Publication: Toward an Eco-Industrial Park Framework in Punjab: Regulatory and Institutional Strengthening for Industrial Estates
Abstract
The aim of this report is to provide the Government of Punjab with a preliminary overview of opportunities and obstacles for the adoption of the EIP Framework by industrial estates (IEs) in Punjab, based on the World Bank Group's experience with emerging economies in implementation of the EIP Framework, as well as the results from research on policy regimes and industrial practices in Punjab. As part of this analysis, Sundar Industrial Estate (SIE) has been selected to pilot the high-level technical analysis on the environmental, social, and economic areas to improve, to operationalize the EIP Framework. Results and recommendations in this report are delivered as part of the broader support of the World Bank Group to the government through the Punjab Green Development Program (P165388). In a 2014 assessment of environmental management for Pakistan's industrial growth, the main findings and recommendations suggest that "to strengthen Pakistan’s industrial growth and industrial estates, the government must provide: (i) sectoral policies that support the greening of Pakistan's industrial sector to enhance international competitiveness; (ii) upgraded trade facilitation and sustainable infrastructure (particularly transport and energy infrastructure) to address some of the spatial aspects of industrialization; and (iii) strong institutions for effective industrialization initiatives, including those for small and medium enterprises." As IEs can play a pivotal role in industrial development, it is expected that the EIP Framework will help achieve the vision of Punjab's Growth Strategy 2023 to create "a globally connected and competitive, equitable, culturally vibrant and technologically advanced Punjab with sustainable economic growth driven through a dynamic private sector, an efficient public sector, rich and productive human capital and, a regionally equalized development footprint by 2023."
Link to Data Set
Citation
“World Bank. 2021. Toward an Eco-Industrial Park Framework in Punjab: Regulatory and Institutional Strengthening for Industrial Estates. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/36215 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Enhancing China’s Regulatory Framework for Eco-Industrial Parks(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2019-04-01)China has impressed the world with its rapid economic growth over the past four decades, during which time it has increased its real income per capita by more than 25 times. However, the attendant environmental costs have also been significant, jeopardizing economic and social gains from growth. To move toward sustainable development and reduce the environmental impact of further economic growth, the Chinese government has started to prioritize green development and the building of an ecological civilization. China’s 13th Five-Year Plan (2016−2020) has upgraded the building of the ecological civilization to the level of national strategy — a policy target of top priority.According to the Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE), industrial parks (IPs) are the key source of industrial production and all new industrial projects are required to be operated within industrial parks (Zhang 2018). The growing concentration of industrial activities within IPs suggests that an increasing proportion of industrial pollution will be produced in IPs. Thus, promoting green development of IPs will be vital for the achievement of China’s and the world’s sustainable development goals.Effective management of IPs toward green development requires a well-functioning regulatory framework to provide standards, requirements, guidelines, and robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. Although China does not have a specific IP management law, a comprehensive regulatory framework is in place, covering different legislative levels including (from top to bottom in terms of their importance) laws, regulations, national policies, and standards and indicators. This regulatory framework covers multiple aspects of IP management, including requirements concerning the economic and environmental performances of IPs.This report conducts a comparative analysis between the Chinese green standards and the EIP Framework across all four dimensions—park management and economic, social, and environmental performance— to identify differences and share policy recommendations for further improvements of the Chinese standards.Publication An International Framework for Eco-Industrial Parks, Version 2.0(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021-01)The aim of this publication is to provide an international framework (the "framework") which defines the basic requirements and performance criteria needed for an industrial park to qualify as an Eco-Industrial Park (EIP). It summarizes the areas in which the international organizations that have authored this framework — the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), the World Bank Group, and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH — have aligned to define an Eco-Industrial Park (EIP). The purpose of this publication is three-fold, namely: (i) to assist stakeholders to develop and transition to EIPs; (ii) to consistently engage with, encourage, and recognize EIPs; and (iii) to improve the performance, sustainability and inclusiveness of the industrial sector and move toward an international standard on EIPs. UNIDO, the World Bank Group, and GIZ are supporting governments and industrial park practitioners to develop EIPs in different countries and contexts. EIPs can be defined as industrial areas that promote cross-industry and community collaboration for common benefits related to economic, social and environmental performance. These goals are incorporated into the siting, planning, management, and operations of EIPs.Industrial parks are known by different names, including: industrial areas, industrial zones, industrial investment regions, special economic zones, and industrial corridors, and they are planned and developed for industrial activities and associated commercial and infrastructure services. The concentration of economic activities in industrial parks require that they are sustainable. There are currently a number of tools and processes which assist governments and industrial park stakeholders to implement inclusive and sustainable industrial development. However, a consolidated and targeted framework for EIPs is largely lacking at the international level. Increasingly, countries and industrial park stakeholders request ‘standards’ or benchmarks for pursuing sustainability as envisioned by EIPs. An innovative approach to such requests is to set "prerequisites" or "sustainability performance requirements" 1 for industrial parks, covering regulatory compliance and socio-economic, environmental, and management standards. These standards provide benchmarks for assessing existing industrial parks, retrofitting existing parks, or planning new EIPs. The EIP Framework presented in this document contains these prerequisites and performance requirements, which are outlined in tables in Section 4. These are international and inclusive in scope, and are relevant to all industrial parks, irrespective of what they are called. They are also relevant to stakeholders in the private and public sectors in which these industrial parks are located. The EIP Framework can inform stakeholder networks, and be used by UNIDO, the World Bank Group and GIZ to promote EIPs globally. Legislation by national governments of the regulations, activities and structures governing industrial parks varies considerably across the world, and so the framework recognizes the need to consider local contexts and sensitivities when applying these requirements.Publication An International Framework for Eco-Industrial Parks(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2017-12)The aim of this publication is to provide an international framework (the “Framework”) with the minimum requirements and performance expectations as to how an industrial park can become an Eco-Industrial Park (EIP). It summarizes the key areas in which the three international organizations that have driven the development of this framework — including the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), the World Bank Group, and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ) — have aligned regarding what constitutes an Eco-Industrial Park (EIP). The International Framework for Eco-Industrial Parks will guide policymakers and practitioners on the critical elements that will help both governments and the private sector work together in establishing economically, socially and environmentally sustainable eco-industrial parks.Publication A Practitioner's Handbook for Eco-Industrial Parks(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2019-03)The Eco-Industrial Park (EIP) Practitioner's Handbook is a practical, step-by-step guide that takes stakeholders through the entire process of operationalizing the International EIP Framework. It is composed of three sections. Section one highlights ways in which the government and other relevant stakeholders can support industrial park developers and operators in adopting the International EIP Framework through institutional, financial and technical support. It presents a detailed explanation of the four key steps, as well as a range of activities involved in developing and implementing a national-level EIP initiative. Section two lays out four key steps and action items involved in implementing the International EIP Framework. Section three provides a guideline on how to identify and actively create industrial symbiosis networks-an important strategy for promoting EIPs and operationalizing the International EIP Framework.Publication A Practitioner's Handbook for Eco-Industrial Parks(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2018-09)The EIP Practitioner’s Handbook [or “the Handbook”] is a practical, step-by-step guide that takes stakeholders through the entire process of operationalizing the International EIP Framework. It addresses a wide range of practitioners including industrial park operators; firms located in industrial parks; industrial park planners and developers; decision makers; governmental officials and regulators at the central, provincial and local levels; financing bodies; and funding agencies, donor and international development institutions supporting client governments in designing policy frameworks and facilitating the promotion of EIPs. The Handbook is intended to help practitioners operationalize the International EIP Framework at the national and /or park level, as well as specific EIP performance requirements set in the Framework.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.