Forum (Spotlight Weekly)

Conflict, Development and Nepal Development Forum

By Dr. Bishnu Raj Upreti

The ongoing conflict in the country has been adversely affecting development programs. Early next month Nepalese government is going to face tough questions from the donor community that will gather for the Nepal Development Forum (NDF) meeting to review the development achievement and to envision future course of action. Very bad record of violation of human rights; rapidly growing security expenditure and its developmental consequence to service sector; under spending of the allocated budget in the basic service sectors; failure of the government to provide security to on-going development programs and projects; insecurity perceived by the development workers in villages from security forces and obstruction created in many instances; and the failure of the government to respect the human rights commitment it had made a few weeks back are some of the issues that donor community will vehemently raise. And it would be very difficult for the government to convince donors.

Looking at the 'conflict and development' concept paper prepared by the government for the pre-consultation meeting of the Nepal Development Forum 2004, anyone can easily assess that the government is quite unclear on 'conflict sensitive approach of development'. The document assumes that the Tenth Plan/PRSP can be implemented without any obstruction and four pillars of the 10th plan i.e., broad-based economic growth, effective service delivery, social and economic inclusion of excluded and good governance can be achieved. However, pragmatically it is not feasible to implement the 10th plan and achieve the anticipated objectives at the current context of escalating conflict and the present system of government administration.

The global conflict history has demonstrated that development can be continued even in the situation of on-going conflict, if development modalities are made conflict sensitive. However, that needs different approach, mechanism and procedure. Even Nepalese experience has shown that it is possible to continue development activities if they are transparent, need based, and directly benefiting to the poorest and most marginalized section of people. I had a chance to assess the impact of conflict on Rural Access Program (RAP), one of the largest rural infrastructure initiatives in Nepal. Based on the field visit and discussion with all concerned actors, it was clear that the RAP project is less disturbed from the conflict mainly because of its transparent approach to funding for the construction, need-based, involvement of the poorest people of local community, and flexible nature. Similar experiences have been documented by RCIW, SPDI and many other innovative projects. They were facing less obstruction because community support was strong, local people were recruited or mobilized, activities were apolitical and transparency was ensured. However, the government has not built on these experiences while proposing the future strategy. In the context of violent conflict, three-tier strategy needs to be followed:

1. Immediate strategy: Efforts should be concentrated to 'emergency relief work', 'ensuring human rights' and 'humanitarian support program'. In addition, it is widely realised in the development sector that security forces suspect and even obstruct development workers, if and when development activities are continued in communities. Therefore, a strong coordination with security force must be the immediate priority. Obstruction in supplying food, medicines cause negative perception on people towards the security force. Daily social life of people must not be disrupted from the state side. State can get help of humanitarian agencies like Nepal Red Cross Society or human rights organisations, if needed. Help of the donor community is extremely essential in this stage, perhaps in the form of 'Immediate Relief Fund', as envisioned by the government.

2. Short term strategy: 'Pro-poor public expenditure' proposed by the government is ideally a good concept in both short and long term. But translating it into effective action is fraught with problems as shown by the government’s past performance. Diverting resources to the poorest section should be the first priority. Community groups such as forest users’ groups, mothers’ clubs, water users’ committees, local religious groups become more appropriate institutions to implement these resources at local levels. In this strategy, activities must concentrate on construction of pro-poor infrastructure and rehabilitation of displaced victim of conflict.

3. Long term strategy: As envisioned in the 10th plan, focus must be on addressing underlying causes of poverty, inequality, and social exclusion through it's "four pillar" poverty reduction strategy (i.e., achieving sustained high and broad-based economic growth focusing particularly on the rural economy; accelerating human development though a renewed emphasis on effective service delivery of basic social services and economic infrastructure; ensuing social and economic inclusion of the poor, marginalized groups and backward regions in the development process; and good governance). The Poverty Alleviation Fund could be one of the approaches that ensure improving livelihoods of the rural poor and socially excluded.

Procedural aspects: Total devolution of authorities and responsibilities, community control, public auditing, application of do-no-harm principles, regular risk assessment and management, preparation and strict execution of operational guidelines, involvement of widely accepted institutions like Nepal Red Cross in constant vigilance, monitoring and oversights, integrating peace and conflict impacts assessment (PCIA) of development as monitoring tool can minimise risk related to development programs and projects. Do-No-Harm must be the guiding principle of the development approach and we can learn from the experiences of other conflict-ridden countries. We can also adopt the DAC guidelines while implementing development activities in a situation of full-fledged conflict.

The government must focus its all development strategies, at least for a few years, to achieve comprehensive peace building, which needs different approach than the existing one. Development activities must be concentrated on people's mobilization for peace, rehabilitation, reintegration and reconciliation of victims of conflict, education and awareness to eliminate violence and promotion of social harmony and co-existence, and ensuring basic needs of poor people. All efforts of the government must be achieve peace through development. In addition to the government efforts, civil society also needs to be mobilized. The current conflict is also an opportunity for decentralization, taking affirmative actions to empower women, Dalits and Janajatis, promoting anti-corruption campaign to restore public confidence, improving the effectiveness of public spending and regaining public confidence. This conflict must be utilized as an opportunity for the state reform as well as economic and social transformation of the country.

(The author is a conflict expert)