Politicians, civil society members and many independent thinkers have argued that even distribution of natural resources need to be taken into consideration while demarcating provinces. They suggest that if demarcation is done along lingual or ethnic lines, similar to what Maoist are proposing, folks in Karnali are going to starve to death while folks in Madhes are going to bask in prosperity. This, they argue, is totally unjust. They want to make sure that the central government has the authority to take some revenue generated in one province and distribute it to the other province—particularly if the nation were to be demarcated along linguistic or ethnic lines.
There are a number of problems with such arguments.
We need to think about provincial demarcation that helps convert resources into wealth. We need to think about ways that will make us work hard, take risks, accumulate wealth and spend the wealth to generate more wealth.
Such arguments confuse resources with wealth. A lot needs to be done before resources can be converted to wealth. Nepal is one of the richer countries when it comes to hydro-electric resources, yet it is one of the most poorly electrified countries of the world. Arguably, one could make a case that the more the resources, the more the possible wealth; and hence, equal distribution of resources would lead to equal distribution of wealth. Such an argument misses an important point: It is impossible to predict the economic value of natural resources with reasonable accuracy, especially when we are talking about a time frame of over 50 years.
With development of new technology and new knowledge, the economic value of certain resources can change over time. For instance, the economic value of unemployed engineers in India changed with the development of technology that could transfer their work all over the world with the click of a mouse. The economic value of agricultural lands around Bahruva and Devadiha village near Janakpur may not be high currently but if one were to have irrigation facilities, their economic value would double. There is also a possibility that one day natural gas might be found underneath these two villages and there might be technology to harness it cheaply. If this were to happen, the economic value of land in these villages would shoot up dramatically.
Rather than focusing on distribution of resources based on the perceived economic value that could be way off the mark, it might be useful to think about ways in which we can generate economic value from the existing resources. We need to think about provincial demarcation that helps convert resources into wealth. We need to think about ways that will make us work hard, take risks, accumulate wealth and spend the wealth to generate more wealth. That is the road to prosperity. The bottom line is: Let us not fear lingual demarcation because they may cause disparity in the natural resources. Various regions of Nepal have their own uniqueness and their own kind of natural resources. Mustang and Manang are some of the best places in world to walk. Ilam has one the best environments for tea. Janakpur has a long tradition of religious tourists.
Let us focus on how we can create an environment to harness the resources we have been gifted by nature. Folks in Karnali will not starve if Karnali becomes a separate province. What you will likely see is that they will get together faster to come up with ways to harness the hydro-electric power and sell it to other provinces. In the next few decades, they might end up as the richest part of the country. It may be that Mithila province might get so engulfed in caste conflicts that they will have little time create an environment conducive for business.
Regardless of what demarcation of provinces we end up having, central government should not get into the business of taking wealth from one province and transferring it to another. This will create unnecessary angst among provinces and between the wealthier provinces and the central government; and it will create a dependency syndrome between the poorer provinces and the central government. More importantly, it will discourage provincial governments from working hard to create and sustain a business-friendly environment. The provinces that cannot get their acts together need to pay a price, not be rewarded, only then will they learn.
(Writer is an Assistant Professor of Economics and Finance at Texas A&M International University in Texas, US.)
PLEASE DESIST FROM ATTACKING THE WRITER PERSONALLY AND BE RESPECTFUL TO OTHER READERS.
Please give your full name while posting your comments. This is not to stifle the free flow of comments but your full name will enable us to print the comments in our newspaper.
Actually, It is not Madhesh that will have resources of Nepal. All hydropower production sites are in pahad. Most of the resources are now in Pahad, and districts such as Solukhumbu or Mustang or Kaski are so wealthy, no Madhesi district comes close to it. So, the issue as Jha understands is wrong.
Madhes will be fool to believe that earnings will be going to Pahad from Madhes. Anyone who has seen growing towns such as Dhulikhel, Banepa, Besisahar, Hetauda, Chitwan, Po
[more]
-
mahendra yadav
"We need to think about provincial demarcation that helps convert resources into wealth. We need to think about ways that will make us work hard, take risks, accumulate wealth and spend the wealth to generate more wealth." Man, your writings are like undergraduate term paper. Everyone with a degree and little bit of common sense knows what needs to be done. It is not that people in nepal do not know what needs to be done but translating ideas into practice is a problem. In a fragmented society l
[more]
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
