Submit your Article

With over $7.2bn in so-called concessional loans failing to address poverty in poorer countries like Nepal, the pressure is now on the West to shift toward debt relief or grants. Meanwhile, climate change has become a convenient pretext to impose additional loan burdens on vulnerable LDCs like Nepal. This is already evident in Nepal through initiatives like the Green, Resilient and Inclusive Development (GRID). Multilateral lenders like the World Bank and the IMF, exploiting the greed of Nepali finance bureaucrats for petty benefits, have secured blind approvals for millions in loan agreements in the name of disaster resilience.

This looks like the most likely scenario given the ongoing discussion in COP29 at Baku. A new climate finance goal is up for discussion, which may scale up to $1trn every year by 2030. This was a replacement for an unrealized $100bn target. The funding gaps relating to mitigation, adaptation and clean energy transition need to be addressed. These include diversification of funding through non-grant elements of grants and concessional loans, private sector involvement, and predictability and accessibility to developing nations of funds. Other innovative mechanisms in contemplation for mobilizing additional resources include the Climate Finance Action Fund.

The recent report of the Change Initiative details how the ‘Climate Debt Risk Index 2024’ says Least Developed Countries fall into debt because of climate financing practices. Though they contribute less than 3.3 percent of the global emissions, their countries suffer the most drastic impacts of climate change and are persistently entangled in a web of debt from loans issued for climate resilience and adaptation.

It also highlights the ‘climate debt trap’, where LDCs are forced to borrow extensively in order to combat the vagaries of climate. “The current reliance on  loan-based climate finance,” the report says, “is leaving many countries exposed to debilitating debt, taking money away from vital investments such as health care and infrastructure.” Ironically, this framework has undermined the resilience it was designed to foster by keeping LDCs near financial bankruptcy.

This report states, “LDCs are among those most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and yet bear the highest financial burden through unsustainable loan practices.” Debt related to climate in these countries has risen significantly, constraining their potential for effective application of sustainable climate strategies and, generally speaking, their development.

Climate Debt Risk Index (CDRI) measures countries' risks regarding climate debt for the next decade and projects a likely increase or stability in the levels of debt. The CDRI spotted many high-risk zones, mainly located within South Asia, East Africa and Southeast Asia, showing striking regional differences in vulnerability and loan dependency.

Within South Asia, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh emerge as displaying a very high risk. The former will witness its risk score reach up to 74.17 points by 2030. Bangladesh also emerges as a very high risk because it has signed loans worth $14.31bn, and on account of heightened vulnerability across climate and loan dependence, Bangladesh will emerge as a country slipping from high to very high risk. On an average, East Africa bears the highest risk levels, as already witnessed by record CDRI scores of Mozambique and Madagascar.

The score for Madagascar will peak in 2030 at 81.41, a debt risk category classified as ‘very high’. Meanwhile, in Rwanda, the risk jumps significantly from high to very high risk in light of increased climate challenges.

In Southeast Asia, Myanmar still has one of the highest climate debt risks, with an estimate of 78.87 by 2030, whereas Cambodia and Laos remain high-risk countries due to increased dependence on loans arising from climate finance. The Philippines has demonstrated only a moderate level of debt risk, but many challenges persist. It also categorizes West Africa and the Caribbean as vulnerable zones, while climate-related loans are driving countries like Senegal and Haiti toward high risk by 2030.

Dependence on loans

One disquieting trend reflected in the index is that though climate finance continues to flow in LDCs, much of this is loan-based. In the case of Bangladesh, it has received a total climate finance of $14.31bn, with a Loan-Grant Ratio of 8.34, indicating that loans are highly predominant over grants. Whereas Sri Lanka has a Loan-Grant Ratio of 12.13, one of the highest in the report. Afghanistan relied on grants only and received $0.42bn with no loans, suggesting an absolute breach between debt-burdened and debt-free countries. This creates loan dependency that increases their vulnerabilities, as they have to pay these debts while staring at climate disasters.

According to the report, such financial burdens are unsustainable and divert countries from investing in very important aspects necessary for building resilience against climate impacts.

Adaptation vs mitigation

The second most striking pattern is the differential adaptation and mitigation funding across LDCs. Countries such as Pakistan, a country that received $1.84bn for climate finance in the first instance decided to spend on mitigation at $1.45bn, hence having a low Adaptation and Mitigation Ratio of 0.29. Cambodia has spent more on a balanced approach, with an Adaptation and Mitigation Ratio of 2.07, having equal efforts in both areas.

This means, in practice, mitigation will have a role of reducing the emissions, whereas adaptation measures are core to the LDCs, whose current impacts of the climate change-related events such as flooding, hurricanes, and droughts are already felt. Indeed, it has been suggested that without proper financing of adaptation, these countries will continue to suffer significant economic and social damages. According to the report, a more balanced financing model is important in strengthening resilience.

Sustainable climate finance

The findings of the Climate Debt Risk Index 2024 bring forth actionable solutions on how to mitigate the climate debt crisis the LDCs find themselves in. First, it advocates for a shift from loan-heavy climate finance toward grant-based financing, especially for projects targeting adaptation and loss and damage. This would involve more grants and less loans, hence enabling the LDCs to reduce their debt burdens while building resilience sans increased financial burdens.

The report also recommends debt-for-climate swaps as a method to transform outstanding debts into climate resilience funds, easing burden off the national budget while pursuing climate objectives. In such a deal, part of the country’s debt would be written off in exchange for spending on climate resilience, adaptation, or biodiversity protection. Having proven potentially workable in the past, it is therefore recommended as a means of pursuit for countries at high risk.

Besides the debt-for-climate swaps, the report prescribes innovative financing mechanisms in the form of climate resilience bonds and carbon taxes. Climate resilience bonds would raise funds dedicated to adaptation, while carbon taxes would represent a new revenue stream, keeping off the burden of national debt for climate projects. According to the report, such mechanisms could be decisive in bringing the global climate finance paradigm into the realm of sustainable solutions.

Global policy reforms 

The Climate Debt Risk Index 2024 report includes several remedies regarding the climate debt burden on LDCs. First and foremost, it calls for grants over loans in adaptation and loss and damage to reduce dependence on debt-heavy financing structures that result in a growing financial burden on these countries. It also calls for ‘debt-for-climate swaps’ that would allow part of the debt to go toward building resilience to climate change, thereby reducing fiscal burdens on those economies.

The report calls for global policy reforms to ensure due transparency in the allocation of climate finance, hence backing these financial shifts. It also sets out a clear, standardized set of metrics under the UNFCCC to track the effective delivery and verification of climate finance, hence ensuring equitability and efficiency in its use. These solutions together contribute toward the paradigm shift that needs to take place for the delivery of climate finance in a more sustainable, transparent and equitable manner for LDCs.

Bureaucracy is considered the steel frame of government through which state decisions are implemented, policies activated and policy objectives achieved. Protecting people’s life and liberty, maintaining law and order, conducting plans and programs, and delivering public services to the doorstep of citizens are major responsibilities of bureaucracy. 

Despite dozens of lapses in both theory and in practice, bureaucracy is inevitable as it performs important roles like delivery of day-to-day services both during normal as well as critical times, from the center to the nooks and crannies of the country. For example, even during the Maoist insurgency, bureaucracy was very much at the people’s doorsteps in the form of the VDC secretary, JT, JTA, health worker and the forester, etc.

The main jobs of bureaucracy are almost always the same. But this important organ of the state is anything but a well-oiled machine. In some segments of the society, service delivery is quite poor, giving rise to questions about “merit-based recruitment procedures”. 

Various commissions constituted to reform bureaucracy have submitted their suggestions and recommendations to the government at different points in time, but the implementation of these inputs has been far from satisfactory, making reforms in bureaucracy a pipedream.

In general, service-seekers feel that power and money—and not due procedures—is what gets you public services and this perception is the root cause of public hatred toward government employees. This leaves the service-seeker with no other option than doing what the employee tells you to get desired services, even if it means ignoring relevant rules and regulations. 

But these old ways should not be acceptable. Accountability, integrity and transparency must be maintained at all levels by upholding the right to information. Administration should be compatible to address changing demands of service-seekers in the wake of changes in political, economic, socio-cultural and technological spheres.

Uniting diverse cultures and binding people of different castes and colors living within a sovereign territory is the most important government function, which is executed through the administrative machinery. Truly, administration does not only deliver public services; in fact it delivers democracy to the people.

Dilemmas galore

Politicization of bureaucracy and bureaucratization of politics is a big obstacle in the path of bureaucratic reforms. Political leaders often indulge in bureaucratic tasks instead of bothering to formulate appropriate policies and laws, while public servants do politics to reap financial benefits and undue opportunities. 

Rivalry and unsound competition between and among different services, groups and subgroups within the civil service have created demotivation and frustrations among employees. In terms of monetary benefits, promotion and opportunity to grow, there is no equal opportunity within the civil service. 

The main job of bureaucracy is to serve citizens, but in practice government employees want to lord over the citizens. Facilitation, regulation and promotional role of bureaucracy is necessary to serve citizens better. Quality service delivery will surely strengthen the relationship between the government and the citizens. 

Access to public services often depends on the service-seeker’s political power and financial capacity –the capacity to pay–putting disadvantaged sections of the society at a great disadvantage. 

Through private staff such as private secretary and other intermediaries/intermediary structures, political appointees try to make the service-seeker pay extra money for availing public services, especially in remote areas. 

Employee transfers are almost always questionable, with legal provisions ignored all too often to make space for political power and the power of cash.  

The operational cost of public organizations is extremely high but investment in building and developing human capital is miserable. Procurement of unnecessary and expensive vehicles, machinery, and heavy equipment without identifying need assessment, proper maintenance plan and estimation of economic capability of the country has been causing a steep rise in public spending in the unproductive sector. 

Extremely low salary and paltry perks, including financial benefits, is one of the main reasons behind corruption in bureaucracy. While the blame for a low severance package goes on the “limited capacity of the state”, a chosen few employees often get unlimited opportunities to earn through the backdoor. 

Inefficiency and ineffectiveness are another source of public hatred toward bureaucracy. It is compared to winning a battle to get public services without hassle-free manners. Political leaders and powerful persons have been receiving public services by enforcing power rather than obeying the system. Such practices have been encouraging service providers to enforce monopoly and discrimination against the grassroots.

Low morale and diminishing loyalty toward occupation are the ugly products of unequal opportunities to grow, weak reward and punishment system, over-politicization, discrimination between and among different services, groups and sub-groups. 

In a short period of time, corrupt politicians and employees have amassed huge wealth (as if by magic) whereas the honest lot is at the receiving end in various walks of life. Time has come to prohibit commercialization and bureaucratization of politics and politicization of business and bureaucracy for national prosperity.

Views are personal

Humans used to be hunters and gatherers for 2.5m years, they plucked wild fruits and hunted wild animals as they traveled. It all changed about 10,000 years ago, when they started to influence the lives of selected wild plant and animal species for their benefit. The transition from nomadic to agriculture proceeded in a stage which involved just a small change in daily life over a generation.

What changes?

Presently, agriculture is one of the main occupations in the course of human civilization, which is the origin of the first crop to the society known today. In the long run, people started living together for agriculture practices. Availability of enough food and protection in a society helps in further population growth within the community. Use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers lead to maximum crop production, which helped in reducing hunger but this manipulation altered the whole ecosystems, resulting in habitat destruction, decline in biodiversity, soil fertility and nutrient depletion.

As the human population is increasing, demand for food is also increasing and intensive methods of farming eventually are escalating. This results in decrease of useful crop pest predators and thus rise in pest outbreaks. These intensive modern agriculture practices lead to deterioration of the natural habitat and biodiversity of numerous plants and animals. The use of pesticides kills the keystone species, which agitate the ecosystem and risk millions of important species up the food chain.

Chemical pesticides have been used as a traditional method for pest and disease control. However, it impacts negatively on biodiversity, crop quality and human health. Alternatively, use of biological pest regulation instead of pesticides is the best solution in recent scenarios.

Biological pest regulation maintains its population under the limit over time. Until now, biological pest regulation mainly focuses on manipulating the behavior of pests and arthropods (natural predator). Approaches like using pheromones (chemical signals that insects release to communicate), disrupt their mating and changing foraging sites have shown success. However, arthropods as a predator, mobility is not so much, indicating this method is effective in specific areas only where these predators are present. While arthropods as predators are effective bioregulators, including specific species of reptiles and amphibians into this approach can improve the regulation of pest populations. Utilizing arthropods, along with reptiles and amphibians significantly helps in bioregulation of pests.

Amphibians and reptiles can survive in a disturbed habitat and use different resources. While hunting, predators consider the characteristics of the prey, such as what they eat, how they move and how they behave in their environment. These characteristics reflect how predators prefer to hunt. For example: some actively search while others wait and ambush their prey.

Reptiles and amphibians use their visual and olfaction (sense of smell) to track and identify prey. The characteristic hunting process directs the sensory faculty either visual or olfactory. For example, lizards and some of the amphibians that are active foragers use their smell sensory while ambush foragers like some species of iguanas depend on their visual. In specific cases like oriental garden lizards, they wait for prey to come close, wait for the movement of the prey to capture. They don’t react if the prey doesn’t show any movement or release any chemicals by the prey.

According to foraging theory, active foragers prefer stationary prey having relatively large size and are widely distributed over area whereas ambush foragers catch mobile prey and prefer small size prey found in grouped distribution. Ambush foragers have broader prey as a diet than active foragers because the chance of capturing prey is less and they cannot be selective as active foragers.

Another interesting behavior of reptiles and amphibians is that they use the surrounding environment as information about the prey and protection from their predators. They can create a cognitive map (mental representation of the environmental reminder), which helps to guide in their home range, locating their spread-out prey without searching randomly every time.       

Active foragers are good at spatial learning since they have larger home ranges and are always in mobility, which require these skills more than ambush predators. While ambush predators spend less energy in searching for prey, they eventually change spots with abundances of food.

This information can help in the agricultural field, to mobilize active or ambush predators according to the nature of the pest, and the size of the agriculture farm.

Conclusion

Agriculture fields with active foragers are beneficial as they are good at scanning their environment and forming memories about pest-infested crops/areas. For them, spatial clues like natural habitats, trees help in locating prey more successfully. Meanwhile, ambush foragers use local cues like distinct shapes or natural rocks to find and remember hunting spots. Keeping crop patches in the same locations helps both active and ambush foragers to create authentic memories of their surroundings, making them easier to hunt.

Protecting and maintaining their habitats for breeding and hibernation is also important. Amphibians prefer small water bodies with warm and sunny aspects while reptiles favor open areas for warmth and vegetated areas for dwelling. Their habitats should connect so that the population gets easy access to each other for biological activities.  Maintaining habitat with dense vegetation for shelter, creating edges with different vegetations to add up habitat diversity, and maintaining different height shrubs will provide camouflage during different activities.

Plastic pollution is one of the major contributors to the triple planetary crisis: environmental degradation, climate change and biodiversity loss. It also poses a threat to the ecosystem and human health.  The world generated 353m tons of plastic waste in 2019 which is twice the amount since 2002. Out of the total waste generated only nine percent was recycled and almost 50 percent was disposed of in landfill sites, 19 percent incinerated and 22 percent discarded and leaked into the environment and river system. 

Out of total waste generated in Nepal, 16 percent of urban waste consisted of plastic waste contributing to 2.7 tons plastic waste production daily. According to Bajracharya et al., (2022), 15 percent of the waste is managed inappropriately, either burnt or discarded in the environment. A study highlighted evidence of microplastic in diverse aquatic ecosystems.  A wide range of polymers are present in plastic waste such as polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyamide, Polystyrene (PS), and polyester. These polymers have adverse effects on the living beings, environment and some prove difficult to recycle.

Indistinguishably, the diverse aquatic ecosystems reveal microplastic presence exemplifying the need for awareness and research related to circular economy. In 2020, a waste management baseline survey revealed that the waste comprises 54 percent organic. This clearly demonstrates the potential of organic waste, primarily composed of biodegradable matter, to be transformed into valuable resources such as compost. Moreover, inorganic waste can be effectively categorized into plastics, metals, electronic waste, and other components, thereby facilitating tailored management strategies. 

As evidenced, plastic pollution is the major contributor to environmental degradation, threatening ecosystems, animals, plant species and humanity itself. Plastic leakage on the freshwater ecosystem causes a significant impact on aquatic life. Plastic is persistent in nature, and it contains high levels of toxic chemicals and resulting pollutants are transported around through the air and upstream. Waste management is a crucial issue that demands immediate attention. Uncontrolled disposal/dumping and open burning predominantly contribute to environmental degradation. The governmental bodies, the private sector, and NGOs face challenges for proper waste management of plastic. This emanates from the unmanaged collection, segregation and prevalence of open dumping/disposal coupled with lax policy implementation. Although policies have been adopted, their implementation is uneven, with certain municipalities enforcing few relevant rules while others entirely neglect them.

Human actions and consequences

Humans are responsible for most of the planet’s problems. The tendency of humans to encroach on the environment and undermine the ecological footprint has become susceptible to modern problems. Apart from the natural hazard, the pollution caused by human induced activities has vastly affected the planet following a suit of interlinked mishaps; climate change, global warming and impending doom. 

The degradation of plastic released into the environment leads to serious threats to biodiversity. Atmospheric agents such as abrasion, ultraviolet radiation and photo oxidation in combination with the bacteria degrade plastic fragments into the micro and nanosized particles. Scientists discovered the presence of microplastic in human stools, demonstrating how these particles are ingested and excreted by our bodies. Research conducted on human placenta reflected the presence of microplastic in human lungs, blood, placentas and breast milk. This highlighted the presence of micro-plastic from production to disposal, hence, constant exposure and intake of plastic threaten our well-being. The pervading nature of plastic is the reason for its increasing infiltration into the human body.

Impact of plastic pollution is not only limited to humans, but it poses a major threat to the terrestrial organism’s health including megafauna. As per recent research, the existence of macro- particles in the dung of the greater one horn rhino at Chitwan National Park has raised alarming concerns. Hence, Immediate actions and prevention methods are required for comprehensive waste management. Strategic plans are essential to mitigate the negative impact of plastic pollution and its sustenance in the long run. 

On a similar note, air pollution has become a prominent issue that has raised concerns and contested debates on “who did it” and “how it happened” among scientists and researchers. The myriad effects have become evident after the famously known “smog” has taken a storm in developed and developing nations. In China, smog affected the health and visibility of the residents. Similarly, in Nepal the level of air pollution has affected visibility, and the Government was forced to close schools for four days in 2021 and banned walkers in the morning concerning dangerous levels of air pollution.

Vehicle emissions and construction dust, coupled with Kathmandu’s geographic constraints, are the primary culprits behind the city's pollution crisis. Rising global temperatures are expected to intensify this problem. Air pollution is majorly contributed through human induced activities such as the open burning of plastic waste, backyard burning, and indoor air pollutants. According to research conducted by Kundan Lal Shrestha, almost nine percent of municipal waste is burnt in the open space including plastic and other inorganic waste. The study highlighted that out of 10 residents residing inside the valley, one resident burnt their waste either in backyard or open spaces. As a result, the practice of organic waste and plastic burning persists ubiquitously.

Ban on single-use plastic, awareness campaigns are the major interventions taken by the government. In 2022, the Kathmandu Metropolitan City implemented stringent measures to penalize individuals, with fines of up to 500,000 and legal ramifications under the Environment Protection Act. Different initiatives were taken by the government, but none of them was able to give a result-based outcome. For the purpose of filling in the gaps, several NGOs have taken different measures at different capacities.

Our intervention

Concurrently, CREASION has been working as a catalyst to bring change to the community through collaborative and sustainable approaches. Since 2005, our approaches have aligned towards innovation and compassion to protect the environment for a better future. We are working together with the policymakers and other private sectors to create a resilient, inclusive, carbon-neutral future which will lead towards net zero emissions by 2045, to support the long-term vision of the Nepalese Government. 

Similarly, we have been working in PET recycling since 2019, to mitigate the negative impact of plastic pollution. To date, we have successfully recycled 9343 tons of waste PET which significantly reduces the carbon emissions by 19,657.68 tons. We ensure waste reduction by integrating green recycling and preventing air pollution by cutting off carbon emission. 

In addition, we are also focused on empowering the informal sector by introducing advanced technology and promoting the transition towards a circular economy. It has been instrumental in encouraging youth, women, and marginalized communities, providing support and resources to help them embark on their entrepreneurial journeys. Formation of the waste smart school, educating and encouraging children towards sustainability and conservation of environment. 

Our efforts are not limited to recycling plastic and supporting the informal recycling sector. Empowering youth, advocating for environmental justice and collaborative effort to create a resilient environment is our fundamental responsibility. We are working together to beat plastic pollution and prevent the leakage of plastic into the river system to preserve the freshwater ecosystem.  To envision a better future, it's important to promote sustainable practices. Our efforts align with the sustainable development goals through the engagement of youths to be part of cleaning campaigns in the major hotspot areas, advocating at the local level and partnership with the policymakers to address the existing gaps in waste management leading towards sustainability.

Open burning is common in the context of Kathmandu valley especially during the winter season. To achieve the goal of a Clean and healthy environment for everyone, our sole objective is to minimize the negative impact caused by plastic pollution. Our work on empowering the marginalized communities, strengthening them through workshops and training, and mobilizing the youths as a catalyst and advocate for the environmental crisis has proved vital for the future generation and environment conservation. These sessions include the integration of the circular economy to improve the livelihood of the marginalized and vulnerable communities through the market value chain.

The interlinkages between the destruction imposed by humans in the environment originates from the individualistic behavior encroaching the wildlife habitation and the ecological footprint. The environment has a deep link towards humans and all living beings and vice versa. But the failure to recognize our interdependency has led to negligent behaviors and selfish motives to extract the resources from the environment and polluting the environment.  Human induced activities are directly linked to pollution and degradation in the environment, and this affects humans and animals as they all depend on the environment's resources.  Pollution is a double-edged sword given that human activities generate two primary types of pollution: point and nonpoint. On one hand, point source pollution, emitted from identifiable locations like factories and sewage plants, is easier to regulate in general. For example, smokestack emissions and industrial wastewater. On another hand, nonpoint source pollution is more diffuse, stemming from widespread areas like urban runoff, agricultural fields, or forests. This type is harder to control as it comes from multiple sources such as rainwater washing over city streets carrying pollutants into waterways. Both types harm air and water quality further, the environment in a larger context.

The predicament of plastic pollution pertains to over consumption, waste management and microplastic. Nevertheless, Nepal is facing a pressing environmental challenge due to the increasing threat of plastic waste to its pristine ecosystems, including the Himalayas and the Terai region. This has resulted in detrimental impacts on biodiversity and ecological balance. A comprehensive approach involving the government, civil society, and the private sector is crucial to address this problem. The key strategies include promoting reusable alternatives, implementing plastic ban or restrictions, strengthening waste management systems, promoting the 3Rs namely; reduce, reuse, and recycling of plastic materials. Furthermore, education and knowledge dissemination on the harmful effects of plastic pollution to the youths and public will be effective in practicing reducing waste and environment conservation. Through collaborative efforts, Nepal can work towards a plastic-free future, safeguarding its environment, human health, and economic development.