Submit your Article

Quality education is widely regarded as the backbone of a country’s development. Statistics show that nations that are successful, strong, progressive, and exemplary consistently maintain very high standards of education. Our government, too, has allocated a comparatively significant share of the national budget (around 11 percent) to this sector. It is often cited that Japan invested nearly 49 percent of its budget in education for several years following the Second World War. In India, Jagdish Gandhi introduced the concept of the Quality Circle into the academic ecosystem with the expectation of an overarching, education-induced transformation. One of the key indicators for measuring the quality of education is research. This argument is also advanced in the special issue publication Chetanako Muhan (2080), published by the Shreekant Adhikari Foundation. Yet today, research activities seem to be drifting away from their mission and turning increasingly into a mockery.

A few months ago, a distinguished speaker invited to a regional program proudly claimed, “I did research for half an hour today and discovered a few things.” As a presenter at the same program, this contributor found it difficult to comprehend whether research is something that can truly be completed in half an hour. On another occasion, a person with an academic identity uploaded a photograph on Facebook of himself on his mobile phone, and captioned it, “Doing some serious research.” Has research now been reduced to ‘mobile work’? Does merely knowing how to use Facebook qualify one as a researcher? Such questions persist.

Sometime later, this contributor received an email from a PhD researcher who had sent a questionnaire to measure patients’ perceptions of private hospitals. Despite visiting hospitals only to care for others, express goodwill, or attend meetings, the contributor has rarely been a patient in a private hospital for at least the past 15 years. Upon being informed of this, the sender casually replied, “No problem, just choose whatever option seems good and tick it.” These are only representative incidents, but taken together they clearly reveal how a dense and serious subject like research is being dangerously trivialized.

Research is a strong foundation and an essential pillar of academic life. Anyone completing a master’s degree is required to conduct at least one research project, which is often their first formal exposure to research. How far they pursue it thereafter depends on their sustained interest and commitment. Those who cannot fight should not join the army; those who cannot argue should not study law; those who cannot generate profit should not enter commerce; and those who cannot conduct research should think carefully before entering academia. Yet in recent times, distortions appear to be expanding far more rapidly than purity in academic research.

It is both pathetic and painful that thousands of identical research works under the same title circulate in academic circles. Research outputs lacking rigorous study and genuine effort—prepared and even home-delivered theses—are becoming increasingly common. At times, dissertations by unmarried researchers include acknowledgements thanking “my husband” or “my wife,” mistakenly referring to a friend’s spouse. Some pages read, “I am deeply grateful to my supervisor for continuous support, advice, suggestions, and tireless encouragement throughout the study,” even though the supervisor may never have met the student even once. Should one laugh or cry?

There is also a growing misconception that research must be based strictly on primary data. Many insist that “expert opinion doesn’t count, but respondents do.” Thick data requirements, non-numerical support, and deep interpretation are bluntly dismissed. Furthermore, the validity, participation, and honesty of respondents are rarely verified. Questionnaire-based studies often collect opinions rather than factual data. Research is not an election where whatever the majority says becomes truth. If the goal is to gather opinions, the choice of respondents should depend on whether the topic demands the views of the general public or of experts. For instance, if one is researching the usefulness of a political or electoral system, can conclusions be drawn merely by surveying random people on the street? Or is it more logical to sit in a library, study expert literature, examine prior research, and compare practices across countries?

Pushparaj Joshi’s book Research Methodology argues that comparative and analytical desk-based study must occupy a larger space in contemporary research. Nonetheless, the University Grants Commission and universities remain hesitant to recognize desk studies as legitimate research. The UGC tends to value time spent running around fields collecting data as grant-worthy, while time invested in dense comparative analysis grounded in core literature is largely disregarded.

Regardless of the method, once research is completed, publication is desirable. So-called “high-ranked” foreign journals demand exorbitant fees while offering prestige through labels such as Q1 to Q4 and Scopus indexing. At the same time, journals seeking modest collaboration or regional partnerships are branded as “predatory.” As many university research projects are donor-driven, assessment standards have become increasingly distorted. Commercial considerations now overshadow scholarly collaboration, turning publication into a transactional rather than intellectual exercise.

Recent data show that only seven medical science journals from our country are listed in these self-proclaimed, dollar-fee-driven rankings. No journals from other disciplines are included. In the social sciences, publication criteria appear heavily biased toward Western preconceptions and colonial narcissism. To secure space, publications must shape conclusions to fit Eurocentric narratives of supremacy—alongside paying hefty processing or publication fees.

How long will our universities continue to apply foreign and biased standards to evaluate local academic work? When will we break the illusion that “foreign” automatically means “international”? Is something international because of borders, or because of standards? The irony is that even the publications of our own universities and the University Grants Commission are excluded from these inflated and questionable rankings. 

There is also no shortage of “scholars” who possess negligible and nondescript publications of their own but are experts at offering heavy-handed advice to others. Another troubling aspect is the contradictory feedback given by evaluators. Many internal and external examiners speak superficially and in violation of basic research principles. This contributor has frequently witnessed reviewers contradicting their own earlier advice. Some say, “It’s not correct,” yet fail to explain what is wrong or how it can be corrected. Such distortions damage the very core of research.

Recently, a friend who claimed to have strong research skills bragged, “You don’t need to work hard anymore. Just give clear prompts or bullet points to ChatGPT, and it will instantly prepare a research article. Then you can submit it wherever you want.” Such remarks instantly dim whatever little enthusiasm and commitment remain. Due to the negligence of both researchers and regulatory bodies, genuine dedication to research is steadily being discouraged. Research was once an extraordinary and sacred mission. Today, it has been reduced to a cheap joke.

These days, two questions are so prominent regarding the socio economic development of Nepal. First, how can the good policies practiced by various successful countries be implemented to strengthen the internal economy? And second is why the development efforts failed to attract youth in the mainstream? To find the answers, we need to identify the way of achieving fruitful results according to the new generation’s desires. In the context, about the status of socio-economic development, currently, we can find three types of opinions. 

The first view claims that the country has made significant progress from a socio-economic perspective. The second logic is negative that denies the first view.  This logic did not see any adequate space for the future development of youth and the coming generation. The third view is mixed; and it compares the economic and social progress between past and present period and argues that some results have been achieved but it is not enough in comparison to other countries including neighbors; not enough as the demand and desire of the conscious people including new generation. This view is more realistic and fair since it shows the picture of yesterday's work, progress, and results as well as shortcomings and inadequacies of the past period. Therefore, to draw concrete conclusions, it will be better to divide Nepal’s development into different time periods.

Until 1956, the length of motorable roads in the urban areas of Nepal, basically in Kathmandu, Birgunj, and Biratnagar was 500 kilometers, out of that only half could be used throughout the year. There were two railways, Raxaul-Amlekhgunj and Jayanagar-Bijalpura, 130 kilometers long in aggregate. A ropeway of 67 kilometers was in operation from Bhimphedi to Kathmandu. There were two small canals named Chandranahar (Saptari) and Juddhanahar (Sarlahi) for irrigation purposes built by the government. Total hydro electricity generated was 3100 KW. In terms of health, there was Bir Hospital and Naradevi Ayurveda Hospital only. At that time, there were only four dozen high level educational institutions including Durbar High School and Trichandra College. The number of primary schools was near about four hundred. The literacy rate was below five percent. 

Even until the mid-decade of 1963, the development of physical infrastructures was less than a dozen. At the national level, the Tribhuvan Highway, Arani Highway, Prithvi and Siddhartha Highways were in operation but Raxaul-Amleshgunj railway was already closed. There was no electricity except in cities such as Kathmandu, Birgunj, Biratnagar and Bhairahawa. Until the 1970s too, Indian land had to be used to reach many parts of Nepal. By 1990 too, the length of the road, irrigated area of land and power generation capacity were 7,000 kilometers, 493,000 hectares and 238 MW respectively. The total number of schools was 2,1826 and the health institutions reached 1,100. During this period, the literacy rate reached 30 percent and the average age reached 55 years.

By the middle of July 2024, the length of the road reached 36,000 kilometers, the area of irrigated land was registered to 1.6m hectares and the renewable energy (electricity) capacity had increased by 14 times and recorded to 3,336 MW. In terms of social infrastructure, the number of schools and health institutions are 35,447 and 8,746 respectively. Now, the literacy rate is 77 percent and the average life expectancy rate is 71 years. The number of people below the poverty line has decreased to 20 percent, which was 49 percent in 1990. However, this poverty rate is the highest among South Asian countries. 

In this way, during the three and a half decades after 1990, in terms of numbers, Nepal has made significant progress in the areas of physical and social infrastructures but the achievement is not satisfactory in terms of quality and adequacy. Because of the total roads in terms of transportation, the percentage of black and gravel roads is 23 and 24 respectively; remaining is unpaved, which can only be used by vehicles for a few months. From a safety point of view too, the condition of the roads is poor. On the other hand, large vehicles carrying goods or passengers to Kathmandu from the eastern part of Chitwan have to travel an unnecessary distance of about 200 kilometers. The additional economic burden or cost created by this has adversely affected the competitiveness of the entire country and made daily life expensive. There is no significant progress in railways; ropeways are closed. Cable cars built by the private sector are used only for tourism purposes; those are not suitable for daily and business life. More than a dozen national pride and transformational projects are incomplete; the cost is increasing every year. Some projects that were supposed to be completed in five years have not been completed for 15 years, the initially estimated cost has not only doubled but also increased by six times. The achievements mentioned above, in comparison to today’s needs and standard of developed countries, it is clear that we are lagging behind. The per capita income in 1990 was $186, in 2024 this figure increased eightfold to $1517, but due to rapid depreciation of the Nepalese currency against the US dollar it could not strengthen the purchasing power of the people. In terms of region, the per capita income of Bagmati Province was $2,600, while that of Madhes Province was limited to $932, which is less than that of Karnali. This gap has increased dissatisfaction in people.

Comparing neighboring countries, according to the World Bank, Nepal’s per capita annual income is $1,500, while the average per capita income of South Asia is $2,700. The per capita income of the Maldives is almost nine times higher than Nepal’s income. Bhutan’s figure is $3,900, while India’s income is at the average level of South Asia. Bangladesh and Sri Lanka’s income is $2,600 and $4,500, respectively, Nepal is at the bottom. All these matters may have made the people frustrated. 

Against this backdrop, in order to drive the economy in line with the existing consciousness of the society and to move it in the right direction, on the one hand, it is necessary to change the constitution radically and on the other hand, drastic change in governance, systems, processes and procedures keeping the goal of optimal use of resources through good governance and effective management. In fact, the constitution is expansionary, because it increases the cost of state operation and demands a lot of financial resources rather than yielding resources. 

The issue of self-reliance should be taken in mind; because, the development of technology has dismantled the foundation of a self-reliance of the global economy. Nepal’s current economy is like a dependent one, it would be practical to make it interdependent; since currently, and building a self-reliant economy is just ideal thought where a country fulfills all the economic, social, and structural needs of its citizens through its own production and management without relying on foreign trade, aid, or investment. 

In today’s era, the economy cannot be completely self-reliant. China, USA, Japan, and Singapore are also not completely self-reliant. It is practical for Nepal to think of becoming self-reliant in food and electricity sector-wise. So, it is the right time to be proactive to overcome internal contradictions, conflicts, and inefficiencies and work to establish strong interconnections between Nepal’s economy and the global economy. This needs a multifaceted effort.

Nepal’s politics is heading toward a critical juncture. Old narratives are collapsing, but a new horizon is not yet clear.

For the past three decades, the reins of power in Nepal have revolved around a few leaders. At times, one would join another’s leadership; and at other times, one overthrow the other to ascend to power. This cycle brought deep frustration to the country rather than stability. Now, the political consciousness, from the streets of Kathmandu to the village squares, has fundamentally changed. An old era is now breathing its last breath, and the footsteps can be heard.

The three big powers— Nepali Congress (NC), the CPN-UML and Nepali Communist Party (NCP)— that have been determining the destiny of the country for years are now in the most serious existential crisis in their history. For decades, these parties only showed people dreams. But, they never showed any readiness to fulfill those dreams. The faces of those in power did not change. Only their power equations and working rooms changed.

History does not always move in the same rhythm. The GenZ movement seen in Sept 2025 proved to be a turning point in the history of Nepali politics. This movement was not limited to the demand for a change in the government, but was a collective mass uprising against institutional corruption, nepotism, favoritism, and incompetent leadership that had been entrenched for years. The anger that started from social media and spilled over to the streets changed the grammar of traditional politics.

That movement has given a clear message: Nepali people are now tired of the ‘farming of assurances’ that the parties do. The leaders who were called ‘liberators’ of yesterday are now looking like ‘exploiters’. The new generation is looking for an alternative to leadership. This movement has given a clear signal that today’s politics will not be based solely on the interests of heritage and history. Today’s politics demands positive results, ethics, and a new perspective.

Collapsed fortresses: The pathetic condition of the old parties

The leadership of NC is currently in crisis. The country’s oldest democratic party is now in an ideological vacuum. The factionalism within the party is no longer limited to positions, it has become a major battle for ‘generational transition’. Young leaders are no longer ready to carry the burden of the old and weak leadership. They know that if the leadership does not change, it will be difficult for the NC to preserve its historical existence in the 2025 elections.

Although discipline appears from the outside regarding the single leadership of KP Sharma Oli, a volcano of dissatisfaction is burning inside. After the dramatic collapse of the government in 2025, the ideological crisis in the party deepened. The slogan of ‘Prosperous Nepal’ alone is no longer enough to satisfy the cadres. Due to the leadership’s harsh style and tendency to prohibit new ideas, a large section of the UML is looking for an alternative.

The NCP is currently on the defensive. It has transformed itself with the merger of some other small communist parties under the banner of the Nepali Communist Party. As it falls into the clutches of power, the agenda and changes on which the party grew have all been lost. The Maoists are losing their ‘core’ public opinion by focusing more on the arithmetic of power than on the fundamental problems of the people. The party is now fragmenting into smaller factions and groups, diminishing its national influence.

Alliances without principles and economic laxity

The most tragic aspect of Nepal’s politics right now is the ‘death of principles’. There is no political basis for which party will align with whom at what time. One alliance is formed in the morning, another in the evening. These alliances are not for the development of the country, but are based on the interests of how to stay in power and how to manage the state treasury. While leaders are busy making and breaking crude alliances like houses of sand, the country’s economic indices are declining. Youth exodus is alarming. Inflation has reached the sky. Development construction works are at a standstill.

The conflict between new forces and old desires

The failure of old parties has created a playing field for new forces like the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). But they do not seem to have the ability to understand the welfare state that the people want. Although the people see the new parties as hope, these parties also seem to be confused due to the lack of internal discipline, maturity and clear direction. The public is beginning to feel that there is no guarantee that the trend will change when a new face comes in.

Amidst this political confusion and instability, a small group is trying to revive the debate on the monarchy. This is more out of love for the monarchy than out of anger at the inaction of the current republican leaders. The people are not trying to reinstate the deposed king, but rather for stability, security, and a guardianship that will allow them to thrive in their own country. The current system has failed to fulfill this desire of the people.

While spontaneous change is naturally conducive to the country, time, and situation, the outcome of movements driven by the vested interests of external powers is always unfortunate. This eternal truth must be understood by those at the forefront of the process of giving and taking responsibility. The irony remains that this truth has always been pushed to the sidelines in critical moments of power transfer. The same happened in the recent turmoil in Nepal.

The election of March 2026: A litmus test for the system

The upcoming election in March 2026 is not just an ordinary periodic election. It is a major litmus test for the current political system and constitution of Nepal. If this election also repeats the old face and old trends, the people’s patience may break.

The path of Nepali politics in the coming time hinges on these three main questions.

The first is leadership. Some leaders of the old parties that have been in power for years are not very popular among the people now. Will those parties dare to bid farewell to their old leaders and bring forward new, educated and capable youth? This remains to be seen.

The second is the unity of new forces. Many new faces and parties have now entered politics. But will they remain divided into small groups or will they all become a strong force together? Only if they can unite will the country get a reliable alternative.

The third and most important thing is the problems of the people. In politics so far, there has been a lot of debate about which leader will get the chair. But in the upcoming elections, will we only talk about ‘who will become the Prime Minister’ or will we make the problems of the people like rising inflation, unemployment and increasing domestic production the main issues? The upcoming elections will either lead Nepal to a stable and prosperous path, or push it into a whirlpool of even greater political instability and conflict. This dirty game of power must end now. If the leaders fail to understand the footsteps of time, their names will be limited to the pages of history as ‘characters who spoiled the country’. The upcoming elections will decide not only the government, but also the future direction and condition of Nepal.

Iran reopened its airspace after a near-five-hour closure amid ⁠concerns about possible military action between the US and Iran that forced airlines to cancel, reroute or delay some flights, Reuters reported. 

Iran closed its airspace to all flights except international ones to and from Iran with official permission at 5:15 p.m. ET (2215 GMT) on Wednesday, according to a notice on ‌the US Federal Aviation ‌Administration website.