The views expressed in this paper/presentation are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect

the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the source, originality, accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented, nor does it make any representation concerning the same.

15-11-2010

The 2010 Flood and Poverty in Pakistan: A Preliminary District-level Analysis

By:

G.M. Arif, N. Iqbal and S. Farooq 1

Pakistan Institute of Development Economics Islamabad

Background Paper for Conference on the " The Environments of the Poor”, 24‐26  Nov. 2010, New Delhi

                                                            
1

G. M. Arif is the Joint Director of Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Nasir Iqbal is the Staff Economist of Pakistan Institute of Development Economics and Shujaat Farooq is Research Fellow of Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.  

i   

Table of Contents 1. 2. 3. Introduction Data sources and methodology Flood affected districts and the systemic issues behind the disaster 3.1. 2010 Flood Affected Areas 3.2. Systematic issues behind the flood Pre-flood demographic and socio-economic situation: a districts-level analysis 4.1 The demographic, social and economic profile 4.2 Infrastructure 4.3 Pre-flood poverty situation Losses of the 2010 flood 5.1. Losses to Agriculture 5.2. Damages to Infrastructure The 2010 flood and poverty: some implications 6.1 Poverty levels 6.2. Health implication 6.3 Implications for education 6.4. Flood and migration Policy responses: are they adequate? Concluding Remarks References

4

5.

6.

7. 8.

List of Tables Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7: Table 7: Table 8: Socio-demographic characteristics by districts as affected by the 2010 flood Percent of Mouzas having infrastructure facilities Trends in Poverty, 1998-99 to 2005-06 District level headcount ratios and deprivation index Province-wise Damages of Cropped Area and Cattle Head Damaged area by selected crops Economic Loss of Crops Damages due to 2010 Floods in Pakistan (billion Rs) Required and Available Amount for Floods Emergency Response Plan Province Wise Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) (as of 24 Sep. 2010)

List of Figures Map 1: Figure 1: Figure-2: Districts affected by the 2010 flood Damaged of Health Facilities Trend of Various Diseases in Flood Affected Areas

ii   

The 2010 Flood and Poverty in Pakistan: A Preliminary Districtlevel Analysis
1. Introduction Environment degradation is among the major recent challenges faced by Pakistan. Degraded soils, a decline in forest cover and rising level of air and water pollution are the major environmental issues. The environmental degradation is further compounded with the rapid urbanization linked with rural to urban migration. This growth has led to creation of slums around the city peripheries and low lying areas (GoP, 2010). Pakistan is also disadvantaged by its heavy dependence on a single river, the Indus, for surface water. The country is, therefore, highly vulnerable to the effects of basin degradation and water pollution. The importance of poverty-environment nexus is well established, and Pakistan’s ranking in the Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) is very poor (Khan et al. 2007). 2 The flood in 2010 in Pakistan has reinforced the environment poverty-nexus as one of the greatest humanitarian crises in the history of the world. Prior to the flood, the economy of Pakistan was facing severe challenges at internal and external fronts with a poor law and order situation. The continuing energy crisis combined with these challenges discontinued the growth momentum in the real sector since 2007-08. The double digit inflation with rising unemployment in the past two years has also badly affected the overall well-being of the Pakistan population. The 2010 flood has implications at both the macro and micro levels. At the macro level, the flood has caused losses both to the GDP and to the capital stock and thus has hampered the growth potential of the country. In the long run, its impacts are twofold: capital damages may induce a lower GDP in subsequent years (to the extent of investment losses); and output losses (caused during the flood-affected year) may lower incomes and possibly, reduce savings available for financing investments. At the micro level, the flood has direct implications on the household living standard. It may have reduced the income level of households by damaging their assets and sources of income thus aggravating the household poverty. Moreover, the 2010 flood has disproportionately affected the poorest regions of Pakistan, southern Punjab and rural Sindh where deprivation levels are high and the infrastructure is poor. The majority of the population in these regions is highly dependent on crop income with less diversification in their sources of incomes. The flood has snatched their limited assets and livelihoods and has pushed them into extreme poverty. The purpose of this study is to determine the implication of recent flood at the district level. Due to lack of data and insufficient information, the scope of study is very limited and it only focuses on the implication at the micro (district and household) levels. Keeping this in view, this study aims to analyze the impact of the 2010 flood on poverty which is measured in term of head-count ratio, education, health and infrastructure facilities at the district level with the following specific objectives; • • • to analyze the extent of severity of the flood across the districts and explore the systematic issues behind the flood; to examine socio-economic situation in the flood affected districts before the flood 2010; to examine the losses of the flood;

                                                            
2

In 2005, Pakistan is ranked at 131 out of 146 countries, with an ESI score of 39.9 

1   

• •

to assess the implications of the flood on poverty, health, education and migration (displacement); and to draw some policy implications.

The rest of the study is organized as follows. The details on the methodology and sources of data are given in the following section. A discussion on the flood affected districts and the systematic issues behind the flood is given in section 3, followed by an analysis of the sociodemographic and economic situation prior to the 2010 flood in section 4. The losses of flood have been analysed in section 5. The implications of the 2010 flood on poverty, health, education and migration are given in sections 6. Adequacy of the policy responses is assessed in the penultimate section. Conclusions and policy considerations are given in the final section. 2. Data sources and methodology This study is essentially a review study, based on the existing literature. There are 100 districts in four provinces of the country. For this study, the districts in each province are classified into three categories i) districts severally affected by the 2010 flood, ii) districts affected moderately by the flood, and iii) districts not affected by the flood. The flood has also moderately affected additional 14 districts in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB). Poverty is considered in this study as a multidimensional phenomenon, and four different dimensions of poverty are used to understand its severity at the district level before and after the 2010 flood, including the headcount ratio (or proportion of population living below the official poverty line), deprivation level, socio-economic and demographic characteristics including displacement (migration) and infrastructure development. The existing research has used three methods for the flood impacts assessment; a) impacts assessment method and b) depth-damage functions and data set constructions; and c) project appraisal methods. This study has used the assessment approach in which the damages of the current flood have been examined in the context of the above-mentioned dimensions of poverty. The assessment of flood damages made by various national and international institutes is the primary source to classify districts into three abovementioned categories: severely, moderately and not affected districts. This study has collected and organized the data by these three categories of the districts. Information on socio-economic and demographic characteristics is mainly drawn from the Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement (PSLM) 2008-09 and Pakistan Demographic Survey (PDS) 2007. The 2000 Agriculture Census has been used to obtain the information on the household status e.g. farm, livestock or non-agriculture households. This information leads to understand the sources of income across the households. Agriculture statistics on the cropped production at the district level are obtained from the Agriculture Statistics 2007-08. The population Census 1998 has also been used to collect information on population density. Both physical and social infrastructure data have been taken at the district level from the mouza Statistics 2008. These statistics are provided by the Agriculture Census Organization at the mouza level 3 . The mouza-level information on seven types of infrastructure are aggregated at the district level including percentage of mouzas fully electrified, mouzas with soling streets, and mouzas having the facilities of piped drinking water and drainage. Data on distance from village                                                             
A mouza is the lowest administrative unit in rural areas and commonly used for land record, revenue collection, census block and seat allocations in the local bodies
3

2   

(mouza) to metal road in kilometers have also been aggregated at the district level. Availability of boys and girls schools in mouzas at district level has also been included in the analysis. For the pre-flood district level poverty analysis, this study has used the available information mainly from Jamal (2006, 2007) and Cheema (2010). Jamal (2006) has used HIES 2001-02 data to estimate the district level poverty. Cheema (2010) has used the official poverty line for the 2004-05 period to estimate the poverty at the district level by using the poverty mapping technique while Jamal (2007) has used the same dataset to compute the districts level poverty, but with different methodology. For the deprivation level, this study has used the deprivation index developed by Jamal et al. (2003). They have provided district-wise deprivation indices by using Population and Housing Census data of 1998. Jamal et al. (2003) developed a Multiple Deprivation Index (MDI) for each districts based on the combined education, health, housing quality, housing services, and employment sectoral indices. The overall MDI can be used to make inter-district comparisons of populations that are deprived with respect to the indicators chosen for the analysis. The lowest value of index represents least deprived and highest value of deprivation index represent most deprived districts in the province. 3. Flood Affected Districts and the Systemic Issues Behind the Disaster During the last 5 years, Pakistan has faced two biggest disasters of the world in terms of the population affected, areas, human losses and infrastructure losses: an earthquake in 2005 and flood in July-August 2010. The scale and destruction of the 2010 flood was more than twice the Haiti Earthquake 2010, Cyclone Nargis 2008, Pakistan Earthquake 2005, Cyclone Katrina 2005, and Indian Ocean Tsunami 2004 (Appendix Table 1). The UN has rated the 2010 flood in Pakistan as the greatest humanitarian crisis in recent history. Prior to the 2010 flood, the major losses in Pakistan due to the floods occurred in the 1970s and 1990s (Appendix Table 2). 3.1. 2010 Flood Affected Areas The 2010 flood has affected an area of 10.518 million acres; 4 Sindh being the most affected province (41% of the total area), followed by Punjab (36%), Khyber Pakhtun Khaw (KPK) (12%), Balochistan (11%) and Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK) (negligible). In the central and northern Punjab, the canal command areas affected by floods are by the Jhelum and Chenab rivers, whereas in southern Punjab, the areas are affected by the Sindh River. The areas affected in Sindh are largely on the right bank of the Indus River in the upper Sindh. The Indus River changed the course due to the breach of the bund on the right bank but again in the central Sindh the flows of the Indus river diverted from the right bank to join the Indus main. In KPK, the areas affected by floods are largely in the south from the Indus River system, especially from the right bank. The areas in the north have also been affected severely but the extent is much smaller than to the south. In Balochistan, the area affected by flood is largely in the eastern side of the province at the right bank of the Indus River. More than two-thirds of the total 100 districts of Pakistan were affected by the flood: 29 were severely and 49 were moderately affected (Map 1). The flood has also moderately affected additional 14 districts in AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) areas. The proportion of severely affected to moderately affected districts is more in Punjab and Sindh than in KPK and Balochistan. All the                                                             
4

The total cropped area in 2010 was 23.80 million hectares (GOP, 2010). About one-fifth of Pakistan’s total land area has been remained underwater; however, the magnitude varies from region to region as depending on the severity of flood.

3   

severely affected districts of Punjab lies in its southern zone, including Muzaffargarh, Rajanpur, D. G. Khan and Rahim Yar Khan (Map 1). The primary affects of the flood with its severity and duration vary from region to region as depending on topology, population density and area of cultivation. The intensity of flood was much destructive in the mountainous areas which include three provinces KPK, AJK and GB and some areas of Balochistan. In the flatter areas of Punjab and northern Sindh, the densely populated and cultivated areas of Pakistan, even it was very destructive with a slower inception but affected mainly economically. In the lower Sindh, the ongoing riverine delta flooding may have longer lasting effects due to soil saturation of these low lying areas. 3.2. Systematic issues behind the flood Overall the population of Pakistan is surrounding in a number of rivers, coming from the northeast of the country. The Indus is one of the world's great rivers with a length of some 3,200km and 56 percent of its basin lies in Pakistan and covers approximately 70% of the country’s area (NDMA, 2007). In routine the causes of floods in Pakistan include heavy concentrated monsoon rains, snowmelt flows, cloud bursts, hill torrent flows and temporary natural dams as a result of landslide or glacier movement. Four factors have largely induced the devastating flood in JulyAugust 2010. The first is the abnormal rains. The meteorological setup in Pakistan during the period of July and August of 2010 was unique in terms of spatial coverage, duration and intensity comparing with the historical events. In early July 2010, a strong ridge of high pressure began to develop near the Ural Mountains in Russia. As this ridge became stationary for nearly two consecutive months, persistent rains fell in most of the area of Pakistan and in parts of Afghanistan and Indian held Jammu and Kashmir beginning at the end of July 2010. Only in couple of days, the clouds have dumped about 10 times more rains than annual rainfall of the country. The second spell of rain started in third week of July generated unprecedented flood flows in major, secondary and tertiary rivers including nullahs in KPK, followed by Punjab and Sindh. Local rivers and nullahs of Balochistan also received unprecedented floods. Rivers Swat, Panjkora and Kabul in KPK in particular, experienced historic flood flows. Second, the areas which received the trigged rain in last week of July rarely receive monsoon rains in the past, thus the risk of the monsoon belt has shifted as well as changes in the intensity of the monsoon due to deforestation, change in land use pattern, population growth in the floodprone areas 5 . The number of extreme weather events like windstorm and floods has tripled since 1980, and the trend is expected to persist. 6 The unprecedented floods reflected "the adverse impact of climate change and the growing vulnerability of countries to climate change." The Indian experts also point to evidence of rising temperatures in the Himalayas and more intense rainfall events. 7 The higher Atlantic Ocean temperatures also contributed to the intense monsoon rains in Pakistan (WMO). 8 Third, the global warming with climate change might be one explanation, but poor land management and outdated irrigation systems are also caused the worst floods. A number of irrigation channels has been build in 18th century which have now less capacity to flow the water due to silt coming from hills. 9 A major factor is also the illegal logging in the KPK province especially in the Malakand division where about 70 percent of forests have been felled away by                                                             
5 6

Pakistan Meteorological Department p://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSGE6780D0._CH_.2400   http://blogs.reuters.com/alister-doyle/page/5/   7 Bishwajit Mukhopadhyay, deputy director-general of meteorology at the India Meteorological Department http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSGE6780D0._CH_.2400  8 http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/un-links-pakistan-floods-to-climate-change/19601138   9 http://pakobserver.net/201009/01/detailnews.asp?id=49964  

4   

‘timber mafia’. The lack of trees leads to soil erosion and exhaustion because tree roots help bind soil, naturally retaining water. Over-grazing can also remove topsoil and stunt plant growth. 10

Map 1: Districts affected by the 2010 flood

                                                            
10

International Water Management Institute. 

5   

Finally, the lack of preparedness has added to the damages of the floods although the previous history and the current prediction did exist. The flood was not properly monitored in real time due to weak telemetric system. The lack of attention to maintenance of river embankments, silting of river beds, weak water protection infrastructures and unplanned settlements in riverine areas has raised the human and financial losses. The flood management was too week at the local level to provide protection and relief. In upper basin of Indus River it was unexpected; however, in the lower basin especially in Sindh where the maximum damage has accrued, the government had sufficient time to take right steps. Being lack of rescue and relief activities, most of the people that were either forced to leave houses unalarmed or with prior notice did not know where to go for shelter, food, medicines and other basic facilities. The stagger flash has swept away a number of weak Flood Protective bunds due to poor repairing and maintenance of the bunds. It was also accused that in southern Punjab and especially in Sindh, a number of bunds has been breached due to political influences. 4 Pre-flood demographic and socio-economic situation: a districts-level analysis The knowledge about the pre-flood demographic, social and economic situation of the affected areas and population is crucial for the impact assessment on poverty. These characteristics measure the ability of the households to mitigate the impact of any shock. A household with sound economic and social background can easily come out from a shock as compared to a household with weak conditions. This section reviews the social, economic and demographic characteristics of households in general and in particularly in flood affected districts of Pakistan. 4.1 The demographic, social and economic profile Pakistan is the world’s sixth most populous country with an estimated population of 173.5 million in 2010 (89.8 million male while 83.5 million female). Approximately 66.4 percent of the population resides in rural areas while 33.6 percent live in urban areas. The province-wise data show that in Punjab about 56.4 percent of the country population is living (38.3 percent in rural areas and 18.1 percent in urban areas). The second largest province of the country is Sindh with the population of 41.3 millions. In KPK, 14.1 percent of the total population reside (12.0 percent in rural areas while 2.4 percent in urban areas). Balachistan is the least populous province of the country, inhabiting only 4.9 percent of the total population. Table 1 presents data on the selected socio-demographic indicators across the districts classified into three categories: severely affected, moderately affected and not affected. In the population density, the severely affected districts are not different from other districts. However, the density in both severely and moderately affected district is high, particularly in Muzaffargarh and Rahim Yar Khan. One of the most important indicators of demography is the household size. If a large household size increases the number of earners, it may reduce the chances of being poor by increasing the household income otherwise the large family size may push the household into poverty. According to Pakistan Demographic Survey 2007, the average household size in Pakistan is 6.65. In urban areas it is 6.58 while in rural areas it is 6.69. The province wise data show that the lowest average household size is observed in Punjab (6.4) while highest household size (7.7) is noted in KPK. Table 1 shows that the household size in the severely affected districts of Punjab is generally larger, around 7.5, as compared to the size either in the not-affected districts or in moderately affected districts. To some extent, Table 1 indicates relatively high fertility in southern Punjab and rural Sindh, the two severely affected zones. It suggests a high population pressure in the flood affected districts.

6   

Table 1: Socio-demographic characteristics by districts as affected by the 2010 flood Population Literacy Mortality Non Farm density Rate Agri HH Districts HH Size rate Liv HH Punjab Districts severely affected by the flood Mianwali 57 54 181 7.5 33.1 22.4 44.4 Layyah 52 80 178 7.5 17.2 16.7 66.1 Rajanpur 27 62 90 7.5 24.7 16.9 58.4 D. G. Khan 41 61 138 7.6 32.7 18.9 48.4 R. Y. Khan 43 82 264 7.2 20.5 12.0 27.8 Muzaffar Garh 44 82 320 7.4 27.3 18.8 54.5 Khushab 58 79 139 6.7 33.6 18.2 48.2 Districts moderately affected by the flood Bhakhar 58 80 129 6.5 18.0 18.8 63.2 Sargodha 61 91 455 6.6 44.5 25.5 29.9 Jhang 51 89 322 6.6 32.5 25.3 42.2 Multan 56 70 838 7 56.6 18.2 25.3 Districts not affected by the flood Islamabad 84 39 6.3 75.5 5.2 19.3 Chakwal 76 59 166 6.3 29.5 13.9 56.5 Lahore 80 50 3,566 6.8 91.4 4.7 3.9 Rawalpindi 69 40 636 6.6 53.0 5.0 42.1 Jhelum 77 69 261 6.5 41.9 11.5 46.7 Gujrat 73 65 642 7 43.6 10.5 45.9 Sialkot 66 70 903 7.4 52.1 14.3 33.6 Attock 61 60 186 6.2 36.7 10.3 53.0 Gujranwala 71 76 939 7.5 64.7 14.8 20.6 Faisalabad 61 58 927 7 59.2 16.0 24.8 Toba Tek Singh 65 64 499 6.9 46.7 21.7 31.6 Narowal 63 74 541 7.7 31.2 21.0 47.8 Mondi Bahawal 66 71 434 6.6 35.4 22.7 41.9 Sahiwal 50 65 576 6.7 41.7 22.9 35.4 Sheikhupura 65 87 557 7 48.6 17.6 33.9 Hafizabad 58 81 352 7 40.5 25.8 33.7 Bahawalnager 43 92 232 6.7 33.7 25.0 41.3 Okara 50 86 510 6.5 40.5 25.2 34.3 Khanewal 52 87 476 7.1 32.3 27.8 39.9 Kasur 56 74 595 7 43.9 21.0 35.1 Pakpattan 45 95 472 6.2 35.5 26.9 37.6 Lodhran 46 86 422 7.2 30.9 23.0 46.2 Vehari 44 479 6.6 35.7 25.7 38.6 Bahawalpur 54 72 98 6.7 38.9 18.9 42.2

7   

Districts

Population density

Ghotki Sukkur Khairpur Jaccobabad Shikhapur Thatta Dadu Larkana Hyderabad Nowshero Fero Nawabshah Karachi Tharparkar Mir Pur Khas Sanghar Badin

Peshawar Lower Dir Tank Nowshera D. I. Khan Swat Charsada Kohistan Upper Dir Shnagla Abbottabad Haripur Hangu Bannu Swabi Chitral Kohat Karak Lakki Marwat Mardan Mansehra Malakand Batgram

Literacy Mortality Non rate Rate Agri Sindh Districts severely affected by the flood 6.5 57 160 45 8.6 35 176 56 47.7 44 97 6.9 54 29.5 32 270 6.8 39 32.9 32 350 6.9 53 45.1 38 64 6 41 43.8 36 89 7.4 61 37.1 57 260 7.1 53 35.9 Districts moderately affected by the flood 43 524 6.3 69 58.4 33 369 7.5 72 45.9 49 44 238 7 28.0 Districts not affected by the flood 78 39 2,795 6.1 97.7 39 48 47 6.9 29.5 45 42 536 5.9 40.8 53 41 135 6.7 29.4 42 169 6 40 27.4 Khyber Pakhtunkhaw Districts severely affected by the flood 32 1,606 8 53 70.5 57 454 9.9 52 8.9 47 142 8.8 38 24.9 44 500 8.8 43 52.0 57 116 7.3 39 32.8 50 236 8.8 47 43.0 38 1,026 7.6 43 45.4 47 63 10.2 30 3.7 57 156 9.5 49 11.8 61 274 8.9 39 18.7 Districts moderately affected by the flood 54 448 6.6 72 25.8 50 401 6.8 68 30.0 36 287 10.4 44 22.6 35 551 9.4 49 38.6 56 665 7.8 49 36.3 86 21 8.5 56 3.7 49 51 221 7 41.1 51 128 10.8 53 14.1 54 155 9.2 44 24.7 41 895 8 47 45.9 35 252 7.8 57 28.3 39 475 9.2 56 22.3 67 236 8.4 47 13.0 HH Size

Liv HH

Farm HH

26.8 25.5 36.6 18.6 32.0 30.9 28.9 22.2 29.0 38.3 1.8 25.5 37.3 28.8 20.7

25.5 45.0 30.5 36.3 2.4 32.1 35.2 19.4 25.1 33.7 0.5 45.0 21.9 41.8 51.9

11.2 16.3 23.7 11.6 25.0 10.1 18.3 9.5 13.2 12.4 3.9 9.1 6.8 10.3 18.4 5.0 10.4 8.8 19.2 15.8 7.7 11.7 5.7

18.3 74.8 51.4 36.4 42.2 46.8 36.4 86.8 74.9 68.9 70.2 60.9 70.6 51.1 45.3 91.3 48.5 77.1 56.0 38.3 64.0 66.1 79.3

8   

Boneir

Jafarabad Nasirabad Loralai Barkhan Qilla Saifull Musa Khel Bolan/Kachhi Sibbi Jhal Maagsi Gwadar Quetta Kalat Khuzdar Mastung Awaran Ketch/Turbat Panjgur Ziarat Zhob Kharan Qillah Abdull Lasbela Pishin Chaghi Kehli

40 37 15.8 Balochistan Districts severely affected by the flood 38 34 177 8.1 21.2 31 41 73 8.2 42.4 Districts moderately affected by the flood 38 35 30 9.9 20.7 82 29 7.4 29 12.7 62 28 8.9 37 3.6 23 82 23 8.1 3.6 47 38 7.8 52 19.0 46 32 23 8.6 56.1 66 30 9.3 23 4.9 Districts not affected by the flood 61 41 15 6.8 89.6 67 42 281 8.9 77.7 42 55 36 9.2 30.2 46 61 12 7.4 21.6 37 57 30 9.8 57.4 43 60 4 8.1 15.0 52 44 18 7.2 33.9 49 32 14 8.6 7.0 65 66 22 8.8 8.8 41 52 14 10.7 18.1 33 46 4 6.6 19.0 37 32 112 9.6 24.7 46 21 8.4 40 23.5 55 32 47 11.2 35.1 43 49 4 8.5 21.2 7 51 4.6 45.1 271 9.5

12.1

72.0

21.2 6.2 25.4 10.2 12.8 65.4 15.0 14.0 9.2 4.1 6.8 10.1 18.4 10.6 31.4 18.2 24.7 8.2 25.8 18.4 23.2 25.6 19.0 25.5 45.3

57.6 51.4 53.9 77.1 83.6 31.0 65.9 30.0 85.9 6.3 15.5 59.7 60.0 32.0 53.6 47.8 68.3 83.0 56.1 62.7 52.1 50.9 45.9 53.3 9.6

Literacy is an important indicator of education because its improvement is likely to have an impact in the longer run on other important indicators of welfare. The literacy rate at the national level for population 10 years and above was 57 percent in 2008-09. Literacy remains much higher in urban areas than in rural areas. Literacy rate are high in Punjab and low in Balochistan. Similar trends are found for rural and urban areas across other provinces. The districts-wise literacy data show that the situation is worse in the flood affected districts of all provinces (Table 1). In Punjab, for example, the flood affected districts like Rajanpure, Rahim Yar Khan, D. G. Khan and Muzaffargarh are among the least literate districts within the province. Similarly, in Sindh, Jaccobabad, Thatha, Dadu, and Kashmore which are the severally flood affected districts fall in the lowest ranks in literacy. Infant mortality rates also show that flood affected districts across the provinces have relatively higher rates as compared to the national level figures or even overall province level rates. The 2000 Agriculture Census classifies rural households under three broad categories: agricultural households that operate land as owner-cultivators or tenants; livestock owners; and non-agricultural households. At the national level, the share of non-agricultural households in total rural households is 45 percent, while agricultural households and livestock owners 9   

constitute 37 percent and 18 percent respectively. There is a variation in the share of pure livestock households in total rural households across the four provinces; it is highest, 22 percent, in Sindh. The district level analysis shows relatively high proportion of farm households in severely affected districts of both Punjab and Sindh (Table 1). These are the districts where access to the non-agriculture sources of income particularly foreign remittances is lower than in economically better-off regions of the country e.g. northern Punjab. The housing sector has a direct relevance with the 2010 flood, which, in addition to crops and infrastructure, has badly damaged the dwellings particularly in rural areas. The pre-flood situation (2008-09) of the housing units by tenure reveal that 87 percent of households were living in their own dwelling units while 6 percent of households rented dwelling units and about 6 percent had rent free units and only 1 percent households lived in subsidized housing units in Pakistan. Provincial and district-level statistics reveals that people predominantly live in their own housing units. There is no significant difference across the flood affected districts and other districts of the provinces in term of the house ownership. Rebuilding of the housing units damaged by the flood is a major challenge for the country. 4.2 Infrastructure The main components of the physical infrastructure in rural areas are roads, electricity and access to safe drinking water while the social infrastructure includes health and education institutions, and rule of law. In order to access the impact of current flood on poverty, the role of infrastructure cannot be ignored. Data on the physical infrastructure across the provinces and districts are presented in Table 2 including access to metal road, electricity, street soling, drain system and availability of piped drinking water. The table shows clear differences across the regions in term of existence of these infrastructures. In Punjab, overall 80 percent mouzas has the facility of metal road within the one kilometer distance. In severally flood affected districts of Punjab, 76.9 percent of mouzas are located at a distance of less than one kilometer from the metal-road. In Sindh, overall 67 percent mouzas has access to a metal road within the distance of one kilometer. In severally flood affected districts of Sindh, 64.3 percent of mouzas are located at a distance of less than one kilometer from the metal-road. The situation of access to a metal road within the distance of one kilometer is very bad in KPK (38 percent mouzas) and Balochistan (20 percent mouzas), although the flood affected districts of these two provinces were better as compared to the whole province (Table 2). In term of electricity, 47 percent mouzas in Punjab, 10 percent mouzas in Sindh, 34 percent mouzas in KPK and 12 percent mouzas in Balochistan have access to electricity for whole mouza. The flood affected districts in Punjab and Sindh have relatively low level of access to electricity as compared to the province average. But in case of KPK and Balochistan, the flood affected districts have relatively more access to electricity as compared to the province average. The situation of soling streets, access to piped drinking water and drainage system is not different from the situation of access to a metal road and electricity (Table 2). Like physical infrastructure, the similar differences are found in access to education and health facilities. Education is one of the important factors that contribute in poverty reduction. Literature indicates the direct as well as indirect impact of education on income level of the poor. Existence of educational institution in the region shows that 34 percent of mouzas in Punjab has the facility of education institution for boys and 30.5 percent has facility of education institution for girls 11 .                                                             
Educational Institution for boys is an index calculated by taking the summation of four indicator of education by equally weighting so: Education Institution Index= ((primary school*0.25) + (middle school*0.25) + (high school*0.25) + (college*0.25)). Similar index is calculated for girls.
11

10   

The flood affected districts in Punjab have less access to these facilities (Table 2). In Sindh, 37.5 percent of mouzas has the facility of education institution for boys and 27.3 percent has the facility of education institution for girls. The flood affected district has low figures in both institutions as compared to the province average. Overall the infrastructure facilities are less in Balochistan as compared to other provinces.
Table 2: Percent of Mouzas having infrastructure facilities Physical Infrastructure Distance to Metal Soling Piped Province Electricity Drain road<1 street water 80.0 47.0 66.0 58.0 9.0 Overall Punjab Severely affected district 76.9 15.9 49.4 33.7 5.5 Moderately affected district 79.0 26.8 66.8 53.8 7.0 Total affected district 77.6 19.8 55.7 41.0 6.1 67.0 10.0 30.0 23.0 7.0 Overall Sindh Severely affected district 64.3 10.3 35.0 29.1 8.0 Moderately affected district 70.6 12.1 49.1 34.3 10.6 Total affected district 67.1 11.1 41.3 31.4 9.2 38.0 34.0 29.0 19.0 20.0 Overall KPK Severely affected district 55.2 38.0 53.1 37.4 30.8 Moderately affected district 63.8 36.3 57.8 39.5 30.7 Total affected district 60.1 37.0 55.8 38.6 30.7 20.0 12.0 8.0 7.0 9.0 Overall Balochistan Severely affected district 36.5 6.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 Moderately affected district 22.2 14.3 2.6 1.5 11.7 Total affected district 24.6 13.0 2.9 1.8 10.5 Source: MOUZA statistics, 2008 Soft Infrastructure Educati on Ins. 34.0 32.6 34.2 33.2 37.5 35.8 40.1 37.7 33.3 41.7 46.3 44.3 22.3 26.9 25.6 25.8 Health Ins. 30.5 28.1 31.7 29.4 27.3 26.6 30.7 28.4 24.5 29.4 35.3 32.7 11.3 12.3 11.5 11.6

4.3 Pre-flood poverty situation It is worth to give first a brief overview of the poverty situation before the flood at the national level. The official poverty line, based on the threshold of 2350 calories per adult equivalent per day, was first time applied on the 1989/99 HIES/PIHS dataset. Poverty estimates for the 1998/99 – 2005/06 period are presented in Table 3. According to the official poverty line, the overall incidence of poverty in 1998/99 was 30.6 percent (20.9% in urban areas and 34.7% in rural areas). It increased to 34.5 percent in 2000/01. This increase in poverty was high in rural areas than in urban areas. Overall the 2000-06 period witnessed a sharp decline in the proportion of population living below the poverty line, from 34.5% in 2000/01 to 23.9% in 2004/05 and 22.3% in 2005-06; a decline of 12.2 percentage points in 5-6 years. The percentage of population living below the poverty line in rural areas has declined from 39.3% in 2000/01 to 27% in 2005/06; the corresponding decline in urban areas was from 22.7% to 13.9%, suggesting a decline of 12.3 and 9.6 percentage points in rural and urban areas respectively. However, the sharp decline in rural areas could not narrow the rural-urban gap; rural poverty (27%) in 2005/06 is almost double the urban poverty (13.1%).
Region 1998-99 2000-01 2004-05 Table 3: Trends in Poverty, 1998-99 to 2005-06 Urban Rural 20.9 34.7 22.7 39.3 14.9 28.1 Pakistan 30.6 34.5 23.9

11   

2005-06

13.1 27.0 22.3 Source: GoP, 2009 (Economic Survey of Pakistan 2008-09)

The official poverty estimates after the 2007-08 period are not available, despite the availability of the PSLM data for this period. However, the common perception is that due to the sharp rise in both oil and food prices since 2008, poverty in Pakistan has sharply increased to a level of around 33 percent in 2009. This study thus considers that poverty which declined between the 2001 and 2006 period has gone up well before the 2010 flood; it was probably around 33 percent. It is not common in Pakistan to estimate poverty at the district level because of the nonavailability of representative data. However, recently attempts have been made to compute district-level poverty using different techniques. District level poverty estimates are available for the year 2001-02 (Jamal, 2006) and for 2004-05 (Cheema, 2010 and Jamal, 2007). These estimates provide reliable information on the district-level variations in poverty levels (Table 4). Poverty level in rural areas of the severally flood affected district of Punjab was 41 percent on average in 2001 12 . It declined to 33 percent in 2004-05. After 2005-06, poverty is believed to have gone up because of high inflation. This implies that more than one-third of the population was living below the poverty line in the severally affected districts of Punjab before the 2010 flood. Poverty level is relatively low in both moderately and not affected districts of Punjab. In Sindh, the situation is not different either; poverty declined between the 2001 and 2005 period and around one-quarter of the households in severely affected districts was living below the poverty line in 2005-06 (Table 4). Considering the jump in poverty after 2005-06, approximately 30% of the Sindh population was below the poverty line before the 2010 flood. The deprivation levels as presented in Table 4 also show that the districts severely affected by the flood particularly in Punjab and Sindh have high deprivation levels while the majority of the districts with low deprivation index has not affected by the flood or its effect was moderate. The picture which emerges from the pre-flood district-level analysis is that overall Pakistan has not witnessed any positive change in poverty between the 2006 and 2010 period because of high inflation and very low economic growth. The regional and district-level variations in sociodemographic and economic indicators persist in the country and the flood in July-August 2010 has disproportionately affected the poor regions and districts particularly in south Punjab and rural Sindh.

District

Table 4: District level headcount ratios and deprivation index 2001 2005-05 Urban Rural Urban Urban Rural Rural Overall Overall Jamal Cheema Jamal Cheema Jamal Cheema Punjab Severely Affected District

Deprivation level

                                                            
12

 Simple averages are calculated for affected districts 

12   

Mianwali Layyah Rajanpur D. G. Khan R. Y. Khan Muzaffar Garh Bhakhar Khushab Sargodha Jhang Multan Islamabad Chakwal Lahore Rawalpindi Jhelum Gujrat Sialkot Attock Gujranwala Faisalabad T.T. Singh Narowal Mondi Bahawal Sahiwal Sheikhupura Hafizabad Bahawalnager Okara Khanewal Kasur Pakpattan Lodhran Vehari Bahawalpur

65.8 37.3 35.4 6.9 24.3 24.2 14.0 29.3 28.8 46.6

17.1 42.2 62.1 40.2 45.7 38.4 27.3 28.0 12.6 30.4 37.3 4.0 24.9 4.2 7.5 19.3 21.8 10.1 20.5 19.7 18.4 21.3 19.7 32.6 26.2 22.5 29.7 32.1 34.7 30.4 34.1 44.6 30.9

24.15 17 38.75 23 50.74 22 39.09 30 59.77 29 53.29 34 42.44 20 52.25 35 35.71 18 48.30 38 57.09 28 56.15 38 Moderately Affected District 35.54 21 14.42 26 43.74 27 17.73 26 28.47 18 24.75 31 48.27 26 27.19 31 30.73 21 42.69 35 Not Affected District 3 16 25.75 12 16.98 12 10.70 9 14.95 24 16.21 10 6.71 17 21.79 11 8.84 18 22.56 14 8.90 18 19.41 12 12.24 19 19.17 10 12.89 19 24.46 16 13.56 23 22.02 15 18.20 25 36.44 17 15.01 23 32.93 19 17.31 24 31.66 18 14.79 25 32.42 30.94 39.69 43.00 36.17 49.19 39.97 40.53 56.90 41.93 40.35 16 17 23 25 23 26 25 21 24 27 24 19.28 24.25 17.37 29.93 28.30 36.63 24.59 35.98 47.04 27.58 39.13 27 29 27 28 30 30 31 31 31 32 34

33.38 40.86 54.16 51.01 45.87 56.29 18.21 24.37 25.66 32.25 38.40

22 29 33 33 34 37 25 26 27 30 30 8 12 12 14 16 17 17 17 19 21 21 23 24 25 26 26 28 29 29 29 30 30 31 31

High High High High High High Medium Medium High Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium High High Medium High

18.09 11.60 11.32 12.32 12.72 13.96 14.11 19.04 19.84 18.95 19.30 17.33 21.66 26.20 24.04 32.45 29.98 38.84 28.18 36.70 48.37 30.03 39.46

Ghotki Sukkur Khairpur Jaccobabad Shikhapur Thatta Dadu Larkana Hyderabad Nowshero Fero

28.7 40.3 33.6 -

33.7 52.5 32.7 63.2 43.9 34.4 42.9 42.2 33.1 38.4

Sindh Severely Affected District 54.14 22 33.88 18 26.18 17 22.76 23 43.54 18 25.16 21 44.29 20 29.73 22 57.79 26 40.28 27 50.93 24 45.73 27 57.77 28 32.20 27 53.84 29 40.87 29 Moderately Affected District 26.31 16 20.22 21 46.79 19 27.40 25

40.8. 24.96 27.41 34.16 51.03 46.87 36.44 43.33 23.13 33.11

19 19 21 22 26 26 27 29 19 23

High Medium Medium High High High Medium Medium Low Medium

13   

Nawabshah Karachi Tharparkar Mir Pur Khas Sanghar Badin

11.4 32.1 -

36.5 26.3 28.5 43.2 42.5 33.1

Peshawar Lower Dir Tank Nowshera D. I. Khan Swat Charsada Kohistan Upper Dir Shangla Abbottabad Haripur Hangu Bannu Swabi Chitral Kohat Karak Lakki Marwat Mardan Mansehra Malakand Batgram Boneir

31.9 37.7 20.0 17.3 44.3 47.0 53.5 -

47.4 12.0 32.8 27.1 46.0 21.8 25.6 32.0 28.9 12.2 38.7 34.5 29.8 20.2 29.6 15.0 22.7 25.6

Jafarabad Nasirabad Loralai Barkhan Qilla Saifull Musa Khel Bolan/Kachhi Sibbi Jhal Maagsi Gwadar Quetta Kalat Khuzdar Mastung Awaran

43.2 32.1 23.3 47.7 -

58.7 56.2 37.8 33.5 56.2 -

26 22.26 22 Not Affected District 8.34 8 26.15 24 43.57 14 24.31 19 24.10 12 30.82 29 39.06 21 20.63 25 40.94 22 32.42 26 Khyber Pakhtoon Khaw Severely Affected District 34.72 19 38.31 33 62.06 27 32.97 27 60.95 29 30.65 27 39.93 25 24.09 29 32.24 20 34.97 32 46.45 21 38.68 33 54.43 35 37.77 34 35.56 38 59.57 32 54.32 41 50.79 41 Moderately Affected District 24.89 12 20.43 24 24.79 10 27.57 24 47.06 23 42.35 27 36.24 20 33.01 28 51.37 28 22.67 29 33.10 17 41.91 30 41.83 22 23.62 32 70.54 28 34.66 31 34.05 19 47.81 32 53.60 29 39.63 34 26.49 18 20.38 34 58.51 33 36.99 34 29.22 36 45.38 40 Balochistan Severely Affected District 50.51 15 42.71 23 60.66 20 56.90 26 Moderately Affected District 45.91 17 52.81 27 84.26 27 49.46 27 37.52 13 61.98 30 54.26 31 67.80 28 42.41 32 49.04 21 58.16 39 70.07 33 52.71 37 Not Affected District 50.14 10 44.67 21 26.69 12 46.24 31 62.94 20 38.55 21 58.38 21 48.33 21 36.07 15 43.57 27 61.54 25

48.68

32.68 9.15 28.92 28.53 24.67 34.83

24 9 18 23 24 25

Medium Low High High High High

36.51 34.62 34.87 27.98 34.63 39.64 40.83 35.56 54.53 50.79 21.17 27.25 43.20 33.20 27.30 40.96 28.53 36.93 46.49 42.46 20.74 39.19 29.22 45.38

26 27 28 28 30 31 34 38 41 41 22 22 27 27 29 29 30 31 31 33 33 34 36 40

Low High High Medium High High High High High High Medium Medium High Medium Medium High Medium High Medium Medium High High High High

44.14 57.27 52.10 52.84 60.66 54.26 45.56 55.81 53.42 47.55 34.15 41.89 50.96 42.34 61.54

22 26 26 27 29 31 31 34 36 15 20 21 21 25 25

High High High High High High High High High High Low High High High High

14   

Ketch/Turbat Panjgur Ziarat Zhob Kharan Qillah Abdull Lasbela Pashin Chaghi Kehli

29.7 43.8 -

37.8 58.3 -

61.06 25.19 56.31 49.37 59.03 33.56 65.75 73.17 83.68

13 6 20 14 22 13 23 29 24 -

53.35 50.87 40.19 67.82 55.28 61.34 66.65 61.87 75.78

27 30 30 32 32 36 38 36 43 -

54.40 49.68 41.29 65.99 55.52 58.82 66.40 62.36 76.91

26 29 29 30 32 34 34 35 40 -

High High Medium High High High High High High -

5. Losses of the 2010 flood Flood losses are generally divided into two categories: direct losses and indirect losses. The direct losses cover the visible losses arising by direct contact with water i.e. the losses to human being, houses, infrastructure, agriculture etc. The indirect losses are the consequences of direct losses and can be revealed as the disruption of economic and social activities and may continue over the long run by a series of chain of effects and multipliers, called ‘linkage effects’ (Parker et al., 1987). In this section, the direct losses of the 2010 floods have been explained with a major focus on agriculture and infrastructure losses. During the 2010 flood, 1,961 persons died and 2,995 injured. The deaths largely occurred in KPK while the injuries were found mainly in Sindh and KPK. The flood damaged 1.9 million dwellings and their inhabitants moved out to nearby safe locations. Approximately 60 percent of the damaged houses were in Sindh. Similarly, the loss of cattle heads was higher in Sindh than in other provinces (Appendix Table 3). The lifeline of the country’s economy, the irrigation sector on Indus and various other rivers has also sustained huge losses due to a number of breaches and damages to head-works and hydro plants. The World Bank and ADB preliminary Damage Need Assessment (DNA) shows that the direct flood losses are about $10.05 billion (Rs 846 billion) in terms of damaged crops, infrastructure and public and private property. Sindh suffered the maximum damage amounting to around Rs 350 billion, followed by Punjab Rs 253 billion, KPK Rs 103 billion, Balochistan Rs 55 billion and Fata Rs 5 billion. 5.1. Losses to Agriculture The 2010 flood has caused damages at an unprecedented level to agriculture crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry. It has also destroyed the primary agriculture infrastructure including tube wells, water channels, headworks, bunds, storages, animal sheds, seed stocks, fertilizers and agricultural machinery. It struck just before the harvesting of the major crops including cotton, rice, sugarcane with minor crops i.e. maize, vegetables, fruits etc. Out of the total 10.518 million acres flooded area, 59.3 percent was irrigated agriculture, followed by bare soil (12.6%), rangelands (8.6%), water bodies (6.4%), forests (4.9%), rainfed and Rod-Kohi farming (4.2%), un-cultivated land (2.9%) and settlements (1.1%). Table 5 show the cropped affected areas and loss of cattle heads by districts. In Punjab, the flood damaged the crops heavily in Mianwali, Rajanpur, Muzaffargarh, Sargodha, Rahim Yar Khan and Jhang districts. Mazaffargarh, Rajanpur and Rahim Yar Khan are in south Punjab and part of the cotton belt on which the textile industry heavily depends. Similarly the cropped area damaged in different districts of Sindh was part of the cotton belt. The loss of cattle was also very high with over 3.2 million heads of livestock and about 6 million poultry, particularly in Sindh. Only the Sukker district in Sindh witnessed the loss of 124,000 cattle. The other severely affected districts in Sindh in this loss are Gotki, Shahdadkot, Khairpur and Kashmore. The cattle losses 15   

were also high in Charsadda and Kohistan districts of KPK (Appendix Table 4). In addition, more than 14 million livestock are at risk due to fodder shortages and heightened risk of disease.
Table 5: Province-wise Damages of Cropped area and cattle head Cropped Area Affected (Acres) Punjab Severely affected districts Moderately affected districts Sindh Severely affected districts Moderately affected districts KPK Severely affected districts Moderately affected districts Baluchistan Severely affected districts Moderately affected districts GB & AJK Moderately affected districts 1,310,255 401,701 2,235,045 218,458 423,933 136,132 349,400 281,305 85,140 Source: NDMA, 2010 Cattle Head Lost 3,461 198 262,238 26 51,327 1423 N.A 15,031 4,957

The data on crops for the year of 2009 and the cultivation in 2010 have been used to find out the potential damages for various crops at the district level. Table 6 shows the total cultivated area and the damage areas across the provinces (the details at the district level are in appendix Table 4). Punjab has lost about 16.2 percent and Sindh has lost about 28 percent of their total cotton cropped areas. The initial estimates have shown the loss of 1.5 million bales; however, the latest estimates show that the cotton belt in Punjab and Sindh has faced a loss of about 15% of last year’s actual production with 2.5mn bales. 13 The damage to area under sugarcane was also very high in the three provinces with a production loss of half a million tons. This will add up to the deficit of sugar which Pakistan already has to meet through imports. The rice production loss may be over two million tons mainly in Sindh province. Maize, an industrial crop is also damaged by an area lost of 5.45 percent of the total with mainly in Punjab. Millet and Sorghum which was used for food grains in old times but now for the fodder is also affected widely in all provinces. The Kharif fodders include a number of crops as sorghum, millets and a variety of others. The damage of fodder with about 31 percent of the total area caused high inconvenience to farmers, as livestock fodders supply was restricted or cut in extreme cases.
Table 6: Damaged area by selected crops Type of Crop Cultivated area and damages Total area (in million ha.) % Damage area Cotton Damage factor Production loss (in million bales) Total area (in 000 ha.) Punjab 2.50 16.21 0.79 1.38 698 Sindh 0.65 28.26 0.67 0.6 269 Baluchistan 0.01 25.00 1 0.01 0.70 KPK 0.04 102 Total 3.20 18.49 1.45 1069.7

Sugarcane

                                                            
13

 http://vuhelp.net/blogs/viki/35‐pakistan‐flood‐made‐loss‐cotton‐report‐16‐august‐2010.html  

16   

% Damage area Damage factor Production loss (million tons) Total area (in 000 ha.) Rice % Damage area Damage factor Production loss (million tons) Maize Total area (in 000 ha.) % Damage area Total area (in 000 ha.) Millets % Damage area Damage factor

14.73 0.43 2.1 1818 12.97 0.24 0.12 525.6 8.41 394.8 26.80 0.44

28.40 0.59 2.3 642 79.02 1 1.83 2.8 74.8 1.87 0.8

60 65.42 1 0.42 60 2.1 -

15.10 0.64 0.4 190 9.1 1 0.02 530 3.15 4 22.50 0.8 0.03

16.61 4.8 2710 32.21 2.39 1118.4 5.45 475.7 22.70 29.2

Production loss (million tons) 28.9 0.2 Note: Damage factor equal to 1 mean complete damage of crop in the flooded area Source: Rapid Assessment by FAO and SUPARCO

5.2. Damages to Infrastructure The floods have caused a significant damage to public and private infrastructure which include houses, roads, bridges, railway lines, power and communication installations, schools, health facilities, hydropower plants etc. It has disrupted the movement of commodities which led to scarcity of basic commodities, petroleum products with hike in prices in the local markets. Up to now, the initial assessment is not covering the details of all infrastructure damages. In northern areas, almost all hydropower installations, while in KPK, a number of grid stations and transmission lines have been damaged. One of the greatest losses of primary concern is the significant damage to Karakoram Highway (KKH). The northern regions and some areas of KPK are experiencing the worst shortage of basic necessities and medicine; consequently the peoples are now suffering from epidemics, starvation, lack of medicine, and shelter. The initial assessment shows that about 12,597 schools has been partially or completely damaged throughout the country with 6,852 in Sindh, 3,641 in Punjab, 926 in KPK, 900 in Baluchistan,197 in AJK and 81 in GB. About 227 and 903 water supply schemes have been damaged in Punjab and KPK respectively. As shown in Figure 1, about 514 health facilities which include the BHU, RHC, THQ, DHQ and others have been affected by the floods with 280 partially damaged (PD) and 234 fully damaged (FD).

Figure1: Damaged of Health Facilities

17   

Regarding the road damages, about 283 km of road length has been damaged in KPK, 2,899 km road length in Punjab, 950 km in GB, and 12,000 km in Sindh. 14 The lifeline of the country, the main national highway got a number of breaches with about 33 bridges has been partially or fully damaged in various provinces of the country out of which about 19 has been repaired by providing diversion or the RCC bridges has been installed. About 278 small and large bridges has been wiped away only in KPK, while about 70 percent bridges of small and medium size with suspension bridges has been wiped away in northern areas. About 33 bridges on main highways has been partially or completely damaged out of which. Beside this a number of suspension and small bridges has been wiped out. The Pakistan Railway has suffered Rs 6.07 billion of infrastructure damages which include the damage to bridges, breaches in the track, damages to buildings etc. The suspension of passenger services in various railway divisions during 23.7.10 to 2.9.10 lead to the loss of Rs.361.971million. The suspension of goods trains on Sibi-Rohri, Mahmood Kot Oil Terminal, goods in transit for Afghanistan (GITA) and cement traffic lead to the loss of Rs.460.00 million. Although the data on infrastructure damages at the district level are not available, the macro picture does show a huge loss at the micro (district) level. 6. The 2010 Flood and Poverty: Some Implications The economic crises, health shocks, high population growth and natural disasters generate the transition from being non-poor to being poor as well as the persistence of poverty among those who are already poor (Suryahadi and Sumarto, 2001). Such shocks have direct and indirect losses. The indirect losses include the risk coping costs such as loan, disinvestment of assets, sale of assets, postponing health related expenditures, withdrawing children from school and child labour. In the absence of assets, the households not only face poverty in the short run but also may trap in long term poverty. Considering poverty as a multidimensional concept, this study has focused on its three aspects; headcount ratio or the proportion of population living below the (official) poverty line, health and education. In view of the displacement of people on a large scale, the migration phenomenon has also been taken into account. The question is what are the implications of the recent flood on these dimensions of poverty?

6.1 Poverty levels In the absence of data for the post-flood period, it is not possible to estimate poverty at the national or regional levels. However, it is not difficult to draw some implications of the recent flood for poverty levels. It has been discussed earlier that the flood hit the areas severely in south                                                             
14

 http://www.onepakistan.com/news/national/58709‐Floods‐damage‐12000‐‐roads‐Sindh.html  

18   

Punjab and rural Sindh where poverty has historically been higher than the other regions of the country. The flood has surely pushed many non-poor household into poverty at least for the short period of time in these two poor regions. Many poor households are also likely to have been pushed to an extreme poverty condition. Consider the data as reported in Table 1 which shows that rural households in both south Punjab and Sindh are engaged in farming livestock rearing and non-agriculture activities. Among these three types of the households, empirical studies have shown that poverty has been relatively higher in the non-agriculture households, followed by livestock households and small farmers. It has been shown in the previous section and in appendix table 5 that the major flood affected areas have lost their homes, their crops and heads of livestock. Due to the lack of industrial base, the sources of income of households situated in these severely affected areas are less diversified, with their heavy dependence on agriculture, livestock and casual labour with negligible flows of foreign remittances. All the social indicators show the higher level of poverty and deprivation in these areas with large household size, poor literacy level, higher mortality rate and poor level of infrastructure with poor access to education and health facilities. There also exists higher level of inequality in terms of assets and land ownership. Through the destruction of roads, transport and market infrastructure, the flood has a significant negative impact on commodity market. As a result, the functioning capacity of transporters, processors, wholesalers and retailers has been decreased with upward movement of transaction costs and shortage of food commodities. While comparing the prices after the flood with the July 2010 Federal Bureau of Statistics prices, the prices of rice and wheat have increased in flooded areas by about 10 percent in Sindh and more than 80 percent in KPK. The price of sugar, a key commodity, has increased with an average of about 20%. The losses to crops and livestock along with the poor functioning capacity of the market have significantly reduced the expected income of all the occupational groups. About 50 percent of the affected households have lost the immediate access to their principal livelihoods by more than half. The flood has pushed the marginalized group in the depth of poverty as the people who lost their income by more than 75 percent, 45 percent were already below the national poverty line. 60 percent of the daily wage labourer has lost their income by more than 50 percent. More than the 70 percent of the formers lost their more than 50 percent expected income (60% of them lost over 75%) (WFP, 2010). Thus the flood affected people have to face a number of key challenges to recover their livelihood, agriculture and livestock. The agriculture sector requires an immediate intervention as the wheat sowing season is just around the corner and it cannot be waited like delay in building infrastructure in the flood-hit areas. The immediate repair of about water courses is necessary for Rabi crops. The government of Pakistan has planed to provide free seeds for cultivation in floodaffected areas. To supplement, FAO has also promised to distribute free of cost seeds for Rabi crops to farming families in the first phase. The government of Punjab has also announced to provide fertilizer, seed to those formers who have the land up to 25 acres. A number of NGOs and INGOs are also working to promote agriculture and livestock to restore the livelihood of the marginalized people. All these steps, if done timely and effectively, will take time to help the affected people to meet their losses and escape poverty. The experience of the other countries particularly Bangladesh shows that the flood affected people primarily rely on credit from the informal sources to meet their basic needs during the post-flood period. The preliminary investigation in the flood affected areas of Pakistan shows that besides selling their assets, the poor households are coping with this crisis by shifting their consumption to inferior food item and borrowings (WFP, 2010). 19   

It thus appears from this very brief discussion that the 2010 flood has pushed several households into poverty or extreme poverty situation particularly in south Punjab and rural Sindh. The likely rise in poverty in these regions of the country is also likely to have increased poverty at the national level. The flood has severely affected 20 million people. Given that around one-third of them were poor prior to the flood and another one-third have moved into poverty because of the flood, at least for short period of time, the flood has added 16 to 17 million poor at the national level. Poverty is districts severely affected by the 2010 flood could be around 50 percent, particularly in rural areas. Among the poor, the proportion of extreme poor is also likely to have increased sharply. 6.2. Health implication A number of diseases including gastroenteritis, acute diarrhea, paralysis, respiratory infections, malaria, skin infections and many others (Appendix Table 6) have grown affecting 6.7 million peoples only in two months. Figure 2 shows the trends of diseases after the flood; the diarrhea which include acute and bloody diarrhea is stagnant, while the acute respiratory infections ARI and suspected malaria are increasing in the flood affected areas. In the north, the incidence of diarrhoea is low and is expected to decline with the change of climate but it still remains high in the southern areas of Pakistan. On the other hand, ARI are expected to rise in KPK and northern Punjab with the rising cold and the inadequate shelter. Figure 2: Trend of various diseases in flood affected areas

Source: WHO (a)

The winter has started and the people are going back to their homes. Malaria still remains a potential threat with the recent attack of Dengue fever to more than 5,000 people especially in Punjab and Sindh provinces. Contaminated water, lack of sanitation and poor access to health are still the main causes of concern in several areas especially in Sindh. The health concerns are raising due to poor nutrition, food security, shelter and malnutrition issues. The estimates of World Food Program (WFP) shows that half of population is not getting the acceptable intake as according to the global food consumption score (FCS) 15 . About 5 percent of mothers have stopped breastfeeding and 16 percent has reduced the breastfeeding because of the less                                                             
The food consumption score (FCS) was calculated based on the number of days particular food groups were consumed as follows: FCS = 2(cereal)+3(pulses)+4(poultry/meat/eggs)+0.5(oil)+4(milk products)+1(vegetables)+ 1(fruit)+0.5(sugar/sweets). Cut-offs was applied as follows: 1. Poor food consumption is score between 0.5 – 21 2. Moderately food consumption is score between 21.5 – 34.5 3. Adequate food consumption is score of more than 35+ 
15

20   

quantity of milk. Only 19 percent of respondents in flood affected areas are using the standard breast milk substitutes (BMS). Increasing numbers of children are expected to develop acute malnutrition combined with infectious diseases which can be life‐threatening in malnourished children (WHOb 2010). 6.3 Implications for education Regarding the education, the flood has damaged the infrastructure of over 12,500 schools with more damages in rural Sindh (6,852) and southern Punjab (3,641). About 2,894 schools are still using as temporally shelter. There were approximately 1.8 million affected children, including 680,000 girls who are unable to attend school (UNICEF, 2010). The poor affected population is unable to spend some amount for the schooling of their children. To recover their homes and nutrition, they would prefer to see their adult boys on jobs rather to acquire education. There is a need to provide temporary school structures including tents, school-in-box kits etc to ensure continuation of education during the transition period from tents to permanent buildings. An integrated approach is needed to sustain the quality of education, including food incentives, school feeding for all children, better health and hygiene, and provision of psychosocial support for children and teachers affected by the flood. Further, the livelihood of these households must be restored to protect these children from child labour.
Table 7: Required and Available Amount for Floods Emergency Response Plan Required Received Key Sectors Strategic Results resources (in %) ($ millions) Girls, boys and women have protected and Water, sanitation reliable access to sufficient, safe water and 123.82 31.4 and Hygenic sanitation and facilities Excess mortality among girls, boys and women in Health 50.83 32.1 humanitarian crisis is prevented The nutritional status of girls, boys, and women is Nutrition 27.6 65.1 protected from the effects of humanitarian crisis Girls and boys access safe and secure education Education 36.4 31.4 and critical information for their own well-being Girls and boys rights to protection from violence, Child protection 12.98 47.8 abuse and exploitation are sustained and promoted. Total 252.3 92.2 Source: UNICEF, Sept. 2010

The education cluster has been developed with the plan to construct temporary school structures to compensate for the schools that were damaged and that are not safe for children. About 461 temporary learning centres (TLS) have been developed which are benefiting 39,413 children across the country. However, the performance of the cluster is very poor; according to the damages of the flood, about $36.39 million are required, whereas the cluster has only 31.4% of this amount in hand (Table 7). The clusters require about $252.3 million for the recovery of water, sanitation and hygienic, health and education rehabilitation. However, the available amount to relevant clusters is only $92.2 million, with a shortfall of $160.8 million.

6.4.

Flood and migration

21   

The flood affected peoples have to migrate in a very emergency situation with no evacuation time in KPK and sudden stretch of water in southern Punjab and Sindh due to poor management. As shown in Table 8, about 10 million people have been displaced in affected areas across the provinces with more in Punjab and Sindh. In start, numerous temporary Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) locations have been established by the government, self-managed camps organized by communities and/or private donors at public schools and playgrounds. However, being limited capacity or poor facilities in camps, a number of families has scattered along road sides and embankments or shifted toward unaffected areas or toward their relatives in safe places.

Table 8: Province wise Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) (as of 24 Sep, 2010) Province Total Displaced persons* Number of Relief camps** Balochistan 218,000 17 KPK 651,700 825 Punjab 2,666,000 327 Sindh 4,596,000 4,196 GB & AJK 27 All 8,131,700 5392 Source: *Initial assessment by WFP, **NDMA (September 26, 2010)

The majority of affected peoples are farmers or agricultural laboures, whose lives are tied to the land. However, it is highly likely that at least one family member of the displaced may migrate to urban centres as they have no opportunities at local level with higher economic burden after the flood. It may not have serious implications for the overall level of urbanization. However, like the previous history of 2005 earthquake, if cities such as Lahore and especially Karachi witness an influx of large numbers, certainly it will stress their infrastructures and increase pollution. Unemployment and crimes can increase due to the inability of the urban labour market to adequately absorb new migrants. The government of Sindh is interested to adjust a number of rural affecteess in two major cities Karachi and Hyderabad where it has established about 108 shelter camps in which about 66,121 IDPs are residing. Their permanent settlement may have some political and ethnic implications. According to the print media, the labour-importing countries in the Middle East may consider to provide job opportunities to one family member of the flood affected households. Overseas migration is low in the severely affected districts of South Punjab and Sindh. If this opportunities is opened for the affected households, it will have a lasting effect on their well-being. 6. Policy responses: are they adequate? 16 As the flood waters have receded and the affected people have started to go back to their homes. They need support in restoring their homes and livelihoods. The most immediate needs expressed by households are cash, food and shelter, followed by non-food items (building material), medical support and clothing/blankets. The role of government is very crucial to tackle the challenges which include the restoration of livelihoods. Various department at federal, provincial and districts are working to control the disasters. However, In the context of 2010 flood, the role of disaster management in relief and rehabilitation seems to be inadequate. The Provincial Disaster Management Authorities have either not been established or are non                                                            
16

We mainly focus on government policy responses

22   

functional in the provinces. The District Disaster Management Authorities (DDMAs) are too weak to cope with any disaster due to lack of equipments and training. The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) is relying on other institutions for relief and assessment activities. The government has defined six key priorities for early recovery phase including on-form livelihoods, shelter, community restoration, education, health, restoration of infrastructure and public utilities. The ‘Watan Cards’ scheme has been launched for the rehabilitation of flood victures. Upto October 22, 2010, about 90,000 cards have been preceded with an initial instalment of Rs.20,000 per households. The government has established National Emergency Operation Center which is responsible for the transparent and equitable distribution across the affected areas. A number of clusters has been developed in various fields including agriculture (FAO), camp coordination/management (UNHCR), community restoration (UNDP), education (UNICEF/Save the children), emergency shelter (UNHCR), emergency telecommunication, health (WHO), food (WFP), information management, logistic (WFP), nutrition water, sanitation and hygienic (UNICEF) and protection (UNHCR). The aim of these clusters is to prompt the emergency relief by ensuring greater predictability, accountability and partnership. All these clusters have adopted the targeted approach. The priorities set by the government for the rehabilitation of the flood victims and the development of clusters seems to be steps in the right direction. However, the level of commitment, resources, and the actual steps taken are not adequate for the rehabilitation process. The flood affected households are in three broad categories: farm households, livestock households and non-agriculture households. The farm households need assistance in sowing the Rabi crop while the needs of the livestock and non-agriculture households, which constitute about 50 percent of the rural population, for restoration of their livelihood are different. The government has set a plan to assist the farm community for the Rabi crop sowing by providing them seeds, fertilizer and other inputs. But the apprehension is that the delay in this assistance and benefiting the influctial people at the cost of small farmers may slow the rehabilitation process or even make it less effective. Other apprehension is that the non-agriculture households would largely be ignored. These households are among the poorest rural households and they can be further socially excluded, if they are not made the integral the part of the rehabilitation process. 8. Concluding Remarks This study has carried out a preliminary analysis at the district level to assess the impact of recent flood on the poverty situation. The study has first examined the poverty situation, with its multidimensionality concept, before the flood. It has then reviewed the flood losses to determine their implications for poverty. Based on the analysis following key point have emerged. Firstly, the climate change and global warming are the major causes of the 2010 flood. Secondly, the 2010 flood has disproportionately affected the poor regions of the country – south Punjab and rural Sindh, characterised by high deprivation level, poor infrastructure and unfavourable demographic situation. Thirdly, flood has caused about US$ 10.05. billion (Rs 846 billion) in terms of damaged crops, infrastructure and public and private property. The damage to crops and infrastructure will severely affect the individuals as well as the employment, growth and export in the real sector of economy with up-turn of inflation. Fourthly, poverty estimates reveals that the flood affected districts are relatively poor and their main source of income is agriculture and livestock. The 2010 flood has caused severe damages to these two sectors. So, the recent flood has direct implication on poverty status of the household through the loss of household assets and income, determination in health status, and destruction of education and 23   

infrastructure facilities. The present analysis indicates that in the short term, 6-7 million people are likely to have pushed into poverty because of the recent natural disaster. After the 2005 earthquake, the 2010 flood is the major national disaster Pakistan has faced in five years. But no improvement has been witnessed in disaster management. There is lack of coordination among the concerned authorities to mitigate the adverse consequences of disasters. In addition to unprecedented rains and environmental degradation, the poor preparedness of the authorities has led to more damages. Although right priorities have been identified, the lack of both political commitment and resources seem to be the major obstacles in the rehabilitation process. International commitments are week as well. The government has to mobilize internal resources to rehabilitate the flood victims. International communities must actively participate in the process of rehabilitation. The proper flood management plays an important role in protecting the people. So right policies at right time are the key to avoid the possible damages. First, there is an urgent need to identify unpopulated areas where the flow of flood could be diverted in future so that the populated areas may be protected. The districts severely affected by the 2010 flood may be targeted. Second, new dams should be constructed on the one hand and on the other hand inspection and repair of old dams should be carried out before the onset of seasons causing accumulation and/or carrying of heavy volume of water (such as rainy season). These structures should be thoroughly inspected for possible weak-spots. Third, the forestation process, which helps in binding the loose soil, should be implemented at the national level. A major impact that afforestation provides is that it reduces the impact of flowing water. As water charges forward, its speed is reduced to some extent due to resistance offered by trees. Fourth, the sea-beaches may be widened, so that they can absorb the impact of flood-waters. Finally the conversion of the flood-prone areas into wetlands, where, inhabitation is not allowed, is required to prevent the construction of permanent structures in these areas.

24   

Reference: Cheema, I. A. (2010) Tracing the Spatial Dimensions of Poverty, Working Paper 2010-02, Oxford Policy Management, UK Government of Pakistan (2010), Pakistan 2008 MOUZA Statistics (settled Areas), Ministry of Economic Affairs and Statistics/ Statistics Division/ Agriculture Census Organization Government of Pakistan (2010) Pakistan Economic Survey 2009-10. Ministry of Finance Islamabad Government of Pakistan (2009) Pakistan Economic Survey 2008-09. Ministry of Finance Islamabad Government of Pakistan, 2000 Agriculture Census. Government of Pakistan, various issues, Pakistan Integrated Household Survey (PIHS), Federal Bureau of Statistics, Islamabad. Government of Pakistan, various issues, Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement (PSLM) Survey, Federal Bureau of Statistics, Islamabad. Jamal, H. (2006) Does Inequality Matter for Poverty Reduction? Evidence from Pakistan’s Poverty Trends. The Pakistan Development Review, vol. 45(3), pp. 439-459 Jamal, H. Khan, A. J. Toor, I. A. and Amir, N. (2003) Mapping the Spatial Deprivation of Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, vol. 42(2), pp. 91-111 Jamal, H. (2007) Updating poverty and inequality estimates: 2005 Panorama. SPDC Research Report No. 69, Social Policy and Development Centre, Karachi. Khan, H. Inamullah, E. and Shams, K. (2007) Population, environment and poverty in Pakistan: linkages and empirical evidence, Environment, Development and Sustainability, vol. 11(2) NDMA (2010), National Disaster Management Authority, http://ndma.gov.pk/ NDMA (2007), National Disaster Risk Management Framework Pakistan. PARC (2010), “Assessment of 2010 Flood Impacts in Pakistan: Extent and Coverage of Impacts and Adaptation Strategy”, Pakistan Agricultural Research Council Suryahadi A., and S. Sumarto (2001), “The Chronic Poor, the Transient Poor, and the Vulnerbale in Indonesia before and after the Crisis”, Working Paper, Jakarti; Smeru. WFP (2010), “Pakistan flood impact assessment”, World Food Program. WHO (a) Weekly Epidemiological http://www.whopak.org/idps/index.asp Bulletins, government of Pakistan and WHO.

WHO (b) “Pakistan Health Cluster no. 19”, World Health Organization, September, 28, 2010 http://www.whopak.org/idps/documents/bulletins/Health%20Cluster%20Bulletin%20No%2019Final.pdf UNICEF (September 2010), http://www.unicef.org/pakistan/

25   

Appendix Appendix table 1: A Comparative Analysis of the current Flood with Recent World Disasters Pakistan Flood* (Aug. 2010) Population affected affected area(sq km) Death Injured House damaged 20,184,550 132,000 1961 2,995 1,910,439 Haiti Earthquake (Jan. 2010) 3,200,000 13,226 230,000 300,000 250,000 Nargis Cyclone Myanmar (May 2008) 2,420,000 23,500 84,537 19,359 450,000 Katrina Cyclone USA (Aug. 2005) 500,000 N.A 1,836 N.A. 200,000 Earthquake Pakistan (Oct. 2005) 3,500,000 30,000 73,338 128,309 600,152 Tsunami Indian Ocean Basin (Dec. 2004) 2,273,723 N.A 238,000 125,000 N.A

* Figures based on initial assessments, NDMA Post Nargis Joint Assessment report, July 2008, prepared by ASEAN Earthquake 8/10, Learning From Pakistan’s Experience, prepared by the NDMA, Oct 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina, http://www.emdat.be/search‐details‐disaster‐list, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake_and_tsunami,

Appendix table 2: Historical Flood Damages In Pakistan Prior to Current Flood 2010 Period Value of Damaged (Rs million) Death Village Affected 26,107 37,308 1,000 20,060 15,379 99,854 No. of Floods 3 3 1 2 6 15

1950-59 25,596 2,433 1970-79 250,677 1,292 1980-89 25,630 508 1990-99 78,278 1,599 2000-2008* 5,640 1,956 Total 385,785 7,788 * in 2000-2008, the damages of 3 floods has not been reported

26   

Appendix Table 3: Summary of Damages and Losses (As of 02 Oct. 2010) Province Area Affected Deaths Injured (Sq.km) 322 48 98 Baluchistan KPK* Punjab Sindh AJK G-B Grand Total N/A 14,047 30,132 1,800 7,500 132,000 1,156 110 393 71 183 1,961 1,198 350 1,202 87 60 2,995 Houses Damaged 75,261 200,799 509,814 1,114,629 7,106 2,830 1,910,439 Total Affected Districts 12 24 11 17 7 7 78 Population Affected (000) 700 3,800 8,200 7,184.6 200 100 20,184.6 Cropped area Cattle affected head (Hectares) 255,237 55,501 205,347 774,610 1,056,758 30,820 3,635 2,326,407 52,750 3,659 262,264 288 4,669 379,131

* including FATA,

Source: NDMA 17

                                                            
17

 http://www.pakistanfloods.pk/en/damage/summary-of-damages 

27   

Appendix Table 4: Cropped area affected and cattle head lost by districts Cotton Sugar cane Cropped Area Loss Area Loss Area Cattle (000 Damage (mill. (000 Damage (million Name of Affected Head (Acres) Ha) Factor bale) Ha) Factor tons) District Lost Mianwali 460,512 345 9.6 1 0.04 1.4 0.8 0.1 Layyah 83,000 30 17.7 1 0.05 4.4 0.8 0.2 Muzaffar garh 304,000 2,127 124 1 0.35 22.5 0.8 0.9 DG Khan 24,760 27 28.8 1 0.1 1.1 0.8 0 Rajanpur 320,604 207 107.1 1 0.42 9.8 0.8 0.5 RY Khan 117,379 725 22.9 1 0.1 7.5 0.8 0.2 Khushab Bhakkar Jhang Multan Sargodha Total of Punjab Shikarpur Sukkur Ghotki Jacobabad Khairpur Qambar Shahdadkot Dadu Thatta Kashmore Jamshoro Larkana Naushehro feroze 59,710 27,202 102,256 45,015 167,518 1,711,956 110,189 102,300 105,157 687,000 46,055 497,380 99,190 177,800 400,124 9,850 25,028 52,600 136 11 11 17 23 3,659 838 124,448 41,778 615 32,290 44,039 533 U.S 17,500 197 R.A 3.3 2.6 17.3 0.5 13.7 0 0.8 0.2 0 0 0 0.1 0.2 0 0

Rice Area (000 Ha) 1.8 3.6 19 12.1 9.8 2.1 13.9 0.5 28.6 2.1 11.6 Loss (000 tons) 2.9 6.6 36.1 27.8 20 3.9 0 0 9.9 0 0 Area (000 Ha) 5.8 12.1 45.8 7.3 18.9 4.6 18.5 7.6 61.1 9.7 35

Fodders Production Loss (000 tons) 0.05 0.14 0.59 0.1 0.23 0.06 0 0.08 0.45 0 0

Damage Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0.2 0 0

Damage Factor 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0 0.8 0.4 0 0

3.7 30.3 26.3 2.1

1 0.1 0 0

0.01 0.01 0 0

29.6 79.8 0 14.7

0.75 0.75 0 0.75

0.1 0.3 0 0.1

13.3 1.6 4 0 4

0.8 0.8 0.8 0 0.8

0.273 0.07 0.183 0 0.185

109.7 7.4 16.1 66.3 1.7 0 73.7 68.2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

383 16 32 272 5 0 275 190

4.4 10.7 2.7 7.6 0 13.4 6

0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0 0.8 0.8

0.11 0.27 0.05 0.13 0 0.27 0.11

14.7 0.9

0.5 0

0 0

4.8 29.4

0.5 0.8

0.112 1.205

4.9 11.9

0.75 0.5

0 0 5.2 0.8 0.149

160.3 1.4

1 0

626 4

22.8 3.5

0.8 0

0.49 0

1   

S. Benazirabad Hyderabad Matiari T.M. Khan Total DI Khan Peshawar Lower Dir Tank Nowshera Charsada Swat Kohistan Dir Upper Shangla Lakki Marwat Bannu Abbottabad Haripur Battagram Mardan Swabi Karak Kohat Hangu Malakand Buner Chitral Mansera Mehmand Agency Total of KPK Gilgit

57,170 R.A 63,500 20,160 2,453,503 180252 92797 774 49915 40725 34470 25000 -

R.A R.A 26 R.A 262,264 120

23.2 3.6

0.5 0.5

0.1 0

9.7 4.3

0 0.5

0 0.121

1.3 1.3

0 1

4 4

6.8 1.9

0 0.8

0 0.04

9.7

0.6

0.2

5.3

1

13.7

11.4

0.8

0.23

33559 14908 2720 20

2 3.7 0

0.5 0.8 0.5

0.1 0.1 0

0 0 0.3

1 1 1

0 0 0.8

1.6 0.5

0 0

0 0

0

0.5

0

89232 1500 700 100 3750 35000 3747 150

35 135 141 361 8 6 302 26 2 227 180

0

0.5

0

4.6

0

0.5

0

0

0.5

0

1953 560065 2,041 52750 112

2   

Skardu Diamer Ghizar Ghanche Astore Hunza Nagar Total of GB Naseer Abad Jafarabad

1,144 1,699 1,783 776 901 639 8,983 349,400

1,213 1,558 1,500 210 50 26 4,669 N.A N.A 2.5 1 0.006 38.9 85.4 1 1 132.4 290.2 3.1 0.8 0.07

Musa Khel N.A N.A Qilla Saifulla N.A N.A Loralai N.A N.A Sibi 64,000 15031 Barkhan 4,205 N.A Kachhi 152,100 N.A Jhal Magsi 61,000 N.A Total N.A 630,705 Total of AJK 288 76,157 GRAND TOTAL 5,441,369 338,373 Note: It not include about 6 million poultry lost Source: NDMA, PARC, 2010

3   

Appendix Table-5: Province-wise Distribution of Households by various Damages in the Flooded Areas (in %) GB Damage of crops Mean Area land holding (acres) Percentage of lost Damages of livestock (%) Mean Cows before flood Mean Cows after flood Cows Damages (%) Mean Buffaloes before flood Mean Buffaloes after flood Buffaloes Damages (%) Mean sheep/goat before flood Mean sheep/goat after flood Sheep Damages (%) Mean Poultry before flood Mean Poultry after flood Poultry Damages (%) Damage of Houses (in %) Not damaged Lightly damaged Heavily damaged Completely destroyed Status of Food Stock (%) No food stock <1 week 1-2 week 2-4 week *by median approach 2.1 76 2.4 1.9 24 0.4 0.4 7 10.3 5.2 49 9 2 78 14.1 20.2 2 62.6 KPK 6.3 45 0.7 0.4 39 0.5 0.4 31 0.5 0.4 26 3.3 1 71 26.5 36.7 21.1 15.7 Punjab 6.9 87 2.2 1.8 20 1.3 0.9 25 3 2.4 21 4.9 1.6 68 6.4 33.6 19.1 39 Sindh 16.1 95 3.2 1.1 66 2.7 1.2 56 4.1 1.5 65 3.9 0.7 83 1.1 10.8 19.4 62.9 70 14 5 5 All 9.1 (5)* 88 2.2 1.4 38 1.5 0.9 40 3.1 1.9 39 4.5 1.3 72 9.1 27.7 18.9 41.8 55 22 9 10

80 35 54 11 49 17 3 12 10 6 3 15 Source: Rapid Assessment by WFP (2010)

Appendix Table-6: Priority diseases reported during July 29, 2010 – October 1, 2010) Acute Bloody ARI Suspected Skin Diseases Others Diarrhea Diarrhea Malaria Diseases Week 31 25,689 1,449 25,335 3,954 36,383 101,742 Week 32 94288 4566 92,134 17,348 115,080 521,937 Week 33 182,548 7,907 185,546 27,453 246,959 615,499 Week 34 199,607 11,024 217,071 45,542 296,441 654,575 Week 35 138,644 10,839 187,226 45,652 202,630 468,836 Week 36 68,909 9,228 96,607 40,441 92,039 251,782 Week 37 57,072 6,705 69,969 32,692 56,844 191,155 Week 38 64,925 6,411 89,949 42,759 60,704 221,628 Week 39 54,404 5,896 81,583 36,514 57,020 198,473 Source: WHO (a)

Total consultation 194,552 845,353 1,265,912 1,424,260 1,053,827 559,006 414,437 486,376 433,890

1