Resilience in the age of climate breakdown

Pakistan needs to use its existing water more intelligently and more fairly

There is a profound irony at the heart of climate change. Countries in the Global South that have contributed relatively little to historical greenhouse-gas emissions are among those most exposed to its consequences. However, one cannot oversimplify this issue. India remains a lower-middle-income country, yet it is among the world's largest polluters in absolute terms because of the scale of its population, industrial activity and energy use. Pakistan, by contrast, has a much smaller ecological footprint, but this is not the result of environmental consciousness. It reflects the relatively smaller scale of its economy, industrial base and consumption.

The World Bank has estimated that climate-related risks, environmental degradation and air pollution could reduce Pakistan's GDP by 18–20 per cent by 2050. The problem becomes even starker when viewed through the lens of Sustainable Development Goals. Pakistan remains far from meeting many of its development targets, and climate shocks threaten to reverse hard-won gains. A flood does not merely destroy crops; it can destroy schools, roads, clinics and livelihoods. Climate change therefore acts as a multiplier of existing development failures.

Yet South Asia still fails to cooperate adequately on problems that do not respect borders. Water, in particular, is increasingly viewed through a security lens rather than a shared survival lens. That is especially dangerous between India and Pakistan. The two countries depend on the same river systems, but mutual distrust has hardened into strategic competition. India is trying to turn water into an instrument of pressure and potential coercion. However, the region cannot afford to treat rivers as weapons. Water scarcity on both sides of the nuclearised border will not be solved through brinkmanship.

The same logic applies to air pollution, which also ignores national boundaries. The World Bank has estimated that more than half of air pollution in many major South Asian cities originates outside the locality in which it is measured. Coordinated action across borders is therefore far more effective, and often less costly, than fragmented national responses. Regional cooperation is not a luxury. It is a necessity.

The same principle should apply to climate finance. The creation of the Loss and Damage Fund was an important achievement, but its resources remain tiny relative to the scale of need. Pledges are still far below what developing countries require to cope with present and future shocks. Demanding more loss-and-damage financing is necessary, but it cannot become the main climate strategy. Rebuilding after every disaster is neither economically nor socially sustainable. Developing countries need to adapt, decarbonize and become more resilient before disasters occur.

For Pakistan, that means rethinking how water and development are managed. The country not only needs new storage dams to contend with its water insecurity, but it also needs to use its existing water more intelligently and fairly. That means investing in water recycling, groundwater recharge, improved irrigation, soil management, rainwater harvesting, wetlands restoration, pollution control, and better storage where appropriate.

Pakistan's energy transition offers a broader lesson. Much of the country's recent solar expansion has been driven not by the state, but by households, businesses and the private market, especially the falling cost of solar panels. That shows what is possible when clean energy becomes affordable. But solar alone is not enough. It still requires stronger grids, storage and transmission if it is to serve the broader public interest. The same is true for water: resilience will not come from grand announcements alone, but from the careful management of existing resources, rather than just waiting for India to restore the Indus Water Treaty.