Constraints of Nepalese Agriculture
Some Future Strategies

By Poshendra Satyal Pravat

NEPAL is primarily an agricultural country and it provides employment to 80 per cent of the population, contributes more than 50 per cent of the household income, occupies about 40 per cent of GDP and has a significant bearing on the manufacturing and export sectors. Despite various efforts for increasing production and productivity, the performance of agricultural sector is far from satisfactory and the yield per unit area is less than that of other advanced countries. Different factors are responsible for large deviation in actual productivity of agriculture with respect to its potentiality.

Problems

Firstly, Nepal has deep structural problems that are difficult to overcome. Nepal is a hilly country, as such transport and agriculture very difficult. It’s landlocked country hampering international trade. The inaccessible hilly areas with no proper market channels have further aggravated the problem. Due to the unscientific indigenous method of cultivation and serially fragmented and scattered land holdings, the farmers of the country find it very hard to make living. Thus, Nepalese economy is largely agricultural in nature and the characterisation of the economy as a gamble of monsoon has not been changed. Moreover, the agricultural sector goes through phases of neglect and push and the agricultural policy cycle is more damaging than the agricultural weather cycle. As large productive farming areas have been occupied as a result of rapid and unplanned urbanisation and industrialisation, some of the renowned fertile lands are now no more available for agricultural purposes.

Due to the lack of proper agricultural extension facilities, farmers are not aware of scientific methods of production technology. Further, hybrid seeds are costly and are beyond the reach of small and marginal farmers. Lack of varieties resistant to various stress and other attributes which are best suited in the context of Nepalese climate have caused lesser yields. There is not enough irrigation facilities as only about 29 per cent of the cultivable land is irrigated. The poor farmers of Nepal are not in a position to buy expensive fertilizers for getting higher yields. As the initial cost of investment is very high in many remunerating propositions of agriculture, small farmers hardly enjoy the high price offered to the products from such propositions. In addition to that, our farmers can’t afford to set up green houses and poly houses required for off-season vegetable and flower production. Due to high costs of production, the price of agricultural produce of Nepalese farmers is high. As a result of this, Nepalese agricultural products can’t compete with the agro-products from the neighbouring countries, including India. This has discouraged Nepalese growers to continue their occupation. Sometimes, insect pests and diseases are beyond the control of our illiterate farmers. Furthermore, no proper marketing facilities are available in many parts of the country except in some areas surrounding the cities. The stronghold of middleman in marketing has worsened the problem as they dupe our ignorant farmers in the process of marketing of their agricultural surplus. Similarly, no infrastructure is available for preventing the post harvest losses.

Future Strategies

In the coming years, very hard work is needed to tackle these challenges to boost the agricultural production of the country in order to meet the need of the growing population and make Nepal more prosperous and wealthy nation. The should be concentration on teaching, research and extension activities in agricultural diversification and on the agricultural research on cultivation of minor and underutilised crops in tribal and hilly areas and also on the development of those varieties of crops that can perform well in rainfed and marginal soil conditions. The aim should be focussed on to develop location specific agricultural technology on the basis of close consultation with farmers and to improve the technology delivery system with collaborative, well-coordinated and efficient agricultural research and extension system responsive to farmers’ needs. The availability of quality seeds the make effort to introduce low-cost hybrid seed production technology and to develop effective production technology of hybrid varieties should be ensured.

Efforts should be given to develop and popularise organic farming in some areas and explore the export potential of organic agro-products in foreign countries, as organic products fetch very high price in comparison to commercially produced agro-products. Our endeavour should be to develop Integrated Pest Management (IPM) schedule in different crops in order to reduce the cost of insecticide and fungicides and protect the environment too. Similarly, the setting up of agro-based industries with better post-harvest technology so as to avoid post harvest losses should be encouraged. If needed, drip and sprinkler irrigation facilities and other irrigation resources should be generated after their feasibility studies in different agro-climates of the country. Above all, agricultural revolution is only possible if we focus on long-term sustainability of agriculture rather than short-term maximisation of yield. This will help in poverty alleviation by improving the standard of living through accelerated and expanded employment opportunities.

The International Debate Over Migrants Vs. Refugees

By Clare Nullis

IN an era when millions are on the move, the fate of 460 Afghans stuck on a ship near a remote Australian island has highlighted the dilemma of deciding who is an illegal migrant wanting an easier life and who is a refugee fleeing in fear.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees on urged Australia to let the Norwegian-registered ship Tampa land on Christmas Island after its journey from Indonesia for "humanitarian reasons."

The agency steered clear of adding political fuel to the fire by pronouncing which country had a legal obligation to take them in, but issued a plea that the boat people should not be cast as villains.

"It is well to remember what the conditions are like in Afghanistan," said UNHCR spokesman Ron Redmond. "The country has been plagued by 22 years of war, drought, famine and displacement," he said, describing it as "an impossible situation."

The standoff in the Indian Ocean coincided with a further clampdown by Afghanistan’s hard-line Islamic rulers, who closed the offices of two Christian relief organisations Friday and expelled their foreign workers. The ruling Taliban have detained staff from a German-based group for allegedly trying to convert poor Afghans to Christianity. Preaching Christianity carries the death penalty for Afghans.

The Taliban stand accused by the United Nations and Western governments of stamping on fundamental freedoms and denying women basic rights like education and employment.

The worsening situation has led to an upsurge in the number of people trying to flee. Last year, Afghans applied for asylum in at least 68 countries across the world. In the past five years, the number of asylum requests in Europe has tripled to 34,000, with Germany accounting for about one third of them.

But with European countries shutting their doors to would-be refugees, increasing numbers have made their way to Australia and North America. According to UNHCR figures, there are a total of 4,300 Afghans in the United States and 3,600 in Australia.

This is in addition to the 5 million displaced within Afghanistan and living in dire conditions in neighboring Pakistan and Iran.

On face value, many Afghans would appear to meet the 1951 refugee convention’s definition of a refugee as having a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion."

But in practice, according to refugee workers, Afghan migrants face increasing hostility, with reelection-hungry politicians and mass media accusing them of trying to tap public benefits and enjoy an easy life at the taxpayer’s cost .

The Australian government - which last year granted refugee status to 92 per cent of the Afghans which applied - typifies the hardening attitude, according to human rights campaigners.

"They have prevented a boat load of people who would probably be granted refugee status from reaching their territory," said Rachael Reilly, refugee policy director of Human Rights Watch. "That is a very cynical move and they are violating their obligations under the 1951 convention."

"The fundamentals of this debate is that it is extremely likely the people on the boat have fled persecution, considering the record of the Taliban," Reilly said in a telephone interview.

As Prime Minister John Howard gears up for national elections in November or December, his conservative coalition is facing growing community resentment over the rising tide of asylum seekers. In two recent state elections, Howard’s coalition lost substantial support to the new One Nation Party, a right-wing, anti-immigration party, started by former fish and chip shop owner, Pauline Hanson.

Reilly said it was "spurious" for the Australian government to argue they should be returned to Indonesia, from where they came, as the Asian nation did not conform to international standards on refugee treatment.

But Australia and most other Western governments say they must take a firm stand, given that intercontinental travel and an upsurge in human trafficking have made the existing refugee convention increasingly irrelevant.

"Its values are timeless, but we should stand back and consider its application in today’s world," British Prime Minister Tony Blair wrote about the convention in The Times of London earlier this year.

The convention, which celebrated its 50th birthday in July, was meant to deal with the massive dislocations that followed World War II and to guide the resettlement of one million post-war refugees. But the international refugee burden has grown to 22 million and public sympathy is running out.

Afghan asylum seekers grabbed the headlines in early 2000 when a hijacked Afghan airliner touched down at a London airport, with the hijackers claiming they had escaped one step ahead of the Taliban. Nearly 80 civilians on the plane subsequently claimed asylum, but the vast majority were rejected. Although crew members were initially treated as heroes when they returned home, UNHCR says they were subsequently harassed and threatened. Three crew members escaped to Pakistan. The fate of the civilian passengers is unclear, according to UNHCR. (AP)

Bourgeois Education

By Bijay Aryal

THERE was a news story in The Sunday Times of London the other day that Chinese students are flocking to the United Kingdom to get traditional English education. Last year more than 500 Chinese students joined the elite boarding schools such as Harrow, and about as many are expected to do the same this academic year too, it says. This number has outstripped the numbers from Japan and West Asia. And most pupils are the children of high-ranking Communist party officials or the new entrepreneurial class, it is said.

British schools are competing with their counterparts in Canada, Australia and New Zealand to attract such arrivals, to get a larger share of the growing Chinese student market. On the other hand, the Communist party officials seem to be attracted to bourgeois education.

Back in Nepal, the leftists clamour for janabadi shikshya. Several leftist parties bear the Communist signboard. Whatever promises may be in their election manifestos or other party documents or in the slogans they chant, the leaders of almost all parties send their children to elite schools in Kathmandu or abroad, depending upon the size of their purses. Over the past decade many of them have been better off. But there is no information about the Maoist leaders waging their "people’s war" on this. Other communists in Nepal are no less bourgeois in their attitude towards education (when it comes to finding a school for their own children) than those who have been. The charm of bourgeois education lives on, whether for the Chinese communist leaders or their Nepalese counterparts.

Back Papers

For some years the SLC Board has held exams within two months of the SLC regular results for those who failed the school level examination with certain qualifications. The students who fail in more than two papers were disqualified. This year, too, a chance has been offered to them. And in a week the partial exams start for those whose failure is within the limits of two
papers.

But a question that remains unresolved is: what is the use of this opportunity of a second time so early if the students who get through at the second attempt cannot get enrolled in any Plus Two institute or under TU the same year. Next year everybody can get an admission if they pass their partial exams? So what’s the difference? Those appearing for early ‘back paper’ will have only one consolation, if any: that they don’t have to keep their fingers crossed till next year if they can pass now. Otherwise this system has little utility.

Recently there is a couple of advertisements in newspapers trying to tap this early batch of exempted candidates. The ads appealed them to enroll and it seems they would be allowed to start their college life this year instead of the next. If such is the case it is a wise thing for the authorities to do. However, the principal of a college said that it was done to book the students a year earlier and the most the college could do was to allow them to attend the classes, but not have an enrolment for this year and not to appear at the exams.

This year’s academic calendar has just started. In four to six weeks, the results could be announced. And till then, provisional admissions could be used. Why waste the students’ one precious year without any solid reason?