close

Climate initiatives

By Editorial Board
January 05, 2026
Residents wade through a flooded road, following the monsoon rains and rising water level of the Chenab River, in Patraki, Chiniot district of Punjab, August 30, 2025. — Reuters
Residents wade through a flooded road, following the monsoon rains and rising water level of the Chenab River, in Patraki, Chiniot district of Punjab, August 30, 2025. — Reuters

Climate resilience is becoming a growing imperative for countries like Pakistan. The 2025 floods devastated the country and were part of a string of serious natural disasters that the country has had to deal with in recent years and the winter smog has seen the country’s urban centres, most notably Lahore, top global air pollution rankings. Compounding the problem are long-term environmental stresses such as water scarcity, air pollution and accelerated glacial melt, which harm the nation’s lives and livelihoods even when they do not cause outright catastrophes. Amid this heightened climate risk profile, the West has retreated from its traditional role as an aid provider to the Global South and as a leader in the global fight against climate change. This is despite it bearing disproportionate responsibility for global warming. In this context, the two major climate resilience initiatives Pakistan signed with the Asian Development Bank last week are vital. The agreements include the $180.5 million Sindh Coastal Resilience Sector Project (SCRP) and the $124 million Punjab Climate Resilient and Low Carbon Agriculture Mechanisation Project. The former will reportedly promote integrated water resources and flood risk management, restore nature-based coastal defences and strengthen institutional and community capacity for strategic planning and the latter aims to enhance agricultural productivity and climate resilience across 30 districts of Punjab.

The projects will primarily be financed through loans from the ADB, making it important that the projects are actually properly implemented and enhance climate resilience and also lead to tangible economic gains. Pakistan already has too much debt with too little to show for it. The Sindh project is expected to benefit more than 3.8 million people in the Thatta, Sujawal and Badin districts, while the Punjab project will provide small farmers with improved access to climate-smart machinery, circular agriculture practices to reduce crop residue burning and testing and training facilities. It will also empower 15000 women through skills development and livelihood diversification. Both projects target some of the country’s most pressing environmental problems. When it is not flooding, the Indus River, the country’s primary source of fresh water, is retreating and the rising scarcity is driving massive saltwater intrusion across Sindh’s coastal belt, destroying fertile lands and contaminating drinking water. In Punjab, the country’s breadbasket, outdated farming techniques and a lack of capital lead to polluting practices such as agricultural waste burning and more inefficient resource use, which manifests in water waste.

It is heartening to see the government taking serious steps to address these issues, and that some international organisations remain willing to contribute to climate initiatives in the Global South. However, for projects like this to truly succeed, they need to be aligned with the country’s broader economic framework and direction. Both projects are deeply tied to agriculture, an area where the IMF, the country’s major financial backer, has been pushing for higher taxes and less government intervention. How this demand is being implemented, what the tax rates will be, and how much government support farmers can count on going forward remain somewhat unclear. While providing farmers in Punjab with better machinery and techniques and those on Sindh’s coast with more resilient water resources is important, farmers will struggle to thrive under a cloud of ambiguity. Taking on loans to make farming more climate-resilient may not be worth it if policy changes or ambiguity in other areas drive farmers away.