Apart from the economy, the village is also a symbol of stability. We think that everything should change, but the village should remain as a village. But we often forget that the childhood of every city is the village.
What you should know
Whenever Dashain comes, there is a rush of people leaving Kathmandu, the city of convenience, dreams and possibilities. It seems that this city itself is leaving the city. Be it the earthquake of 2072 BS or the Covid pandemic of 2076 BS, whenever a major disaster strikes, Kathmandu is abandoned.
Now the country is facing elections. Once again, Kathmandu is being abandoned in the same way. Not only Kathmandu, but in most of the so-called Global South countries, the third occasion for ‘mass migration’ after festivals and disasters is the election. But where is this ‘mass’ ‘migrating’? The direct answer to this is – to the village.
In this era of globalization, what is the importance of the village? What is the meaning of the village’s production system? Even if there is no village, what will be the impact on civilization? Such a common perception is prevalent. But a village is not just a unit of settlement, it is an integral part of the national production system.
Agriculture contributes about 25 percent to Nepal's economy of about 60 trillion. That is, the village supports an economy of about 1.5 trillion, and according to the Economic Survey 2081/82, the contribution of the agricultural sector to the gross domestic product has been gradually increasing since the fiscal year 2079/80.
In addition, a large part of tourism under the service sector and cottage and small industries under industry are based in villages. Not only in underdeveloped countries like Nepal, but also in countries like the United States, the share of the rural economy is significant. Villages contribute 10 percent to the American economy. Which is more than 2 trillion US dollars.
The contribution of the rural economy is not limited to this. Due to various distribution systems and commercial activities, the rural economy also plays a role in advancing the urban economy.
For example, if there is no rice grown in the fields of the village, food will not be cooked in the five-star hotels of the city. If the village does not send truckloads of vegetables, the city is forced to eat empty rice. Moreover, schools, colleges, and construction areas in other cities are also run by students and workers from the village. The city's housewives who are renting out their houses and running their household expenses are supported by those who have come from the village looking for opportunities. The capital accumulation and wealth creation of the city depends on the contribution of the village.
Apart from the economy, the village is also a symbol of stability. We think that everything should change, but the village should remain like a village. But we often forget that the childhood of every city is the village.
So, is the destination of the village the city? Don't the village have its own 'village' aspirations? If we talk about general commentary, the dream of the village is to become a city. But if we look at the culture preserved by the village, the manpower supported by the village, and its usefulness and importance, the village is a unit that cannot be neglected.
But how much importance have the parties that have said they will take charge of 'statecrafting' in the elections being held under special circumstances given to the village in their development blueprints? Where are the villages in the party manifestos? Have the parties that share the dream of making villages cities and cities more advanced cities come up with a plan to develop villages in the concept of villages? Or does this country not need villages at all?
The CPN-UML is one party that has accepted the existence of villages. It seems to have accepted the existence and need of villages in the 25 pillars of prosperity section of its manifesto. Accepting villages as centers of production and labor, the UML has mentioned that it will 'launch a national campaign for prosperity through the complementary development of villages and cities'.
The UML, which started the 'Build your own village' campaign in 2051, has mentioned that it will take forward the revitalization of villages as a national agenda. However, without presenting any concrete action plan, there is room for doubt in its justification.
Another party, the Nepali Congress, has also envisioned connecting the two as partners in prosperity rather than bridging the gap between villages and cities. The Congress has promised to develop villages as an extended part of the city and create an environment where every Nepali can live a dignified life in their own place.
There is conservatism in the villages. Hardly anyone who has moved to the city would dare to return to the village. But saving the village, the charioteer of crisis and celebration, is as important as building the city. In addition, the Congress has announced that it will coordinate between all three levels of government to develop a value chain that connects village products to the national and international markets and to build development structures so that basic facilities are equal in urban and rural housing. Compared to the UML, the Congress has also presented some foundations in its plan to protect villages and build villages.
The reason why the manifestos of these three parties are studied here is that these three parties have entered the election with their future prime ministerial candidates. The main concern is what their village development model will be if they get the mandate to form the government.
000
The plan to save the village is not just an undertaking of romantic nostalgia. In every crisis, people seek the shelter of the village, and preserving the existence of the village is a matter of human civilization.
China had launched the Rural Revitalization Program in 2017 to modernize agriculture and reduce the income gap between rural and urban areas. Decades before China, Japan had also launched the Mura Okoshi Undo (Rural Revitalization Campaign) to address the declining economic power and population of villages after World War II.
Even Marshall McLuhan, a scholar in the field of communication, did not use the word city when imagining an advanced world. Instead, he called it a 'global village'. In McLuhan's concept, the development of electronic media technologies connects the entire world like a village. Geographical and social distances are erased, and interconnectedness and interdependence increase like in a village. The world becomes 'one community'.
Villages are not only poor. And cities are not only rich. Yes, the need for villages has increased even more to protect this sense of community. Villages are sometimes neglected and considered as an indicator of poverty. But the Small Area Estimation of Poverty, 2023 released by the National Statistics Office on December 25 says that villages are not only poor. And cities are not only rich.
In Nepal, 20.27 percent of citizens live below the poverty line, meaning they spend less than Rs 72,908 per capita per year. Of these, 18.34 percent are urban dwellers. Slightly more than this, 24.66 percent of citizens living in rural areas are below the poverty line.
Yes, there is suffering in the villages. There is discrimination in the villages. There is conservatism in the villages. Hardly anyone who has moved to the cities would dare to return to the villages. But protecting the villages, the charioteers of crisis and celebration, is as important as building the cities.
