Tuesday 07 July, 2020

Development Cooperation Policy  2019 : Some Commentaries(Part Two)

Development Cooperation Policy 2019 : Some Commentaries(Part Two)

There is a lack of clear-cut policy on INGOs in DCP. We have seen mushrooming of INGOs in Nepal and this needs to be controlled. DCP must put minimum threshold for any INGOs keen to work in Nepal. This will helps to reduce the number of INGOs in Nepal, which will make it easy to monitor. In order to consolidate the small-scattered fund, DCP mooted the idea of joint fund where DPs are expected to provide fund and GoN will use this fund to address the needs of Province and Local government. This will be much better management arrangement than in the past where individual donors spent small amounts of money in a small area without having any potential impact.

DCP also underlines the need to utilize domestic TA as far as possible. This was also stated in previous DCP but sadly this has not been implemented. Since MoF has very limited monitoring capability, this provision has not been strictly followed in the past. Same situation can happen in future as well.

Second, DCP also outlines need to provide budgetary support as preferred mode of assistance so that government can focus on its priority areas. Under the current context, this seems to be good option although DPs are reluctant about spending through government treasury. In the current context, since federal government has to provide transfer to LG and PGs, this mode of budgetary support will greatly help the process. DCP also calls for sector wide approach like in health and education sector. Given the experiences so far, SWaP is much difficult to implement as DPs are more keen to implement the independent projects than contributing for basket funding. From the GoN’s perspective, it makes sense to have sector wide approach as outlined in DCP, but it is easier said than done. DCP outlines MoF as key agency to deal with foreign aid, which seems to be a appropriate proposition. There should be at least uniformity in development assistance policy for all provinces.

DCP also underlines the need to utilize domestic TA as far as possible. This was also stated in previous DCP but sadly this has not been implemented. Since MoF has very limited monitoring capability, this provision has not been strictly followed in the past. Same situation can happen in future as well.

DCP also lacks timeframe to exit from external assistance. We have been receiving development assistance for the last six decades but it needs to be stopped at certain point of time. Therefore, some clear timeline would have been much better to disengage with the development partners in the long term. This is only possible when we are able to mobilise our domestic resources effectively. In addition, it also requires sustained growth for sometime.

Implementation Committee of DCP looks impressive but not pragmatic. Since all members are high level government officials, it is unrealistic to expect their time for the proper implementation of DCP. It would be more appropriate to have some outside specialists and also representatives from development partners in the committee to ensure the ownership. A workable small team of expert would be more pragmatic to oversee the implementation aspect of DCP in Nepal.

Leave Comments