Reinventing Government:The Nepalese Case

Dr. Bishwa Keshar Maskey, T.U

" The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new lands, but in seeing with new eyes"-Marcel Proust.

The term governance is commonly used to explain the authority given to the government to "move toward avowed goals, reduce the inherent cleavages among social, cultural, ecological and political systems and communities, concert sound policies, mobilise resources and maintain a sufficient level of legitimacy and credibility before the public".

Reinventing governance, in this sense, ensures a reduction in the role of government in many traditional areas and stretching it out to the decentralisation of functions.

The increasing interest in governance springs from the triumph of market economy over centralised planning, from the popular tendency to associate accountable government with economic success, and from the weakening role of the state as a consequence of fiscal crisis, corruption and proliferating social crises such as ethnic conflicts, gender and ecological movements as well as the emergence of civil society.

The notion of reinventing government in Nepal has come as an inescapable response to the challenges posed by the maximalist state in the past. Especially in the realms of poverty, gender inequality, regional disparity and ecological deterioration successive post-independent governments registered dismal failure. The regional governments also appeared too weak to respond to the challenges posed by international economic competition then, and later by economic globalisation. The increasing dependence of the state on foreign aid, trade, technology, market, information, and development infrastructures further marked the wearing down of the scope of the governments to govern, formulate proper policies and implement them in the interest of the vast majority.

The political and economic transformation brought about by democracy movement across the world in the 90s had its influence in the functioning of the government, first, through the introduction of the system change from partyless system to multi-party democracy, and then the permutation of the role of state from interventionary, active and predatory to market friendly, and second, through the restructuring of the system of economy from mixed/statist variety to a liberalised one with the attendant policies of minimalist state policies-privatisation, denationalisation and deregulation. The minimalist paradigm reduced the role of the bureaucracy as the whole political, philosophical, legal and economic framework has been reshaped to push the locomotive of market economy. This is the complete reordering of governments in the region both in size and functions of production, distribution, regulation and control paraphernalia's.

Reinventing of government in Nepal, thus, involves a combination of new visions, policies, strategies, values and institutions which transgress not only the government but also the horizontal actors like the NGOs, self-help groups, consumer associations, entrepreneur associations' civil society, and local government institutions. The rationale is to decentralise political and economic power, increase productivity and effectiveness in economic management and to see the government and corporations assume adequate responsibility to stimulate economic growth and meet people's aspirations in a sustained manner.

Development in terms of reinventing governance is not an imposition of value-oriented rationality on the people that tends to dislocate their life-support system but a calculated effort which may strike a balance between the needs of the impoverished segment and acclimatisation of the nation's competitiveness to the global economy. Limited government does not allude to weak government. Rather, it is to hold back the paternalistic tendency of the government that strangulates enterprise, abets dependence and fosters corruption and irresponsibility. The success of the government lies in its ability to create a sound legal framework within which it works the law of contract, private property, protection of consumers and laws that abolish monopoly to foster competition. Quite apart from its contribution to a legal framework, government has many functions, which can not be accomplished by the private sector. Defence, environment, social development, and infrastructure development to name a few.

Reinventing government in Nepal warrants the examination of the roots of crisis in governance from the standpoint of contending theories and views regarding what development can mean and how the roles of social actors- civil society, self-help organisations, NGOs , donors and other actors are conceptualised in the development process. The practical aspect in handling the issue of poverty alleviation is the first focus. The crucial policy response will be posited in the study, suggesting whether government can serve as a viable tool to bring the modified role of the state in creating an environment for human development.

Rationale for reinventing Governance: The ideological rationale for reinventing governance has been provided by the global ascendancy of neo-liberalism in the late 1980s. This ideology rejects most of the theories, which had rationalised the dominant role of the state in social and economic development. It seeks to substitute market forces for the State's control over planning, economic management and social control. Individual entrepreneurship and initiatives are seen as indispensable for competition in the marketplace. The school of neo-liberalism advocates that the rational choice of individuals is the driving force of development whereas the State functions only as a promulgator of the rule of law that enables individuals to pursue their self-interest.

With the onset of structural adjustment programme, the scope of governance especially in economic decision-making had begun to be downsized by the policies of privatisation, deregulation, tax reduction, cut in public expenditure, and revenue increase in matter of public utilities. In order to reduce inflation, the monetarist approach of controlling public sector borrowing and money supply has been applied. The welfare/mixed economy has been seen as paternalistic and inflexible and, therefore, inimical to human freedom. Similarly, State intervention has equally been regarded as a force that inspires dependency rather than self-reliance, equality and prosperity of the masses. Neo-classical economists and officials of the World Bank and the IMF began to put conditionalities on recipient countries for certain kinds of development assistance. The World Bank, for example, while supporting the Structural Adjustment Programme, SAP, put the conditions to liberalise trade, control market distortions, springing from subsidies, reorganisation of public sector industries, reform in public administration and laws in consonance with foreign direct investments, FDI.

Similarly, the IMF also called upon government in Nepal to reduce official expenditure, increase tax, interest rate and price of goods and commodities so as to accumulate capital for investment in productive sectors of the economy. Reinventing of governance thus is de-linking of the economic power of the state and giving it to the private sector. It also emerged as a necessity to adjust to international market and the problem of "legitimisation" it faced. As a result, the state is "forced to deal with the dysfunctional side effects of the economic policies under a number of restrictive conditions-balancing a policy of economic stability against a policy of social reform in a world economy that increasingly limits the individual state's latitude for action and without being able effectively to control social integration or to plan ideology".

Major donor countries have consistently focused on the promotion of market-oriented reforms, democratic participation, human rights protection, rule of law, judicial reforms, protection of minority rights, and promotion of fundamental human values. The recipients of German aid have to meet five preconditions: human rights, rule of law, people's participation, market friendly economic policy and pro-development state. In the sphere of reinventing governance, USAID and ODA are extending co-operation in judicial, legislative and local self-government reforms higher secondary education, reforms training police and public officials on democracy and human rights, improvement in media culture and support in technical areas. The Scandinavian countries are pushing the principle of twenty-twenty, that is, the government should allocate 20 percent of its budget in the social sector with them offering 20 percent in the same.

A number of International Non-Governmental Organisations, INGOs, working in South Asia in different sectors of development co-operate with local NGOs and partners. They are very diverse in orientation, philosophy, ideology and motives. The conflicting priorities of the government, donors, INGOs, civil society organisations continue to polarise the process of development. Owing to the weakness of the regional States caused by their heavy dependence on foreign aid, nearly 45 percent on average of development budget comes from foreign aid, regional governments have been steadily losing their power to formulate public policies and implement them. One of the most vivid examples of government failures is in the area of poverty alleviation.

Political will for poverty alleviation: Following the recommendation of SAARC Independent Commission on Poverty Alleviation, successive governments have often referred to themselves as being wholly democratic, promising a Welfare State with immense benefit to citizens particularly in schools, postal services, health, income, infrastructure and social work. Each country aims to raise production, employment, standards of living and general well-being of the people, thus unfolding opportunities leading to a richer and more satisfying life". All the SAARC countries have pledged improvement in the people's standard of living, creation of employment opportunities, social service and just distribution of income. They are signatories to the Copenhagen Declaration. The State-provided welfare has been the key to the creation of a more egalitarian society. The State thus blended the characteristics of mixed economy, culture of bureaucratisation and social mobilisation, and pro-poor institutions in development projects.

The irony of the plans, programs and projects in Nepal is that they generate only a trickle-down effect on the rural poor and the needy. Rather, it is "benefiting the urban elite and rural elite with an urban connection, while the overwhelming majority of the poor have remained in the periphery of the development circle". Now the question that often springs is:; what are the new strategies of poverty alleviation the donors, government, INGOs and private sectors have initiated to make the South Asian governments accountable to the South Asian majority?

The question of improving governance rests on mechanisms to promote decentralisation of power, authority and responsibility from the Centre to the districts, village and municipalities, and on stimulating the increased involvement of the people in the governance. It also involves a return to democratic politics, legislative sovereignty, and reforms in civil service so that efficiency of public sector management is nurtured.

One of the crucial challenges faced by Nepalese governments is how to alleviate poverty-subsistence or absolute-and relative deprivation. More than fifty percent of the people in the country live below the absolute poverty line. These people lack not only the basic amenities of life, such as food, housing, clothing, fuel and household commodities but also cannot meaningfully participate in the productive life of the society.

Conclusion: Reinventing governance in Nepal is essential for the management and transformation of state power to address widespread concerns of the majority of the people. A democratic state is necessary but is alone not a sufficient condition for expeditious social development. The observable efficiency of the state apparatus is most likely to be achieved only when the majority of the people have adequate access to the means of production, wealth and political power. In a multi-ethnic country where the bulk of population live below the poverty line, democratic governance must necessarily undertake the following major tasks: people's empowerment, social integration and guaranteed human rights.

The collective strength of the people at grassroots level can never be realised if they do not build self-reliance and self-confidence. The people must take the initiatives and design actions through critical self-reflection. Aiming to attack the roots of poverty, governance has to tilt the balance of power and resources in favour of the poor and encourage them to understand the context within which their institutions operate both at the macro and micro levels, for their self-fulfilment and self-realisation. Mobilisation of people, socialising them in democratic environs, conscientising them with adequate strategies with a view to leading them to eventual empowerment are the responsibilities of all development actors-the state, NGOs and the civil society. Clearly, the key to the success of poverty alleviation lies solely and undoubtedly with the appropriate reinvention of governance.

(From the author's book: Development Governance: Agenda for Action"-chief editor.

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past |