Social and Infrastructure Development Indicators

Nepal has a population of 28.1 million (UNDP HDI 2015). It is a least developed country (LDC), with a Human Development Index (HDI- 0.548) ranking 149 out of 188 countries. Nepali society is socially stratified through its adherence to Hindu notions of caste. When inequality factors are taken into account Nepal’s HDI score drops by 26.8% per cent to 0.401 (UNDP 2015). This is one marker that demonstrates the role that inequality plays in preventing human

development progress. It is important to understand that Nepal is not a homogenous society, despite 250 years of attempting to create a centralized and unified state. Nepal is a “multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual, multi- religious” (Serchan 2012: 87). For example, there are 123 different languages spoken throughout Nepal.

Daily life is a struggle for most. The 2015 Human Development Index puts the percentage of working poor (at PPP $2 USD a day) at 49.5%. Whereas, 23.7% are living below the income poverty line ($1.25 USD a day). When this level of poverty is compounded with the effects of a disaster on livelihoods and basic infrastructure, the results are grim news stories of the 2015 earthquake survivors who died from winter exposure (Shrestha 2016) and vulnerable children being trafficked because of the loss of their families (Jones 2015).

Just under sixty per cent of the overall adult population are literate. This average belies the large gap in literacy among males and females. Male literacy is 71.6% and female literacy is 44.5% (GON 2012). The education sector is one HDI component that has made gains. In 1981, the adult literacy rate was 23%

87

(Mathema 2007). However, access to education and quality of education remain problems (Bhatta 2008; Ghimire 2015). Nepal first developed a New Education System Plan in 1971, which was the first time in Nepal’s history that education was made widely available (Bhatta 2008). There is a belief in education being available to all (Bhatta 2008). However, many students drop out in the primary grades for a variety of reasons which may include malnutrition and lack of potable water making it hard for students to concentrate, families unable to afford school fees, children needing to work at home, etc. The quality of state education students receive is also poor as indicated by the 50 to 70% failure rates in compulsory School Leaving Certificate exams (Bhatta 2008).

In rural areas poverty is acute. The rate of poverty in rural communities jumps considerably from the 23.7% national average. In the less developed western regions of the country, the poverty rates stand at 45% and 46% (International Fund for Agricultural Development 2016). Agriculture and subsistence

agriculture accounts for 76% of total household livelihoods (note that only 52% of agricultural households are literate) (Central Bureau of Statistics 2012). Approximately 70% of farm households have land holdings of less than 1 hectare “and many depend on plots that are too small to meet their subsistence requirements (International Fund for Agricultural Development 2016). The majority of farming is done using basic equipment. Only 1% of farm households own a tractor or power tiller and most do not use improved high-yield seeds (Central Bureau of Statistics 2012). Agriculture accounts for over one third of Nepal’s GDP.

Another important contemporary factor that has shaped Nepal’s social political and economic sphere are the number of young people who have left Nepal to find work elsewhere, and contribute to Nepal households by sending

remittances. In 2014, 520,000 labour permits were issued for Nepali’s who planned to work abroad (International Labour Organisation 2016). The World Bank estimates that remittances made up 32.2% of Nepal’s GDP in 2015. The large outmigration of young and able-bodied men and women in the 20 to 40- year age range has significant political implications, as they are absent and unlikely to vote in elections. As stated by the International Labour Organisation, the migrant worker phenomena have created some unique vulnerabilities:

“Nepali migrant workers make an enormous development contribution to their home country but also to the destination countries where they fill

88

labour market niches by doing jobs that nationals are unable or unwilling to fill. But their contributions do not lessen their vulnerability to labour exploitation and abuse. Studies of recruitment processes and working conditions for low-skilled migrants consistently reveal indicators of abuse commonly associated with exploitation including forced labour and trafficking” (International Labour Organisation 2016: Online).

Pattisson (2016) reported that at least forty-four Nepali migrants died during the summer of 2014 while working in Qatar. The fact that so many Nepali people are forced to leave their country for work, only to be exploited and abused abroad, is both a reflection of the compliancy of a host of actors (e.g. multinational

corporations, governments, manpower agents) when it comes to labour under the current neoliberal economies (Pattisson 2016) and a reflection of the dire conditions in Nepal.

One example of Nepal’s undeveloped physical infrastructure is its road system. Nepal is a country where distance is sometimes still measured by hours of walking on foot rather than drive times and kilometres (Campbell 2010). Many places in the difficult terrain of the hills and mountains, remain isolated and only accessible by foot, disconnected from broader transport and economic

networks. The majority of rural roads constructed are basic “low technology” rural roads (Petley et al. 2007: 37). Providing access to rural and isolated communities has been actively pursued with donor money such as the Asian Development Bank. In 1985, the total road length in Nepal was 6000 km (World Bank 2013) whereas, by 2015 the road length stands at over 80,000 km

(Himalayan Times 2015). In 2006, fourteen district headquarters (out of seventy- five) had no direct access by roads. By 2013, this number had been reduced to two district headquarters (GON 2013). Haphazard road building is resulting in increased slope instability and landslides (Petley et al. 2007) especially in fragile hill/mountain districts. In 2014 the previously mentioned Juri landslide destroyed five kilometres of the Araniko Highway and created an artificial dam across a tributary of the Koshi River resulting in a risk of potentially catastrophic flooding downstream16_{. The construction of roads is providing better access to}

government centres and services and markets; however, due to the haphazard nature of road construction, roads are also contributing to the increased risk of landslides.

89

Table 4-3. Nepal's Development Indicators

Indicator Source

General

Population 28.1 million (total) UNDP HDI 2015

GDP growth (annual 5%) 5.4% (2014)

3.4% (2015)

World Bank Poverty Data 2016

GNI per capita (USD) $730 2015

GON Budget Allocation 2014/15 Rs 495,185,306,000 GON 2014b

Foreign Grants/Loans 2014/15 Grant- Rs 73,385,924,000

Loan- Rs 49,528,770,000

GON 2014b % of seats held by women in

parliament

29.5 % UNDP HDI 2015

Corruption Ranked 131 out of 168 and

given a score of 27/100

Transparency International

Urban Population- 2015 18.6% UNDP HDI 2015

Internet users (% of population) 15.4 % UNDP HDI 2015

Health

Life Expectancy at Birth 69.6 years

71.1 (females) 68.2 (males)

UNDP HDI 2015

Public Health Expenditure (% of GDP)

6% UNDP HDI 2015

Education

Adult literacy rate 57.4% UNDP HDI 2015

Public Education Expenditure (% of GDP)

4.7 % UNDP HDI 2015

Population with at least some secondary education (% ages 25 and older)

17.7% (female) 38.2 (male)

UNDP HDI 2015

(Source: various- indicated in table)

All of the above indicators of Nepal’s extremely low development ought to be considered with disaster vulnerability in mind. The following quotation is

especially relevant in light of the poverty and inequalities experienced in Nepal: “Vulnerable populations are those most at-risk, not simply because they are exposed to a hazard, but as a result of a marginality that makes of their life a ‘permanent emergency’” (Bankoff 2001: 25).

In light of the social indicators discussed above, it is clear that in contemporary Nepal many people are in a state of ‘permanent emergency’ that exacerbates their vulnerability to disasters.

It is hard to reconcile Nepal’s poor development status when it is the recipient of approximately one billion USD in annual foreign assistance (Bell 2014). Nepal’s poor ranking on the corruption index by Transparency International of 131 helps to clarify this conundrum (Table 4-3). Nepal’s public institutions are marred by an extractive culture of corruption and rent-seeking, which is fuelled by donor money. As Bell (2014) writes:

90

“The defining characteristic and raison d’etre of the political economy are the practice of patronage for the purpose of resource extraction: through the sale of offices and political favours, bureaucratic graft, commissions on public contracts, lucrative but unproductive donor programmes, politically protected business cartels, or any other opportunity for rent seeking” (Bell 2014: 338).

Corruption is widespread in all facets of Nepali government administration (e.g. political party, bureaucracy). Corruption is a significant issue in regard to mainstreaming DRR for several reasons: as long as it is widespread and entrenched in government processes it remains a barrier for changing policies and sparking innovation, and it robs the community of funding that could be invested in disaster risk reduction.

Corruption’s impact on Nepal society was best illustrated over the course of this research by the case of load-shedding in Kathmandu Valley, although examples can easily be drawn from other sectors such as education or health. Kathmandu valley residents, businesses and tourists were accustomed to living without power for up to fifteen hours a day. Hotels and those who could afford it would keep the lights on through generators, solar power, and power inverters. The public was told that electricity had to be rationed because there was not enough in the grid. Instead, officials at the Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) were

receiving “bribes to allow industries to have dedicated feeders… power started going to those who paid, and load-shedding got much worse” (Shrestha 2016: Online). Recent reforms to cut out the systemic corruption has resulted in the resumption of twenty-four hours of electricity to homes in Kathmandu Valley. Credit for this has been given to Kulman Ghising, the newly politically appointed head of the NEA. As explained in a Nepali Times exposé on the issue:

“Kulman Ghising was appointed by the former guerrilla leader of the Maoist-Centre, Janardan Sharma, when he became Minister for Energy in the present coalition. Sharma has the green light from Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal to remove load shedding to show performance and improve the party’s credibility. Sharma has publicly accused the previous management of NEA of “leaking” electricity, and even set up a committee to investigate it” (Shrestha 2016: Online).

As seen in the above quote, the dismantling of NEA’s corruption required the backing of the Prime Minister (Maoist) who viewed it as a way to build public support for his party, while serving as Prime Minister with a limited term in a coalition government. According to the Nepali Times, Ghising’s action of ending the practice of ‘leaking electricity’ has disturbed a ‘hornet’s nest.’ In this case, NEA trade union bosses are pushing for Ghising’s removal now that their

91

funding source and those of their political affiliates (in Nepal, trade unions are extensions of political parties) have been dismantled. This illustrates the difficult and possibly dangerous task that individual’s face in dismantling the systemic corruption that pervades Nepalese institutions. It also illustrates the challenge of changing policy when elites are profiting from the status quo. In this case, the countries capital region went without electricity in order for political elites to profit.

It is safe to say that the root of Nepal’s poor developmental performance is linked with its weak and corrupt governance. Unfortunately, the historical roots of this can be traced right back to Nepal’s unification in 1768, which means it is extremely difficult culture to change. This is examined in the next section.