"You are right in saying that our elite has contributed to the problems of this country. But remember that whatever progress we have made has also come from our leaders. Primarily the problem has been that our leadership came either from the military, from the politicians, from the bureaucrats, or a combination of these three"
Ali Tauqeer Sheikh has been the National Programme Director of LEAD Pakistan (Leadership for Environment and Development) since its inception. He brought the programme to Islamabad in 1995, at a time when Pakistan was about to be declared a terrorist State.
A senior research fellow at Rockefeller Foundation, New York, and a PhD student in International Relations, Sheikh worked hard to convince reluctant donors for the need for introducing such a programme in the country.
LEAD, to date, has trained over a hundred Pakistani professionals in areas of environment and sustainable development. Sheikh believes, this network of leaders (which expands after every two years) could be an agent of change for better environment and sustainable development in Pakistan.
In a recent interview with Political Economy Sheikh talks about various aspects of leadership, development and environment.
Ali Tauqeer Sheikh
Question: Experts believe the 10 years between the Earth Summit and the Johannesburg Conference were a new "lost decade". Do you agree?
It wasn't a 'lost decade'! It has been a very solid decade in terms of streamlining the environmental agenda around the globe, setting up new institutions and legislating on a number of important environmental laws. Despite this, the challenge is immense. There could be further environmental degradation but a good ground has so far been covered in terms of 'systematic approaches' to the issue.
Question: How did Pakistan fare during this period?
Environment and Sustainable Development are much understood terms now and are considered to be in everyone's interest. New institutions, laws, policies, educational courses, etc have been introduced, but a lot is still ahead of us to achieve in these areas.
Question: But where do we see the implementation? The state of our environment is abominable!
Pakistan's crisis of governance is very deep. Successive governments have struggled with their own survival. Policy responses have been fragmented-many times shortsighted and implemented half-heartedly. Governments, in this country, have traditionally failed to police their own regulations. This is a serious systemic problem, which is surely not at the top of the present government's agenda.
Question: You are a great proponent of environmental justice. But the governments in this country have been denying even human justice. Aren't your efforts, in such a situation, like casting pearls before swine?
Two wrongs cannot make one right! Environmental justice is the question of equity, fairness to the poor and marginalised resources allocation and their utilisation without usurping future generations' rights. We need to draw a new social contract whereby the development paradigms are linked with the imperatives of environment. If we succeeded in doing that, we will start moving to environmental justice, which is really the 'soul' of a society.
Question: The WEHAB targets (water, energy, health, agriculture and bio-diversity) set at Johannesburg last year give an impression as if streams of milk and honey would start flowing in the Third World if they were implemented. Please comment.
The Summit did give some targets. Most environmentalists will dismiss them as very modest and inconsequential. Their concern actually is the rate of depletion of resources, which is much faster than the deadline to meet the targets. But having a global consensus, even on modest targets, in my view was an accomplishment.
In the given circumstances, when the US stayed out of the Summit, it could not have delivered better. The consensus has emerged amongst very diverse stakeholders. It depends on us to what extent we take the targets seriously. If Pakistan has to go back in 10-year time and say: 'Yes, we honour our commitment,' then we will need to move now and have action-oriented policies and allocations.
Question: What would be the impact of US-Iraq conflict on the future of environment and sustainable development?
After the end of the Cold War, we thought that humanity would be able to focus on the sustainable development agenda. But the US' overly assertive policies distracted us from this agenda. The environmental cost for such conflicts is tremendously huge.
Environmental cost for Iraq's invasion on Kuwait was around $200bn. Many rich countries in the region are still paying for it. Another war of this sort will dwindle the resources reserved for education, health, infrastructure, and other very important issues that Sustainable Development advocates. It will also isolate the US from global environmental movement, such as the follow-up on Kyoto Protocol.
Question: Your network of 'leaders' is a miniscule minority of elite that is widely perceived to be responsible for Pakistan's conundrums. How committed is it for the true cause of environment and sustainable development?
Yes, you are right. These associates and fellows are the 'intellectual elite' of this country. They are the 'activist elite'. People like these are the future of this country. They are fortunate to have undergone our training. Any society's future will hinge on the quality of leaders it produces. All we have done in the last 10 years is to invest in the quality of leaders this nation needs to have in future.
I am not talking about the political leaders alone. I am talking about the leadership that needs to come from civil society and NGOs, different corridors of government, business and industry, corporate sector, media and academia, and others. Solutions to our problems will inevitably come from within the society.
In the coming years, it will be our leaders who will need to offer solutions. Yes, you are right in saying that our elite has contributed to the problems of this country. But remember that whatever progress we have made has also come from our leaders.
Primarily the problem has been that our leadership came either from the military, from the politicians, or from bureaucrats or a combination of these three. What LEAD has tried to provide is a new generation of leaders drawn from various sectors so that whenever we are able to seriously address our sustainable development concerns, there are people who are properly equipped in terms of skills, knowledge and attitude to resolve these challenges.
Question: What tools of assessment have you used to ascertain the performance of your "leaders"?
There have been several ways for us to see if we are on the right track in terms of investing in people. Yes, we do see them in action. We do see them contributing in various layers and tiers of society and we are very proud of them.
Question: Any examples?
Numerous examples! I can give you instances where our people in industry, government, NGOs, media and academia, forged partnership at their own; conceived, undertook and sustained change for the better. I can cite you many examples whereby they stood up for the interests of the marginalised and the poor. They favoured decisions that helped us address most of the problems-environmental pollution, ground water contamination, advocacy on larger dams, and construction of social infrastructure. Remember this is a process-formation of social capital-that LEAD has undertaken.
Question: What is your vision of leadership?
Leadership in sustainable development is a departure from Bonapartism-man on the horseback, with all centralised powers. We are suggesting that leadership is driven by values, highest ethical and professional standards and it believes in consensus, understanding and protecting interest of various stakeholders and finding the common ground.
Unless there is a consensus on a decision, there is no guarantee of its implementation. This is a globally proven paradigm. We are seeing that leaders could be at the grassroots level and at the helm of an institution. The one who is most effective in striking a balance between the needs and available resources is the ideal leader.
Question: Would you like to single out a few such leaders?
The list is very long and one does not need to worship heroes. Leaders, like all human beings, have to be imperfect. When we talk about leaders we talk about human beings, not prophets. The people that have impressed me most are those who are most human-who make as many mistakes as anybody else, but at the same time they are committed to highest ethical values and make decisions in consultation with others based on a dialogue.
Question: What is the difference between a 'leader' and a 'manager'?
Leadership is beyond management. Leadership is about future vision and ethical values. Management is essentially efficiency and implementation of a particular policy. Creating a consensus that is driven by future having all the stakeholders on board, are the characteristics of a leader. A manager may have the characteristics of a good leader, but a good leader may not necessarily have the characteristics of a good manager.
Question: Is General Pervez Musharraf a leader or a manager?
I have not observed Musharraf very closely. But whatever I see in the newspapers, I would say: "Neither!" A good manager will have the characteristics of a chief executive-to manage all the resources efficiently and prudently within the given timeframe. Whereas Musharraf has kept his promise of holding elections, but we don't see him acting as chief executive of a corporation, in terms of brining resource-efficiency. The biggest resource of this country is its people. He has not harnessed their energies to build this country. As a leader, he has surely outmaneuvered many of his opponents, but I don't see any vision coming from his activities.
Question: What vision of leadership are you trying to sell to the corporate world?
Sustainable development encompasses all spheres of the society-production, consumption and the values that anchor primarily these two activities. Nothing is a greater stress for economy or sustainable development than large lifestyles. Lifestyles are determined by the variety in the range of things we have around us to consume. As our purchasing power increases, we consume more and more.
The question is, those who conduct business of manufacturing, can they move towards a more responsible stewardship of their products. Instead of relying on more damaging and environmentally degrading raw materials, can they go for safer and cleaner productions and use technologies that are less polluting? Those who emit less and those who commit less affluence-is an ideal target many corporations in the world have adopted.
Many corporations around us are richer than the GoP and it is only ethical to accept them as socially responsible like good citizens of society. It is very important for them to play a leadership role in taking charge of the communities and areas they work in. And work in partnership with them as a socially responsible citizen. In the old paradigm of development, we are too used to seeing villains all around us. Sometimes, government is villain, sometimes NGOs or universities. Often times, businessman is seen as villain. They all are citizens of this country. It is equally their responsibility to ensure that we move towards more sustainable consumption patterns, production, and technologies
Question: Which school of thought you espouse for Corporate Social Responsibility? Should it remain a voluntary preserve of the companies, or should there be a legislation to force them to report on their social and environmental performance?
How many laws have we been able to enforce? If we put too much on corporate governance, there may be only 'governance' issues and no 'corporate' issues. Government has no capacity to police either-multinationals or the small and medium enterprises (SMEs). One should expect from multinationals to adhere to not only the national laws but sometimes even with the higher standards of their mother countries. At this level, people of Pakistan should have higher expectations from them.
The large component of Pakistan's economic activity is the SMEs that range from a very small, illiterate entrepreneurs to people who are extremely enterprising and sometimes very well educated. And certainly the expectation level needs to be tempered with realities on the ground. Therefore, I don't see any successful legislation that can make it mandatory. We will have to favour the voluntary compliance of standards during the initial stage.
![shehzad](javascript:openWin("http://www.sikhspectrum.com/images/shehzad.jpg"))
![](javascript:openWin("http://www.sikhspectrum.com/042003/images/ali.jpg"))