Introduction
The signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) on 21 November 2006 heralded the beginning of a new chapter in Nepal’s history. Although it is a political document signed between the Seven-Party Alliance and the Maoist party to carry out a series of political and security transitions—such as cease hostilities, manage arms and armies and end the 10-year armed conflict—the CPA commits Nepal to a profoundly ambitious agenda of political, governance, economic and social transformation. In many ways, the CPA can equally be viewed as a ‘checklist’ of long-term development priorities, vital for creating a just society and achieving a sustained peace.
Six years since the signing of the CPA, Nepal remains in the midst of its very complex transition. ‘Business as usual’ approaches to development are not enough in these circumstances and more is required of development instruments and actors to work at the heart of peace-building. The government’s ‘periodic plan’ is one such instrument as it defines the medium-term development priorities and goals of the country. In order to advance the CPA’s transformation agenda, it is imperative that Nepal’s periodic plans have good alignment with the CPA.
This Field Bulletin looks at how core priorities identified in the CPA are featured in Nepal’s current Three-Year Plan. Overall, the Three-Year Plan shows strong alignment with the CPA. The Plan is particularly focused on promoting social inclusion, equitable growth, employment generation and good governance, though concrete targets or activities are often not specified. Attention to rule of law, respect for human rights, land reform and considerations for state restructuring are also included in the Plan, but to a much lesser extent. Action towards transformation of the security sector, on the other hand, is largely missing. The most important question, which still awaits an answer when the Plan concludes in July 2013, is whether or not progress has been achieved against these priorities? Even more so, will the next periodic plan maintain the existing momentum to push Nepal’s development efforts further into the core peacebuilding agenda of the CPA? With much talk of the ‘logical conclusion of the peace process’ arriving imminently, this may not be a given, despite the long-term agenda laid out in the CPA.
Background
Nepal has been carrying out ‘planned development’ since 1956, with each of the 12 periodic plans reflecting the dominant national development discourse of the day. Broadly, the first four periodic plans (from 1956 to 1975) prioritised transportation and communications. The Fifth and the Sixth Plans (from 1975 to 1985) focused on agricultural development. The Seventh Plan (from 1985 to 1990) sought to meet basic needs such as food, clothing, education, sanitation and transportation. Reflecting the political changes following the first Jan Andolan of 1990, the Eighth and Ninth Plans (from 1992 to 2002) prioritised poverty alleviation and regional disparity reduction. In order to fill the shortfalls of these preceding Plans, the Tenth Plan (from 2002 to 2007) came into effect with the sole objective of poverty reduction. The Three-Year Interim Plan (from July 2007 to July 2010) responded directly to the post-conflict and CPA context, emphasising the reconstruction of conflict damaged infrastructure, the provision of immediate relief to conflict victims and support to inclusive development. In many ways, it was guided by a post-CPA ‘euphoria’ which characterised the period when the Plan was being developed. However, “the consensus [...] shown during the formulation of the Plan could not last during the implementation period”.
Overall, it has been observed that Nepal’s “planning experiences exhibit that development performance has been both a combination of success and failure.” The current Three-Year Plan itself recognises previous mixed successes, “Even after more than 50 years of planned development efforts, our economic growth has not been able to gain expected pace. As the outcome of the implementation of the past plans, some achievements have been made in sectors like road, irrigation, drinking water, information and communications, literacy and school enrolment rate, average life expectancy, child mortality rate, maternal mortality rate, however, the country is still in a least developed country stage at large.”5 While many periodic plans have fallen short of their targets, the plans remain the central instrument for determining national development priorities and expenditure.