Kathmandu

Politics and Load Shedding

New York - Prakash Kumar Shrestha
Published in www.nepalipost.com 13 February 2009 10:36 am | 0 comments

The world is in financial crisis, followed by economic recession but Nepal is in unprecedented energy crisis, having load-shedding of 14 hours per day. This shows that we are going back toward past decades in ”New Nepal”. Why do we have this difficult situation in this modern age? General people do not know the detail facts of hydropower development. However, they want enough electricity by paying reasonable price. Whose responsibility is to ensure the generation of hydropower?

In this modern and liberalized world, resources and techniques are not the major constraints for the development of the infrastructure like hydropower. And, we have an abundant supply of labor and nature-given water resources. Then, according to economic theory, there should be the production or supply to meet demand. We should not have current horrible situation of power shortage. Then, what has gone wrong resulting in such a severe crisis? We need to look at this from the political economic perspective to identify reasons and solutions. It is the politics in general, and particularly over water, that has been preventing hydropower projects from being constructed.

Everyone would agree that we have not had right and investment friendly political environment so far, although we are moving in right direction politically. Political instability and internal conflict since 1990, which still continues, has been seriously impacting our developmental work and capacity. In the history, however, almost all countries in the world had passed through the some sort of conflict and war. But, in many advanced countries, after the conflict and war, they began a right path of development with political consensus.

Although we are now republic, our political environment has not improved much for investment and economic development. Still, political parties are quarreling for trivial matters, ignoring major issues of the economy and country. It looks that they are again going to repeat the game, which was seen in the 1990s after the restoration of multiparty democracy, pulling the country back in the development index. They are now once again forgetting the promises they had made in front of people.

Now Nepal is seriously lacking energy, because of which productive activities are suffering. However, it has not been a matter of seriousness and discussion in political arena, which holds decision and commanding power to get the things done. Unfortunately, we are just observing cheap drama among parties, suffering from same sort of disease of not being able to manage their own party first. Experience has revealed that the party in the power is most vulnerable to split and prone to internal conflict. Political leaders are not giving a very small fraction of their time to think, discuss and implement economic issues and agendas. Despite political difference, they can have common agenda for economic development. Why not they inaugurate the construction of 10 or more hydropower projects simultaneously by all leaders being together immediately? Why not all parties expedite the construction work by mobilizing their own youth wings? Why not they set aside their political difference, at least for developmental work? It will provide people with some hope about future that they will get electricity and better life after suffering for certain time.

Now, in the world market, the prices of oil and construction materials have declined significantly, owing to recession in the world. For Nepal, it can be the right time to accelerate the construction of infrastructure in order to boost the economy and provide employment to the mass. However, the statistics of first four months published by Nepal Rastra Bank showed the weak capital expenditure of the government. Private sector is also not getting amicable environment to invest.

People are expecting the economic revolution from the parties jointly as we saw in the last phase of political revolution? Experience and history of advanced countries showed that even without natural resources countries can make progress; just we need unity, commitment and good politics. We can borrow money and technique for development, but can we borrow politics? Can our political leaders ready to give our country on contract for management and development? Even after the historical political change of being republic, we have yet to see new change in behaviors of political parties and way of running government.

Our present is the outcome of past, we can easily blame for past, but can we do something good so that future won’t blame us. If we don’t get prosperous Nepal after being republic, then what will be the difference between the Rana Regime and the current regime? How long we will have to suffer for energy, employment, and equality? How long we will have to go foreign countries for employment? Can political parties give an hour per day to ponder over these things and get solutions and implement it? General people don’t have any choice but to expect answer from the political parties. Our political leaders look complacent on crisis that the capitalist economies have been facing now, but are not worrying to have 14 hours load shedding. They are also ignoring the fact that we need a huge sum of capital to generate the targeted ”10000 MW”, which we get from the capitalist economies only. In fact, there should be capitalist mode of production to provide incentive and socialistic mode of distribution to get equality in the economy. In electricity generation, market along cannot produce without effective and supportive role of the government. Hence, the government has the sole responsibility to end the current energy crisis and political parties should support it, putting aside political differences.

बेरोजगारीको समस्या र मृगतृष्णारूपी रोजगारी

कान्तिपुर पत्रिकामा २०६५ चैत्र ७ गते प्रकासित

प्रकाशकुमार श्रेष्ठ

न्यून आर्थिक वृद्धि तर उच्च जनसंख्या वृद्धि नेपाली अर्थतन्त्रको एउटा विशेषता भएको छ । यसले गर्दा नेपालीहरूका लागि रोजगारी मृगतृष्णाजस्तै भएको छ । बाँच्नका लागि रोजगारी अपरिहार्य हो तर रोजगारी सिर्जना र बेरोजगारीको समस्याप्रति यथेष्ट ध्यान नपुगेको प्रस्टै देखिन्छ । यसले गर्दा एकातर्फ आर्थिक क्रियाकलापले गति लिन सकेको छैन भने अर्कोतर्फ सामाजिक र राजनीतिक स्थिरता हासिल गर्न गाह्रो परिरहेको छ ।

नेपालमा मुद्रास्फीतिजस्तो बेरोजगारीलाई नियमित मापन गर्ने गरिएको छैन । यसले नेपाली अर्थतन्त्रमा बेरोजगारीको मात्रा कति छ र यो बढेको छ कि घटेको छ भन्नेबारे थाहा छैन । विकसित देशहरूमा भने मासिक रूपमै बेरोजगारी दरलाई मापन गरी सार्वजनिक गरिन्छ । यस दरमा आउने उतारचढावले अर्थतन्त्रको स्थिति बताइरहेको हुन्छ । तद्नुरूप सरकारी नीति तथा कार्यक्रमहरू तय गरिन्छ । तर, नेपालमा बेरोजगारीको यस किसिमको मापनको अभावमा बेरोजगारीको स्थितिप्रति जवाफदेही भएकोे देखिँदैन ।

मापन नगरिए पनि नेपालको आर्थिक वृद्धिदरको स्थितिलाई हेर्दा बेरोजगारी उल्लेख्य छ भने कुरामा दुई मत छैन । नेपालमा छुटफुट रूपमा खुल्ने विज्ञापनमा पर्ने हजारौं निवेदन, वैदेशिक रोजगारीमा जाने लामो लर्को, रोजगारीका लागि नेता, मन्त्री र 'ठूलाबडा' हरूकोमा धाइरहेका युवाहरूको पंक्तिलाई हेर्ने हो भने मुलुकमा बेरोजगारी दर उच्च रहेको देखिन्छ । मौसमी कृषि कर्मले गर्दा अल्प बेरोजगारीको दर अझ बढाएको छ । गैरसरकारी स्र्रोतअनुसार नेपालमा झन्डै ४२ प्रतिशत बेरोजगारी रहेको देखिएको छ । केही वर्षयता नवशास्त्रीय अवधारणाअनुरूप सरकारी वित्तीय सुदृढीकरण नीतिले वित्त घाटालाई नियन्त्रण गरे पनि नेपाली युवाहरूको रोजगारी पाउने अवसर भने मृगतृष्णा भएको छ ।

नेपालका नीति निर्माण तहमा बेरोजगारीलाई महत्त्वको रूपमा हेरिएको पाइँदैन । अमेरिकाजस्तो देशको मौदि्रक नीतिको एउटा उद्देश्य पूर्ण रोजगारी कायम गर्नु पनि छ । मुद्रास्फीति र बेराजगारीलाई सन्तुलित ढंगबाट हेर्ने गरिन्छ, किनभने दुवै वास्तवमा समाजका दुश्मन हुन् । तर, नेपालको मौदि्रक नीतिको प्रमुख उद्देश्य स्पष्ट रूपमा मूल्य स्थिरता कायम गर्नु रहेको छ । त्यति मात्र होइन, हाम्रो वित्त नीति पनि रोजगारी सिर्जनामा केन्दि्रत छैन । मूल्य स्थिरता कायम गरेजस्तै न्यून बेरोजगारी दर कायम गर्ने जिम्मेवार नीति नेपालमा रहेको देखिँदैन ।

बेरोजगारी ज्यादै संवेदनशील विषय हुनुपर्ने हो । अझ, गरिबहरूका लागि बाँच्ने आधार नै रोजगारी हो । यति मात्र होइन, उत्पादनको महत्त्वपूर्ण साधन श्रम हो, तर यो यस्तो साधन हो जसलाई सञ्चित गरेर राख्न सकिँदैन । कुनै व्यक्तिको काम गर्ने समयमा काम पाएन भने त्यो व्यक्तिका लागि त्यो समय फर्केर आउँदैन । त्यो सदाका लागि खेर जान्छ । बेरोजगार रहनु भनेको अर्थशास्त्रीय दृष्टिकोणमा उत्पादनको साधन खेर जानु हो र व्यक्तिले आय गुमाउनु हो । यसबाहेक रोजगारीको आर्थिक र सामाजिक महत्त्व पनि छ । रोजगारीमार्फत एउटा व्यक्तिले सहज ढंगबाट जीविका चलाएर समाजमा मर्यादापूर्वक बस्न सक्छ ।

बेरोजगारीले गर्दा समाजमा तनाव हुन गई राजनीतिमा पनि असर पर्छ । भनेजस्तो काम पाएको व्यक्ति व्यर्थमा सडकमा ढुंगामुढा गर्न जाँदैन । बेरोजगार युवाहरू भएकाले नै होला, नेपालको सडक विभिन्न बहानामा तातेको तातै गर्छ । राजतन्त्र गएर गणतन्त्र आएर सबै नेपाली बराबर भएको अवस्थामा पनि राजनीतिक सहजता आउन सकेको छैन । बेरोजगारीका कारण राजनीतिमा असर पर्ने कुरा विकसित देशहरूले बुझेका छन् । त्यसैले

रोजगारी सिर्जनामा यथेष्ट ध्यान दिने गरेका छन् । नेपालमा भने राज्यले यसतर्फ आवश्यक ध्यान दिन सकेको छैन ।

नेपालमा रोजगारी सिर्जना गर्न सकिँदैन त ? रोजगारीका लागि उत्पादन हुनुपर्छ । कहिलेकाहीँ पुँजीप्रधान उत्पादन भयो भने पनि उत्पादन बढेको अवस्थामा पनि रोजगार नबढ्न सक्छ । नेपालको श्रमशक्तिको वृद्धिलाई हेर्दा श्रमप्रधान प्रविधिले बढावा पाउनुपर्छ । नेपालमा तरल राजनीति र पूर्वाधारको अभावले गर्दा आर्थिक क्रियाकलापले गति लिन सकेको छैन । व्यावसायिक हुन नसकेको अपहेलित कृषि पेसा, उद्यमशीलताको अभाव, दुई छिमेकी देशहरूबाट आउने सस्तो आयात र उर्जाको संकटले नेपालको आर्थिक क्रियाकलाप थला परेको छ । यस अवस्थामा निजी क्षेत्रबाट रोजगारी सिर्जना हुने अवस्था तत्काललाई देखिँदैन ।

पुँजी र श्रमबीच प्रायः द्वन्द्व भइरहेको हुन्छ, जुन नेपालमा अहिले उच्चबिन्दुमा देखिन थालेको छ । तर, आफ्नो वर्गीय स्वार्थका लागि द्वन्द्व गरे पनि श्रमिक र पुँजीपतिहरूले बुझ्नुपर्ने कुरा हो भने श्रम र पुँजीको सम्मिश्रण नभईकन उत्पादन हुँदैन । उत्पादन नभई दुवै वर्गलाई फाइदा छैन । किनभने त्यस्तो अवस्थामा श्रमिकले ज्याला र पुँजीपतिले नाफा गुमाइरहेका हुन्छन् । नेपालमा शोषणरहित नाफामुखी औद्योगिक श्रम सम्बन्ध आजको आवश्यकता हो । तर हामीकहाँ आन्तरिक उत्पादन बढ्न नसकेका कारण विदेशी उत्पादनले फाइदा उठाइरहेको स्थिति छ ।

विश्वव्यापीकरणले वैदेशिक रोजगारीको ढोका खोलेको हुँदा अहिले नेपालका बेरोजगार युवाहरू वैदेशिक रोजगारीमा उल्लेख्य संख्यामा गएका छन् । यसबाट विप्रेषण -रेमिटेन्स) आप्रवाह भएर कठिन अवस्थामा पनि नेपालको अर्थतन्त्र चलिरहेको स्थिति छ । आर्थिक वर्ष २०६५-६६ को सुरूवाती छ महिनाको तथ्यांकलाई हेर्दा औसत मासिक १५ अर्ब ७२ करोड रुपैयाँ, साताको ३ अर्ब ६३ करोड र दैनिक ५२ करोड रुपैयाँ विप्रेषण नेपाल भित्रिने गरेको देखिन्छ । वैदेशिक रोजगारीबाट विदेशी मुद्रा आए पनि यसलाई रोजगारीको दीर्घकालीन समाधानका रूपमा लिइनुहुँदैन । अहिलेको विश्वव्यापी मन्दीले वैदेशिक रोजगारीलाई नराम्ररी प्रभाव पार्ने देखिएको छ । आगामी दिनमा विप्रेषण ओरालो लाग्ने सम्भावना छ । अहिले विदेशबाट विदेशी मुद्रा कमाएर पठाउने र उतैबाट आयात गरी उपभोग गर्ने प्रवृत्ति पनि छ । यसले गर्दा आन्तरिक माग भए पनि आन्तरिक

उत्पादन बढ्ने गरेको छैन । फलस्वरूप कालान्तरसम्म पनि लाहुरे हुने पुर्खौली पेसा नेपालीहरूले जारी राख्नुपर्ने देखिन्छ ।

ऐतिहासिक रूपमा राजनीतिक परिवर्तनको स्थिति र युवाहरूको उच्च आकांक्षाबीच वर्तमान सरकारले रोजगारी सिर्जनालाई पहिलो प्राथमिकतामा राख्नुपर्ने देखिन्छ । व्यापक मात्रामा पूर्वाधार निर्माणमा खर्च गरेमा एकातर्फ तत्काललाई रोजगार सिर्जना हुने र दीर्घकालमा अर्थतन्त्रको क्षमता बढेर निजी क्षेत्रको आर्थिक क्रियाकलाप वृद्धि हुने देखिन्छ । तर, नयाँ सरकारले पनि पुँजीगत खर्च गर्न नसकेर २०६५ पुस मसान्तमा नेपाल राष्ट्र बैंकमा २२ अर्ब ५९ करोड रुपैयाँ निस्त्रिmय रकम राखेको छ ।

नेपाल अहिले अविकासको कुचक्रमा छ । विकास हुन नसक्दा आर्थिक गतिविधि बढ्न सकेको छैन । यसले गर्दा बेरोजगारी छ र राजनीतिक असहजतालाई मलजल पुगेको छ । राजनीतिक असहजताले विकासका गतिविधिलाई पछाडि पारेेको छ । यो कुचक्रले गर्दा वैदेशिक सहयोग आए पनि र मनग्गे राजस्व संकलन भए पनि आर्थिक विकासले गति लिने छाँट देखिँदैन । कुचक्र तोडेर विकासको सुचक्र सुरु हुने हो भने नेपालको पनि विकास हुनसक्छ । तर, कुचक्र कसले र कसरी तोड्ने भन्ने सबाल सबभन्दा विचारणीय छ । जसरी राजनीतिक परिवर्तनका लागि सबै राजनीतिक दलहरू एकजुट भएर अगाडि बढे, अविकासको कुचक्र तोड्ने काम पनि उनीहरूबीचको न्यूनतम सहमतिबाट मात्र हुनसक्छ । सानातिना राजनीतिक दाउपेचलाई एउटा दायराभित्र राखी सबै नेपालीलाई चाहिएको आर्थिक विकासको कामलाई सहमतिका आधारमा जोड दिएमा विभिन्न खाडी मुलुकमा रोजगारीका लागि सर्वसाधारण नेपालीहरू भौंतारिनुपर्ने थिएन ।

लेखक न्युस्कुल फर सोसल रिसर्च, न्युयोर्कमा विद्यावारिधि अध्ययनरत छन् ।

Some Lessons from the US financial crisis for Nepal

	Article Published in myrepublica.com (2009-1-10) The world economy is now in recession, triggered by the sub-prime mortgage crisis that began in the US housing market since the mid-2007. Tsunami of this financial crisis has swept various big banks and dragged the economies of advanced countries into recession. The so-called big banks, "too big to fail", like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns have disappeared, and stock markets all over the world have historically plunged in 2008. The current crisis looks like a serious crisis after the 1930´s great depression. This event is, in fact, a blow to the flourishing free market concept after the 1970s in the name of neo-liberalism. What happened in the high tech and advanced financial system of developed countries? Main reasons for the current financial crisis can be succinctly categorized as: first, false conception of people that real estate prices grow forever and heavy credit flow to this sector by the financial institutions; second, highly complex financial derivative markets promoted by securitization, not backed up by real sector activities in the name of risk diversification and financial engineering, motivated by speculative purpose, which people hardly understand; third, highly integrated financial market and homogenous behavior, adopting same sort of model for evaluating risks, thereby exhibiting "animal spirit"; fourth, high leverage ratio by borrowing short-term and buying long-term mortgage- based securities; and the last but not least is the relaxation of regulatory measures on the ground that market can regulate itself through self-discipline. Many economists and intellectuals have already analyzed, in detail, the reasons behind the current financial crisis, which has the epicenter in the US. Moreover, many people have also discussed the possible implications from the current financial crisis in the different sectors of economy in Nepal as well. However, the matter of what should we learn from this crisis for Nepalese financial system is greatly lacking in our discussion. Actually, one should get some lessons from this crisis to avoid similar crisis in future in any country. Nepal´s financial sector is still nascent and is not so complex so that we have not witnessed any systemic financial crisis to date. However, our financial system is not far from such a crisis if we look at the current development of this sector. Amidst the weak performance of real sector, the financial sector has been expanding rapidly in recent years. Thanks to the remittance inflows so far. Having observed the profit of some banks and financial institutions, many new investors are more and more interested to enter this sector. However, with the ever expanding market, the financial regulator may not able to regulate the system efficiently and opportunity of profit will wither away. The long run fate of the financial system is, indeed, based on the performance of the productive sector. Given the weak real sector in Nepalese economy, it is time to think twice before entering into this sector. The second lesson is that haphazard and risky credit lending, for sake of fast profit, may invite crisis sooner or later. Banks and financial institutions in Nepal have recently been extending credit heavily to real estate sector. For example, private sector credit from commercial banks increased by 26.9 per cent in 2007/08 compared to a rise by 17.1 per cent in 2006/07. As a result, the real estate prices have been rising in the major cities of the country. In 2007/08, commercial banks alone extended Rs. 8.2 billion credit to real estates and Rs. 10.0 billion to residential construction. If we include development banks and finance companies, this amount can go up further. People generally believe that real estate prices do not fall, but, this is not true. A burst in the price of real estate is seen to be one of the major causes that has been triggering financial crisis in the world. For example, Japan´s financial crisis in the 1990s, East Asian financial crisis in 1997 and the recent US financial crisis are a few to name. Thirdly, financial institutions are running their business on public deposit; they should be regulated properly by the regulators, in most cases the central bank. Excessive credit flows to unproductive sector should be checked as it can trigger a crisis sooner or later. The main job of financial system is to facilitate payment system in the economy and act as financial intermediary linking depositors and lenders. Undesired risk taking for making hefty profit should be checked. In this context, tightening monetary policy stance and the recent introduction of risk-based supervision by Nepal Rastra Bank can be taken as a step in the right direction. The fourth lesson is that players in the financial market should be heterogeneous because herd and homogenous behavior would trigger and aggravate financial crisis. However, the current policies taken by Nepal Rastra Bank has been promoting the homogeneity in the financial sector, and narrowing the gap among the commercial banks, development banks and finance companies. From the current fiscal year 2008/09, commercial banks, development banks and finance companies are the counterparties for the monetary policy and all of them can mobilize current deposit: prior to this, commercial banks only mobilized current deposits. As a result, 25 commercial banks, 58 development banks and 70 finance companies are competing in the same kind of market and performing almost the same sort of jobs. Their growing inter-linkage and circular relation could make financial system vulnerable. The fifth lesson is that market is powerful, but it can fail sometimes. Hence, there should be effective and efficient public institution to regulate the financial market. The right combination of the government and the market is therefore necessary for a healthy development of the economy. To conclude, it can be said that financial sector is a very important, but sensitive market. It can facilitate real economic activities, but it is very prone to crisis by nature; and when it fails, it drags the economy into crisis by obstructing payment system and credit market. Hence, all stakeholders from general public to the operators of financial institutions and the central bank should constantly monitor the development of this sector. Most importantly, banks and financial institutions should not lend heavily to unproductive sector. A proper and a reasonable diversification of the portfolio are necessary to mitigate likely default risk. It is to be noted that a long run sustainability of the financial sector finally depends on the equal development of the productive sector. (Shrestha is a PhD student at New School for Social Research, New York, USA.)