Editorial [ The Kathmandu Post (Nepal)]

Manage waste disposal

The problem of finding a suitable dumping site has been plaguing the government and the Kathmandu metropolitan authorities since quite some time. It is truly regrettable that authorities have been unable to solve this problem by finding a suitable dumping site. Kathmandu produces close to 3000 quintals of trash daily, but the problem of disposing it seems to at the bottom of the government’s agenda. Worse still, the problem of selecting a dumping site has been plagued by political wrangling and public pressure. A proper waste management system for Kathmandu simply does not exist.

Since the termination of a German funded project for managing Kathmandu’s garbage problem about two years ago, the government has paid scant attention to the problem. The failure to identify a suitable dumping site shows the government’s ineptitude. All it has been able to do is to resort to temporary dumping
in areas inside the valley, thus aggravating the health hazard. An example of this is the short term solution like dumping along the Gokarna-Gujeswori stretch of Bagmati river. This ill fated effort not only damaged the river ecosystem but also resulted in a number of incidents of bird collision with airplanes. The implication was that failure to manage waste could inadvertently threaten the nation’s tourism industry. Local resistance has played an important role in preventing dumping in populated areas, but it has also resulted in failure to use the identified sites for dumping.

It is imperative that the government do careful homework to find a truly suitable permanent site. Recent reports have indicated Simpani in Makwanpur district as a possible location. The sparsely populated area, however, needs some infrastructure development. It is indeed regrettable that the government’s choice of Okharpauwa has been deemed unsuitable by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). Authorities should learn to accept expert advice that takes into account the long term impacts. Instead of simply choosing a site to throw away the garbage, it is imperative that the government implement a systematic waste management programme. Separating bio-degradable and non-degradable waste is important as only the latter needs to be dumped carefully in landfills. Technology for recycling waste products must also be made available. There is no reason why Nepal should not import these techniques. Paper, glass and metal belong to the category of recyclable materials. A lot of money can be saved if such materials are recycled. Long term waste management must include establishing infrastructure for the waste management industry also. Apart from the direct benefit of proper waste disposal, a lot of people can be employed.

It is high time the government thought seriously about managing the garbage problem. Simply choosing short term solutions will not help. What the people need is efficient collection and disposal of waste from our overpopulated city. Political pressure and local resistance should not be allowed to influence the government’s choice of a dumping site. The government should also do more serious study before it takes its next step to resolve this perennial problem.

Nepal’s cultural heritage on trial

By Keshav R Jha

Nepal’s cultural heritage in Kathmandu valley is now on trial. A 21-member intergovernmental committee will examine the report of the high level mission which visited Kathmandu in September under the Chairmanship of Mr Abdelaziz Touri. This committee meets in Cairns, Australia, 27 November to 2 December, where it will deliver its verdict.

The landmark verdict on the seven monument zones (Kathmandu, Patan and Bhaktapur Durbar Squares, Pashupatinath, Changu Narayan, Swayambhunath and Boudhanath) will have far-reaching impacts on the conservation work and prestige of the present government which has expressed a commitment to develop the Kathmandu valley as a tourist destination. The entire Nepali nation is anxiously awaiting this verdict.

The World Heritage Committee has been pressurizing Nepal since 1993 to recognise the urgent need to mobilise international technical assistance and public support both to safeguard the world heritage values of the sites, and to mitigate the deterioration of the authentic character of Kathmandu valley. In 1998, Nepal struck a deal with UNESCO and ICOMOS and drew up a timebound action plan based on 55 recommendations for the better conservation of Kathmandu valley. One of those 55 recommendations is that the work should be accomplished by 2004. In view of this fact, it is really perplexing that our Nepalese observer team attending the World Heritage Committee meeting last year, agreed to welcome the high level mission in Kathmandu to pronounce on Nepal’s heritage and justify its inscription on the list of world heritage in danger.

During the week-long visit to Kathmandu, the high level mission heard from the Nepalese leadership, that they were against the proposal of the Committee to put Kathmandu valley on the ‘In Danger List’. Despite these efforts and protests, if the World Heritage Committee decides to inscribe Kathmandu valley on the ‘In Danger List’, it will deal a severe blow to the government and local authorities, not to mention national prestige and vital tourism interests. Such a decision will be counterproductive and will not serve the purpose of UNESCO, that is, to continue preservation of the Kathmandu Valley World Heritage Site.

Currently 27 sites out of 630 World Heritage Sites are inscribed on the In Danger List in accordance with Article 11 of the UNESCO Convention. Nepal became a party to this Convention in 1978. Article 11 deals with a variety of dangers such as armed conflict, earthquakes, poaching, unplanned construction and other natural disasters which constitute threats to the site on the World Heritage List. Inscription on the In Danger List requires the committee to develop a programme of corrective measures and subsequently to monitor the situation of the site. All efforts must be made to restore the site’s values in order to enable its removal from the In Danger List as soon as possible.

In the case of Nepal, it is not necessary to inscribe Kathmandu Valley in the In Danger List as there is already a tripartite agreement between UNESCO, ICOMOS and HMG to implement the 55 recommendations by 2004. Nepal still has four years to comply. It will be most unjustifiable and unwarranted if the World Heritage committee decides to implement its decision of last year to inscribe Kathmandu valley on the In Danger List.

According to present indications, the committee has been considering inclusion of Kathmandu valley on the In Danger List to maintain its credibility, using Article 11 of the Convention to safeguard Kathmandu’s irreplaceable heritage. Nepalese authorities and local government do not however subscribe to this view. They still think that they can safeguard the heritage themselves at the national level without mobilising international support.

Out of the seven monument zones, the committee has problems with two; Kathmandu Durbar Square and Boudhanath. The Committee is well aware of Bhaktapur having been honoured by UNESCO in recognition of its work in the restoration hope, reinforcement of solidarity, and consolidation of the culture of peace. The Heritage Group, a Bhaktapur based NGO, is organising the First International Youth Festival of World Heritage Cities (April 11-16, 2000) in cooperation with the Nepal National Commission for UNESCO. One of the festival’s three main objectives is to raise public awareness on heritage conservation.

An international scientific meeting on Lumbini will take place in April next year, and the evaluation and relaunch of the International Campaign for Safeguarding Kathmandu Valley will be held in the same month. In view of all these developments, it would be ridiculous on the part of the World Heritage Committee to take any decision contrary to the agreement which gives Nepal until 2004 to meet its obligations.

The Nepali delegation to the committee should be led by the Culture Minister accompanied by competent senior officers who can defend Nepal’s case in Australia. Our Ambassador in Tokyo, who concurrently accredited to Australia, could play a crucial role in enlisting support in favour of Nepal among members of the Committee. The 21 members of the Committee are: Australia, Belgium, Benin, Canada, China, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Portugal, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Thailand and Zimbabwe. Currently, Morocco holds the Chair but according to established practice Australia will replace Morocco as chair during the session in Cairns in November.

As a desperate move, the Nepalese government has lately launched its diplomatic efforts to woo the 21 members of the World Heritage Committee in New York, Geneva, Tokyo and Paris requesting them to postpone the decision of the Committee until 2004 so that they can comply with their obligations inside the timeframe. Nepal is hoping that the verdict of the World Heritage Committee in Australia will not invite disaster to their conservation efforts. Since Nepal has been elected to the Economic and Social Council for three years, effective from 1 January 2001, it will give added leverage to Nepal if it drummed up support in its favour while campaigning to preserve its status.

Irrespective of the decision of the World Heritage Committee, the cultural properties of Kathmandu valley will remain properties of the Nepalese people. Nobody is going to take them away. But, in case they decide to inscribe on the List of World Heritage in Danger, the government will consider it as a dishonour, and the people will take it as a disgrace to their local efforts.

Air boss throwing shots

By Damakant Jayshi

Hari Bhakta Shrestha (or HBS), Executive Chairman of Royal Nepal Airlines Corporation (RNAC), the timeless milching cow for businessmen and politicians, never fails to amuse. Like him or not, he pales everyone in his surrounding by his ever humble posture.

On Monday, he was summoned by the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) to answer not so comfortable questions on the Lauda Air lease deal. This column is not going to debate the merits of the deal. It focuses just on the unforgettable performance of our illustrious chairman.

To begin with, HBS had not carried the file dealing with Lauda Air! He had, he said, come with the ATR plane file. The honourable MPs were not amused.

Then came the grilling. Where in the agreement was it written that RNAC had to send money as bank guarantee? It inspired a most memorable performance from the unputdownable HBS.

He dodged and fumbled and sifted through his papers, with so many pairs of eyes fixed on him. After nearly a most telling 20-25 seconds, a voice came to his rescue. "Hari Bhakta ji, there are no Lauda papers with you. Take this, a copy of agreement between you and Lauda Air," an MP offered help. HBS avoided it like a plague. I wondered if he was thinking like Sita, who wanted to be swallowed by the earth when questioned by Lord Ram.

"May be RNAC dreamt that such a security clause existed in the agreement and they sent the money," suggested another member.

Then came the million dollar question, both in letter and spirit. What would happen to the bank guarantee of over one million greenback dollars, if the Corporation does not go ahead with the deal?

HBS started giving details of his effort to ensure that the "much-needed plane" lands in Kathmandu, unlike the Chase Air plane which never arrived, despite the fact that advance payment had been sent for it too. One MP remarked : "It seems we are more anxious than Lauda Air to remove their worry." No response from the star of the day.

Another piqued lawmaker asked HBS to answer in "yes or no" whether or not the money will be forfeited. The cynosure of all eyes had his eyes downcast, reminding one of a maths whiz-kid concentrating fully on the problem lying in front of him, oblivious to his surroundings. However, unlike the kid, the chairman had no answer.

This was followed by the scene of the day.

Unable to stomach HBS’ intransigence any longer, another MP decided to make matters simple for HBS. "I will give you three options. Just say which one is correct : In the case of the plane, we decide to cancel the deal - (a) money will return to us (b) money will be forfeited and (c) anything can happen." HBS preferred to abide by the maxim ‘Silence is more eloquent than speech’. At last, an exasperated member suggested: "Let us go to the airport carrying placards, with Where is our million? written on them, just like hotel staff do to attract the arriving passengers." So be it.

Social capital in development

By Tilak Kandangwa Limbu

Just a decade back, rural communities, which are the true reflection of Nepal, had a different scenario. Although economically deprived, rural isolated communities had a rich blend of immeasurable Social Capital. Mutual trust, reciprocity and collective action had always been a alient features of our isolated and scattered communities. Social intercourses, performing collective tasks with a spontaneous inner urge for the betterment of community, were the most distinguishing features of our communities. Irrigation canals, foot-trails, artistic and harmonious social structures that have withstood the test of time are testimony to rich social capital, inherent in our communities.

Some years down the road and we have quite a different picture of our rural communities. Social capital, which is so important in our geographical context, is corroding rapidly, and that, too, at an exponential rate. Individualism is flourishing and the wefts of our social fabric is being mutilated beyond repair. For instance, most irrigation canals constructed by our forefathers through collective action are running so smoothly that it ironically challenges our present day irrigation built with technical expertise. But their grandsons today show aversion to such work. Some call it simply unachievable and some, petty matters. Why? What is the driving force behind the scene that has caused the degradation of this wealth? What are its probable ramifications? This problem needs to be addressed.

Everything undergoes change; dynamics of change is inevitable. For change to occur in a societal set up, an external agent is necessary. This external agent determines whether the result is positive or negative, but sadly in our communities, the result shows a dismal picture. To some extent, "Dump the technology theory" of the past and indiscriminate donor-centric attitude at present are the contributing factors that have hindered community creativity and mobility. However, more importantly, at present, rampant unauthorized political intervention, political hooliganism, pampering of political cadres at the local level by irresponsible leaders is causing a split within the community. Ram Bahadur just cannot tolerate Harke because he has different political colours and vice versa. Political polarization has engendered vicious mistrust tearing away the very fabric of social capital with which they were so intrinsically woven. Further, development programmes, either state-sponsored or assisted by international communities, have been worst hit by this corroding capital.

Although development remains as elusive as ever, quest for development has been a never-ending saga particularly for a developing country like Nepal. We have already completed a development cycle demolishing the one based on community to donor-cum-state-sponsored and at present, we are again back to community management. What has the long aimless cycle yielded? Almost negligible positive output, more extraneous input and loss of time and energy. Economic gains and living standards are decreasing while social, political poverty is on the rise, and most importantly, community cohesion is on the verge of collapse. This is because our so-called intellectual heads are overflowing more with imported ideology and software--be it political or development--rather than suitable indigenous one. At present, development packages are compelled to fight the battle in two fronts: poverty and those additional burden of extraneous inputs.

Fortunately, though late, we are back to the community managed system. The present, holistic development through people’s participation is gaining importance and has been showing some encouraging signs. All governments and donor-funded development programmes, at present, demand active community involvement. UNDP and its different facilitating programmes, for instance, REDP (Rural Energy Development Programme) which aims at increasing the livelihoods of the people through community-managed renewable energy systems taking micro hydro as an entry point, are out in the arena with community mobilization packages. These programmes demand active participation from the grassroot level and this is where social capital is very important. It is obvious that the outcome and success of the present programmes largely depend on the degree of social capital available in the target area.

On extensive field trips ,this scribe has felt rapid decay of social capital, and more often the cause is political poverty, coupled with insurgency dilemma. People seem fed up with development slogans. There is an ever-increasing gulf of mistrust between development workers and common masses. It is not that people don’t want development but they hate it simply because too many people have taken unfair advantage of their resilience and social structure. They view development as a political product, as a direct product of political affiliation with government personnel and politicians and this is killing their creativity and collective behaviour. Therefore, it is high time the government ensured good governance, equitable distribution of development packages and stopped unauthorized political meddling at all levels. The state apparatus and development organizations should be aware that people do not have unlimited patience since they have had bitter experiences in the past. Communities have become sensitive like the Mimosa plant Any indisciplined manipulation may cause unfortunate crash of good development programmes, banking so heavily on social capital.