Showing posts with label Development. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Development. Show all posts

Monday, May 24, 2021

What Can Developing Cities Today Learn From the Urban Past?

Abstract from a NBER working paper by Edward L. Glaeser on lessons on urbanization for developing cities:


The downsides of density, including traffic congestion, contagious disease and crime, were common in Victorian London and classical Rome, just as they are today in Sao Paulo and Lagos. Our urban past provides lessons for developing world cities today. 

  • The first lesson, that I highlight, is that political power, not commerce, has long driven the growth of the world’s largest cities, and that fact remains true for many developing world mega-cities today. 
  • The second lesson is that while market access fundamentally shaped the cities of the past, the power of transport to determine urban fortunes has declined. Transportation infrastructure no longer transforms cities unless it is accompanied by complementary investments, such as education. 
  • The third lesson is that infrastructure, such as sewers and roads, functions best when combined with incentives, which can ensure the adoption of sewers and discourage the abuse of highways. 
  • The fourth lesson is that the development of many western cities relied on a nexus of property rights for landowners, including the right to build, buy, alienate, mortgage and rent, that are far more limited in many developing world cities. 
  • The fifth lesson is that there is a menu of institutions for managing infrastructure, including direct public control, independent public authorities and public private partnerships. Local conditions, especially the level of public capacity, will determine the best choice among those institutions.



Monday, February 22, 2021

Key highlights of Nepal's long-term economic vision (FY2020-FY2044)

According to a press note by National Planning Commission, the government is aiming to graduate Nepal from LDC category (to a developing country status) by FY2022 with per capita income of USD 1,400 and a middle-income country by FY2030 (according to WB classification, Nepal is now in the lower middle-income country category). In FY2019, which is considered as base year for the long-term vision, per capita income was USD 1,047. 

Furthermore, by FY2044, the national goal is to achieve a high-income country category with per capital income of USD 12,100. To be fair, these are actually adapted from long-term development vision published by the government in 2018. They are also in the recently published the 15th Five Year Plan (FY2020-FY2024). 

Three phases of long-term economic development vision (Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali) are:

  • Generating prosperity and happiness (15th five-year plan, FY2020-FY2024), which aim to create the foundation of prosperity and happiness through economic, social and physical infrastructures to accelerate economic growth.
  • Accelerating prosperity and happiness, and achieving SDGs (16th and 17th five-year plan), which aim to rapidly achieve the indicators of prosperity and happiness. By the end of 17th five-year plan (FY2034) Nepal will have graduated to a middle-income country with a goal to high-income status.
  • Sustaining prosperity and happiness (18th and 19th five-year plan), which aim to achieve sustainability by maintaining balance between prosperity and happiness. Social justice and double-digit economic growth on average are to be achieved during this period. By the end of this phase (FY2044), the economy will be self-reliant, independent, and prosperous. 

It outlines 10 national goals and 76 indicators for long-term economic development vision. It also identifies 8 strategic national strategies, 9 drivers of economic transformation, and 8 enablers. 

The ten long-term national goals are:

  1. Accessible and modern infrastructure and connectivity
  2. Development and full utilization of human capital potential
  3. High and sustainable production and productivity
  4. High and equitable national income
  5. Well-being and decent standard of living
  6. Safe, civilized and just society
  7. Healthy and balanced ecology
  8. Good governance
  9. Comprehensive democracy
  10. National unity, security and dignity

The eight long-term national strategies are:

  1. Achieve rapid, sustainable and employment-oriented economic growth
  2. Ensure affordable and quality health care and education
  3. Develop internal and international interconnectivity and sustainable cities/settlements
  4. Increase production and productivity
  5. Provide a comprehensive, sustainable and productive social security and protection
  6. Build a just society characterized by poverty alleviation and socio-economic equality
  7. Conserve and utilize natural resources and improve resilience
  8. Strengthen public services, enhance balanced provincial development, and promote national unity

The nine drivers of economic transformation are:

  1. High-quality and integrated transport system, information technology and communication infrastructure, and massive networking
  2. Quality human capital and entrepreneurial work culture and full utilization of potential
  3. Hydroelectricity production and promotion of green economy
  4. Increase in production, productivity, and competitiveness
  5. Development and expansion of quality tourism services
  6. Modern, sustainable and systematic urbanization, housing and settlement development
  7. Development and strengthening of the provincial and local economy and expansion of the formal sector
  8. Guaranteed social protection and social security
  9. Governance reform and good governance

The eight enablers that will provide support for the realization of drivers of economic transformation are:

  1. Political commitment to the constitution, democracy, and development
  2. Demographic dividends and civic awareness
  3. Geographic location as well as natural diversity and abundance of natural resources
  4. Socio-cultural diversity and unique identity
  5. Social capital and Nepali diaspora spread around the world
  6. Clean and renewable energy
  7. Goodwill of friendly nations and the international community
  8. Federal governance and fiscal federalism
The overall structural strategy over the next 25 years is to reduce share of agriculture sector in GDP to 9%, but increase share of  agriculture and services sectors to 30% and 61%, respectively. The annual average GDP growth target of 10.5% is set for the period. A summary of the targets (which may be reviewed in subsequent plans) to be achieved by FY2044 are as follows:
  • Average annual GDP growth: 10.5%
  • Per capita income: USD 12,100
  • Population under absolute poverty line: 0 (or below 1%)
  • Population in MPI: 3%
  • Gini coefficient based on property: 0.25
  • Ratio of richest 10% and poorest 10% population (Palma ratio): 1.1
  • LFPR (15+ years): 72%
  • Share of formal sector employment: 70%
  • Electricity generation (installed capacity): 40,000 MW
  • Households with access to electricity: 100%
  • Per capita electricity consumption: 3,500 kilowatt-hours
  • Households with access to motor transport within 30 minutes of travel: 99%
  • National and provincial highways (black topped up to two lanes): 33,000 kms
  • National highways (>two lanes and fast tracks): 3,000 kms
  • Railroads: 2,200 kms
  • Population with access to internet: 100%
  • Life expectancy at birth: 80 years
  • Maternal mortality (per 100,000 live births): 20
  • Child mortality rate (per 1000  live births): 8
  • Underweight children: 2%
  • Literacy rate (15+ years): 99%
  • Net enrolment rate at secondary level (9-12): 95%
  • Gross enrolment rate at higher education: 40%
  • Population with access to improved drinking water: 96%
  • Population covered by basic social security: 100%
  • Gender development index: 0.99
  • Human development index: 0.760

Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Nepal ranked 109 out 140 economies on economic competitiveness

The World Economic Forum has published an updated version of its global competitiveness rankings by including potential of and opportunities from rapid technological change (dubbed as the Fourth Industrial Revolution [4IR]), which is also one of the critical factors for higher productivity and an important determinant of long-term growth and income.

The new report is named Global Competitiveness Report 2018 (GCI 4.0 2018) and includes a number of new, critically important factors such as entrepreneurial culture, companies embracing disruptive ideas, multistakeholder collaboration, critical thinking, meritocracy, social trust. These factors complement traditional components such as ICT and physical infrastructure, macroeconomic stability, property rights, and years of schooling. They together enhance human capital, innovation, resilience and agility. This year’s report also introduces a new benchmark that scores an economy from 1 to 100 (the largest figure being called the frontier that each country should aspire to reach).

The index includes 98 indicators grouped into 12 pillars of competitiveness: Institutions; Infrastructure; ICT adoption; Macroeconomic stability; Health; Skills; Product market; Labour market; Financial system; Market size; Business dynamism; and Innovation capability. Some of the pillars of competitiveness are the same as in the previous reports, but some are different or regrouped (especially those to do with ICT and innovation).

The 2018 ranking is not compatible with rankings in the past. However, they include backcasting estimation for 2017 that can be compared with 2018 edition. The logic behind the change in competitiveness scoring is that the pathway to prosperity through progressive industrialization by leveraging low-skilled labor is now diluted by the advent of the 4IR. The cost of technology and capital is lower than ever (but would still require a number of other factors for adoption). It calls for a holistic approach to competitiveness, as a good performance in one pillar doesn’t make up for a poor performance in another (investing in technology without investing in digital skills will not yield meaningful productivity gains). All pillars are weighted equally rather than according to a country’s current stage of development.

With a score of 85.6, the United States is the closest economy to the frontier, the ideal state (100), where a country would obtain the perfect score on every component of the index. The other in top 10 are: Singapore, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, Netherlands, Hong Kong SAR, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark.


In South Asia, all economies need to enhance innovation capacity, technological readiness and address the usual development constraints related to institutions, infrastructure and skills. In ICT adoption and innovation capability, the region lags behind from the rest of the world (although India is an outlier with 31st rank).

India leads the region in all areas of competitiveness except for health, education and skills, where Sri Lanka boasts the highest life expectancy (67.8 years) and the workforce with the highest amount of schooling (9.8 years). The report notes that India has invested more heavily on transport infrastructure and services, while Sri Lanka has the most modern utility infrastructure. The quality of Indian research institutions stands out in the region.

In South Asia, India ranks 58th (up five places compared to 2017 backcast edition), followed by Sri Lanak (rank 85), Bangladesh (rank 103), Pakistan (rank 107), and Nepal (rank 109). All countries in the region, except India, saw their rank deteriorate compared to the 2017 backcast estimate. 


Nepal is the least competitive country in South Asia. It ranks 109 out of 140 economies included in the report. In none of the four broad components it ranked below 100. Its overall comparable rank in 2017 was 108.

In enabling environment component, it ranks 108 out of 140 economies. Within this component, the ranking on institutions is 98, infrastructure 117, ICT adoption 101, and macroeconomic stability 96.
  • Within institutions pillar, the worst ranking is on quality of land administration (133) and intellectual property protection (122). The ranking on organized crime is also pretty bad. The beast ranking is on shareholder governance.
  • Within infrastructure pillar, the ranking is the worst: above 100 in all of the subcomponents (except for airport connectivity, on which it ranks 75).
  • Within ICT adoption pillar, the best ranking is on mobile cellular telephone subscriptions per 100 people (57) but fares worst in internet subscriptions and users.
  • Within macroeconomic stability pillar, it ranks 116 in inflation and 82 in debt dynamics (this one was one of the best in previous reports but looks like the fast accumulation of debt is a factor here)
In human capital component, it ranks 103 out of 140 economies. Within this component, the ranking on health is 102 and skills 106.

In markets component, it ranks 105 out of 140 economies. Within this component, the ranking on product market is 130, labor market 125, financial system 58, and market size 84.

In innovation ecosystem component, it ranks 105 out of 140 economies. With this component, the ranking on business dynamism is 98 and innovation capacity 110.

Despite the importance of 4IR now, for many of the low-income countries (also least competitive ones), the main causes of slow growth and low level of prosperity continues to be ‘old’ development issues such as institutions (security, property rights, social capital, checks and balances, transparency and ethics, public-sector performance and corporate governance), infrastructure (road, rail, air, electricity, water connectivity) and skills (education, critical thinking). They cannot ignore these issues and hope to achieve technology-based leapfrogging.

For non-least competitive economies, the policy approach should incorporate 4IR. For instance, investment in broader measures of competitiveness today to sustain growth and income in the future; enhancing the fundamentals of competitiveness today to improve resilience to shocks; supporting those who lose out to globalization; enhancing agility and future-readiness; ensuing effecting institutions to promote competitiveness; strengthening financial system; and proactive, far-sighted leadership.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

NPC, MOF and the failure of planning in Nepal

It was published in The Kathmandu Post, 14 October 2016. 



Constraints on effective development planning are pretty much the same now as they were in the 1960s

The Ministry of Finance (MoF) and the National Planning Commission (NPC) are the two most important government agencies responsible for designing fiscal policy, which primarily consists of prioritising public expenditure and mobilising internal (tax and non-tax revenue) and external (grants and loans) resources. They also oversee formulation of laws and policies that have fiscal implications, prepare medium- and long-term development plans and advise the government on the optimal path to achieving political-economic priorities.

However, with their existing administrative structure, leadership style, and roles and responsibilities, these two crucial agencies are increasingly ineffective in fiscal management and economic planning. Ministers, secretaries and joint secretaries from other ministries regularly complain about the implementation hurdles in these bodies such as delays in budget approval, insufficient fund allocation, and a heavy-handed approach to the selection of sector-specific projects. This lack of effective inter- and intra-ministry coordination and haphazard project planning contribute to the low capital spending. Last year, for example, only 56 percent of planned spending was expended. The functional and administrative structure of the MoF and the NPC, which was created about six decades ago and marginally tweaked in successive years, cannot effectively respond to the fiscal management and economic development challenges the country faces now.

Recurring issues

Despite the socio-political changes over the decades, the constraints on effective development planning and its implementation are pretty much the same now as they were in the 1960s. In a 1972 paper titled ‘Why Planning Fails in Nepal?’ published in the journal Administrative Science Quarterly, Aaron Wildavsky (the then dean of the Graduate School of Public Policy, University of California at Berkeley) outlines the probable reasons: “insufficient information, few and poor project proposals, inability to program foreign aid, opposition of the finance ministry, and severely limited capacity to administer development.” The paper highlights the ritualistic meetings at the NPC and its lack of authority; inadequate attention to boost absorption capacity by determining targets and outlays; lack of competent and relevant officials at the helm of planning and budget execution; and the rise in recurrent expenditure due to shoddy capital spending.

Furthermore, other problematic issues outlined in the paper are the under-execution of capital budget; the cumbersome and obstructive processes at the MoF and the NPC to release funds for already approved projects; a tug-of-war between the NPC and the MoF in planning, financing and monitoring of projects; high staff turnover; low incentive to perform better; deficient technical education of divisional heads (joint secretaries) or project directors; and a culture of waiting for orders from above to skip decision-making on management and implementation issues by project directors. In essence, “economic development is only a sometime thing for them”, concludes Wildavsky.

These were some of the administrative and operational issues hindering planning and implementation back in 1972, when the economy was still closed to competition and trade. Fast forward to 2016 and these issues still remain the same despite the economy’s liberalisation, entry into the global and regional trade regimes, a devastating decade-long Maoist insurgency, and a sea of change on social, economic and political fronts. It, unfortunately, points to the fact that these two agencies have failed to evolve to confront the emerging economic and development challenges.

In every monthly or quarterly project portfolio meetings, these issues are discussed without much sense of responsibility. The ministries point fingers at the MoF and the NPC, and vice versa. At best, they end up forming a committee to study the constraints and recommend appropriate remedies. This drama of project planning, budget approval and implementation and formation of countless committees is repeated in every budget cycle.

The MoF officials act as if they are the ultimate authority to decide on project selection, planning and financing and, at times, even impose their will on the line ministries by controlling budget allocation and approval. Meanwhile, the NPC veering off its intended path is lost in the political and bureaucratic quagmire. It has become a toothless organisation with no tangible authority to make line ministries follow the path outlined in the medium- and long-term development plans. Its top leadership has remained unstable and busy in inaugurating insignificant workshops, attending futile overseas seminars and bickering with politicians over petty projects. The core functions of development planning and policy advising to the government are forgotten. Amidst this mess, the line ministries are seeking guidance on project preparation, planning, funding and implementation along with appropriate policies and laws.

Restructuring the two agencies

The corridors of the MoF and the NPC are most abuzz during budget preparation. But except for the fruitless yet ritualistic portfolio meetings, they remain largely silent during the phase of budget execution. Hollow steps are taken to deal with issues on project implementation by forming countless committees and subcommittees while, in reality, real progress is as elusive as it was six decades ago.

This has to change now. As a start, the functional and administrative restructuring of the MoF and the NPC should be initiated. The NPC should focus on designing and monitoring medium- to long-term development agenda with a time-bound action plan to be implemented by the line ministries, on assisting the line ministries in project readiness, including public private partnership projects, and on advising the government on fiscal and development issues. Additionally, given the shortage of investment-ready projects, the NPC should work with line ministries to come up with a project bank, which may include shovel-ready projects that could be taken up for implementation if funds are available.

Meanwhile, the MoF needs to focus on fiscal management—expenditure and debt management and resource mobilisation (revenue and foreign aid). It still lacks a centralised public debt management office, which could effectively shoulder the responsibility of managing domestic and foreign debt. Instead of micromanaging the line ministries’ projects, the MoF should focus on arranging and approving funds to the projects that need it the most. Furthermore, its Chief Economic Advisor’s office, Economic Policy Analysis Division, Revenue Management Division, and Budget and Programme Division need to be more agile and effective. They all should facilitate, not hinder, project implementation across all ministries.

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Efficiency and integrity in public procurement in Nepal

This piece is adapted from the issue focus section of Macroeconomic Update Nepal, Vol.4, No.2, published by Asian Development Bank, Nepal Resident Mission.


I. Introduction

Many medium to large-scale development projects in Nepal are plagued by implementation delays and cost overruns. At the core of such recurrent hurdles is inefficient public procurement, contributed by a range of factors such as legal and policy complications, lack of required human resources to manage contracts, political intervention at management and operational levels, weak leadership by project directors and their high turnover, and prolonged delays by oversight and judicial agencies to clear contentious procurement. Consequently, project implementation is slow with cost and time overruns, quality of infrastructure construction is not up to the taxpayers’ expectation, and disbursement is slow and below target. These all result in low capital expenditure, insufficient jobs creation, and sluggish economic growth.

Efficiency and integrity in public procurement (of goods, works and services) enhance value for money and accelerate project implementation, which in turn stimulates private sector activities and innovations. Furthermore, if done in the right way and on time to maximize the value for taxpayers’ money, public procurement could be used as a strategic policy tool to address the myriad of economic, social and environmental challenges faced by the country.[1] Hence, efficiency and integrity in public procurement—equivalent to around 12% of GDP[2]— is vital to not only accelerate project implementation, but also to achieve medium-term goal of graduation from LDC category and long-term goal to be a middle income country by 2030, which also is the target date to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs).

Public procurement is done when taxpayers’ money and/or grants and loans funded by development partners are used to finance public goods and services, including building of roads, airports, dry ports, hydroelectricity, irrigation canals, drinking water facilities, school and hospital buildings, and consultancy/advisory services. Unscrupulous procurement practices (resulting in wasteful capital spending in the last quarter of fiscal year) tends to increase recurrent spending in the next several years, since the sub-standard fixed assets need to be maintained more frequently. Furthermore, implementation delays unnecessarily prolong the project construction and completion, which ultimately is a drain of public funds. Hence, if done in the right way, efficient public procurement, which makes spending effective and has the potential to yield substantive savings (on whole-of-life cost basis),[3] contributes significantly to create the foundation for economic growth to take off on a high and sustainable path.

II. Key Highlights of the Amended PPA 2016

The recently amended Public Procurement Act (PPA) 2016, which has come about after prolonged revisions and delays, dictates public procurement in Nepal. In line with the amended PPA, procurement policy, operating guidelines and necessary administrative changes (including capacity enhancement) need to be rolled out to effectively implement it. The amended PPA includes procurement methods such as lump sum, catalogue shopping, limited tendering and buy back method (which is a new addition to the methods of procurement).

Preparation and approval of estimates: Cost estimate is not required, except works, for procurement up to NRs100,000. Regarding the approval of estimates, the officials involved in the design or estimation, checking or approval and the consultant involved, shall be responsible and subjected to legal action if the revised estimate is more than 25% of the initial estimate or due to defective design or abnormal estimation. In the previous version of the PPA, cost estimate was not required for procurement of up to NRs25,000.

Qualification of bidder or proposer: No qualification requirements is prescribed for the procurement of a construction work with cost estimate less than NRs 20 million  unless the procuring entity has decided that the work requires qualification criteria. In the previous version of the PPA, no qualification requirements were needed for the procurement of a construction work with cost estimate less than NRs 6 million.

Invitation to bid: A re-invitation with reduced submission period may be given if no bids/ proposals are submitted within the stipulated time or all the submitted bids/ proposals are non-responsive. The period shall be at least 15 days for national competitive  bidding and at least 21 days for international competitive bidding. However, in case no bids/ proposals are submitted during re-invitation period or all of the submitted bids/ proposals are non-responsive and there will be loss to the procuring entity (or some activity of the PE will be affected), then the procuring entity may re-invite the bid by giving at least seven day notice for national bidding. Else, it could procure following the methods specified under Section 8, with approval from one level higher authority. Furthermore, works within the prescribed estimate amount under national competitive bidding may be procured competitively only from domestic bidders. In the previous version of the PPA, in the case of procurement of construction work, preference was given according to the sub-section (1) of section 12 of the Construction Entrepreneur Act, 1958.

Withdrawal or modification of bid: A bidder has to make a sealed application 24 hours prior to the deadline for submission if it intends to modify or withdraw its bid unless the bid is submitted through electronic submission. In the previous version of the PPA, a bidder may, prior to expiry of the deadline for the submission of bids, make a sealed application for modification to or withdrawal of bid that a bidder has once submitted.

Acceptance of bid and procurement contract: A performance security of 5% is levied if the bid price is up to 15% below the estimate. An additional performance security equivalent to half the difference between the bid price and the amount that is 15% below the estimate is needed if the bid price is lower than 15% of the estimate.

Provision of advance: The procuring entity, after the agreement, may provide advance of up to 20% of the contract amount by getting a bank guarantee to the supplier, construction entrepreneur or service provider. Initially half of the advance is provided, and the other half is given based on the utilization of the initial advance. Moreover, except under the provision of Section 10(5), the payment for advance is made to a specially opened account for the contract. The contract may be terminated if the contractor misuses the advance payment.

Variation order: The variation of up to 5% may be done by gazette II class officer, up to 10% by Gazetted I class officer, up to 15% by department chief, between 15% and 25% by Secretary, and 25% and above by the Council of Ministers. However, for the procurement of amount less than NRs6 million, the department chief may approve the variation order in excess of 15%. In the previous version of the PPA, a variation order above  15%  was issued as per the decision by the Council of Ministers.

Price adjustment in procurement contract: Unless otherwise provided in the procurement contract, if price needs to be adjusted in the course of implementation of a procurement contract having duration exceeding 12 months, then the competent authority may adjust the price. In the previous version of the PPA, the duration period was 15 months. 

Mechanism for dispute settlement: Contract agreement will include provision of dispute settlement through prevailing law on arbitration if the dispute cannot be settled amicably.

Termination of contract and remedy: The procuring entity may terminate procurement contract if the supplier, consultant, service provider or construction entrepreneur does not perform as per contract, or its conduct is not as specified in section 62(2) or it misuses the advance payment. If the contract is terminated because the contractor did not start, abandoned or did not attain progress as per the agreement, the procuring entity may terminate the contract anytime. If the contract is terminated as per section 59(7), the full amount of performance security shall be forfeited. Any additional amount to complete the remaining work shall be recovered as amount due to the government. The remaining work after the termination of contract may be completed by inviting financial proposal from the remaining bidders selected under section 25 by giving 15 day notice. Meanwhile, the approval of one level higher authority is required prior to requesting for financial proposal as per section 59(9). In the previous version of the PPA, the procuring entity could terminate procurement contract if the supplier, consultant, service provider or construction entrepreneur did not perform as per the contract.

Blacklisting: If a bidder selected pursuant to section 27 or a consultant selected pursuant to section 38 does not come to sign the contract, then it may be blacklisted.

Hindrance of procurement process: The authority authorized to investigate is required to request any document from the procuring entity with due consideration to not hinder the procurement process as far as possible.

III. Implications for Public Procurement Management

The PPA has been amended after an iteration of discussion with a range of stakeholders. Overall, the added or amended provisions are in the right direction. For instance, the onus of timely and quality procurement is placed on the chief of the procuring entity (department, division or section of a project or program), including the completion of the task within the stipulated time. Additionally, in order to make procurement official more accountable, a provision on non-compliance is added. Specifically, the amended PPA has included a provision that  “Ensuring completion within the set time by conducting regular supervision, monitoring, and quality control measures to implement or to cause to implement the procurement agreement made under this act, will be the responsibility of the chief of the concerned public entity.” This opens up the possibility of prosecution of underperformers.

The other positive aspects of the amended PPA are that e-bidding is now explicitly mentioned and six additional direct procurement methods are added, facilitating the procurement by public enterprises. These include: (i) procurement of goods and services between two public entities; (ii) public entities/enterprises doing business by competing with private sector; (iii) procuring aviation, aircraft and associated equipment; (iv) procuring goods and services on rates fixed by international organizations; (v) procuring goods and services for organizing programs and promotional activities outside the country; and (vi) procuring goods and services by diplomatic mission.

Another important amendment is the provisions to facilitate fast decision-making on matters related to cost variation. For instance, department heads can approve variation of up to 15%, between 15% and 25% by the concerned Secretary, and on and above 25% by the Cabinet. Although an additional layer of committee is added in this process, the overall amendment will likely speed up review and approval of variation, which is one of the most contentious issues in public procurement and has been delaying project implementation. A related positive amendment concerns the shortening of price adjustment applicable for contracts exceeding 12 months instead of 15 months in the previous version of the PPA. This price adjustment is applicable to the contract procured under the multi-year contract that is tendered.

On the institutional side, regulatory function of PPMO has been strengthened to include additional functions to (i) issue necessary manuals; work procedures; and technical notes required for procurement methods such as turnkey, EPC, schedule rate contract, and management contracts, etc.; (ii) review and cause to review after procurement, (iii) develop roaster of contractors, consultants, suppliers, and  service providers regarding their procurement qualification and experience, (iv) issue electronic procurement guidelines, (v)  certify/ accredit procurement experts, and (vi) forward case to competent authority for necessary action if the procurement carried out by the public entity is found to be contradicting with the PPA, its rules, work procedure, or guidelines. PPMO has been entrusted sole responsibility to maintain a national e-GP system and the PPA has provisioned that the method of submitting the bids through e-bidding shall be in accordance with the procedure approved by PPMO. Public entity may adopt only electronic- procurement procedure partially or completely in public procurement. In other words, public entity, based on the capacity, may phase out the paper based submission to obtain full benefit of the e-GP system.

Furthermore, the amended PPA has explicitly mentioned that the procurement process will not apply to the following methods and a separate working procedure to procure goods, services and works may be issued: (i) design and build; (ii) turn key/EPC; (iii) design, build and operate; (iv) public private partnership/build operate and transfer; (v) framework agreement; (vi) cost replacement; (vii) management agreement; (viii) exchange; (ix) installments; (x) buy on lease; (xi) buying land properties; and (xii) operation and maintenance or management procurement based on performance. These are an improvement because the previous version of the PPA was silent on these methods and had created confusion especially on the procurement related issues for public private partnership projects.

Remaining Gaps. While these amendments are expected to make procurement timely and efficient, thus helping to accelerate project implementation, a number of shortcomings also appear in the amended PPA. These need to be gradually addressed over time as it may slowdown the speed of project implementation.

The additional penalty (forfeiture of bid security and other financial penalties to the bidder) imposed in case the contract is not signed is impractical as merely putting a stringent provision may not help to get a good contractor. There is a need for concurrently improving the quality of selection. Specifically, any deficiencies of the bids (such as serious errors in a price bid) that may oblige the bidder to withdraw later, need to be detected and such bid be duly rejected. Similarly, reduced rebidding time, in case the first round of bidding fails, does not necessarily provide fare treatment to new bidders or lead to the most efficient selection of a contractor.

The amended PPA also provided clearer provision of dealing with the low bids, by specifying the level of additional performance guarantees. While this can provide clarity to deal with such circumstances, the issue of low price bidding needs to be dealt with by strengthening the technical evaluation, thereby effectively rejecting the insufficiently experienced and skilled bidders, which is one of the causes of the low price bidding. On this account, within the context of PPR amendment, PPMO is considering the introduction of one-stage two envelope (1S2E) selection process, in which technical and financial evaluation is separately undertaken. Likewise, there is a need for strengthening the disciplines of contract management for higher compliance with cost, time, and quality in executing the works after contract signing.     

The earlier draft PPA had included a provision of additional advance without bank guarantee, which could be used for the additional deployment of construction materials and equipment. The provision was entirely removed from the final PPA. This could have provided a basis for meeting such requirements, with specification of how the paid amount was to be guaranteed (through material valuation or bank guarantee).

Furthermore, the increase in threshold of works contract/tender without requiring bidders’ qualifications up to NRs 20 million (current threshold is NRs 6 million) may foster malpractice in the construction industry. First, entry of insufficiently experienced and skilled contractors can undermine the timeliness, quality, and cost of the works. Second, contractors may prefer to register a new firm every time they bid for a new contract whenever the firm’s past performance record was poor. This has the potential to undermine capacity development of the construction industry. Third, the absence of qualification for such contracts may result in irregular practices with political pressures.  Such system may best be introduced after establishment of sound registration and performance recording system of the contractors.

The threshold applied to international bidders may violate WTO as well as procurement procedures of multilateral development banks (MDBs). Country system needs to be harmonized to MDBs procurement standard. This provision will restrict participation of international bidders in domestic market and may open up avenues for political pressure to frequently change the thresholds, which will lead to unpredictable procurement environment in the country.[4] Similarly, the provision to allow withdrawal of bid only before 24 hours of the deadline is impracticable. Bidders should be allowed to withdraw their bids at any point in time before the bid submission deadline.

IV. Way forward

Almost all of capital spending and some capital formation related components of recurrent spending (such as use of grant to local bodies to build local infrastructure, operation and maintenance, etc.) are subjected to public procurement in Nepal, which together amount to 12% of GDP. Efficiency and integrity in procurement for goods, services and works is vital to accelerate project implementation and enhance the quality of spending, which eventually leads to higher, sustainable and employment-centric inclusive economic growth. This in turn is essential to graduate from LDC category by 2022, and to become a middle income country by 2030 along with the achievement of the SDGs.

Public procurement is governed by the recently amended PPA 2016. While the amendments or addition of new provision are expected to lead to timely and efficient procurement, a number of shortcomings need to be gradually addressed over time. Additionally, timely implementation of the amended PPA by rolling out updated policy, regulations, operational guidelines and manuals, and institutional setup is equally important. For instance, fully rolling out e-bidding system is urgently required, given that the present system still requires that original bid security must be submitted on paper, which undermines the effectiveness of e-submission of bids.  This will help to make public procurement efficient, transparent and rules based. Similarly, the evaluation bids should be completed within the stipulated timeframe and payment of contract processed on time.

The government needs to ensure that transaction costs are not prohibitively high, which is a natural barrier for the participation of small and medium contractors, whose capacity needs to be enhanced. E-procurement, which creates a marketplace characterized by equal access and competition under a transparent framework, needs mainstreaming along with the capacity enhancement of implementing agencies, contractors, and other stakeholders. It lowers the likelihood of rent-seeking opportunities as it minimizes in-person contacts before bid submission and during bid evaluation. A rigged tendering process in the absence of e-procurement stifles competition, leading to lower quality of goods, works or services at higher cost.

The executing and implementing agencies need to boost their capacity on technical and administrative matters related to efficient procurement, including clarity about the scope and nature of work, contract management methodology, and the associated financial aspects of procurement design and processing. A lack of professionalism remains one of the major weaknesses. Public procurement is a specialized profession requiring effective integration of technical, financial, and legal requirements in its process of preparation, contractor selection, and execution. Competent human resources required for its efficient execution are critical. It essentially is a strategic policy lever/function of the government as opposed to mundane administrative service.

A careful procurement planning and effective performance monitoring yield value for taxpayers’ money used for public procurement. This is equally important throughout the procurement life cycle: preparation of bids, submission and evaluation of bids, awarding contracts and executing contracts with sound contract management, which is another critical subject for efficient execution of infrastructure investments in Nepal while duly controlling time, cost, and quality. (See Box 4.) Exception to the rule (bypassing the amended PPA) and breaching threshold procurement should be minimized in order to maximize the utility of taxpayer’s money and to leverage the bulk purchasing power of the government.
__________
[1] OECD. 2016. Public Procurement for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. Paris.
[2] Average of capital spending, grant/transfer to local bodies and use of goods and services over the last five years.
[3] It refers to (potential) cost savings throughout the lifetime of the projects despite the short-term cost being relatively higher. Exclusive focus on short-term savings, for instance awarding contract to those bidding under a reasonable cost estimate (in other words, below threshold procurement) and those with weak contract management, priority may lead to cost overruns and higher recurrent costs in the subsequent years. A combination of low cost and quality consideration in awarding contracts could result in long-term cost savings.
[4] For example, the proposed PPR amendment has provision that procurement of cost estimate from NRs 20 million ($200,000 equivalent) to NRs1 billion ($10 million equivalent), bidding may be among domestic contractors only.

Saturday, September 26, 2015

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Here is the list of the 17 SDGs agreed this week at the UN. There are many targets within each group. SDGs are the set of long term global development goals. They succeeded the MDGs.

  1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
  2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
  3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
  4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
  5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
  6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
  7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
  8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
  9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
  10. Reduce inequality within and among countries
  11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
  12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
  13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
  14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
  15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
  16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
  17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development


The targets within Goal #8 (Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all) are as follows:

8.1. Sustain per capita economic growth in accordance with national circumstances and, in particular, at least 7 per cent gross domestic product growth per annum in the least developed countries

8.2. Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation, including through a focus on high-value added and labour-intensive sectors

8.3. Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services

8.4. Improve progressively, through 2030, global resource efficiency in consumption and production and endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10-year framework of programmes on sustainable consumption and production, with developed countries taking the lead

8.5. By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value

8.6. By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training

8.7. Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms

8.8. Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and those in precarious employment

8.9. By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products

8.10. Strengthen the capacity of domestic financial institutions to encourage and expand access to banking, insurance and financial services for all

8.a. Increase Aid for Trade support for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, including through the Enhanced Integrated Framework for Trade-Related Technical Assistance to Least Developed Countries

8.b. By 2020, develop and operationalize a global strategy for youth employment and implement the Global Jobs Pact of the International Labour Organization

Saturday, May 30, 2015

[Interview] Nepal quakes 'severely disrupted all economic activities'

This blog post is adapted from an interview published in Deutsche Welle (DW) on 26 May 2015. An earlier updated economic outlook following Nepal’s earthquake is here.


More than 8,600 people died in two major quakes that hit Nepal on April 25 and May 12, destroying nearly half a million houses and leaving thousands desperate for food, shelter and water. Thousands more have been left homeless and are camping out in the open, with just weeks to go until the monsoon rains. The UN estimates eight million people - nearly a third of Nepal's population - may have been affected by the earthquake, with at least two million people needing tents, water, food and medicines over the next months.

In a DW interview, Chandan Sapkota, economics officer at the Nepal office of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), talks about the extent of the economic damage caused by the disaster, what it will take to rebuild the Himalayan nation's shattered economy and where the money for reconstruction is likely to come from.

DW: In monetary terms, how would you assess the scale of the damage caused by the quakes?

Chandan Sapkota: The 7.8 magnitude earthquake on April 25 and the subsequent aftershocks - including a 6.7 magnitude tremor on April 26 and a 7.3 magnitude quake on May 12 - have caused widespread damage to lives, property and livelihoods. Over 8,600 people are dead, and the number of injured is nearing 22,000.

Furthermore, over half a million houses have been destroyed. Many businesses are fully or partially closed and tourists are staying away. A clearer picture on the full cost of the earthquake will emerge following the post disaster needs assessment, which is scheduled to be completed by mid-June, but the government has suggested it could be $5-$10 billion. Certainly, monetary and other costs to Nepal are huge.

Which parts of the country are most affected?

Almost half of the 75 districts in Nepal have been affected one way or another. However, the damage is most pronounced in the upper belt of central and western administrative regions - Kathmandu valley falls within the central region. The government has identified 14 districts as severely earthquake-hit areas for rescue and relief operations. These districts account for 15.5 percent of the total land area of Nepal.

Rural roads, schools, community centers, health posts, bridges, homes, farmland, livestock, food stock and heritage sites have been particularly badly damaged. Some key utilities like power distribution systems, water supply and sanitation facilities have also been affected.

How has this disaster impacted the country's economy?

The disaster has severely disrupted all economic activities - agricultural, industrial and services - in the earthquake-hit areas in varying degrees. Farmland, livestock and food stocks have suffered from landslides which is problematic so close to the planting season.
Power and water distribution, manufacturing and construction activities have also been disrupted. Meanwhile, retail and wholesale activities, the largest sub-sector save agriculture, and tourism have been hit hard. Schools, universities and financial services are only partially operational. Confidence in the real estate and housing markets has plummeted.

Supply disruptions have exerted upward pressure on food and non-food inflation. Exports have declined and imports have increased, widening the trade deficit and reducing the current account surplus. Slower economic activities means the government is pulling in less tax revenue than it anticipated, which will undermine its budget spending.

The earthquake has hit the poorest and marginalized populations in the remote areas most severely. There is a risk that the loss of livelihoods, coupled with higher food prices, will push a sizable number of people back below the poverty line, calling for urgent attention of providing livelihood restoration support in a timely manner.

With a well-designed recovery and reconstruction plan together with efficient relief operations, it is likely that the economy will rebound, including tourism activities, soon. Basic services are being gradually restored.

According to your estimate, how much money is needed to reconstruct the country, and what could be achieved with that amount?

It would be hard to put a number on reconstruction costs right now as a detailed assessment only started earlier in the middle of last week. At the least, it will be over $2 billion for rehabilitation and reconstruction of physical infrastructure and heritage sites. If we include the cost of retrofitting the buildings and facilities that survived the earthquakes, the total cost could be substantially more. The government has set up a $2 billion National Reconstruction Fund, to which it has contributed $200 million and is aiming to raise the remaining from donors.

What facilities need to be reconstructed first, and does the country have the necessary means to do this at the moment?

Full rehabilitation and reconstruction will be a mammoth task for the country. A massive and speedy effort is crucial before the onset of the monsoon expected around second week of June. This means temporary shelters, cash transfers, food supplies, sanitation and the resumption of basic public services, among others. Then, the difficult task of rehabilitation and reconstruction of roads, bridges, schools, health posts, water supplies, power distribution systems and world famous heritage sites should get going.

To do all this, the country will require a clear institutional set-up, legal mandate, and clear implementation arrangements. A separate lean, efficient apolitical body with a fixed operational lifetime may be helpful to expedite decision-making, procurement, and approvals although reconstruction projects be implemented through the line ministries that are best informed about their areas. This should be complemented by robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. In short, overall project implementation capacity needs to be drastically enhanced.


Where is Nepal expected to get the necessary funds from for reconstructing the country?

The country will need large amounts of funds for reconstruction. There are several avenues to bridge the gap. First, rationalization of ballooning recurrent expenditure could open up some space to increase capital spending, which stands at a mere 3.3 percent of GDP.

Second, a part of the fund could be raised domestically by selling bills and bonds. Bond sales could be larger than the government has typically done but the yield has to be attractive enough for the public, financial institutions and pension funds to buy. Likewise, the government may also consider raising revenue by a special time-bound tax targeted for reconstruction.

Third, external grants and loans - mostly on concessional terms from multilaterals institutions such as the Asian Development Bank and from bilateral donors - could cover the remaining funding need. Overall, we are hopeful about the country's fiscal resilience and discipline to be able to handle the reconstruction needs. Mobilizing funds is vital but the government needs to match this with a viable reconstruction plan and a clear strategy for implementation.

How is this likely to affect the country's economic outlook in the near and mid-term?

The earthquake and subsequent aftershocks will certainly impact economic growth, inflation, the external trade balance and the country's fiscal position. It will likely drag GDP growth down to 3.8 percent in the fiscal year (FY) 2015 ending July 15, 2015 - 0.8 percentage points lower than the 4.6 percent rate forecast in ADB's Asian Development Outlook 2015 (ADO 2015) published in March. Growth could be even lower - between three percent and 3.5 percent - if supply disruptions become more intense than we currently expect. GDP grew by 5.2 percent (at basic prices) in FY2014.

In FY2016, growth could rebound to 4.5 percent or higher contingent upon the scale and pace of rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts concerning physical infrastructure. The medium-term growth outlook depends on monsoon rains, a resurgence of investor confidence, and reconstruction efforts.

Lower agricultural output and supply disruptions will exert upward pressures on food and non-food prices, resulting in inflation to edge up to 8.2 percent in FY2015 and 8.5 percent in FY2016 In the medium term, the boost in aggregate demand as a result of higher reconstruction spending will likely keep inflation at elevated levels.

The fiscal deficit and current account balance will likely worsen in the medium-term. The country's ability to cope with possible shortages of construction materials and labor for reconstruction will also impact the outlook for growth, inflation and the external balance.

How is this likely to impact migration?

There could well be a net increase in outmigration, particularly if reconstruction is slow, which could create a shortage of labor, a further slowdown in reconstruction, and push up wages. Continuing the reforms to increase private sector investment, including through public private partnerships, in construction and labor-intensive manufacturing will be critical to create adequate jobs and restrain the outflow of workers in the short to medium term.

Friday, May 22, 2015

Updated economic outlook following Nepal’s earthquake

This blog post is adapted from a 3 post-disaster blog posts on Asian Development Blog. Here are parts 1, 2 and 3.


In a blog post on 1 May, we presented a quick preliminary analysis of the economic impact of the 7.8 magnitude earthquake that struck Nepal on 25 April.

A subsequent 7.3 magnitude aftershock on 12 May brought further casualties and inflicted added damage to property. The government has declared 14 districts as severely affected (mostly in the central and western regions) although the earthquakes have affected about two-thirds of Nepal’s 75 districts.

Background. According to the National Seismological Center, the 25 April earthquake was followed by over 240 aftershocks with local magnitude above 4. The powerful aftershock of 12 May shook a large part of the country, particularly central and western administrative regions, further damaging the already weakened houses and other physical infrastructure, and triggering massive landslides in rural areas.

Latest data have confirmed over 8,500 deaths and 17,866 injured. Some 489,549 and 269,534 houses were, respectively, fully and partially destroyed, forcing thousands of people to seek temporary shelter under tents and tarpaulin sheets. Meanwhile, thousands of classrooms have been either fully or partially damaged.

Needs assessment. The economic cost of damage following the earthquake and aftershocks, and the rehabilitation and reconstruction needs will be clearer after a detailed Post Disaster Needs Assessment, initiated by the government in collaboration with development partners, including ADB. The assessment, which has just kicked off, is scheduled to be completed by 15 June. ADB will be leading/co-leading the assessment of the education, irrigation and transport sectors, and macroeconomic impact assessment.

Growth outlook: The agriculture, industry, and services sectors will see a varying degree of slowdown as a result of the earthquake and powerful aftershocks, which will likely drag GDP growth down to 3.8% in the fiscal year (FY) 2015 ending 15 July 2015, 0.8 percentage points lower than the 4.6% rate forecast in ADB’s Asian Development Outlook 2015 (ADO 2015) published in March. There is a prospect for even lower growth (between 3% and 3.5%) if supply disruptions become more intense than we currently expect. GDP grew by 5.2% (at basic prices) in FY2014.

In FY2016, the loss of seeds, farmland, and livestock, and a weak forecast monsoon will mean agricultural output will remain weak but the industry and services sectors are expected to rebound — depending on the speed of rehabilitation and reconstruction activities, and their impact on aggregate demand. This could result in GDP growth of about 4.5% next year. Within the services sector, the real estate and renting sub-sector is expected to further slow but a modest pick-up in hotel and restaurant activities is likely due to a partial recovery of tourism sector. The possibility of higher growth rate (between 4.5% and 5.5%) exists, but it will be contingent upon the scale and pace of rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts.

Source: Central Bureau of Statistics; ADB Nepal Resident Mission staff estimates. 

  • Agriculture. Beyond the impact of last year’s delayed and sub-normal monsoon, the impact of the earthquake on the agricultural production (which accounts for about 34% of GDP) will be minimal this fiscal year given that harvesting was already largely completed.
  • However, there has been substantial loss of food stocks and livestock and aftershocks have swept away farmland in some of the severely affected districts. The 14 most affected districts account for 13.8% of the total area of agricultural holdings. The share of paddy (rice) produced in these districts is about 9.1% of national production while the area under paddy production accounts for 8.6% of the country’s total paddy area.
  • Production of maize and millet will be somewhat more affected given that these 14 districts together account for a relatively large 23.4% and 28.7% of national production, respectively.
  • Given this, we are less upbeat on the outlook for the agricultural sector than we were on 1 May and now see agricultural output growth this year at 2.5% versus the 3.0% growth we forecast in May and in March. The loss of farmland and livestock in the severely affected areas, and the recent forecast of a potentially weak monsoon (influenced by the building up of El Nino conditions over the Pacific) will likely keep agricultural sector growth stagnant in FY2016.

Source: Ministry of Agricultural Development

  • Industry. Growth in the industrial sector (which accounts for about 15% of GDP) has been held back by the lack of adequate electricity and other supply-side bottlenecks for a long time. The earthquake will further slow industrial activities in the remaining months of FY2015.
  • The severely affected districts account for about 20% of total manufacturing establishments, manufacturing jobs, and manufacturing value-added in the country. Similarly, nearly a quarter of total hydropower produced in the country is affected by the earthquake. The drastic slowdown in capital spending and building activities following the earthquakes will hit construction. The cumulative impact of these sub-sectoral developments mean that we now see industrial growth at 2.3%, lower than the 3.5% level forecast in March.
  • In FY2016, the planned reconstruction spending and prospects of hydropower plants resuming normal operation will likely boost industrial sector growth.

Source: Central Bureau of Statistics

  • Services. The services sector (which accounts for about 51% of GDP) will be the most affected by the earthquake. There has been a drastic slowdown in wholesale and retail trade in the severely affected districts as warehouses, shops, and trading outlets are only partially operational. Tourism has slowed sharply due to the earthquake, landslides and avalanches, resulting in cancellation of bookings and changed travel plans. Furthermore, the partial opening of banks and financial institutions in the affected districts will slow credit flows and other transactions.
  • The combined effect of these will lower services sector growth from the 5.8% forecast in March to around 5.1%. In FY2016, the rebound of wholesale and retail trade, tourism (to some extent), and the normalization of financial activities will likely mean services sector growth will shoot up. This is despite a potential lull in the real estate and renting services sub-sector.

Inflation. Lower agricultural output in the first nine months of fiscal year (FY) 2015 (ending 15 July 2015) was already exerting upward pressure on food prices. This is being compounded by the depletion of household food stocks and farmland in the severely affected areas as well as supply disruptions along the major trading routes with the People’s Republic of China. With the onset of the monsoon, further supply disruptions are likely due to landslides.

These two factors will likely increase prices of cereal, vegetables, and fruits, pushing up food inflation to double-digit levels despite lower prices of fuel exerting less pressure on farm machinery, irrigation, and food processing costs. Similarly, non-food inflation, mainly from imported items, will be boosted by the supply disruptions, which intensified after the strong aftershocks. The combined impact of these two factors will push up headline inflation in FY2015 to 8.2% from the 7.7% level forecast in ADB’s March Asian Development Outlook 2015 (ADO 2015). Inflation in FY2014 was 9.1%.

In FY2016, the projected slowdown in agricultural output due to a likely sub-normal monsoon, higher aggregate demand due to cash transfers to cover basic housing requirement, government, temporary jobs during rehabilitation and reconstruction, and production bottlenecks (arising from the long running supply-side constraints such as the lack of adequate electricity, labor shortages and low productivity, etc) will likely push headline inflation to around 8.5%.

Source: Nepal Rastra Bank; ADB Nepal Resident Mission staff estimates

External sector balance. The ADO 2015 forecast Nepal’s current account balance at 2.7% of GDP for FY2015, primarily due to the slowdown in official remittance inflows. In fact, official remittance inflows in the first nine months of FY2015 decelerated much more than our earlier estimate. Hence, despite the uptick in inflows immediately after the earthquake, the rate of annual inflows in FY2015 will still be lower than in FY2014.

Meanwhile, the trade deficit is expected to widen further as exports slow and imports register modest growth, primarily due to higher non-oil imports (and despite lower oil imports which constitute about 20% of total merchandise imports). The impact of the earthquake on the agricultural and manufacturing sectors will also hit merchandise exports in the remaining months of FY2015.

Furthermore, tourism earnings will also be negatively affected as mountaineering and trekking activities have been closed for the rest of this season. Popular trekking routes, world famous heritage sites, and many hotels have either been destroyed, require major repair, or need careful structural assessment.

The combined effects of these will likely bring down Nepal’s current account surplus to about 1.0% of GDP this fiscal year, down from 4.7% of GDP in FY2014.

In FY2016, despite an expected moderate rebound in remittance inflows, substantially higher imports will likely push the current account to a deficit of 1.5% of GDP. Exports will likely rise marginally primarily due to a rise in manufacturing output next year but imports will likely increase drastically as a lower agricultural harvest will likely mean higher food imports to meet demand. Rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts will also necessitate importing items ranging from industrial inputs to heavy machinery and construction materials. This will further widen the trade deficit.

Meanwhile, the picture on migration (and subsequently workers’ remittances) is unclear as of now, but a highly probable scenario is that there will be a net increase in the number of emigrant workers if reconstruction projects are slow to get off the ground, resulting in a lack of job opportunities. The severely affected 14 districts account for about 18% of total migrant outflows and 13.6% of total remittance inflows. Overall, current account balance, and the balance of payments, will largely depend on the imports and remittances inflows.

Source: Department of Foreign Employment; World Bank; ADB NRM staff estimates.

Fiscal balance. About 60% of total capital spending typically happens in the last three months of the fiscal year. The earthquake and subsequent aftershocks have delayed planned project implementation and forced the government to realign its focus toward immediate relief and rehabilitation efforts before the onset of the monsoon. Any perceived excess funds that are unlikely to be spent this year have already been diverted for this purpose. The 14 severely affected districts together account for about 58% of total capital spending in the country. Hence, overall capital spending will fall below the government’s NRs117 billion target set for FY2015. In fact, actual capital spending has averaged just 76% of budgeted allocations in the past three years. Recurrent spending will likely be over 95% of budgeted allocation (about 65% of allocation).

Meanwhile, the disruption to regular economic activities has slowed demand for both domestic and imported goods, which have undermined overall revenue mobilization. Import-based revenue accounts (custom duties, value added tax and excise on imports only) for about 45% of total revenue.

Source: Ministry of Finance

Consequently, the government is projecting a revenue shortfall of about $300 million (against a FY2015 revenue target of $4.4 billion, which includes grants as well). To cover a part of the immediate relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction costs, the government is raising about $500 million from bill and bond sales in the next two months. Hence, a marginal slowdown in expenditure, a bigger-than-expected revenue shortfall, and a comparatively large volume of domestic borrowing in the coming two months will likely increase the fiscal deficit to about 1% of GDP this year, up from 0.1% of GDP in FY2014.

In FY2016, revenue will likely rebound modestly with an increase in consumption of imported and domestic items. Meanwhile, capital spending will increase to cover rehabilitation and reconstruction costs. The government has estimated the preliminary cost for reconstruction at $5 billion to $10 billion spread over a few years. Consequently, the fiscal deficit will likely be higher than 2% of GDP in the next few years. Its exact level will be contingent upon the contribution from development partners (mainly grants). Meanwhile, the government has set up a National Reconstruction Fund of $2 billion to which it has contributed $200 million. It hopes to raise the rest from donors during the international donors’ conference expected to be held in coming months.

Priorities. The government is winding down rescue operations and is gradually focusing on relief efforts in view of the start of the monsoon season in the second week of June. Together with relief efforts, rehabilitation and reconstruction planning, institutional arrangement and implementation will gather pace. In this regard, the following priorities may be considered:

  1. Delivery of basic relief items and cash grants to affected households before the onset of monsoon.
  2. Finalize the Post Disaster Needs Assessment as scheduled and use the results as key inputs for an upcoming international donors' conference and the fiscal year 2016 budget, which is expected to be delivered in the second week of July.
    To finance reconstruction and rehabilitation costs, rationalization of recurrent expenditure could open up some space to increase capital expenditure. Domestic borrowing could focus on medium-to-long-term bonds. External borrowing is normally on concessional terms.
  3. Ensure a clear institutional set-up, legal mandate, and implementation arrangement for reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts. A separate lean and efficient apolitical entity with a fixed operational lifetime would be helpful to expedite decision-making, procurement, and approvals. However, the implementation of reconstruction projects should happen through the line ministries.
  4. Ensure robust monitoring and evaluation of reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts. Good governance is essential for effectiveness of such efforts.
  5. Continue the ongoing and planned reforms to increase private sector investment. This is particularly important to boost investor confidence in the economy and the country’s ability to effectively deal with the aftermath of the disaster. Some of the reconstruction projects may be initiated on a public private partnership (PPP) basis, for which the government will have to pass the nearly finalized PPP Policy and speedily enact the PPP Act. Other policies and acts prepared or updated with the aim to develop the private sector and increase their investment also need to be passed or enacted in an expeditious manner.