Submit your Article

As Nepal advances toward its climate commitments under the Paris Agreement and national plans, one target stands out as both urgent and ambitious: achieving net zero carbon emissions. This goal, though complex, is not impossible—especially if Nepal harnesses one of nature’s most powerful, yet often overlooked, climate allies: the Vetiver grass system.

With rising temperatures, rapidly melting Himalayan glaciers, unpredictable monsoon patterns, and an alarming increase in landslides and flash floods, Nepal is already living the harsh realities of climate change. While industrialized countries focus on energy transition, electric vehicles, and technological carbon capture, countries like Nepal—with limited industrial emissions but high vulnerability—must champion nature-based solutions that are affordable, scalable, and regenerative.

This is where Vetiver grass (Chrysopogon zizanioides) offers a uniquely powerful opportunity. Traditionally known for its use in soil conservation, erosion control, and slope stabilization, vetiver is now gaining recognition as a natural carbon sink. Its dense and deep root system, which can grow over three to five meters underground, allows it to sequester large quantities of atmospheric carbon dioxide into the soil.

Recent studies have shown that Vetiver grass (Chrysopogon zizanioides) has the potential to sequester 15 to 20 metric tons of CO₂ per hectare per year—a rate that rivals or even surpasses many tree-based afforestation projects. What sets Vetiver apart is its rapid growth cycle and its massive, fibrous root system, which penetrates 3 to 4 meters deep into the soil within a single growing season. Unlike trees, which can take decades to reach maturity and store significant carbon, Vetiver achieves measurable carbon sequestration in just months.

The deep-rooted nature of Vetiver is critical: carbon stored below 1 meter in the soil is far less likely to be disturbed by erosion, fire, or agricultural tilling, meaning the captured CO₂ remains stable and locked in the ground for decades, if not centuries. This makes Vetiver not only effective, but a highly reliable long-term carbon sink.

Moreover, the Vetiver System allows multiple planting and harvesting cycles per year depending on climatic conditions and management practices, which further accelerates carbon absorption. Each cycle contributes fresh biomass, organic matter, and root expansion—deepening the soil’s carbon bank.

From a land-use perspective, Vetiver can be strategically integrated into a variety of landscapes to maximize both environmental and economic benefits. On degraded and barren lands, Vetiver plays a crucial role in restoring soil fertility while sequestering significant amounts of carbon. Along flood-prone riverbanks, it stabilizes the soil, reduces erosion, and captures sediment-rich carbon, contributing to cleaner waterways. When planted on road and highway slopes, Vetiver prevents erosion and helps create resilient green corridors. Additionally, when used along agricultural field boundaries, it serves as a protective buffer that not only shields crops from wind and water damage but also enhances carbon storage capacity, supporting sustainable farming practices.

A major advantage of Vetiver is its low maintenance: it requires minimal irrigation, no pesticides, and thrives in poor soils. This makes it ideal for large-scale deployment in Nepal, especially through community forestry programs, local governments, youth cooperatives, and eco-enterprises.

In a time when Nepal seeks to meet its Net Zero Carbon target within the next five years, adopting the Vetiver System at scale could be the most cost-effective, nature-based, and scientifically sound strategy available.

Nepal’s net zero ambition is bold—but it is within reach. In Vetiver, we have a low-cost, high-impact, nature-based solution already tested across different terrains of Nepal. As the world looks for scalable climate solutions, Nepal has the chance to lead by example—not by waiting, but by planting. The Vetiver System is not just about green landscapes; it’s about a green future.

With the goal of achieving net-zero carbon emissions within the next five years, the vetiver system in Nepal shows promising potential. In 2022, Nepal emitted approximately 56.7m metric tons of CO₂ equivalent greenhouse gases. According to studies, vetiver grass can absorb around 15.24 metric tons of carbon per hectare per year. Based on this, Nepal would need to plant vetiver across approximately 333,335 hectares to offset its annual carbon emissions.

To achieve this goal within five years, vetiver would need to be planted on 66,667 hectares of land annually. Out of Nepal’s total 4.1m hectares of arable land, the proposed plantation area represents only 8.13 percent, making it both practical and achievable. To help visualize these facts clearly, a visual infographic has also been prepared, showing how Nepal can realistically achieve its net-zero target using the vetiver system.

To maximize impact, strong policy support and cross-sectoral alignment are essential. The government should formally recognize Vetiver systems within national carbon offset strategies and incorporate Vetiver-based interventions in future updates of Nepal’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Additionally, it is crucial to facilitate streamlined carbon credit certification mechanisms, allowing local communities, municipalities, and private firms to access benefits from global carbon markets. By taking these steps, Nepal can accelerate progress toward its net zero targets while simultaneously unlocking significant opportunities for climate finance and green investment.

While carbon sequestration is a central focus, Vetiver offers multi-dimensional value across environmental and socio-economic domains. It plays a vital role in soil and water conservation by reducing erosion, restoring fertility, and enhancing groundwater recharge. In the context of disaster risk reduction, Vetiver strengthens slopes and embankments, offering natural protection against landslides and floods. It also generates livelihood opportunities through its use in handicrafts, essential oil extraction, composting, and livestock fodder. Moreover, Vetiver supports biodiversity and ecological regeneration by reviving degraded landscapes and fostering the growth of native flora and fauna.

Commercial banks have set aside Rs 35.07bn for loan loss provisions in the third quarter of fiscal year 2024/25. According to the recent data of the Nepal Rastra Bank, the amount is Rs 4.80bn less than Rs 39.87bn that the bank had allocated for provisioning in the same period of the previous fiscal year.

Of the 20 commercial banks in the country, Everest Bank allocated the least amount for loan loss provisions, setting aside only Rs 270m. This is lower than Rs 630m that the bank had set aside for provisioning in the same period of 2023/24. Standard Chartered Bank reversed its loan loss provisions, recording a write-back of Rs 99m in the third quarter year, against a Rs 250m provision in the same period of the previous fiscal year.

On the other hand, Kumari Bank topped the list for the highest loan loss provisions, allocating Rs 5.16bn by mid-April. Laxmi Sunrise Bank was next with Rs 3.19bn allocated for the same purpose by the end of third quarter. The need for high provision is due to rising non-performing loan (NPL) levels in the banking system. NPL levels of banks have reached as high as 8 percent by the third quarter. Out of 20 commercial banks, 18 saw an increase in their NPL level, with one bank recording an NPL ratio of nearly eight percent. Nine banks have an NPL ratio above five percent, while three banks—Standard Chartered, Sanima, and Everest—have NPLs at or below four percent. Banks like Nepal Investment Mega, Himalayan, Kumari, Laxmi Sunrise, NIC Asia, Nepal Bank, and Prabhu Bank also have NPL ratios exceeding five percent.

Banks profit up by 1.4 percent

Commercial banks collectively earned a net profit of Rs 41.25bn over the first nine months of 2024/25. According to the NRB, this is an increase of 1.4 percent over Rs 40.68bn that the bank had reported in the same period of the previous fiscal year. The profit growth is largely due to the facility for restructuring and rescheduling loans in the construction provided by the central bank. In the third quarter, 11 banks reported higher net profits, while nine saw a decline.

Nabil Bank has recorded the highest net profit among 20 commercial banks in the country. The bank’s net profit has reached Rs 5.05bn—a growth of 8.21 percent from the same period of the last fiscal year. Nepal Investment Mega reported a 38.61 percent surge in net profit to Rs 4.54bn, while Global IME’s profit grew by 37.12 percent to Rs 4.53bn. Everest Bank saw its net profit rise by 32.55 percent to Rs 3.45bn. Nepal Bank Limited reported the highest net profit growth of 2,032.8 percent, with its net profit reaching Rs 2.78bn by the third quarter.

Over the past few weeks, Rajendra Lingden, chairperson of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), has been under immense stress and anxiety as individuals outside his party attempted to hijack the leadership of the pro-monarchy movement. RPP remains the only significant party advocating for the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state. As the party was preparing to launch a series of spring street protests, party member Nava Raj Subedi abruptly left to lead a separate pro-monarchy front—one informally led by businessman turned monarchy champion Durga Prasai. This unexpected move placed Lingden under pressure from both within his party and royalist sympathizers to align with the Prasai-led movement.

Senior party leaders Dhawal Shumsher Rana and Rabindra Mishra openly defied Lingden by joining Prasai, believing his approach offered a more forceful means to restore the monarchy and Hindu state. Although Lingden himself did not participate in the March 28 protests, he did not stop his cadres from doing so. As Lingden and his loyalists scrambled to uncover the architects behind the Subedi-Prasai alliance, suspicion grew within the RPP that former king Gyanendra Shah had covertly backed these non-political figures to undercut RPP’s influence. Despite being displeased with the actions of Rana and Mishra, Lingden chose not to escalate the issue, fearing it might lead to a party split.

Recently, Lingden breathed a sigh of relief after Shah invited him and other party leaders for a meeting, clarifying his preference for Lingden at the helm of the pro-monarchy campaign. According to RPP insiders, the former king also denied any role in the March 28 protests or contact with Prasai, despite a viral video showing Prasai exiting the former king’s residence. The former king reportedly clarified to Lingden that the Subedi-led committee had not been his initiative. His statements, along with the visible decline in momentum following the March 28 protests, suggest that RPP has regained control of the monarchist narrative.

Subedi is now under unofficial house arrest, and Jagman Gurung has replaced him as the leader of the movement. However, Gurung’s leadership has failed to gain traction. With Prasai in police custody, his largely non-ideological base has fractured, and his supporters have vanished from the streets. RPP continues to stage protests, but their size is diminishing. While the party insists that more demonstrations are coming, it appears unlikely that RPP will generate the kind of momentum necessary to compel the government into negotiations—at least in the short term.

Lingden remains under pressure from former king Shah to consolidate the growing base of monarchist supporters. Yet, there is a risk that other royalist factions may refuse to rally behind him. While the government has released Rana on health grounds, RPP is pushing for the release of Mishra as well. Meanwhile, Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, led by Kamal Thapa, has remained absent from the streets, though Thapa offers moral support to the movement.

Internal dynamics of RPP

Within the RPP, there are starkly divergent views on how to pursue the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state. Lingden and his close allies advocate a pragmatic approach: acknowledging the party’s limited strength, they favor patience and calculated engagement. They argue that while street demonstrations can elevate the party’s visibility, they are unlikely to succeed without significant popular support.

On the other hand, leaders like Rana and Mishra believe the party must act decisively and launch full-fledged protests, even if they risk violence. During the March 28 protest, they tried to incite the crowd to march toward Singhadurbar or the airport, asserting that mere symbolic protests would not suffice. Despite his personal opposition, Lingden was reluctant to prevent his cadres from joining on moral grounds. Rana and Mishra have long expressed dissatisfaction with Lingden’s cautious leadership, believing that only an assertive street campaign can restore the monarchy.

A senior RPP leader said: “We don’t support figures like Prasai, but as a royalist party, we face a moral obligation to lend support to any group advancing our core agenda.” This moral quandary partly explains why both Rana and Mishra actively participated in the Prasai-led protests. Currently, RPP holds 14 parliamentary seats and, while it has accepted the 2015 constitution, it continues to advocate for a return to the monarchy. Still, many RPP leaders privately concede that restoring the monarchy is an uphill task and that the party should instead focus on reviving the Hindu state agenda.

Lessons for former king​​​​​​​

In recent years, former king Shah has made visible efforts to reassert his relevance, frequently traveling both domestically and internationally. Though he has refrained from publicly endorsing any political party, there were reports of him meeting Prasai just prior to the March 28 protest—a claim he later denied in a meeting with RPP leaders. Within RPP, there is suspicion that Gyanendra may have played a role in setting up the Subedi-led committee, although both Shah’s secretariat and Subedi insist this was not the case.

Some in the RPP interpret these developments as a deliberate attempt by the former King to sideline their party. In hindsight, the March 28 protests have offered a critical lesson for Shah: aligning with volatile, unelected figures like Prasai can harm the monarchy’s reputation. In the aftermath of the violence, which included arson and fatalities, political parties and the government alike held the former king partially responsible. Shah has since expressed sorrow over the events.

A movement lacking clarity​​​​​​​

While pro-monarchy protests seek the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state, the movement suffers from a lack of clarity. There are lingering questions about Shah’s legacy and his son Paras Shah’s suitability for the throne. Many supporters avoid defending Shah and Paras’ past actions, insisting instead on the general principle of monarchy restoration. Even Subedi, in multiple media appearances, has stated that Paras is unfit to be king.

Moreover, the movement lacks a clear vision for what kind of monarchy it envisions. The rhetoric suggests a desire to dismantle current democratic structures and revert to a centralized monarchical system. Kamal Thapa has proposed that Parliament should determine the monarchy’s future role and position. Meanwhile, Shah has begun speaking more openly, calling for structural change while still professing support for democracy—an apparent contradiction that underscores the movement’s ideological disarray.

Can the course be reversed?

A close analysis of the demands made by royalist forces reveals a desire to completely reverse Nepal’s political trajectory. However, achieving this through street protests seems nearly impossible. The hope of achieving it through dialogue also appears unrealistic. As one veteran political scientist put it: “They want to restore the monarchy by creating anarchy like on March 28, but that will only push the country toward another civil war.” He added that any major instability could provoke a massive counter-movement from citizens who support the current system.

To their credit, RPP appears uninterested in fostering violence. Since March 28, the party has organized two peaceful demonstrations in Kathmandu. Yet, the dwindling size of these gatherings reflects the public’s limited appetite for radical political change.

RPP’s future path

Following his meeting with former king Shah, Lingden seems rejuvenated. The RPP has held two protests, although turnout continues to decline. The party is now focused on strategy, especially after the former king indicated his preference for RPP leadership in the monarchist movement. Shah’s assessment is that support is rising and that the RPP should unify royalist forces under its banner.

However, unity remains elusive. For now, RPP views the protests more as a platform to build momentum for the 2027 national elections than as a genuine push to reinstate the monarchy via street activism. With Prasai unlikely to be released anytime soon, the pro-monarchy movement—briefly commanding national and international attention—is beginning to fade. Unless royalist forces unite behind a clear vision, their campaign may fade into political irrelevance.

When I look back at my education—from childhood through my master’s degree—I realize how much it was structured around rote learning: memorizing facts, repeating them and aiming for good marks. I didn’t attend a prestigious school, just a regular one like most students in Nepal. Regardless of the school, the emphasis was the same. This pattern wasn’t just my experience—it’s reflective of a broader issue in Nepal’s education system. This kind of education didn’t teach me how to think or understand the world; it only taught me how to pass the exams. 

Even today, with some changes here and there, many schools continue to follow this outdated pattern. Whether well-resourced or under-resourced, the focus remains on memorization, repetition and obedience. The result? A generation that can recite facts but struggles to think critically. Worse still, questioning is often actively discouraged. In my experience, when students ask questions, they're frequently met with responses like, “Don’t ask too many questions” or “Just focus on the syllabus.” This discourages curiosity and stifles intellectual growth. If we want to cultivate thinkers and leaders, we must create an environment where asking questions is encouraged—not seen as a sign of disrespect, but as a sign of engagement. 

I’m not advocating for baseless questions, shouting or insults, as we often see on social media; that kind of behavior doesn’t promote healthy discourse. Instead, I advocate for thoughtful, well-reasoned questions—ones that are essential for growth and understanding. We must teach students not just how to gather information, but how to question it, analyze it and think critically. Sadly, this skill remains missing in many education systems, including Nepal’s.

Rote learning and blind following 

With some exceptions, schools in Nepal—regardless of whether they are well-resourced or not—still emphasize memorization and grades over teaching students how to think. The problem is even more pronounced in under-resourced schools, where education remains largely about repeating what’s taught and passing exams. This creates students who are good at memorizing but poor at thinking critically. In some well-resourced schools, while modern methods are used, students often adopt Western ideas without questioning or developing their own perspectives. This creates a disconnect in their minds; they may learn to think in a Western way but fail to fully engage with or understand their own culture. This leads to confusion and a lack of visionary leadership, which Nepal desperately needs. One alarming trend is the focus on preparing students to migrate abroad, primarily to Western countries. From a young age, students are taught that success depends on passing exams and acquiring qualifications to settle abroad. I am not against studying abroad—global exposure is valuable—but the issue arises when studying abroad becomes the only path to success, which is not always true. This narrow view has led to a loss of vision for Nepal’s future. Instead of nurturing local leadership, we are teaching students that the best way to succeed is to leave their country behind.

Vedantic and Buddhist wisdom

This widespread focus on external validation—whether through grades or foreign degrees—has come at the cost of our own intellectual traditions. But Nepal has never lacked a tradition of deep thought. Long before modern schooling systems, our culture valued questioning, contemplation and philosophical inquiry. Nepal’s intellectual and spiritual traditions, especially Vedantic and Buddhist philosophies, have long emphasized deep, reflective questioning. These traditions encouraged individuals to explore the nature of existence, the self and the world—not to accept things blindly, but to understand truth through inquiry and reflection. 

Both Vedanta and Buddhism emphasize that knowledge is power, but only when it is understood through contemplation and personal experience. Sadly, this tradition of critical thinking and self-inquiry has been overshadowed by an increasing reliance on rote learning and unquestioned acceptance of information. This shift has steered us away from the rich intellectual tradition of inquiry and independent thought that Nepal once embraced. 

To change this, we need to reclaim the legacy of critical thinking and inquiry. My point here isn’t to discard modern science textbooks or start teaching only Sanskrit and ancient scriptures. Rather, it’s about taking the essence of those philosophical traditions—especially their emphasis on questioning and inner exploration—and weaving that spirit into today’s classrooms. By doing so, we can reshape the education system to foster freethinkers—people who question, explore, and lead with a clear vision.

Empowering the next generation 

Given these gaps, the real question is: how can we move forward? How can we improve the education system in Nepal? The solution likely lies in finding a balance. We cannot discard exams and grades entirely, but we should place more emphasis on critical thinking, problem-solving, and curiosity. Our education system must nurture free thinkers, not just exam-passing robots. The role of teachers is central to this transformation. Teachers must teach students how to ask good questions, think critically, and express ideas clearly. Classrooms should not just be places where students receive information but where they engage with it, question it, discuss, and debate. Teachers need to create an environment where curiosity and independent thinking are encouraged. While systemic change is essential, it’s important to remember that transformation starts in the classroom. And classrooms cannot change unless teachers are empowered. 

At the same time, many teachers in Nepal are working under extremely challenging circumstances, often without proper support, training, or resources. The issues I raise here are not criticisms of individual teachers but of a system that has not empowered them to innovate or think freely. Any reform must begin with supporting and valuing our educators, ensuring they have the tools they need to foster critical thinking and curiosity in the classroom.

The link to leadership

The consequences of our educational shortcomings extend beyond classrooms. Nepal’s current political crisis is not just a struggle for power—it’s a crisis of leadership. The country lacks visionary leaders capable of guiding Nepal toward a better future, and this deficit reflects deeper issues within our education system. Instead of fostering critical thinking and independent thought, we are producing followers who passively accept information. This is evident in our political landscape, where many follow empty rhetoricians rather than leaders with clear ideologies. 

To address Nepal’s political crisis, we must shift the focus from just who holds power to how we educate our people. Our education system is failing to produce the kind of visionary leaders we desperately need. A nation without an educational foundation that encourages critical thinking and nurtures leadership will remain stagnant, regardless of the political system or the individuals who rise to power. If we want to shape a brighter future, the future of the nation depends on how we educate young people today. 

Without an education system that fosters independent thought and leadership, we will continue to see a generation of followers, rather than leaders with vision. We, as educators, parents and citizens, must steer Nepal’s education system toward a future where critical thinking is valued above rote memorization. This is not just about changing curriculums—it’s about changing the very mindset with which we approach education. Only then will we truly empower our youth and ensure a better future for the country.