Why regional and national governments need to collaborate to deliver infrastructure

In 2015, Nepal was officially recognised as a federal country.

In doing so, each tier of government – federal, provincial and local – was granted greater influence over infrastructure planning.

It was expected that this change would provide more opportunities for development and improve service delivery.

But since then, communication between levels of government has been limited.

We recently spoke with Chandra Shrestha, a resilient infrastructure specialist and ICE country representative for Nepal. Chandra outlines the challenges with the current government structure and its implications for infrastructure.

Splitting roles and responsibilities across infrastructure sectors

Constitutionally, federal, provincial, and local governments divide responsibility over the main infrastructure sectors in Nepal:

• transportation
• energy
• irrigation and water transportation
• water supply and sanitation

Each level of government comes up with separate plans to identify and deliver on their priorities for each sector.

This means each individual tier of government makes its own decisions for the sectors and there are no clear connections or lines of communication between them.

What this split has meant for Nepal’s infrastructure

Since the shift to the federal governance structure, it has been difficult for Nepal to address the important infrastructure needs of the entire country.

Transport infrastructure

The split in roles and responsibilities means that the country isn’t getting the quality roads it needs.

The construction of national highways is handled federally, while planning for local and provincial roads is managed by their respective governments.

Working separately has led to an increase in poor road construction and a higher risk of flooding and landslides, leading to unsafe driving conditions for locals and tourists.

Energy infrastructure

Nepal can generate most of its electricity from hydropower. Its aim is to produce 30,000 megawatts by 2035, and it's currently only generating around 3,000.

Energy is mainly handled at the federal level.

Nepal could produce more hydropower if it could better coordinate with other levels of government, which also handle energy-related infrastructure.

Generating more hydropower can also help Nepal transition to cleaner forms of energy and respond to the impacts of climate change, which is beneficial to all tiers of government.

What Nepal could improve to deliver on its infrastructure needs

To address these needs, greater communication is needed. Chandra highlights two opportunities

1. Boost data sharing:

Improving what and how information is shared can help all levels of government better understand the type of infrastructure that needs upgrading.

To achieve this, different tiers can meet regularly and work together to share data on infrastructure.

For example, sharing information can help officials at all levels increase their knowledge of roads, and more importantly, which ones require maintenance.

2. Reduce financial uncertainty:

Currently, the federal government is in charge of distributing money to local and provincial administrations.

The available funds are shared among the various regions almost equally, regardless of their developmental requirements.

This means that no extra finances are to be provided, even when a larger project may require more funding.

By taking the time to discuss and agree on how much funding is needed, money can be reasonably divided to ensure that all infrastructure needs and their connected projects are delivered.

Having these discussions would help to better understand the cost of infrastructure projects and how finances should be divided between the tiers of government.

How can the Enabling Better Infrastructure (EBI) programme help Nepal deliver on its infrastructure needs?

By changing to a federal system, Nepal has enabled different levels of government to focus on specific infrastructure sectors.

To ensure all future needs of the country are addressed, it can consider creating a national plan to set out a common vision that all levels of government can work toward.

Principle 1 of the EBI guidance outlines that a clear vision helps to achieve buy-in from the entire country and supports infrastructure decision-making.

Nepal can also look to Principle 7, which recommends creating a framework between levels of government that establishes effective relationships for long-term change.

Nepal could learn from Chile’s approach. To help showcase how changes can be made, Chile demonstrated how a federal administration can work across different levels to strengthen infrastructure planning.