book1

tourism, biodiversity and remi� ances through foreign employment in
coopera� on with the private sector.
Narra� ng “Foreign Assistance: An Unfi nished Journey,” Prof. Bishwambher
Pyakural candidly affi rms that Nepal’s planned development began with
the infusion of foreign aid in the 1950s and now it has embarked on 11 th
fi ve-year development plan. While the fi rst four plans (1956-62, 1962-65,
1965-70, 1970-75) laid emphasis on the basic infrastructure development,
only the Fi� h Plan (1975-80) recognized people-oriented development and
the need for egalitarian benefi ts. The sixth plan focused on mee� ng basic
minimum needs of people through a reduc� on in income inequality and
employment. The seventh plan a� empted to bridge development plans and
implementa� on with an aim to increase produc� vity capacity of economy
by expanding physical resources. The eighth plan a� er the democra� c
change of 1990 focused on sustainable development, poverty reduc� on
with inclusion of popular programs. With the realiza� on of sector-based
development, the ninth plan iden� fi ed agriculture and forestry, water
resources, industrializa� on, interna� onal trade and tourism development
with the objec� ve of poverty allevia� on. Only in the tenth plan, Poverty
Reduc� on Strategy Paper was aligned with special treatment of marginalized
and vulnerable people. In the interlude of Maoist insurgency the two
consecu� ve Interim Plans paid special focus on confl ict-sensi� ve relief,
reconstruc� on, revival of economy, and gave emphasis on good governance,
eff ec� ve service delivery and inclusive development process.
He unveils the pervasiveness of foreign aid in all sectors of Nepal’s
poli� cal economy: agriculture, irriga� on, forestry, transport, power,
communica� on, industry and commerce and even social services. In the
process na� onal priories shi� ed along with donors. Obviously, foreign aid
has posi� vely contributed to per capita GDP in the long run but it is found
to be nega� ve in the short-run implying that country suff ered from a lack of
aid absorp� ve capacity and high aid vola� lity. So the main issue is to iden� fy
the eff ec� veness of foreign aid to increase its further effi ciency. The cri� cism
that aid has actually hampered development goals of the poor countries is
drawing a� en� on to majority of aid prac� � oners. The rich donors are always
behind their commitment to off er 0.7 percent of their gross na� onal income
as offi cial development aid. Nepal, however, faces a large discrepancy
between aid commitment and disbursement. The reasons are: lack of
matching fund; weaknesses on making the claims for reimbursement; and
inability to fulfi ll the agreed grants and loan condi� onality.
If the links of foreign aid is seen to democracy, human rights, governance,
liberaliza� on and economic reforms backed by reduc� on of corrup� on
and confl ict in recipient countries there is a pause: Aid is eff ec� ve when
it is moderate in volume and counterproduc� ve when it is puff ed-up. The
central debate over its contribu� on to na� onal development, therefore,
lingers on. Present Foreign Aid Policy, 2002 doesn’t integrate aid with
priority developmental ac� vi� es, and is in major overhaul. Dra� Foreign
Aid Policy, 2009 intends to develop and adopt a Na� onal Ac� on Plan
XIV