Kamala Sarup: Financial Reforms In Nepal

War is undoubtedly the destroyer of economic development. War damages the environment; it wreaks havoc on social, education and health services, it destroys capital, leaving shattered infrastructure. War also diverts portfolios away from domestic investment. War also distorts foreign aid. War massively diverts government expenditures away from provision of economic services.

In any case, the gains of wars are usually be counted as a loss, no gain.

We need to end ongoing Nepali Maoists war, build a sustained peace.

So the best way to bring the economy back to normalcy is give due respect to internal economy. We should not hesitate in experimenting and adopting various successful programs experimented by various countries ranging from taxes levied on a country's citizens, to population control. Effective regional and local administrations with strong policies in certain administrative sectors (such as transport, education, health, water supply, solid waste disposal, energy systems and air quality) could play a great role in the promotion of sustainable development in the long run.

We can not forget how the contraction in public expenditure and the consequent reduction in aggregate demand could not but adversely affect employment in the unorganised sector, whether non-agricultural rural employment or urban informal sector employment.

Higher literacy and health standards were the most crucial factors in enhancing labour productivity which in turn went to facilitate significant import substitution and export promotion. Several significant changes have taken place in Nepal since 1990. Though Nepal has always had the intention to eradicate poverty, much of it has been guided by displaced concerns and misplaced priorities.

Even if we see In a 2001 comparison of 174 countries Nepal ranked 150th in per capita income, a universal indicator of material wealth and living standards, since money enables people to buy at least the basic living needs for themselves and their families: food, drink, shelter, clothing, medicines, and health care.

We have a question Can we Nepali realistically expect to gain more wealth relative to other countries in the future?

At the same time, there is need to review these programmes,and the emphasis also needs to be put on what are the adjustment implications on the provision of public goods, particularly public health, nutrition, education, because these not only have immediate effects on consumption, but they have long-term effects on the people.

We should not forget, the direct causes of per capita income and living standard increases are economy and employment. That are transformed into consumable goods and services comprising basic living standards that are summarized in per capita income statistics. Social Investment on economic and associated incomes devoted to preventing people from killing from each other, i.e.,

There are other ways to increase per capita incomes, of course, but they are limited. Therefore, a poor country like Nepal must import technology, investment money on development that produces more and better goods and services for its own people and for producing goods and services for trade with foreigners. Loan As we have seen from World Bank, IMF, and WTO efforts, do not necessarily make Nepal rich. So in this situation, Nepal can make itself popular in the global market in coordination with our friendly countries.

Even in particular, countries with too many mountains like Nepal with an unfavorable geography, or culture, or economy is severely handicapped to make sufficient technological advances that increase the wealth and living standards of its people are unlikely to become richer relative to other countries, although we can certainly hope to become richer because of the inevitable trade of cheaper goods and services.

What does Nepal need to do? At the same time, we also need to learn and act. If human poverty has to be eradicated, attention must shift from income poverty to the poverty and inequality of opportunities - economic, social and political. Nepal needs sustained public action to be guided by strong economic development priorities. Further reforms are needed in agriculture, industry and services. All subsidies should be targeted sharply at the poor and the truly needy like small and marginal farmers, farm labour and the urban poor.

A good economy features steady, vigorous competition among those who provide the money and take the risks and benefits of ownership. They and their surrogate managers buy equipment, goods and labor services to create products for sale. Thus, in a economy, money creates greater amounts of money and greater average living standards, which are distributed unequally among its people.

Nepal could, like other South Asian countries, e.g., China and India, devote money (financial capital) to technical education, like programming, which is labor-intensive, and requiring little capital equipment, and export that knowledge, but that requires spending lots of money providing technical educations.

(Kamala Sarup is an editor of peacejournalism.com)

© Scoop Media