvest and normally the most aggressive tillage operation. Tillage is best done when the soil is wet
enough to allow the soil to be plowed and strong enough to give reasonable levels of support for the
tractor. This may be immediately after the crop harvest or at the beginning of the next wet season. The
dryer the soil, more power will be required to shatter and break the surface layers into smaller clods.
Primary tillage is done using disc plows, moldboard plows, tined plows and in some instances rotovators
and is generally the deepest plowing (100‐150mm) and requires the most energy.

Secondary tillage is any work completed after primary tillage is completed. It is usually shallow (50‐
75mm) and less aggressive than the primary tillage. Normally 1‐3 secondary workings are done after
primary tillage and before planting depending on soil quality, weeds prevalence, and the need for
puddling. Implements used for secondary tillage include disc and peg tooth harrows, tined cultivators,
rotovators. Puddling is the working of the soil in a totally flooded state to realign soil particles in a manner
that will reduce the deep-water percolation and leave the surface level for crop establishment. It is
normally done using tractors and rotavators or animals and peg tooth harrows.

25 | P a g e
3.5 Planting methods & timeframe
Planting the crop on time in a well-prepared seedbed helps produce a fast growing, uniform crop that
will have higher yields and will be better able to compete with weeds and pests. The best time to plant
depends on the local climate, maturity time of the variety, water availability and the best harvest time.
While rice may be transplanted (manually or mechanically) or directly seeded, the yield potential is the
same with different intake of resources. Transplanted crop matures faster in the production field;
however, it takes 5‐10% longer after establishing the nursery to harvest. The number of plants
established, and seedling vigor improve competitiveness of crop against weeds and determine the final
yield potential. Mechanical transplanters have
built-in trays or seedling boxes. Seedlings are
grown on a thin layer of soil in 30cm x 60cm trays
per seedling box. In some instances, seedlings are
grown on larger areas and then cut into rectangular
strips (mats of seedlings) that fit into the planting
trays of the transplanting machine. Manual
transplanting has been an old tradition and is often
conducted by a group of labour engaged especially
for this purpose. It is difficult to remain precise with
plant spacing and population per acre. Direct
seeded crops tend to mature faster than
transplanted crops but often face more competition
from weeds. Direct seeding is practiced in a very
limited way in Punjab only. When conducted, it is
done by broadcast, dibbling, line sowing or drilled
by using a machine in both wet and dry soils.

3.6 Weed management

A study by the Rice Research Institute32 describes the impact of weeds on paddy rice:

- Decreased yield by direct competition for sunlight, nutrients, and water

- Increased production costs e.g., higher labour or input costs
- Reduced grain quality and price
- Yield losses due to uncontrolled weed growth in direct seeded lowland rice was reported to be
between 45-75%, and for transplanted lowland rice approximately 50%.

Weed control during land preparation is crucial to reduce the amount of weed pressure in the field. Land
preparation should start 3-4 weeks before planting. Plowing destroys weeds and remaining stubble from
the previous crop. Most common methods of weed control include:

- Cultural method (stale bed, pre and post emergence of weeds)

- Manual control (post emergence of weeds)
- Mechanical control (post emergence control of weeds)
- Chemical control (weedicides, pre and post emergence)

According to the survey conducted, 80% farmers reported using weedicides as the primary chemical
control compared to 14% and 11% farmers who reported using manual and cultural methods
respectively as shown in Figure no 22.

32
Sabar & Sabir, 2020, Rice Research Institute Kala Shah Kaku
Country Report

100%
80%
80% 71% 70%
Fully
60%
Partially
40%
None
16% 19% 18%
20% 14% 11%
2%
0%
Manual Cultural Weedicides

Figure 22: Weed control Methods In Rice

Weeds should be allowed to grow before the next cultivation. In addition, a leveled field helps retain a
constant water level that controls weeds. Weed control is important to prevent losses in yield and
production costs, and to preserve good grain quality. Weed management should be practiced during
specific stages of rice production. Following management practices are recommended by agronomists
for integrated weed management, mostly at pre-emergence stage:

- Weed competitive cultivars

- 1-2 irrigations (Rauni) before land preparation
- Double irrigation (Rauni) and land cultivation before sowing
- Single or double irrigation and land cultivation will reduce the weed pressure
- Selection of proper post herbicide according to the weed species

Figure 23 presents the gradient of effectiveness of weedicide by method and stage of control.

F
i
g
Figure
u 23: Stages of weed control and its effectiveness
r
e
3.7n Nutrient management
o
Manures
, and other organic sources are used to improve soil fertility and soil organic matter content and
to 2provide micronutrients and other growth factors not normally supplied by inorganic fertilizers.
1
Application
: of these materials may also enhance microbial growth and nutrient turnover in soil. Organic
fertilizers,
: e.g., animal manure and green manure are used as fertilizers. Farmyard manure should be
added
S to the field from which wheat, or any other previous crop has been harvested before land
a
b
a 27 | P a g e
r
,
M
.
,
a
preparation for rice crop. Manures may fulfill a significant amount of the crop nutrient requirements for
nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and micro-nutrients. Over the long term, when manure with high
carbon content is applied, soil organic matter increases. As organic matter increases, more nutrients
become available due to a larger pool of nutrients. The benefits from increased soil organic matter are
exhibited by an improvement in other physical and biological properties of soil. Furthermore, additional
organic matter in the soil due to manure applications may increase our soil Cation Exchange Capacity.
The table below shows the main the ingredients of different manures.

Table 3: Nutrient content of various organic materials, Rice knowledge Bank 33

Seria Organic Material N% P2O5 % K2O%
l No
1 Crop Residue (Rice Straw) 0.5-1.8 0.15-0.26 1.2-1.7
2 FYM (Cattle Manure) 0.8-2.1 0.44-0.88 0.4-0.8
3 Compost 0.5-2.0 0.44-0.88 0.4-1.5
4 Sewerage Sludge 1.6 1.79 0.2
5 Pig Manure 0.7-1.0 0.44-0.66 0.6-0.9
6 Sheep & Goat Manure 2.0-3.0 0.88 2.1
7 Poultry Manure 1.5-3.0 1.15-2.25 1.0-1.4
8 Oil Cakes 2.5-8.0 1.15-2.25 1.2-2.3
9 Green Manures
10 Sesbania 1.7-2.8 0.1-0.2 1.4-1.9
11 Azolla 2.0-5.3 0.16-1.59 0.4-6.0
Manures may also contain components with potential liming effects on the soil. This particular
contribution may help keeping soil pH in normal levels, maximizing nutrients availability for crops. Some
of the physical properties of soil affected by manure application include:

- Bulk Density
- Soil Aggregate Stability
- Water Infiltration
- Water Holding Capacity
- Activity of Soil Biota

Some of the challenges confronted during application of various control measures include the following:

1. High cost of transportation for managing bulky material.

2. High costs per unit of nutrient.
3. Sufficient availability of fully decomposed manures
4. Manure applied during land preparation does not meet the demand of later crops
5. Material applied may have an unpleasant odor, making it undesirable for farmers and others.

Farmers believe that undoubtedly farmyard manure has positive impact on yield and soil health, but its
use is limited due to limited availability. Green crops such as Sesbania (Jantar) may be used as green
manure to enhance soil fertility and improve yields on sustainable bases. After adding manure,
ploughing of dry soil is done twice followed by an irrigation.

It is advisable to combine organic manures with the application of inorganic nutrient sources as per
requirement of rice crop. It will allow farmers to use organic materials or manure available on-farm at
low cost to supply a portion of the crop’s demand for nutrients and improve soil fertility where required.

The balanced use of fertilizers is crucial to maintain soil fertility and higher crop yields. Improved
methodology for fertilizer application to enhance and sustain rice productivity. Basal urea incorporation
into water saturated soil and top dressing in no water condition followed by irrigation has been reported
as a successful practice. Fertilizer should be applied on the basis of soil analysis and thus soil testing
facilities are necessary within farmers’ reach. Organic Nitrogen (N) sources available on-farm such as
farmyard manure and compost can be effective and financially attractive in partially meeting the N
requirement of rice.

33
http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org
Country Report

Nitrogenous/Phosphoric/Potash
Nitrogen is an essential plant nutrient being a component of amino acids, nucleic acids, nucleotides,
chlorophyll, enzymes, and hormones. Nitrogen promotes rapid plant growth and improves grain yield
and grain quality through higher tillering, leaf area development, grain formation, grain filling, and protein
synthesis. N is highly mobile within the plant and soil. N is the most limiting element in almost all soils.
Thus, proper application of nitrogenous fertilizers is vital to improve crop growth and grain yields,
especially in intensive agricultural systems. Insufficient and/or inappropriate fertilizer nitrogen
management may be detrimental to crops and to the environment. Optimal nitrogen management
strategies aim at matching fertilizer nitrogen supply with actual crop demand, thus maximizing crop
nitrogen uptake and reducing nitrogen losses to the environment.

Inorganic fertilizer is the common source of supplemental N, and it is typically more profitable for farmers
than purchased organic N fertilizers. Apply 40−50 kg N/ha as inorganic fertilizer for every ton of
additional grain yield over yield without N. At optimum levels of nutrition, the rice crop (straw plus grain)
takes up around 16 kg N per ton of grain yield (10 kg N in grain + 6 kg N in straw).

As shown in the Figure no 24, responses to the survey showed that 77% farmers apply nitrogenous
fertilizers,76% farmers apply phosphoric fertilizers and 58% potash fertilizers (as basal dose) during
land preparation.

90%
80% 77% 76%
70%
58%
60%
50%
50% Land Preparation
42%
40% 33% Tillering
29%
30% Booting
20% 13%
10%
10%
0%
nitrogenous phosphorus potash

Figure 24: Fertilizer application at different crop stages

As shown in the picture below, leaf color and crop appearance indicate the plant N status and help
determine the need for N fertilizer application. Nitrogen split applications for growth stage- based N
management using the Leaf Color Chart (LCC). The efficiency of nitrogen (N) fertilizer use can be
improved by monitoring leaf color at 7-to-10-day intervals with the leaf color chart (LCC) and only
applying N fertilizer as needed by the crop (see LCC label). The splitting pattern approach provides a
recommendation for the total N fertilizer requirement and a plan for the splitting and timing of
applications in accordance with crop growth stage, cropping season, variety used, and crop
establishment method. LCC may be used to adjust individual topdressings. The required total amount
of fertilizer N may be estimated to develop a splitting pattern. The LCC is used at critical growth stages
to adjust predetermined fertilizer N rates.

29 | P a g e
 Figure 25: Leaf Color Chart used for assessment of crop need for nitrogen

Phosphorus is an essential nutrient both as a part of several key plant structure compounds and as a
catalysis in the conversion of numerous key biochemical reactions in plants. Phosphorus is noted
especially for its role in capturing and converting the sun's energy into useful plant compounds.
Phosphorus is a vital component of DNA, the genetic "memory unit" of all living things. It is also a
component of RNA, the compound that reads the DNA genetic code to build proteins and other
compounds essential for plant structure, seed yield and genetic transfer. The structures of both DNA
and RNA are linked together by phosphorus bonds. Phosphorus is a vital component of ATP, the
"energy unit" of plants. ATP forms during photosynthesis, has phosphorus in its structure, and
processes from the beginning of seedling growth through to the formation of grain and maturity.

Thus, phosphorus is essential for the general health and vigor of all plants. Some specific growth factors
that have been associated with phosphorus are:

● Stimulated root development

● Increased stalk and stem strength
● Improved flower formation and seed production
● More uniform and earlier crop maturity
● Increased nitrogen N-fixing capacity of legumes
● Improvements in crop quality
● Increased resistance to plant diseases
● Supports development throughout entire life cycle

Phosphorus deficiency is fairly common in irrigated rice, and its damage occurs throughout the growth
cycle of the crop.

Potassium is essential in nearly all processes needed to sustain plant growth and reproduction. Plants
deficient in potassium are less resistant to drought, excess water, and high and low temperatures. They
are also less resistant to pests, diseases and nematode attacks. Because potassium improves the
overall health of growing plants and helps them fight against disease, it is known as the "quality" nutrient.
Potassium affects quality factors such as size, shape, color and vigor of rice grains. Potassium is often
the most limiting nutrient after nitrogen (N) in high yielding rice systems. K fertilizer needs to be applied
in adequate amounts in most irrigated rice fields. Other nutrients need to be applied in balanced
amounts to ensure a good crop response to K fertilizer application and to achieve a healthy and
productive crop. Split K in at least two doses if soil is sandy with leaching. Use of K at flowering
increases resistance to lodging and diseases in dense canopies with high yield target but may not
increase yields.

3.8 Water management

There is a need to improve rice water productivity as well as water use efficiency. Around 1300−1500
mm is a typical amount of water needed for irrigating rice in Asia. Irrigated rice receives an estimated
34−43% of the total world’s irrigation water, or about 24−30% of the entire world’s developed freshwater
resources.
Country Report

Alternate Wetting and Drying

(AWD) is a water-saving
technology that farmers can
apply to reduce their irrigation
water consumption in rice fields
without decreasing its yield. In
AWD, irrigation water is applied
a few days after the
disappearance of the ponded
water. Hence, the field gets
alternately flooded and non-
flooded. The number of days of
non-flooded soil between
irrigations can vary from 1 to
more than 10 days depending
on the number of factors such Figure 26: Potassium cycle
as soil type, weather, and crop
growth stage. Although AWD is
the recommended method of water management to reduce water use and methane emissions, farmers
still mostly deploy conventional irrigation methods. The first step, therefore, is to educate farmers on
how to make their conventional methods more water efficient. Farmers deploying conventional methods
need to keep water depth at 1-1½ inch at the time of transplanting and one week later. It may be
gradually increased to about 2-inch for a period of 20 days. About 25-30 days after transplanting, the
field should be kept at water saturated level without letting it dry. Afterwards, the field should be well
irrigated wisely to the saturated level till the grain formation. Watering should be stopped two weeks
before harvesting the crop. Granular pesticide may be applied in 1 to 1.5-inch standing water and water
depth should be maintained for 5 days.

The construction of channels to move water from one to the other field greatly improves the control of
water by individual farmers. Field channels allow water to be delivered to the individual seed beds
separately and the main field does not need to be irrigated. In addition, the ability to control water to the
field is important so that the farmers can retain water (especially after applying fertilizer so that the
nutrients are not lost) or when the field needs to be drained for harvesting. Construction of individual
field channels is a recommended practice in any type of irrigation system.

31 | P a g e
Large amounts of water may be lost during land soaking prior to puddling when large and deep cracks
are present due to drainage of water down the cracks, beyond the root zone. Shallow tillage operations
before land soaking may be useful. This fills in the cracks and can greatly reduce the amount of water
used in land preparation. Puddle the field to reduce water loss. For clayey soils that form cracks during
the fallow period, puddling results in a good compacted hard pan. In heavy clay soils, puddling may not
be necessary to reduce water losses because of the low infiltration rate of such soils; however, puddling
may still be necessary if the soil was cracked prior to primary tillage, if weeds are present prior to
transplanting, or if the soil is too hard or cloddy for transplanting after soaking. Despite reducing water
loss, the action of puddling itself consumes water. There is a trade-off between the amount of water
used for puddling and the amount of water “saved” during the crop growth period because of a compact
hard pan. Wetland preparation can consume up to a third of the total water required for growing rice in
an irrigated production system. Minimizing time between operations is also very helpful in saving
precious water resource during rice cultivation. The period of time between land soaking for land
preparation and planting may be up to 40 days.

High cost of water and shortage at the time of crop establishment is a growing concern. This may be
efficiently managed through dry land preparation which uses considerably less water and labor than
wet land preparation. Good bunds are a prerequisite to limit water losses. Bunds must be well
compacted, and cracks or rat holes should be plastered with mud at the beginning of the crop season
to limit water loss. Bunds should be high enough (at least 20 cm) to avoid overflowing during heavy
rainfall. Lower levees of 5−10 cm height in the bunds may be used to keep the ponded water depth at
that height. These levels can be heightened with soil when more stored water is needed.

A practical way to implement AWD safely is by using a ‘field water tube to monitor the water depth on
the field. After irrigation, the water depth will gradually decrease. When the water level has dropped to
about 15 cm below the surface of the soil, irrigation should be applied to re-flood the field to a depth of
about 5 cm. From one week before to one week after flowering, the field should be kept flooded, topping
up to a depth of 5 cm as needed. After flowering, during grain filling and ripening, the water level may
be allowed to drop again to 15 cm below the soil surface before re-irrigation. AWD may be started a
few weeks (1−2 weeks) after transplanting. When many weeds are present, AWD should be postponed
for 2−3 weeks to assist suppression of the weeds by the ponded water and improve the efficacy of
herbicide. Local fertilizer recommendations as for flooded rice may be used.

3.9 Insect & diseases control

Rice crops may be checked regularly for insects and disease outbreaks. Control measures should only
be applied when pests reach an Economic Threshold Level (ETL) as indicted in Table 4.

Table 4: Insects and diseases assessment chart

Damage and Symptoms ETL Control
Insects/disease
Grasshopper Nymphs and adults feed on Nymphs/adults / Clear field borders
leaves and stem net sweep Insecticides in
2/Nursey, 5/Crop severe cases
Stemborer, Larvae cut of central shoot from 5% dead head or Insecticide next crop
white, yellow base. Dead head-vegetative stage white heads Crop rotation
and pink borers or white head-reproductive stage Clean fallows
Leaf folder Larvae eats green leaves and form Affected leaves per Spot spraying
tube-like structure plant 2 in August
3 in September
White back plant Nymphs and adults suck plant sap Nymphs/adults per Insecticide
hopper near plant base and may cause plant:
hopper burn 15-20 in August
20-25 in Sept/Oct
Bakanae (foot Abnormal plant elongation in Clean seed and
rot) nursery. Yellowing green, thin, fungicide treated
taller seedlings in field after 2 seed
weeks
Country Report

Bacterial Leaf Water-soaked lesions from leaf tip Resistant varieties

Blight into leaf blade Manage N fertilizer
Blast Eye shaped lesions with pointed Discourage late
ends on leaves. On panicle and planting. Reduce
nodes, dark and dry late N application
Stem Rot After 2-3months, small dark spots Destroy crop
on the internodes stubble, irrigation
management

Insects and diseases may spread between fields or between seasons if not controlled properly. After
harvest, cleaning the harvesting equipment is essential to prevent further infection. Some diseases may
live on the stubble between seasons and infect a healthy planted crop. In general, plowing after harvest
removes stubble that serves as remaining food and shelter for pests, especially insects. In cases where
field was infested, all stubble must be removed from the field to prevent transfer of infection to another
crops. Many varieties have been developed with resistance to different diseases. As illustrated by the
Figure no 27 about 79% farmers fully control rice insects with chemicals (insecticides), 18% through
manual and 24% have no knowledge of insect control respectively.

100%
79%
80%
67%
59%
60% 50% Fully
42% Partially
40%
24% 24% None
18% 16%
20% 8% 9%
5%
0%
Manual Cultural Insecticides No knowledge

Figure 27: Insect pest control in rice

Use of short-duration and resistant cultivars decreases chances of fast multiplication of insect pest
populations. In short-duration cultivars, insects cannot compete as many generations, hence
populations may not reach damaging levels. Resistant varieties experience relatively less feeding
damage on their leaves and stems, which also means less entry points for bacterial and fungal
diseases. Planting at the same time (or within a 2-week window) in all the neighboring fields may help
minimizing insect, disease, bird, and rat pressure on individual fields. High nitrogen can increase
susceptibility to certain pests and diseases and thus specific fertilizer recommendations is very
important. Similarly overuse of insecticides is a common tendency among farmers and may lead to pest
outbreaks. Natural insect enemies of rice pests are also killed when insecticides are applied beyond
specified quantity, and this may lead to an outbreak of other rice insect pests. Other ways to encourage
natural pest enemies are to allow plants on the bunds and between fields to flower (yellow and white
flowers attract natural enemies).

Major Pests (insects, diseases, weeds) & their management practices

More than 100 species of insects are considered pests in rice production systems globally, but only
about 20 species cause significant economic damage. The recommended control of insect pests is
F
to
i develop and follow an Integrated Pest Management plan. As shown in Figure 28, 60% farmers
participating
g in the survey suggested that insects are major threat to rice production while 58% declared
weeds
u and 53% considered diseases as major pests of rice respectively.
r
e
n
o
.
2
4
33 | P a g e
 60%
58%

53%

INSECTS WEEDS DISEASES

Figure 28: Major pests, diseases, and weeds in rice

As revealed in survey and shown in Figure 29, about 81% farmers control rice diseases by using
fungicides whereas 56% use disease resistant varieties and 24% of farmer manage diseases by cultural
methods. 2% farmers have no knowledge regarding disease management in rice.

The four most important strategies for rice disease management are to rotate crops, plant resistant
varieties, plant in warm soil and use fungicides when necessary. An integrated approach that uses all
of these methods is the most effective and profitable. The biggest challenge for rice breeders is the
breakdown of resistance in existing varieties over the years. Therefore, breeding durable and broad-
spectrum resistant cultivars is again a challenging task.

81%

56%

24% 2%

Fungicides Use of resistant varieties Cultural methods No knowledge of controlling

diseases
Figure 29: Percentage of methods used for disease control in rice

3.10 Time of maturity

Correct timing of harvest is crucial in order to prevent crop loss. Grain losses may occur from rats, birds,
crop lodging, insects, and shattering. Timely harvesting ensures good grain quality and high market
value. Too early harvesting results in a larger percentage of unfilled or immature grains, which will result
in a lower yield and in higher grain breakage during milling. Harvesting too late leads to excessive
losses and increased breakage in rice. Timing of harvesting also affects the germination potential of
rice seed. Harvesting the crop on time is very important to maximize yields and grain quality. If crops
are harvested late, heavy losses will occur through shattering and bird attacks. Quality will also
decrease due to grain weathering, which also results in more breakages and down grading through
poor grain color.

As mentioned in Figure 30, 55% of the farmers harvest their rice crop by considering grain color and
45% farmers harvest their crop by checking grain moisture at the time of crop maturity.Most common
criteria of crop harvest in rice sector are crop color, number of days and human assessment for moisture
in rice grains rather than scientific. Harvest based on residual moisture is not common due to lack of
awareness, equipment, moisture-based pricing and fear of delayed sowing led to random or panic early
harvest deteriorating rice quality and attracting mycotoxins. Experts recommended as follows:

● 80-85% of the grains are straw colored.

● Moisture is between 20-22%, which is normally about 30 days after flowering.
● Grains in the lower part of the panicle are hard, not soft.
● Grains are firm but not easily broken when squeezed between the teeth.
 Country Report

55%
45%

GRAIN COLOR RESIDUAL GRAIN MOISTURE

Figure 30: Farmers (%) harvest their crops based on maturity indicators

Determination of residual moisture

Grain residual moisture is an important field of measurement in legal metrology that is closely related
to reliability in the international/domestic trade and quality of life. Grains are usually required to be dried
after harvest before sale or transaction because raw and wet grains are not suitable for long-term
storage as they deteriorate rapidly. Dried grains are also convenient for efficient transportation because
of their decreased weight.

As shown in Figure 31 based on respondents of survey about 43% farmers considered “Lack of
Awareness”, 63% farmers considered “Lack of Equipment” as a major challenge while 51% farmers
described “Lack of Moisture Based Mechanism”. Similarly, 52% farmers highlighted “Weather
Uncertainty” and 40% farmers deliberated “Delay in Sowing of Next Crop” as major challenge in
determination of residual moisture of in rice grains.

63%
52% 51%
43% 40%

Lack of Equipment Weather Uncertainity Lack of Moisture based Lack of Awareness Delay in Sowing
Mechanism

Figure 31: Degree of challenges in determination of residual moisture

3.11 Harvest management practices in rice

Harvesting and post-harvest loss management should be emphasized to minimize losses and maximize
production potential from land and reduce GHG footprint per kilo or production. It is extraordinary that
the tremendous efforts being made to lift rice productivity through modifications and manipulations of
the rice plant and its environment, are not matched by corresponding efforts to address the dramatic
post-harvest losses that continue to occur through much of the rice growing world. Part of the
productivity gains that have been laboriously achieved through decades of research and development
are simply thrown away after harvest in many cases. According to SRP, some 1.3 tons of food – a third
of all food produced globally – is lost or wasted every year, resulting in annual economic losses upwards
of $940 billion. As part of concerted efforts to attain the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals specific
to agriculture, the SRP recently revealed a target to cut such waste in half by 2030.

Harvesting is the process of collecting the mature rice crop from the field. Paddy harvesting activities
include reaping, stacking, handling, threshing, cleaning, and hauling. Harvesting may be done manually
using sickles and knives, or mechanically with the use of threshers or combined harvesters. Small
farmers harvest their crop manually whereas big farmers deploy mechanical means. Combined
harvesters harvest crop and manage stubble. Regardless of method, a number of guidelines must be

35 | P a g e
followed to ensure that harvest losses are kept to a minimum and grain quality is preserved during
harvest operations. Post-harvest loss minimisation offsets GHG emissions with more gain per unit of
land under flooded cultivation. Regardless of the size of the farm, following best practices are essential
to follow to reduce post-harvest losses:
- Always check the moisture content of paddy grains moisture before harvesting.
- Harvest rice crop when residual moisture content of paddy grains is attained not more than 22%.
- For harvesting, only use harvesters which are specifically designed to harvest rice crop like Kubota
combined harvester.
- Before hiring a combined harvester, it is necessary to make sure that its operator is skilled and
completely familiar with all adjustments and setting of machines required for efficient harvesting.
- Always maintain proper forwarding and cutting speed
- It is essential to make sure that gear setting, speed and clearance of threshing drum and blower
speed are as per user manual and crop condition.
- A safer approach may to take a paddy harvest sample after a little bit of time during harvesting
operation and keenly observe the sample every time to determine the cleaning efficiency, ratio of
de-husked grains and grain breakage so that necessary adjustment to combine harvester may be
made well in time as per operator’s manual to minimize the harvesting losses.
- To avoid mixing of rice verities, it is pertinent to clean the harvester by evacuating the grain tank
and by running it idle for a short time before next harvest.

3.12 Residue management

Rice straw is a by-product produced when harvesting paddy. Each kilogram of milled rice produces
roughly 0.7-1.4 kilos of rice straw depending on varieties, cutting height of the stubbles, and moisture
content during harvest. Rice straw is separated from the grains after the plants are threshed either
manually, using stationary threshers, or more recently, by using combined harvesters. The rapid
introduction of combined harvesters is a game changer since rice straw is evenly spread in the field.
Manual collection is unprofitable because of the high labor cost. Incorporation of straw in the soil is also
not possible with two to three crops per year since the turnaround time is too short for decomposition.
These constraints lead farmers to burning rice stubble directly in the field, causing the release of
greenhouse gases and smoke leading to human health hazard. With the development of recent
technologies, rice residues may be processed and managed with better practices. Scalable processing
and management options to manage rice straw may be classified as in-field and off-field options.
Changing social, climatic, environmental, and economic circumstances, particularly in Asia, are driving
transformations in rice agro-ecosystems that will undoubtedly result in changes in the residue
management strategies for rice farmers. It aligns with the response from the survey where farmers and
agriculture experts considered residue management as the biggest challenge in rice production chain.
Country Report

4. Major sustainability challenges faced along the rice value chain

Scenarios for growth in water demand suggest that because of the projected increases in food demand,
irrigated food production will need to increase significantly. Demand from other sectors will also increase
because of economic development and increase in population. Nearly all countries in the region will
need to invest considerable efforts and resources in a mixture of improved demand management of the
water sector and interventions on the supply side to achieve the very considerable improvements in
water use which are required. But approximately 1 billion people would live in regions of absolute water
scarcity.

There is a need to improve rice water productivity as well as water use efficiency. Land preparation,
soaking for maintaining water level in the paddy fields and soil saturation require more water than plant
transpiration. System and farm irrigation is quite low (in the range of 30 to 40%). A river basin
perspective should be adopted, defining the boundaries of intervention (farm, system, basin), paying
attention to managing the return flows and to water quality. However, practices which minimize irrigation
inflow are of a direct interest to farmers who receive less and more costly water. Water saving practices,
which require greater water control, typically are associated with or part of packages to improve
agronomic practices and the efficiency of use of other inputs. Available strategies include developing
improved varieties, improving agronomic management, changing the crop planting date, reducing water
use for land preparation, changing rice planting practices with wet or dry seeding, reducing water use
during crop growth through intermittent flooding, maintaining the soil in sub-saturated condition,
alternate drying and wetting, optimum use of rainfall, supplementary irrigation of rainfed low-land rice,
water distribution strategies, water recycling and conjunctive use and alternative methods to flooding
for growing irrigated rice under aerobic conditions.

Acceptance by farmers of these strategies and practices will depend on economic factors, improved
water control and management of water at the system level for a better irrigation and drainage service
and a conducive environment i.e., legal framework at national and local levels. Technical support in
upgrading irrigation systems for efficient water distribution, and agricultural support in adapting
agricultural practices to modified irrigation methods, will be equally important. Financial support to
initiate community-managed credit-schemes, human resources development at district and community
level, and a facilitating environment (market systems, storage facilities, management of agricultural
produce and sound government macro-economic policies) to permit increases in production will ensure
the economic viability.

4.1 Farm management challenges

A manager usually faces various problems such as how much irrigation water and fertilizer to use,
feeding levels, seed application rates, machinery and labor use, determination of rates and levels for
other inputs. Few major challenges of farm management in rice are shown in the following graph with
their percentages.

72%

43%
38%
30% 28% 28%

Lack of Water shortage Non availability of Lack of new seed Insect pest Lack of awareness
mechanization quality inputs varieties outbreak

Figure 32: Farm management challenges

37 | P a g e
Soil health
Soil supports life and it allows plants like rice to grow upright and turn towards the sun. It also provides
needed nutrients to ensure enough yields, and store and supply water to plants. It is estimated that 99%
of the food and fiber we produce grows on soils and only 10-12% of the earth's surface is covered by
soils available for agriculture. It helps filter water; immobilize many toxic substances, mineralize crop
residues and store carbon, and exchange gases with the atmosphere. Although these nutrients already
come from the soil, some plants like rice may still need supplemental nutrients (those added to the soil
with fertilizers) especially when higher yields are required for a growing population. Soil health four
areas that encompass soil and rice, including managing of nutrients to ensure maximum benefits for
all. Organic materials can reportedly improve a soil’s physical properties leading to better structure,
aggregation, improved water-holding capacity, and better drainage. However, these changes may not
do much to the flooded rice soils in Asia where fields are typically flooded during land preparation by
plowing or rotovating and then tilling at soil saturation (called puddling) which eventually destroys soil
structure. Incorporated or surface applied organic materials could potentially improve the physical
properties of rice soils in cases where soil is prepared without puddling like direct dry seeding. In these
cases, the potential effects on soil physical properties will depend upon tillage practices and the
decomposition rate of the added organic material. These are most effective as nutrient source for crops
would have high concentrations of essential nutrients and relatively rapid rates of decomposition which
can lead to an almost synchronized release of plant-available nutrients to coincide with the needs of
the rice plants.

Water application (water management)

Pakistan is a water stressed country and, therefore, efficient use of water is important for provision of
safe drinking water, sustainable agricultural and industrial growth. The agriculture sector, core of
national economy and food security, is highly vulnerable to changes in water availability. Alternate
wetting and drying offers both mitigation and adaptation benefits to the rice sector, which emits large
amounts of methane into the atmosphere.

Rice production consumes almost half of the water supply, resulting in negative impacts to the
environment, such as erosions and runoffs. Typical rice production practices consume too many
resources and even contribute to the overall emissions of methane. The challenge for the rice sector
now is to utilize available resources while reducing its methane emissions into the atmosphere.
Addressing this challenge through alternatives, such as AWD, can be a major boost to climate action
in the rice sector, which supplies food for half of the global population. Alternate wetting and drying
(AWD) is now accepted as a viable mitigation measure in agriculture. Through this technique, rice
farmers can reduce methane emissions, cut their pumping costs and enhance the efficiency of their
water use. AWD; however, offers a variety of adaptation options as well. A climate-smart practice that
presents both mitigation and adaptation benefits is critical to addressing climate change in rice
production. AWD reduces the frequency of flooding in the rice farms, which then improves the quality
of soil structures. A proper implementation of AWD can increase the yields of farmers in certain
conditions. Studies found that AWD improves soil quality and fertility by helping the soil absorb zinc and
nitrogen. It also allows organic nutrients to be reused by the next batches of crops.

Meanwhile, in terms of crop health, AWD reduces the incidence of certain pests and diseases, further
improving yields. Moreover, AWD increases the zinc content in grains, which will benefit zinc-deficient
people around the world. With AWD decreasing water consumption, rice production can reduce
instances of such impacts. Farms that adopt AWD also decompose rice straw better than farms
practicing traditional irrigation strategies. AWD is suitable to communities that suffer from a lack of water
supply. In general, this technique is a cheap and practical alternative for poor communities, promoting
proper utilization of available water.

Lack of climate resilient varieties

Developing rice varieties that can survive in dry conditions and yet produce adequate yield is vital in
helping farmers cope with the effects of climate change. Tackling the issue will take action from the
ground up. Given the urgency of the problem, scientists are exploring ways to make crops like rice
require less water to grow in the first place, in an attempt to produce the same amount of food using
less water. To keep rice bowls around the world full, researchers breed new varieties of rice that can
endure stresses like drought, floods and salt. Drought tolerant varieties, flood tolerant varieties and salt
tolerant varieties. To save and even boost production, rice growers, engineers and researchers have
Country Report

turned to water-saving irrigation routines and rice gene banks that store hundreds of thousands of
varieties ready to be distributed or bred into new, climate-resilient forms.

Lack of technology and mechanization

Farm mechanization is an important element to accelerate growth in agriculture sector and it’s lack is a
main constraint in increasing agricultural productivity. Mechanization is a crucial input for agricultural
crop production and historically has been neglected in the context of Pakistan’s farmers’ capacity
building and farmers are still following the traditional agricultural practices as per their forefathers which
ultimately reduced the ability to cultivate sufficient land and achieve efficient yield. Lack of capacity in
developing and adopting innovations at each node of value chains are further adding to the poor
performance of agriculture sector. Stakeholders involved at different nodes of value chains are either
not capable to adopt or they are unaware about the benefits of adoption of modern production, grading
and processing techniques. Transformation of manual transplanting into mechanical transplanting by
establishing service-providing units and strengthening local service providers for timely and cost-
effective services. Agriculture services should be recognized as an industry with proper incentives like
exemption of sales tax on rental services of agricultural machines, income tax relief & investment loans
to create local jobs significantly.

Low quality inputs

The lacks in access and affordability of good quality agriculture inputs, including fertilizer, seed,
information, advisory, bank credit, mechanization services etc., has resulted in low average yields and
poor profits for farmers. Unavailability of quality inputs and exploitation of farmers by supplying inputs
of counterfeit source is a big challenge in improving productivity and far income in rice sector. Similarly,
conventional mindset of farmers to multiply their own seed for years with least purity, more genetic
variability, and susceptible to environmental impact.

Lack of knowledge for best management practices (BMP)

Manual transplanting of rice results in an increase in cost of production as well as delayed transplanting
(due to shortage of labor) and less plant population (45,000-50,000) than the optimum (80,000 plants
with two plants per hill) reducing yield significantly. Lack of mechanization, optimal plant density, the
high cost of groundwater extraction, unavailability of labor & its high cost during peak sowing season
makes things harder for rice farming. Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) and Alternate Wetting and Drying
(AWD) are examples of climate change coping mechanisms that particularly address one of the main
challenges in rice-based farming: the use of water. Like the AWD method discussed in previous section,
Direct seeding, is a crop-establishment method where pre-germinated seeds are sown directly onto the
soil surface, can help address high labor cost in rice farming. It offers certain advantages viz., It saves
labour, requires less water, less drudgery, early crop maturity, low production cost, better soil physical
conditions for following crops and less methane emission, provides better option to be the best fit in
different cropping systems. Direct seeded plants tend to have better root growth and are therefore more
prepared for climatic extremes.

These technologies increase the productivity of the main sources of water used in rice farming by
reducing water losses and changing traditional practices that contribute to suboptimal use of water. On
the other hand, diversified rice-based multiple cropping system with high-value crops improves farm
productivity and farmers’ incomes. Additionally, the application of best management practices promotes
the efficient use of scarce resources such as soil nutrients while protecting and conserving the natural
resource base.

4.2 Economic challenges

Rice provides livelihoods for nearly 1 billion people, but that livelihood lacks resilience. The world’s 144
million rice smallholders disproportionately bear the risks of production but are inadequately equipped
to safeguard their livelihoods against turmoil ranging from the current COVID-19 pandemic and its
health and economic impacts to the climate crisis. Women farmers, who contribute up to 80% of farm
labor while also overseeing the education and health of households, go unrecognized for their essential
contributions and remain systemically excluded. Paradoxically, those who grow food are among the
world’s most vulnerable and food insecure. If we have to combat hunger effectively in the rice-growing
developing world, we need to produce 50-60% more rice in the next 25-30 years. This additional

39 | P a g e
production must come from existing or less land and water with the efficient use of all resources
including purchased inputs. The three factors that could contribute to increased rice productivity are: a)
developing new rice varieties including hybrids with higher yield potential; b) minimizing the gap
between farmers’ current yields and the economically exploitable potential yield of varieties they grow;
and c) reducing the post-harvest losses to improve profitability. Both biological and socioeconomic
constraints limit yields. In particular, lack of access to knowledge on crop and resource management
options and inadequate access to credit and other inputs are major limitations to rice farmers in many
developing countries.

There is high variability in rice yields among countries and regions as well as among farmers even in
homogenous domains. Profit gaps arise due to various factors, including post-harvest losses in quantity
and quality of rice grain. Biophysical, socio-economic, management, institutional, and policy factors are
responsible for yield and profit gaps. Identification of problems/causes for such gaps and development
of possible mitigation measures can only be considered the first of a twostep process. The second and
equally important step is to minimize the knowledge gap between researchers, extension staff and
farmers by developing and using viable mechanisms to transfer new knowledge and techniques from
researchers to farmers and collect feedback to re-orient research on issues critical to farmers. An
integrated crop management (water, soil fertility/nutrients, weeds/pests/diseases, and post-harvest
technology) is vital to maximize the productivity and profitability of rice farmers. All technologies and
practices should help farmers to increase and/or maintain grain yields at same or reduced cost.
Improving the quality of milled rice and increasing the recovery of head-rice will enhance farmers’
profitability. We need to train the extension staff and equip them with adequate tools so that they can
educate their farmer-clients on modern rice farming techniques. Farmers need adequate training and
technical support to improve their decision-making capacity and properly utilize the new techniques

Unavailability of working capital

Most of farmers are resource poor with small land holding following the traditional rice farming practices
with no access to working capital, quality agricultural inputs and farm mechanization due to lack of
regular support from the public or private sector. The linkage between formal financial sector and
farmers ranged between poor to completely absent depending on farm size and education level of the
farmer, among few other factors. Especially the small farmers could not get the bank loan due to a
variety of reason such as challenges in collateralization of agriculture. land, other difficult banking
documentations and lengthy procedural requirements. In absence of formal lending, the farmers rely
on informal sources of credit, which mostly means getting loan from arthi (commission agent). Loans
from arthi bounds farmers to less than fair terms and conditions and often farmers suffer to the hands
of the arthi at the time of sale of their produce and ends up earning unfair and low margins. As a result,
these small farmers had to bear the financial burden of agriculture production, thus trapping them in a
perpetual cycle of poverty due to low margins and limited income.

The current rice value chain is inefficient and causes a substantial loss to the farmers due to the poor
marketing system controlled by middlemen. These middlemen exploit the farmers’ money lending for
the purchase of agricultural inputs and to meet day to day needs. This circle of debt continues and
leaves the smallholder farmers in a precarious economic spot. In return, the middlemen procure their
paddy at lesser rate, charge their commission, and delay payments to farmers. This causes the farmer
to borrow from middlemen, who charge exorbitant interest rates. Middlemen have occupied an
important space in the economies of various countries of the globe over in different historical periods/
points in time. At present, the middlemen continue to hold an important position in the rural economy of
developing countries. It is perceived that middleman is involved in exploiting the poor by charging
usurious rates of interest trapping borrowers in a vicious cycle of indebtedness.

Market access
Farmers often face serious difficulties in accessing markets to sell their goods in the marketplace. They
are constrained by their remote location, high transportation costs, limited knowledge, and the lack of
business skills and the bargaining power they require to interact on equal terms with other market
intermediaries. Reliable market access boosts productivity increases incomes and strengthens food
security. It can contribute to reducing poverty and hunger for producing families and their communities
if appropriate measures are taken to reduce market risks and unequal market power. It isn’t always
easy to connect smallholders to markets, nor to ensure their produce meets market standards. Unequal
distributions of power also mean small producers can earn significantly less than other actors. Better
access to domestic and international markets allows small producers to reliably sell more produce, with
Country Report

better quality and at higher prices. This in turn encourages farmers to invest in their own businesses
and increase the quantity, quality and diversity of the goods they produce.

4.3 Environmental challenges related to rice production

Climate change is largely detrimental to global agriculture systems. Rising sea levels and extreme
weather events such as typhoons, heavier rains, intense heat stress, and prolonged droughts result in
enormous losses in lives, livelihoods, properties, and the environment. Rice cultivation is considered a
leading driver of habitat loss in wetlands and forests, uses one-third of the world’s fresh water, and is
responsible for 10% of global anthropogenic methane emissions. Climate impacts alone are expected
to lead to reductions in global rice supply of up to 15% by 2050. Maintaining current rice yields will thus
be an enormous challenge. Under conventional production methods, this may require an additional land
area and further increase emissions by 300 MT CO 2 equivalent34. While rice production is a major
contributor to climate change, it is also highly vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change.
Rice provides livelihoods for nearly one billion people, but those livelihoods lack resilience. The majority
of rice producers are smallholder farmers, who are especially vulnerable to the impacts of economic
instability, climate change and health crises. Climate change continues to wreak havoc on rice farming
and will continue to do so into the fore seeable future, it is thus important to be well equipped with
knowledge and resources that can help rice farmers become more resilient and better cope with its
effects. Policy makers need to integrate climate-smart agricultural technologies into the national agenda
through the institutionalization of supportive policies that are hinged on sound science-based solutions.
NAMA plans can function as an important building block to implement Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. NAMA frameworks for rice will boost mitigation of
future climate crises by developing new cultivation practices and technologies that minimize emissions,
enhance input-use efficiency, and predict and respond to future climate threats.

81%

76%
72%

Residue burning GHG emissions Water scarcity

Figure 33: Environmental challenges

Climate Change
Pakistan is vulnerable to the effects of climate change which has occurred due to rapid industrialization
with substantial geopolitical consequences. Between 2000 and 2019, the Germany-based organization
German watch ranked Pakistan as the 8th most affected country. During this period, the sub-continent
nation lost on average 500 lives annually as a result, or 10,000 over the course of the whole period.
similarly, Pakistan was ranked among the top 23 countries in the world by the UN facing drought
emergencies over the past two years. In Pakistan, climatic changes are expected to have wide-ranging
impacts, such as: reduced agricultural productivity, increased variability of water availability, increased
coastal erosion and sea water incursion, and increased frequency of extreme climatic events. Pakistan’s
climate change concerns include increased variability of monsoons, the likely impact of receding Hindu
Kush-Karakoram-Himalayan (HKH) glaciers due to global warming and carbon soot deposits from
trans-boundary pollution sources, threatening water inflows into Indus River System (IRS).

Heat Stress is increasing day by day because of the highly unpredictable changes in climate. Billions
of people are getting expose to harmful heat waves. Rice growing season is the peak season of heat
waves. In 2030, 27.5B people will expose to heat waves, 37.6B in 2060 and 41.3B in 2090.

34
https://www.sustainablerice.org/about-rice/

41 | P a g e
What Pakistan is experiencing being a perfect climate storm. The country’s Agriculture is suffering due
to heatwaves arriving earlier than expected. Due to which Pakistan have to import food items last year
mainly due to climate change, despite being a net exporter for many years.

Rice production is both a victim and a contributor to climate change. Drought, flood, saltwater, and
extreme temperatures devastate crops and risk the livelihoods of 144 million smallholder rice farmers
each growing season. At the same time, traditional cultivation methods, such as flooding paddy fields
and burning rice straw in open fields, contribute approximately 10% of global man-made methane, a
potent greenhouse gas. Rice farmers need to improve the productivity of their farms so they can grow
more on the same amount of land using less resources and with a smaller environmental footprint.

Alternative agronomic management practices such as direct-seeded rice, non-puddled rice, and
conservation agriculture, as well as the use of ICT tools like Geographic Information Systems, are just
a few of the innovations and solutions having potential to help farmers optimize farm inputs like water
and fertilizer to address this challenge. Climate change can trigger a collapse in the rice supply and
the entire food system. The health of land and water is vital for rice production but is at increasing risk.

Figure 34: Exposure to heatwaves (billion person-days per year)

https://www.fao.org/3/cb0718en/cb0718en.pdf
https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_21/16-Climate%20change.pdf

Key climate change impacts on rice are compared as in the following Figure 35.
Country Report

73%

51%
40% 39% 38% 37%

Water shortage Insects and diseases Crop lodging Disruption in Reduced yield Sterility
outbreak sowing /harvest
time

Figure 35: Major climate change impacts on rice farming

Rising temperature
Agricultural is vulnerable to climate
change. Understanding climate
change, especially the temperature
impacts, is critical if policymakers,
agriculturalists, and crop breeders are
to ensure global food security. Rice
generally grows best in places with hot
days and cooler nights. But in many
rice-growing regions, temperatures
are getting too hot. Temperature
regimes greatly influence not only the
growth duration, but also the growth
pattern and the productivity of rice
crops. Extreme heat, above 35˚ C, can

diminish grain counts in just weeks, or

even days. The most damaging effect
is on grain sterility; just 1 or 2 hours of
high temperature regime, anthesis Figure 36: Map showing regions with rising temperature
(about 9 days before heading and at
heading) result in a large percentage of grain sterility. Such extreme heat events are expected to
become common with climate change. One of the greatest threats is bacterial blight, a fatal plant
disease caused by the bacterium. The disease, most prevalent in Asia and rising in Africa, has been
reported to have cut rice yields by up to 70 percent in a single season.

Droughts & floods

As climate change makes extreme weather more common, an urgent search has begun to find ways to
meet the growing water challenge. Drought is the most widespread and damaging of all environmental
stresses, affecting agriculture in general and rice in particular. According to the International Rice
Research Institute (IRRI), about 38% of the world's land area, where 70% of the population lives and
70% of global food supply is produced, suffers from drought. Recent climate change estimates predict
the intensity and frequency of water shortage to deteriorate further. This problem has a huge impact on
the production of rice, a water-adapted plant grown in flooded fields. In the coming years, climate is
expected to become more erratic, making events such as drought increasingly common. Agricultural
technologies can play a key role in helping farmers adapt and survive. Climate change threatens
agricultural production around the world in many ways, endangering the food supply and livelihoods of
rural populations. In marginal or unfavorable rice environments, where production is already
constrained by stresses like drought and submergence, the changing climate poses additional risks.
With the advance of climate change, extreme events such as droughts and flooding are becoming more
frequent. Finding staple foods such as rice that can survive an unreliable water supply is essential to
the world’s long-term food security. Most rice plants are grown in fields, or paddies, that are typically

43 | P a g e
filled with around 10 centimeters of water. This constant, shallow inundation helps stave off weeds and
pests. But if water levels suddenly get too high, such as during a flash flood, the rice plants can die.
Striking the right balance between too much and too little water can be a struggle for many rice farmers,
especially in Asia, where over 90 percent of the world’s rice is produced.

Water scarcity
The world’s crops require 2.7 trillion cubic meters of water a year, but countries around the world are
struggling to find enough. As climate change makes extreme weather more common, an urgent search
has begun to find ways to meet the growing water challenge. Water is a vital component for a successful
and sustainable rice production. Any shortfall in water supply can affect agricultural and economic
growth, quality of life and the social stability of the country. Along with these challenges, the water
scarcity also brings secondary issues. When water is scarce, weeds become another problem for
farmers. Weeds directly compete with crops for water. It is even more pronounced in rain fed areas that
constantly struggle with water shortage because of lack of irrigation. By 2050 the demand for water will
increase by 50% globally. Rice farmers will compete with growing demand from manufacturing,
electricity, and domestic use for this natural resource. Meanwhile, land degradation, pollution, and urban
encroachment is constantly diminishing the amount of land suitable for farming.

Water availability
In most regions of the world, over 70 percent of freshwater is used for agriculture. By 2050, feeding a
planet of 9 billion people will require an estimated 50 percent increase in agricultural production and a
15 percent increase in water withdrawals. So, too, is finding ways to make the use of water in all areas
of agriculture more precise and efficient. The scale of the challenge is vast. At present, agriculture
accounts for an enormous 70% of all freshwater use worldwide, and this thirst is only going to increase.
The world’s population is expected to exceed 10 billion by 2050. And as incomes rise among the poor
in many countries, diets are shifting from primarily starchy foods to animal protein, which guzzles up
still more water.

Pakistan's water resource availability, delineating water supply system and its sources including
precipitation and river flows and the impact of increasing climatic variability on the water supply system.
The focus was on the current water usage and requirements in the agricultural sector and how changing
climatic conditions will affect the consumption patterns. With inflows expected to become more variable
in the coming years, the severity of climatic extremities will become more pronounced, driving up water
demands in addition to the demand increase from a rising population and urbanization. Over extraction
of groundwater resources is also disturbing the water calculus and pushing the country towards a critical
demand-supply gap.

Pakistan's water sector remains vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. To ensure that Pakistan
is adequately prepared to deal with the changing climatic realities, it is important to understand the
nexus between water availability, agricultural productivity and climatic variability. The work has
endeavored to highlight the same indicating the existing availability of water based on a single river
system which is Indus Basin System and its tributaries; future projections of water requirements for
crops, livestock, forest, rangelands, ecological and municipal sectors and the challenges Pakistan faces
in accommodating the increasing demand for water from competing sectors. Further, limited water
conservation practices that are contributing towards the degradation of water quality and loss.

Soil & water contamination

Climate change accelerating, and researchers raising the alarm about related threats, such as arsenic
contamination and bacterial diseases, the demand for innovation grows. Pesticides affect soil
invertebrates in many ways, from directly killing them to reducing reproduction, growth, cellular function
and overall species diversity. The contamination of groundwater occurs as a result of leaching due to
nitrate. The ground and surface waters are infested with heavy metals, whose concentration poses a
threat to humans and animals. A very small number of pesticides interacts with its targeted weed or
pest. The remainder contaminates the soil, air and water and can have significant impacts throughout
the ecosystem. Pesticides can also linger in the soil for years or decades after they are applied,
continuing to harm soil health.
Country Report

GHG emissions
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) absorb energy and slow
the rate at which energy escapes to space by acting
as an insulating agent and in turn warm the earth.
GHGs can have varying effects on the Earth's
warming. Gases differ from each other in their ability
to absorb energy (radiative efficiency), and time
they stay in the atmosphere commonly referred to
as lifetime. To compare the varying warming
potential of different gases The Global Warming
Potential (GWP) index is used. It measures how
much energy the emissions of 1 ton of a gas will
absorb over a given period of time, relative to the
emissions of 1 ton of carbon dioxide (CO2)35. The
greater the GWP, the more a given gas warms the
Earth compared to CO2 over that time period. The
time period usually used for GWPs is 100 years. Figure 37: Climate changing scenario
GWPs allow emission estimates for different gasses
to be added up by providing a uniform unit of measurement, allowing policymakers to compare
emissions reduction possibilities across sectors and gases.

The most important emissions from rice paddies include methane and nitrous oxide. Rice is responsible
for around 10% of the global GHG emissions. 12% of annual global methane emissions come from rice
paddies36. Methane (CH4) is estimated to have a GWP of 27-30 over 100 years CH4 lasts in the
environment for about a decade on average, which is much less time than CO2. Nonetheless, CH4 has
larger energy absorbing capacity than CO2. CH4 also oxidizes to form the ozone, which is a much more
potent GHG. Similarly, Nitrous Oxide (N2O) has a GWP 273 times that of CO2 for a 100-year timescale.
N2O emissions remain in the atmosphere for more than 100 years, on average. Among its many
sources, 27% of all methane emissions come from enteric fermentation due to agricultural activities.
Flooding of rice fields causes enteric fermentation by providing ideal anaerobic conditions for methane
producing microbes. As shown in figure 38, most survey respondents realized flooding as a major
source of GHG emissions. Figure 38 also revealed that survey participants acknowledged that GHG
emissions were in one way or the other related to the entire range of agronomic practices such as land
preparation and input use.

76% 72%

51%
40% 35% 34%
27%

Continuous Residue burning Conventional Unlevelled fields Type & method of Long duration Lac of optimal
flooding puddling method fertilizer varieties plant density
application

Figure 38: Major factors of GHG emissions reported by % respondents

Figure 39 shows survey respondents’ perceptions regarding mitigation solutions for GHG emissions
from rice. 53% of respondents reported laser levelling to be the most effective choice, 52% reported
AWD tube, 51% short duration varieties and 48% reported Improving nutrient use efficiency as the most
effective means of mitigating GHG emissions from rice. It is also encouraging to know that respondents
understood the prudence of using all of these solutions in combination to yield maximum benefit.

35
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials
36
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/06/how-rice-is-hurting-the-planet/
45 | P a g e
 53%
52%
51%

48%

Laser land levelling Alternate Wetting & Short duration varieties Improving nutrient use
Drying(AWD) efficiency

Figure 39: Solutions recommended by % respondents for mitigating GHG emissions

Residue burning & smog

Intensification of rice-cropping systems has been associated with the use of high-yielding and short-
duration varieties with shorter turnaround time between crops in multi-cropping systems. Furthermore,
the rapid introduction of combine harvesters constitutes a game changer because of the larger amounts
of straw that are left spread out on the field. Manual collection of the straw in the field is unprofitable
because of the high labor cost.

Incorporation in the soil poses challenges in intensive cropping systems. As a result, open-field burning
of straw has increased dramatically over the last decade, despite being banned in most rice-growing
countries because of pollution and the associated health issues. Therefore, it is important to look for
sustainable solutions and technologies that can reduce the environmental footprint and add value by
increasing the revenues of rice production systems.

Smog has emerged as a serious environmental hazard & crop residue burning is considered one of the
contributor in the formation of smog. Smog is formed as a result of chemical reactions among
suspended particles in lower part of the atmosphere, less than 5km above the ground & constitutes a
mixture of air pollutants including ozone, dust particles, smoke particles, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), nitrous oxides & oxides of Sulphur. In Pakistan, the problem of smog has been increasing in
intensity. The contribution of agriculture sector (crop residue burning) is significant for the seasonal
smog phenomenon, although it is the third sector only by emissions following transport & industrial
sector. The main reasons for burning crop residue are to get rid of trash/residue, the difficulty in soil
preparation, desire to save labor cost, to eradicate pests & to facilitate cultivation for timely sowing of
the next crop. The practice of rice straw open burning is caused by the necessity of a short turnover
time between rice and subsequent crops. Elimination or processing of rice straw should be carried
rapidly so as it does not act as a physical barrier to prepare a seedbed for the following crop. agriculture
(mainly considering rice residue burning). It accounts for 20% (121 GG) of total air pollutant emissions
with respect to other sectors. The emissions from residue burning of other crops have not been
estimated due to the fact that since smog usually happens in October & November & these two months
only involves burning of rice residue.

After harvesting of rice crop with a combine harvester, land is prepared for next crop by burning of left-
over crop residues. According to agricultural and environmental experts, crop residues burning not only
causes remarkable pollution problems in the atmosphere but also cause nutritional loss and deteriorate
the physical health of soil. According to International Rice Research Institute, open-field burning of rice
straw causes nutrient loss, depletion of soil organic matter (SOM), and reduction in the presence of
beneficial soil biota (Mandal et al 2004). Rice straw burned in the field also causes greenhouse gas
emissions (GHGE), including 0.7–4.1 g of CH4 and 0.019–0.057 g of N2O per kg of dry rice straw, and
emission of other gaseous pollutants such as SO 2, NOx, HCl and, to some extent, dioxins and furans
(Oanh et al 2011, Jenkins et al 2003). Rice straw burning is also an important source of aerosol particles
such as coarse dust particles (PM10) and fine particles (PM2.5) (Chang et al 2013), affecting regional air
quality and the radiation budget of the earth (Engling et al 2009). For these reasons and the unaffordable
health risks that rice straw burning poses on the environment, open-field straw burning has been
banned or is strictly regulated in agricultural regions across the world.
Country Report

4.4 Social challenges

Gender inequality
Women play a significant role in rice production as farmers and transplanters. Women are mainly
involved in the transplantation work and that they are most neglected segment in the rice value chain.
They are involved in the task for approximately 45 days’ time span for rice transplantation on millions
of acres in Punjab, Pakistan. There has been enormous pressure; not only for the women
transplantation workers to cover the area but also for the rice farmers to ensure in time rice
transplantation to secure optimum rice yield. This work however poses significant health hazard for
these women. With reference to the women’s contribution as transplantation workers, it was found that
this task is highly demanding and tough, but on the other hand better paid than other temporary jobs
available acquired by these women due to two reasons: There is a shortage of labor for this task; and
transplanting is a specialized task and not everyone can do this.

For closing the gender gap in access to productive resources such as land, seeds, credit, machinery,
or chemicals can increase agricultural output by 2.5 to 4%, which translates to increased food security
for an additional 100 million people. Increased participation of women in agricultural sector including
farming, research for development and extension will accelerate the realization of development goals,
such as reducing poverty and addressing food security. Joint efforts to empower women and strengthen
their role in rice production, research, and extension with the aim of narrowing the gender gap for
women is direly needed.

42%
37%

26%
23%

Decent work conditions Gender Inequality Potential of child labour Wages discrimination

Figure 40: Social challenges in rice farming reported by % respondents

Child labor
Child labor is common in agricultural communities as families often rely on children for help with
production. In some cases of bonded labor, children are born into bondage and must work to pay off
their parents’ debts. In both cases, child labor impedes the child’s schooling and development, can hurt
their health and wellbeing and perpetuates cycles of poverty. Child labor in agriculture is both a cause
and effect of poverty. Insufficient adult labor availability exacerbated by migration to towns for work,
inadequate agricultural technology and practices, and cultural tradition mean that young children are
often used for work. Lack of access to quality schools in rural areas, and cultural perceptions about the
relevance of education, are further factors encouraging child labor. Child labor can be found in
smallholder farms where children are exposed to inappropriate hazards or risks, such as through
exposure to pesticide, or where they have to work long hours, tending livestock for example. Child labor
can also be found in large plantations, where children may be obliged to work. Child labor is work that
harms, abuses and exploits a child or deprives a child of fully participating in education. It refers to
working children below the national minimum employment age, or children under 18 doing hazardous
work. Age-appropriate tasks that do not present hazards and do not interfere with a child’s schooling
and right to leisure are not considered child labor. Such family farm and off-farm activities can help
children learn valuable skills, build self-esteem and contribute to household income. Therefore, it is
important to distinguish between economic activities that do no harm to the child, and child labor.

47 | P a g e
Decent work condition
Farm workers have the right to decent work that offers fair pay, security and equal opportunities for
learning and progression in an environment where people feel safe, respected and able to organize,
express their concerns or negotiate better conditions. Decent work conditions ensure to improve the
wellbeing and livelihoods of farmers and their communities, as well as the environment. Decent work
challenges typically stem from low wages, the informal nature of working relations in agriculture, and
weak enforcement of laws and regulations. Sometimes solutions also require mindset shifts, whether
that means getting communities to recognize that child labor is a problem or working to transform long-
held gender norms. That’s why understanding the root causes of poor labor practices in an area is
necessary to effectively address the circumstances that perpetuate exploitation and abuse. It is an
enormous challenge that takes collaboration with key stakeholders across supply chains to drive
systemic, positive change together. Many farms do not meet basic health and safety requirements,
including providing proper sanitation facilities or medical care in case of injuries on the job. In rice female
transplanters are vulnerable biggest health and safety risks exposure to harsh weather, hot standing
water and long working hours. Due to the largely informal and seasonal nature of working relations in
agriculture, including in many cotton communities, there are often no or poorly enforced minimum wage
regulations. When minimum wages are paid, they are often still not enough for workers to provide a
decent life for themselves and their families. Even so, a lack of economic opportunities often leaves
workers with no choice but to accept these conditions.

Labor Rights
Labor rights are poorly understood and not enforced. Farmers and workers tend to have a limited
understanding of the fundamental principles and rights at work, including the right to organize and
bargain collectively. Agricultural workers typically fall outside worker support mechanisms (unions,
social security schemes, etc.) compared to workers in other industries. This perpetuates the risk of labor
rights’ violations as those who may be in an exploitative position may not know that they are, and
therefore not raise complaints or push back against illegal practices; or they may not have access to
safe channels to raise their complaints. The lack of regulation, social security and labor inspection in
the agricultural sector in many countries results in weak accountability for perpetrators and little
protection for workers. The dispersed farm labor makes any interventions targeted to support workers,
including monitoring or awareness raising, a real challenge to roll out and scale.
Country Report

5. Policy and Actors Framework to Manage Climate Impacts on Rice

Cultivation

5.1 Policy landscape on adaptation and mitigation

There are multiple policy documents at federal and provincial levels within climate change, water and
agriculture sectors that may have direct or indirect influence on Pakistan’s adaptation and mitigation
interests. A quick scan is presented in the following paragraphs:

5.1.1 National policies/strategies

i. National Climate Change Policy 2012 and Act 2017

Despite that Pakistan is among the lowest GHG emitter in the world, the National Climate Change Policy
(NCCP) suggests mitigation measures to reduce emissions especially from the energy and agriculture
sectors that contribute bulk of emission from Pakistan. The Goal of the NCCP is ‘to ensure that climate
change is mainstreamed in the economically and socially vulnerable sectors of the economy and to
steer Pakistan towards climate resilient development’.

Chapter 5 of the policy is on mitigation. Quoting the National GHG inventory conducted in 2008, the
Policy stated that the total emissions in 2008 were 310 million tons of CO2 equivalent. This consisted
of CO2 54%; Methane (CH4) 36%; Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 9%; Carbon Monoxide (CO) 0.7%; and Non-
Methane Volatile Organic Compounds 0.3%. From these figures it is evident that Methane is a major
contributor to the total GHG emissions from Pakistan. In Section 5.6 the policy stated, ‘the agriculture
and livestock sectors accounted for about 39% of Pakistan’s total GHG emissions in 2008. These
emissions were essentially all methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), 79%, and 21% respectively,
and originated mainly from four enteric fermentation in cattle (all in the form of methane); 2) rice
cultivation; release of nitrous oxide from agricultural soils/ nitrous fertilizer; and manure management’.
To mitigate emissions the policy calls for support of the international community in technological
innovations and provision of financial resources. Among others, the policy suggested the following
mitigation measures:

- Promote wide-scale adaptation of better management practices for agriculture and livestock with a
reduction in the use of chemical fertilizer, water, and pesticides.
- Manage water in rice paddies to control releases of methane from agricultural soils and introduce
low water dependent rice varieties.
- Develop capacities of the relevant institutions to undertake appropriate mitigation actions to reduce
GHG emissions from the agriculture and livestock sectors.

The national climate change policy was proceeded by the Framework for implementation of climate
change 2014-2030 and climate change Act 2017. The Framework provides details on how the Climate
Change Policy of the country will be implemented. As other policy document, the Framework also
acknowledges decreasing and un-predictable availability of water resources in the country. For
conservation of water resources, the Framework provides detailed Actions under Mitigation and
Adaptation sections. In Chapter 6 on Agriculture and Livestock Mitigation, the Framework indicates
increasing GHG emissions from agriculture and livestock sectors at the rate of about 3% per annum
and stresses the need for containing or slowing the growth of emission. Some of the Actions suggested
by the Framework to reduce emission in agriculture sector especially from rice production are:

- Develop and promote best management practices for methane and nitrogen management in
agriculture and livestock sectors.
- Introduce low water dependent rice varieties.
- Develop and introduce improved water management in rice paddy to control release of methane
from agriculture soils.

The Pakistan Climate Change Act was passed by the Parliament in 2017. The purpose of the Act was
to ‘meet Pakistan’s obligations under international obligations relating to climate change and to provide
for adaptation of comprehensive adaptation and mitigation policies, plans, programmes and other

49 | P a g e
measure required to address the effects of climate change and for matters connected therewith and
ancillary thereto’. The Act provided for establishment of the Pakistan Climate Change Council headed
by the Prime Minister or his nominee and Pakistan Climate Change Authority. Among others, the main
function of the Authority is to ‘formulate, comprehensive adaptation and mitigation policies, plans,
programmes, projects and measures designed to address the effects of climate change and meet
Pakistan's obligations under international conventions and agreements relating to climate change and
within the framework of a national climate change policy as may be approved by the Federal
Government from time to time’.

The Act also provided for establishment of a climate change Authority. Among others, an important
function of the Authority is, “to formulate, comprehensive adaptation and mitigation policies, plans,
programmes, projects and measures designed to address the effects of climate change and meet
Pakistan's obligations under international conventions and agreements relating to climate change and
within the framework of a national climate change policy as may be approved by the Federal
Government from time to time”.

ii. The National Water Policy 2018

The National Water Policy (NWP, 2018) recognizes and alarms severe shortage of water in the country.
The main objective of the policy is improvement of water resources and conservation in the country.
Objective 2.26 of the policy is specifically on water conservation in agriculture sector and states:

- Enhancing water productivity through infrastructure development and adoption of improved

technologies in a sustainable manner (objective 2.26).

The policy also recognizes decreasing per capita water resources in the country and states, ‘with rapidly
growing population, Pakistan is heading towards a situation of water shortage and by corollary, a threat
of food insecurity. Per capita surface water availability has declined from 5,260 cubic meters per year
in 1951 to around 1,000 cubic meters in 2016. This quantity is likely to further drop to about 860 cubic
meters by 2025 marking our transition from a “water stressed” to a “water scarce” country. The situation
calls for rapid development and management of the country’s water resources on a war footing’. The
policy also recognizes that the ‘impact on water resources is inextricably linked with climate and the
impending climate change scenario has serious implications for Pakistan’s water resources. The
changing and unpredictable precipitation patterns may have serious consequences, including flash
floods in the north and increasingly prolonged droughts in the south’.

In the chapter on Irrigated Agriculture (Chapter 10), the policy promotes the concept of ‘Crop Per Drop’
and suggests a ‘National plan for implementation of improved irrigation methods and practices. The
policy also suggests ‘extensive research and development for new varieties of crops with high yields,
lower water consumption and reduced GHG emissions.

iii. National Food Security Policy 2019

The National Food Security Policy recognizes that food security in Pakistan is still a key challenge due
to high population growth, rapid urbanization, low purchasing power, high price fluctuations, erratic food
production, and inefficient food distribution systems. Food insecurity in Pakistan is primarily attributable
to limited economic access of the poorest and most vulnerable to food. A key factor limiting access to
food, particularly since 2007, is increase in the prices of essential food items. The policy recommends
improved food availability and resilient agricultural growth, especially in water scarce and rainfed areas.
It is interesting enough to note that the policy’s focus is on securing water resources for land
development with multiple measures (e.g., to reduce groundwater depletion, harness rainwater
potential, reduce losses) and improve water productivity in agriculture through climate smart solutions
as means to improving food security.

iv. The National Environment Policy 2005

The National Environment Policy 2005 aims to protect, conserve, and restore Pakistan’s environment
for sustained development and to improve quality of life of citizens. This policy was amended when in
2011 the 18th Constitutional Amendment devolved Central Government’s functions to the Provinces.
Federal and provincial Environment Protection Agencies are mandated to ensure an effective
implementation of Environment Protection Acts (revised by the provinces). The Provincial Environment
Country Report

Protection Acts have a larger focus on brown environment and GHG emissions from non-agricultural
sectors.

5.1.2 Provincial policies/strategies

i. Provincial climate change policies

Punjab Climate Change Policy (draft 2017, approval awaited) aims for climate compatible development
and growth. The policy promotes Carbon resilient development through sustainable cities and other
carbon resilient development measures (transport, energy, slum management) and low carbon
development (which includes agriculture). Under the pillar of low carbon development, it talks about
Water-Food-Energy nexus and emphasizes on wastewater recycling and management. Improved
water-use practices in agriculture (including enhancing water efficiency and productivity, incentivizing
use of efficient devices and techniques, rehabilitate irrigation infrastructure, removing sedimentation,
constructing breeches, and upgrading the water distribution system) has been emphasized by the
policy.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Climate Change Policy is a draft from 2016 (approval awaited). Its main goal is
to achieve climate compatible development and green growth. Energy, transport, and industry are
recognized as major GHG emitters before agriculture. The proposed emission reduction measures from
agriculture include residue management, low tillage and promoting improved water management and
conservation. Since Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) is a forest rich region (17% area under forests), carbon
sequestration schemes are encouraged by the policy.

Sindh and Balochistan provinces do not have their own policies on climate change yet, however both
the provinces have a major emphasis on conservation of water resources since drought is a frequent
phenomenon in these provinces. A larger focus of climate policies in these provinces may be on climate
resilient agriculture than mitigation.

ii. Provincial agriculture policies

The Punjab Agriculture Policy (2018) amply covers the need for water conservation and emission
reduction in the agriculture sector, especially in rice. One of Its goals is to ‘massively expand water
conservation efforts’. In the chapter on Climate Smart and Regenerative Agriculture, the policy
acknowledges increasing emissions from various sectors including from rice cultivation. The policy
recommends ‘mitigation of GHG’s emissions from key and minor sources in the agriculture sector’. The
policy states that ‘mitigating effects of agriculture on climate change by reducing GHG emissions can
come from helping farmers adopt sustainable and climate-friendly practices and techniques.

Sindh Agriculture Policy (2018-2030) aims to achieve efficient, prosperous, and resilient agriculture and
livestock sectors that can provide good incomes and decent employment to those involved in
production, processing, transport, and storage; and at the same time provide safe, nutritious, and cheap
food to urban and rural populations. The policy uses the term Climate Smart Agriculture; however, the
larger emphasis is on climate resilient agriculture and not clearly to address mitigation and
environmental issues emanating from agriculture.

KP Agriculture Policy (2015-2025) is highly diverse in its focus. It aims at enhancing sector productivity
and competitiveness, supporting mechanisms for tobacco and sugarcane (as two most important cash
crops of the province), improving food security and access, and improved natural resource
management, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Technology development within
agriculture to improve its efficiency is included in these priorities. Within the field of climate change, a
larger emphasis is on climate resilience, land zoning and soil and water conservation in arid and high
elevations areas “beyond watercourse lining”.

Baluchistan’s Agriculture Policy (2014) has a primary objective to enhance income and employment
opportunities for rural people, while at the same time halting, and eventually reversing, the rapid
resource degradation taking place. The policy is high on preventing malnutrition and increasing calorie
intake especially for women and children, enhancing food security, and creating incentive systems to
support agriculture to be more efficient and profitable. This is obvious given the fact that Baluchistan is
the largest, least populous and most water scarce province where agriculture is totally dependent on

51 | P a g e
rare rainfall and where extreme droughts are very frequent. The policy does not make any deliberation
on this since rice cultivation is not a major crop in the province and its cultivation is limited to small,
irrigated pockets of the province in the South.

iii. Provincial water policies

In line with the recommendation of the National Water Policy 2018, the Punjab and KP provinces have
so far developed their water strategies/policies. The Punjab Water Policy (2018) focuses on the
following eight areas: (i) Balancing productivity and conservation, (ii) Balancing infrastructure
development and environment, (iii) Balancing supply and demand, (iv) Enlarging stakeholders’
participation, (v) Adapting to climate change hazards, (vi) Achieving financial sustainability, (vii)
Harnessing information technology, and (viii) creating knowledge. Within priority v, its focus is on better
understand the local impacts of Climate Change through modelling, develop surface and groundwater
storages, flood, and drought management to mitigate impacts of Climate Change, strengthening
capacity of universities and research centers, and enhance collaboration.

The KP Integrated Water Resource Management Strategy was launched in 2020 with four main pillars,
12 priority areas and 100 action lines. The first pillar is sustainable water resource management by
ensuring 100% WASH coverage, improving water balance (surface and ground), enhancing water
productivity in agriculture, and managing watersheds. The second pillar focuses on improved water
governance by addressing missing policies and improving them, structured users’ participation,
improving coordination and building capacities. The third pillar is devoted to promoting public-private
partnership by engaging private sector and regulation whereas the fourth pillar aims at enhanced
citizens’ engagement for improved water governance.

5.2 Policy analysis – opportunities and gaps

This section provides a brief analysis of opportune entry points and gaps pertaining to encouraging
adaptation and mitigation pathways in agriculture sector generally and in rice sector specifically, in the
existing policy framework in Pakistan.

Some of the key opportunities are summarized in Table 5.

Country Report

Table 5: Key opportunities in available national / provincial policies for GHG emission mitigation and adaptation in agriculture
Policy / strategy Mitigation Adaptation Short Lived Climate
Pollutants (SLCP) relevance
and entry points
National Water • Need for an extensive research • Promote Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)37 • Water use efficiency,
Policy 2018 on water saving technology and • Use irrigation efficient practices (drip irrigation, Laser Land productivity
reduced GHG emissions Levelling, AWD, DSR) in the provinces • Research on clean
• Crop per drop approaches and techniques technology
• Flood irrigation categorically discouraged
Climate Change • Manage water for reduced • Introduce low water dependent rice varieties. • GHG reduction targets
Policy 2012 and methane emissions. • Comprehensive adaptation plans (provinces) • Rice varietal development for
Act 2017 • Low external inputs in • Research on agro-ecology appropriate adaptation pathways low water requirement
agriculture • Clean energy
• Develop capacities in mitigation
actions.
• Slowing emissions from
agriculture, livestock
Nationally • Energy efficiency, low carbon • Climate resilient buildings and agriculture • Drought/flood tolerant rice
Determined pathways • Introduction of water conservation technology & techniques in varieties
Contributions • Methane emissions reduced by irrigated agriculture • Efficient Water Management
2021 increased irrigation efficiency in • Demand management measures to increase • GHG reduction through AWD
rice production water-use efficiency & productivity • Crop residue management
• Climate smart inputs & management practices • Avoid residue burning
• Climate monitoring, forecasting & early warning system.
National Food • Sustainable agriculture models • Climate resilient agriculture • Sustainable agriculture
Security Policy and growth • Water conservation in multiple uses • Water use efficiency
2019 • Low external input agriculture • Reduce groundwater depletion
• Enhance rainwater harvesting potential
Environment • Environmental Impact • Improved quality of lives for citizens by addressing brown • No direct relevance
protection Assessment of commercial environment and regulation (air, water)
projects
• Brown environmental
management and pollutant
control

37IWRM is a process which promotes coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources in order to maximize the resultant economic and social
welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems (Global Water Partnership)
53 | P a g e
Provincial climate • Water-Energy-Food nexus • Rehabilitate irrigation infrastructure (Punjab) • Residue management and
change policies (Punjab) • Improved water uses practices (Punjab, KP) zero / low tillage
• Wastewater treatment and • Improved water use
recycling (Punjab) efficiency
• Residue management and low
tillage (KP)
Provincial • Emission reduction from • Water use efficiency and productivity (Punjab, Sindh, KP) • Emission reduction from rice
agriculture agriculture sector (Punjab) • Climate resilient agriculture (Sindh, KP) • Water efficiency practices
policies • Technology enhancement for • Food security and nutrition (Sindh, Balochistan)
improved agriculture efficiency • Capacity development (all)
(Punjab, KP)
• Capacity development in
mitigation (Punjab)
Provincial water • Research and collaboration to • Hazard management and use optimal water potential (Punjab and • Research
polices study impact of water efficiency KP) • Water productivity
on climate change indicators • Water productivity (Punjab and KP) enhancement
(Punjab, KP, Balochistan) • Improved water balance (surface and ground) (Punjab, KP, • Improved water balance
Balochistan)
Country Report

There are several missing areas which are also critical for progressive achievement in
adaptation and mitigation in agriculture sector, with an impact also on important revenue crops
such as rice.

1. Land use / land use change elements are weak or missing in all the policies. As a matter of
fact, there is limited data on land use change in Pakistan. According to Pakistan’s Readiness Report
on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) 2021, conversion of
forests to other land uses is quite significant. In total xx% land was converted from forests to
agriculture. However, more alarming is that xx% land use change was recorded to other land uses
including built environment. A similar situation is confronted by agriculture sector. According to one
study, in Hyderabad Sindh, 70% land under agriculture was converted to support soaring
urbanisation and building of townships 38. This superposition of land can create shortage of food
and fibre for its growing population as well as can germinate socioeconomic and infrastructural
issues not only in this mega city, but also in the country. So, this study is a tool for policy makers
and future generations (Peerzado et al., 2019). Another study in district Mardan of KP found that
the built area increased about six times engulfing agricultural land (Ali et al. 2020). A study in Punjab
studied socio-economic drivers in prime agricultural areas of Faisalabad ad Sahiwal during 2017-
18 shaping the farmer’s decision of agricultural land conversion and found that as high as 94.0% in
Faisalabad and 99.0% in Sahiwal was converted to infrastructure or built environment (Farah,
2019). Similar reports were published for Lahore Punjab in the newspapers 39. As such, Pakistan
does not have a land use policy or zoning which counters uncontrolled conversion of agricultural
and environmental resources to other forms of land uses. Therefore, it is a dire need of the time for
government and land use planners to device new land use policies and strategies for proper land
use, and to reduce expansion on agricultural land. An effective land use policy and workable
measures require coordination among different ministries (climate, agriculture, industry,
environment) with inter and intra departmental coordination between and within provinces to
preserve the agricultural land and improve the farmer’s livelihoods at rural-urban interface.

2. Agrochemicals. Excessive use of agrochemicals and unsustainable use of fertilizers have

contributed to a multitude of global challenges – high emissions, soil & water contamination, air
pollution, loss of biodiversity, and risks to human health. Threats that the climate crisis brings to
agriculture and food systems are multiple, multidimensional, and interconnected. It affects the
conditions of food production through changes in temperature and precipitation, extreme events,
pests and diseases. The issue is particularly prominent in South Asia because agriculture is
increasingly dependent on agrochemicals, water, and energy, and irrigation is fossil fuel energy
intensive due to policy incentives and institutional support. Although these policy supports have
increased food production considerably, they have also intensified resource use and exerted a high
toll on the environment, ecosystems, society, and public health. Adaptation strategies tend to be
developed on a smaller scale in a highly limited way (e.g., local water use efficiency, improved
variety, sowing time) while mitigation strategies tend to be developed on a larger scale because
mitigation involves specific actions that must be pursued at the national or international levels. In
principle, mitigation strategies need to be synergistically combined with adaptation strategies. For
example, drainage management has direct impacts on adaptation and crop productivity. Precision
agriculture mobilize nutrients from organic sources in addition to chemical fertilizers and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, making adaptation and mitigation synergistic. In some cases, where
potential synergies are incompatible, a trade-off between adaptation and mitigation comes into play.

3. Production oriented policies (economic rather than ecological mind set). In Pakistan all policies
tend to favour intensive rather than optimal use of inputs combined with other efficient agronomic
practices to boost production. Economic conditions, marketing infrastructure, market linkages,
capital markets and easy access to finance and resource are critical weaknesses of the agricultural
ecosystem and play a crucial role in hindering the adoption of modern agricultural methods and
crop diversification. Pakistan spends a large amount of foreign exchange on importing edible oil,
pulses, and seeds of many agricultural crops which it can produce indigenously through proper
R&D and private sector engagement. Ignoring all these aspects aggressive input use promoted
during the Green Revolution has remained the norm which has led to criminal negligence of led to
ecology and biodiversity of cropping systems. This has resulted in encroachment of exhaustive

38
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X17303818
39
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/20461-lda-to-convert-agriculture-land-into-residential-areas

55 | P a g e
 crops like sugarcane and maize into the system without considering depletion and degradation of
natural resource of the country. Short-term economic gains at the expense of ecological suitability
have led to catastrophic results in terms of depletion of precious natural resources like soil and
water. There is a dire need to consider ecological factors while promoting crops and varieties on a
policy level. Agro-ecological zoning based on climatic patterns is the best way to ensure resource
productivity and healthy cropping systems.

4. Intra sectoral collaboration is emphasized in the policies and a coordinated multi-stakeholder

approach is a common recommendation in most policy documents. In reality, however, it is not
materialized. The various intersectoral actions were often more vertically organized and not fully
integrated in a systemic way within sub-national administrative setting or among federal and
provincial agencies. This barrier includes data mismanagement (and not deficit thereof). Without
making if gigantic or complicated for the government to deal with, data management needs to be
consistent and well organized at least within a concerned department so that progress is founded
on existing data and knowledge with accountability and trend analysis.

5. Agriculture does not have a status of business or industry in Pakistan, and most of the
agricultural labour is informal. Regulations on decent work conditions are often not applied by
agricultural employers and there is hardly any accountability on the work conditions farm labour is
offered, particularly women with children, leading to exploitation, poverty and job insecurity.
According to an estimate by Helvetas (2016 and 2017), there are over 200,000 women
transplanters (majority mobilised and engaged as full family including children) in rice sector in
Punjab. These women work under challenging social and environmental conditions. Their
employers on the other hand complain about their poor performance (poor management of planting
density, tilted or failed transplants) and lack of availability of labour when they are needed.

6. Despite a strong emphasis on water efficiency in different policies, an aggressive approach

to reform agriculture on water efficient pathways is missing. There are scattered, and highly
appreciable, efforts which have localised impact. However, an overall demand for water to grow
crops is still high and is increasing despite change of land use. Grievance on inadequate supply of
water is increasing in Punjab and Sindh as noted by stakeholders and documented in various
studies (Zulfiqar, 2019; Shah et al 2018; Sial et al. 2018) and several news reports 40 in recent years.
Shortage of water supply against demand is also leading to tensions at local level and among
institutions and provinces.

7. Monitoring, Reporting and Verification system is not yet fully defined in agriculture.
Government of Pakistan has undertaken some initiatives to develop measuring and reporting
system for various financial and physical parameters in the country, but the country does not
conduct any MRV for GHG emissions directly. Pakistan does not have institutional arrangements
for GHG Inventory preparation or broader climate MRV. However, Pakistan has conducted ad-hoc
project-based inventory work, which has helped build somewhat sustainable institutional capacity
for ongoing and continuously improving MRV outputs. The project under National Forest Monitoring
System (NFMS) developed an MRV system for REDD+ in Pakistan to support continuous
monitoring of forest and land/use change (Arbonaut, 2018). Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC)
has been working towards developing standards to make the climate change monitoring process
efficient and effective. The Ministry has revised NDCs in 2021 for UNFCCC reporting. Pakistan has
started preparing the GHG inventories in the last decade which also accounts for the emissions
from the rice sector, however, a well-established MRV system (as per UNFCCC requirements) does
not exist in general for any sector and specifically for Rice sector.

40
https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/sindh-facing-acute-water-crisis-asks-pak-govts-help20220505184032/ 7th May 2022;
https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/pakistans-sindh-faces-crisis-acute-water-shortage-for-drinking-
irrigation20210828153201/ 6th May 2022,
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2349404/sindh-facing-severe-water-shortage-shoro 5th May 2022,
https://theprint.in/go-to-pakistan/for-pakistans-battle-with-food-shortages-blame-policies-corruption-and-water-wastage/939616/
2nd May 2022,
https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2021/11/13/pakistans-looming-water-crisis/ 5th March 2022
Country Report

5.3 Barriers to policy implementation

Despite gaps, the preceding section alludes to the fact that there is a strong policy base with good
content and opportunities. These policies, however, suffer implementation challenges as confirmed by
most of the stakeholders. The stakeholders believe that Pakistan has good policy documents, however,
these are not implemented in letter and spirit. The stakeholders identified the following barriers leading
to ineffective implementation (Figure 41).

1. Lack of robust mechanism to steer implementation (67%). An example includes National Water
Policy’s recommendation on banning flood irrigation in agriculture. The provinces are expected to
define an implementation mechanism by (a) develop and provide techniques and advice to the
farmers to switch to efficient irrigation methods (b) define a gradual regime to eliminate flood
irrigation (c) monitor progress and enforce policy. In the absence of a steering mechanism on how
to achieve, a policy recommendation is just words and not a real translation into action.

2. Inadequate stakeholder consultation at sub national and local levels (63%). This is certainly
problematic since there are no boundaries of what level and extent of consultation and engagement
by stakeholders is adequate. However, private sector is particularly concerned that they are not
consulted during preparation of policies and thus their ability to contribute to the sector is badly
affected. Several sourcing agents of rice complain that the concerns they receive from international
market need remedial actions that are beyond their control.

3. Lack of finances to realize targets (60%). Implementation mechanism need resources to become
practically effective. The stakeholders emphasized that it is not about more resources (which are
certainly lacking) – it is about deployment of right resources and capacities with commitment. An
example is water efficient techniques. Resources are needed for high quality research and
development of techniques / technology and resource mobilization from interest private investors.

4. Lack of enforcement at all levels (59%) is a barrier that deals with overall implementation failure
due to the factors explained above. Enforcement also deals with ineffective punitive measures on
revenue matters such as water theft, sale of adulterated agro-chemicals and other inputs. Lack of
political interest (4%) was indicated by very few stakeholders.

5. Inconsistent priorities by the governments (56%) lead to redundancy of policies. Policies that
affect land, water and environmental resources may be at times contradictory and competing. At
the same time, different sectors / sub sectors take precedence over each other from time to time
due to changing priorities by the government which breaks momentum of agricultural growth.

67% 63% 60% 59% 56%

4%

Lack of robust Inadequate Lack of finances to Lack of Inconsistent Lack of political

mechanism to steer stakeholder realize targets enforcement at all priorities of interest
implementation consultation at sub levels governments
national / local
levels

Figure 41: Barriers to policy implementation as reported by the respondents

The stakeholders also ranked major barriers concerned with implementation of specific measures
leading to adaptation and mitigation in rice sector. In the order of priority, farmers’ resistance, fear, and
apprehension to adopt new ideas in rice value chain, limited funds to scale good practices, knowledge
deficit and skills among stakeholders, lack of appropriate data on impact of techniques and practices
and lack of realization that the impact of climate change can exacerbate already prevailing challenges
to the value chain were identified as main barriers. Other barriers include limited research base coupled

57 | P a g e
with limited resources on R&D and baselines on effective mitigation and adaptation pathways and skill
deficits among practitioners to guide adaptation and mitigation coupled with coordination challenges.

This analysis leads to the fact that there are four core areas where development assistance is required
for effective adaptation and mitigation solutions in rice sector:

63%

61%
60% 60% 60% 59%
58%
58% 57%
57%

Farmers are Funds are Knowledge Offices are not Climate change Limited Lack of skills Baselines on Lack of Poor
resistant to limited for up deficit in fully equipped realization still research base: among field adaptation and resources for coordination
new ideas scaling good implementation for real time limited effective practitioners mitigation R&D between
practices bodies data collection mitigtion & missing research and
adaptation extension
pathways

Figure 42: Major implementation barriers to adaptation and mitigation measures

1. Farmers’ education and skill development.

2. Research and development of techniques and technologies supported with feasibility analysis
(scale, cost of production, risks, economics and application). This must include baseline and
impact studies.
3. Skill development and training of agricultural practitioners.
4. Institutional coordination (research and extension, private and public sectors, inter sectoral
coordination) beside improved access to and management of data

Currently, none of the sectors (especially agriculture) in Pakistan have clear GHG emission reduction
targets. No evidence could be found on NDC tracking since 2015. Talking to stakeholders, no agency
could tell with confidence about NDC compliance since there are no monitoring tools. No agency has
proper and consistent MRV systems. The statistics provided by the provinces are also not sensitive to
monitoring low emission pathways. For instance, one example relevant to rice is that of AWD and DSR
application. The GCISC requested provinces to precisely inform them on area under AWD /DSR
practices so that they could calculate methane reduction using emission factors from other countries in
the region. However, this could not be done since there were no segregated datasets on rice produced
by conventional or non-conventional methods. The scientists depend on the government’s statistics
reports on agriculture to calculate progress on emissions reduction. Any flaws at this level may lead to
wrong calculations and interpretation. Therefore, an important step is to align statistical reporting to the
needs of GHG emission MRV in the country.

A strong and methodologically reliable research is extremely important for decision making and finding
right pathways of interventions. A rice relevant example came from FAO’s recent study on smog
conducted at the request of the provincial government (FAO, 2018). The study demonstrated that it is
not wise to place all the blame on rice stubble burning, which has 20% contribution to smog. This
research was important since the earlier narrative took away the responsibility from other contributors
to Smog. On the other hand, it also validated the urgency to control stubble burning and find solutions
for alternate technology, even if with incentives.

The primary emission factors are not available in Pakistan. Most of data come from South Asian regional
countries with agricultural practices like Pakistan. The IPCC methodology supports this. However, with
Country Report

the introduction of the Modality Procedures and Guidelines (MPGs) for the transparency framework for
action and support under Paris Agreement 41, parties need to submit their first biennial transparency
reports and national inventory reports by 31 December 2024. A Common Reporting Format is being
negotiated. In 2023 Pakistan will enter Global Stocktaking, which is a five-yearly review of the impact
of countries' climate change actions under the Paris Agreement. All this requires that Pakistan must
begin submitting annual GHG inventories. The GCISC under the Third National Communication, is
planning to support the MoCC to prepare inventories from 1999-2020 as per the 2006 guidelines of
IPCC. Sooner than later, Pakistan needs to create its own strong capacities to conduct reliable GHG
emissions inventories by source and removal by sinks. There is a need for a precise system of inventory
with a data management and communication mechanism which has minimum drudgery for the experts
involved remains important.

5.4 Actors’ analysis and perspectives in Pakistan’s rice sector

A detailed list of actors and their mandates related to mitigation in agriculture sector is provided in
Annex 1. These include, Rice Farmers, members of the Rice Exporter Association of Pakistan, federal
ministries (Food Security, Climate Change), Provincial departments (agriculture, irrigation), research
actors (Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, Global Change Impact Studies Centre, provincial rice
research Institutes, academia, relevant international development actors, and others. This section
describes few of these actors and their perspectives important in any endeavor to decrease SLCP
emission in the rice sector.

5.4.1 Farmers
The main stakeholder in the rice sector is farmers. The rice farmers increasingly face shortage of
irrigation water. In case of canal irrigated areas, water is provided to farmer through the centuries old
Warabandi system introduced by the British (Bhatti and Kijne, 1990). Warabandi is defined as “weekly
rotational schedule of irrigation deliveries to farmers” (World Bank 1994). “Warabandi is a rotational
method for distribution of the available water in an irrigation system by turns fixed according to a
predetermined schedule (specifying the day, time, and duration) of supply of canal water to each
irrigator in proportion to the size of farmer’s landholding in the outlet command” (Malhotra 1982). In the
wake of shortage of water in the country, farmers are reported to face differentiated shortages (Sial,
Niazi and Ali, 2018). The farmers at the head face less shortage compared to the farmers at the tail.
Some farmers use illegal practices to get more water to make up for the shortages or irrigate their fields
at convenience. This results in conflicts between the farmer and the Irrigation authorities as well as
among the farmers along head, mid and tail of the canal. Shortage of irrigation water forced farmers to
adopt better irrigation and agronomic practices. Since the tail farmers face more shortages of irrigation
water, they will gain more from irrigation efficient techniques and therefore are willing to adopt such
techniques earlier than other fellow farmers if available and affordable (Ali, Zulfiqar and Nizami, 2019).
Since inception of Pakistan's canal irrigation system, warabandi has been traditionally practiced as a
tertiary (watercourse level) water distribution method based on rotation of water turns among the
individual water users. However, with changes in social conditions, intermittent water-related conflicts
among the farmers and the growing need for water led to increased official interventions in this originally
farmer-managed katcha (informal) warabandi tradition, resulting in the widespread conversion of katcha
warabandi practices into more rigid pacca (official/formal) warabandi schedules. The katcha warabandi
is still in use in some areas of Punjab and Sindh, which is managed and controlled locally by landowners
without interference from the government.

Chapter 8 covers the results of socioeconomic survey conducted with the farmers in this study and will
detail their perspectives on water and other related issues in rice cultivation.
5.4.2 Public sector duty bearers
In Pakistan, the government is organized as federal Government with several ministries; provincial
Government with several technical departments; and the district authorities reporting to the provincial
authorities. Most of the departments are devolved to the provinces through the 18 th Constitutional
Amendment and hence there are no reporting lines between federal and provincial departments except
for policy linkages (water, agriculture, climate change and industry being examples). Various thematic

41 https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/l23_0.pdf

59 | P a g e
departments in the provinces provide services through their district setups (e.g., education, agriculture,
industries, water, environment, power and so on). They have their policy and administration head offices
at the provincial level. The districts are administratively subdivided into district headquarters, tehsils,
and union councils. These three tiers are responsible to provide services to rural and urban citizens of
the districts and where relevant, coordinate development actors. The Planning & Development
Departments in the provinces serve as hubs for development planning and financing and act as
coordinating agencies for other provincial thematic departments.

A. The provincial actors

The agriculture departments in the provinces are the main stakeholders mandated to support the
farmers in improving production and resource efficiency. Headed by the Secretaries, the departments
typically have three units which are most relevant for SLCP initiative: Extension, Research and On-
Farm Water Management (OFWM) departments, all headed by respective Director Generals. The
OFWMs are mandated to improve irrigation efficiency at the farm level.

Beyond the farmgate, the irrigation network is managed by the Irrigation departments of the provinces
headed by Secretaries. Historically, greater emphasis of the Agriculture department (Extension and
OFWM) has been on improving availably of irrigation water for farming. Development projects of the
Agriculture departments include subsidized tube wells, small dams, and water ponds to harvest and
store rainwater42, irrigation efficiency tools (such as precision levelling equipment) on subsidized terms
and conditions. The OFWM departments have also implemented projects directed at high irrigation
efficiency. The projects include drip and sprinkler irrigation, land levelling and improvement of water
courses to decrease water loses43. With increasing shortage of irrigation water, the Agriculture
department is hard pressed to support the farmers in increasing irrigation efficiency. As a response, the
department has initiated several projects mentioned above and is keen to support other actors that
could invest in irrigation efficiency and conservation of water resources.

The Pakistan irrigation network is one of the largest contiguous networks in the world. The Indus Basin
Irrigation System of Pakistan consists of three large dams, 85 small dams, 19 barrages, 12 inter-river
link canals and 45 canal commands, and 700,000 tube wells (Ibrahim, 2019). An aggregate length of
canals is 56,073 km. The average annual cultivated area of the country is reported to be 63.56 million
acres (Ahmed, 2007; Baig et al., 2013 and Frenken, 2012). Out of which, about 75% is reported to be
under irrigation. Out of this, 17.07 million acres is irrigated by canal water, 10.2 million acres by
groundwater and 19.67 million acres by canal water and groundwater combined, 0.67 million acres by
wastewater, 4.94 million acres by the spate irrigation, 7.9 million acres is rainfed and 3.09 million acres
riverine (ibid).

The Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) manages big water reservoirs whereas the
Irrigation department manages the vast irrigation channel network which start from the reservoir and
deliver irrigation at the farmgate. The Irrigation departments are then divided into various zones headed
by Chief Engineers of the respective zones. The Irrigation departments are mandated to provide
adequate, equitable and reliable water for irrigation to the farmers aiming at increased agricultural
productivity. The department has faced challenges to meet the demand for irrigation water due to ever
increasing size of farmland coupled with deteriorated irrigation network and shortage of funds to
manage the systems (GoP, 2012). The department therefore may be keen to support any efforts
targeted at irrigation efficiency in the country.

As such this picture suggests that the responsibilities for water for agriculture are split among three
actors within the province (and the fourth being the farmer). In case of water productivity in rice crops,
the most relevant actor is OFWM department with a direct collaboration with the Extension department,
both reporting to the same authority.

The provincial stakeholders from different interviews highlighted the following:

1. Water efficiency / improving water productivity is a topic in Punjab due to stressed canal irrigation
system and groundwater. KP is joining now and is keenly looking at the best practices introduced

42 Agripunjab.gov.pk
43 Ofwm.agripunjab.gov.pk/projects
Country Report

in Punjab. In Sindh and Balochistan it is not yet a topic since surface water is available in relatively
adequate quantities in rice producing area or there are other alternatives with rice such as fruit
orchards.
2. Agriculture extension services are obsessed with production statistics. GHG emissions and
environmental concerns are often secondary or ignored.
3. AWD tubes and DSR have been tried at reasonable scales in Punjab, on pilot scale in Sindh, and
never in KP and Balochistan. There are replication challenges since the farmers are not yet
confident that they will not lose their yields with AWD. There is a lot of negative advocacy from the
farmers. When a farmer’s field fails due to other reasons, the blame goes to the new technology.
4. While GHG is not a topic widely discussed at provincial level, stubble burning is. Therefore, a
quicker entry point to reducing emissions may be by offering a solution to rice residue burning to
catch the attention of policy makers (even though stubble burning contributes far less than the
actual methane emission during cultivation).
5. Coordination among provincial players is weak (e.g., among agriculture, irrigation, and research)
hence a joint forcefield is not created.
6. Collaboration with federal players is active when there is a federally financed project for the
provinces. There is no collaboration specifically on GHG mitigation issues.
7. In KP and Balochistan, private sector is not quite present in rice value chain. In Punjab and Sindh,
there is a presence of vibrant private sector, and the agri-business environment is quite active.
Cooperation between public and private actors however is weak.
8. All the provincial actors are open to embracing and introducing best international practices and
learn.

B. Federal actors
The Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC) is the nodal institution at the federal level mandated to deal
with the adaptation and mitigation issues at national level and support the provinces. The ministry is
also responsible for fulfilling international obligation related to climate change. The ministry is guided
by Climate Change Policy 2012 (followed by Climate Change Act 2015) and international negotiations
on climate change. There is a disconnect, however, between federal and provincial levels since the
implementation of this policy needs to be in the provinces where there is no dedicated actor to monitor
implementation. The provinces on the other hand, have tendency to prepare their own policies. A close
complementarity between federal and provincial policies is essential to ensure all energies asserting in
one direction. Actions including revision of NDCs, preparation of NAMA projects, and monitoring of
GHG emissions are supported by federal ministry.

In case of agriculture, the provinces are in the lead seat. The Federal Ministry of Food Security and
Research is mainly a strategic player which gives policy guidelines and dwells on inter-provincial issues,
whereas the provinces ensure context specific planning and implementation.

The discussion with senior stakeholders at federal level brough the following main points on table:

1. Mitigation in agriculture sector including methane emissions reduction in paddy are included in
revised NDCs for Pakistan (to be completed by March 2021). The Global Change Impacts Studies
Centre (GCISC, a dedicated national research centre for climate change studies) is updating the
national Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the year 2017-18 and is coordinating the NDC priorities
from multiple agencies on behalf of the MOCC.
2. Agriculture financing is rather limited at MOCC from global instruments (such as GCF, GEF etc.).
The MOCC houses one project on agriculture (GCF, FAO Climate Smart Agriculture) which is not
yet off the ground; there is a huge space for more actions, especially for projects on mitigation with
adaptation co-benefits in agriculture. Climate smart rice is a high potential area for MOCC; earlier
some efforts were made but a relevant partner could not be found.
3. NDC’s narrative on climate mitigation in agriculture sector is strong. However, unfortunately
implementation remained weak. This is also because the policy narratives supported by MOCC in
mitigation are more dominant in energy sector. The provinces need to take the lead on mitigation
actions.
4. Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) of emissions is currently weak, but has been
integrated in the activities under the currently ongoing revision of NDCs.
5. Planning Commission is strongly ascribing to promote “paradoxical agriculture” in Pakistan (pure
organic ridge farming). This will be a holistic package deploying production technique through good

61 | P a g e
 soil management, reduced carbon emission, water efficiency and no use of chemical inputs. The
initiative will be financed under Climate Adaptation Resilience Fund (CARF) and will be directly
steered by the Commission.
6. Unfortunately, there is a lot of alienation between ministries of Food Security and Climate Change.
An interested development actor may need to mediate such institutional gaps.
7. The Ministry of Food Security feels excluded from international negotiations on Climate Change,
and from international financial agreements with the donors (e.g., UN agencies). The ministry,
however, fully supports that agriculture is a provincial subject and the provinces are independent to
negotiate and agree on projects and programmes meant for the provinces. On the other hand,
MoCC also feels that it is also not taken on board while developing programmes, discussions,
agreements, and in negotiations pertaining to agriculture, food security and climate change. Thus,
both the ministries need to establish a formal mechanism for decision making and coordination.

5.4.3 Private sector

The private sector has long suffered in Pakistan during early 2000s from insecurity, political instability,
and energy crises. The situation has, however, improved over years and the private sector has dared
to bring innovation and new ideas in the market by fully exploiting windows of opportunities. It represents
a development partner which is little explored in relation to local economic development. The private
sector still finds risks for its operation in remote rural areas except when they have large commercial
incentives. An important trend in recent years is that the private sector is increasingly interested in
partnering with development actors for visibility; at the same time there is an increasing growth of social
enterprises which have commercial strategies to maximize improvements in financial, social, and
environmental well-being alongside securing their profits. These are often small in scale and have a
greater ownership within social fabric. A few private sector actors relevant in the SLCP mitigation
initiatives are described below:

i. Rice export companies / millers and their association

Several national and international rice companies export basmati rice from Pakistan. In the past, rice
was being exported by the Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan. In 1980s the private sector could export
rice. Later, these companies formed the Rice Exporter Association of Pakistan (REAP). REAP has 675
members and significantly influences rice export policies of the country. The international market is
increasingly encouraging rice which is produced on sustainable production principles. Some of the
international companies, therefore, are sourcing rice through their local partners from farmers who use
improved agronomical and efficient irrigation techniques in rice cultivation. Some of these companies
also support contract farmers to produce rice following SRP Standard. These companies could be very
useful partners of the government and other actors in efforts directed at reducing emission from paddy
rice and could serve as a role model for other companies.

The REAP is a joint forum of over 1250 rice Small and Medium Enterprises (over 600 operate in Punjab)
including millers. REAP plays crucial role on negotiating market for Pakistani rice (mainly Basmati).
REAP includes all rice millers which is an influential size in promoting water efficient practices in the
country. Hence an improved capacity of REAP on assuring compliance with the SRP Standard and
water efficiency may serve a high PUSH factor in this project. REAP’s effectiveness can trigger a better
export market for Pakistani Basmati rice with water efficiency label. The members of REAP may be
highly influential in promoting desired SLCP packages and give scale. REAP’s member companies
which directly work with farmers (covering around 25% of Punjab’s rice area), may also raise farmers’
awareness, and support them in introducing various proven water efficient techniques.

The members of REAP shared two important points:

• REAP gave a presentation, to the ministry of commerce, on its plans to potentially double the rice
export. The main focus was on increasing productivity, through better seed, farm mechanisation
and resource efficiency. They reportedly asked the government to set a target making at 30% of
rice production in Pakistan sustainable as per SRP Standard. This was just an initial presentation
and goals will be mutually agreed.
• Increase in rice export is also the goal of the government. This is an entry point, as per REAP’s
view, to promote increased productivity with efficient use of resources, especially land and water.
Excess land may be used for import substitution of agriculture products, import of which creates a
continuous pressure on the trade account.
Country Report

The main challenge with REAP, however, is that it will be a daunting task to convince all their member
companies that adoption of SLCP packages will have a positive impact on their businesses and there
are no economic risks involved for the value chain in the long run. So far, a project financed by Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) namely Water Productivity (WAPRO) operating in
Punjab has been able to motivate around 10 big millers to join SRP – this scale needs to enlarge with
a greater impact.

Further views from the rice companies’ interviews are summarized as follows:

1. Galaxy Rice Mills and Rice Partners Limited (RPL) are championing water productivity in Pakistan;
they do this to sustain rice supply chain and to secure long-term economic interest of the business.
2. GHG mitigation is not yet their topic, however an important selling argument for EU consumers and
customers. Some traders, however, may never change since their buyers do not demand for
reduced GHG emission or other standards.
3. According to all the companies interviewed (notably Atlas, Matco, Engro), Minimum Residue Level
(MRL) in rice is currently a more immediate worry for exporters than GHG emission mitigation. MRL
issue directly affects exports and the government’s support to deal with the issue is essential.
4. The government needs to improve awareness and capacities in applying water productivity at
farms’ level as an entry point to reduce emissions at scale. Private companies directly working with
farmers have acquired good technical knowledge on water efficient practices.
5. Several companies have their own R&D set up and they continue to try to improve production
systems. Trust deficit between public and private and increasing international trade requirements
lead private sector to establish their own R&D systems.
6. There are huge data deficits in public and private sectors. High quality research is needed to fill
knowledge gaps (and the private sector may also guide on topics for further research).
7. RPL and Galaxy are pioneers in applying the SRP Standard in Pakistan and many other companies
are following (notably Atlas, Matco, Engro interviewed for the study). However, scale is relatively
small. How will government adopt and apply this for millions? The Government has little knowledge
of the SRP Standard but is interested.
8. Private companies feel that they are not getting support from the government for what they are
doing. The government has large extension wings, whereas companies are also engaged in giving
services and training to the farmers.
9. Trade-based negotiations could ideally be led by the government, especially on tricky issues such
as water efficiency, socially responsible behaviour, MRL, aflatoxins etc. instead of leaving the rice
companies alone with the buyers; it is important that the government recognises importance of such
issues constraining revenue generation and supports companies in addressing MRL issue with
more technical assistance.
10. The rice companies demand state of the art, internationally accredited, high-quality labs for samples
tests. The current facilities are not sufficient for supporting international trade.

ii. Service providers

Skilled service providers provide different services to the farmers on commercial basis. These may
include machinery and hardware dealers, machine operators (such as tractor operators, land levelling
experts, harvesters), agriculture input providers etc. Strengthening such SMEs is important to include
in the project plans. New or improvised range of services emerges from introduction of new techniques
e.g., laser land levelling equipment, AWD tubes, new germ plasm in rice from research and seed
industry, agriculture inputs, hardware fixers, and spare parts. The WAPRO partners interviewed under
this study observed that there is an increasing number of service providers in the market to offer paid
services to the farmers (esp. in precision levelling and hardware support). More competition is resulting
in reducing cost of services and quality. The SLCP packages need to be calibrated to the capital and
skill needs of the service providers. Service delivery can make or break the proposed packages for
enhancing water productivity and mitigation of greenhouse gases. This is also important for financial
sustainability after the project period without additional donor funding.

A few reflections from the interviews are as follows:

1. Training on mechanical maintenance and precision, access to necessary spare parts, and genuine
inputs with quality control are necessary for service providers to serve rice farmers. Usually, SMEs
63 | P a g e
 have money for a machine or two and they start providing services without any training and thus do
not make optimal use of technology for efficiency.
2. Micro-credits are not easily available for SMEs to do business or build asset capital.
3. Provision of subsidised services to farmers by government may leads to SMEs running out of
business (e.g., provision of 50% subsidy laser land levelling to the farmers). Instead, the
government could train SMEs and provide them subsidized machinery so that this service is
sustainable in the long run and is affordable for the farmers.
4. SMEs need to access information on market demand for services. They are often indecisive where
to invest for service provision (what kind of machinery, technology etc. to buy for making a living).

iii. Middlemen/arhtees
There is a clear distinction between rice milling companies which directly purchase rice from farmers,
and middlemen or arhtees who are closely engaged with farmers. Nearly 25% rice area is supported
by rice companies who source rice from the farmers directly and provide them necessary agronomic
advice. Nearly 75% rice cultivation area’s outreach is directly with government. This way, arhtees have
large rice area under a direct access as the only market agents for rice farmers. A general perception
is that these farmers are difficult to be reached for improved or non-traditional practices. While
companies can lend a hand with the government to promote good practices by providing punctual
agronomic advice, financial incentives and economic evidence, the only incentive with non-contract
farmers is to make their own judgement on production economy. Arhtees therefore need to be taken
very seriously as an important medium to promote technology. The companies interviewed for the study
believe that this is doable.

Some of the key messages include the following:

1. A general perception about arhtees is very negative; they are money lenders, exploit farmers, and
are least interested in ethical practices in the value chain. While this could be partly true based on
farmers’ experience, it is necessary to find a few champions among arhtees and use this channel
to change things. Make them believe that this will not reduce their profit margin nor burden them
with extension responsibility.
2. A starting point is to sensitize arhtees and the government; the government could go a step further
and introduce obligatory standards for arhtees to offer support.
3. What exactly arhtees may do? According to the companies, arhtees could provide AWD tubes to
the farmers and give advice on how to use them; brochures in Urdu with drawings can be even
more helpful. Arhtees may also note down farmers’ feedback for extension workers to assess if this
channel is working and to treat negative advocacy well in time.
4. Include arhtees in relevant training programmes.

5.4.4 Academia and research actors

At federal level, there are dedicated research institutions such as Pakistan Agriculture Research Council
(PARC), National Agriculture Research Centre (NARC), and Global Change Impact Studies Centre
(GCISC) to uptake topics of national significance and offer solutions. At provincial level, there are
provincial research bodies including for instance, the Kala Shah Kaku Rice Research Institute in Punjab,
Dokri Rice Research Institute in Sindh, and research wings with the provincial agriculture departments.
Dokri and Kala Shah Kaku are especially assigned the task of rice varietal development. In total 11
varieties have so far been registered by Dokri and 27 by Kala Shah Kaku. Federal research institutions
(such as PARC rice research centre) have a job to evaluate rice varieties produced by provincial
research stations and present to seed council for approval. Smaller rice provinces (KP and Balochistan)
do not have their own rice research centres, but they may benefit from work conducted in Punjab, Sindh
and at federal level.

At the same time there are several universities with faculties and research programmes in different
fields of agriculture including irrigation agronomy and water. The stakeholders have indicated several
aspects of rice value chain needing research and validation. These include crop-water requirements,
water efficient techniques, their impact on economics of value chain, and GHG emissions mitigation. At
the same time, there is a high potential to share already available knowledge at a large scale for giving
boost to replication. The universities may play a crucial role in both the areas in close collaboration with
national and international research and academic community.
Country Report

The main take homes from stakeholders’ discussion are as follows:

1. Governance regime and actors’ engagement on climate change and water sector strategies has
generally improved. There is a strong narrative on adaptation to climate change or resilient
agriculture systems – yet not in a systemic way
2. A focus on mitigation is generally missing in Pakistan’s research agenda, except in case of energy
and recently to some extent in forestry.
3. There are no drought resistant varieties in rice specifically for DSR / AWD conditions. This came
out as a common concern from public, private, research actors.
4. Agriculture bureau of statistics annually publishes details on each crop. These statistics, however,
do not track adoption to new technology. There is no segregation between puddled, DSR or AWD
rice. Without this segregation, it is difficult to monitor adoption rate and impact of technique and
technology.
5. Farmers’ main concern is economic viability of crops they produce. Researchers often fail to
produce convincing comparative examples from different practices. In addition, farmers are
annoyed due to weeds in DSR and thus stick to puddled rice. Effective solution to weeds problem
can help improving adoption rate.
6. Due to weak MRV systems for GHG tracking, no agency can tell with confidence if GHG emission
mitigation targets set were met or not. Emission measurement technology is expensive.
7. Research agenda in public sector mostly include high efficiency irrigation techniques, their impact,
new varieties etc. A larger interest is in climate resilient agriculture.
8. Except at GCISC, there is no focus on GHG mitigation aspects in agriculture research in Pakistan;
GCISC does not have stake in the field with primary research; however, it is an important hub for
information on GHG inventory and make use of data provided by the provinces. Provincial
collaboration with GCISC needs to be strengthened.
9. Most of public research is supply driven and does not adequately benefit from farmers’ feedback
and experiences.

5.4.5 International development actors

These may include international donors in Pakistan, bilateral NGOs and international research
institutions supporting thematic areas relevant to SLCP related actions (e.g., water efficiency, improved
water governance, water infrastructure and distribution, water & climate relevant polices, value chain
development, and skill development). International development actors are also increasingly interested
in partnering with private sector for promoting socially and economically viable businesses. Promotion
of green technology has been more successful through private sector engagement and thus new types
of consortia are emerging with public-private and international actors with complimentary knowledge
sets. At the same time, many international development actors are changing their position and funding
levels viz a viz COVID-19 outbreak and other factors, internal or external. However, all the international
actors contacted for this study welcomed the ideas of mitigating SLCP from agriculture and showed
interest in the topic.

Key points discussed during interviews are as follows:

1. It is important to recognize that rice and cotton value chains have a complex actors’ map engaging
multiple actors and interests.
2. The agriculture and water sectors are victim of poor inter-agency coordination, data management,
and sharing.
3. Water efficiency in agriculture has not been optimally achieved despite availability of techniques,
good economy, and years of investment. GHG mitigation sounds a far-fetched issue under the
current pressures that actors are managing to address.
4. There are good policies, but implementation of policies has face challenges. Pakistan is blessed
with competent human resources; due to institutional failure they do not perform as expected.
5. The ingredients of SRP concept are aligned with the policy priorities of the government; therefore,
promoting the SRP Standard stands a good change if policy makers are sensitized about its
benefits. The SRP Standard needs to be introduced and adopted by the government as the officially
preferred standard for exporting rice. The Punjab government is taking interest. There needs to be
a neutral facilitator like BCI in cotton.

65 | P a g e
6. The NDC’s claim that Pakistan emits only 0.84% of global GHG emissions 44, provides an excuse
for some for not taking mitigation seriously. The new with updated figures and pledges of the
government for mitigation targets, may facilitate serious discussion on mitigation.
7. There is a willingness to invest in efficient water infrastructure.
8. Currently there are a few good examples in water efficient agriculture (e.g., by Better Cotton
Initiative in cotton (BCI) and by WAPRO in rice), but upscaling is a challenge without collective
action of the private sector and the government.
9. WAPRO is a good example worth upscaling including introduction of AWD technique in Pakistan.
An additional layer with AWD could be mitigation co-benefits. There is a need for validating
economics of different techniques.

5.5 Actors’ participatory initiatives in the field

In response to recent national and international discussions on resource efficiency, some actors have
initiated projects on climate smart agriculture in general and specifically on irrigation efficiency. Few
projects indicted by stakeholders are summarised in this chapter .

5.5.1 Water productivity in commercial agriculture (WAPRO)

The WAPRO project jointly funded by the Global Programme Food Security (GPFS) of the Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and international companies is being implemented in
seven districts of Punjab. Rice Partner Limited (rice miller, the local sourcing partner of MARS Foods)
and Galaxy Rice Mills (rice miller, the local sourcing partner of Westmill) are partners in implementing
WAPRO. WAPRO is based on Push, Pull and Policy components. The Push component supports rice
farmers in adopting water efficient and other improved agronomic techniques following the SRP
Standard. Water efficient techniques include introduction of AWD tubes, DSR and laser land levelling.
The Pull component supports farmers in marketing rice produced with the SRP Standard. The Policy
components is to study, document and disseminate best practices through research studies,
workshops, and seminars especially for the policy makers. The Policy component facilitates dialogue
among important stakeholders especially the farmers, policy makers and the market players.

5.5.2 Prime Minister’s initiative on productivity enhancement of rice

Financed by federal government, this interprovincial initiative operates in Islamabad, Punjab, Sindh, KP
and Balochistan. It has started in 2019 and will conclude in 2024. The initiative’s core areas include (i)
Coordinated research to develop rice varieties for climate resilient, high yielding, short duration, insect
pest and disease resistant as well as crop production and protection technologies (ii) Popularize
agricultural machinery, seed of improved varieties and fertilizer use for rice by providing subsidies and
making demonstrations (iii) Demonstrate appropriate & mechanized production technologies for rice
planting, water saving and harvesting etc. and (iv) Mobilization of multidisciplinary research & extension
based scientific resources using print and electronic media, field demonstrations and field meetings
etc. to improve rice production. This initiative aims to double average paddy yield for basmati and coarse
rice through reducing yield gaps and increasing productivity and profitability through multifarious
activities to compete at international market. Practically, all rice related agencies in Pakistan are
involved in this project including PARC (coordinator) and provincial agriculture departments.

5.5.3 Transforming Indus basin with climate resilient agriculture & water management
Briefly known as Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA), this project aims at transforming agriculture in the
Indus Basin by increasing resilience among the most vulnerable farmers and strengthening government
capacity to support communities to adapt. Pakistan’s vulnerability is linked with its arid to semi-arid
climate, as well as its high dependency on a single river system along snow and glacial meltwater for
its agricultural water supply. This project will develop the country’s capacity to use the information it
needs to adapt to the impacts of climate change on agriculture and water management by putting in
place state-of-the art technology. It will build farmers’ climate resilience through skills, knowledge, and

44The 0.84% figure is anyway not comparable to global emissions or other countries because each country is sharing
emission levels calculated from different years (since they are not bound by UNFCCC to share emission level from each
year) and following multiple guidelines.
Country Report

technology enhancement activities. It will also create a wider enabling environment for continuous
adaptation. This project has an estimated lifespan of 20 years. CSA is a project financed by Green
Climate Fund (GCF) and will be implemented initially in eight cotton dominated districts of Punjab
including Lodhran, Khanewal, Muzaffargarh, Multan, DG Khan and three districts in Sindh.

5.5.4 Initiatives to improve irrigation infrastructure

The Punjab Irrigated Agriculture Productivity Improvement Project (PIPIP) was designed to maximize
productivity of available water by adopting a complete OFWM technological package for minimizing
water losses at various levels of tertiary conveyance network and improving its application efficiency at
the farm level. The PIPIP foresees an integrated development approach, envisages upgrading /
developing unimproved and partially improved watercourses/irrigation schemes, promoting high
efficiency water conserving technologies such as sprinkler/drip irrigation systems, laser land levelling,
capacity building of all stakeholders, and undertaking action research for acquisition, indigenization,
and pilot testing of improved water management interventions to suit the local conditions. The project
has been sponsored by the Government of the Punjab and World Bank through Agriculture department
and is being implemented since 2012 throughout Punjab.

The Sindh Irrigated Agriculture Productivity Enhancement Project (SIAPEP) is a World Bank funded
Project. SIAPEP (2015-2021) aims to improve irrigation water management at tertiary and field levels
in Sindh. The project supports efficient management of scarce water resources and improve tertiary
and field level structures where water losses are highest together with promotion of high efficiency
irrigation system and improved irrigation agronomy. This way, the project is designed to augment
adaptation under different climate change scenarios in water stressed Sindh. The project’s core
components include promoting drip irrigation system, water courses lining, laser land levelling and
kitchen gardening.

The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Irrigated Agriculture Improvement Project (KP-IAIP) is a 6-year long project
jointly funded by the World Bank and farmers. The project has just begun in the field and is implemented
by the OFWM directorate of the Agriculture Department. The project will cover all thirty-four districts of
KP including seven newly merged districts from erstwhile federally administered tribal areas. The project
will work on both canal and non-canal irrigation systems and the activities include lining of canal and
non-canal command area watercourses, harvesting of spring water into water storage tanks, capacity
building and high efficiency irrigation system.

In Balochistan, World Bank has financed Balochistan Integrated Water Resources Management and
Development project to strengthen provincial government capacity for water resources monitoring and
management and to improve community-based water management for targeted irrigation schemes in
Balochistan. This project comprises three components. The first component, institutions, capacity and
information will support a gradual transition to IWRM approaches in Balochistan in line with the existing
IWRM policy. It will support institutional restructuring, professional development, installation and
operation of hydro-meteorological systems, and establishment of multi-agency river basin information
systems that provide public access to all available hydrometeorological data for the two project basins
(Nari and Porali) basins with community mobilization and participation.

5.5.5 GRAISEA
The Gender Transformative and Responsible Agribusiness Investments in South-East Asia (GRAISEA)
program is a three-year program that aims to improve the livelihoods of women and men small-scale
producers in Asia through more responsible and inclusive value chains and private sector investments.
The program hopes to achieve the recognition of women as central actors in their supply chains, and it
aims to help them demonstrate economic leadership. The GRAISEA program is based on the
recognition that financial viability and gender equitable/sustainable supply chains are not mutually
exclusive, and that win-win-win propositions (community/environment wins, women and men small-
scale producers win, and larger businesses win) are possible. Building on pilots in selected
commodities, this program utilizes a multi-stakeholder approach, with Oxfam acting as a convener to
bring together the diverse stakeholders involved in selected commodity value chains to achieve its
overall development objective “Improved livelihoods for women and men small-scale producers in the
Asia region through more responsible and inclusive value chains and private sector investments and
where women demonstrate economic leadership”.

67 | P a g e
5.6 Lessons learned from different initiatives
• It is easier to motivate famers if technology is easily available and affordable. Imported technology
is expensive and complicated to operate for the farmers.
• The idea to harmonize monitoring systems in the rice sector (as it has been done in cotton) is not
feasible because in cotton farmers are organized in learning groups and in rice as contractual
farmers; this is the reason that monitoring adoption rate in rice is not as easy as in other crops.
• Participation of the government line departments in the project activities is very useful to promote
mutual ownership by Government and project support actors, and further replication of practices at
large scale. The Government is leading water efficiency management agenda in agriculture.
• AWD tubs have proven very successful. For now, however these are not readily available in the
local market. Upgradation of AWD tubes with sensors (to alerting farmers on cell phone for irrigating
the field) will motivate farmers at large scale to adopt this technology.
• DSR results in more weeds. However, this method is still being practiced and is very effective in
term of water saving. Therefore, effective methods for reducing weed need to be worked out.
• Use of Mechanical transplanters as an alternate to manual transplanting proved to be very useful
in terms of number of plants per unit area (almost doubled), labour cost, and water savings. This
must be promoted. Farmers are fast shifting from manual transplanting practices to DSR and
mechanical transplanters.
• Rice millers are directly approaching farmers instead of through arhtees. This trend is contributing
to change arhtees’ behaviour towards farmers. Rice millers directly sourcing rice from farmers also
ensure good production standards and quality of purchased rice.
• Evidence sharing regarding economics of irrigation efficiency has a positive impact on behavioural
change of the farmers.
• Rice value chain is complex involving multiple actors. Multi-stakeholder meetings prove meaningful
linkages among actors.
Country Report

6. Future of Mitigation and Adaptation Actions in Rice Sector

The biggest achievement of the Paris Agreement is a global consensus that climate change is real and
urgently needs to be addressed by all states, industrialized and developing. To fulfil expectations of the
global community, it is important to build trust at the national level. Trust will be cultivated through
political and legal accountability and making domestic mechanisms strong, ambitious, and responsive
to the global demand45. Parties to United Nations Framework Convention to Climate Change (UNFCCC)
recognize that if domestic governance is not accountable, ethical, and transparent, public trust will
continue to erode and national interest to adopt climate solutions for a greater impact will dwindle.
Therefore, it is essential that national-level implementation processes engage both the likely winners
and the potential losers of this transformation. Policies need to be both ‘green’ and ‘just’, including
concrete measures in core revenue generation sectors in the countries (e.g., agriculture in case of
Pakistan).

6.1 Multi-stakeholder engagement and joint collaboration

Multi-stakeholders need to be brought together and convinced that there are clear overlaps between
mitigation pathways and social and economic well-being of the nation. All the stakeholders interviewed
unanimously urged for a multi-stakeholder approach. The role of businesses, districts, provincial and
federal governments, civil society organisations, academia, researchers and think tanks – everyone’s
commitment is important. The private sector has never been more active in Pakistan with their climate
commitments than now, even when many of them may not label this. There are clear examples, though
at small scale, of complimentary relationship between agri-business viability and climate change
adaptation and mitigation. One of the stakeholders indicated that many emerging economies see
climate change as a major barrier and threat to their economic development. Individual businesses
relying on agricultural supply chains see this even more clearly and ominously, as explained by national
rice companies, and thus are ready to take steps in the right direction.

Based on the discussion with government officials, it seems that climate governance now, is limited to
ticking timelines on national commitments. The provinces are little involved in taking the pressure on
meeting national commitments and managing institutional governance to meet ambitious goals.
However, the way government is managing revision of the NDCs, reflects a high commitment to bring
multiple stakeholders on board. There are four main groups to manage GHG inventories in the country46
as per 2006 IPCC guidelines and prepare NDCs:

Sensitization of policy makers and decision-makers is essential for them to see the value in certain
investments. There is a continuous disconnect among various actors and organizations (e.g., federal,
and provincial, research and field etc.). There are various parliamentary committees and tens of actors
in agriculture who have no joint forum to discuss issues and acquire understanding on innovative
concepts. Climate change, reducing emissions, adaptation and sustainable agriculture are some of the
least known topics among agriculture actors. Flow of information from one actor to the other is hardly
mediated.

The interconnectedness among multiple issues may serve an opportunity to acquire policy attention.
There are two topics as an example. Smog is a big policy issue at the moment and gains hype during
rice harvesting weeks and later during winter. This is an opportunity to introduce improved harvesting
and seeding techniques, motivate policy makers to subsidize combined harvesters, happy seeders etc.
reduce residue burning and thus reduce temporal emissions. At the same time, the stubble may be
sold, rice fields’ readiness of wheat may be quickened and at the end of the day, it will be a win-win and
cost-effective solution. Water efficient rice production is another such lead. It addresses sustainability
of rice value chain, reduces supply-demand deficit for water, increases yield and reduces GHG
emissions from rice. The stakeholders suggest defining SLCP packages around such issues for multi-
actor engagement.

Another capacity building area is to provide technical assistance to the farmers on sustainable rice
production chain with less water, improved soil fertility management and better moisture retention. The

45 https://www.ucl.ac.uk/global-governance/sites/global-governance/files/policy-brief-climate-change-after-the-paris-agreement.pdf
46 https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/support/Primer_2006GLs.pdf

69 | P a g e
farmers may also need a few simple gadgets to monitor their progress (e.g., AWD tubes with sensors,
mobile apps etc.).

6.2 Research needs to support mitigation and adaptation

Research, validation, and knowledge management remain important to enhance motivation of late
adapters. Three areas have been prioritized by the stakeholders.

Varietal development
The need for varietal research is a priority area indicated by several stakeholders. In the absence of
drought resistant and early maturity varieties, farmers are reluctant to use transplanted rice varieties
under AWD or DSR conditions. Special varieties which suite drought conditions or have less water
requirement are essential for promoting water efficiency and low emissions agenda. There is a need
for drought resistant varieties in Pakistan which may have a good export value (e.g., Basmati rice
varieties) and which perform better in AWD and DSR conditions. As a welcome news, the development
of drought resistant varieties for DSR is in process and may be expected soon from rice research
institutes. Variety development takes years – but it is still worth the time investment. Variety
development process is constrained by access to reliable genetic resource. The public rice research
actors need to buy germ plasm and lines from reliable sources with desired genes in priority areas. IRRI
used to supply these for free in the past. However, now since Pakistan is no more a member of IRRI,
and perhaps the policies have changed on both sides, this free access has been blocked.

Water saving and efficient techniques

Research on the challenges associated with alternate irrigation regimes including AWD tubes and DSR
is still inadequate in Pakistan. These are water efficient methodologies that need to be further refined
and adapted to Pakistan’s conditions. In addition, it is very important to study economics of these
methods to convince farmers and enhance adoption rate. The stakeholders report lack of diagnostic
analysis in agriculture technology development. At times technology fails due to other factors, however
a negative advocacy kills the entire case for addressing the problem and take remedial actions. Several
stakeholders commented on provision of subsidized technology by the government to encourage
adoption by farmers. It works for some time; however, it is necessary to withdraw subsidy when there
is enough demand and encourage market forces to take over. A continuous subsidy may be counter-
productive since the scale may only be achieved through the market. The government as a regulator
may support through skill development, pricing, import subsidy, and low-bracket taxation.

Capacity development of research facilities

Public sector researchers and stakeholders felt a significant lack of fiscal space in their work. Research
institutions have limited capacity to deal with GHG emissions and mitigation issues in agriculture. The
stakeholders believe that training alone or gadgets only is not a solution. Having said this, research
needs to be equipped with necessary equipment but also an excellence to deploy them in the right
places in a right manner. A specific emphasis has been laid on youth engagement (young researchers,
students, young farmers, ICT experts, educationists) to improve chances for improving options and to
encourage fast adoption.

A very genuine demand from private sector is to enhance quality and reliability of agriculture research
laboratories. The private companies indicated the need to also have state of the art labs in the
government research facilities to increase quality standards and demand for Pakistani rice. The private
sector requires access to labs. The labs need to be upgraded and accredited to the international
standards required by most clients so that the companies do not have to take their samples abroad for
analyzing Maximum Residue Levels (MRL), aflatoxin or other tests.

6.3 Public private participation

The most important policy element in rice value chain is public-private partnership and collaboration.
Interviews with rice companies were eye opening. Companies are promoting sustainable rice
production, introducing water use efficiency, struggling to find their way through preventing MRL, and
taking farmers into confidence on good standards. In a highly forward-looking manner, the message
from the companies was that the private sector must stay ahead of government to ensure water use
efficiency in rice for sustaining supply chain. The government is highly occupied with introducing
structural efficiency in irrigation system. To companies, improvement in conveyance system should not
Country Report

be a disincentive to promote water productivity and behavioral change to use less water even when it
is amply available.

The private sector is concerned about future sustainability of rice value chain. There are also fears
whether the government will permit rice cultivation in the long run or not. There is an ample space for
policy dialogue to achieve a win-win position to sustain rice value chain with improved water use
efficiency. Several policy issues need to be gripped from the top decision-making level. For instance,
the system only talks about adaptation and does not focus on reducing emission and mitigating climate
change effects.

6.4 Mitigation actions for reduced GHG emission

There are voices that farmers will not go for water efficient production due to our preaching on mitigation
co-benefits. The farmers will go for it for their economic viability. Therefore, an entry point to this debate
is that we prove that farmers are providing water in excess to crop needs – and less is better may also
lead to other benefits.

The stakeholders reported that in Pakistan several break throughs have been made in the livestock
sector. There are few global solutions, for example feed rationing, which have proven successful also
in Pakistan. However, there are no tools to monitor emission reduction and report. Agriculture has a
long way to go in mitigation and adaptation. Actors in Pakistan pursue climate resilient agriculture which
is too basic and that too is still weak and not systemic. Future projects therefore must focus on reducing
methane emissions (including livestock and rice) in a farming system development approach so that
capacities created are relevant for the whole sector.

Pakistan needs to prepare itself for 2023 when the country will be asked to report mitigation compliance.
There are no mechanisms of reporting from provinces to the federal. There are needs for creating
reliable MRV mechanism or tools for data. Pakistan specific software-based technology is needed which
can generate automated GHG emission data. Several standards which were voluntary in the past, may
become obligatory as pressure on resources increases. Institutional and capital investors will look for
green economy not only in the international trade but also local market.

In case of rice, the stakeholders and experts have identified mitigation options with justification as
follows (Figure 43):

1. The hight priority areas is to do away from flooding to dry or alternate irrigation supported rice.
There is a proven reduction in methane emission, as described in earlier pages
2. Flooded and alterne wetting and drying techniques are dependent on transplanted rice. Every single
transplanted seedling and a unit area of cultivated rice has a methane emission footprint. Therefor
it is important to optimise transplanting density to fully utilize production resources and reduce net
emissions.
3. Another proposal from experts is to stop irrigating fields at least 10-15 days before harvesting. This
has a positive impact on reduced emissions and contributes to keeping Maximum Residual Level
(MRL) under control.
4. Quality of seed is an important determinant of ensuring that none of the productive resources
(including land, water, agro-chemicals) and GHG footprints are wasted on weeds or blind seeds.
5. One recommendation is in the direction of Direct Seeding governed under minimum tillage regime.
The same could be applied to the overall cropping system on a farm. Minimum tillage reduces soil
emissions, helps conserve soil moisture and organic matter, and human effort.
6. Laser land levelling followed by alternate wetting and drying significantly reduces water application
for cultivating rice with optimum depth of water reaching equally to every seeding and as such
contributing to reduced methane emissions.
7. Short duration varieties reduce water demand, occupy land resource for a shorter period due to
early maturity, and thus have a lower GHG footprint. Short duration varieties are also recommended
in view of climate change (increased temperature, early spring and summer, changed
hydrometeorological patterns).
8. Overall, an improved nutrient balance improves quality of crops and grains. The intension is to
maximize productivity to every molecule of GHG emitted and resources deployed. Thus, while on
the one hand, efforts are made to reduce GHG emissions through various means, it is important to

71 | P a g e
 also work on productivity enhancement using multiple organic means (such as precision levelling,
nutrient management, soil and water management).

64%

61% 61%

58%
58%
56% 56% 56% 56%

Switch from Improve Termination of Pure quality of Conservation Laser land Switch from Short duration Improving
flooding to dry transplanting irrigation at seeds agriculture / levelling flooding to varieties with nutrient use
sowing /direct density least 10-15 minimum alternate higher yield efficiency and
seeding days before tillage wetting and potential balance
harvesting drying

Figure 43: Mitigation options with adaptation benefits reported by the respondents

6.5 Adaptation options in rice value chain

Farmers’ attitude is the largest barrier as this study identifies. This is because agricultural farmer in
Pakistan faces resilience issues in the sector which is very sensitive to climate change and is fragile to
market forces. All the stakeholders emphasized that water efficiency in agriculture is the most relevant
and practical entry point to reduce GHG emissions from rice. A direct approach to GHG mitigation may
scare actors’ interest since there is no capacity on the subject in public and private sectors yet. When
the entry point is as straight as promoting water efficiency (e.g., through AWD or other means), there
are more chances that a change of practice may be accepted. Adaptation to climate change therefore
needs to go hands in hands with mitigation efforts and also because several measures for adaptation
have mitigation co-benefits.

82%

67%
58% 56% 53%
45%
33%
29% 29%
25%
17%

Efficient Yield Improving Better land Educate Train field Protecting ICT solutions Educate Availability of Enhance
water management resilience to use farmers practioners biodiversity government working food safety
management per drop of climate or rice capital
water and change /
land extremes

Figure 44: Factors, as reported by respondents, reducing effects of climate change in rice

Apart from land and water efficiency, the stakeholders have highlighted the need for improved resilience
to climate change and extremes, training and education, protecting varietal diversity, access to finance
and assuring food safety for local / national consumers (as prevalent in the international market where
regulation on aflatoxin is very strict). The stakeholders also highlighted ICT based solutions at several
levels such as (i) information dissemination to the farmers on best practices and early warning on pests
or climate extremes (ii) market information (iii) water efficiency through digital methods (iv) digital MRV
to monitor and report emissions etc.
 Country Report

The stakeholders were asked to enlist key measures to improve their resilience (Figure 45). Many of
these thoughts overlap with mitigation measures suggested in earlier section. However, this is further
confirmation of the fact that the best investment is where both adaptation (resilience to climate change)
and mitigation benefits are potentially accrued.

59%
58% 57% 57% 57%
55%
54%
52%
51%
49%

Strengthening Optimum plant Improved Direct seeding Improved pure Improved rice Training and Laser land Water efficient Improved farm
bunds and population nutrient / minimum soil quality of seeds breeds / advisory leveling to save rice production mechanization
sluices to balance working varieties (short services (staff water incl. harvesting
conserve duration) and farmers)
moisture

Figure 45: Options for increased resilience /improved adaptation in rice value chain

6.6 Digital monitoring, verification and reporting system

In order to have an effective MRV system, Pakistan needs to have a very strong crop monitoring system.
In case of rice for instance, the government of Punjab and Sindh are assuring rice reporting system
along cultivation method (flooded fields, AWD, DSR) for disaggregated analysis. Distribution of livestock
between provinces (first proxy for environment classification) is available from the livestock census,
conducted every 10 years. Yet the last livestock census was completed in 2006.

At COP 24, the UNFCCC adopted the Modalities, Procedures and Guidelines (MPGs from Decision
18/CMA.1) for implementing the Paris Agreement gathered in the "Paris Rulebook". Based on these
requirements, each Party shall regularly provide:

- A national inventory report of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of

greenhouse gases.
- Information necessary to track progress made in implementing and achieving its nationally
determined contribution under Article 4.
- Each Party should also provide information related to climate change impacts and adaptation under
Article 7, as appropriate.
- Developing country Parties should provide information on financial, technology transfer and
capacity-building support needed and received under Articles 9, 10 and 11.

The objective of the new international adopted framework is to enable the implementation of mitigation,
adaptation and support actions as well as their monitoring over time. This monitoring will be reported
on a regular basis as part of the Biennial Transparency Report (BTR), which will replace the BUR
(Biennial Updated report) by 2025. In this context, the inventory of GHG emissions as well as the action
monitoring indicators are essential for the monitoring and confidence of the international community.

Within this framework, Pakistan is a signatory Party to the Paris Agreement, and Ministry of Climate
Change (MoCC) Government of Pakistan is the official governing representative of Pakistan for the
implementation and compliance of the reporting to the UNFCCC. The Global Change Impact Studies
Centre, Ministry of Climate Change (leading the GHG Inventory compilation and NDC revision process
for Ministry of Climate Change, Government of Pakistan) is developing a roadmap for its future setup
into a robust GHG inventory MRV system based on institutional and regulatory arrangements
integrating the federal and provincial departments, sectoral agencies organized for data collection,
alignment and reporting consistently with the Enhanced Transparency Framework modalities,
procedures, and guidelines. This will prepare ground for climate-relevant data provision in Pakistan,
developing country specific emission factors in each sector of GHG inventory and a digital platform to
acquire and store GHG inventory data.

73 | P a g e
It is recommended for Pakistan to work on developing the institutional arrangements on a basis of the
current UNFCCC reporting requirements, as well as the new MPGs under the Paris Agreement. The
current UNFCCC reporting guidelines encourage countries to develop institutional arrangements and
to describe the procedures for data collection and archiving in their formal UNFCCC submissions.

The federal Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC) is the legal coordinating entity and the national and
international focal point for the climate related activities. Stakeholders’ consultation at the highest
institutional level has led to the decision that the MRV setup will consist of a single national entity under
the roof of MoCC to act as supervisory and coordinating body which is Global Change Impact Studies
Centre (GCISC). This system will be fed through the data gathered in the provinces. The MRV system,
therefore, will have its data source at decentralized level while assuring two-way communication
between GCISC and the provinces. A broader GHG MRV system has been developed to establish
historical baselines, validate data quality, analysis of mitigation policies implementation, and reporting
compliance. An overarching objective for mitigation MRV is to ensure that estimates are consistent and
captured within the national inventory, BTR reporting, and feed into the Paris Agreement’s global stock-
take. A dedicated MRV system is being set up at the Global Change Impacts Studies Center. Data flow
necessary to feed the system includes the following ingredients:

- Total area cultivated

- Area under Continuously flooded
- area under intermittent flooding
- area dry sowing
- Time of sowing
- Variety wise area
- Time, amount and mode of irrigation
- Time, type, amount and mode of fertilizer applied
- Manure applied if any
- time, amount, type and mode of insecticide and weedicide applied.
- Area under stubble burning
- Govt recommendations on rice cultivation
- Residual moisture content at harvesting
- Daily weather data (Temp, Precipitation, ET)

The data flow needs to be gradually smooth with quality issues in all the parameters addressed, the
dedicated MRV for Rice platform will be able to calculate the GHG emissions and based on the standard
vs applied mitigation techniques for emissions reductions (methane) will be calculated and reported.

6.7 Global alliance for meeting mitigation & adaptation challenges

A large segment of stakeholders (81%) reached out for this study are aware of Sustainable Rice
Platform (SRP) standards. As a baseline, the study found out that 41% stakeholders were members,
affiliates or consultants with SRP (Figure 46). There is an increasing pressure from the export market,
especially in EU (Mars, Harba47, Vee Tee Rice, VSR Rice, Westmill etc.), to produce rice with
sustainable practices. The rice export companies interviewed believe that the SRP Standard is
becoming more and more obligatory from EU customers. The millers in Pakistan who trade rice to EU
are around 30-35. Of them, around 30% are SRP registered. As a low hanging fruit, an objective
pathway is to promote the SRP Standard and integrate the GHG emission reduction agenda within SRP
framework.

One of the most frequent messages from the stakeholders was to invest in awareness raising of farmers
as well as government in favour practices promoted by SRP. However, most of them suggested that
this is not just about preaching. It is about presenting some convincing facts and figures (especially
economics of water use efficiency in rice through AWD / DSR). Both the farmers and private companies
are interested in viable businesses. Farmers are clever and know what is good for their business.
Companies believe that the growing awareness among private sector shows that the market will search
for SRP farmers when international demand rises. The government is interested in revenue generation

47 80,000 tons (8-10 sourcing agents and millers in Pakistan)

Country Report

and manage already stressed water resources. All these interests can be brought together for creating
successful collaborative models.

For the farmers, the most convincing argument is the increased production with same or less amount
of water using precision land levelling, AWD and DSR techniques. The government is aware of the SRP

30%
28%

21% 20%
16%

5%

Heard of SRP Indirectly working Media interaction Member Affiliate Consultant

Figure 46: Linkages and networks among stakeholders

Standard and is interested to know more. The narrative from SRP facilitators (such as WAPRO
partners), however, needs to be adapted. Instead to beginning by presenting an exhaustive list of 41
key requirement under the SRP Standard in the beginning, it is necessary to make the pillars more
prominent and match these with already existing policy narratives of the government so that they see a
reason to embrace SRP with interest. Table 6 shows minimum incentives attached with the SRP
Standard for the government and farmers:

Table 6: Why should stakeholders adopt or encourage the SRP Standard?

Farmers’ incentives to comply with the SRP Government’s incentive to encourage the
Standard? SRP Standard
• Advisory services from SRP member • Export enhancement, growing EU demand for
companies / extension agents at the doorstep SRP rice.
• There is an increasing demand for SRP (even • Production is environment and resource
when regular rice market drops), market friendly (less water, inputs)
security. • Reduced GHG emission
• Better economics of yield with water • Domestic and export production will increase
productivity (but proven by economic analysis • Other intangible benefits and moral support
and studies). (SDGs, climate change related policy
• Sustainability of rice value chain obligations)

Another view is about accreditation or certification. When mass number of farmers (contract or free)
begin to follow the SRP Standard, there needs to be a system of minimum verification or accreditation
to verify the claim that the farmers do apply best standards practices. This is to raise SRP’s standard
from voluntary to relative obligatory. The SRP compliant companies suggest that they need several
supply chain members on their side – this will lead to more clients for the farmers, a great pull for the
SRP Standard and a greater policy case for the government. The WAPRO project is making efforts in
this direction. Till the government is ready to play a role of an enabler and facilitator to promote SRP, it
is necessary to have a neutral facilitator in the country also mandated to train interested parties.

The practitioners and extension workers believed that it is important to involve extension agents (public
and private) in a stepwise extensive training for a greater sustainability. Verbally, everyone within rice
value chain who knows SRP and observes results from WAPRO partner companies, appreciates the
effectiveness of the SRP Standard (of which water productivity is the most important and prominent
pillar). However, these are endorsed into a policy document, no success in uptake of SRP is expected
in the long run. Field replication from one farmer to the other cannot guarantee upscaling. Farmers
continue to fall back into their comfort zone of traditional practices.

75 | P a g e
6.8 Potential project strategy to support for NAMA / Adaptation Plan of Action

Based on stakeholders’ interviews and socioeconomic survey with farmers, it is evident that the best
entry points for SLCP interventions are those which are embedded in the current national narrative and
thus are easier to propel interest and motivation among stakeholders. SLCP intervention may capitalize
on the current readiness on ground (Figure 47):

1. The current policy spaces for innovation regarding sustainable rice standard / SRP
a. Policy dialogue on mitigation potential and solutions in agriculture
b. Special support, green loans and tariff support for sustainably-produced rice
c. Technology development for easy removal of residual waste or conversion

2. Rising enthusiasm for improved water management, conservation, water productivity in

agriculture
a. Varietal research and development to improve drought tolerance
b. Research and international collaboration to address and remove barriers
c. Awareness raising on low emission and SRP rice for local and global markets

3. A critical mass of farmers and pilot sites with a high success rate on use of AWD tubes to
increase irrigation efficiency in rice
a. Address challenges reported by the farmers for upscaling AWD
b. Awareness raising of farmers on sustainable production practices
c. Engaging farmers on the most important issues they face

4. Readiness and capacities for digital MRV in agriculture

a. Strengthen MRV, reference emission levels, and prepare for new regime of MRV
reporting post 2023
b. Improved local / sub national capacities for data flow to feed MRV and contribute
Country Report

Water
Use the current
management,
policy spaces for
conservation,
innovation
water
regarding SLCP
productivity in
packages
agriculture

Use of AWD
tube to increase Digital MRV and
irrigation improved
efficiency in rice capacities in
(high success agirculture
rate)

Figure 47: Entry points for SLCP interventions

Indicative intervention packages leading to mitigation of SLCPs are as follows (Figure 48):

1. Technology development and transfer to reduce emission from agriculture

2. Capacity development among stakeholders in SRP and related knowledge fields
3. Technical assistance for data management (ICT, MRV)
4. Develop financial mechanism to support SLCP packages
5. Research and development on support areas leading to mitigation

Figure 48: Indicative SLCP Packages and Interventions

77 | P a g e
6.9 Feasibility analysis of SLCP packages

Figure 49: Potential barriers to be considered in rice sector and future interventions

For the proposed SLCP packages to be successful, it is important to think of present and potential
barriers in advance and discover if the proposed interventions are feasible. The following chart is a
result of the socioeconomic survey and interviews with the stakeholders (Figure 49):

1. It is important to follow an integrated approach for mitigation and adaptation. A pure mitigation
focus (e. g. removal of SLCP) is not feasible from adoption point of view and cannot achieve
results. There are always adaptation co-benefits which are necessary to be considered. Thus
may create interest and motivation among local players including farmers.
2. Follow a landscape approach (farming system approach). This entails that rice does not grow
in isolation. A farming system has livestock (which has a large contribution in emissions) and
farming practices for and other crops which jointly contribute to GHG balance sheet.
3. Develop rice NAMA concepts and financing strategies for rice sector with easy-to-follow
obligations and more accountability for stakeholders (certainly with adaptation co-benefits).
4. Harness SRP’s potential as an inclusive, comprehensive, and already tested entry point.
5. The concept needs to be flexible. New openings may emerge to support rice NAMA. Check
where the pulse is already running high (like in case of water, smog, global trade targets that
are highly demanding for standards).
6. Do not shy to engage actors which are labeled as more difficult and little ready for a change –
for example middlemen or arhtees, money lenders, big farmers etc.
7. It is essential to follow a multi -partner and multi-stakeholders’ approach. Federal and provincial
ministries, the rice millers, technology developers, communication technology, media - have to
be on board for lending their respective strengths.

A future project implementation strategy with a consortium-based set up engaging multiple

institutional with comparative advantages will be effective. It is necessary to take research and private
sector on board. Major millers need to be on board, who are directly working with farmers. Many these
millers are already championing best practices in rice cultivation through the farmers and are
Country Report

proponents of the SRP Standard. This will create a push and pull effect to promote good standards.
The private companies are of the view that if private sector in rice wishes to sustain supply chain and
stay in business, there is no harm to give a small premium to the farmer for a longer-term benefit. This
mindset of the companies is very encouraging. A possible future project may take this financial
contribution into account and in return enhance visibility of these companies as an incentive.

The project must not shy of engaging big farmers since they are influencers in the value chain and
smaller farmers try to copy from them. Workshops, training, capacity building and dialogues within the
provinces engaging all types of farmers is essential. It is at farmers’ level where readiness level will
improve for better practices and reduced GHG emissions. Low hanging fruits, e.g., making intermittent
irrigation more common, is the easiest way to reduce emissions because farmers feel the impact of
water stress and will be easier to convince on this agenda.

A pilot project is very important to build a stronger base for a national project. The key elements
of a pilot project may include capacity building of extension services (public and private), demonstrating
technology, conducting economic comparison studies, and by creating a culture of awareness from
farmers to consumers. The interventions of the provincial OFWM departments on water efficiency may
serve a great departure point in the project.

6.10 Financing strategies /mechanisms to support the envisaged packages

Most of the stakeholders are in favour of project / programme approach and suggest approaching global
financing mechanisms such as Global Environment Facility, Green Climate Fund, NAMA facility and so
on. This is primarily because a system of climate mitigation financing is not yet fully known or installed
in Pakistan48. A project will provide finances for implementation of interventions to achieve mitigation
and adaptation, which will be reported through a well-articulated MRV system, and an analysis of the
food security impacts as well.

Pakistan intends to follow nested approach (with jurisdictional scale) to integrate jurisdictional/
Provincial GHG mitigation initiatives into larger-scale programmes. The reasons for choosing a nested
approach with jurisdictional scale is that agriculture is a decentralised and provincial subject. The
provinces serve as data hubs and MRV responsibilities to report emission reduction.

The term “nesting” originated from a desire to integrate existing mitigation projects into larger-scale
programmes while allowing them to continue generating and trading carbon units (Lee et al. 2018).
These projects use reporting and accounting rules including methods for calculating baselines and
accounting for emission reduction, apply environmental and social safeguards, may maintain sub
national registries either consistent or inconsistent with emerging national systems. The challenge of a
nested approach, however, is how actions at smaller scales may best be catalysed to contribute to
larger-scale jurisdictional (national or subnational) performance. Carbon units generated within such
systems could be consistent with, and represented in, the national accounts. In other cases, Joint
Implementation among federal and provinces and performance assessment may be considered
between sub national and national units. A nested approach with jurisdictional scale, therefore, helps
fulfil local objectives, makes methane reduction rice projects implementable and achievable, and helps
contributing to larger national objectives.

In a nested approach with jurisdictional scale, mitigation results may be measured and accounted at
multiple scales from individual farms to a rice agro-ecology managed by a company or district or any
other defined unit. The rice case is less challenging in the sense that land entitlement is usually clear,

48
Reducing Emissions through Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is still in readiness phase
preparing to enter into implementation phase. Helvetas has conducted a Carbon Benefit Sharing mechanism study
considering existing forest tenure system and considering role of non-right holders which may be quite significant
in conserving forests and building Carbon pool. REDD+ benefits will be distributed with predefined shares for
MoCC (negotiator), provincial government (manager and owners of Carbon pool), forest owners (owners of
carbon pool) and forest right holders.

79 | P a g e
and the investment made by the farmers, a private company or provincial government can be
documented. With this documented farm economy, calculating remission reduction benefits may be
relatively convenient as opposed to more complex cases such as forests. A clearer pre-definition of
most likely nested cases (e.g., based on administrative, legal, or social boundaries) may be important
to prevent case to case confusions and conflict. In Pakistan’s context, these clarities may be ensured
at multiple levels:

• At national level Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), methane pledge and emissions
reduction targets (or removals) determine the national course of action with strategic direction for
the provincial level may be helpful. Provinces may be supported by GCISC in determining baseline,
building provincial capacity in measurement and reporting. Ministry of Climate Change will seek
international buyers. International companies sourcing rice from Pakistan may also serve to either
attract buyers and/or become methane investors beside sourcing rice.
• At provincial level, a state or province may identify benefit sharing proportions by agricultural land
boundaries by revenue records for rice farmers. It may create a baseline against which performance
is measured and seek payment for results.
• Local level: Area specific projects may be developed in a participatory manner with clear baselines
against which to measure performance and generate and sell carbon credits based on
measurement.

Benefits are allocated to:

• Farmers who take verified actions to achieve emission reductions (performance);

• Provincial Agriculture department for financing adaptation and mitigation actions with circular
finances from emission reduction;
• Ministry of Climate Change to finance and strengthen MRV system at federal and provincial levels.

This country report concludes that a project / programme approach through a global financial
mechanism must be attempted first and activities including benefit sharing mechanism and developing
adequate financial strategies to support the envisaged packages through carbon trading may be
included in the capacity development package. Prefinancing for developing GEF / GCF projects is
essential. Project development facilities must be reached out to support this based on concept note
developed from the available data and the country report.

Roadmap after the country report

A final consultation with stakeholders determined that the lead may be taken jointly by Government of
Pakistan (MoCC), Provincial government and Helvetas to prepare a concept note for project
development facility. There are three pathways to embark on the next step:

- Approach GEF through UNEP, which is a GEF Executing Agency to take this project
- Approach one of the GCF accredited agency with knowledge in agriculture sector
- Helvetas is in process to become GCF accredited agency. A concept note prepared by stakeholders
may then be taken forward as a first project idea.
- Approach NAMA facility for financing

Step 1 The country report and MRV report from Helvetas and GCISC are the first steps well
achieved in the roadmap to full scale climate smart rice project / programme to implement
envisaged intervention packages.

Step 2 Review of report by primary stakeholders (MoCC and provinces)

Step 3 Preparation of concept note for GEF consideration to acquire project development facility

Step 4 Further elaborate intervention packages

Country Report

Step 5 Operationalize digital MRV system by introducing mandatory data management practices
in the districts

Step 6 Review of concept note by stakeholders and NDA

Review of concept note by UNEP (GEF option)

Step 7 Finalize concept note for the National Steering Committee

Step 8 Follow GEF project development cycle

Intended beginning of full project: January 2025

Step 1 has already been achieved by the study group beside attending also to Step 2 and 3 with the
stakeholders engaged. In case of Step 4, this report suggests intervention packages need to be
elaborated for developing funding proposals for interested funding agencies including global, bilateral,
corporate and the government. It is also obvious that the process to fast move towards climate smart
agriculture will require funds beside significant technical assistance from relevant and competent
organizations.

An attempt has been made to tabulate Indicative costs of intervention packages (Annex 2). These may
be revisited and further elaborated when a specific project is conceived and prepared for a specific
donor. The following disclaimers are noted with respect to the indicative financial table:

- These are based on one rice production district of Punjab

- These are based on inflation trend for 2022
- These costs do not include administrative / personnel costs
- These costs include technical assistance and other soft costs e.g., training and advocacy support.
- These are calculated for a project duration of 7 years
The proportionate resources required for various Intervention Packages are presented in the following
graph:

IP 1
24% 27% IP 2

5% IP3
IP 4
15%
29% IP 5

Figure 50: Financial estimates for implementing Intervention Packages

A non-hierarchical organization structure will take the process forward. It is not excluded that this
primary structure may also eventually take responsibility to implement all, some or part of intervention
packages after reassessment with respect to a specific project at hand after including specific
capacities.

81 | P a g e
 •Rview the reports and provide comments
National Designated Authority •Discuss and agree on taking CSR program forward
(MoCC) and UNEP •Agree on funding instrument and define steps
•Take leadership on creating enabling conditions for CSR

•Ensure data harmoization with the ministry of Climate change

Provincial governments of Punjab •Offer interest and inputs for CSR production
and Sindh •Contribute in offering and receiving capacity building initiative
•contribute to adoption of CSR production

•Continue to facilitate stakeholder dialogue

•Prepare concept notes for interested parties / donors
Helvetas •Offer support on implementing program development steps
•Develop full program and faciltiate / give implementing support

•Convene SRP members on Climate Smart Rice production agenda /

share the findings of the report
National SRP chapter •mobilize itnerest for CSR project / program
•Acquire fianncial and non financial support

•Contribute to operationalizing MRV system

Rice international and national •Show interest in CSR initiative and include methane reduction in
their production chain
companies
•Where feasible, officer financial and non fianncial support

•Keep an interest in CSR production and motivate farmers

•Contribute to program development and participate in dislogues
CSOs / Research •Share grounded knowledge / reesarch work already in place to foster
CSR intended agenda

Figure 51: Organizational framework to take the country report to the next steps

Each of the intervention packages is a project in itself. However at the same time, the intervention
packages cannot be implemented in isolation since this will lead to compromise impact. Therefore a
preferred recommendation is to seek a funding possibility that is large and supports a programme
approach to achieve climate smart rice production in the country.
Country Report

Literature Reviewed
Agricultural Marketing Information System. (n.d.). amis. Retrieved from www.pk/Agristatistics/Data /

Agricultural Marketing Information System. (n.d.). Government of Punjab. Retrieved from

www.amis.pk/Import

Ahmed, A., Iftikhar, H., & Chaudhry, G.M. (2007) Water Resources and Conservation Strategy of
Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 46 (4), 997–1009. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41261209 . Accessed 9 May 2022.

Ali, J., M. Zulfiqar and A. Nizami (2019). Does improved water productivity matter for the farmers? A
case of water-efficient rice production from Pakistan. Journal of Developing Country Studies,
9(9) 58-65. www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-607X (Paper) ISSN 2225-0565 (Online) DOI:
10.7176/DCS. Retrieved from
https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCS/article/view/49438

Ali, S., Ali, S., & Parveen, S. (2020). The Impact of Farmland Conversion on Agricultural Production of
Tehsil Takht Bhai, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan (1985-2015). Pakistan Social Sciences
Review (PSSR), 4(3), 555-573. ISSN 2664-0422. Retrieved from
https://pssr.org.pk/issues/v4/3/the-impact-of-farmland-conversion-on-agricultural-production-
of-tehsil-takht-bhai-khyber-pakhtunkhwa-pakistan-1985-2015.pdf

Arbonaut Oy/WWF-Pakistan (2018). National Forest Monitoring System - Measurement, Reporting

and Verification (MRV) System for Pakistan. MoCC/National REDD+ Office. Retrieved from
https://www.redd-pakistan.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/08/NationalForestMonitoringSystem_Draft_Final.pdf

Bhatti, M. A., & Kijne, J. W. (1990). Irrigation allocation problems at tertiary level in Pakistan.
Overseas Development Institute. Retrieved from
https://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/4613/Irrigation%20allocation%20proble
ms%20at%20tertiary%20level%20in%20pakistan.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Chang CH, Liu CC, Tseng PY. 2013. Emissions inventory for rice straw open burning in Taiwan
based on burned area classification and mapping using Formosat-2 satellite imagery. Aerosol
Air Qual. Res. 13:474–87.

Climate Change Impacts on Rice. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/2022-

05/Drought_in_Numbers_%28English%29.pdf

Daniel Workman. (n.d.). World’s Top Rice Exporters, 2021. Retrieved from
https://www.worldstopexports.com/rice-exports-countrys

Ebrahim, Z. (2019). Irrigation in Pakistan: Water theft drains Indus canals dry. The Third Pole.
https://www.thethirdpole.net/en/food/pakistan-irrigation/ Accessed on 8 May 2022.

Elahi et.al. (n.d.). Farmer Perceptions of Climate Change, Observed Trends and Adaptation of
Agriculture in Pakistan,2019, . Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30341722/

FAO. (2018). Remote Sensing for Spatio-Temporal Mapping of Smog in Punjab and Identification of
the Underlying Causes Using Gis Techniques (R- Smog). Food and Agriculture Organization
of UN & Agricultural Department, Government of Punjab. Retrieved from
http://www.gcisc.org.pk/R-SMOG-Report.pdf

Farah, N., Khan, I., Maan, A.A., Shahbaz, B., & Cheema, M.J.M. 2019). Driving Factors of
Agricultural Land Conversion at Rural-Urban Interface in Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of
Agricultural Research, 57(1), 55-62. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336847494_DRIVING_FACTORS_OF_AGRICULT
URAL_LAND_CONVERSION_AT_RURAL-URBAN_INTERFACE_IN_PUNJAB_PAKISTAN
83 | P a g e
FRENKEN, K. (2012). Irrigation Water Requirement and Water Withdrawal by Country. Food and
Agriculture Organization of UN. Retrieved from
http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/water_use_agr/index.stm

Global Yield of Rice. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?commodity=milled-

rice&graph=yield

GoBN. (2014). Balochistan Agriculture Sector Policy and Strategy. Government of Balochistan.
Quetta. Retrieved from http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak173418.pdf

GoKP. (2015). Agriculture Policy Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – A Ten Year Perspective (2015 – 2025).
Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar. Retrieved from
http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak173417.pdf

GoKP. (2016). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Climate Change Policy (draft). Environmental Protection Agency,
Forestry, Environment and Wildlife Department, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Peshawar. Retrieved from https://epakp.gov.pk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/KP-Climate-
Change-Policy-Approved-2017.pdf

GoKP. (2020) Integrated Water Resource Management Strategy. Planning and Development
Department, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar. Retrieved from
https://www.phedkp.gov.pk/KP%20IWRM%20Strategy/IWRM%20Strategy/IWRM%20Strateg
y_Main%20Document.pdf

GoP. (2005). The National Environment Policy. Ministry of Environment, Government of Pakistan.
Islamabad. Retrieved from
https://pbit.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/National%20Environmental%20Policy%202005.pdf

GoP. (2012). National Climate Change Policy. Ministry of Climate Change, Government of Pakistan.
Islamabad. Retrieved from
http://www.gcisc.org.pk/National_Climate_Change_Policy_2012.pdf

GoP. (2017). The Climate Change Act, 2017. Senate Secretariate, Government of Pakistan.
Islamabad. Retrieved from
https://policy.asiapacificenergy.org/sites/default/files/Pakistan%20Climate%20Change%20Act
%2C%202017.pdf

GoP. (2018). National Water Policy. Ministry of Water Resources, Government of Pakistan.
Islamabad. Retrieved from https://water.muet.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/National-
Water-Policy.pdf

GoP. (2019). National Food Security Policy. Ministry of National Food Security and Research,
Government of Pakistan. Islamabad. Retrieved from
http://www.mnfsr.gov.pk/userfiles1/file/National%20Food%20Security%20Policy%20%202018
%20(1).pdf

GoP. (2021). Pakistan Updated Nationally Determined Contributions 2021. Government of Pakistan.
Islamabad. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-
06/Pakistan%20Updated%20NDC%202021.pdf

GoPB. (2017). Punjab Climate Change Policy (draft). Environment Protection Department,
Government of Punjab. Lahore. Retrieved from
https://epd.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/PCCP%20Draft%20%28internatl%29_0.pdf

GoPB. (2018). Punjab Agriculture Policy 2018. Government of Punjab. Lahore. Retrieved from
http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak191274.pdf

GoPB. (2018). Punjab Water Policy. Irrigation Department, Government of Punjab. Lahore. Retrieved
from http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak191275.pdf
Country Report

GoSD. (2018). Sindh Agriculture Policy (2018-2030). Planning & Development Department,
Government of Sindh. Karachi Retrieved from http://www.sagpme.com/assets/docs/Sindh-
Agriculture-Policy-2018.pdf

Grievance on inadequate supply of water. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/sindh-facing-acute-water-crisis-asks-pak-govts-
help20220505184032/ 7 May 2022

IPCC . (2006). Retrieved from https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/support/Primer_2006GLs.pdf

Jenkins BM, Mehlschau JJ, Williams RB, Solomon C, Balmes J, Kleinman M, Smith N. 2003. Rice
straw smoke generation system for controlled human inhalation exposures. Aerosol Sci.
Technol. 37(5):437–454. doi:10.1080/02786820300977.

Land use change elements . (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/20461-lda-to-

convert-agriculture-land-into-residential-areas

Land use changes elements . (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X17303818

Lisa Elaine Held. (n.d.). What You Need to Know about The Environmental Impact of Rice Production,
2021. Retrieved from https://foodprint.org/blog

Malhotra, S. P. (1982). Warabandi system and its infrastructure (No. 157). Central Board of Irrigation
and Power. New Delhi

Menalled et.al. (n.d.). Climate Change Perceptions and Observations of Agricultural Stakeholders in
the Northern Great Plains,2018. Retrieved from https://waferx.montana.edu/documents

Mandal KG, Misra AK, Hati KM, Bandyopadhyay KK, Ghosh PK, Mohanty M. 2004. Rice residue
management options and effects on soil properties and crop productivity. Food Agric. Environ.
2:224–231.

Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan. (2020). Pakistan Economic Survey . Retrieved from
www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_20/02_Agriculture.pdf.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. (2021). Labour Force Survey 2020-2021. Retrieved from
www.pbs.gov.pk

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. (n.d.). Statistical Yearbook 2019. Retrieved from www.pbs.gov.pk

Pakistan Credit Rating Agency Limited. (n.d.). Rice Research. Retrieved from
www.pacra.com/sector_research/Rice

Paris Agreement. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/l23_0.pdf

Paul Hawken. (n.d.). Drawdown Project, 2017. Retrieved from

https://drawdown.org/solutions/improved-rice-production

Peerzado, M.B., Magsi, H., & Sheikh, M.J. (2019). Land use conflicts and urban sprawl: Conversion of
agriculture lands into urbanization in Hyderabad, Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi Society of
Agricultural Sciences 18(4):423-428. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323146840_Land_use_conflicts_and_urban_sprawl
_Conversion_of_agriculture_lands_into_urbanization_in_Hyderabad_Pakistan

Planning Commission of Pakistan. (2021). 11th Five Year Plan, Chapter 21 Agriculture and Food
Security. Retrieved from www.pc.gov.pk

85 | P a g e
Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan. (n.d.). Export History 2011-2021. Retrieved from
https://www.reap.com.pk/exporthistory
Rice Exporters Association Pakistan. (n.d.). Map indicating Pakistan rice export markets. Retrieved
from https://reap.com.pk/riceimportingcountries

Rice knowledge Bank. (n.d.). Nutrient content of organic materials. Retrieved from
http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org

Rice Production Map of Pakistan . (n.d.). Retrieved from

www.ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/cropview/comm_chartview.aspx

Rice Value-Chain for Domestic Marketing in Pakistan . (n.d.). Retrieved from

www.pacra.com/sector_research/Rice%20Sector%20PACRA_1604759631.pdf

Rodriguez et.al. (n.d.). , American Journal of Plant Sciences, Environmental Impacts of Rice
Cultivation, 2015. Retrieved from https://file.scirp.org
https://file.scirp.org/pdf/AJPS_2015082514031710.pdf

Rodriguez et.al. (n.d.). American Journal of Plant Sciences, Environmental Impacts of Rice
Cultivation,2019. Retrieved from https://file.scirp.org

Sabar & Sabir, 2020. (n.d.). Rice Research Institute Kala Shah Kaku.

UNFCCC. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.ucl.ac.uk/global-governance/sites/global-

governance/files/policy-brief-climate-change-after-the-paris-agreement.pdf

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2015). Emissions Summary for Pakistan.
Retrieved from https://di.unfccc.int.

United States Department of Agriculture. (2021). Foreign Agricultural Services, Global Market
Analysis. Retrieved from https://apps.fas.usda.gov

Word Bank. (n.d.). Rural Population (% of Total Population) Pakistan. Retrieved from
www.data.worldbank.org

World Bank. (1994). Pakistan Irrigation and Drainage: Issues and Options. Agriculture Operations
Division Afghanistan, Maldives, Pakistan and Sri Lanka Department South Asia Region.
Retrieved from
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/336261468775507459/pdf/multi0page.pdf

World Bank (2018). Approaches to REDD+ Nesting. Lessons Learned from Country Experiences.
Forest Carbon Partnership Fund.

Zulfiqar, M., Abbasi, I., Khan, H., Nizami, A., Hakeem, A., Ali, J., & Khan, M. J. (2019). Agricultural
Economy of Skardu is Based on Glaciers and Snow Melting-A Case Study of Burgay
Watershed. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 35(2), 320-662. Retrieved from
http://researcherslinks.com/journal-details/Sarhad-Journal-of-
Agriculture/14/archive/2019/June
Country Report

Annex 1: List of Stakeholders engaged in the consultation process

Responses Position / Organization
1. Ms. Naheed Shah Durrani Federal Secretary, Ministry of Climate Change
2. Dr. Kazim Niaz Federal Secretary, Ministry of Climate Change
3. Mr. Alberto Groff Deputy Head of Mission, Swiss Embassy
4. Mr. Joudat Ayaz Addl. Secretary, Ministry of Climate Change
5. Marina Uantala First Secretary, EU
6. Mr. Stephen Langrell Team Leader Rural Development & Economic Cooperation, EU Delegation Pakistan
7. Ms. Marci Baranski Programme Implementation Officer, UNEP
8. Mr. Jens Soth Advisor, Helvetas Switzerland
9. Ms. Roshan Ara Programme Manager, EU
10. Mr. Irfan Tariq DG Environment, Ministry of Climate Change
11. Ms. Farzana Altaf, DG Environment Protection Authority
12. Mr. Hadiqa Jamshed Focal Person, NDC. Ministry of Climate Change
13. Mr. Ahsanullah Khan Kundi Climate Finance Unit, Ministry of Climate Change
14. Mr. Arif Goheer Head Agriculture & Coordination, Global Change Impact Studies Centre
15. Mr. Sher Shah Hassan Consultant, Global Change Impact Studies Centre
16. Mr. Saqib Mushtaq Consultant, Global Change Impact Studies Centre
17. Mr. Rao Irshad Ali Khan Chairman, Indus River System Authority, (IRSA)
18. Dr Muhammad Yousaf National Coordinator Rice, Pakistan Agriculture Research Council / National
Agriculture Research Centre (PARC / NARC)
19. Dr. Bashir Ahmad Director, Water Resources Institute, Pakistan Agriculture Research Council / National
Agriculture Research Centre (PARC / NARC)
20. Dr. Muhammad Ashraf Chairman, Pakistan Council for Research on Water Resources (PCRWR)
21. Dr. Naveed Iqbal Deputy Director GIS Hydrologist. Pakistan Council for Research on Water Resources
(PCRWR)
22. Dr M. Anjum Ali Buttar DGA (Extension & Agriculture Research) Punjab, Lahore
23. Dr. Abid Mahmood CEO, Punjab Agriculture Research Board
24. Mr. Rana Mahmood Akhtar Chief, Planning and Evaluation, Agriculture Department Punjab
25. Mr. Hafiz Qaiser Deputy Director
26. Programme Implementation Advisor, Agriculture Delivery Unit, Agriculture
Ms. Sana Khalid Omer
Department, Punjab
27. Mr. Irfan Dogar Advisor, Agriculture Delivery Unit, Agriculture Department, Punjab
28. Mr. Hafiz Abdur Rehman Advisor, Agriculture Delivery Unit, Agriculture Department, Punjab
29. Dr. Syed Sultan Shah Director, Kala Shah Kaku Rice Research Institute
30. Dr. Syed Sefan Ali Chief Specialist, Kala Shah Kaku Rice Research Institute
31. Dr. Arshad Makhdoom Sabir Senior Scientist, Kala Shah Kaku Rice Research Institute
32. Mr. Abdul Rahim Soomro Secretary, Agriculture Department Sindh
33. Mr. Riaz Dayo Additional Secretary, Agriculture Department Sindh
34. Mr. Mansoor Ahmad Director General Agriculture Ext, Sindh
35. Mr. Nihal Uddin Mare Director, Agriculture Department Sindh
36. Mr. Mustafa Nangraj Director Information Agri. Extension, Sindh
37. Mr. Muhammad Ibrar Sheikh Director, Agriculture Department, Sindh
38. Ms. Saima Minhas Research Officer, Agriculture Department, Sindh
39. Mr. Muzaffar Ali Agronomists
40. Mr. Munawar Kazmi Country Director, ACIAR
41. Mr. Ishfaq Ahmed Resilient Agriculture Specialist, ADPC
42. Mr. Sahibzada Mansoor Ali Consultant for Agriculture Value Chain, Asian Development Bank
43. Mr. Sayyed Ahmad Masud CEO, Change Mechanics
44. Mr. Shahwar Khan Project Manager, NIC Faisalabad

87 | P a g e
45. Mr. Shakil Team Lead / ADB / CABI
46. Mr. Umer Saeed Climate Resilient Agriculture (Agronomist), ADB
47. Mr. Zeeshan Suhail Public Affairs Manager, Nestle
48. Dr. Nadeem Akbar Associate Professor, University of Agriculture Faisalabad
49. Mr. Ghulam Rasul ICUN Head Climate Change
50. Mr. Arshad Ashraf P.S.O NARC/PARC
51. Mr. Muhammad Abdullah Zahid Business Dev. Manager, National University of Science and Technology
52. Mr. Ali Tariq CEO, Rice Partners Limited
53. Mr. Ihsan Ullah Vice President, Rice Partners Limited
54. Mr. Saddam Virk Asst. Purchase Inspector
55. Mr. din Mohammad farmer
56. Engr. Mudassir Ali Scientific Officer
57. Mr. Sultan Ahmed Bhatti Farmer
58. Mr. Javed Ahmad Development Manager
59. Mr. Hasnat Babar Student
60. Mr. Azhar Abbas Technical Services officer
61. Mr. Mohammad Zubair Student
62. Mr. Amir Javed Student
63. Ms. Hina Jabeen Student
64. Ms. Faiza Siddique Research Fellow
65. Mr. Bilal Ashraf Agronomist
66. Mr. Noor Hassan Farmer
67. Mr. Muhammad Ismail Sale officer
68. Mr. Waqar Ahmad shaikh Medical store
69. Mr. Hafiz Ghulam Jilani Asst. Manager Matco Foods Kisan Dost Program
70. Mr. Hafiz Muhammad Ismail Atlas foods
71. Ms. Humera Qasim Director Climate Change, Save the Children
72. Mr. Khurram Bashir Associate Professor, Water Informatics & Technology (WIT) LUMS
73. Mr. Muhammad Farhan ul Haq Assistant Professor, University of Punjab
74. Mr. Wajih ul Hassan Student
75. Mr. Munawar Agha Owner
76. Mr. Abdul Rehman Agronomist
77. Mr. Murtaza Kamal Farmer
78. Mr. Liaquat Ali Farmar
79. Mr. Shahbaz Ahmed Farmer
80. Mr. Wajid Laghari Farmar
81. Mr. Saram Mehmood Area manager
82. Mr. Imran Khaliq Senior Executive Marketing
83. Mr. Saqib Javed BS agriculture
84. Mr. Mazhar Iqbal Regional sales manager
85. Mr. Arslan Ahmad Field officer
86. Mr. Ahmad Raza Student
87. Mr. Sheraz Shoukat Security supervisor
88. Mr. Muhammad Zeeshan Technical Services Officer
89. Mr. Yasir Agronomist Fatima Fertilizer
90. Mr. Umer Saeed Agriculture officer
91. Ms. Aqeela Younas Plant Pathologist
92. Hafiza Hamima Elahi Peerzada Agri. Services Officer
93. Mr. Umair Islam Scholar
94. Maria Ubaid M. Phil Scholar
95. Mr. Shafay Agronomist
Country Report

96. Dr. Aman Ullah Field Solution Trainee

97. Mr. Arsalan Ahmed Farmer
98. Mr. Iqbal Nagra Agronomist at Punjab university
99. Mr. Muhammad Zulqarnain Agronomist
100. Mr. Muhammad Sajid Farooq Farmer
101. Mr. Afzal Ahmad Bhatti TSS
102. Mr. Waqas Ahmad Syngenta AFO
103. Mr. Noman Akmal R&D Officer
104. Mr. Mumtaz Ahmad Senior Scientific Officer
105. Mr. Shahbaz Hussain Banker
106. Mr. Badar Munir Sr. Agronomist
107. Mr. Pienda Khan Farmer
108. Mr. Iqbal Nagra Agronomist
109. Mr. Aaqib Hameed Researcher
110. Mr. Hamza Maqsood Research Associate
111. Mr. Talha Farooq Seed Analyst
112. Mr. Mohammad Sibghatullah Agriculture Field Officer
113. Mr. Saifullah Agri Seed Officer
114. Mr. Sadiq Shahzad Agriculture Field Officer
115. Mr. Muhammad Imran Fo
116. Mr. Ghulam Yaseen Demand Generator
117. Mr. Arish (Demand Generator) Agronomist
118. Mr. Hussain Nawaz Agronomist
119. Mr. Saifullah Farmer / activist
120. Mr. Abaid Raza Technical Agriculture Expert
121. Dr. Muhammad Shahzad Ahmed Scientific Officer/Plant Breeder
122. Ms. Iqra Agriculture officer
123. Ms. Sumaira Maqsood Lecturer
124. Ms. Maria Ubaid R&D officer
125. Mr. Javed Iqbal Director Agriculture Extension
126. Mr. Mustafa Nangraj Director Information Agri Extension Hyderabad
127. Mr. Amjad Ali Bhutto Deputy Director
128. Mr. Rasool Bux Junejo Additional Director Agri Extension Sakhar
129. Mr. Sarfraz Agribusiness Manager
130. Mr. Imran Khaliq Sr. Executive Marketing (Agri. Services)
131. Dr Muhammad Ashfaq Associate professors
132. Dr Tahir Hussain Awan Senior Scientist and Rice Researcher
133. Mr. Saeed-Ur Rehman Head Agronomic Solutions Southeast Asia+Pak
134. Mr. Sadia Sultana Scientific Officer, Ph. D. Student
135. Mr. Abid Nazir Research Associate
136. Mr. Jabir Riaz Agriculture
137. Mr. Faiza Siddique Research Fellow
138. Mr. Saddam Hussain Research Associate
139. Mr. Aman Ullah Agronomist
140. Mr. Mumtaz Ahmed R&D Manager Engro Fertilizers
141. Dr Muhammad Yusuf National Coordinator Rice
142. Mr. Khuda Bux Kalwar Agriculture Expert
143. Dr. Javaria Nasir Lecturer
144. Mr. Larik Shafi Muhammad Director (Rtd:) Agriculture Extension, GoS.
145. Mr. Muhammad Saood Technical Support Executive

89 | P a g e
146. Mr. Syed Hamid Muzammil Technical Services Officer
147. Mr. Muhammad Jawad Asghar Student
148. Mr. Hamza Maqsood Researcher
149. Mr. Muhammad Asif Senior Scientist
150. Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Field Officer AGAHE
151. Mr. Pervaiz Iqbal Ansari Project Manager
152. Mr. Waseem Hussain FAA
153. Mr. Mubashar Iqbal FAO
154. Mr. Chaudhary Muhammad Rafiq Director Rice Research Institute Kala Shah Kaku
155. Mr. Sajid Ali Assistant Professor
156. Mr. Ghulam Yaseen FO
157. Mr. Zafar Iqbal Manager, RPL
158. Mr. Muhammad Arif Goheer Head Agriculture, Forestry & Land Use
159. Mr. Hafiz Muhammad Waqas Technical Services Advisor
160. Mr. Husnain Nawaz entomologist
161. Mr. Arish Akhlaq Demand Generator
162. Mr. Rizwan Ali Project Coordinator
163. Mr. Mudassar Ahmed Quality and Food Safety Coordinator
164. Mr. Fahad Zulfiqar Project Officer
165. Mr. Nihal Uddin Mari Director
166. Mr. Jawad ali Advisor water and climate change
167. Mr. Masood Iqbal Awan Assistant Professor
168. Mr. Muhammad Sami Ullah Sustainable Agriculture Specialist
169. Dr. Muzammil Hussain Director Agriculture (FT&AR) Gujranwala
170. Mr. Muhammad Zahid Aziz DM
171. Dr. Amanullah Khan Professor of Agronomy
172. Mr. Javed Baloch Head of Sales
173. Mr. Zulqarnain Haider Scientific Officer
174. Mr. Shoukat Ali Area Agronomy Manager
175. Mr. Olatoye Temitope Senior Agricultural Officer
176. Dr. Mumtaz Cheema Professor
177. Mr. Muhammad Tahir Naeem Head Farm Advisory Centre, Fauji Fertilizers
178. Dr. Dawood Anser Saeed Farm Manager Govt Seed Farm Chillianwala
179. Mr. Ashfaq Ahmad Agribusiness Manager
180. Mr. Muhammad Ishaq Associate Professor
181. Ms. Sadaf ali Rural strategy specialist
182. Mr. Muhammad Tafhim Zafar Technical Sales Supervisor
183. Ms. Iqra Asghar Coordinator livelihood and gender empowerment
184. Mr. Muhammad Ismail Stewardship Manager CP Syngenta
185. Mr. Talha Farooq Research Associate
186. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Research Associate
187. Mr. Badar Munir Niazi Scientific Officer
188. Dr. Syed Arif Hussain Rizvi Scientific Officer
189. Mr. Amer Mumtaz Principal Scientific officer
190. Mr. Nauman Fazal Assistant research officer
191. Mr. Muhammad Qadeer Manager (Mechanized Agriculture Operation Services)
192. Mr. Mohammad Bilal Assistant Manager
193. Mr. Ibad khan Director
194. Mr. Zafar Iqbal Lodhi Deputy Director, Planning and Evaluation, Agriculture Department Punjab
195. Mr. Abdul Khurram Wahid Progressive Farmer
196. Mr. Umer Farooq Spare In charge
Country Report

197. Mr. Hafiz Shoukat Ali Agri. Extension Specialist

198. Muhammad Javed Shahzad Assistant Director (Technical)
199. Mr. Haseeb Ahsan Agriculture officer
200. Mr. Shahid Tarer MD, Galaxy Rice Mills
201. Ms. Shumaila Sharif Deputy Director Agriculture (OFWM)
202. Mr. Muhammad Imran Shazad Project Manager
203. Ms. Maryiam Director
204. Mr. Aamer Hayat Assistant professor
205. Mr. Umer Farooq Head of Product
206. Mr. Ahsan Munir Extension officer
207. Mr. Mohammad Aamir Sana Rice Miller
208. Mr. Hussain Tawawalla Senior Evaluator and Advisor
209. Mr. Arjumand Nizami Country Director Helvetas
210. Mr. Amir Hussain Agriculture Officer
211. Ms. Asima Tanveer International Researcher
212. Mr. Khalid Mahmood Manager, Sales & Trainings
213. Ms. Amna Naeem Student
214. Mr. Hafiz Muhammad Ahmad Senior Agronomist, HBL
215. Dr. Abdul Rasheed Chief Research & Development
216. Dr. Muhammad Ishfaq Agriculture Officer
217. Ms. Shahana Wash Officer
218. Mr. Aftab Naseem Deputy Manager Agri Services, FFC
219. Mr. Imran Sheikh Galaxy Rice Mills
220. Dr. Arjumand Nizami Country Director, Helvetas
221. Dr. Jawad Ali Deputy Country Director, Helvetas
222. Mr. Munawar Khattak Provincial Coordinator, Helvetas
223. Mr. Nadeem Bukhari Team lead, Helvetas
224. Mr. Shahrukh Khan National Coordinator, Helvetas
225. Mr. Zahid Rehman National Program Officer, Helvetas
226. Mr. Muhammad Riaz Manager Admin., Helvetas
227. Mr. Attique Ahmed Finance Manager, Helvetas
228. Adil Hussain F&A Officer, Helvetas

91 | P a g e
Annex 2: Estimated cost of implementing Intervention Packages (US$)
Intervention Packages49 Indicative Remarks
costs
Technology development and Transfer 1,500,000 These costs include developing, demonstrating
Provide low emission and sustainable rice technology 800,000 technologies; contributing financial subsidies to
Develop appropriate technology (mechanical and non- 500,000 promote use of new technology; training and
mechanical technologies) improving skills of service providers, providing
Include enabling conditions for dissemination of 200,000 improved equipment for introduction etc. In
technology (advocacy, finances and subsidies) addition, part of this IP will also look creating
enabling conditions in public and private sector
to sustain technology and offer support for
trouble shooting

Capacity development Capacity development 1,600,000 This IP is highly critical for sustaining sustainable
Increase awareness on climate change in rice sector 500,000 and climate smart rice production in the
(government, private sector, farmers, researchers, others) country. It includes reinforcing SRP in Pakistan,
Promote knowledge on SRP standards 300,000 assuring that MRV capacities are decentralized
Training on SRP standards (public and private sector 200,000 at provincial and national levels and co-
actors) articulate; and that farmers as well as public
Use and application of appropriate technology 250,000 and private sector actors are trained on various
Skill building of farm labour 200,000 aspects of SRP. Communication and outreach
Youth engagement on sustainable rice production 150,000 tools will be used to disseminate key messages
technology for raising interest of the stakeholders.
Technical Assistance for Data Management 850,000 Data management systems at various levels will
MRV strengthening and reporting system (MoCC and 400,000 be supported through ICT based tools for
Provinces) informing impact on rice value chain or vice
Develop ICT to help the officials and other stakeholders 250,000 versa to track if things are on a right track; ICT
Ensure use of MRV data and reports for policy decisions 200,000 tools will also be development to introduce
and improvements smart technologies (e.g. timely climate forecast,
digital AWD tubes)
Develop financial mechanisms for envisaged packages 250,000 It is predicted that this specific IP will largely be
Develop financial models to help farmers access finances / 150,000 financed by micro-finance institutions. The
incentives projects will provide finances to support MFIs in
Include risk coverage for climate smart rice production 100,000 developing and piloting different models and
(e.g., crop insurance) for advertising
Green loans for mitigation in agriculture (e.g., create a 50,000
system from Methane benefit sharing mechanism)
Policy support / research and Development 1,300,000 This IP is mainly included to removing
Policy advocacy for climate smart rice production 250,000 bottlenecks faced in adoption of climate smart
(including effective implementation) technologies and processes. This is one, through
Variety development and patent rights 550,000 policy advocacy and improving conditions for
Solutions for mitigation and adaptation in agriculture 300,000 effective implementation; and two, through
Economics of technological options 200,000 targeted research and development activities to
find solutions to the problems (such as varietal
development, adaptation and mitigation
solutions). Young researchers will also be
engaged and encouraged here.
Total 5,500,000

49(i) These are based on one rice production district of Punjab (ii) These are based on inflation trend for 2022 (iii) These
costs do not include administrative / personnel costs (iv) These costs do include technical assistance and other soft costs
such as training and advocacy support (v) These are calculated for a project duration of 7 years
Country Report

93 | P a g e