Submit your Article

Nepal’s agriculture sector is entering the digital age. The country’s 16th National Plan (2024-25 to 2028-29), the Digital Nepal Framework 2.0, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development's modernization agenda collectively envision a technology-driven transformation of agriculture. The priorities are ambitious and necessary: climate-smart farming through digital weather advisories, precision agriculture, smart irrigation, drought forecasting, crop disease early warning systems, and digital marketplaces that connect farmers directly to buyers.

The government is investing in centralized farmer databases, digital land and production records, e-extension services, online subsidy systems, and integrated agricultural information platforms. At the same time, private-sector and development partners have introduced a growing range of digital tools aimed at improving agricultural productivity and resilience.

Platforms such as Hamro Krishi, e-Hatbazar, GeoKrishi, PlantSat, Smart Krishi, and Farm2Fork provide weather forecasts, pest and disease alerts, market information, expert consultation, farm management tools, and digital learning resources. These innovations have the potential to improve decision-making, reduce risks, and increase farmers' access to services and markets.

Yet a fundamental question remains: Who is benefiting from Nepal's digital agricultural transformation?

The paradox of connectivity

According to the Nepal Telecommunications Authority, broadband penetration has surpassed 144 percent, and nearly 96 percent of internet users access services through mobile devices. On paper, Nepal appears highly connected.

However, connectivity alone does not guarantee inclusion.

For many citizens including farmers, internet use remains largely limited to social media, entertainment, and basic communication. Access to the internet has not automatically translated into greater access to education, economic opportunities, or digital services in agriculture sectors. Digital literacy remains uneven, particularly among rural populations, women, elderly citizens, and marginalized communities.

Significant disparities persist across geography and income groups. Urban centers enjoy relatively reliable connectivity and greater access to digital services, while remote and mountainous regions continue to face challenges related to network quality, affordability, and digital skills. Provincial disparities are equally striking. According to the Nepal Media Survey (2022), internet access ranges from 76 percent in Bagmati Province to only 50 percent in Madhesh Province, where millions of smallholder farmers reside.

Most digital agriculture platforms assume that users possess smartphones, stable internet access, and sufficient digital literacy to navigate applications. For many farmers, however, these assumptions do not reflect reality.  According to the Multi-dimension Poverty Index Report 2021, 17.4 percent of Nepalis are multidimensionally poor, and it will be challenging to reach them with digital innovation solutions.

As a result, Nepal faces a growing paradox: more people are connected than ever before, yet many remain digitally excluded from the opportunities that digital transformation promises.

The gender dimension of digital exclusion

Nepal is experiencing a rapid feminization of agriculture. As men migrate to cities and abroad in search of employment, women are increasingly responsible for managing farms, making production decisions, and engaging with markets. Despite their expanding role, women remain among the most digitally excluded groups in the agricultural sector.

Limited access to smartphones, lower levels of digital literacy, affordability constraints, and time burdens associated with household responsibilities all restrict women’s ability to participate in digital spaces. These barriers become even more pronounced among elderly, low income-groups and those women living in remote rural areas.

In many communities, women continue to rely on family members, neighbours, lead farmers, or cooperatives to access agricultural information. Consequently, digital tools often fail to reach the very people who now form the backbone of Nepal’s agricultural workforce.

The challenge is not merely one of access. Digital solutions are frequently designed without sufficient consideration of the realities faced by rural women. Assumptions regarding device ownership, internet availability, literacy levels, and digital confidence can unintentionally exclude women from meaningful participation.

If digital agriculture initiatives are not intentionally designed to address these disparities, they risk reinforcing existing inequalities rather than reducing them.

Looking beyond access

Digital inclusion is often measured through infrastructure indicators such as internet coverage, mobile subscriptions, or broadband penetration. While important, these indicators tell only part of the story.

The Multidimensional Digital Inclusiveness Index (MDII), developed by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), offers a broader perspective. It argues that digital inclusion extends beyond connectivity to incorporate meaningful participation, usability, equity, and social outcomes.

The framework highlights three critical dimensions.

First, innovation usage asks whether digital tools are accessible, usable, and valuable for intended users. A platform may be technically sound, but if it is unavailable in local languages, difficult to navigate, or incompatible with commonly used devices, adoption will remain limited.

Second, stakeholder relationships focus on whether underserved communities are involved in the design and improvement of digital innovations. Technologies developed without meaningful participation from farmers often fail to address their actual needs and priorities.

Third, social consequences examine whether digital technologies reduce inequalities or inadvertently reinforce them through exclusion, bias, data misuse, or unequal access to benefits.

These dimensions are particularly relevant for Nepal, where digital agriculture initiatives are expanding rapidly while policy frameworks for data governance and digital rights remain underdeveloped. As the country advances its digital and artificial intelligence agendas, ensuring that technologies are inclusive, ethical, and accountable becomes increasingly important.

A seven-point agenda for inclusive digital agriculture

To ensure that digital transformation benefits all farmers rather than a privileged minority, Nepal must adopt a more inclusive approach.

First, define success. Progress should not be measured solely by connectivity rates or app downloads. Indicators such as digital literacy, productive digital engagement, and gender-disaggregated usage data should become central measures of success.

Second, invest in community-based digital literacy programs. Rural municipalities, particularly in provinces with lower digital access, should establish digital learning centers where farmers can receive hands-on support and training. Digital literacy must become a core component of agricultural extension services.

Third, co-design technologies. Farmers, especially women and marginalized groups, should be involved from the earliest stages of technology design and testing. Co-creation improves both adoption and effectiveness.

Fourth, address affordability barriers. For many smallholder farmers, the cost of smartphones, internet packages, and device maintenance remains expensive. Hence, the interventions can be designed considering these aspects, for instance, public-private partnerships for internet packages support, development of apps that does not require internet access throughout.  

Fifth, strengthen data protection and governance.  Nepal needs a robust legal framework to protect personal data and prevent misuse as centralized farmer databases and digital information systems expand.

Sixth, build a supportive environment. Training, community support networks, accessible content, and responsive institutions are equally important for sustained adoption.

Seventh, evaluate technologies through an inclusion lens. Digital tools should be assessed from their social impacts. Policymakers and developers must ask whether technologies benefit marginalized groups, represent diverse users, and avoid reinforcing inequalities.

A digital future that leaves no farmer behind

Nepal’s digital transformation in agriculture is no longer a question of whether it will happen but how it will unfold. The policy vision exists, and technologies are emerging. Investments are also growing. The challenge now is to ensure that digital innovation does not become another source of inequality.

A farmer in Karnali should have the same opportunity to benefit from digital advisory services as a farmer in Kathmandu Valley. A woman managing her household farm should be able to access agricultural information as easily as her male counterparts. Smallholders, Indigenous communities, and marginalized groups should not merely receive technologies designed elsewhere; they should actively shape the systems intended to serve them.

Digital agriculture will succeed when every farmer can meaningfully use digital tools to improve livelihoods, strengthen resilience, and participate fully in agricultural development. 

The author works with International Water Management Institute as a National Researcher — Social Science, Water and Natural Resources

Emergence of states has downsized spiritual influences of families and local communities, and frequently the latter ones are encouraged, even forced, to abandon their traditional views and make room for what the rulers prescribe. This is how less-influential nationalities within big countries are losing their identity.

In absolute terms, and from the perspectives of feelingless outsiders, a culture may seem a serendipitous stuff replaceable with anything handy. The truth is all cultures are formed through millennia-long man-nature interactions. Practiced by large or small populations, disregarding their cosmetics, all cultures are fittest hitherto to the practicing lands and peoples. To any person, the culture of his community is an inseparable part of civilized life. Use of the term ‘uncultured’ to express disapproval of someone’s behavior shows the gravity any community gives to the cultural aspects.

While advances in modern technology has brought incalculable benefits, its uneven distribution has created divisions: rich-poor, advanced-backward, strong-weak, superior-inferior, expanding-shrinking, dominant-submissive, free-constrained, ultimately upholding the expression ‘might is right’. Alex Haley’s 1976 novel Roots: The Saga of an American Family best describes how the strong ones impose their values, as seen in the denial of Kunta Kunte’s very name, and renaming him Toby. Obviously, one can emerge from slavery but cannot reclaim lost language, culture, religion and identity.

Of all age groups, elderly are considered wisest; children, most innocent. The elderly are approached either in a gesture of respect or with an intent of cropping their rich experiences; the minors, for their cheerfulness, joyfulness, vigour, fun, enthusiasm. Whether they smile, play, tell stories, yawn or cry, or be they happy, angry, clean or dirty, children win our admiration. With small efforts, their mood and response can be changed.

Children understand our problems; they slowly give up their proto-language, and adapt to the words, signs and body languages adults use. In place of simple instincts-guided situational responses, they accept complicated orchestrated systems of law and justice, enforced by institutional provisions of punishments, should one fail to obey. By the time they knowingly start learning from adults, they also begin to realise their limits and helplessness; nay, inferiority. The young minds begin to surrender their dreams, and own what seniors feed.

Impressed with success, seniors continue training a minor, through different categories of commands; some planned, others impromptu. The higher the kid achieves, as measured by yardsticks of grown-ups, the more he is praised. Undoubtedly, extended families and native communities are sincere in their part.

Children are not foolproof. Sweets, games, celebrations and praises easily win their hearts. They care about music and rhythm over words and implications. They find nothing alien in anything as long as it serves their taste buds and other senses. Wisemen are aware of the dangers such weakness can invite if not guided properly, and thus prescribe ‘appropriate’ measures. Disregarding these warnings, some schools, business firms and leaders involve the young minds in cultural programmes aimed at pleasing VIPs and guests.

We have an age-old culture of hospitality, as expressed in ‘atithi devo bhava’ (the guest is god), and the concept of universal friendship, as expressed in 'vasudhaiva kutumbakam' (the world is one family). The practice of assigning panchakanya or five virgin girls offering fresh flowers as a gesture of welcome to venerable guests was widespread until the recent past. Thanks to cheap use of the practice and gender movements, now mostly adults and males perform the job.

New forms of exploitation

The Constitution of Nepal has made education up to elementary mandatory, and the government is obliged to provide it free to all school-age children. This means local governments have to ensure the children are attending schools. If pupils are unable to pursue elementary education for their personal physical disability or financial poverty, the government should provide special support, including schools appropriate for physical and teaching-learning activities, and financial support to students and their guardians. Utilized optimally, Nepal has enough resources available to carry out these reforms. What our governments need badly are willpower and good management.

It is precisely here, ‘helping hands’ creep in. Some offer parentships to a few kids, others distribute food or clothes, still others make monetary donations, most of them carried out in lavish ceremonies crowded with hundreds if not thousands of audiences, in front of mass media. More often than not, the expenditures of hand-over celebrations far exceed the support the beneficiaries receive.

Sadly, schools teach playgroup children a foreign language, oblivious of the fact the fate of 124 mother tongues currently spoken in the country depends on whether our kids learn and practice them. Our governments should provide primary education in mother tongues. It is time to act. Campaigning in the media for the conservation of mother tongues is useless if we miss it in classrooms.

Nepal is one of the richest countries in native festivals. But our schools are training to celebrate alien festivals, at the cost of local festivals. Blind imitation of influential foreign cultures is exactly the opposite of what our educational institutions are supposed to deliver.

Under survival threats, anything can be acceptable. Pushed to extremities, people show extreme behavior. Demarcations between just and unjust, legal and illegal, acceptable and unacceptable, beneficial and harmful, all get blurred, or simply erased. At the moment, our economic situation is not that bad. Unfortunately, contemptible trends have appeared in Nepali society. Government-funded schools are seen begging foreigners for snacks which the government has already provided to all students in need. Politicians, social workers and school management committee members are seen more than eager to spread hands for alms, on behalf of the local poor. The leaders do so mainly to get close to foreign donors. In the give and take, they forget the identity and interests of the land and people they represent. Such a mindset needs to change.

Cultural exchanges can be a positive way to foster harmony among diverse communities. However, it is important to approach such exchanges with respect, sensitivity and ethical considerations. We need to ensure that such exchanges are based on our needs rather than exploiters’ stereotypes. Make sure we do not fall prey to someone’s soft-power dream. Make sure we are not taking sides, especially against the poor, oppressed and underrepresented.

To safeguard the interests of our children, it should be ensured that they are not used for commercial purposes, that they are not put in a position of disadvantage to benefit others.

Final point. Remember, listen intently, most of the stories and dramas sound interesting. If others need an audience to their cultures, we also need so. Cultures make an impact only when they reach the audience. We want our cultures to also make an impact. Thus, unless it is two-way, say no to whoever wants a one-direction audience in our children. It is our duty.

In 1950, as the Cold War intensified and the geopolitical landscape of Asia underwent profound transformation, the United States began to define a comprehensive foreign policy toward Nepal. Although Nepal was a small, isolated Himalayan kingdom with limited international influence, its strategic location between India and Tibet gave it considerable geopolitical significance. The US State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, Volume V: The Near East, South Asia, and Africa reveals that American policy toward Nepal was shaped by three interconnected objectives: preventing the spread of communism, encouraging gradual political and economic modernization, and integrating Nepal into the emerging postwar international order.

The United States formally recognized Nepal in 1947, and the two countries signed an Agreement of Commerce and Friendship on April 25 of that year. Diplomatic relations were further strengthened in 1948 with the exchange of ministers between Kathmandu and Washington. Despite these developments, official contacts remained limited because Nepal’s international engagement was minimal, and the United States had not yet established a permanent diplomatic mission in Kathmandu. Nevertheless, Washington viewed Nepal as an increasingly important country due to the expansion of communist influence in Asia, particularly following the communist victory in China in 1949 and growing instability in Tibet.

At the heart of American policy was the determination to ensure that Nepal remained under a non-communist government. The State Department explicitly identified the maintenance of a non-communist regime and the continued orientation of Nepal toward the Western democracies rather than the Soviet Union as its principal objectives. Nepal’s geographical position along the Himalayan frontier made it a strategic buffer between India and Tibet, which itself was becoming increasingly vulnerable to Chinese Communist expansion. American policymakers feared that political instability in Nepal could provide opportunities for communist infiltration and threaten broader Western interests in South Asia.

Despite supporting Nepal’s existing government, the United States did not endorse its authoritarian political system. The document describes the Rana regime as one of the world’s most autocratic governments, standing in sharp contrast to American principles of representative government and individual liberty. However, Washington believed that abrupt political transformation could destabilize the country, creating conditions favorable for communist agitation. Consequently, American policy favored gradual political reform rather than immediate democratization.

The State Department encouraged Nepal’s rulers to implement the Constitution promulgated in 1948, which had never been fully enforced. American officials believed that introducing representative institutions and expanding popular participation in governance would strengthen Nepal's long-term stability. At the same time, they cautioned against rapid democratization, arguing that premature reforms might produce internal disorder, encourage revolutionary movements, and undermine Nepal’s independence. Thus, the United States sought a careful balance between promoting democratic values and preserving political stability during a period of intense ideological competition.

The Cold War significantly shaped American perceptions of Nepal’s domestic politics. Although communist activity within Nepal itself was considered limited due to the government’s strict repression, US officials remained concerned about communist influence among Nepali political exiles operating in India. The report suggests that legitimate democratic movements were often forced underground by the Rana government’s authoritarian policies, inadvertently encouraging cooperation between democratic reformers and communist activists. American policymakers believed that controlled political liberalization would reduce the appeal of revolutionary ideologies while maintaining effective resistance against communist expansion.

Beyond political reform, the United States aimed to reduce Nepal’s long-standing international isolation. For centuries Nepal had limited foreign contact, but Washington regarded greater international engagement as essential for strengthening Nepal’s independence and aligning it with the Western world. American diplomats strongly supported Nepal’s application for membership in the United Nations. Although the Soviet Union vetoed Nepal’s admission, the United States pledged to continue advocating for Nepal’s entry alongside other countries blocked by Soviet opposition. In the meantime, Washington encouraged Nepal’s participation in international organizations, including the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE), where Nepal had already begun to gain diplomatic experience.

The United States also sought to expand direct engagement with Nepal by encouraging greater access for American citizens. Although Nepal had traditionally restricted foreign travel, American officials consistently urged Kathmandu to allow more Americans to enter and travel throughout the country. Increased educational, cultural, and commercial exchanges were viewed as important tools for exposing Nepal to Western ideas and reducing its dependence upon neighboring powers.

Economic development formed another central pillar of American policy. US officials recognized that Nepal remained one of the least developed countries in the world, with limited infrastructure, weak industrial capacity, and severe shortages of trained technical personnel. The government of Nepal had announced ambitious plans for agricultural modernization and industrial development through a series of five-year programs, but lacked the financial and technical resources necessary for implementation.

Rather than offering large-scale financial assistance, the United States emphasized technical cooperation. American policymakers believed that Nepal’s first priority should be a comprehensive survey of its natural resources, agricultural potential, and industrial opportunities. Reliable economic data, they argued, would encourage foreign investment and facilitate long-term development planning. Negotiations were initiated with American organizations capable of conducting such surveys, although Nepal’s shortage of foreign exchange delayed implementation.

The Point Four Program, President Harry Truman’s initiative for technical assistance to developing countries, provided another mechanism for American involvement. Preliminary plans included experts in flood control, hydroelectric development, land reclamation, and geological surveying. Particular attention was given to the possibility of discovering strategically valuable mineral resources. The report openly acknowledged that if important minerals were found, the United States would seek access to them while preventing hostile powers from acquiring these resources. This objective reflected the broader Cold War strategy of securing access to strategic materials while limiting Soviet influence.

Nevertheless, American officials remained realistic about the limits of US assistance. They recognized that Nepal lacked sufficient foreign exchange to finance ambitious development programs and depended heavily upon India for trade, investment, and technical expertise. Since India itself faced severe economic constraints, Washington concluded that Nepal’s economic progress would inevitably be gradual. The report emphasized that the United States should avoid creating unrealistic expectations regarding financial aid while maintaining a willingness to discuss Nepal’s developmental challenges openly and constructively.

Relations with neighboring countries also played a crucial role in American policy. India occupied a particularly important position because of its geographic proximity, historical connections, and economic dominance. Following British withdrawal from India in 1947, New Delhi inherited much of Britain’s influence over Nepal’s foreign affairs. Although India favored democratization in Nepal, it also tolerated political activism by Nepali exiles operating from Indian territory. American officials expressed concern that communist groups might infiltrate these movements, though they stopped short of urging India to suppress democratic opposition. Instead, Washington preferred discreet diplomatic discussions with Indian officials regarding the communist presence within Nepali exile organizations. 

The United Kingdom also remained an important partner in Nepal. British influence dated back to the nineteenth century, and London had formally recognized Nepal’s independence in 1923. Britain continued recruiting Gurkha soldiers for military service, a practice that the United States regarded as strategically valuable. The report specifically noted that Nepal’s renowned military manpower should remain available to the United States or its allies. At the same time, Washington acknowledged Britain’s extensive experience in Nepal and supported continued close Anglo-Nepalese relations rather than attempting to replace British influence.

Tibet represented another important dimension of Nepal’s foreign relations. Long-standing cultural, religious, and commercial ties connected the two Himalayan societies, while Nepal maintained a resident representative in Lhasa. As communist China consolidated control over Tibet, American officials viewed Nepal as an increasingly valuable source of information regarding developments across the Himalayan frontier. The establishment of a permanent American diplomatic mission in Kathmandu was therefore considered desirable not only for managing bilateral relations but also for monitoring political developments in Tibet.

The policy evaluation contained in the State Department report acknowledged that American objectives had achieved only limited success by 1950. Progress toward economic development and democratic reform remained slow, while the absence of a permanent diplomatic mission restricted US influence. Nevertheless, policymakers believed that closer engagement with Nepal would become increasingly necessary as regional developments transformed the strategic importance of the Himalayan region. They concluded that sustained diplomatic contact, technical cooperation, and patient encouragement of gradual reform offered the most effective means of advancing American interests.

In retrospect, the 1950 US policy toward Nepal illustrates the complex interaction between Cold War strategy and the promotion of democratic ideals. American policymakers sought to preserve Nepal’s independence, encourage cautious political reform, foster economic modernization, and integrate the country into international institutions. Yet these goals were consistently subordinated to the overriding objective of preventing communist expansion. The document demonstrates how even relatively small states such as Nepal occupied an important place within the global strategic calculations of the United States during the early Cold War, serving simultaneously as potential partners in development and as critical buffers in the ideological contest between East and West.

A bicycle is among the simplest modern inventions, yet its social effects have been substantial. Across the world it has expanded human mobility, improved public health, reduced pollution, and supported sustainable transport. In Nepal, where patriarchal norms have long restricted women’s independent movement and access to public space, cycling carries deeper meaning. It is not merely a mode of transport. It represents freedom, dignity, confidence, and a practical claim to citizenship. Every woman who rides a bicycle challenges both physical distance and cultural boundaries that once confined many women largely to the household, often described as the “four walls” of the home.

I began cycling for both personal and professional reasons: to reduce dependence on fossil fuel vehicles, improve physical fitness by burning body fat rather than fuel, and support mental well being through regular outdoor activity and reflection. Over time these rides became a form of participant observation. Through participation in Kathmandu Kora, long distance expeditions, and journeys across different regions of Nepal, I observed a growing number of women cycling with visible confidence in both urban streets and rural roads. This raised a central sociological question: is cycling contributing to the transformation of gender relations in Nepal?

The answer emerges from the contrasting ways bicycles are used across the country. In the Kathmandu Valley, recreational and community cycling has expanded notably over the past decade. Organised events, weekend group rides, mountain biking festivals, and training programmes have attracted increasing numbers of women, many from educated urban middle class families, with significant participation from the Newar community. Organisations such as Women Cycling Nepal and the Cycle City Network Nepal have played important roles in creating supportive networks, offering skills training, and advocating for safer streets. Local initiatives, including the Women for Women programme in Lalitpur, have taught more than a thousand women to ride. Participants report greater independence in travelling to markets, delivering products for small businesses, commuting to work, and exploring their own city. Many also describe improved physical health, reduced stress, and new social connections.

A deeper and more structural transformation is visible in the Tarai Madhes plains. Here, bicycles have long been woven into everyday life, especially in industrial and market towns such as Chitwan, Biratnagar, Birgunj, and Bhairahawa. Every morning large numbers of girls cycle to secondary schools and colleges. Women ride independently to markets, banks, health centres, government offices, cooperatives, agricultural fields, and workplaces. Female teachers, community health volunteers, social mobilisers, agricultural workers, and small entrepreneurs rely on bicycles as an affordable and reliable form of transport. Historical accounts show that after malaria eradication and large-scale hill to plain migration in the late 1950s and 1960s, settlements were often scattered and public transport limited. Bicycles became essential for daily mobility. By the 1970s and 1980s, women from diverse ethnic and class backgrounds commonly used them for farming, dairy delivery, school travel, and household errands. In these communities, cycling is not an occasional recreational activity; it is a practical necessity that quietly expands educational attainment, economic participation, and social interaction.

The history of cycling in Nepal reflects broader social change. Bicycles first appeared during the Rana period mainly as prestige items owned by elites, military officers, and senior officials. After the political changes of the 1950s they gradually became more affordable and spread widely, particularly in the flat Tarai. Women’s adoption followed a slower path. In Kathmandu, pioneers such as Sarojini Manandhar began riding in the late 1940s, deliberately challenging conservative norms while dressed in a sari. Yet cycling remained largely a male domain in the Valley for decades. Many women who learned to ride as girls stopped after marriage because of expectations concerning modesty, family honour, and confinement to domestic space. In the Tarai, by contrast, economic necessity and the absence of convenient alternatives helped normalise women’s cycling earlier and more widely.

Feminist and development theory helps explain why these patterns matter. Amartya Sen’s capability approach emphasises that genuine development expands the real freedoms people have to live lives they value. Mobility is a foundational capability: without it, access to education, employment, healthcare, markets, and political participation remains limited. Naila Kabeer’s framework of empowerment identifies three interconnected elements like resources, agency, and achievements. A bicycle functions as a concrete resource that expands physical mobility, strengthens women’s agency by enabling independent decision making, and opens pathways to educational and economic achievements. Feminist geography, drawing on scholars such as Doreen Massey, reminds us that public spaces are socially produced rather than neutral. Roads, markets, and transport systems historically reflected male dominance. When women cycle through village roads, busy markets, or urban streets, they expand the social geography of possibility and assert democratic citizenship in everyday practice.

Intersectionality further cautions against treating women as a uniform group. Experiences of mobility differ according to caste, ethnicity, class, geography, disability, and age. A young Newar woman in Kathmandu, a Madhesi girl in the eastern Tarai, a Dalit woman in western Nepal, an Indigenous woman in the hills, or a woman living with disability encounter different opportunities and barriers. Effective GESI analysis therefore examines multiple and overlapping forms of exclusion rather than assuming a single experience of gender.

Comparative evidence from South Asia strengthens the case for cycling as a tool of empowerment. In the Indian state of Bihar, the Mukhyamantri Balika Cycle Yojana, launched in 2006, provided bicycles (or funds to purchase them) to girls entering secondary school. Rigorous evaluation using large household survey data found that the programme increased girls’ age appropriate secondary enrolment by approximately 30 to 32 percent and reduced the gender gap in enrolment by about 40 percent. It also raised the number of girls sitting and passing secondary examinations. Similar bicycle support schemes elsewhere in India have improved school retention and reduced the time and safety costs of travel. Across the region, however, a stark gender gap in cycling persists. In Delhi, women constitute only around 2 percent of cyclists despite relatively high overall bicycle use. In parts of Pakistan, cultural stigma, harassment, and conservative norms continue to discourage women from riding openly, although some activist groups have begun using collective cycling to reclaim public space. Against this regional backdrop, Nepal’s Tarai experience of relatively normalised everyday cycling by women stands out as a comparative strength, while urban areas still lag behind.

Beyond mobility and education, cycling contributes to physical and mental health. Regular riding reduces risks of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, hypertension, and obesity conditions that are rising in Nepal. It also lowers stress, builds emotional resilience, and provides personal space for reflection, especially valuable for women balancing household, caregiving, and income generating responsibilities. Environmentally, cycling aligns with Nepal’s commitments under the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly those concerning good health, gender equality, sustainable cities, and climate action. Each journey made by bicycle rather than motorised vehicle contributes modestly but meaningfully to cleaner air and lower carbon emissions. Cycling tourism offers additional potential by encouraging slower travel that supports local businesses and cultural exchange while minimising environmental impact.

Important challenges remain. National and municipal transport planning continues to prioritise motorised vehicles. Dedicated bicycle lanes, secure parking, traffic calming, adequate lighting, and systematic road safety education are still limited in most places. Women cyclists frequently report concerns about road safety, harassment, poor infrastructure, and aggressive driving behaviour. These barriers discourage many potential riders even when they recognise the benefits.

Ultimately, the significance of cycling extends beyond infrastructure or individual recreation. It concerns the kind of society Nepal aspires to build. A commitment to gender equality cannot ignore the importance of mobility, because mobility shapes access to nearly every other opportunity. The expansion of women’s independent movement into public space is itself an expansion of democratic citizenship. After years of cycling across Nepal, I have come to see the bicycle as more than a mechanical device. It is an instrument of freedom, a practical means of improving health, a bridge between communities, a support for sustainable tourism, and a quiet response to environmental pressures. Most importantly, it is helping to reshape everyday gender relations. Every woman who pedals confidently to school, to work, to the market, or simply through her neighbourhood expands the boundaries of what is socially possible. Mobility is not a privilege to be granted but a right to be exercised.

To translate this potential into lasting change, concrete and coordinated policy action is required at multiple levels. At the federal level, the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport, together with the Ministry of Women, Children and Senior Citizens and the Ministry of Education, should develop a National Active Mobility Strategy that explicitly integrates gender and social inclusion. This strategy should set measurable targets for women’s and girls’ cycling participation, allocate dedicated budget lines for non motorised transport, and require gender impact assessments in all major road and urban development projects. Drawing lessons from Bihar’s successful cycle scheme, the federal government could design a national “Bicycle for Girls’ Education” programme that provides bicycles or vouchers to girls entering secondary school in districts with low female enrolment and long travel distances, with priority given to Dalit, Madhesi, Indigenous, and economically disadvantaged households.

Provincial governments should adapt these frameworks to regional realities. In the Tarai provinces, where everyday cycling is already strong, the focus should be on upgrading safety infrastructure, regulating mixed traffic, and protecting existing bicycle cultures from rapid motorisation. In hill and mountain provinces, provinces can support adapted bicycle designs, community repair centres, and tourism linked cycling routes that generate local income while expanding women’s mobility. Provincial education and health departments should include cycling skills and road safety in school curricula and community health volunteer training.

Municipalities and rural municipalities hold the most immediate responsibility and opportunity under federalism. Local governments should prepare and implement bicycle master plans that create continuous, protected corridors linking schools, health posts, markets, municipal offices, and residential areas. They should mandate secure bicycle parking at all public buildings and educational institutions, introduce traffic calming measures in school zones, improve street lighting on key routes, and enforce stricter penalties for harassment of women road users. Municipalities can partner with local women’s groups and organisations such as Women Cycling Nepal to run free or low cost training programmes for women and adolescent girls, combined with basic bicycle maintenance skills. Targeted subsidy or revolving fund schemes can help low income women purchase bicycles, while public procurement can favour women led bicycle repair and rental enterprises.

Schools and community institutions have a direct role. Secondary schools should integrate practical cycling instruction and road safety education into extracurricular activities, with special encouragement for girls. Parent teacher associations and mothers’ groups can help address residual cultural resistance by organising family rides and awareness sessions. Health facilities and cooperatives can similarly promote cycling among female staff and members as a low cost means of improving service delivery and personal mobility.

Civil society, private sector, and development partners should complement government action. Cycling clubs, women’s organisations, and GESI focused NGOs can continue expanding training, peer support, and advocacy. Private companies and banks can offer affordable bicycle loans or employer supported cycle to work schemes. Development partners can fund pilot projects, rigorous impact evaluations, and knowledge exchange with successful programmes in India and elsewhere in South Asia.

Nepal’s progress should ultimately be measured less by the number of bicycles sold or the popularity of annual recreational events, and more by whether every girl can safely cycle to school, whether every woman can travel independently without fear, and whether cycling becomes an ordinary and accepted part of daily life across all regions and communities. When these practical steps are systematically implemented, bicycles will more fully symbolise equality, dignity, and inclusion. In that process, Nepal will move closer to the constitutional promise of an equitable, inclusive, and sustainable society.