Submit your Article

Clint Folsom is the mayor of the Town of Superior in Colorado State of the United States. He was elected in November 2014 and re-elected in November 2018. In addition to serving as mayor, Clint is also the managing broker and owner of Folsom & Company Real Estate. He was recently in Nepal when Pratik Ghimire of ApEx caught up with him to talk about his time here.

What was your motive to visit Nepal?

I was especially here to visit Khadbari Municipality of Sankhuwasabha district as the Town of Superior and Khadbari had agreed to a sister-city relationship last year. With this, we will exchange many cultural and developmental activities between these cities. My town also hosted the delegation of Khadbari recently and hence I and my team are here.  

What did you learn from the visit?

We learned so much, from how the people live, what they do for a living and how to host the guests. They welcomed us beautifully with tika and flower garlands. I have never seen such a warm welcoming ritual. In the US, we don’t do that, as it is not part of our culture. I guess we too have to celebrate our visitors a little bit more in America. 

Could we see more of such sister-city collaborations?

Yes, there are possibilities. The other cities in America could enter into such agreements. As long as there are people in each community to form such an alliance, it could easily happen as a sister-city relationship is a relation between people to people, residence to residence, and the government to government. 

What difference do you see between the local governments of Nepal and America?

The most interesting difference was the mayor and the deputy here have their offices, assistants, drivers, and other facilities. It is a full-time job. But in the US, in most small and medium communities, there are no such facilities for the mayors. It is a voluntary job and you have to engage in other professional occupations for a living. When they visited us, one of the places I took them was in our board meeting room where we sit and there are sittings for the public too. The public can listen to our discussion and suggest to us what we should do. But in Nepal, the meeting was held in private. I was really happy to see that the Khadbari Municipality adopted that idea here and, during my visit, they showed it to me at first. It may look like a small thing but there must be the participation of the public in the functioning of local government because we exist for the people. 

Are there any suggestions for Nepali mayors?

I suggest they be transparent and listen to people. The people should feel that they are being heard by their representatives. Sometimes, not every idea could be implemented but you should convince the people.

Satis Devkota is an associate professor of economics and management at the University of Minnesota Morris. He holds a PhD in economics from Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, US. He closely follows Nepal’s politics, economy and international politics. Devkota talks to Kamal Dev Bhattarai focusing on the Nov 20 elections.  What is your take on Nepal’s growing culture of alliance politics? In a democratic society, people are free to create their political parties and contest in elections, which are free of coercion and fair to all contestants. However, forming a political alliance among a group of political parties with diverse political ideologies—political-economic philosophies—blunts the purity of our democracy. Such an alliance is unnatural, and a reflection of the incompetency or insecurity of political parties engaged in forming such an alliance. In general, a political alliance is a group of political parties that are formally united and working together if they have common aims. Looking at the past 30 years of political history in Nepal, you can find only a couple of political alliances that make perfect sense.  Could you explain the culture of past alliances?  First, the NC-Left front alliance that was formed in 1990 together fought against the autocratic Panchayat regime to establish the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy in Nepal. The shared objective was achieved, and the country’s multi-party democracy was reinstated after 30 years. Second, after King Gyanendra dissolved the parliament and seized power in Feb 2005, a seven-party alliance was formed that fought against the king’s direct rule with the intent to restore parliament and multiparty democracy. In the face of broad opposition, the king restored the previous parliament in April 2006. Again, the shared objective of forming the political alliance was met. Besides, let’s evaluate the provisions to form the government in the current constitution of Nepal. A coalition government could be an alternative if a single party cannot achieve the majority in parliament. So, forming a political alliance to form a coalition government is constitutional, and that might lead to political stability if our political parties are prudent and understand political ethics, and respect the values of politics. Unfortunately, our leaders and political parties are not on that boat.  Forming a political alliance in the general election for the house of the representative and provincial election between the two major forces (socialist and capitalist) with the wider difference in ideology, political philosophy, and political-economic agendas is against the ethos of democracy and completely unnatural. It is entirely guided by a single objective: to size down the strength of CPN (UML) in parliament and the provincial positions and to stop KP Oli from being the prime minister again. Such an alliance is unacceptable in a flourishing democracy.  The political leaders are guided by their egos rather than their social responsibilities.  Will the Nov 20 elections ensure political stability? No. The recent public choice literature discusses various political features which crucially influence government behavior, and drive a wedge between what governments actually do and what they are advised to do by economists. Typically, when there is a coalition government led by a political alliance between the political parties with opposing ideologies, political power is dispersed, either across different wings of the government, or amongst political parties in a coalition, or across parties that alternate in power through the medium of elections. The desire to concentrate or hold on to power can result in political instability and inefficient economic policies.  For instance, lobbying by various interest groups, together with the ruling party’s wish to remain in power, often results in policy distortions being exchanged for electoral support. Generally, politicians are interested solely in maximizing their probability of surviving in office, so the resulting character of government is pretty much unstable and very far away from the benevolence assumed by more traditional normative theories of government behavior. In addition, political parties are almost exclusively concerned with furthering the interests of their own support groups. Thus, the conclusions that follow from this discussion are very much different from the conclusion that can be reached if there is a stable government.  During electioneering, all political parties commit to bringing the wave of development, but it is limited only to the slogan, what are the major hindrances to Nepal’s development? Political parties, their leaders, and policymakers lack a clear understanding of the determinants of growth and development in Nepal. Even though they know the common determinants, they may not internalize how each of those determinants affects growth and development, what strategies promote inclusive growth and sustainable development, and if that growth and development strategy leads to achieving the objective of a welfare state in the long run. Besides, political parties and policymakers do not have clear pictures of the intermediate and final outcomes of the long-run growth process. That creates confusion and policy dilemmas, which leads to misleading outcomes.  Actually, policymakers have to look at the proximate and fundamental factors that affect the growth and development of a country. Capital accumulation and productivity growth are the proximate determinants of growth. In contrast, luck, geography, culture, and institutions are fundamental determinants of the growth and development of any country in the world, and Nepal is not exception. Understanding this fact and internalizing the channel through which each of those factors affect our growth and development is fundamental in the first place. That knowledge helps policymakers form evidence-based policies to achieve high growth, alleviate poverty, reduce inequalities, and promote all-faced development in the country. That says there is not just a single hindrance to growth and development in current Nepal. How does a coalition government affect good governance and service delivery? As I have mentioned earlier, a coalition government led by a political alliance of parties with opposing political views leads to political instability and forms an unstable government. That can be a cause of economic distortions. Unstable coalitions or governments that are not likely to remain in power for an extended period of time are liable to introduce policy distortions for at least two reasons.  First, such governments obviously have very short time horizons that have important implications for economic policy in general and budgetary policy in particular. If political power alternates rapidly and randomly between competing political parties or groups of parties, then each government will follow myopic policies since it assigns a low probability of being relocated. Hard policy options whose benefits flow after a long gestation lag are unlikely to be adopted by such a government. Instead, it may spend indiscriminately in order to satisfy the short-term needs of its support groups. This will result in a legacy of high debt to its successor. Although this may constrain the actions of the next government, the current government does not care about the priorities of the next government. The second route through which the rapid turnover of governments may induce policy distortions is relevant in the case of coalition governments. The shorter the expected duration of such governments, the more difficult it will be for the ruling coalition members to agree on policies.  Of course, the more heterogeneous the parties in the ruling coalition, the greater the lack of cooperation will be. Each party in the ruling coalition may then try to promote populist policies in order to exploit its own narrow interests. The most likely casualties of all this will be fiscal discipline, good governance, and service delivery.

Prof Rahul Mukherji is associated with South Asia Institute of Heidelberg University, Germany.  He teaches and conducts research in the area of comparative and South Asian politics and international relations. His current research involves democratic backsliding, politics of welfare and India’s emergence in the global order. In September, Mukherji visited Nepal to share his view on the status of democracy in South Asia. Kamal Dev Bhattarai of ApEx talked to him about the latest trend of democracy in South Asia and Nepal. What is your view on the current state of democracy in South Asia?  The status of democracy in South Asia is quite precarious in many respects. India’s situation in 2016 and 2021 is comparatively worse than Poland and Hungary, the two countries that the world is talking about because their democracies are falling short of expectations. Sri Lanka and India are very close to each other, but India has been ranked worse than Sri Lanka in the V-Dem report.  The global report shows that India’s democracy is declining in this period. Pakistan’s status of democracy is even worse and Bangladesh seems to be backsliding even more.  So, this is a sort of negative side of the story. The positive story is that Nepal and Bhutan are consolidating their democracy.  In many ways, it is difficult to make a comparison between Nepal and India. In terms of democracy, Nepal has a positive trajectory, while India has a somewhat negative trajectory. India’s trajectory in the South Asian region is very important because other countries in this region look at India’s democracy. India’s democracy is important not only for India itself but also for the entire region. If India’s democracy declines, it will not be good for Nepal. How does India’s backsliding democracy affect the region?  It will certainly have a huge impact for the countries in this region. For example, In Bangladesh, the Awami League government, considered to be more secular, could find it difficult to sustain itself if Hindu nationalism in India is pursued in a certain way. If there are leaders with an autocratic bent in Nepal, Sri Lanka, or any other country in the region, they will draw inspiration from India, and there are already some indications of it. What is the role of civil society in protecting democracy in South Asia?  Civil society organizations in South Asia are becoming weak and that is partly because the state is not letting them grow. Civil Society needs the state.  Several legislations introduced by India over the past few years have led to cutting off of foreign lending to non-governmental organizations. The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act has been used to attack both opposition politicians and non-governmental organizations. Likewise, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act has been used to catch many people from civil society and some of them are in prison. These are only but a few of the facets that I have been discussing now. In Bangladesh, the situation is even worse than India. Civil society organizations there are harshly dealt with, which is why the V-Dem ranking of Bangladesh is very low than that of India and Sri Lanka. Civil society is not certainly dead because we have seen farmers’ protests, which led the Indian government to repeal the controversial farm laws. In Sri Lanka, too, the civil society movement led to the ouster of the Rajapaksa family. I guess Nepal must be in a better position, as it has a lot of civil society organizations. Despite some problems, civil society is more alive in Nepal.  In India, too, civil society is active, but it is becoming more and more difficult for it to sustain because the state is trying to restrain them, which is not good for democracy. How do you observe the state of democracy in Nepal?  Nepali democracy is currently in the transitional phase. It seems that Nepal is trying to consolidate its democracy. It took a long time to promulgate the constitution. Before that I was wondering whether the Nepali politicians were actually interested in the constitution. When the constitution was finally endorsed, many people hailed it for its many good features. But only having a good constitution is not enough. Nepal is sandwiched between India and China. Along with a good constitution, Nepal needs strong political parties, which carry a certain agenda. Now it seems that power is the main goal for every political party of Nepal rather than a real agenda. No matter what your ideology, you can come together for a coalition to ascend to power. If power becomes the goal, then it does not matter how good a constitution you have. Consequently, the people of the country will be the ones who will suffer. How optimistic are you about the future of democracy in South Asia?  The future of democracy in South Asia will certainly depend on countries like India, Nepal and Bhutan. India, because it led the way for democracy in the region. When India became a democracy in 1947, no recognized global scholars thought that the country could consolidate as a democracy. Because modernization theory and a lot of statistics suggest democracy comes only after a certain level of per capita income is secured. At that time, India was very poor, it hardly had a middle class. But there was democracy nonetheless. In many ways, India challenged the world sustaining its democracy. India had a coalition government after 1980 and people thought that there was a need for a strong politician.  And today, they have such a strong leader that democracy itself is getting a challenge. In many ways, India is going to become an important country in the region. If it is able to secure its democracy, it will have a good impact on other South Asian countries. If not, it is going to become difficult for the region. Meanwhile, the trajectory of democracy in Nepal and Bhutan are reasons to be hopeful. I hope democratic Nepal and Bhutan will not follow India. Some countries are consolidating democracy on their own but if India does not do so, it will have a negative impact in the region. I am still hopeful that India’s democracy will rise.

“A Coke is a Coke and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking.” Andy Warhol thus summed up the popularity of the world’s most renowned brand, Coca-Cola. There is hardly anybody who has not had a Coca-Cola. Established in 1892, the company sells its flagship popular drink in over 200 countries. Anushka Nepal from ApEx talks to Adarsh Avasthi, country director, Coca-Cola Nepal, on what the company has been up to in the recent years.  Being such a global brand, it might be difficult to maintain the customer engagement. Can you share how Coca-Cola has been maintaining that with the consumers in Nepal? Yes, it is difficult to maintain such engagement among customers, but we believe in hearing them out to make our sales more relatable to them. For instance, in Nepal, we have been giving familiar names to our different sized bottles, like ‘Kanchu pack’, which is understandable to many Nepalis, and they can connect with the product. We also hear out good ideas from the customers themselves too. What better way to understand what customers want than that from a customer itself?   Dashain and Tihar are huge festivals in Nepal, and Coca-Cola never misses to launch a festival campaign each year. What campaign is the company running this year? This year, the star of our campaign would be Chef Santosh Shah, who in collaboration with Coca-Cola shared personal recipes for five different dishes that were specifically targeted for the festival. We also wanted to do something better this year, something that would help us connect with our customers on an emotional level. Which is why we decided to facilitate bringing migrant workers back home during this year’s festival. During this festive season, we wanted to give much more than just a pack of beverages. We wanted our customers to have a family to share that pack of beverage.  Was it a challenge to bring the migrant workers back home? How did the company manage to do so? Yes, it was challenging. We had to find them first in order to bring them back. But the company was determined enough to do so. We had a great team that worked really hard on making that happen. And thankfully, we were also able to capture those moments when families reunite after years. I think many of us were able to empathize too after watching that video. It definitely was not easy, but somehow it became possible. I believe it to be the work of a great team. I think it could also be an inspiration to other companies to do something like that in the future.  Throughout the years, we have noticed a lot of emphasis on social impact by Coca-Cola. Can you elaborate more on this. Our main focus as a company is to always strive to make our production process more sustainable. Most of our products in Nepal are manufactured in a glass bottle, which is sustainable. Also, we have been working alongside several NGOs in order to recycle plastic bottles. Those recycled bottles are again used in our production. Likewise, a lot of retailers in Nepal are women. We have been running a program called ‘Sakshyam’ with an objective to uplift at least 1,000 women with their businesses. For instance, if a woman retailer owns a restaurant, we want to facilitate her on how to make those food items more presentable for their consumers. In this way, Coca-Cola has decided to support women employment, and the program has been going good so far.  We are already nearing the end of 2022, are there any upcoming campaigns that consumers can anticipate?  I would not like to give away all the excitement just yet, but Coca-Cola has been planning to launch some exciting campaigns for the end of this year. Since the FIFA World Cup will be taking place soon, we have been working on a campaign that helps our consumers connect with the game on a more personal level. As we all know, Nepal is very much engaged in football and the World Cup definitely gets everyone on their toes. We are planning to launch a campaign that will not just be about the World Cup, but will be something that our consumers will be able to connect on a personal level. It will be mostly targeted for football fans.