Sometime back, I had a conversation with a member of a prominent Nepal business house who remarked, “We like economic reforms only if they benefit us.” This reminded me of a similar conversation with a North African political leader who candidly admitted, “We like democracy only as long as we win the elections.” Both statements capture a deeper truth: reforms often stall when they are seen through narrow self-interests rather than collective progress. This raises important perspectives on why reforms in Nepal have stalled and what needs to be done to move forward.
I have been advocating for economic reforms since the early 1990s, when Nepal first experienced economic growth through reform initiatives. In Unleashing Nepal, I diagnosed the structural problems that hindered reform and in Unleashing the Vajra, I identified two groups that remain the greatest obstacles.
The first are the Cartelpreneurs, who are business actors that thrive on rent-seeking through cartels and syndicates. Their practices deter foreign investment and disadvantage businesses that prefer transparent competition.
The second are the Donorpreuners and Grantepreneurs, those who have mastered the art of rent-seeking from the different projects of development partners. A telling example is the phenomenon of “never graduating startups,” which began as donor funded projects a decade ago and continued to rely on technical assistance, deliberately avoiding the transition to independent business in order to preserve their access to donor funds. For both the groups, the current system works far too well. It sustains their privilege and profits, which is precisely why they resist reforms that could create a fairer and more dynamic economy.
At the Nepal Economic Forum, our mission as a private sector-led organization is to push for meaningful reforms. We were encouraged when former Finance Secretary Rameshore Khanal was appointed to head the High-Level Economic Reforms Commission in October 2024 and when the committee submitted their report in April 2025. In last week’s NEFview he importantly shed light on both the process involved in it and the recommendations.
Yet, as with many other things in Nepal, the challenge is not in identifying what needs to be done but in action. While government inertia is often blamed, businesses that finance politicians must also bear the responsibility for blocking reforms. Their vested interests have kept the system stagnant.
This tendency is reinforced by what I call “Tariffonomics,” a world where everyone seeks to impose tariffs on their competitors. History, particularly in the pre-WTO era has shown that such measures do little more than isolate growth and serve the interests of a narrow community, rather than a broader economy.
Within the private sector, the absence of global ambitions has bred complacency and undermined pressure for reform. Take the airlines industry. If a duopoly allows operators to rig prices, compromise safety and flout international rules, why would they push for reforms that strengthen oversight, raise costs and cut into profits?
The story is similar in hydropower. Many promoters prioritize quick profits over compliance with global standards on environment and safety. When the government proposes legislation to enforce stricter safeguarding measures important for minimizing damage during natural disasters, power companies band together to resist.
Cartels operate in a similar manner. We routinely see businesses protest when penalized for selling adulterated oil or sub-standard bottled water, framing enforcement as unfair rather than necessary. With so many businesses embedded in the government, I often wonder: how realistic is it to expect a meaningful change?
One hope lies in Nepal’s graduation from Least Development Country (LDC) status in 2026. As development partners reduce or withdraw funding that has long propped up cartels and rent-seeking networks, the focus will inevitably shift towards business partnership, investment promotion, and looking at furthering economic co-operation.
The transition will also mean the end of an era where business leaders were funded by donors to undertake junkets, creating incentives to compete fiercely in organizational elections. We have seen how many civil society organizations collapsed once external fundings dried up. Two decades ago, elections to key associations were highly contested because winning meant access to donor-backed travel and resources. Those days are fading.
With restructuring underway in many development agencies, Nepalis who once decided which businesses to support may soon find themselves without budgets or even jobs. In their price, new arrangements centered on investments and economic co-operation could emerge, creating fresh momentum for reforms and a new order.
For the past twenty-five years, I have argued that Nepal must align with global rules and norms if we are to remain relevant in the international economy. Symbolic differences will not help. Being the only country with a fifteen-minute time difference does not help as well. If we want to be different from India, then why not adopt a global standard such as GMT+6? Similarly, maintaining a fiscal calendar running from mid-July to mid-July creates unnecessary complications for global investors.
Our new constitution removed English and even new technology policies are now drafted in Nepali, by transliterating English words to Devanagari. Yet, translations have never been cheaper or easier. It is not simply about using English; it is about communicating effectively in both global and local languages. Likewise, online services must deliver real functionality, not forcing citizens to appear physically for something that was supposed to be online.
These changes do not require national referendums or sweeping constitutional amendments. They only require a handful of forward-thinking policy makers or private sector leaders refusing to derail the process. We already have evidence that small reforms can transform opportunities. When districts began issuing passports in the mid-1990s, it opened global education and employment markets for Nepalis. The impact was immense.
What we need now is the will to act. My hope is that younger voices in the private sector and among development partners recognize that responsibility does not lie only with the government. Reforms demand collective ownership and even small steps can change the trajectory of Nepal’s economy.
Sujeev is the founder CEO of beed. He leverages over 25 years of experience in diverse fields and geographies to advise, lead and inspire. With comprehensive networks in Nepal’s public, private, civil and diplomatic sectors, Sujeev is a trusted business and policy advisor and respected strategic thinker. From economies of developing countries to economies of human beings, he moves across different worlds, with his passion for the Himalayas being the axis.
