Hubbry Logo
Forestry in PakistanForestry in PakistanMain
Open search
Forestry in Pakistan
Community hub
Forestry in Pakistan
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Forestry in Pakistan
Forestry in Pakistan
Forestry in Pakistan
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
View of 'Fairy Meadow' at Nanga Parbat showing conifer forest of Picea smithiana and Pinus wallichiana.
Part of a series on
Wildlife of Pakistan
Biodiversity
Conservation
Organizations
  • National

International

Related topics

The forestry sector of Pakistan is a main source of lumber, paper, fuelwood, latex, medicine as well as food and provide ecotourism and wildlife conservation purposes. 5% of Pakistan's land is covered in forest (2024). The Shangla district is the only district of Pakistan that composed of more than 80% of forest land.[1]

Statistics

[edit]
Total forest area coverage in km2 (source)
Parameter Pakistan Asia World
Total forest area in 2000 23,610 5,041,800 38,694,550
Natural forest area in 2000 13,810 3,758,240 36,827,220
Plantations area in 2000 9,800 1,109,530 1,867,330
Total dryland area in 1981 725,240 10,781,210 50,599,840
Percentage of forests ~4.97% ~22% ~29%

The percentage of Pakistan's area that is forest is disputed. The UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates 2.2% of the total land of Pakistan is covered by forests. On the contrary, Pakistan Forest Institute estimates it to be 5.1%. According to the survey done under the Red Plus programme in 2017, the forest cover of Pakistan is 5.7%.

According to survey under Red Plus programme, the Azad Jammu and Kashmir has the highest forest cover at 36.9%, followed by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (20.3%), Islamabad (22.6%) and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (19.5%). The World Wild Fund report that between 2000 and 2010 Pakistan has lost 43,000 hectares of land every year.[2]

Types

[edit]
Lajbook, Lower Dir
Miandam, Swat
Ecosystems area by type in 1993 (source)
Ecosystem type Pakistan Asia World
Shrublands, woodlands and grasslands 36% 37% 37%
Sparse or barren vegetation; snow and ice 34% 10% 16%
Cropland and natural vegetation mosaic 28% 34% 20%
Wetlands and water bodies 1% 2% 3%

Uses

[edit]

The forests of Pakistan are a main source of lumber, paper, fuelwood, latex, medicine as well as human and animal food. Other minor products include resin (a fluid in tissue of Chir pine plant that becomes solid on exposure to the air) and 'mazri' (used for making baskets). The forests also provide for ecotourism and wildlife conservation purposes. Forests have also been planted in some areas like Thal Desert to avoid soil erosion and further desertification. Riparian zone along the river Indus have been managed to avoid excess flooding.

Annual production, 1996-1998 (source)
Parameter Pakistan Asia World
Total production (000m³) 31,528 1,111,958 3,261,621
Fuelwood production (000m³) 29,312 863,316 1,739,504
Industrial roundwood production (000m³) 2,217 268,470 1,522,116
Paper (thousand metric tons) 619 88,859 313,206

Deforestation

[edit]
Main article: Environmental issues in Pakistan

According to the UN in 2011, Pakistan was the most heavily deforested country in Asia.[3] The Federal Bureau of Statistics provisionally valued the deforestation sector at Rs.25,637 million in 2005, thus registering over 3% decline of forests in Pakistan since 2000.[4] The main reasons of deforestation are urbanization, farming, overgrazing, and tourism development. Wildlife in Pakistan is confronting a critical situation, marked by the dwindling populations of numerous species. This decline is primarily attributed to pressing threats, including illegal wildlife trade, habitat loss due to urbanization, rising pollution levels, and the impacts of climate change.[5][6]

This has led to severe consequences such as desertification, flooding and endangering of wildlife. As a consequence to deforestation and changing land use patterns, the most critically affected ecosystems of Pakistan are:

  • Juniper forests of northern Baluchistan have been heavily harvested for timber and fuel wood.
  • Ecological changes in the Indus River riparian zone have drastically affected the riverine forests. Large tracts have been cleared for agriculture.
  • The Himalayan temperate forests are also under severe pressure from logging for timber and firewood, and from clearings for agriculture and human settlements. Deforestation rate in Pakistan is increasing 0.2 to 0.5 percent annually.

Conservation

[edit]
Main article: Protected areas of Pakistan

The protected areas serve the purpose of conserving the forests and wildlife of Pakistan. National Conservation Strategy of 1993 was a major landmark of start of conservation of natural resources and wildlife in Pakistan. Resource-managed man-made forests like Changa Manga, Kamalia plantation and Chichawatni plantation have also been planted to serve purpose and conserve forests. Through conservation, a large region of Thal desert has been afforested.

Natural protected forests
Artificial resource managed forests

Organizations

[edit]

Research institutions

[edit]
See also: List of forestry universities and colleges § Pakistan

Punjab Forestry Research Institutes, Gatwala Faisalabad Punjab Wildlife Institutes Gatwala Faisalabad

Botanical gardens

[edit]
Main article: List of botanical gardens in Pakistan

Companies

[edit]
Main article: South Punjab Forest Company

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Forestry in Pakistan

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Forestry in Pakistan involves the , conservation, and utilization of forests that cover approximately 4.73% of the country's area, totaling around 4.12 million hectares, predominantly comprising coniferous forests in the northern hills and arid scrub in the drier regions. These forests play critical roles in watershed protection, support, and , yet they contribute only a modest direct share to GDP—about 2.33% within —while providing indirect economic benefits through timber, fuelwood, and services. Despite government-led afforestation drives, such as the Billion Tree Tsunami launched in 2014, which successfully planted over one billion trees and restored roughly 350,000 hectares of degraded land, Pakistan loses an estimated 27,000 hectares of forest annually, equivalent to 1.5% of existing cover, due to drivers including illegal logging, overgrazing by livestock, agricultural encroachment, and population-driven demands for fuel and timber. This persistent deforestation exacerbates soil erosion, flooding risks—as evidenced in recurrent northern disasters—and biodiversity loss, with natural forest extent shrinking to just 1.37 million hectares by 2020 amid urban expansion and weak enforcement. State-dominated policies have historically prioritized centralized control over community involvement, leading to controversies over in forest departments, such as illicit timber harvesting enabled by lax oversight, and failures in that perpetuate depletion rates of up to 39,000 hectares yearly. Recent efforts, including the extending through 2023 with targets for 3.3 billion plantings, aim to counter these trends via , though challenges persist from poverty-fueled extraction and inadequate monitoring.

Historical Development

Colonial Foundations

The British colonial administration in India initiated systematic forestry practices in the mid-19th century, primarily to secure timber supplies for railway sleepers, shipbuilding, and other imperial infrastructure needs, which extended to the territories that later formed , including and the (now ). Early haphazard exploitation had depleted accessible forests, prompting the adoption of European scientific methods, particularly the German sustained-yield model, to regulate harvesting and promote regeneration. In , where subtropical and forests covered significant hill tracts, initial surveys in the 1840s-1850s under British botanists like Hugh Cleghorn highlighted erosion risks from unchecked felling, leading to preliminary conservancy measures focused on watershed protection and revenue generation. Dietrich Brandis, a German forester recruited in 1856 and appointed Inspector General of Forests in 1864, established the Imperial Forest Department in 1864, training Indian subordinates and creating working plans for selective logging to ensure long-term productivity over short-term extraction. His efforts centralized forest administration, introducing silvicultural techniques suited to species like Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii) prevalent in the Himalayan foothills of Punjab and the Frontier, while prioritizing commercial timbers for export and domestic use. Brandis's system emphasized state monopoly on reservations, often overriding customary grazing and fuelwood rights of local tribes, which fostered resentment but laid groundwork for organized management inherited post-independence. The Indian Forest Act of 1865 formalized colonial control by classifying lands as reserved forests—fully state-managed—or protected forests with limited community access, applying uniformly across British India and enabling demarcation of over 100,000 square kilometers by the 1870s, including key areas in Punjab's and hills. This was amended in 1878 to strengthen penalties for encroachments and smuggling, reflecting revenue priorities amid railway expansion that consumed vast quantities of deodar () from northern tracts. However, in arid regions like and , sparse and scrub received less attention, with policies favoring agricultural conversion over , contributing to patchy implementation and ongoing degradation. By 1900, Punjab's Forest Department had reserved about 10,000 square kilometers, balancing conservation with exploitation, though local ecological was marginalized in favor of utilitarian metrics.

Post-Independence Expansion and Decline

Following in , Pakistan's forestry administration continued colonial-era practices, with initial emphasis on expanding irrigated plantations along canal systems in and to supply timber for reconstruction and agriculture-related needs. These efforts, which reserved marginal lands for species like and , increased planted forest area modestly in the and , supplementing natural cover estimated at around 5% of total land area (approximately 4 million hectares). However, such expansions were limited in scale and primarily served utilitarian purposes rather than broad ecological restoration, as national priorities shifted toward and industrialization amid partition-induced disruptions. By the 1970s, expansion stalled as accelerated due to surging —from 33.74 million in 1951 to 84.25 million in 1981—which heightened demand for fuelwood (accounting for over 90% of annual wood use) and , alongside agricultural encroachment and uncontrolled . Natural forests, particularly coniferous stands in the northern hills, suffered annual losses of about 27,000 hectares, driven by illegal felling, weak enforcement, and community clearing to assert land rights against state claims. Scrub and ecosystems also degraded rapidly, with rangeland exacerbating watershed and in dams like Tarbela (completed 1976). The net outcome was a sustained decline in overall , from roughly 3.59 million hectares in to 3.29 million hectares by 2001, at an average rate of 0.75% per year in natural forests, as confirmed by FAO assessments and Landsat imagery. This trend reflected systemic failures in , including inadequate funding for protection ( budgets often below 0.1% of GDP) and resistance to centralized in tribal areas, culminating in responses like the commercial logging ban after devastating floods linked to upstream degradation. Despite sporadic drives, such as early social pilots, survival rates remained low (under 50% in many cases) due to arid conditions and socioeconomic pressures, underscoring the causal primacy of unmet over conservation incentives.

Policy Shifts from 2000 Onward

In 2001, Pakistan implemented the Devolution of Power Plan under President , which decentralized administrative authority to district and local governments, including aspects of such as forestry. This shift transferred oversight of forest resources from federal to provincial and local levels, aiming to enhance community participation and efficiency but resulting in fragmented enforcement, increased in some areas due to weakened central coordination, and challenges in at the level. The 18th Constitutional Amendment in 2010 further devolved forestry and environmental subjects exclusively to provincial governments, eliminating federal concurrency and prompting provinces to develop autonomous strategies. (KP) led early post-devolution efforts with the Afforestation Project launched in 2014, targeting restoration of 350,000 hectares through community involvement, natural regeneration (60% of efforts), and species suited to local , achieving verified planting of over 1 billion trees by 2017 with independent monitoring confirming 80-90% survival rates in monitored sites. This provincial initiative marked a policy pivot from passive protection to aggressive, ecosystem-based restoration, integrating livelihood support via 50,000 jobs created and bans on timber harvesting in degraded guzara forests to prioritize regeneration. Federally, the National Forest Policy of 2015 emphasized sustainable management, aiming to raise forest cover from 5% to 6% by 2030 through integrated watershed approaches, , and alignment with international commitments like the UN . It promoted multiple-use forests for , , and livelihoods while addressing degradation drivers like fuelwood demand, though implementation relied on provincial buy-in amid criticisms of lacking enforcement mechanisms. Building on provincial successes, the federal Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme (TBTTP), initiated in 2018 and formalized as Phase-I (2019-2023) with a of 125.184 billion Pakistani rupees, expanded nationwide to 10 billion trees by 2028, incorporating 40% direct planting and 60% natural regeneration across ecological zones, with goals to restore 6 million hectares and generate 700,000 jobs. Subsequent evolution under the programme, rebranded as the Upscaling Green Pakistan Programme, incorporated by prioritizing drought-resistant species and protected areas, reflecting a causal recognition of deforestation's role in exacerbating floods and , as evidenced by pre-programme loss rates of 27,000 hectares annually from 2001-2010. Provincial variations persisted, with and focusing on irrigated plantations, while emphasized rangeland rehabilitation, though audits highlighted survival challenges from poor in some federal efforts, underscoring the need for data-driven monitoring over volume targets.

Forest Resources

Geographical Distribution

Pakistan's forests are unevenly distributed, with the majority concentrated in the northern mountainous regions, while arid and semi-arid zones in the south and west host sparse or specialized formations. Approximately 4.8% of the country's land area, or about 4.2 million hectares, is forested, predominantly in (KP), Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), and (GB), where moist temperate coniferous forests dominate the Himalayan and ranges. These northern forests, covering subtropical pine to alpine scrubs, account for over 40% of the total forest area in moist temperate zones alone. In KP, which holds the largest absolute forest area at around 1.5 million hectares or 20.3% of the province's land, coniferous species like Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii) and blue pine (Pinus wallichiana) prevail in the moist temperate forests of districts such as Swat, Dir, and Abbottabad, extending up to 3,000 meters elevation. AJK features high forest density, with subtropical and temperate forests comprising about 27% of national forest area, primarily broadleaved and coniferous types in the Pir Panjal range. GB's forests, though covering less than 10% of its terrain, include dry temperate juniper (Juniperus excelsa) and chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana) in high-altitude valleys like those near Nanga Parbat. Southern and central regions exhibit limited distribution: Punjab's forests, roughly 5-6% of national total, consist mainly of riverain tracts along the Indus and Chenab rivers with species like shisham (Dalbergia sissoo) and babul (Acacia nilotica), alongside subtropical scrub in the Salt Range and Murree hills. Sindh hosts the bulk of mangrove forests in the Indus Delta, spanning about 260,000 hectares of littoral swamps dominated by Avicennia marina, vital for coastal ecosystems but vulnerable to salinity and encroachment. Balochistan, the least forested province with under 5% cover, features scattered juniper and olive woodlands in the Sulaiman and Toba Kakar ranges, alongside dry subtropical scrubs adapted to arid conditions. This north-south gradient reflects climatic variations, with precipitation decreasing from over 1,000 mm annually in northern highlands to less than 250 mm in the plains and deserts.

Classification by Types and Species

Pakistan's forests are broadly classified into nine major types based on physiographic regions, climate, altitude, and vegetation characteristics, as delineated by ecological zoning from coastal lowlands to high alpine zones. This classification, originally outlined in assessments by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), reflects adaptations to aridity in the south and increasing moisture and cooler temperatures northward and upward in elevation. Dominant species within each type are typically resilient to local edaphic and climatic stresses, with conifers prevailing in montane areas and deciduous or thorny hardwoods in drier plains. Littoral and swamp forests occur along the Indus delta and coastal belts of and , comprising stands in saline, tidal zones and freshwater swamps inland. These low-canopy formations, covering approximately 0.3 million hectares historically, feature salt-tolerant species such as (grey ), , and Ceriops tagal in brackish areas, alongside Barringtonia acutangula in swampy depressions; degradation from and has reduced their extent significantly since the 1990s. Tropical thorn forests dominate arid and semi-arid lowlands of , , and parts of below 500 meters , characterized by sparse, drought-resistant thorny trees and shrubs adapted to low rainfall (under 500 mm annually). Key species include Acacia nilotica (kikar), (khejri), Acacia modesta (phulai), and , forming open woodlands with understories of grasses; these cover vast rangelands but face pressures. Tropical dry deciduous forests, transitional between thorn and subtropical types, appear in sub-montane tracts of the and lower with 500-1,000 mm rainfall, shedding leaves in dry seasons. Dominant hardwoods are Lannea grandis, , and Adhatoda vasica shrubs, supporting but limited by edaphic dryness. Subtropical broad-leaved evergreen and semi-evergreen forests occupy foothills up to 1,000 meters in and , with species like Olea cuspidata (wild olive), Acacia modesta, and (hopbush) thriving in 750-1,250 mm ; these sclerophyllous formations provide watershed protection but are fragmented by human encroachment. Subtropical pine forests, primarily Pinus roxburghii (chir pine) stands, extend from 900-1,700 meters in the western Himalayas and Sulaiman Range, forming pure or mixed coniferous belts on rocky slopes with fire-adapted regeneration; associated species include Quercus incana (oak) at lower edges. Himalayan moist temperate forests, between 1,500-3,000 meters in northern ranges, encompass mixed conifer and broadleaf zones with high rainfall (1,000-2,000 mm); principal species are Cedrus deodara (deodar), Pinus wallichiana (blue pine), Abies pindrow (silver fir), Picea smithiana (spruce), and broadleaves like Quercus dilatata (holly oak) and Aesculus indica (horse chestnut), vital for timber and ecology. Dry temperate variants in rain-shadow areas feature Pinus gerardiana (chilgoza pine) and Quercus ilex subspecies, adapted to lower moisture. Sub-alpine forests above 3,000 meters transition to birch-rhododendron (, ) and conifer fringes with , while alpine scrubs and pastures include dwarf junipers () and Salix shrubs, supporting pastoral economies amid harsh conditions. Overall, coniferous species account for over 40% of forested area, underscoring montane dominance in Pakistan's woodland composition.

Quantitative Overview

Current Extent and Cover Statistics

Pakistan's forest cover remains among the lowest in and globally, estimated at 4.7% of total land area as of 2023 according to World Bank data derived from FAO assessments. This equates to roughly 3.6 million hectares, based on a total land area of approximately 77 million hectares. The FAO's Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 reported a slightly higher figure of 3,984,000 hectares (5% of land area) for that year, reflecting a standard definition of forests as land spanning over 0.5 hectares with trees taller than 5 meters and canopy cover exceeding 10%, or potential to reach such thresholds . Discrepancies arise from varying definitions; for instance, Global Forest Watch emphasizes natural forests (excluding plantations), estimating 1.37 million hectares in 2020, or 1.7% of land area.
YearForest Area (1000 ha)% of Land Area (FAO/World Bank)Source
20203,9845.0%FAO FRA 2020
2023~3,6004.7%World Bank
Natural forests account for the bulk of cover, with planted forests comprising about 0.3 million hectares per FAO estimates, though survival rates of afforestation efforts remain low due to arid conditions and management challenges. Government reports from the Ministry of Climate Change highlight marginal gains under the Green Pakistan Programme, but independent assessments confirm persistent low cover, with natural forests at around 5% in recent analyses. These figures underscore Pakistan's classification as forest-poor, with per capita forest area at about 0.02 hectares. Pakistan's has exhibited a consistent decline since , with total area decreasing from 4,987 thousand hectares in to 3,726 thousand hectares in 2020, representing a net loss of approximately 1,261 thousand hectares over three decades. This equates to an average annual net change rate of -42 thousand hectares per year across the periods –2000, 2000–2010, and 2010–2020, with slight variations: -48 thousand hectares annually from –2000, -42 thousand hectares from 2000–2010, and -37 thousand hectares from 2010–2015, accelerating marginally to -41 thousand hectares from 2015–2020. As a of area, fell from around 5.9% in the early 2000s to 4.83% by 2020, underscoring Pakistan's position among countries with critically low resources relative to global benchmarks.
YearForest Area (thousand ha)Annual Net Change (thousand ha/yr)
19904,987-
20004,511-48
20104,094-42
20153,757-37
20203,726-41
Data from FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020, based on national reporting with a definition encompassing areas ≥0.5 ha with >10% canopy cover and trees capable of ≥5 m height at maturity. Gross rates, measured as the conversion of to other land uses, averaged 15 thousand hectares per year from 2004–2016, though net losses exceed this due to limited offsetting gains from and natural expansion. Satellite-based analyses from Global Forest Watch, using Landsat data to detect canopy loss in tree-covered areas (>5 m height), report lower aggregate tree cover loss of 9.53 thousand hectares from 2001–2024 (averaging ~414 hectares annually), with only a fraction attributed to outright versus degradation or temporary disturbances; natural extent stood at 1.37 million hectares (1.7% of land) in 2020, and 451 hectares were lost in 2024 alone. Discrepancies between FAO's broader inventory-based estimates and GFW's remote-sensing focus on dense canopy highlight definitional differences, with FAO incorporating low-density and scrub formations prevalent in Pakistan's arid zones, while GFW emphasizes verifiable loss events. Despite efforts, the trajectory indicates persistent pressure, with no reversal to net gain observed in official assessments.

Afforestation and Survival Metrics

Pakistan's key initiatives have centered on large-scale tree-planting drives to combat and restore degraded lands. The Billion Tree Tsunami Afforestation Project (BTAP), implemented primarily in province from 2014 to 2017, targeted the planting of one billion trees across approximately 350,000 hectares of deforested and degraded areas, fulfilling and exceeding Pakistan's Bonn Challenge pledge for forest landscape restoration. Third-party verification by organizations including the IUCN and WWF confirmed the project's completion, with independent monitoring highlighting effective community participation and nursery management as factors in its outcomes. Survival metrics for BTAP plantations showed robust results in evaluated sites, particularly for multipurpose species like (comprising 78% of plantings), Acacia nilotica, and . A study of sites in reported average survival rates exceeding 90%, with individual locations ranging from 83.1% at Musa Kahr to 97.1% at Kirri Shamozai after 24-27 months; E. camaldulensis demonstrated superior adaptability in arid conditions, achieving heights of up to 2.93 meters and girths of 19.3 cm. Broader assessments pegged overall survival at around 89%, among the highest recorded for such programs, due to phased planting, support, and exclusion of . Growth performance correlated with survival, with D. sissoo averaging 2.8 meters in height and 19 cm girth, underscoring the viability of species selection for local ecosystems. The subsequent Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme (TBTTP), launched nationally in 2018 under the Clean Green Pakistan movement and targeting 10 billion trees by 2023, expanded to over 6 million hectares across provinces, including deserts and rangelands. By June 2023, it had planted over 705 million trees in alone toward a provincial sub-target of one billion, with national efforts emphasizing indigenous species and job creation for 500,000 workers. Official reports cited survival rates of 70-90% in initial phases, building on BTAP methodologies, though comprehensive independent audits remain limited. Critics, including environmental experts, have questioned TBTTP survival claims, estimating effective rates closer to or below 60% in water-scarce regions due to insufficient post-planting care, bureaucratic oversight, and mismatches between species and sites—such as in pastures, which strained and increased risks. Instances of mass sapling die-off from heat and in areas like were documented, with calls for prioritizing natural regeneration over rushed planting to enhance long-term metrics. While government monitoring via apps and drones aimed to track progress, discrepancies between planted numbers and verified survivorship highlight challenges in scaling BTAP's localized success nationally.
InitiativeTrees PlantedArea Covered (ha)Reported Survival Range (%)Key Verification/Source
BTAP (2014-2017)~1 billion350,00083-97 (avg. >90)WWF/IUCN studies
TBTTP (2018-2023)>5 billion (partial)>6 million targeted60-90 (disputed) reports; critic estimates

Economic and Utilitarian Roles

Harvesting and Product Extraction

Timber harvesting in Pakistan is primarily conducted through selective felling in state-managed and community forests, guided by provincial regulations under the Forest Act of 1927 and subsequent ordinances like the NWFP Forest Ordinance of 2002, which mandate permits for extraction and emphasize regeneration obligations for right-holders. Annual allowable cuts are calculated based on sustained yield principles, with total timber production estimated at 3.5 million cubic meters per year, though actual harvests often exceed sustainable levels due to enforcement gaps. In , operations involve manual and mechanized skidding using tractors, with guidelines from 2004 specifying measures like cable yarding in steep terrains to minimize soil disturbance during extraction. Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) extraction constitutes a significant portion of harvesting activities, particularly in northern and subtropical forests, where communities collect items such as chilgoza pine nuts, medicinal herbs, , morels, and wild fruits through manual during seasonal periods, often spanning 6-10 hours daily in summer. Sustainable practices, promoted in initiatives like the Restoration Initiative, include community-led protection committees and regulated quotas to prevent overharvesting, as seen in chilgoza forests where local processing reduces waste and supports livelihoods without clear-cutting. Fuelwood gathering, the dominant NTFP use, accounts for over 80% of rural household energy needs, harvested via axes and saws from scrub and coniferous stands, though this contributes to degradation when unregulated. Extraction faces challenges from , exemplified by a 2025 operation in uncovering timber worth 1.7 billion Pakistani rupees extracted corruptly, highlighting weak provincial enforcement despite policies requiring participatory management for harvest resumption. Recent measures, such as Punjab's 2025 ban on tree felling and timber auctions, aim to curb excesses, prioritizing conservation over short-term yields in response to annual wood deficits exceeding 29 million cubic meters.

Contributions to GDP, Employment, and Livelihoods

The forestry sector's direct contribution to Pakistan's gross domestic product (GDP) stands at 0.54% in fiscal year 2024-25, accounting for 2.31% of the agriculture sector's value added, which itself comprises about 23% of total GDP. This figure reflects primarily timber, fuelwood, and minor non-timber outputs, with growth in the sector at 3.03% for the same period, driven by modest expansions in production volumes. Official statistics from the Pakistan Economic Survey capture only formal economic activities, potentially underrepresenting indirect benefits such as ecosystem services like soil conservation and carbon sequestration, which are not monetized in national accounts. Direct formal employment in remains limited, with no comprehensive national breakdown available in recent labor force surveys; however, the broader sector, including forestry subsets, employs 37.4% of the , or roughly 40 million , many in rural areas overlapping with forest-dependent activities. Informal labor, such as seasonal timber harvesting and NTFP collection, supplements wages for low-income households, though precise figures are scarce due to the sector's unregulated and reliance on provincial forest departments for oversight. Forests play a critical role in rural livelihoods, particularly in northern and mountainous regions like and , where communities derive 32-39% of household income from forest resources including fuelwood, medicinal plants, and wild fruits. In surveyed areas, 82% of households depend on fuelwood for cooking and heating, while 45% harvest medicinal herbs and 28% collect edible nuts or fruits, contributing 10-25% to annual income amid limited and off-farm opportunities. This dependency underscores forests' function as a safety net for subsistence economies, though overexploitation risks depleting these resources without sustainable management.

Drivers of Forest Loss

Anthropogenic Pressures Including Population and Illegality

Pakistan's rapidly expanding , which grew from approximately 220 million in 2020 to over 240 million by 2023, intensifies pressure on limited resources through heightened demand for fuelwood, conversion, and urban expansion. Rural households, comprising a significant portion of the populace, rely heavily on forests for fuelwood, with estimates indicating that over 80% of domestic energy needs in remote areas are met this way, contributing to annual losses of around 27,000 hectares. This dependency correlates directly with ; for instance, in the region of , rates have accelerated alongside a doubling of local from to 2020, driven by clearing for subsistence farming and . Agricultural expansion exacerbates these pressures, as growing food demands prompt the conversion of marginal forest lands into cropland and pastures, particularly in northern provinces like and . Between 2000 and 2012, such shifts accounted for a 12.36% decline in in areas like Barawal, Dir Lower, where barren land and agriculture expanded at the expense of wooded areas amid population-driven settlement. Overgrazing by , supporting livelihoods for millions, further degrades and prevents regeneration, with studies linking a 2.9% annual rate in the 1980s-1990s partly to these systemic demands from unchecked demographic growth. Illegal logging, often orchestrated by organized networks known as the "timber mafia," represents a profound anthropogenic threat, undermining legal frameworks and exacerbating resource depletion. These groups, with reported ties to political figures and corrupt officials, facilitate unauthorized harvesting that rivals or exceeds licensed extraction in volume; a 2025 investigation uncovered an operation in northern forests valued at 1.7 billion Pakistani rupees (approximately $6 million USD), involving systematic evasion of regulations. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, illegal cutting persists despite provincial bans, contributing to an estimated 27,000 hectares of annual forest loss nationwide, as corroborated by global environmental assessments. Such activities not only accelerate canopy loss—Pakistan's forests shrank by 18% from 3.78 million hectares in 1992 to 3.09 million in 2025—but also fragment habitats, with lax enforcement enabling mafia control over supply chains to urban markets.

Environmental and Climatic Factors

Pakistan's forests are predominantly concentrated in the northern mountainous regions, including the Himalayan and ranges, where subtropical to temperate climates prevail, but the country overall features arid and semi-arid conditions covering about 80% of its land area, limiting forest regeneration and exacerbating vulnerability to degradation. These climatic regimes, characterized by low average annual rainfall (less than 250 mm in many areas) and high rates, inherently constrain growth and survival, particularly in subtropical thorn forests and dry temperate zones, leading to natural dieback and reduced accumulation independent of activity. Droughts, intensified by climate variability, represent a primary climatic driver of forest loss, with prolonged dry spells causing widespread tree mortality through stress and increased susceptibility to pests. In , extreme events linked to global warming have accelerated rates by promoting infestations and fungal diseases in coniferous species like , with studies identifying frequency as a key correlate to canopy loss exceeding 1% annually in vulnerable stands. Aridity further compounds this by fostering , where soil moisture deficits hinder seedling establishment; wind and in deforested slopes, amplified by sparse vegetative cover, remove at rates up to 13 million hectares affected nationwide, preventing forest recovery and creating feedback loops of further degradation. Floods, often following erratic patterns altered by , drive episodic destruction through hydrodynamic forces and subsequent landslides, particularly in the basin and northern watersheds. The 2022 floods, for instance, devastated riparian and montane s by scouring root systems and depositing sediments that smother vegetation, with glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) from accelerated Himalayan glacier melt—driven by rising temperatures—exacerbating downstream and loss of over 10% of foothill cover in affected districts. fires, fueled by prolonged dry seasons, low humidity, and high winds under warming conditions, have increased in frequency, burning thousands of hectares annually in chir pine-dominated areas, as evidenced by National Disaster Management Authority records linking climatic to heightened fire risk. Topographic factors, such as steep slopes (identified as a predictor with 0.0529 relative importance in loss models), interact with these events to accelerate runoff and instability, underscoring causal chains where climatic extremes directly precipitate structural decline.

Socio-Economic Consequences

Deforestation in erodes rural livelihoods heavily reliant on forest resources, with non-timber forest products (NTFPs) such as fuelwood, , , and honey contributing 10-25% of income in areas like , and up to 41-60% for some collectors in northern regions. Approximately 80% of rural populations in forested vicinities depend on NTFPs for subsistence, and empirical studies indicate that households engaged in forest-based activities exhibit lower rates and higher overall incomes compared to non-dependent peers in the Himalayan foothills. Forest depletion thus perpetuates a cycle of impoverishment, as reduced access to these resources forces substitution with costlier alternatives or shifts to unsustainable , further straining finances in poverty-prone districts. The forestry sector supports direct for about 17,800 workers, while broader wood-based industries and indirect dependencies employ over 500,000 individuals, representing a critical buffer against in rural economies. Annual forest loss at rates exceeding 27,000 hectares—equivalent to 0.75% of remaining cover—translates to forgone economic output, with official estimates undervaluing forests at 0.41-0.43% of GDP but broader valuations, including services like watershed protection, reaching up to 11.48% when factoring in livestock fodder, , and . This underreporting stems from reliance on marketed timber metrics, ignoring unmonetized rural benefits that sustain and buffer against inflation-driven costs. Indirect consequences amplify through heightened disaster vulnerability, as deforestation diminishes soil stabilization and water retention, exacerbating flood severity in monsoon-prone basins. The 2022 floods, linked in part to upstream forest degradation, inflicted USD 30 billion in damages and losses, elevating national poverty by 4.0-4.3 percentage points and impoverishing an additional 9 million people, predominantly in agrarian Sindh and Punjab where eroded watersheds intensified inundation. Resultant agricultural yield declines—through siltation and erosion—compound food insecurity, displacing pastoralists and smallholders, while prompting rural-to-urban migration that burdens informal labor markets and inflates urban poverty rates without commensurate job creation. These dynamics underscore causal linkages wherein forest loss not only curtails direct revenues but cascades into broader socio-economic instability, particularly for low-literacy, land-poor demographics in northern and western highlands.

Management and Preservation Strategies

Forestry in Pakistan operates under a framework shaped by the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (1973), which designates forestry as a provincial subject, with the federal government responsible for inter-provincial coordination, international commitments, and regulation of timber imports and exports under Article 151. Following the in 2010, authority over devolved further to provincial governments, diminishing prior federal oversight while requiring national-level harmonization for cross-border issues. The foundational legislation is the Forest Act, 1927 (Act XVI of 1927), inherited from British colonial law and adapted provincially, which consolidates regulations on reserves, transit of produce, and duties on timber and other materials. It categorizes forests into reserved (strictly controlled, with extinguished private rights unless claimed within three months of notification; Sections 3-9), protected (regulated use with specified prohibitions like felling reserved trees; Sections 29-33), and village forests (assigned to communities under government rules for local use; Section 28). Offenses, such as unauthorized clearing or damage, incur penalties including imprisonment up to six months and fines scaled to damage value (up to ten times the assessed loss), with provisions for seizure of offending property. Provinces have enacted amendments and supplementary ordinances, such as the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance, 2002, to address local governance and community involvement. The National Forest Policy 2015, promulgated by the Ministry of Climate Change, serves as an umbrella framework to support provincial policies, emphasizing amid a forest cover of approximately 5% and annual of 27,000 hectares. Its core objectives include expanding cover through mass (targeting 70-80 million saplings annually, deemed insufficient), conserving via protected areas and ecological corridors, integrating forests with sectors like and water, and implementing REDD+ mechanisms to reduce carbon emissions while fulfilling UNFCCC obligations. Key measures propose legal reforms for timber trade regulation, establishment of a national Timber Regulatory Authority for inter-provincial oversight, and promotion of scientific planning to combat and impacts, with a planned policy review after five years (in ). Implementation remains provincially led, with federal facilitation for national programs like drives.

Protected Areas and Reserves

Pakistan's protected areas system plays a critical role in conserving forest ecosystems, which constitute about 5% of the country's land area amid ongoing pressures. These include national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, game reserves, and reserves that safeguard subtropical, temperate, coniferous, and forests, particularly in the northern and western regions. As of 2020, Pakistan had notified 398 protected areas, comprising 31 national parks, 92 wildlife sanctuaries, 97 game reserves, and other designations, with terrestrial coverage reaching 19.21% of the land but unevenly protecting forest habitats due to governance gaps. The Protected Areas Initiative, launched in 2020, aims to expand and strengthen these zones to 15% of national territory by enhancing management and anti-encroachment measures, though implementation has faced delays. Key forest-focused national parks in and include , established in 1984 and expanded to 3,312 hectares by 1998, which protects moist temperate coniferous forests dominated by blue pine () and supports watershed functions through community-involved reforestation efforts that have replenished over 200 million cubic feet of timber volume. , gazetted in 1980 across 17,386 hectares, conserves subtropical chir pine () and mixed broadleaf forests in the Himalayan foothills, with biomass stocks estimated at significant potential despite documented degradation from urban encroachment and fires. In , integrates scrub forests with riverine elements over 127,032 hectares, serving as a biodiversity refuge in semi-arid conditions. Biosphere reserves emphasize long-term forest sustainability, such as the Juniper Forest in , designated in 2013 with a 11,243-hectare core zone amid a 110,000-hectare landscape featuring ancient Juniperus excelsa trees exceeding 4,000 years old—the largest such stand in and second globally. This reserve buffers against and fuelwood extraction, hosting endangered species like while maintaining ecological connectivity. Riverine forest protections in , classified as protected forests along the spanning thousands of hectares in districts like and , prioritize Dalbergia sissoo and Acacia nilotica stands against flood and logging threats. Effectiveness remains limited by weak enforcement, with many areas experiencing persistent and ; a 2021 assessment linked poor management scores to suboptimal conservation outcomes for and ecosystems. Wildlife sanctuaries in , such as (81,750 hectares), incorporate plantation forests to curb extraction, yet systemic underfunding hampers patrols. Overall, these reserves mitigate forest loss rates—estimated at 2.5% annually outside protections—but require bolstered legal compliance and monitoring to sustain verifiable and carbon benefits.

Community and Private Sector Involvement

Community-based forest management initiatives in Pakistan, particularly (JFM), emerged in 1996 to address by involving local populations in protection and sustainable use of forest resources. In province, the Forest Ordinance of 2002 and accompanying JFM rules enacted in 2004 formalized community participation, enabling local groups to share responsibilities for , patrolling, and benefit-sharing from timber and non-timber products. These programs have engaged approximately 80% of targeted communities in activities such as forest guarding and regeneration, with indicating improved in participating areas through reduced and enhanced livelihoods via income from tapping and fuelwood sales. FAO-supported projects have further bolstered community roles by establishing gender-inclusive Community Forest Protection and Conservation Committees (CFPCCs), which manage over 4,400 hectares of restoration in high-conservation Chilgoza pine forests and promote sustainable harvesting practices. The Mountain Areas Conservancy Fund (MACF), operational since the early 2000s, integrates community stewardship in the , , and , funding participatory monitoring that has conserved while providing alternative incomes like fees. Despite these advances, challenges persist, including uneven enforcement and within communities, which limit equitable benefits as documented in field assessments. Private sector engagement primarily occurs through plantations on non-state lands, which supply 88% of Pakistan's wood requirements, including 98% of fuelwood and substantial timber volumes, driven by economic incentives for farmers and enterprises. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) target short-gestation activities such as nursery development, seed collection, and logging operations, with policy frameworks encouraging corporate involvement in to offset industrial wood demands. The Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme, launched in 2018, incorporates private financing mechanisms like and industry contributions, mobilizing organizations for large-scale planting on private holdings to enhance and raw material supply chains. However, private efforts remain constrained by regulatory hurdles and market volatility in the timber sector, which processes domestic logs but imports significant volumes due to inconsistent supply.

Key Reforestation Programs

Billion Tree Tsunami in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

The Project was initiated in 2014 by the (KP) provincial government under the administration, with the goal of planting and regenerating one billion trees over five years to combat , restore ecosystems, and enhance in response to severe forest loss from , grazing, and natural disasters. The project emphasized both direct seedling plantation and assisted natural regeneration, targeting degraded lands, watershed areas, and protected forests across the province, with a of approximately $169 million funded through provincial resources and international support. Implementation involved community mobilization, including local labor for planting, establishment of nurseries producing over 800 million seedlings of such as , , and , and enforcement measures like banning timber harvesting in key areas to aid regeneration. By 2017, the project had restored or afforested 350,000 hectares, surpassing its Bonn Challenge commitment of 348,427 hectares for land restoration by 2020, through a combination of 600 million planted trees and 400 million regenerated via protection and seeding. Third-party verification by WWF-Pakistan, conducted in phases from 2015 to 2017, assessed survival rates using field plots and found an overall average of 83.4% for planted sites, with suitable spacing, pit sizes, and minimal damage from pests or grazing, though rates varied by terrain and species. Subsequent analyses confirmed net increases in tree cover, attributing gains to the program's scale and monitoring, despite challenges like uneven survival in arid zones (ranging 37-85% in some studies). Outcomes included improved watershed protection, reduced , and enhanced , with satellite data showing sustained forest expansion in KP by 2018, serving as a model for the national Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme launched in 2018. The initiative generated short-term for over 50,000 locals in planting and , though long-term depended on continued enforcement against illegal activities.

National Ten Billion Tree Tsunami

The Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme, also known as Plant for Pakistan, was launched on September 2, 2018, by the under , with the goal of planting 10 billion trees nationwide over five years to address , enhance , and mitigate climate change impacts. The initiative built on the provincial Billion Tree Tsunami in , expanding to federal and other provincial levels, with Phase-I spanning 2019–2023 at a budgeted cost of 125.184 billion Pakistani rupees, focusing on , , and wildlife restoration across diverse ecosystems including mangroves, rangelands, and urban areas. Implementation involved collaboration between federal and provincial forestry departments, local communities, and international partners like the , emphasizing species suited to local conditions such as shisham, , and native broadleaves, with targets allocated by province: (5 billion trees), (2 billion), (2 billion), and (1 billion). By the end of Phase-I in 2023, government reports claimed over 7 billion trees planted, including 1.5 million on launch day alone, but independent audits highlighted discrepancies in verification, with a 2021 special audit by the Auditor-General of Pakistan noting incomplete monitoring and potential over-reporting due to reliance on self-reported data without third-party validation. Post-2023 progress has been uneven following political shifts, including Khan's ouster in , which raised concerns about sustained funding and commitment, leading to scaled-back targets and integration into broader climate policies. Verifiable impacts remain limited; while some regional studies on precursor programs showed modest increases in tree cover (e.g., 350,000 hectares restored in via satellite imagery), national-scale assessments as of 2024 indicate survival rates below 50% in arid zones due to inadequate and maintenance, with socioeconomic critiques pointing to exclusion of landless herders and low wages for laborers (often 300–500 PKR per day). Critics, including academic analyses, argue the program's top-down approach prioritized quantity over quality, with issues like planting risking and conflicts with local grazing needs in former , where community buy-in was low despite reported job creation for 500,000 workers. A 2024 peer-reviewed evaluation of similar efforts underscored that while initial canopy cover gains occurred, long-term effectiveness hinges on enforcement against and , areas where enforcement gaps persist amid allegations in procurement. Despite these, proponents cite contributions to estimates of up to 1.5 million tons annually if survival improves, aligning with Pakistan's Nationally Determined Contributions under the .

Outcomes and Verifiable Impacts

The Afforestation Programme in planted 872.3 million seedlings across 103,973 hectares by June 2017, with third-party monitoring by WWF-Pakistan documenting an overall survival rate of 88.75% (774.13 million surviving seedlings). Block plantations exhibited 84.79% survival, woodlots 75.84%, and saline or waterlogged areas 83.4%, though regional variations persisted, such as lower rates in certain watershed bioengineering structures. Earlier Phase I monitoring in 2016 reported block plantation survival at 86% and farm forestry at 65%, alongside generation of 320,500 man-days of employment and distribution of 6.98 million seedlings to over 30,000 farmers. Satellite-based NDVI analysis confirms increased green cover province-wide, rising from 51% in 1990 to 64% by 2021, with healthy expanding from 2% (265 km²) in 2010 to 35% (4,000 km²) in 2021, attributing much of the 1,951 km² gain to programme interventions across 267 km² of sites. In the Tarbela catchment, forest-mixed grew from 46.51% to 53.02% by projected 2025 levels, reducing barren land from 30.51% to 24.05% and yielding environmental benefits including a 22% drop in load (45 million tons annually) and decreased yield from 54 mm to 35 mm, aiding watershed stabilization. enhancements included natural regeneration at rates up to 2,412 seedlings per in enclosures, while rehabilitation covered 962 of degraded sites through conservation structures. However, inconsistencies in , inadequate post-planting management, and variable watering contributed to unstocked areas in some plots. The national Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme, initiated in 2018 with Phase I spanning 2019–2023 at a cost of 125.184 billion Pakistani rupees, aimed to plant or regenerate 10 billion trees nationwide but lacks comparable independent verification of survival and impacts. mechanisms for monitoring exist, yet special audits have identified gaps in , financial oversight, and verifiable progress, with limited peer-reviewed data on long-term stocked areas or ecological outcomes. While building on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's model, the programme's top-down scale has raised concerns over sustained maintenance and exclusion of local needs, potentially undermining durability despite reported planting volumes. Overall, these efforts have demonstrably boosted short-term cover in targeted regions, but enduring success hinges on addressing enforcement and policy continuity.

Institutional Framework

Governmental Bodies and Enforcement

The federal Ministry of Climate Change and Environmental Coordination (MoCC) oversees national forestry policy through its Forestry Wing, headed by an Inspector General of Forests (BPS-21) and supported by deputy inspectors and wildlife conservators, serving as the national focal point for international forestry conventions and coordination with provinces. Following the 18th Constitutional Amendment in 2010, primary forestry authority devolved to provincial governments, with MoCC retaining a facilitative role in policy formulation, such as the National Forest Policy of 2015, which emphasizes provincial implementation of conservation and sustainable management while addressing federal-provincial coordination on cross-border issues like watershed protection. Provincial forest departments execute day-to-day and . In , the Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Department, led by a Chief Conservator of Forests, advises on policy and directly manages state forests, including patrols against ; for instance, in July 2025, it arrested a timber ringleader in Khanpur during a crackdown on the "timber mafia," seizing equipment used for unauthorized . Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's Climate Change, Forestry, Environment & Wildlife Department enforces forest laws via field officers monitoring protected areas and watersheds, integrating with reforestation drives like the , though it faces resource constraints in remote terrains. Sindh's Forest Department handles similar provincial duties, focusing on and arid zone forests, while and maintain analogous structures under their environment ministries for local oversight. These departments rely on rangers and guards for on-ground , empowered under provincial forest acts to issue fines, seize timber, and prosecute violations like encroachments, which increased despite policies prohibiting regularization of illegal occupations. Enforcement remains hampered by systemic issues, including political interference, understaffing, and , which undermine field officers' authority and enable illicit activities such as illegal felling for timber export. Provincial reports highlight inadequate budgets for patrols—e.g., Punjab's department struggles with vast scrub forests prone to over-exploitation—and weak judicial follow-through, where convictions for forest crimes are rare due to evidentiary gaps and local influence. Efforts to bolster include ranger programs and like GIS mapping for monitoring, but outcomes are limited by poverty-driven local complicity in resource extraction and tenure ambiguities that dilute departmental control.

Research Entities and Academic Contributions

The Pakistan Forest Institute (PFI) in , established in 1947 under the Ministry of Climate Change and Environmental Coordination, serves as the primary federal research body for forestry, conducting problem-oriented studies in , forest mensuration, , and farm forestry through its Forestry Research Division. Affiliated with the since 1958 for degree examinations, PFI has contributed to sustainable via projects such as national response strategies for forest conservation and assessments, including analyses of tree species diversity for ecosystem restoration in degraded areas. Its publications, including the Pakistan Journal of Forestry, disseminate findings on topics like growth performance of native species under varying climatic conditions, supporting recommendations despite challenges in field implementation. Provincially, the Punjab Forestry (PFRI) in Gatwala, , operational since the early 2000s under the Punjab Forest Department, focuses on optimizing forest resource use through trials on systems and techniques tailored to 's semi-arid zones, yielding data on yield improvements from integrated planting models. Complementing this, the Rangeland (RRI), established in 1991 under the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), addresses rangeland degradation—covering over 60% of Pakistan's land area—via forage improvement programs and livestock grazing impact studies, with outputs including genetic evaluations of native grasses for . Academic contributions emanate from university departments, where the Department of Forestry, Range Management, and Wildlife leads in citation-weighted research output, producing over 10,000 scholarly works on watershed hydrology and wildlife-forest interactions since the 1990s, including PhD-level theses on potentials in irrigated plantations. Similarly, the Islamia University of Bahawalpur's Institute of Forest Sciences emphasizes extension services and research on arid-zone , with studies documenting survival rates of drought-resistant species like Acacia nilotica exceeding 70% in experimental plots. Departments at institutions such as Bahauddin Zakariya University, , and contribute specialized work on range management and high-altitude biodiversity, often collaborating with PFI on joint surveys that quantify deforestation rates—estimated at 2.5% annually in northern tracts from 2000–2020—informing strategies grounded in empirical plot data rather than modeled projections. These efforts, while advancing knowledge on causal factors like and fuelwood extraction, highlight implementation gaps where research findings have not consistently translated to on-ground policy shifts due to enforcement limitations.

Non-Governmental and International Partners

Non-governmental organizations play a supplementary role in Pakistan's forestry efforts, often focusing on conservation, community engagement, and targeted restoration projects amid limited government capacity. WWF-Pakistan, a prominent actor, has implemented initiatives to restore , including planting over 1.6 million trees across 1,600 hectares since August 2019, emphasizing watershed management and soil conservation in vulnerable regions like the Galiyat area. Through the Recharge Pakistan program launched in collaboration with international funders, WWF-Pakistan advances for and ecosystem resilience, integrating forestry with flood and drought mitigation in northern districts. Other NGOs, such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Snow Leopard Foundation, contribute through biodiversity-focused interventions that indirectly support forestry by addressing habitat degradation in high-altitude ecosystems, though their scale remains smaller compared to national programs. International partners provide funding, technical expertise, and project implementation support, frequently tying assistance to broader and . The World Bank has financed multiple forestry initiatives, including a $188 million project approved in June 2020 to combat , , and risks through enhanced forest management and community involvement across degraded landscapes. Earlier efforts, such as the Forest Sector Development Project completed in the , aimed at institutional strengthening and but yielded only modest outcomes due to enforcement challenges. In 2024, committed €20 million for a forest protection project targeting 10,000 hectares of new plantations, alongside for provincial forest departments and improved monitoring systems. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) supports forestry via climate resilience programs, contributing $5 million to the Recharge Pakistan initiative in 2023, which leverages like recharge basins and to restore ecosystems in water-stressed areas. The (FAO) of the backs restoration in specific ecosystems, such as the Chilgoza pine forests under the global Restoration Initiative, focusing on to reverse degradation and support local livelihoods through harvesting. The (UNEP) has aided efforts, planting millions of trees since 2010 as part of the national 10 , yielding economic benefits like enhanced fisheries while bolstering coastal forest cover against erosion. These partnerships often emphasize verifiable metrics like hectares restored, yet their long-term efficacy depends on sustained local enforcement, which historical data from World Bank evaluations indicate has been inconsistent.

Persistent Challenges and Debates

Effectiveness of Top-Down Approaches

Top-down approaches in Pakistan's forestry sector, characterized by centralized government directives and large-scale mandates, have produced verifiable successes in localized contexts but struggled with and scalability at the national level. The Afforestation Programme (BTTAP), implemented in province starting in 2014, achieved a net increase of approximately 300 km² in tree cover from 2014 to 2020, equating to a 6% gain in targeted areas as measured by and administrative data comparisons. This expansion involved planting across 263,153 hectares, aerial seeding over 23,096 hectares, and promoting natural regeneration on 306,983 hectares through temporary bans on wood harvesting and grazing, supplemented by surveillance. (NDVI) analysis from 1990 to 2021 confirmed healthy forest cover rising from 2% (265 km²) to 35% (4,000 km²) in project regions by 2021, with overall green cover advancing from 51% to 64%. These outcomes were validated via and field observations, demonstrating that enforced restrictions and some community monitoring can drive empirical restoration in deforested montane areas. In contrast, the national Ten Billion Tree Tsunami (TBTT), launched in to expand similar efforts nationwide, has encountered substantial implementation flaws that diminish its effectiveness. Critics, including environmental experts, argue that sapling survival rates remain low due to insufficient maintenance staff, particularly in arid and hilly terrains where heat and neglect cause widespread die-off, as evidenced by burnt saplings in districts like . Planting in water-scarce zones without prior hydrological assessments has depleted , damaged natural springs, and eroded , while impeding traditional grazing lands heightens risks from accumulated dry . The program's bureaucratic leadership, sidelining ecological expertise, and vague site selection criteria further compound these issues, with no robust monitoring framework disclosed to track long-term viability or native species adaptation. Broader limitations of top-down models stem from their reliance on short-term political momentum without institutionalizing protections, leading to potential reversals upon policy shifts. In BTTAP areas, gains risk erosion if grazing and harvesting bans are lifted post-surveillance, underscoring the fragility of enforcement-dependent progress. Exclusion of local communities exacerbates failures, as plantations often conflict with resource-dependent livelihoods, fostering sabotage or neglect; benefits like nursery contracts disproportionately accrue to government allies rather than incentivizing stewardship. Despite TBTT's projected 125 billion rupees ($750 million) expenditure, annual deforestation persists at around 40,000 hectares, indicating that centralized mandates alone fail to address root causes like illicit logging without complementary bottom-up integration and sustained fiscal commitment. Short-term environmental metrics, such as modest rainfall increases (0.5-0.8% per 10% project exposure) in BTTAP zones, show limited broader climate benefits, with temperature and air quality impacts inconclusive or negligible.

Conflicts with Local Resource Needs

In Pakistan, local communities in rural and mountainous regions, particularly in and northern areas, depend on forests for essential resources such as fuelwood, which accounts for over 80% of household energy in many households lacking access to alternatives, fodder for , and timber for and income. This reliance exacerbates , with rural poverty and population pressures driving annual losses of approximately 27,000 hectares, as communities harvest unsustainably to meet immediate survival needs amid limited and economic opportunities. Conservation and policies, often imposed top-down by the Forest Department, restrict such access to promote regeneration, leading to direct conflicts as locals resist planting or protect grazed areas from , viewing forests as communal assets rather than state property. For instance, regeneration frequently fails because ubiquitous and fuelwood collection by and villagers prevent seedling establishment, while communities block departmental efforts to replant cleared sites used for or . Historical tensions peaked in events like the 1999 protests in Azad Jammu and Kashmir, where hundreds of forest dwellers and NGOs demonstrated against evictions and denials under colonial-era laws still enforced, highlighting how exclusionary policies fuel non-compliance and informal resource capture. These clashes undermine program efficacy, as unmet local needs incentivize illicit harvesting—estimated to contribute up to 40% of wood supply in some regions—despite patrols, because enforcement gaps and allow mafias to exploit the void left by desperate communities. State dominance in policy-making has perpetuated this cycle, marginalizing indigenous tenure systems and ignoring causal links between resource scarcity and , with studies showing that without integrating alternatives like subsidized or co-management, conservation yields only temporary gains. In , where forests support up to 50% of rural incomes through non-timber products, over-extraction persists due to weak alternatives, eroding while sustaining short-term human needs in a context of 2.2% annual in high-value areas.

Corruption, Illicit Activities, and Enforcement Gaps

Corruption within Pakistan's forestry sector primarily manifests through collusive arrangements between forest officials, timber mafias, and illicit loggers, enabling widespread illegal harvesting and smuggling. Bribes are routinely demanded at multiple stages, including log extraction, transportation, and marketing, with forest guards often imposing arbitrary fines as extortion. In regions like Swat, such practices create an open-access regime, where weak oversight allows truckloads of illegal timber to traverse valleys unimpeded, exacerbating deforestation and depriving local communities of sustainable resource access. A prominent example is the Rs1.7 billion timber scam uncovered in in September 2025, implicating 140 forest officials in the illegal felling and auctioning of 2.3 million cubic feet of timber. This fraud was facilitated by a three-year suspension of monitoring mechanisms, which permitted timber mafia expansion; upon resumption in 2024, audits revealed systemic irregularities, leading to referrals for prosecution by the and Anti-Corruption Department. Similar patterns persist elsewhere, as seen in March 2025 arrests of eight individuals in for operations backed by corrupt networks. Enforcement gaps compound these illicit activities, stemming from outdated legislation like the 1927 Forest Act, which assigns vast territories to under-resourced officials, hindering crime detection. Low penalties—such as fines up to 500 rupees or six months' imprisonment—fail to deter profitable , while unmaintained forest boundaries invite encroachments and disputes remain unresolved due to governmental disinterest. Collusion between foresters and contractors further erodes accountability, with local hostility toward the Forest Department impeding community cooperation in monitoring. These deficiencies not only sustain rates but also undermine revenue collection and conservation efforts across provinces.

References

  1. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS?locations=PK
  2. https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_25/2_Agriculture.pdf
  3. https://finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_24/Highlights.pdf
  4. https://pide.org.pk/research/economic-contribution-of-forestry-sector/
  5. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2018/07/pakistan-s-billion-tree-tsunami-is-astonishing/
  6. https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/country/pakistan
  7. https://mocc.gov.pk/Detail/M2NlMTE5YzgtNTVlOC00YjgwLTliMDAtZThlMzk3MTZmOTA1
  8. https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/PAK/
  9. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/endpovertyinsouthasia/green-emergency-deforestation-pakistan
  10. https://chakorventures.com/blog/causes-and-effects-of-deforestation-in-pakistan/
  11. https://pide.org.pk/research/an-anatomy-of-state-failures-in-forest-management-in-pakistan/
  12. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/74290/1/NDL2007-091.pdf
  13. https://mocc.gov.pk/SiteImage/Misc/files/Year%2520Book%25202023-24%281%29.pdf
  14. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666719325001189
  15. https://www.fao.org/4/x5348e/x5348e04.htm
  16. https://foresthistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/FHT05_Brandis_forestry-by-correspondence.pdf
  17. https://www.environmentandsociety.org/sites/default/files/key_docs/das-1-1.pdf
  18. https://perspectivia.net/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/pnet_derivate_00005708/mann_brandis_en.pdf
  19. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/001946469403100202
  20. https://evs.institute/environmental-legislations/indian-forest-act-1865-colonial-control/
  21. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/forests/international-day-of-forests-2025-punjab-was-not-always-the-land-of-endless-fields-it-once-had-woods
  22. https://files.acquia.undp.org/public/migration/pk/UNDP-PK-ECC-Forests-and-Biodiversity.pdf
  23. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/an-environmental-history-of-india/west-and-east-pakistan-and-india-following-independence-194771/9BFD7074A8FB879D6FF989397BDFD582
  24. https://www.fao.org/4/am623e/am623e00.pdf
  25. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8482&context=igc
  26. https://file.pide.org.pk/pdf/PDR/207/Volume4/1189-1203.pdf
  27. https://ojs.jdss.org.pk/journal/article/download/636/551
  28. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11027-006-9050-9
  29. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-024-04573-x
  30. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak149130.pdf
  31. https://dialogue.earth/en/forests/pakistan-forest-policy/
  32. https://mocc.gov.pk/ProjectDetail/M2QzOWJmMjUtZTU3MC00NmFkLWE4YmMtZDFhMmRlOGU2NGRh
  33. https://tbttp.gov.pk/
  34. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/pakistans-ten-billion-tree-tsunami
  35. https://www.iied.org/20996iied
  36. https://www.fao.org/4/ac778e/ac778e15.htm
  37. https://www.fao.org/4/w7704e/w7704e03.htm
  38. https://tribune.com.pk/story/1926478/forest-cover-rises-6
  39. https://pecongress.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/9-An-Overview-of-Forests-in-Pakistan-By-Engr.-Saeed-Iqbal-.pdf
  40. https://www.fao.org/4/w7704e/w7704e02.htm
  41. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340601350_Forest_types_of_Pakistan
  42. https://www.graana.com/blog/the-different-types-of-forests-in-pakistan/
  43. https://tradingeconomics.com/pakistan/forest-area-percent-of-land-area-wb-data.html
  44. https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/PAK?category=forest-change
  45. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/28ab23bb-3dcb-48d6-b35d-166a2fd3adb6/content
  46. https://wwfasia.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/deforestation--forest-degradation--and-flood-risk-in-pakistan--3-.pdf
  47. https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/c6d654b1-7da9-48f5-b292-6f5e2988709f
  48. https://iucn.org/news/forests/201708/pakistan%25E2%2580%2599s-billion-tree-tsunami-restores-350000-hectares-forests-and-degraded-land-surpass-bonn-challenge-commitment
  49. https://forestist.org/Content/files/sayilar/451/44-52.pdf
  50. https://thinklandscape.globallandscapesforum.org/52934/pakistan-is-on-its-way-to-planting-10-billion-tree-tsunami-heres-how/
  51. https://pide.org.pk/research/challenges-and-opportunities-of-the-ten-billion-tree-tsunami-project-tbttpp-a-case-study-of-the-ex-fata-pakistan/
  52. https://www.ideassonline.org/public/pdf/BillionTreesPakistan-ENG.pdf
  53. https://www.dw.com/en/pakistan-environmentalists-slam-10-billion-trees-project/a-59062200
  54. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak54292.pdf
  55. https://khalidzafar.com/en/laws-of-pakistan/the-forest-act-1927/
  56. https://environment.gov.pk/SiteImage/Misc/files/provincial_guidelines/F2BForestHarvesting.pdf
  57. https://journalajraf.com/index.php/AJRAF/article/view/108
  58. https://www.therestorationinitiative.org/chilgoza-pine-revival-restoring-pakistans-forests-and-protecting-the-pine-nut/
  59. https://iucn.org/story/202212/restoration-initiative-pakistan-story
  60. https://journalpsa.com.pk/index.php/JPSA/article/view/166
  61. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/authorities-uncover-corrupt-officials-massive-030000445.html
  62. https://sindhforests.gov.pk/admin/MediaLibrary/National%2520Forest%2520Policy%25202010.pdf
  63. https://www.facebook.com/StartupPakistanRecorder/posts/punjab-chief-minister-maryam-nawaz-sharif-has-announced-an-immediate-ban-on-tree/914296537633985/
  64. https://research-portal.uws.ac.uk/files/52881604/2017_08_22_Nazir_et_al_Forest_final.pdf
  65. https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_25/Highlights.pdf
  66. https://file.pide.org.pk/pdfpideresearch/rr-economic-contribution-of-forestry-sector.pdf
  67. https://finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_24/2_agriculture.pdf
  68. https://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/labour_force/publications/lfs2020_21/LFS_2020-21_Report.pdf
  69. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989420300081
  70. http://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019GEcoC..2000765H/abstract
  71. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989419301556
  72. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302192
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11588280/
  74. http://www.iaset.us/download/archives/--1470813489-1.%2520JANS%2520-%2520Analysis%2520of%2520Deforestation.pdf
  75. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/810
  76. https://www.fao.org/4/xii/0983-b1.htm
  77. https://www.app.com.pk/domestic/illegal-tree-cutting-a-major-driver-of-pollution-and-environment-crisis-experts/
  78. https://www.fairplanet.org/editors-pick/the-fight-to-end-illegal-timber-cutting-in-pakistans-most-forested-province/
  79. https://climate-diplomacy.org/magazine/environment/land-left-drown-timber-mafia
  80. https://www.urdupoint.com/en/pakistan/illegal-tree-cutting-a-major-driver-of-pollut-2071121.html
  81. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10867341/
  82. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352186425005255
  83. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8782284/
  84. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11888
  85. https://irjssh.com/index.php/irjssh/article/download/28/24/325
  86. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/8/28/behind-pakistans-repeated-floods-melting-glaciers-depleted-forests
  87. https://www.ndma.gov.pk/storage/outlooks/May2025/Pejhux165WHduhxbPv6z.pdf
  88. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/392674176_The_Role_of_Non-Timber_Forest_Products_NTFPs_in_Rural_Livelihoods_Evidence_from_District_Chitral_Pakistan
  89. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.11.22.568298v1
  90. https://www.profor.info/content/making-case-forest-investments-pakistan
  91. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016716303564
  92. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5894
  93. https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/PAK?category=land-use
  94. https://www.profor.info/keywords/pakistan
  95. https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/PAK
  96. https://www.fao.org/4/x6638e/X6638E24.htm
  97. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/10/28/pakistan-flood-damages-and-economic-losses-over-usd-30-billion-and-reconstruction-needs-over-usd-16-billion-new-assessme
  98. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41885-024-00155-3
  99. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/pak3333.pdf
  100. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225366406_A_Critical_Analysis_of_Forest_Policies_of_Pakistan_Implications_for_Sustainable_Livelihoods
  101. https://iucn.org/news/pakistan/202007/pakistans-protected-areas-initiative
  102. https://www.protectedplanet.net/country/PAK
  103. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/pakistan-ramps-protected-areas
  104. https://mocc.gov.pk/SiteImage/Misc/files/Report%2520on%2520Carbon%2520Stock%2520Assessment%2520and%2520Forest%2520Cover%2520Change%2520of%2520Ayubia%2520National%2520Park.pdf
  105. https://www.wwfpak.org/our_work_/forests/saving_watershed_in_ayubia/
  106. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1018364722001598
  107. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/14/2/201
  108. https://fwf.punjab.gov.pk/lal_suhanera_forest_park
  109. https://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/6116/
  110. https://www.dawn.com/news/1802053
  111. https://sindhforests.gov.pk/page-riverine-forests
  112. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7999559/
  113. https://fwf.punjab.gov.pk/wildlife_sanctuaries
  114. https://openknowledge.fao.org/bitstreams/15409373-e46b-42d4-962e-fcb43e2fe38b/download
  115. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10549811.2025.2451441?src=
  116. https://www.fao.org/in-action/forest-landscape-restoration-mechanism/resources/projects/project-detail/the-restoration-initiative---reversing-deforestation-and-degradation-in-high-conservation-value-chilgoza-pine-forests-in-pakistan/en
  117. https://mocc.gov.pk/Detail/ZDY4MGRiMGEtZGFhZi00ZmYwLThjYjUtMGI4MDUyNmU0ODUx
  118. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376270389_The_Practices_and_Prospects_of_Community_Participation_in_Joint_Forest_Management_in_Khyber_Pakhtunkhwa_Pakistan
  119. https://www.pc.gov.pk/uploads/pub/1st_five_pages_of_10_billion_Tree_Plantation.pdf
  120. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376390046_10_Billion_Tree_Plantation_Financing_Member_Private_Sector_Development_Competitiveness_Planning_Commission_of_Pakistan_Ministry_of_Planning_Development_Reform_Government_of_Pakistan
  121. https://codeforpakistan.org/stories/mapping-billion-tree-tsunami-plantation
  122. https://wwfasia.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/btap_monitoring_report_phase_ii.pdf
  123. https://www.theigc.org/blogs/billion-tree-tsunami-afforestation-pakistan
  124. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/pakistans-tree-tsunami-plans-to-plant-10-billion-trees-in-5-years/articleshow/65646791.cms
  125. https://agp.gov.pk/SiteImage/Policy/special%2520audit%2520report%2520on%2520ten%2520billion%2520tree.pdf
  126. https://www.climatechangenews.com/2022/04/19/pakistans-tree-planting-ambition-in-doubt-after-imran-khans-exit/
  127. https://iucn.org/es/node/15700
  128. https://www.iied.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/2022-06/IIED20996.pdf
  129. https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/18569/1/haris-j-20230123.pdf
  130. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1650
  131. https://wwfasia.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/bttap_third_party_monitoring_report_1.pdf
  132. https://mocc.gov.pk/Detail/MDk0MDA3MTUtY2Y0Ny00M2NiLWI1NjUtNjM1MTI2ZTYxYTli
  133. https://pbit.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/National%2520Forest%2520Policy%25202016.pdf
  134. https://fwf.punjab.gov.pk/forests
  135. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2553958/punjab-forest-department-targets-timber-mafia-in-major-crackdown
  136. https://few.kp.gov.pk/
  137. https://www.developmentaid.org/organizations/view/421907/sindh-forest-department
  138. https://nipapeshawar.gov.pk/KJPPM/PDF/CIP/38PSS/PSS4.pdf
  139. https://pfi.gov.pk/flr/DRAFT%2520NATIONAL%2520ACTION%2520PLAN%2520FOR%2520FLR%2520IN%2520PAKISTAN.pdf
  140. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/34c795e2-039a-41f5-8b60-1b070e0e05bf/content
  141. https://www.pfi.gov.pk/forestry_research.php
  142. https://www.pfi.gov.pk/
  143. http://nceg.uop.edu.pk/GeologicalBulletin/Vol-Special-2013/Abstract9.pdf
  144. https://fwf.punjab.gov.pk/detail_pfri
  145. https://www.parc.gov.pk/Detail/NTM3NWY3YzgtMThkMy00N2VhLTk4MGMtNjE5ZDNlOGE3NmYy
  146. https://edurank.org/environmental-science/forestry/pk/
  147. https://web.uaf.edu.pk/Contents/faculties/agri/depts/frw/fr_overview.html
  148. https://www.iub.edu.pk/institute-of-forest-sciences?f_id=MTA=
  149. https://bzu.edu.pk/view_department.php?deptID=55
  150. https://su.edu.pk/department/forestry
  151. https://kiu.edu.pk/department/department-of-forestry
  152. https://forestsolutions.panda.org/insights/restoration-for-people-and-the-planet-pakistan-in-the-spotlight
  153. https://www.wwfpak.org/?390998/Forests-are-essential-for-controlling-floods-and-droughts-WWF-Pakistan
  154. https://wbmfoundation.org/best-ngos-working-on-environment-issues/
  155. https://ndrmf.pk/press-releases/pakistan-wins-world-bank-us-188-million-funding-for-first-nature-based-solution-project/
  156. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/420171468286258875
  157. https://www.dailyexcelsior.com/germany-allocates-20-million-euros-to-pakistan-for-forest-protection-project/
  158. https://pk.usembassy.gov/u-s-backs-recharge-pakistan-project-to-enhance-pakistans-resilience-to-climate-change/
  159. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/pakistan-restores-mangroves-economy-and-ecosystem-benefits
  160. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/823081541716238227
  161. https://dialogue.earth/en/climate/billion-tree-tsunami/
  162. https://www.paspk.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/LS-551.pdf
  163. https://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin-articles/pakistan-local-peoples-long-struggle-for-the-forests
  164. https://articles.pakistanlawyer.com/2024/11/04/pakistans-forest-management-challenges-and-opportunities/
  165. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1389934118301849
  166. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7439/files/wp070091.pdf
  167. https://www.geo.tv/latest/621348-rs17-billion-timber-scam-unearthed-in-kp-140-officials-found-implicated
  168. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2534304/eight-arrested-for-illegal-logging-in-mansehra
  169. https://file.pide.org.pk/pdfpideresearch/rr-024-analysing-institutional-set-up-of-forest-management-in-pakistan.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.