Sudeshna Thapa

Following Nepal’s transition to a federal state with the promulgation of its republican Constitution in 2015 and the subsequent elections across all three tiers of government, understanding public perceptions is essential to assess how the system is being implemented on the ground. 

The study, titled “Gauging Elite Perceptions: Views from the Subnational Level,” offers valuable insights into the attitudes, beliefs, and practices of a key group of constituents, the “local elite”, at both the local and provincial levels. It examines their views on the implementation of federalism in Nepal, as well as the functioning of federal, provincial, and local governments, particularly with regard to public service delivery and inclusive, participatory planning and decision-making processes. 

The study is particularly pertinent given the pivotal role local elites play in shaping public opinion and influencing government decisions, often serving as intermediaries between the public and policymakers. Understanding their perspectives can help inform policymaking and guide interventions that promote a more inclusive and representative polity, especially for historically marginalized populations.

While elected and government officials across the study sites, (provincial capitals, and two local units in each of the seven provinces), viewed federalism as inherently positive, other respondents, including civil society actors and media representatives, among others, believed its implementation has not been wholly effective, the study revealed. Their discontent stemmed primarily from the perception that the federal government has been reluctant to devolve power to local and provincial levels as mandated by the Constitution. 

However, the dissatisfied respondents acknowledged that the creation of empowered local governments had improved service delivery at the grassroots level. They expressed higher satisfaction with local governments than the provincial ones, while crediting the latter for bringing service-seekers from minority communities closer to bureaucrats and elected representatives. 

Of the 630 respondents asked to rate the overall performance of the federal governance structure on a scale of 1 to 10 (with 1 being the least effective and 10 the most), 26 percent rated it 8 or more, a staggering 58 percent gave it between 4 and 7, and a relatively small 16 percent rated it 3 or below.

Based on a mixed-methods approach, comprising a comprehensive desk review and primary data collection, the study found that the majority of the respondents believed federalism has made politics either fully or mostly more inclusive of marginalized populations and people from all genders. Respondents were also asked whether particular groups – Adibasi Janajatis, Dalits, Madhesis, Muslims, and people with disabilities – were encouraged to participate in planning and decision-making processes within their respective local governments and whether their concerns were taken into consideration. A majority of the 630 respondents indicated that such groups were “always” encouraged in the case of women (57 percent), Dalits (58 percent), and Adibasi Janajatis (57 percent). By contrast, fewer respondents said the same for Madhesis (49 percent), Muslims (34 percent), and people with disabilities (42 percent).

Further, respondents highlighted a range of structural and political challenges confronting subnational governments, including overlapping jurisdictions, delays in lawmaking, limited fiscal resources, and increasingly cumbersome bureaucratic procedures. They also pointed to weak coordination among the three tiers of government, alongside entrenched political patronage and the dominance of powerful actors within political parties, as major impediments to effective governance, illustrating how informal power structures continue to dilute the constitutional promise of federalism and constrain the realization of a more inclusive, accountable, and equitable system of governance. While the study finds that Nepal’s federal transition has delivered tangible gains—particularly in local service delivery and political inclusion—persistent political and institutional bottlenecks continue to limit its full potential.

¹The local elites surveyed as part of the study represent a diverse array of influential individuals across various sectors and communities, including elected officials, government representatives, political and traditional leaders, civil society actors, academics, journalists, business leaders, and representatives of user groups, public institutions, I/NGOs, and organizations advocating for marginalized and minority groups, among others.

²The selection of local level units other than provincial capitals was based on the Local Government Institutional Capacity Self-Assessment) scores for FY 2021/22. One local unit each from among the five highest- and five lowest-scoring ones were chosen for the study.