With more than half of the world’s GDP depending on nature, Islamabad too was meant to grow with it, not at its expense. The master planning of the capital city, which fully integrated nature, was hailed for having a protected area, the Margalla Hills National Park, right at its doorstep. Islamabad’s green belts, horticultural parks, and urban forests, such as the Shakarparian forest, not only act as climate regulators but also perform the vital functions of carbon sequestration, habitat preservation, and soil stabilisation, all of which are important in mitigating disaster risks, human health challenges, and ensuring stable economic growth.
That is why reports of around 40,000 trees being felled in the Shakarparian area to develop infrastructure feel so jarring. This only deepens the contradiction between what the government says on the global stage and what is happening on the ground.
Ranked as the most vulnerable country to climate change, Pakistan’s urban population stands at the forefront of this crisis, with very little being done, let alone being promised, for them. For Islamabad, in particular, climate change is no longer a distant threat; it is very much a present reality. Summers are hotter, heatwaves last longer, and rainfall is more intense and less predictable. In this reality, urban trees are not ornamental features; they form an integral part of the city’s basic climate defence system.
The loss of mature trees is never trivial, particularly in an urban biodiversity enclave such as the Shakarparian forest, which formed the core habitat for almost 200 species of animals and plants. While the government has stated that the loss will be offset through a ten-to-one tree replanting ratio, they fail to understand that planting new saplings, even at scale, does not replace what is lost in any meaningful timeframe.
Credibility on climate, at the end of the day, is not built in conference halls but in the everyday decisions we make about land, trees, and the kind of cities we choose to live in
This exercise presents a serious contradiction with Pakistan’s climate messaging. Very recently, at COP30 in Belém, Pakistan presented itself as climate-vulnerable but climate-responsible. There was discussion about nature-based solutions, ecosystem restoration, and the potential to generate billions of dollars through carbon markets. Real conversations and commitments, but not backed by intentions and actions; yet, we wonder why our climate finance needs of GBP 275 billion are not given enough attention on a global scale.
Globally, carbon markets and climate finance frameworks rely on credibility, trust, and integrity. It took Brazil more than fifteen years of conservation-led confidence-building to finally operationalise its carbon markets. Cutting down mature urban forests to facilitate infrastructure development, under public management, directly undermines that logic. Having a rationale for that makes it even worse. As a Pakistani conservation professional working in the international space, it becomes difficult to argue for high-integrity carbon strategies while eroding some of the most accessible and visible carbon and biodiversity assets we have.
Environmental conservation is not anti-urban growth. Infrastructure is essential for development and for fulfilling the economic and mobility needs of the people. However, climate-smart sustainable development must be grounded in evidence-based decision-making and the application of internationally recognised frameworks such as the Mitigation Hierarchy. This approach prioritises the avoidance of unnecessary environmental loss, followed by the minimisation and mitigation of impacts, the restoration of affected ecosystems, and, only as a last resort, the use of offsets. Urban forests should be treated as assets to be strengthened, not obstacles to be cleared and compensated for later.
In spite of this, Islamabad can still lead by example. With strong resolve and informed citizens, it must strive to protect its remaining urban forests by being transparent about decisions that affect them, particularly within Environmental Impact Assessments, basing decisions on evidence and data, and genuinely integrating nature-based solutions into planning. This would not only send a powerful signal that Pakistan’s climate commitments are more than words but also ease access to global climate finance.
Credibility on climate, at the end of the day, is not built in conference halls but in the everyday decisions we make about land, trees, and the kind of cities we choose to live in.