Paramendra Bhagat
October 7, 2002
Rapid Economic Growth For Nepal: What Would It Take
Paramendra Bhagat
October 7, 2002
What would it take? This is a topic I have visited often from different angles. And I expect my interest to remain.
One, my personal history of having grown up in the country, where my parents, my brother and sisters live, and the emotional attachment that will forever remain. Two, my predilection for active politics. I dabbled in politics with the likes of Hridayesh Tripathy before coming to the United States to attend college. I became my college's student body president at the end of my freshman year, a record. I read everything on Bill Clinton I can get hold of. I have broached the possibility of some day running for Congress, although, for now, I just want to be able to write full-time; the possibilities of going into software or law remain. I keep up with the news on Nepal - the internet makes it oh so easy - and have become a regular at Sajha.com. I am a news junkie in general anyway. Three, as a student of politics and economics, the second poorest country comes across as a human laboratory of interest, for there are many countries similarly struggling. Heck, there even might be messages for the poor pockets in the rich countries if we ponder hard enough. Four, with an ingrained disposition to counter tendencies against racism I don't envision a future where the West will always remain the rich island in the ocean of poverty that is the Global South. The Global South's path to wealth does not, can not, will not have to be imitations of where the West has already been, but new headways as intellectually stimulating as any. Someday perhaps many parts of the South will hopefully have overtaken the West. Why not?
My limited academic training in the intricacies of economic theory might hinder me in getting specific with the details, but my broad suggestions ought to appeal. More important, I am willing to give it a try and put forth my views for a broad, ongoing discussion. And my political background and instincts should compensate for and otherwise guide what I have to say. That probably puts me at a distinct advantage, for no matter what we might cook up in sharp company, ultimately those ideas have to be taken to the broad public, and implemented with their participation.
For Nepal, I see a three-pronged strategy:
The anti-corruption drive has to go ahead full-fledged and it has to be institutionanlized. The recent legislation granting property rights for women was a good thing. Political parties have to be made to make their finances transparent, intra-party democracy institutionalized, by law, if possible. I am all for a referendum, and possibly turning the country into a republic: the monarchy is expensive business. That also might be the solution to the Maoist insurgency that has brought the country to a halt. The introduction of a federal form of government is a necessary precondition to genuine social justice for the many marginalized groups like the madhesis, the janajatis and the dalits. There can be no rapid economic growth in the absence of social justice.
Political leadership can make all the difference. And so fair play is important, so the political leadership can emerge.
Profit-making is a good thing. The largest party is communist, the two Congresses are socialist. That prevents the emergence of a culture that is gungho about the market in action. I say this with the spirit that both Ralph Nader and John McCain make a lot of sense to me. Large corporations too are anti-market for they have a tendency to distort free play. And democracy that swerves away from one person one vote through the play of money is distorted democracy as well.
The trade regime has been unfair to the poor countries. I hold serious disagreements with the World Bank/IMF. Their actions over the past half century have been anti-democracy, anti-market.
The market ought to prevail, in the country, and at the global level. Insitution-building is what both democracy and markets are about. They are not impromptu decisions to switch ideologies. Work has to be done, help sought from wherever it might be available.
The dominant thinking remains that Nepal is primarily an agricultural economy like the western countries were more than 100 years ago. And that it needs to catch up. That approach is self-defeating. The idea ought not be to imitate the West, if only because their version of industrialization has hurt the planet beyond recourse. And it does not make money sense to do what they did.
Steer a novel course. Focus on the service sector to get people off the crowded paddy fields. A massive investment in education ought to make better sense than ensuring a deep grid of roadwork first.
A massive investment in education and health is needed. A massive proliferation in primary and secondary and adult education programs so as to jack up the literacy rate from 40 to 95 percent within years. Have the private sector do the wealth creation. Let the government focus on what it ought to do: invest in human capital.
An elitist information technology industry carefully nurtured might also lead the way in several ways.