Securing The Quality Of Life

Quality of life is a life of choice. To make life worth living requires a balance among ecological sustainability, population growth, inclusive economy and responsive governance. A fresh vision is necessary in Nepal to locate demographic affairs within the equation of ecological, social, economic and political contexts and human rights, especially the empowerment of women and the poor because responsiveness to them is the cornerstone of good public policy. It is geared to safety, happiness and prosperity of all where no one is subordinated to the other’s will. High-quality education is a great leveller of society. It helps Nepalis to realise their potential, needs and aspirations and move beyond the usual trickle-down progress deemed derisory. 

The quality of life calls out for another kind of progress based on justice, equity and sustainability. Elimination of the vices of society returns people to their humane existence. The World Health Organisation defines the quality of life as "an individual's perception of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns." One can, however, see a trilemma in the practical affairs of Nepal between the increase in women’s rights, particularly their pivotal role in social change and fragile political will of governance; between rich-poor disparity and the ubiquity of a single model of progress; and between the approval of sustainable use of nature and a slow process of creating suitable technologies capable of reducing the huge stress on natural environment.

Scientific tools

 Nepal has internalised the goals of sustainable development of the UN. They have a merit as they do not want to leave any one left out. But the resources, institutions, administration and political will to achieve all the goals remain alluring in a world of scarcity caused by geopolitical rivalry, wars, conflict and disorder. Reducing individual toil through the use of scientific tools can become a realistic hope for the dignified existence of Nepalis.  Powerful elites’ control over natural and human resources, knowledge and technology rears a false hope that the elements of progress will naturally tip without imposing reasonable tax on them. Poverty, migration, inequality and conflicts have created scarcity of public goods in the world and embittered competition among powerful elites and nations.  

The Global South has realised that it would be absurd to contest for the same paradigm of progress regardless of its suitability and costs on unequal people, economic and political dynamics and ecology.  Modern technology in Nepal has brought down death rates but the money economy has increased social inequality, economic insecurity and cut the self-sufficiency of the masses based on agriculture and industrial production. It entails to change the value pattern in society where balance between the bearing capacity of nature and people and caring competence of elites is struck thus letting the quality of life take its fullness even for the poor in Nepal. 

In this context, both constitutional and human rights and duties are to be balanced by the key leadership in the commanding height of the decision sphere. The dynamic components of Nepali admin, business and civil society have to furnish context-sensitive policies to sensitise the leaders so as to integrate quality of life to new approaches of governance, institutions, strategies and actions to specific measures. The enlightened and public-spirited civil society conjures up a diversity of interests, identities and movements. They are integral to societal structure in a constant process of self-reproduction. It thus links ethics to politics and sets the coherence of law and policy by easing advocacy, resource and allocation in society to reform the unjust structures that have institutionalised unjust living conditions.

It calls for a long-term vision of Nepali planners and leadership, rather than their short-term survival tactics on power by whatever means available and ability to shore the support of active public who are capable of reducing risks to democracy and progress. Their constant vigilance, education and activism turn authorities responsible to their power, mandate and duties. Civic participation of organic intellectuals in awareness, production and cooperation transforms communities from passive recipients of official aid into legitimate partners in decision and action on behalf of sovereign Nepalis and the right to development included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In a world of accelerating technological change, three crucial challenges -freedom from the deficiency of basic needs, regulation of blind pursuit of profits of business and prevention of ecological degradation that threaten the survival of human beings - must be resolved optimally. Population began to grow in the wake of agriculture growth and accelerated with industrial revolution with corresponding advances in health, technology, education and material wealth as preconditions to social emancipation.  But when representatives of Nepalis act as interest groups of society who are more interested in running the political economy as usual without any concern for depopulation of the nation, improving the quality of life of Nepalis becomes an uphill task. 

They need public morality which rests on an extraordinary chemistry of their personal conscience, ethical voice of the community and the transformational nature of leadership accountable to the people. It historicises the role of socialising agencies of the nation because they spur cognitive development of children by means of personality growth, inculcation of basic values, shaping character and integrating them into the life-world of Nepali nation. The moral energy of Nepalis lays the psychic edifice of their public spiritedness. It has helped them to create public space for political thinking, expression and action. 

Similarly, creation of robust  community also plays the role of mediation between individuals and the state, brings the government closer to the people thus leading to their overall competence,  participation, freedom, self-help and ecological, gender and social justice so that even the poor can compete on an equal term to ensure the quality of life. The core values of empowering people should be commitment to democracy and mutual respect among sub-groups of Nepali society. And, the approach of national integration should be unity in diversity. The doctrine of melting-pot seems needlessly assimilatory of identities although Kathmandu has practiced it for long by converting each one into Newar while other parts of the nation tolerated cultural pluralism akin to salad bowl nourished by its syncretic religion, language and culture.

The problems now spring from too many rights of people and too few duties. This disparity has made them rights-conscious but weakened the stability-driven polity and its ability to foster the quality of life of Nepalis by offering public goods at the minimum costs they can easily afford and deserve. A rights-based political culture is healthy only when society is consciously organised, holds the ability to articulate and effect collective action. In an informal society, economy and polity of Nepal it does not help much as they are not adequately linked to public policies, laws, institutions and resources. It entails sensible measures which would enhance public fortitude without risking the basic individual rights set in the constitution.

But the dilemma is: how to distinguish between pressure for solving Nepalis general basic needs problems and their unreasonable demands which cannot be negotiated in the middle ground. Its alleviation demands the articulation of new civic responsibilities. For the protection of vulnerable sections of society and preventing gender and social violence several strategies can be useful: improving the public security, promoting social justice, sustaining the civility of socialising agencies through the revitalisation of civil society and strengthening the honesty and ability of public authorities to support their diverse scales of production, trade and distribution. Yet, if problems are rooted in a political culture of greed and monopoly, the solution will only treat the effect, not the cause.

Mutual support

In this case, the use of right must make for rightness, sustaining mutual support and commitment to attend public good. But this is possible only when Nepalis are able to overcome the pitfalls of the polity which makes corruption endemic, infecting the policy by special interest groups who not only clench elected leaders in their grip but also perverts them with money, makes them unaccountable and discredits their moral character. Only a robust national integrity system can rectify this. Unless the Nepali state is enabled to develop public policies in the interest of the community and leaders are made accountable to popular will, the virtuous cycle of progress cannot take off the ground. This suggests that Nepalis have to find a leeway inside and outside the polity in order to achieve self-governance. 

There are other choices also, such as mobilisation of underrepresented minorities, socialisation of people on core public issues, amassing political energy for social movements and protecting democracy from the demagogues, corrupts and criminals. In fact, Nepalis imagination for good governance can equally be captured by devolution of power, optimal use of public money, curbing the flow of private funds in the political process, reduction the cost of running public office, promoting the transparency of political process, establishing the rule of law, enhancing the ability of political parties to represent the people and fostering sound public debates. The edifice of Nepali community is not artificial creation; it is built on the ethical and intellectual heritage of social life innately linked to their existential security, often struggling to improve the quality of life.

(Former Reader at the Department of Political Science, TU, Dahal writes on political and social issues.)