PCEF Notes from Meeting of 2 March 2009

Agenda

1. Report on previous work
2. Reports and studies
   - NMT
   - DC Rules
   - Sludge disposal (new, to be studied)
3. Environment Status Report 2009

Notes

1. Report on Previous Work The minutes of the last meeting on 13 June 2008 were circulated. As per the last meeting, the Schools group has been meeting with SSA and School Ed Dept meetings, and the DC Rules group work has been integrated into DP Steering Committee. The PCEF was to focus on the ESR; frameworks had been developed by Prof Aneeta Benninger (for ward-level analysis), water, biodiversity, waste management in consultation with Dr Ajay Ojha; limited incorporation was possible due to inadequate of time and missing data; process is to be strengthened in 2009
2. Cycle Track and Footpath Designs
   a) Shri Ranjit Gadgil reported on a rapid assessment carried out of the design of the cycle track implemented on Sinhagad Road, which is good, but there are issues that are documented at http://government.wikia.com/wiki/Cyclists%27_Issues
   b) The Municipal Commissioner (MC) suggested that on roads which are not under JNNURM one could create cycle tracks quickly by using a curb stone separator. Cycle track would be at same level as the road and will be tarred surface. He asked Shri Bhosekar of Aundh ward to undertake such a cycle track on Aundh road (Raj Bhavan road - from University Circle to Bremen chowk). Shri Bhosekar informed that this would not be possible from the Ward maintenance budget since cost is likely to be high (2.6 km stretch) and would give a cost estimate for the said project.
   c) In each ward, approximately 5 km of footpaths are being built/ repaired; RWAs, Mohalla Committees can help in assessing the quality of the work done. Of special interest is the changeover (slope) at property access that should be checked by RWAs and citizens
   d) The list of roads where the footpath is to be made walk-able is available at http://government.wikia.com/wiki/N.M.T(Non-Motorized_Cell)#Tasks_Ahead_for_the_N.M.T_Cell The reports may be uploaded by the Mohalla Committees on the wiki or given to the NMT Cell
   e) Shri Satish Khot suggested that the Grievance Redress System be used for NMT related complaints; MC identified Mr Latkar as the officer in charge to address the complaints for NMT
   f) Shri Satish Khot suggested that the cycle track network and the footpath assessment exercise (and tools for the same) could be publicized in print form and not only on the wiki in order to reach many more citizens
3. Reaching organic fertilizer from Sewage Treatment Plants Sludge and organic MSW into Peri-urban Farmers
   a) MC suggested that PCEF should investigate the possibility of conversion of STP sludge into organic fertilizer and the mechanism of reaching it to farmers in the peri-urban areas of Pune and linking the whole initiative to organic farming networks who could help in monitoring the quality of the fertilizer and its regular availability
   b) Shri VG Kulkarni, Dev Engineer in charge of STP is to be the PMC contact for this; he is currently on leave; CEE would follow up on this task once Shri Kulkarni is back and obtain basic information regarding STP location-wise sludge production, quality etc. Further studies with students from Pune Univ/ other institutes would be done to work out the economics, hold consultations with farmers and related NGOs etc.
4. DC Rules
   Ms Anagha Paranjape reported on the discussions on the DC Rules group. An analysis of rules of other cities has been done; an Environmental Planning and Mgt chapter to be added to the DC Rules, based on Pune’s ecohousing policy (rainwater harvesting, SWM, noise and dust mgt on construction site). A presentation on the work done thus far is to be presented and discussed at the DP Steering Committee meeting, whenever next organized.
5. Environment Status Report
   a) Background: At the first meeting of the PCEF in 2007, it had been decided that the citizens groups and NGOs would help strengthen the process of development and use of the ESR. The current system of tendering of the ESR has meant that the report content and quality changes from year to year. The lack of mechanisms for participation in the process has also meant that the ESR is not used by citizens for ward level monitoring of the city environment. It was felt that this year another arrangement may be tried out in which citizens' groups could also participate/input.
   b) Prof Aneeta Benninger described the rationale for the ESR, as envisaged in the 74th CAA, and that the electoral ward level status should be reflected in the ESR; the data already available with the Ward Offices has to be compiled and analyzed so as to provide a picture of what improvements are needed in various wards; specific projects could then be budgeted by the prabhag samitis
   c) The first task is the preparation of the framework of the ESR, including information reporting, analysis, consultation process and cycle of data collection, analysis, recommendations, programme implementation review, etc. This may include the ward-level analysis suggested by Prof Aneeta Benninger, a consideration of the KPI work of Janwani, the Standardized Service Level Benchmarks initiative under the JnNURM, the Strategic Environment Assessment work being done as part of the Sustainable City Plan with Sida, the CEROI indicators (www.ceroi.net), actions to be taken by cities under the Kyoto Protocol and analysis of the past ESRs.
   d) The framework is to be drawn up by several participants who volunteered to do the same (Shri Sharad Mahajan, Ms Zigisha Mhaskar, Ms Anagha Paranjape, Shri Ranjit Gadgil, Shri Avinash Madhale, Ms Neha Ambastha, Ms Sanskriti Menon), in consultation with Shri Bhosekar and with Shri Mangesh Dighe and Shri Vikram Jadhavar (PMC Environment Dept); Sanskriti would also check with Ms Tasneem Balasinorwala about the possibility of her involvement in developing the framework
   e) The framework would be placed before the entire PCEF again in the first week of April, and once finalized, Department heads, Ward Officers etc. would be requested to give the necessary information; NGOs and academic institutes would also be requested to share any studies relevant to the ESR
   f) A team would then help with data analysis and writing of chapters, which would again be circulated as a draft, and Shri Satish Khot volunteered to circulate it among citizens' forums such as mohalla samitis, and then finalized for translation and production and placing before GB by PMC Environment Dept
   g) Further, after acceptance by GB, the main recommendations for each ward would be sent to the Prabhag Samiti by the PMC Environment Dept for consideration in the ward level planning and budgets subsequently
   h) Shri Sharad Mahajan offered to give various maps without any charge
   i) Shri Ashish Kothari suggested that if time is short, then a more practical approach be taken by concentrating on three or four areas that would be possible
   j) Shri Sharad Mahajan also suggested that July 31st should be sacrosanct and if electoral ward-wise report is not possible, then an aggregate ESR as per previous years should still be tabled on the due date
   k) The Commissioner said that a diffuse group such as PCEF will not be able to work unless someone agrees to anchor the activity. Janwani's name was suggested and was agreed to by MC and Ranjit Gadgil, though the PCEF would be mainly responsible for finalizing the framework for the ESR based on suggestions of all stakeholders.
   l) PMC (the Environment Dept.) would be responsible for the collection of the data and the Commissioner asked Mr. Devanikar, Addl Commissioner (Gen), to ensure that all wards and HoDs comply.
   m) It was further discussed that the actual production of the ESR (printing) could be tendered, however Sharad Mahajan suggested that PMC has in-house printing facility, and should do it. A final decision can be made by the PMC and as such does not impact the work of PCEF/Janwani.
   n) Sanskriti said that the work by PCEF/Janwani may involve some costs such as data entry, photocopies, printing of draft copies (limited) and possibly honorarium to be given to sector experts who agree to assist in the making or evaluation of the framework. The Commissioner agreed that any actual costs to Janwani could be reimbursed, or paid directly by PMC
   o) No tender has been issued for the creation of the ESR thus far and with this arrangement it was decided that it would not be needed. The idea that PMC would develop the ESR in-house and that the Environment Dept be strengthened was welcomed by everyone. The ESR would be a PMC product, but guided in this manner by the PCEF, which group effort would be anchored by Janwani
6. Update on DP Steering Committee Meeting
   Shri Aniruddha Pawaskar, Dy CE reported that the next DP Steering Committee is to be held shortly. MC suggested that the agenda should include:
   a) Presentations by the commissioned agencies and groups for ELU, DC Rules, Socio-economic and Demography studies, focusing on the important findings pertinent for the DP revision process
   b) Possibility of appointment of a City Architect as part of the DP Cell, as suggested by Prof Aneeta Benninger
   c) Focus on rules for redevelopment and renewal as suggested by Prof Aneeta Benninger
   d) Heritage conservation strategies
7. Environment Impact Assessment of Large Projects
   a) Shri Ranjit Gadgil initiated a discussion on the possibility of conducting Environment Impact Assessments (EIA) of large projects undertaken by the PMC.
   b) MC informed that the MoEF has a new notification for EIAs to be conducted (2009, available at http://envfor.nic.in/legis/legis.html#H)
   c) It was decided that the following should be incorporated into the contracting and tendering procedures of the PMC:
   a. That EIAs be done for green fields projects worth more than 50 crore to be taken up by PMC such as 100 feet rd, 80 ft road, bridges, ring road, STPs etc, and esp under the 23 villages DP
   b. Cost-Benefit analysis and Environment Damage Mitigation Plan (EDMP) to be incorporated into works in already built areas, retrofitting of existing infrastructure and projects currently underway
   d) The PMC Environment Cell should anchor this effort and make the ToRs for EIA, BC analysis , EDMP for new projects now being tendered and in the future, by listing out all the proposed projects over 50 crore – Shri Mangesh Dighe to identify 5-7 such projects of different kinds, roads, bridges, STP etc
   e) The ESR framework should include reporting on the EIAs done each year
   
   

Participants

1. Adv.Bhagyashree Alate ,SLA
2. Anagha Paranjape Purohit,BN College of Architecture
3. Anantrao Katkar ,A.E. Sahakar Nagar
4. Aneeta Benninger,CDSA
5. Anil Jagtap,Ward Officer, Bibwewadi
6. Ashish Kothari,Kalpavriksh
7. Ashok Pingle,MASHAL
8. Avinash Madhale,CEE Urban
9. C.K.Waghmare,A.C.Yerwada Office
10. D.S.Molak,DMC-2
11. Dinesh Girolla,JE, MC Office
12. L.M.Kondhare,Dy.M.C.[G] Security and Fire Brigade
13. Madhav Deshpande ,Ward Officer, Hadapsar
14. Madhav Jagtap,Ward officer, Kasba Vishrambagh
15. Mangesh Dhige,Environment officer PMC
16. Meher Gadekar,
17. Mr. Machindranath Devanikar,Addl. Municipal Commissioner (Gen.)
18. Mrs.Ulka Kalaskar,Dy.Ch .Acct
19. Mukund Bhosale,Ward Officer, Sangamwadi
20. Neha Ambastha,CEE
21. Nitin Udas ,Ward Officer, Karve Road
22. P.D.Pawar,J.E. Garden Department
23. Pravinsing Pardeshi,Municipal Commissioner
24. Pushkar Kanvinde,Principal College of Architecture
25. Ramesh Shelar,
26. Ranjit Gadgil,Janwani
27. S.P. Bhanage,Asstt.Engr. Parwadi Water Work
28. S.S.Jana ,O.S. Tax Department
29. Sanskriti Menon,CEE Urban
30. Satish Khot,NSCC Pune
31. Sharad Mahajan ,MASHAL
32. Shreeram Salvekar ,Ward Offcer, Dhole Patil road
33. Subhash Swami,School Board PMC
34. Sudhakar Tambe,Education Officer, PMC
35. Sudhakar Telang ,Z.C.4
36. Surendra Karpe,J.E. Road
37. Suresh Jagtap,DMC-3, Solid Waste and Vehicle Dept
38. T.S.Dharurkar,PMPML
39. Umesh Mali ,Ward Officer, Dhankawadi
40. Vijay Dahibhate,Dy. Comm Zone 1
41. Vijay Landge,Ward Officer, Ghole road
42. Vikram Jadhavar ,Environment officer JnNURM PMC
43. Zigisha Mhaskar,CHF International

ESR Framework

Pune produces an Environmental Status Report (ESR) every year, and it has done so since 1997. This is mandated in the state-level legislation (the BPMC Act) following the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act and the Twelfth Schedule.

The development, writing and production of the ESR is usually tendered out. The Pune ESR has been prepared over various years by Mashal, Change Re-engineering, PATPL, and in recent years by the PMC Air Quality Cell. Since the approach and detail in the different chapters is quite varied, it appears that there is no continuing information framework for the ESR as a whole or for the individual sections.

In order to make the ESR a more useful / usable document, some reorganization of the ESR has been suggested by the Pune Citizens Environment Forum (various meetings):

1. The purpose of the ESR has to be clear
1. It should reveal the health status of the population linked to the state
   of services and the environment
2. It should provide information support for investment and management
   decisions for the PMC
3. It should serve as an important input into the annual budgeting and
   planning exercises of the PMC
4. It should be a tool for citizens' use as well, serving both as an
   information/ education resources, as well as a way for tracking improvements
2. It should have some overview chapters for a comprehensive picture of the city, including key sectors
3. Certain data sets have to be presented disaggregated at ward-level so that actions needed to be taken by corporators are clear, and these can in turn be linked to ward level municipal budgets and plans
4. It is important to create the framework, even if data is not there. The purpose of this is to identify data gaps and put in place appropriate data collection systems
5. Descriptive material, detailed data tables, references etc are valuable information and the ESR is a good way of making such information publicly available and these may be included. However, the key actionable aspects may be presented as a separate section for facilitating monitoring and follow-up
6. Information, such as flights operating out of Pune and list of Malls, which has appeared in the ESR of some years may be removed from the report as it is not directly relevant. However, a lot of the development-related data could still be included, albeit in the form of appendices.
7. The ESR will need to draw upon data apart from the official data gathered and provided by PMC departments on municipal services and functions
8. Which data is gathered and reported by the PMC depts. needs to be looked into, as they may not necessarily be collecting some critical information – this depends on what goals (short and long term) are being set for improvements – for instance if reducing energy use is a goal, then data related to energy use in specific service provision will have to be tracked
9. In any case the Key Performance Indicators for PMC depts exercise initiated by Janwani should link with the ESR preparation work; the KPI work in Pune is also linked to the Benchmarking of Municipal Services initiated by JNNURM
10. This means that citizens, academic institutions, independent organizations, NGOs etc can also and should contribute information
11. A system to receive and categorize information needs to be created for this
12. Information collection/ compilation/ review etc can happen year round
13. The ESR should be available on the internet – creating wikis may be a useful way to do this

'''Which indicators?'''
Draft frameworks have been developed for biodiversity and water. These are available under the respective Work Themes in this blog

The CEROI set prepared by UNEP GRID Arendal may also give useful insights [http://www.ceroi.net/ City Environment Reports on the Internet]

Draft Framework for ESR Status of Biodiversity

I. Introduction and Scope
Biogeographic zone in which Pune is located

Why is BD important to assess - impacts on human health and environment locally, regionally and globally (as appropriate)

The ESR reports on

• status of ecosystems, hot specks and selected groups of plants/animals, and selected species in the city
• institutional aspects of BD conservation/ management: specialized govt/scientific agencies to deal with bd, civil society engagement, forums of complaint/redressal, conflict resolution

Definition / ownership related issues

• while some major ecosystems (river, forest) are not technically under PMC limits and are governed by other government depts, they are enclosed by PMC lands and they are heavily impacted by the city and contribute in a major way to the citizens’ health and city aesthetics
• several hotspecks are within private / institutional lands

II. Values
What values does the city current place on bd?
What values could/should it place?
Differential values between rich and poor? How to put these values into the city’s planning?

III. Policy and legislative framework

• Land records (for river ecosystem integrity) administered by District Collector
• Water Act (for surface water quality) regulated by MPCB
• Irrigation agreement (for water returned to regime and net consumption) by Irrigation dept
• Forest Act for reserved forests
• MRTP Act for urban environment and planning (Development Plan and DC Rules) for BD reservation, green zones, open spaces, setbacks, parks and gardens in municipal lands
• Tree Act for tree felling permissions
• BD Act for management aspects and setting up of Biodiversity Management Committee

IV. Key drivers or factors influencing Biodiversity

• Population growth and pattern of settlement (?) affecting land conversion and usage of BD rich areas
• Amount of untreated or uncollected sewage and garbage (for river / water body quality)
• Road widening/ construction
• Any others? Biomass collection?

V. Status and Change in Key Indicators

1. Aggregate green cover extent: total area and per capita green cover (from Sharad/ DP Cell), disaggregated between forest/wild/semi-wild and lawns/parks
2. Tree cutting and transplantation/survival, plantation and survival rates, exotic/indigenous ratio in plantations (from Tree Authority records and Garden Dept)
3. Select rare species status (TBD – Dr Sane, Dr Ankur Patwardhan, Ranwa)
4. Ecosystems/ hotspecks (including small wetlands) status report in table below (needs a quick outreach to various research and study groups, colleges for data on different parts of the city)

5. Ecosystem type (forest, grassland, river, reservoir, garden, hotspeck)

   Name (for e.g. Vetal Hill, Baner Hill, Mula R, Mutha R, Ramnadi R, Katraj Lake, Pashan Lake, Turtle Pond, Bat roost site .....)

   Location (with a map key)

   Ownership/ regulatory authority (for e.g. PMC, private ...)

   Legal status (Reservation, green zone, private/ institutional)

   Area (ha)

   Status of major indicators of health of ecosystem (state methods and reliability elsewhere)

   For e.g. for Lakes: Hyacinth cover increased; Fish species decreased by x; Black winged stilts increased; Migratory species number decreased

   For Rivers: Physical-chemical characteristics at various points; indicator species of fish, birds, plants + Ecosystem physical integrity by measuring naturalness of banks in terms of area of encroachments in the form of lawns, roads, tenements etc

   For Gardens: Number of indigenous vs exotic trees and %

   For Hotspecks: Flapshell turtles number same, Bats number same etc....

   Based on above, state Change in Ecological Status (improved, degraded, no change from previous year – TBD over time)

6. Status of Institutional aspects of BD Management in City
   Current institutional methods of BD Mgt: Garden Dept, Pune Tree Authority, Encroachments Dept, Water and Sewage Dept
   Existence of BD Management Committee: No
   Steps taken to set up one: None
   Mapping of BD: Not done
   BD Info system: Not done

(add civil society institutional aspects and actions…PTW, Lakaki lake committee, Green Earth, etc.)

VI. Analysis and Key Issues and Concerns

Status of BD

• Forest status improved through soil and water conservation works carried out over … acres
• River status degraded over previous years, as measured through instances of pollution/ extent of pollution and decrease in number of freshwater fish species etc
• Lake status degraded over previous years, as measured through decrease in numbers of birds, and diversity/composition of migratory bird species
• Grassland status degraded as area of grassland decreased as it has been planted over by trees, or fire instances
• Gardens total area increased though number of exotic tree species planted increased
• Tree numbers went up or down as measured through tree-felling permissions granted less plantation (and survival) number
• Hot specks – 30 (or whatever) in number; x number were extinguished; y number were preserved and granted ‘PMC Hotspeck’ status (perhaps in the future)
• Rare species numbers/distribution – enhanced / went up or down

Comment on overall status of BD

Status of Institutional Aspects

• Policy and legislation gaps and issues of coordination between multiple authorities
• Data and information gaps
• Financial gaps

VII PMC Response planned
VIII Recommendations

Appendices

• Methodological and reliability aspects
• Where to report data year round

Draft ESR framework - Water

Pune and the Status of Water

Scope

River basin and water regime in which Pune is located
- Rivers and streams flowing through Pune and reservoirs on these
- Groundwater

Pune city uses surface and ground water, and in the process impacts the physical integrity of the resource, consumes energy and returns water of a certain quality and quantity back to the water regime. The ESR attempts to assess the impact of the city on three aspects related to water:

• Physical integrity of the water regimes (surface and ground) (local and regional impact)
• Physical and chemical quality of the water resource (local and regional impact)
• CO2 released to the atmosphere (global impact)

Why this is important to assess - Impacts on human health locally, regionally and globally

Policy and legislative framework

• Land records (for ecosystem integrity) administered by District Collector
• Water Act (for surface water quality) implemented by MPCB
• Ground water Act (for ground water quantity and quality) administered by GSDA
• BPMC Act (for municipal obligation to supply – linked to net consumption) by PMC
• Irrigation agreement (for water returned to regime and net consumption) by Irrigation dept

Key drivers or factors influencing Water

1. Population growth (for quantity abstracted)
2. Tapping of groundwater for home and commercial uses (for quantity abstracted)
3. Economic growth and pattern of economic activity (for quantity abstracted)
4. Pattern of settlement (for physical integrity of both surface and ground water regimes)
5. Amount of untreated or uncollected sewage and garbage (for quality)
6. Industrial effluents (for quality)
7. Technology used by PMC and private entities (for quality, quantity and energy efficiency)
8. Fiscal instruments (their role as regulatory instruments)
9. Extent of rain water harvesting (for quantity)
   

Status, Trends and Projections of Key Indicators

Primary indicators

1. Physical status of rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers (including channel integrity and ecosystem base flows)
2. Water quality in rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers
3. Net consumption and where released (supposed to be in Mutha right bank canal as per Irrigation Dept and PMC agreement)
4. Energy used for net consumption (municipal water supply, estimated spend in sump to overhead tank, bore well pumps) (yields global impact of CO2 related to water supply)

Secondary indicators (relate to social and economic aspects)

1. Coverage of households - municipal supply, private (tankers, bore wells – nothing wrong with private supply except bore well difficult to regulate)
2. Municipal spending
3. Technology used

Key Issues and Concerns

Against above selected indicators

1. Physical status of rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers channel integrity not maintained; no concept of ecosystem base flows; natural aquifer systems being dismantled and degraded due to construction, etc
2. Water quality in rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers is being degraded; toxicity in rivers and reservoirs reaching levels that will affect animal and human health;
3. Net consumption rising and where released (supposed to be in Mutha right bank canal as per agreement)
4. Energy used for net consumption (municipal water supply, estimated spend in sump to overhead tank, bore well pumps) (yields global impact of CO2 related to water supply) - CO2 footprint rising (energy used by water sector)

Secondary indicators (relate to social and economic aspects)

1. Coverage of households - municipal supply, private (tankers, bore wells – nothing wrong with private supply except bore well difficult to regulate)
2. Municipal spending

Concerns related to information, regulatory authority, technology etc

• Policy and legislation gaps and issues of coordination between multiple authorities
• Data and information gaps
• Financial gaps

Response

TBD

Recommendations

Primary

• Physical integrity related
• Quality related
• Consumption related
• CO2 / energy efficiency related

Secondary

• Data collection systems related
• Local policy related

Appendix: Data Sets Contributing to Water Indicators

Primary indicators

Physical status of rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers (including channel integrity and ecosystem base flows) and MPCB classification of River I, II, III, IV and A, B, C zones

Data needed
· Channel information
· Aquifer information
· Encroachment
· Base flows

Water quality in rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers
Data needed
BOD, COD, pH, turbidity measurements at appropriate locations and times
Proximate measures
- Waste water treatment
- Sewage not captured (informal settlement data)

Net consumption and where released (supposed to be in Mutha right bank canal as per Irrigation Dept and PMC agreement)
Data needed: Quantity measurements before and after (or use proximate measures – which ones?)

Energy used for net consumption (municipal water supply, estimated spend in sump to overhead tank, bore well pumps) (yields global impact of CO2 related to water supply)

Data needed
Municipal supply electricity units used and converted to CO2 equivalent
Number, type of sump and bore well and how long they run (alternatively MSEDCL records on domestic pumpsets – total units used and converted to CO2 equivalent)

Secondary indicators (relate to social and economic aspects)
Coverage of households - municipal supply, private (tankers, bore wells – nothing wrong with private supply except bore well difficult to regulate)

Draft Framework for 'Water' in Environment Status Report

Overview of Water in Pune

• Scope (e.g. rivers and streams flowing through Pune, groundwater, lakes in vicinity)
• Policy and legislative framework
• Key drivers or factors influencing Water (e.g. population and per capita consumption growth, amount of untreated or uncollected sewage and garbage, tapping of groundwater for home and commercial uses, industrial effluents, extent of rain water harvesting)

Status, Trends and Projections

(as per indicators and data sets we've chosen - see below)

Key Issues and Concerns

• (should focus on end issues not on data issues. Examples – Ground water levels and quality continuing to erode, Toxicity in rivers reaching levels that will affect animal and human health, Natural aquifer systems being dismantled and degraded due to construction, etc)
• GW not covered
• Multiple agencies
• Data related issues

Recommendations

• Water, waste water, ecosystems and hygiene related
• PMC functioning and organization related
• Data collection systems related
• Local policy related

Water Indicators and Data-sets

• Water quality on surface streams (whatever the std indicators are of BOD, COD, turbidity, acidity etc)
• Water quality of aquifers (as above)
• Ecological flows and critical stocks maintained?
• Reduction of waste water flows - % houses / units sewer connected; % sewers/ qty reaching waste water treatment plants
• Wastewater treatment
• Annual withdrawals of ground and surface water
• Surface and Aquifer flow quantities before and after city
• Net water consumption
• Energy consumption in water provision and waste water treatment (both in municipal pumping as well as household level pumping from sumps and bore wells if data can be gathered or estimated)

Environment Status Report extract

EXTRACT ON ESR FROM PCEF MINUTES 6 Oct 2007

Environment Status Report

As decided in the inception meeting of the PCEF, one of the tasks that the Forum should take up is the development of a framework for the Environment Status Report ESR). This is a mandatory annual report that municipalities in Maharashtra are required to produce.

The process agreed upon at the meeting is:

1. A core group consisting of Aneeta Benninger, Ranjit Gadgil, Himanshu Kulkarni, Sanskriti Menon, Laxmi Narayan, Ajay Ojha, Vijay Paranjpye (and expandable as per needs) should be set up, to
develop an overall framework for the report and for individual chapters
work with the PCEF theme groups and additional groups/ individuals to take up responsibilities for the development of various sections of the ESR, including Indicators for each theme
review and edit the drafts submitted by each group
submit a budget to the PMC for developing the framework and content

2. The minutes of this meeting are to be considered as the formal communication to PCEF from PMC to begin work on the ESR

3. Decisions related to content and framework:
a. Currently ESR focuses on PMC’s contribution to environment management. However, achievements by NGOs, Corporates, Citizens Forums and their best practices should be a part of the ESR.
b. The ESR should report on ecological carrying capacity and the footprint of the city and not only sectoral environmental status. This paradigm of environmental status reporting can take into account the impacts of Pune such as due to the sourcing of water from catchments outside Pune and releasing effluents without treatment.
c. A document containing the framework and benchmarks for various sectors of the ESR is one deliverable. This would help to standardize the future ESRs and make them comparable and over time to reveal the changing status of environment
d. Methods for collecting and reviewing data should be standardized; thus data gaps in current data collection systems should also be identified
e. ESR should be based on ‘spatial and temporal’ approach because environmental changes do not happen in sectors. Performance of each municipal ward must be reviewed, ranked and linked to budget allocation. ESR should have two components – status of municipal services offered and status of ambient environment.
f. An ongoing data compilation process may be developed so that data and information from diverse sources can be gathered at one location (online and as a repository)
g. The ESR should be uploaded on the PMC website
h. ESR should have relevant indicators from the Human Development Index (HDI).


ESR - Possible Reporting Framework

See CEROI – City Environment Reports on the Internet http://ceroi.net/index.htm

Environment Status Rerport extract

EXTRACT ON ESR FROM PCEF MINUTES 6 Oct 2007

Environment Status Report
As decided in the inception meeting of the PCEF, one of the tasks that the Forum should take up is the development of a framework for the Environment Status Report ESR). This is a mandatory annual report that municipalities in Maharashtra are required to produce.

The process agreed upon at the meeting is:

1. A core group consisting of Aneeta Benninger, Ranjit Gadgil, Himanshu Kulkarni, Sanskriti Menon, Laxmi Narayan, Ajay Ojha, Vijay Paranjpye (and expandable as per needs) should be set up, to
develop an overall framework for the report and for individual chapters
work with the PCEF theme groups and additional groups/ individuals to take up responsibilities for the development of various sections of the ESR, including Indicators for each theme
review and edit the drafts submitted by each group
submit a budget to the PMC for developing the framework and content

2. The minutes of this meeting are to be considered as the formal communication to PCEF from PMC to begin work on the ESR

3. Decisions related to content and framework:
a. Currently ESR focuses on PMC’s contribution to environment management. However, achievements by NGOs, Corporates, Citizens Forums and their best practices should be a part of the ESR.
b. The ESR should report on ecological carrying capacity and the footprint of the city and not only sectoral environmental status. This paradigm of environmental status reporting can take into account the impacts of Pune such as due to the sourcing of water from catchments outside Pune and releasing effluents without treatment.
c. A document containing the framework and benchmarks for various sectors of the ESR is one deliverable. This would help to standardize the future ESRs and make them comparable and over time to reveal the changing status of environment
d. Methods for collecting and reviewing data should be standardized; thus data gaps in current data collection systems should also be identified
e. ESR should be based on ‘spatial and temporal’ approach because environmental changes do not happen in sectors. Performance of each municipal ward must be reviewed, ranked and linked to budget allocation. ESR should have two components – status of municipal services offered and status of ambient environment.
f. An ongoing data compilation process may be developed so that data and information from diverse sources can be gathered at one location (online and as a repository)
g. The ESR should be uploaded on the PMC website
h. ESR should have relevant indicators from the Human Development Index (HDI).
ESR - Possible Reporting Framework

(From CEROI – City Environment Reports on the Internet http://ceroi.net/index.htm)

DPSIR
Driving forces
Pressures
State
Impact
Response