Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nepal’s Changing Governance Structure and Implications for Agricultural Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Agricultural Transformation in Nepal

Abstract

The chapter deals with the implications of Nepal’s new constitution, particularly federalism, on broad agricultural policy planning as well as on agricultural research and extension. It evaluates how constitutional reforms will shape three key issues in governing the agriculture sector—authority, autonomy, and accountability. Using comparative cases, it offers policy options relevant to these three aspects of governance. This chapter also draws lessons for Nepal from the experiences of other countries such as Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, and South Africa.

Sections in this chapter draw from the authors’ IFPRI Discussion Paper 1589.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Part 7, Sect. 74.

  2. 2.

    Although the local body units may be changed through the Constitutional reform process, it is nonetheless the case that policy planning and implementation will increasingly be under the purview of local rather than federal governments, and it is important to understand local capacities and constraints.

  3. 3.

    State structure does not necessary map neatly onto degree of decentralization. In other words, federal states can still be oriented towards deconcentration while unitary states can be devolved.

  4. 4.

    “Local bodies” is the collective term to refer to DDCS, VDCs, municipalities, and wards.

  5. 5.

    See Schedule 4.

  6. 6.

    In practice, however, as noted above, accountability, authority, and autonomy over extension services remain primarily with the central government.

  7. 7.

    Calculated from data from Swanson and Davis (2014), World Development Indicators, and Food Security Portal (http://www.foodsecurityportal.org/).

  8. 8.

    See Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators (ASTI), available at http://www.asti.cgiar.org/.

  9. 9.

    Interview with NARC, Kathmandu, January 13, 2016.

  10. 10.

    Ibid.

  11. 11.

    Interview with NARC, Kathmandu, January 13, 2016.

  12. 12.

    See 2015 Constitution, Schedule 7.

  13. 13.

    Interview with CEAPRED, Kathmandu, January 14, 2016.

  14. 14.

    This is consistent with a report by Inlogos (2009), which found that only 2.5% of VDC block grant resources were used to fund agricultural and irrigation projects.

  15. 15.

    This is not necessarily a bad thing, as spending on rural roads is one of the most productive public expenditures in Nepal (Dillon et al. 2008).

  16. 16.

    Nepal has had 16 Ministers of Agriculture between 2001 and 2015.

  17. 17.

    Interview with NARC, Kathmandu, January 13, 2016.

  18. 18.

    Interview with CEAPRED, Kathmandu, January 14, 2016.

  19. 19.

    Suvedi and McNamara (2012) note that the lack of elected local leaders for the last decade has severely undermined the ability of extension agents to be responsive to farmers’ needs.

  20. 20.

    Notably, the classification of country cases into state “types” is subject to interpretation since they often have features that commensurate with both types.

  21. 21.

    Significantly, in 2015, India began implementing a broad fiscal reform to devolve a 10% point increase in tax revenues to states (Power to the States 2015).

  22. 22.

    We were informed that this incentive system was considered in the early 2000s. However, the profiles of extension staff found they were predominantly from a small group of districts where technical and vocational education centers were located and therefore would not have sufficient expertise to go to different areas.

  23. 23.

    For some caveats on corruption, please see http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.com/news/kenya-devolution-still-evolving.

  24. 24.

    Authors’ calculations using World Development Indicators 2015.

Abbreviations

ADS:

Agricultural Development Strategy

AIATs:

Assessment Institutes for Agricultural Technology (Indonesia)

CAESC:

Community Based Agricultural Extension Service Centers

CPN:

Communist Party of Nepal

CTEVT:

Council for Technical Education and Vocational Training

DADOs:

District Agricultural Development Officers

DAFF:

Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (South Africa)

DDCs:

District Development Committees

DFRS:

Department of Forest Research and Survey

DLOs:

District Livestock Officers

GDP:

Gross Domestic Product

GoN:

Government of Nepal

IAARD:

Indonesian Agency for Agricultural Research and Development (Indonesia)

ICAR:

Indian Council for Agricultural Research (India)

KVKs:

Krishi Vigyan Kendras (India)

LSGA:

Local Self-Governance Act

MARDI:

Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (Malaysia)

MECs:

Members of the Executive Council (South Africa)

MFSC:

Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation

MinMECs:

Ministers and Members of Provincial Executive Committees (South Africa)

MoLD:

Ministry of Livestock Development

MLRM:

Ministry of Land Reform and Management

MoAD:

Ministry of Agricultural Development

MoCPA:

Ministry of Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation

MoE:

Ministry of Energy

MOF:

Ministry of Finance

MoFALD:

Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development

MoFSC:

Ministry of Forestry and Soil Conservation

MoGA:

Ministry of General Administration

MoI:

Ministry of Irrigation

NARC:

Nepal Agricultural Research Council

NARI:

National Agricultural Research Institute

NASRI:

National Animal Science Research Institute

NAST:

Nepal Academy of Science and Technology

NPC:

National Planning Commission

PDA:

Provincial Department of Agriculture (South Africa)

Pemandu:

Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Malaysia)

PSC:

Public Service Commission

R&D:

Research and Development

SALGA:

South African Local Governance Association (South Africa)

TU:

Tribhuvan University

References

  • Azfar, O., Kahkonen, S., & Meager, P. (2001). Conditions for effective decentralized governance: A synthesis of research findings. Working Paper No. 256. College Park, MD: Center for Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector, University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennet, R. (2010). Decentralizing authority after Suharto: Indonesia’s ‘big bang’, 1998-2010. Innovations for successful societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boex, J. (2012a). Review of the criteria and grant allocation formulas for block grants to DDCs and VDCs in Nepal. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, Center on International Development and Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boex, J. (2012b). Toward a federal constitution in Nepal: What is the future role and structure of local governments? IDG Policy Brief. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, A. (2014). Before the ‘big bang’: Decentralization debates and practice in Indonesia, 1949–99. In Hal Hill (Ed.), Regional dynamics in a decentralized Indonesia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asia Studies Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byerlee, D., & Traxler, G. (2001). The role of technology spillovers and economies of size in the efficient design of agricultural research systems (Chapter 9). In J. Alston, P. Pardey, & M. Taylor (Eds.), Agriculture science policy: Changing global agendas. Washington, DC: IFPRI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byerlee, D., & Alex, G. (1998). Strengthening national agricultural research systems: Issues and good practice. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carter Center. (2014). Local governance in Nepal: Public participation and perception. Atlanta, GA: The Carter Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. (2011). NEPAL small area estimation of poverty, 2011 (summary and major findings). Retrieved August 5, 2013, from http://cbs.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Small%20Area%20Estimates%20of%20Poverty,%202011.pdf.

  • Cheema, G. S., & Rondinelli, D. (2007). From government decentralization to decentralized governance. In G. S. Cheema & D. Rondinelli (Eds.), Decentralizing governance: Emerging concepts and practices. Cambridge, MA/Washington, DC: Harvard University/Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheeseman, N., Lynch, G., & Willis, J. (2016). Decentralization in Kenya: The Governance of Governors. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 54(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickovick, T. (2005). The measure and mismeasure of decentralization: Subnational autonomy in Senegal and South Africa. Journal of Modern African Studies, 43(2), 183–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, A., Sharma, M., & Zhang, X. (2008). Nepal agriculture public expenditure review. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Nepal (GoN). (2006). An assessment of the implementation of the Tenth Plan/PRSP. Kathmandu, Nepal: National Planning Commission Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Nepal (GoN). (2013). Agricultural Development Strategy (ADS): 2015-2035. Kathmandu, Nepal: Ministry of Agricultural Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Nepal (GoN). (2015a). Constitution of Nepal. September 20, 2015 (2072.6.3). Kathmandu, Nepal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Nepal (GoN) (2015b). Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) Assessment: Nepal PFM Performance Assessment II. Kathmandu, Nepal: Ministry of Finance and Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inlogos. (2009). Assessment of village development committee governance and the use of block grants. Kathmandu: Ministry of Local Development and United Nations Development Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kathyola, J., & Job, O. (Eds.). (2011). Decentralisation in commonwealth Africa: Experiences from Botswana, Cameroon, Ghana, Mozambique, and Tanzania. London, UK: Commonwealth Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lankina, T. (2008). Cross-cutting literature review on the drivers of local council accountability and performance. Social Development Working Paper No. 112. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maseru, J. (2008). UCLG Country Profiles: Republic of South Africa. Barcelona, Spain: United Cities and Local Governance (UCLG).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nepal Agricultural Research Council Act, 2048. (1992). Kathmandu, Nepal: Law Commission of Nepal. Available at: https://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/nep100289.pdf (Accessed October 5, 2016).

  • Nepal Agricultural Research Council (NARC). (2016). NARC-ACIAR partnership: Past, present, and ways ahead. Kathmandu, Nepal: NARC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power to the states: Making fiscal transfers work for better health. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development and Accountability Initiative, Centre for Policy Research. Available at http://www.cprindia.org/sites/default/files/policy-briefs/India-fiscal-transfers-CGD-working-group-report_0.pdf.

  • Quinn, D., & Ramananda, P. G. (2013). Institutional architecture for food security policy change: Nepal. Washington, DC: USAID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahija, M., Shrestha, H., Stads, G. J., & Bhujel, Ram Bahadur. (2011). Nepal: Recent developments in public agricultural research, Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators (ASTI) country note. Kathmandu/Washington, DC: NARC/IFPRI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Root, C. (2014). Agricultural service responsiveness in Nepal. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sabel, C., & Jordan, J. (2015). Doing, learning, being: Some lessons learned from Malaysia’s National Transformation Program. Competitive Industries and Innovation Program. World Bank. Available at http://www2.law.columbia.edu/sabel/papers/CS-LSJ–DLB%20Malaysia%20PEMANDU–Final-190115.pdf.

  • Sharma, N. K. (2011). National agriculture extension system in Nepal: An analysis of the system diversity. Country Paper Submitted to SAARC Agriculture Centre. Dhaka, Bangladesh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stads, G. J. (2015). Taking stock of agricultural R&D capacity and investment in Nepal. Presented at Regional Workshop on Agricultural Transformation, Challenges and Opportunities in South Asia. Kathmandu, Nepal, February 13–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stads, G. J., Haryono, & Nurjayanti, S. (2007). Agricultural R&D in Indonesia: Policy, Investments, and Institutional Profile. ASTI: Agricultural Science & Technology Indicators. Washington, DC: IFPRI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumarto, S., Suryahadi, A., & Arifianto, A. (2004). Governance and poverty reduction: Evidence from Newly-decentralized Indonesia. SMERU Research Institute Working Paper. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sudarno_Sumarto/publication/4811349_Governance_and_Poverty_Reduction_Evidence_from_Newly_Decentralized_Indonesia/links/0c96051a514ce4e652000000.pdf.

  • Suvedi, M., & McNamara, P. (2012). Strengthening the pluralistic agricultural extension system in Nepal. Monitoring Extension and Advisory Services (MEAS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, B., & Davis, K. (2014). Status of agricultural extension and rural advisory services worldwide: Summary report. Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services: Lindau, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, B., & Rajalahti, R. (2010). Strengthening agricultural extension and advisory systems: Procedures for assessing, transforming, and evaluating extension systems. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2014). Annual Report 2014: UNDP in Nepal. New York, NY: UNDP.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2014a). Nepal: Local Service Delivery in Nepal. Report No. 87922-NP. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2014b). The evolution of Kenya’s devolution: What’s working well, what could work better. Information Note for World Bank Staff. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2012). Devolution without Disruption: Pathways to a successful new Kenya. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2007). Agricultural extension services in Indonesia: New approaches and emerging issues. Jakarta, Indonesia: World Bank. Available at http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2010/03/23/000333038_20100323010352/Rendered/PDF/384680ESW0Whit10Box345622B01PUBLIC1.pdf.

  • World Development Indicators Database. World Bank. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators

  • Yilmaz, S., Beris, Y., & Serrano-Berthet, R. (2010). Linking local government discretion and accountability in decentralisation. Development Policy Review, 28(3), 259–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziblatt, D. (2006). Structuring the state: The formation of Italy and Germany and the puzzle of federalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors are very grateful to the many officials, researchers, donors, and civil society organizations in Nepal that helped inform this report. A special thanks to the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for extending financial support to conduct this study through the policy reform initiatives project in Nepal and to P. K. Joshi and Anjani Kumar for supporting our involvement in this study. We are also extremely grateful to Madhab Karkee, who provided invaluable assistance in facilitating interviews in Kathmandu and providing feedback on previous iterations of the study. We further thank the Institute for Integrated Development Studies (IIDS) in Kathmandu for collecting the DADO/DLO survey data, particularly Bishnu Pant, Ram Khadka, and Anuj Bhandari. The survey could not has been conducted without the support of the Ministry of Agricultural Development and the Ministry of Livestock Development in Nepal. The authors are also grateful to Jane Lole for assisting with the secondary country case studies. All errors remain authors’ own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Food Policy Research Institute, 1201 Eye Street NW, Washington, DC, 20005, USA

    Danielle Resnick

  2. Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, 1440 G Street NW, Washington, DC, 20005, USA

    Jordan Kyle

Authors
  1. Jordan Kyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Danielle Resnick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danielle Resnick .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Visiting Scientist, International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Patan, Nepal

    Ganesh Thapa

  2. Research Fellow, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), New Delhi, India

    Anjani Kumar

  3. Former Director, South Asia Office, International Food Policy Research Institute, New Delhi, India

    P.K. Joshi

Appendix

Appendix

(See Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Source Authors’ compilation. Notes Black lines provide a rough indication of the provincial boundaries as set forth in the January 2016 Constitutional amendment. However, these boundaries were still under consideration as of the writing of this chapter

DADO/DLO survey sample.

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kyle, J., Resnick, D. (2019). Nepal’s Changing Governance Structure and Implications for Agricultural Development. In: Thapa, G., Kumar, A., Joshi, P. (eds) Agricultural Transformation in Nepal. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9648-0_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9648-0_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9647-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9648-0

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation