Despite numerous acts, strategies, and five-year visions, our policies often overlook the lived realities and inherent dignity of our citizens. A national health insurance program may cover basic health services for mothers in rural Tarai, yet many still face malnutrition. A young graduate in Kathmandu may access education, but the lack of meaningful employment undermines their aspiration. A farmer may receive subsidies for seeds, yet without fair market access, their labor and knowledge are undervalued. These fragmented solutions reveal a deeper issue: policies that lack to honor the capabilities and dignity of the people they are meant to serve. And here, the question is raised: Do our policies see people as whole human beings?
This is where Integral Human Development (IHD) offers a different lens. Rooted in the belief that every person possesses inherent dignity, IHD insists that development must address the whole person – body, mind, spirit, dignity, and relationships. It challenges us to design policies that move beyond numbers and sectors. Unlike frameworks that reduce people to economic indicators or mere recipients of aid, IHD views individuals as agents of change embedded in families and communities.
In the context of Nepal, where federalism is still taking root and governance often struggles to balance economic growth with social justice, adopting an IHD framework could make policy more people-centered, integrated, and sustainable.
Human dignity at the center of policy
In Nepal, poverty is frequently measured in income levels or material deficits. Yet dignity is eroded not just by lack of resources but also by exclusion, inequality, and absence of voice. IHD begins with dignity. Policies built on this foundation treat citizens not merely as beneficiaries but as active participants in shaping their own futures.
For example, the 15th Five-Year Plan (2019/20 to 2023/24) envisions a “Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali” and sets ambitious targets across various sectors. However, while the plan emphasizes economic growth, it often overlooks the holistic well-being of individuals. Integrating IHD could ensure that economic policies also promote human dignity and participation. For example, when municipalities engage women’s groups or youth clubs in planning local budgets, they do more than allocate resources; they validate the dignity of participation. When health workers treat patients as partners in care rather than passive recipients, they uphold dignity alongside service delivery. Such shifts in perspective are subtle but transformative: they foster ownership, accountability, and trust between the state and its citizens.
Breaking silos through integrated approaches
Policies in Nepal are often designed in silos: health is separated from education, agriculture from environment, and infrastructure from social protection. Yet, people’s lives are not siloed. A malnourished child cannot perform well in school, and an unemployed youth may face mental health struggles.
IHD calls for integration across sectors. Take maternal health as an example. Beyond free check-ups, safe motherhood depends on nutrition, sanitation, transport, and women’s education. Designing these elements in isolation creates gaps that undermine results. Similarly, climate change policies that prioritize infrastructure without addressing farmers’ livelihoods remain incomplete. An IHD framework would compel policymakers to ask: how do health, education, economy, and environment intersect in people’s daily lives?
Integrated policy-making is admittedly complex, but federalism has opened opportunities for local governments to coordinate across sectors. The question is whether national frameworks will empower them to take such holistic approaches or continue reinforcing silos.
Participation and accompaniment
One of the most powerful aspects of IHD is its emphasis on “accompaniment,” i.e. walking with people rather than delivering services from above. This approach recognizes that development is not simply about providing solutions but about building relationships of trust and solidarity.
Nepal already has successful models that reflect this principle. The role of Female Community Health Volunteers (FCHVs) is a case in point. They do more than disseminate health information; they accompany families, listen to concerns, and build bridges between communities and health systems. Their effectiveness comes not only from technical training but also from trust and presence. Expanding such models across sectors such as agriculture, education, disaster preparedness could make policies far more responsive and grounded in lived experiences. Accompaniment also implies long-term engagement. Too often, donor-driven projects operate on short timelines and exit once targets are met. IHD suggests that policies should commit to being present with communities through both successes and setbacks, ensuring resilience rather than dependency.
A call for action
Skeptics may argue that Integral Human Development (IHD) is too idealistic for a country facing poverty, migration, climate threats, and political instability. However, fragmented, short-term approaches have already proven inadequate. Evidence from community-driven initiatives in Nepal and elsewhere shows that when dignity and participation are prioritized, outcomes improve. Federalism itself is premised on the idea of bringing governance closer to people, an idea that resonates deeply with the IHD vision.
Hugo Flores once said, “It is very simple. If we are drafting a piece of policy or designing a project, and it is good enough to apply it to ourselves or our closest ones, then it is a good project. If not, then it is not good enough.” This principle captures the essence of IHD. Policies must be designed with empathy, care, and dignity. For instance, before opening a clinic, policymakers should ask: “Would I send my own mother here if she were sick?” If the answer is yes, it is a policy grounded in human-centered thinking; if not, it needs rethinking.
As Nepal reimagines its development path amid global and domestic uncertainties, IHD offers a timely and transformative framework. It reminds us that progress cannot be measured only in GDP growth or infrastructure projects, but in how policies nurture the whole person i.e mind, body, spirit, and community. Embracing IHD does not mean discarding economic or technical approaches; it means complementing them with a deeper, dignity-centered vision. It means designing policies that are participatory, integrated, and grounded in human relationships.
If Nepal is to craft policies that truly serve its citizens, it must move beyond fragmented targets and embrace Integral Human Development, a vision that sees every citizen not just as a statistic, but as a whole person with dignity and potential
(The author is a graduate student of Global Affairs (Governance and Policy) at the University of Notre Dame, USA.)
