In this context, it is the responsibility of politicians to chart out a vision for post-earthquake reconstruction. The political consensus for rebuilding the devastated country has cheered the people, otherwise frustrated by never-ending squabbles among parties over petty issues. In fact, our homes and other infrastructures were not earthquake resistant, nor did they fit into the modern development framework. They had to be improved. Thus rebuilding is the need of the hour. But if we only rebuild damaged structures, we would be restoring old structures, with all their attendant dangers. In this situation, our vision of reconstruction can be summarized in a sentence: the country's socio-economic transformation and building of disaster-resilient infrastructure that brings tangible changes in people's livelihood.The first step in the rebuilding process is a regional development framework. The 14 earthquake-affected districts of the central region cover one third of country's population and a significant portion of our economy. The regional development framework will thus have to address the interdependence between the capital and district headquarters, service centers, human settlements and socio-economic relations among these units. We will have to identify appropriate locations for rehabilitation and day to day business and develop robust transportation and infrastructure networks at different levels.
This will make rehabilitation and relocation of earthquake affected settlements easy. Carrying out rebuilding without devising a regional development framework will invite the risk of our physical development initiative becoming a hurdle in the country's economic development. This is why we need to plan settlements under a regional development framework. At the same time, this framework should create opportunities for industrial development and ease people's livelihood with the use of local resources.
In the case of Kathmandu Valley, it is vital to rebuild old structures of cultural importance and reliable and standard public transport infrastructures equipped with metro rail, light rail, trolley bus etc, along with new satellite centers. This might seem costly and ambitious but we need to take it as long-term investment. It will be the responsibility of the team comprising experts and academicians to identify areas of investment, come up with a comprehensive rebuilding plan and plan other projects under this scheme.
Given the current government structure and our old working style, this is a tough ask. If we go on adding to our list of challenges, it won't inspire any hope among the people. It is natural for people to believe our government mechanism, characterized by extreme politicization, won't be able to take up this challenge. But given the will, determination and vision of their leaders, our government machinery is more than capable of delivering. I say this from my own experience of widening of Kathmandu's roads during my tenure as prime minister.
With a confidence that a powerful authority could accomplish this challenging task, I had proposed a powerful reconstruction authority. There is no denying that this task of rebuilding and reconstruction is not possible through existing government mechanisms. For instance, the government has recently unveiled its plan of a reconstruction authority. Since the new body will be dominated by government ministers and secretaries, there is a serious question mark over its effectiveness. We have a bitter experience of our Investment Board. Thus we should have had a powerful and autonomous reconstruction body. It would have included competent human resources from in and outside the government. If we had then chosen officials from within government bodies on the basis of competence and professional integrity, it could have boosted the efficiency of our bureaucracy and also helped salvage its poor image.
The task of rebuilding and reconstruction is really big. And, again, it cannot be achieved through our old ways of doing things. I had realized this after I visited affected districts in the immediate aftermath of the Great Earthquake. This is why I kept advocating for a separate, powerful reconstruction authority in the legislature-parliament and through newspaper and television interviews. My wish was that a visionary, energetic, trusted and popular leader of high integrity would lead the reconstruction authority, along with former bureaucrats with proven experience and vision. This is what should have happened.
As a student of architectural engineering and regional development, I was fully aware of my duty to contribute to reconstruction with my expertise and capacity during this time of national crisis. I didn't even care about the protocol. But some misinterpreted this noble intention as my desire to "bag the leadership of reconstruction authority to serve political interests." This is sad. The sooner we stop viewing everything so cynically, the better it will be for the country.
Though late, the government has realized the need for a separate reconstruction authority and expedited its formation. This is positive. I believe such an authority should have been formed through long deliberations at the legislature-parliament, and by accommodating expert opinions, and not through an ordinance. But I extend my support to this authority, although the question of independence and effectiveness remains an issue as it will largely remain under the shadow of the Cabinet. But it is unfortunate that the government has reduced the resolution motion of the legislature-parliament for rebuilding the devastated country anew to a plan to restore the status quo ante.
PDNA seems to have focused on post-earthquake damage assessment instead of taking the broader task of reconstruction into consideration. This seems to have been done in haste in view of the Donor Conference this Thursday. Our new needs are surely much larger than the old ones. This is why we have been pressing for forward-looking reconstruction, not just rebuilding, of the old structures. As far as possible, we should try to build all-party consensus in favor of building a new Nepal.
We need to take the Donor Conference as an opportunity to garner goodwill and support of the international community for post-disaster reconstruction, rather making it a platform to beg. We need to adopt a policy of self-dependence. We also should look to capitalize on the fast development of our two giants neighbors.
Ultimately, everything boils down to politics. The sooner we implement the 16-point deal and expedite the constitution process, and thereby end the prolonged transition, the easier it will be to undertake disaster management and reconstruction plans.
This is an unofficial translation of a concept paper "Vision for Reconstruction" presented by the former prime minister of Nepal at a gathering of experts in Kathmandu on Tuesday
Related story
Evidence-Based Policy Making in Nepal: Challenges and the Way F...
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
