– NISCHAL DHUNGEL

The opinion piece originally appeared in The Kathmandu Post on 4 July 2023. Please read the original article here.

A small landlocked country in East Africa, Rwanda has been on a remarkable transformational journey. Despite its chequered history, marked by the devastating genocide against Tutsi minorities in 1994, Rwanda has made significant strides in managing its debt burden, achieving impressive economic growth. The landlocked African republic also has some important lessons for Nepal, which endured a Maoist insurgency and decades-long political instability, on debt management and economic development.

Debt trajectory

One crucial factor contributing to Rwanda’s progress is its focus on reducing its debt burden. The country’s eligibility for the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative in 2001 was a turning point. Rwanda received significant debt relief of $1.2 billion, providing a much-needed breathing space for development. The Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) further eased the burden by providing an additional $1.8 billion in debt relief.

Rwanda has reduced its debt-to-GDP ratio from over 100 percent in 1995 to 64 percent in 2022. The Covid-19 crisis led to a sharp increase in the fiscal deficit in 2020 due to revenue shortfalls and increased spending to address the crisis. Total nominal external debt to GDP stood at 75.7 percent at the end of 2021, of which external public and publicly guaranteed (PPG) debt accounted for 54.5 percent of GDP, resulting in the present value of PPG’s external debt to GDP ratio of 34.9 percent. While the increase in external PPG debt is concerning, debt management is done through loans in concessional terms with relatively low-interest rates and careful prioritisation and selection of capital-intensive projects.

However, the debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to continue rising due to the pressure of financing infrastructure development and social programmes, posing risks related to concessional financing availability, US monetary policy tightening, US dollar appreciation, and trade term shocks. As per the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Rwanda’s debt situation remains sustainable, with a moderate external and overall public debt distress risk.

Nepal’s debt trajectory

Nepal’s debt-to-GDP ratio declined from 64 percent in 2000 to 22.3 percent in 2015. As of mid-April 2023, the country’s overall outstanding debt stood at 38.3 percent of GDP, a significant increase from the debt-to-GDP ratio of 25 percent in 2016-17. The debt-to-GDP ratio has been rising due to the pandemic, the transition to federalism, the 2015 earthquake and the depreciation of the Nepali rupee. The fiscal deficit in the first half of 2023 increased the public debt-to-GDP ratio from an estimated 35.6 percent in 2022 to 38.3 percent in 2023. Total nominal external debt to GDP stood at 25.9 percent at the end of 2021, of which external PPG debt accounted for 21.8 percent, resulting in the present value of PPG’s external debt to GDP ratio of 13.1 percent.

Nepal’s external debt is lower than Rwanda’s but is growing faster. It is also more heavily concentrated on concessional terms. Domestic public debt (from 10.1 percent of GDP in FY 2015-16 to 22.2 percent in FY 2020-21) has increased faster than the external debt (from 14.9 to 21.8 percent of GDP) during the same period. Interest rates on domestic loans have also increased due to the government’s increased borrowing, which has crowded out private borrowers. The joint World Bank and IMF Debt Sustainability Analysis found that the risk of Nepal’s overall debt distress and risk of external debt distress is low, and its debt-carrying capacity is still strong. However, there are risks to Nepal’s debt sustainability, including a slowdown in economic growth, a decline in foreign aid and investment, an increase in interest rates, and a depreciation of the Nepalese rupee. Nepal can learn from Rwanda’s experience managing a high debt-to-GDP ratio while maintaining a rapidly growing economy.

Structural reforms

Rwanda’s implementation of structural reforms and debt relief resulted in remarkable economic growth, with an average annual GDP growth rate of 8 percent between 2000 and 2020. Between 2000 to 2022, Rwanda underwent significant structural changes, leading to a transformative shift in its economic landscape. During this time, there was a decline in the proportion of Rwanda’s GDP contributed by agriculture, forestry and fishing, dropping from 31.2 percent to 24.9 percent. Meanwhile, the industrial sector, which encompasses construction, increased its contribution from 16.8 percent to 21.2 percent. Moreover, there was a significant growth in the percentage of GDP represented by exports of goods and services, rising from 5.4 percent to 22.5 percent.

Rwanda’s key exports, such as coffee and tea, are predominantly sold in major markets such as the United States and Europe for coffee, Middle Eastern countries, and Pakistan for tea. Nepal can draw valuable lessons from Rwanda’s experience, particularly in implementing structural reforms, prioritising sectors for development, and determining essential export products.

Rwanda has made strides in developing e-government services by leveraging its existing technologies. In particular, the country implemented a comprehensive “one-stop” e-government initiative called “Irembo” in April 2014. Operating as a single portal, Irembo integrates 96 basic government services such as birth registration, business registration, tax filing and returns, and school enrollment, enabling around 9 million internet subscribers to access these services conveniently. Rwanda’s e-government systems have been acknowledged by the World Bank as a leading performer on the business reform index, enhancing the country’s appeal to investors. These advancements have streamlined administrative processes and fostered a culture of innovation and digital inclusion within the country.

Nepal can take inspiration from Rwanda’s success in developing e-government services, leveraging existing technologies to streamline administrative processes and enhance digital inclusion, ultimately attracting investors and fostering innovation.

Attracting FDI

Rwanda’s commitment to economic liberalisation and attracting foreign investment has driven its economic growth. Foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows increased from $100 million in 2008 to $398 million in 2022. Much of Rwanda’s foreign direct investment (FDI) is focused on specific sectors. Specifically, the energy sector represents 45 percent of all recorded investments, while manufacturing comprises 30 percent. Special economic zones offering tax breaks and incentives have further encouraged investment.

For instance, in 2000, the installed capacity of power plants in Rwanda was only 44 megawatts. Over the past two decades, the government has attracted significant FDI in the energy sector, which has helped increase the installed capacity to 225 megawatts. This has led to a substantial increase in electricity generation, and the electricity access rate has increased from 4.8 percent of the population in 2005 to 49 percent in 2022. By identifying sectors with growth potential and actively promoting investment in those areas, Rwanda has been able to drive economic expansion and create opportunities for job creation and technological advancements.

Despite both countries being landlocked and import-dependent, Rwanda has shown a way of achieving impressive economic growth while Nepal lags behind. Nepal should leverage the advantage of lower interest rates as envisaged in Nepal’s Medium Term Debt Management Strategy (MTDS) and implement structural reforms to reduce corruption, strengthen public financial management and improve the business climate. Enhancing the business environment, promoting digital platforms and establishing centralised investment-related services can attract foreign investment and boost economic growth. Nepal should address the rising debt burden by increasing tax revenue, reducing spending on non-essential items, and carefully prioritising and selecting projects.

– NISCHAL DHUNGEL

The opinion piece originally appeared in The Kathmandu Post on 2 February 2023. Please read the original article here.

The modern globalised ecosystem has increased public debt due to changing economic and political circumstances. Handling public debt goes hand in hand with an effort to balance those circumstances. Public debt is a domestic or foreign loan issued by a government, which remains a viable option to support government spending, and development initiatives, for which the government lacks funding. Owing to economic complexity and the Covid-19 pandemic, government spending has recently increased more quickly than its capacity to generate revenue. With interest rates skyrocketing, the rising debt severely impacts the budgets of developing countries that must invest in their economies.

Nepal started budgeting in 1951, taking debt 11 years after the budgetary practice began. The history of our public debt is not very old. The government started taking domestic loans in 1962, while foreign loans were only accepted beginning in 1963. Post-earthquake and transition to federalism, Nepal’s public debt has increased over the past several years, reaching 42.2 percent of GDP in fiscal 2019-20 from a progressive reduction of 25 percent of GDP in fiscal 2016-17. The impact of Covid-19 and responses to it are responsible for the significant increase in fiscal 2019-20. The debt-to-GDP ratio for Nepal stood at 39 percent in fiscal 2020-21. Due to Nepal’s access to concessional funding (grants or loans less than 2 percent with long repayment periods) from multilateral institutions and foreign countries, its foreign debt servicing needs are low. As per the World Bank, Nepal’s debt distress risk is rated low for both external and total debt. The International Development Cooperation Policy (2019) allows Nepal to obtain a foreign commercial loan, but Nepal has yet to utilise this opportunity. The country needs to be careful while borrowing large commercial foreign loans with highinterest rates.

The impact of public debt on Nepal’s economic growth, examined by the journal Public Debt and Economic Growth of Nepal utilising data from 1978 to 2020, indicates no clear link between public debt levels and economic expansion. The limited revenue sources have resulted in a rise in government spending more quickly than government revenue. The government has borrowed money primarily for weak areas, leaving it cash-strapped and forcing it to take out another loan to repay the previous ones. Some of the current capital loan money is in the stock market and land. Due to insufficient domestic resource mobilisation, excessive fiscal deficit, export-import imbalance, and gaps in revenue and spending, the external debt has worsened. Thus, some authors argue that deficit financing should not be considered as long as there is sustained economic growth and the possibility of encouraging investment rather than discouraging it. Furthermore, there has been no improvement in the country’s capability to repay debt; there has only been an increase in overall public debt and interest.

It is also crucial to analyse the country’s debt condition in light of its foreign exchange reserves. The depreciation of the Nepali rupee against the US dollar has increased Nepal’s debt liability in local currency terms. Foreign currency debt payments may become more challenging at a time of shrinking foreign currency reserves and rising government borrowing from foreign creditors. Nepal’s foreign direct investment (FDI) is the lowest in the region at 0.5 percent of GDP. The impact of lowering the FDI threshold to Rs20 million will further decrease the inflow of FDI. Further, capital flow restrictions may have negative effects on GDP, but FDI offers the extra benefit of not increasing the nation’s debt and relieving strain on foreign exchange reserves. The government should put in place long-delayed FDI reforms, such as simplifying regulatory approval processes, which would lead to foreign currency inflows and spur the transfer of capital and technology to boost growth.

Lesson from Bangladesh

Thanks to a robust economy and a stable government, Bangladesh has avoided relying on foreign forces for domestic survival. Three factors—exports (second largest clothing exporter), remittances (one of the biggest recipients), and fuel prices (relies on imported fuels)—together account for the majority of the economic health of the country. But these factors are in jeopardy due to a global economic slowdown that is particularly destructive in developing nations. Bangladesh has less money to import fuel as exports fall and prices rise simultaneously. It has decided to postpone non-urgent projects and expressed concerns about a growing trade deficit and a decline in remittances.

However, Nepal’s exports are not as strong as Bangladesh’s, and will be less affected by the global slowdown. The government of Nepal is making several efforts to boost foreign reserve exchange. To stop the mounting debt, the newly passed Public Debt Management Act set a limit on external debt at one-third of the GDP. This measure is intended to prevent the government from borrowing carelessly and motivate it to pay down its debts on schedule so it can borrow more money in the future. Nepal also came up with a slew of measures to ban imports of luxury goods to prevent the depletion of its foreign exchange reserves and ended the ban as foreign reserves rose. These underlying traits will continue to shape how Nepal and Bangladesh react to the current global upheavals, including growing prices, impact on remittances, and widened trade imbalance.

State institutions in Nepal are fragile and continue to have problems with checks and balances. The government will struggle in 2023 to stop tax evasion and broaden its revenue base, increasing its need for public borrowing. With a new government in place, synchronising fiscal and monetary policy should ease liquidity shortage to fuel investment in productive sectors. A significant issue with the democratic history of Bangladesh is the absence of robust and viable opposition. Despite political hiccups and mounting public debt, Bangladesh has made commendable economic progress. Nepal and Bangladesh are unlikely to have the same situation as Sri Lanka if their policy measures successfully utilise public debt, and balance national goals and domestic capabilities.

Addressing structural barriers

Building on prior accomplishments and addressing structural barriers will help to accelerate growth, attract private investment, boost productivity, and develop climate resilience to successfully graduate from the least developed country’s (LDC) status and achieve lower middle-income status by 2026. Nepal’s plan for economic growth and how trade, infrastructure, exchange rates, and other economic policies can help with economic development is still unclear. The growth potential will be increased by fostering an environment, encouraging trade and foreign direct investment, growing the financial sector, building human capital, and enhancing good governance. The country must spend the borrowed funds wisely and enact programmes to reduce debt. As Nepal plans to leave the LDC status in 2026, it is crucial to leverage the advantage of a lower interest rate with a long repayment period of borrowed funds. It should then work towards building a sustainable economy by investing in productive sectors with high-efficiency levels to repay the loans over time.

– ANUSHA BASNET

As a developing country, foreign aid has been a major factor in aiding Nepal to meet the country’s all major development. Throughout the years, Nepal has mostly received foreign aid in the form of grants, loans and technical assistance. The country has received most bilateral aid support from countries such as  USA,  UK, Japan, India, and Germany and most multilateral aid from organizations including the European Union (EU), the World Bank (WB), Asian Development Bank (ADB), and the United Nations (UN). The central government created the country’s Foreign Aid Policy 2002 to create stipulations for donors. Also, the Nepal government  tried to streamline the process for the donors and make the whole system transparent by requiring the donors to upload all the accounting details related to the Aid Management Information System (AMIS) portal. The portal was launched by the government in 2019. 

The following graph presents the value of official development assistance (ODA) Nepal has received during FY 2016/17 and FY 2020/21:

The available data highlight fluctuation in the foreign aid that Nepal has received over the last five fiscal years. The official data for the first eight months of the recent fiscal year (FY2021/22) indicates a decline in aid commitment by 32.7 percent as compared to the same period of the previous fiscal year.

The following graph shows a breakdown of ODA disbursement from 2018 to 2020:

While Nepal mostly received grants during the 1960s, concessional loans have been a greater percent of foreign aid after the 1980s. The shift in the amount of foreign aid Nepal received from bilateral to multilateral partners caused this change. The above graph shows that 60 percent of total ODA in FY 2018/19, 69.91 percent in FY 2019/20 and 66.89 percent in 2020/21 were given as loans. A large portion of loans have been taken to develop the infrastructure projects in the country. In FY 2020/21, 98.8 percent of the disbursement received for the road transportation sector, 82.27 percent of the disbursement received for the energy sector, and 73.73 percent of the disbursement received for the reconstruction sector was received in the form of loans.

While the government has been taking out loans to finance development projects, concerns over this preference have been raised in the country. The biggest concern in recent years has been the fear of Nepal falling into debt trap and eventually facing an economic crisis. The tendency of development projects to get extended for completion and lack of effective aid mobilization puts Nepal in a precarious position as greater investment is required to complete these projects. Furthermore, even though its overall contribution to causing climate change is low, Nepal is one of the countries that is most vulnerable to climate change. It is estimated that the country will need USD 46 billion by 2050 to adapt to impacts of climate change. As such, Nepal taking loans from multilateral agencies for adapting to climate change will increase the  financial burden on the economy.

Way Forward

While foreign aid has always been an important component for covering the budget deficit, diversifying the source of financing is critical for the country moving forward. Few solution to minimize the reliance on foreign aid could include:

• Focus on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): Finding alternative sources of financing beyond foreign aid is essential to reduce the dependence on foreign aid. One option for alternative sources of financing could be FDI, which means attracting foreign investors to invest in businesses and projects in Nepal.
• Increased focus on the productive sector: Nepal should strengthen the productive sectors of its economy. The government’s focus should be on providing support to agricultural, service and manufacturing sectors so that the economy can become  self-reliant and subsequently  a net exporter.
• Applying for grants instead of loans: The government should push for grants instead of loans when it comes to getting foreign aid for projects that are geared towards achieving sustainable development goals and climate resilience. The Nepali government should aim at getting grants to combat the negative effects of climate change in the country.

– ANUSHA Basnet

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is defined as a “category of cross-border investment” in which an investor from one country invests in another country wherein the investor has significant control over the business it invests in (IMF, 2009). It may also involve a “transfer of technical know-how, managerial and organizational skills”. For a country aiming to expedite its development process, FDI has been one of the factors aiding the development process of Nepal especially in recent years. The government has also made provisions to make Nepal a more investment friendly country. Acts such as The Foreign Investment and Technology Transfer Act (FITTA) 2019 and Foreign Direct Investment Policy 2015 have been created by the government in an effort to create a better environment for foreign investors. The FITTA states that “investors need to bring 25 percent of the pledged investment within a year from the date of registration, 70 percent by the start of operation, and the remaining 30 percent within the next two years.” The Department of Industry (DOI), Nepal Rastra Bank (NRB), and Investment Board Nepal (IBN) are three agencies that implement the laws regarding FDI. 

As of 2018/19, the stock of FDI in Nepal was Rs. 182.92 billion of which 48.2 percent was paid-up capital, 42.8 percent were reserves, and 9.0 percent was loans. Of the total FDI stock, the service sector accounts for 51.1 percent and the industrial sector accounts for 48.8 percent. Furthermore, within the industrial sector manufacturing, mining and quarrying industry accounts for 28.6 percent and electricity, gas, and water sector accounts for 20.0 percent of FDI stock. While the level of FDI pledge is high, the actual inflow of FDI is still low. 

Looking into the provincial breakdown of FDI statistics, we see the following numbers:

Figure 1: Provincial Breakdown of FDI figures (Data taken from NRB)

From the above graph, we can see that Sudurpaschim province has received the least amount of FDI in all three years (2017, 2018, 2019). The province received FDI of Rs. 13.2 million, 10.8 million, and 27.93 million for the years 2017, 2018, and 2019 respectively. The increase in FDI for the year 2019 can be attributed to the investment brought in for the manufacturing sector (cement industry) and information technology sector (software development industry). Comparatively, Sudurpaschim province lags behind other provinces in terms of being able to attract foreign investment. Years of lack of concrete development plans from the central government, lack of investment in the infrastructure sector and other factors such as a difficult geographical terrain have caused the province to lag behind in terms of development which has affected its current ability to seek investment. Furthermore, delays in current projects have not inspired confidence from the investors. 

However, the provincial government in Sudurpaschim has made efforts to bring in foreign investment. The provincial government has started a process to create a Provincial Investment Board in order to streamline projects that require higher investment (projects requiring investment from Rs. 1 billion to Rs. 5 billion). The government also put in extra effort to woo investors during the Investment Summit organized by the Nepal Investment Board. In terms of attracting foreign investment, tourism, manufacturing sector, energy sector, and transportation sector are few sectors that are being prioritized by the provincial government. The provincial policies and programs for the fiscal year 2078/79 has emphasized completing the ongoing projects in order to attract new investment. The recent agreement between the Investment Board of Nepal and NHPC for the development of Seti river hydropower projects also shows promising signs for the province. 

As the Sudurpaschim government has been creating ambitious plans to expedite the development process of the province, FDI will play an important role in the process. While the province has a lot to do in terms of catching up to other provinces for bringing in FDI, the steps initiated by the government show their commitment and dedication to the economic development of the province.