Problem overview:

     Integrating stakeholders: Various stakeholders involved in this example, some support the highway project and some are against. This example will show how the parties against the highway project have joined forces to persuade financiers to hold back funding until the highway has been rerouted away from the park boundary.

     Meeting information requirements: In this example, NGOs and environmental institutes have proven that the construction of Indus highway will impose irreversible negative impact on the ecological condition of Kirthar National Park by doing an environmental impact assessment of the project.

Background in summary:

     The Highway Project: In 1988, the Government announced its program of construction of Indus Highway (N-55): 1250km designated to provide alternative to existing National Highway (N-5): 1650 km linking Karachi with Peshawar via Lahore. Besides reducing the distance and lessening the pressure on the traffic on the National Highway, the Indus Highway would be instrumental in bringing socio-economic progress to other wise backward areas, which lie in the proposed path.

     Source of funding: The World Bank and Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF), Japan agreed to provide Pak. Rs. 5.5 billion for this road project. The National Highway Authority under the Federal Ministry of Communication was made responsible to construct this strategic national highway. The release of funds and award of the contracts depended on No Objection Certificate (NOC) for the passage of the road from the park from the Government of Sindh.

     Possible Impacts on the Environment: The Sindh Wildlife Management Board (SWMB) was concerned that the highway will have negative effect on the Park, An independent expert carried out a survey and concluded that the highway will have severe risk to the parks wildlife and other features. The principal threats form the highway include, hunting, disturbance, and ecosystem severance. Physical and managerial mitigation measures are unlikely to reduce the impacts to an acceptable level.

     Stakeholders Participation: This stance of the SWMB was widely supported by the public and press. The IUCN-Pakistan and other NGOs approached the World Bank to reconsider financing of this project due to its adverse impact on environment. The World Bank as one of the principal financier of the project insisted for an NOC by the Sindh Wildlife Departments the relevant Government agency responsible for protection of Wildlife in the Province namely SWMB.

     Rerouting the Highway: As a result of these actions, The World Bank backed out from the financing of the Highway Project, till decision by the Court. Meanwhile, the National Highway Authority of Federal Government quickly acted and agreed to reroute the Indus Highway bypassing the Kirthar National Park. As a consequence, these actions by Sindh Government and the National Highway Authority aid for Project was restored.

Peer Review Committee Good practice rating: (1 for the best, 5 for the lowest score)
Sustainability		Efficiency
2	Improvement in either the environment of economic condition with no harm to the other.	2	Cost efficient.
2	Sustainable over time (not one-off)	Process
Adaptability		-	Participation of the community
3	Location adaptability (can the project be done in other places?)	2	Participation of resource owners/users
3	Socio-cultural adaptability.	2	Partnerships between various actors (Governments, NGO, Academia, Private)
3	Level of development adaptability.	-	Degree of coordination and cooperation between government departments.
3	Style of government adaptability.	2	Ability to attract political interest/support
3	Degree of decentralization adaptability.	2	Procedures for feedback and review.
Comments on this example:       The success of the public interest in this case was possible due to the following reasons Technical soundness of the proposal backed by alternative suggestion Support from the public, press and NGOs whom have given their feedback after reviewing the project. Donors understanding and support which helped to realize the need to incorporate development and environmental together. And most important of all, the constitutional petition filed by the Sindh High Court which resulted in World Banks hesitation to support the project. Sustainability of the project:       Improvement in either the environment or economic condition with no harm to the other and Sustainable over time (not one-off) have been rated a 2 from the basis that the movement of the NGOs and public had successfully halted the project and distracted the donors leading to a more sustainable solution. Adaptability of the project to other situations:       Process of decision making and implementation:      Integrating stakeholders: The initial Indus Highway Project that stirred up problems is considered rather inefficient in terms of cost. Because much time has been lost and costs have been incurred before this highway project could reach a unanimously acceptable solution. If the project had incorporated different interested parties during the feasibility phase, then the environmental aspects would have been considered and dealt with, instead of leaving it to be a controversial problem.      Meeting information requirements: The construction of Indus highway would be a good basis for development and better economic condition. But there is always a price to pay and in this case a very high one. Imposed damages from the highway project upon the natural environment of Kirthar National Park are almost unmeasureable. Hence forth, the natural environment is bearing the burden of economic improvement. Fortunately, the government had acted in a compromising way and accepted suggested alternatives from the public to reroute the highway. Cost efficiency: