Implementing Development Projects in Nepal

A development partner has to address Nepal’s heterogeneous society, tactful private sector and hierarchical civil service structure to successfully implement any projects.  

I have gone through variety of experience while implementing developing project at local, regional, central government level, as well as with private sector in Nepal. The special structure of Nepali society, political culture, civil service and the growing bureaucracy within it hold some implications for materializing any missions under foreign aid.  

As per my involvement in some projects under the German Development Cooperation (GIZ) I came to know that some projects achieved success while another remained their goal unattained within the given time.

Although the tasks I was involved with became successful, a huge effort was required to bear out the actions.

I met frequently people from local government—District Development Committee, Village Development Committee and Government Line Agencies--during implementing ‘Inclusive Development of the Economy Program (INCLUDE). The project was targeted at enhancing economic status of the poor and increasing their access to finance. I was monitoring and evaluation officer always tightening belts of my colleagues for acquiring project related information. At the district level, it became really easy to come in contact with the targeted local people. The local government authorities have good rapport with Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) Farmers’ Groups (FGs), Trade Unions, and private beneficiaries.

There is always a chance of captivating benefit by few people in the rural areas. Some local elites, few educated ones and sometimes party cadres are mostly chosen for information gathering. I too arrived to select few of them as there was no other choice given. They were the lone knower of all the developmental activities in the region. In summation, they attend most of the trainings and know information about the local socioeconomic status. As a consequence, most development workers choose them. I was not an exception either.

Next, I worked with local CSOs, NGOs and FGs while implementing Capacity Building for BioTrade Project (CBBT). The project was jointly implemented by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and GIZ in Peru, Namibia and Nepal. GIZ supported private sectors including CSOs producing essential oil in Nepal. While working with CSOs and NGOs, I came to recognize that they’re really adept at mobilizing local people. Government line agencies have good relation with those CSOs and NGOs which is an asset.

In spite of their earnest bond with locals, there is a chance of only favoring their own clans. As a consequence, some backward communities, such as Dalits remained outside the benefit. In my project districts, a majority of Dalits couldn’t be mainstreamed. Indeed, Dalits are very hesitant in passing along with local elites and any new entrants in the hamlet.

In due course, I acted with most of the development partners and high level government officials of the ministries of Nepal during executing Supporting Nepal’s Implementation of its WTO Commitments and the Enhanced Integrated Framework (WTO/EIF-SP) project. The strategy was directed at improving export trade by capacitating GoN to implement its WTO commitment. Another component was effecting Nepal Trade Integration Strategy (NTIS 2010). By mobilizing Aid for Trade (AfT), and Trade Related Technical Assistance (TRTA) through multilateral funding of the WTO under the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF), the project demanded harnessing the effort of all the related ministries and development partners of Nepal.

So far, the project remained successful. It achieved its goal on time by drafting all the laws, conventions and policies. I worked hard to design a monitoring mechanism for the Government of Nepal (GoN) to monitor the implementation of its WTO commitments. Yet, I still doubt its furtherance. Although, together with my team, I constructed a robust mechanism and handed over it to the ministry.

However, during the enactment of the project, I came to encounter a number of hurdles. Particularly, the particular structure of civil service at times impeded smooth running of project activities. All the powers consolidated at the highest echelon of Nepal’s bureaucracy needed special attention at the top. Influencing secretaries and joint secretaries only pushed the operation forward. The appertaining vertical pyramid structure of public personnel didn’t let me execute activities at an officers’ level.  

Also, frequent transfer of the personnel often posed hurdles for project execution. The transferal triggered another teething troubles, such as, fading institutional memory. Recurrently, I encountered different faces on the same chair. That demanded repeated orientation efforts. In addition, feeble IT infrastructure in some of the ministries hindered regular communication with the GoN staffs. In fact, the nature of bureaucracy is accustomed of restricting the flow of information towards below. This is the area to be taken charge of.     

The atypical characteristic of Nepali society and public service needs special attention while implementing development projects in Nepal. Coming up to the aforementioned issue paves way for the success of any development charges.