FB   
 
Powered bysps
        Society for Policy Studies
 
 

 
Nepal and the problem of foreign aid
Posted:Nov 21, 2012
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 

Yam Prasad Chaulagain

The backdrop of the Marshall Plan’s success in rebuilding post-war Europe was the epoch-making inauguration of the history of development cooperation. In 1961, the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD) formally introduced the definition of official development assistance (ODA) by paying special attention to the official and concessional part of the flow of development assistance.

Nepal seems to have been grappling for foreign aid since World War II after the establishment of diplomatic relations with the US in 1947. At the same time, the communist revolution in neighbouring China in 1949 increased strategic interest in Nepal. This means that recently flourishing ties with the international community opened new avenues for external actors beyond India’s traditional influence in Nepal’s geopolitical landscape.

Nepal joined the league of aid recipient countries for its development financing with the launch of its First Five-Year Plan (1956-61). Until the mid-1960s, Nepal depended mostly on foreign grants for all its development projects. Multilateral assistance programmes began in the 1970s, and by the end of the 1980s, a huge amount of foreign aid was in the form of multilateral assistance programmes directed through the international development association of the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank described as soft loans. The World Bank established the Nepal Aid Group in 1976 consisting of six countries and 16 international agencies; and from the late 1980s, it accounted for the largest share of aid to Nepal.

Most importantly, the strategic interest of the superpowers in Nepal had increased the flow of foreign assistance particularly from the US and China. However, Nepal couldn’t achieve much in drawing foreign assistance from the major superpowers because of a changed scenario in the international political landscape. In recent years, most importantly after the path-breaking Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) signed between the seven political parties and the Maoists in 2006, Nepal received a huge amount of bilateral and multilateral assistance from the international community especially to assist the transition from war to peace and post-conflict recovery.

Donors’ strategic interest

Foreign aid to Nepal is provided by a diverse group of donors, including OECD-DAC donors, International Financial Institutions (IFIs), United Nations agencies, global vertical funds and providers of South-South cooperation. India, China, Japan, Germany and the US are also key bilateral donors to Nepal. These donors reported total disbursements amounting to US$ 1.08 billion in fiscal 2010-11. Approximately 58 percent of these resources came from multilateral donors, while 36 percent came from OECD-DAC bilateral donors and over 6 percent from bilateral South-South cooperation partners.

Nepal is also being viewed from a security perspective because it adjoins two emerging superpowers, India and China. For instance, China’s interest in Nepal at present is concerned with Tibet’s safety from the outside world, while India’s strategic interest seems to be related to political and security concerns and particularly the water resources sector. The US is still continuing its pre-Cold War objective — containment of a possible threat of communism in Nepal. The important remark here is that the donor countries and agencies often preserve their strategic interest while providing bilateral and multilateral assistance to Nepal. However, in the recent context, the major donors such as USAID, CIDA and the EU have shifted their priorities from humanitarianism and sustainable development to freedom and international security.

Effectiveness of ODA

The Paris Declaration 2005 as a consensus among donor agencies includes some vital aspects of aid effectives — ownership, alignment, harmonization, result and mutual accountability. According to a report issued by International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI), only nine donor agencies out of 58 achieved a score of more than 60 percent. It apparently shows that most of the aid agencies haven’t fulfilled the spirit of the Paris Declaration. Aid agencies in Nepal have also been reported to have shown unethical behaviour in conducting their various affairs. According to the chief of the Foreign Aid Coordination Division of the Ministry of Finance Lal Shankar Ghimire, more than 70 percent of the capital expenditure is financed by foreign aid.

Despite a rise in ODA, Nepal is the only country in South Asia that has not experienced any significant improvement of its micro and macro economic prospective. According to the Human Development Index (HDI), Nepal is in the 157th position under the low human development category. This indicates that there is an institutional gap in mobilizing the resources received or government mechanisms have not been functioning well.

Conclusion

The donors and the government are equally responsible for the poor performance of ODA in Nepal. To ensure its effectiveness, donors should be transparent in providing assistance and refrain from imposing unnecessary conditionalities on the recipient government. However, conditionalities related to cross-cutting issues such as governance, inclusion, accountability, transparency and political stability should be welcomed by the government of Nepal.

Furthermore, there seems to be a mismatch of priorities between the donors and the government of Nepal. The role of the Finance Ministry’s Foreign Aid Coordination Division in channelising funds has not been seen in a progressive way. The Nepal Development Forum, which is responsible for coordinating between the Nepal government and its development partners, has not produced a conducive environment with regard to acquiring quality foreign aid. This contradiction creates resource gaps, overlapping and duplication, and eventually needy sectors remain uncultivated.

As the Paris Declaration suggests, the accountability issue is very important to ensure aid effectiveness. And the best way to ensure accountability is to ensure transparency in the way aid is managed and used. Development history shows that no country has achieved sustainable growth without expanding trade flows. And expansion depends on the quality of domestic policies, institutions and infrastructure. This is exactly what Fukuyama has written in his book State Building. The state’s scope is the ability to create and enforce laws and policies. Strength is the ability of the state to plan and execute policies and enforce laws cleanly and transparently. This is now commonly referred to as institutional capacity. 

Chaulagain was an Erasmus scholar at the University of Warsaw where he earned an MA in International Relations

The Kantipur Daily, 21 November 2012

 
 
 
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 

Disclaimer: South Asia Monitor does not accept responsibility for the views or ideology expressed in any article, signed or unsigned, which appears on its site. What it does accept is responsibility for giving it a chance to appear and enter the public discourse.
Comments (Total Comments 0) Post Comments Post Comment
Review
 
 
 
 
Thirteen year old Bhuma (name changed) spends his day at home. He does not go to school, or play with children in his neighborhood to avoid being laughed at.
 
read-more
While the South Asian region has its fair share of reasons to be quarrel over, if there is one thing that has managed to transcend boundaries, it has been the soft power of India. As a melting pot of diversity in itself, its cultures, languages, ethnicities and the like are in a symbiotic relation with those across the border. As a res
 
read-more
  The first round of voting for France’s presidential election concluded earlier today. As results have shown, the independent centrist Emmanuel Macron and far-right leader Marine Le Pen will face off in the second and final round of the election on May 7.
 
read-more
India should be extremely wary of any Trump involvement on the Kashmir issue because he would do anything to bring India to the table, writes Dr. Susmit Kumar for South Asia Monitor.
 
read-more
US President Donald Trump met with 15 UN Security Council ambassadors at the White House on Monday, delivering his concerns about the status quo in North Korea. He urged the Security Council to be ready to impose tougher sanctions on North Korea over its nuclear and missile programs.
 
read-more
spotlight image Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sprang a surprise when he registered himself as a candidate in Iran’s presidential election scheduled for May 19. After leaving the office of President in 2013 at the end of two controversial terms, the firebrand populist has been largely inactive in politics. 
 
read-more
spotlight image I am honored to be here today for the first U.S. government exchange alumni conference for India and Bhutan.
 
read-more
Health of the citizens and the economy of the nation they inhabit go hand in hand and every buck spent on former guarantees a manifold increase in the latter,  said noted public health expert K Srikant Reddy. The lecture 'Health and Development: India Must Bridge the Disconnect' was ...
 
read-more
Column-image

Title: Bollywood Boom; Author: Roopa Swaminathan; Publisher: Penguin; Price: Rs 399; Pages: 221

 
Column-image

Title: Defeat is an Orphan: How Pakistan Lost the Great South Asian War; Author: Myra Macdonald; Publisher: Penguin Random House India; Pages: 328; Price: Rs 599

 
Column-image

  The story of Afghanistan -- of the war against the Soviets and of terrorism that has gripped the landlocked country ever since -- is in many ways also the story of diplomat Masood Khalili, who motivated his people and led them...

 
Column-image

Title: The Golden Legend; Author: Nadeem Aslam; Publisher: Penguin Random House; Pages: 376; Price: Rs 599

 
Column-image

Over the Years, a collection of 106 short articles, offers us interesting sidelights on the currents and cross- currents in the public life of India during two distinctive periods: (I) 1987 to 1991 and (II ) 2010 to the present.

 
Subscribe to our newsletter
Archive