A recipe to keep the IPCC relevant

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will need to communicate complex scientific findings effectively, enhance scientific rigour and provide more regional climate information

 

 

 

All eyes are on Paris, where this December the conference of the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) seeks to conclude a legally binding agreement to combat climate change, one of the greatest challenges of our time. The task is formidable but I am optimistic. This optimism comes from my observation of a situation that is distinctly different from the run-up to previous conferences. First, never before have policymakers disseminated such detailed and robust scientific information on the causes and the serious consequences of climate change, and about the options to confront it; second, never before has the business and financial world acknowledged that climate change is a threat to economic well-being; and third, never before did we have a combination of a top-down and bottom-up approach: the goal of keeping the global warming below 2°C is now combined with the declarations by countries of their own ambitions in contributing to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

My optimism is nurtured by the historic joint declaration of China and the US regarding their greenhouse gas emissions, the announcement by the G7 of a long-term goal of decarbonisation, and India's announcement of ambitious renewable energy targets, especially with emphasis on solar energy. Clear and profound words by religious leaders - the encyclical "Laudato Sì" by Pope Francis and the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change - add a completely new dimension to the discussion.

Science has been crucial to establish the understanding of the serious consequences that continued greenhouse gas emissions from burning of fossil fuels and deforestation have on our planet and our livelihoods. Since the foundation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988 we have delivered scientific knowledge to policymakers in the form of comprehensive assessment reports that were created though an open and transparent process by thousands of scientists around the world. Generations of scientists have given their expertise and time voluntarily, which is indeed a unique contribution of the scientific community to all.

After the successful completion of the fifth assessment cycle, the new leadership of the IPCC will be elected in four weeks at its 42nd plenary. How can we make sure that the IPCC continues to assist the policy process of the UNFCCC in as successful a way as it has done over the past 27 years? Do we still need scientific knowledge to make progress in the political negotiations that seek solutions to the challenge of climate change?

I see three priorities that I regard as essential to ensure the continued usefulness and success of the IPCC. The first relates to communication. In the IPCC we need to embark on continuous communication activity. To be effective, communication of complex scientific findings on climate change should be concise and understandable. Statements such as, for example, "human influence on the climate system is clear", succinctly and faithfully summarise complex scientific assessment results. Such headline statements, that we have pioneered in Working Group I and which were much welcomed by all countries, should become a standard element of all IPCC products. This will facilitate communication not only with policymakers but also with the media and the public.

The second priority is maintaining and enhancing scientific rigour, robustness and objectivity in all areas of the assessment. This is important in times where the climate change discussion becomes increasingly political. Only with the authority and credibility of the voice of science will the IPCC be in a position to contribute usefully and effectively to the UNFCCC process.

Third, the IPCC needs to provide more regional climate information. This includes more detailed projections of changes in the water cycle, particularly the monsoon systems delivering water to hundreds of millions of people, and regional projections of sea-level rise that threaten coastal settlements around the world. More robust estimates of the intensity and frequency of extreme events such as drought, flooding, tropical cyclones, and high-sea-level events are urgently needed. This information should be absorbed by impact studies and vulnerability analyses in order to provide quantitative estimates of climate change risks. A much closer interaction between the Working Groups will be required to achieve the regionalisation of information. And an essential element of this third priority must be mentioned: we will not be able to deliver this information successfully without the involvement of the scientists who live and work in these regions. This means that by necessity scientists from all regions, particularly from those that are most exposed to climate change and from developing countries, should become authors and lead authors in the next assessment. Capacity building that targets young experts is the best investment for the future, and will secure a new generation of scientists ready to help in the forthcoming assessments of the IPCC.

The IPCC's work should be recognised in a greater context. By the end of this month, the countries will agree on the 17 Sustainable Development Goals formulated by the UN. The IPCC has concluded in its last Synthesis Report: "Climate change is a threat to sustainable development". Addressing climate change through actions informed by science will send us in the right direction to achieve many of these important goals. However, continued emissions of greenhouse gases and deforestation - in short, business-as-usual - will result in unchecked climate change, creating a world that will be fundamentally different from the one we are now living in. In many regions adaptation will now no longer be possible due to the pervasive changes and worldwide impacts caused by warming and by ocean acidification. This will make reaching most of the Sustainable Development Goals impossible.

---

The writer is professor at the University of Bern, Switzerland, and Co-Chair, Working Group I, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Housing for all: Viability & Roadblocks

One of the most enduring problems faced in this country has been that of housing shortage. It is starkly evident in the fact that about 100 million people live in slums in India. With increasing urbanization this problem has been only growing exponentially. In urban areas, India faces a shortage of over 20 million houses at present. Reports indicate that by 2031 about 600 million people live in urban areas, about 200 million more than at present. The union cabinet has approved the Housing for All schemes by 2022 with a slew of measures aimed at helping people to build houses through financing apart from redevelopment of slums among other things. This scheme was announced in the budget this year.
The programme is a key promise in the Bharatiya Janata Party’s manifesto for the Lok Sabha election in 2014 — a “pucca” house for every family by the 75th year of Independence. Central grant of an average Rs. 1 lakh would be available for a house under the scheme. Even the State governments can exercise flexibility in spending the grant for any slum rehabilitation project using land as a resource for providing houses to slum-dwellers. An interest subsidy of 6.5% on housing loans availed up to a tenure of 15 years will be provided to economically weaker sections/lower income group (EWS/LIG) categories. It is a Centrally sponsored scheme.
The fundamental problem in not achieving housing for all is not really shortage of resources from government side. It is more of a planning and regulatory issue. People are forced to live in the slums, which are in the heart of cities, more for a economic, safety and day to day commutation needs. This is the major reason for the houses built by the government outside the cities laying vacant. 90% of India’s housing problem is not of absolute homelessness. majority of people are living in houses that are not fit for human habitation. People are forced to live in the illegal settlements because of the commutation problem in urban areas. They do not have access for basic facilities. Hence, legal recognition of their existence is necessary.
Various governments at the centre have been taking a slew of regulatory reforms such as allowing foreign direct investments, improving access to credit by households, providing tax incentives on housing loans. This has propelled private sector participation in urban housing development. However, it has largely resulted in the development of Middle Income Group (MIG) and High Income Group (HIG) houses, leading to significant shortage of EWS/LIG or affordable houses. Economically weaker sections/lower income group (EWS/LIG) categories houses constitute more than 95% of the housing shortage in 2012. The development of urban affordable houses has been limited due to several structural issues making it unfeasible business proposition for the private sector.
Major structural issues restricting private sector participation in urban affordable housing are:

• Rapid urban planning process.
• Lengthy and complex Approval procedure.
• High cost of development.
• Restrictive development norms.
• Cost overrun and project delays.

Government proposes independent Commission to recommend MPs’ salaries

Government proposes independent Commission to recommend MPs’ salaries

Inter-Party forums in Legislatures to enhance coordination for better functioning

All India Whips’ Conference at Visakhapatnam to discuss these issues

The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs has proposed a 3-member independent Emoluments Commission to recommend salaries and other allowances for the Members of Parliament. This proposal is contained in the Agenda Notes prepared by the Ministry for the two day All India Whips’ Conference to be held at Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh during September 29-30, 2015. The Conference will be chaired by the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Shri M.Venkaiah Naidu.

Chief Whips and Whips of various parties in Parliament and state legislatures will also discuss establishing inter-Party forums in Legislatures for better coordination to enable effective functioning of legislative bodies. Delegates will also discuss the utility and shortcomings of the MPLADS (Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme) in the light of its implementation over the last 32 years and make suggestions and recommendations.

The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, in the Agenda Notes for the Whips Conference stated that “The setting up of an independent Emoluments Commission for recommending the salaries and allowances of the Members of Parliament will not only put to rest the public outcry and media criticism over MPs themselves deciding their salaries, it will also provide an appropriate opportunity to take into consideration the huge responsibilities and the important role they play in our representative democracy. It would ensure that recommendations on Parliamentary salary are reached in a fair, transparent and equitable way. Once there is consensus on setting up of the Commission, the Salary, Allowances and Pension of Members of Parliament Act,1954 will suitably amended”.


The general principles suggested by the Ministry for determination of salary should be:

i. Salary should not be so low as to defer suitable candidates or so high as to make pay the primary attraction for the job;

ii. Salary should reflect level of responsibility; and

iii. Those with outside interests should not be deterred from entering Parliament, those who chose to make Parliament a full-time career should be adequately rewarded to reflect their responsibilities.

Presently, as per Article 106 of the Constitution of India, salaries of MPs are determined by the Act of 1954, amended from time to time. The last revision in salary of MPs was made in 2010 and MPs presently get a basic salary of Rs.50,000 per month. Salaries of Members of State Legislatures are decided as per Article 195 of the Constitution.

As per a comparative analysis of Members of Parliament in 37 developing and developed countries, basic salary of MPs is in the range of Rs.7,952 in Tunisia to a high of Rs.6,16,675 per month in Israel. MPs of only in six countries i.e Tunisia, Venezuela , Sri Lanka, Nepal, Haiti and Panama are drawing salary less than that of Indian MPs.

As per a survey conducted by Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) of 138 chambers from 104 Parliaments, 69 chambers indicated that it is the Parliament which determines the salaries of Members, in reference to another salary scale. 31 of these stated that MPs’ salaries are determined in reference to the Civil Service salary scale. In case of Bhutan, Namibia and the UK House of Commons, salaries are determined by independent bodies.

While referring to the growing challenges of House management further to increase in the number of parties in the legislatures, the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, in the Agenda Notes has stressed the need for enhancing floor coordination for better functioning of legislatures in the country. In this regard, the Ministry has proposed an inter-Party forum in Parliament and every state legislature to freely discuss various issues to be included in the list of Business of the House ahead of every session.

Presently, there are 6 National Parties, 53 State Parties besides 1,737 Registered/Unrecognised Parties in the country, of which, as many as 37 political parties and groups are represented in the 16th Lok Sabha.

The Conference will also deliberate the implementation of MPLADS scheme, introduced in 1993-94, under which funds being provided for each MP has increased from Rs.5.00 lakhs to Rs.5.00 cr in 2011-12. All India Whips Conference was conceived as early as in 1952, to provide a suitable forum for periodical meetings and mutual exchange of views on matters of common concern and to evolve standards to strengthen Parliamentary Democracy.

Whips of both the ruling and opposition parties play an important role in informing MPs about the business of the day, ensuring their attendance and formulating a collective opinion of the Party on major issues. They also interact with the presiding offices and Secretariat of the House on behalf of their parties to ensure coordination.

Since the first All India Whips Conference held in Indore in 1952, periodicity of the Conferences varied mostly from 2 to 11 years. Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Shri M.Venkaiah Naidu has desired to hold Whips Conferences regularly and the 16th such Conference was held last year.

Seventeen steps to a better world

September 2015 could prove to be a globally important month. Heads of state are expected to gather at the UN from September 25-27 to deliberate and adapt the next generation of development goals — the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Unlike the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), SDGs have been formulated through an open and consultative process of nearly two years.
Emerging from the Millennium Declaration of 2000 were eight MDGs, each with a clear set of targets to be achieved by 2015. These included the goal to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger (MDG1), achieving universal primary education (MDG2), promoting gender equality and empowering women (MDG3), reducing child mortality (MDG4) and improving maternal health (MDG5), combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other deadly diseases (MDG6). There were two further goals — environmental sustainability (MDG7, which included targets of reducing by half the proportion of population without improved water and sanitation), and developing a global partnership (MDG8).
The performance on a few MDGs has been spectacular. According to the UN’s 2015 MDG report, extreme poverty (proportion of population living below an income of $1.25 per day, popularly known as the “dollar a day” poverty line) has decreased from 1.9 billion (47 per cent of the population) in 1990 to less than 840 million (14 per cent) in 2015. Critics argue that much of the success is owed to countries such as China and that the lives of millions who have moved just above $1.25 per day are not necessarily great, since any poverty line is an artificial construct.
With regard to universal primary education (MDG2), the report notes that the net primary school enrolment rate in developing countries is above 90 per cent in 2015, as compared to 83 per cent in 2000. The number of children of that age not in school has decreased to around 54 mn, from around 100 mn in 2000. With regard to MDG3, the report notes that gender equality in primary, secondary and tertiary education in developing countries has improved significantly, with the enrollment ratios for boys and girls now more or less comparable.
In 90 per cent of countries, there are more women in parliament now than in 1995. However, according to the Inter Parliamentary Union dataset, as of June 2015, worldwide (both Houses combined) there were 34,000 male MPs compared with some 9,800 women MPs (22 per cent). In the Nordic states, 41 per cent parliamentarians were women — 19 per cent in Asia and 16 per cent in the Pacific countries. Currently, only 22 countries have a woman president or prime minister. Just five of the top 100 corporate firms in the FTSE 100 have female CEOs. According to an ILO report called “Women in Business and Management: Gaining Momentum”, less than 5 per cent CEOs are women. Thus, it seems that the MDG on gender equality remains far from being realised. There appears to have been some progress on infant and child mortality (MDG4) — seven million fewer children die from preventable causes.
While significant progress has been made on some MDGs, the main criticisms were that MDGs were arbitrary, lacked a theory of change, were chosen without consultation and imposed on developing countries. By 2015, development assistance provided by non-OECD countries like China, India and Brazil is significant. For instance, according to this writer’s estimates based on AidData 2.0, in 2000, Africa received some $33bn from OECD Development Assistance Committee donors, while China’s aid to Africa was about $3.5bn. By 2006, China’s aid had peaked to $22bn, as compared to the OECD’s approximately $60bn.
That the drafting of the new set of goals was done by wide consultation, over two years and through open fora, is an amazing achievement in itself. However, opinions differ on the fact that there are 17 goals and 169 indicators. Sceptics argue that having many goals is fine, as long as there is clarity as to whether there should be any priority and weights attached to the goals. However, sustainable development of a society cannot be achieved with outstanding performance in some dimensions but appalling performance in others. As Sir Richard Jolly pointed out at a recent conference in Helsinki, for the first time since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, these goals will be universal and apply to both developed and developing countries.
On September 28, it is quite possible that we will enter a new era of global consensus that sustainable development would be closer by climbing all 17 steps proposed and agreed by nations big and small.
-

September 2015 could prove to be a globally important month. Heads of state are expected to gather at the UN from September 25-27 to deliberate and adapt the next generation of development goals — the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Unlike the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), SDGs have been formulated through an open and consultative process of nearly two years.
Emerging from the Millennium Declaration of 2000 were eight MDGs, each with a clear set of targets to be achieved by 2015. These included the goal to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger (MDG1), achieving universal primary education (MDG2), promoting gender equality and empowering women (MDG3), reducing child mortality (MDG4) and improving maternal health (MDG5), combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other deadly diseases (MDG6). There were two further goals — environmental sustainability (MDG7, which included targets of reducing by half the proportion of population without improved water and sanitation), and developing a global partnership (MDG8).
The performance on a few MDGs has been spectacular. According to the UN’s 2015 MDG report, extreme poverty (proportion of population living below an income of $1.25 per day, popularly known as the “dollar a day” poverty line) has decreased from 1.9 billion (47 per cent of the population) in 1990 to less than 840 million (14 per cent) in 2015. Critics argue that much of the success is owed to countries such as China and that the lives of millions who have moved just above $1.25 per day are not necessarily great, since any poverty line is an artificial construct.
With regard to universal primary education (MDG2), the report notes that the net primary school enrolment rate in developing countries is above 90 per cent in 2015, as compared to 83 per cent in 2000. The number of children of that age not in school has decreased to around 54 mn, from around 100 mn in 2000. With regard to MDG3, the report notes that gender equality in primary, secondary and tertiary education in developing countries has improved significantly, with the enrollment ratios for boys and girls now more or less comparable.
In 90 per cent of countries, there are more women in parliament now than in 1995. However, according to the Inter Parliamentary Union dataset, as of June 2015, worldwide (both Houses combined) there were 34,000 male MPs compared with some 9,800 women MPs (22 per cent). In the Nordic states, 41 per cent parliamentarians were women — 19 per cent in Asia and 16 per cent in the Pacific countries. Currently, only 22 countries have a woman president or prime minister. Just five of the top 100 corporate firms in the FTSE 100 have female CEOs. According to an ILO report called “Women in Business and Management: Gaining Momentum”, less than 5 per cent CEOs are women. Thus, it seems that the MDG on gender equality remains far from being realised. There appears to have been some progress on infant and child mortality (MDG4) — seven million fewer children die from preventable causes.
While significant progress has been made on some MDGs, the main criticisms were that MDGs were arbitrary, lacked a theory of change, were chosen without consultation and imposed on developing countries. By 2015, development assistance provided by non-OECD countries like China, India and Brazil is significant. For instance, according to this writer’s estimates based on AidData 2.0, in 2000, Africa received some $33bn from OECD Development Assistance Committee donors, while China’s aid to Africa was about $3.5bn. By 2006, China’s aid had peaked to $22bn, as compared to the OECD’s approximately $60bn.
That the drafting of the new set of goals was done by wide consultation, over two years and through open fora, is an amazing achievement in itself. However, opinions differ on the fact that there are 17 goals and 169 indicators. Sceptics argue that having many goals is fine, as long as there is clarity as to whether there should be any priority and weights attached to the goals. However, sustainable development of a society cannot be achieved with outstanding performance in some dimensions but appalling performance in others. As Sir Richard Jolly pointed out at a recent conference in Helsinki, for the first time since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, these goals will be universal and apply to both developed and developing countries.
On September 28, it is quite possible that we will enter a new era of global consensus that sustainable development would be closer by climbing all 17 steps proposed and agreed by nations big and small.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/seventeen-steps-to-a-better-world/#sthash.6pu7OCKg.dpuf

September 2015 could prove to be a globally important month. Heads of state are expected to gather at the UN from September 25-27 to deliberate and adapt the next generation of development goals — the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Unlike the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), SDGs have been formulated through an open and consultative process of nearly two years.
Emerging from the Millennium Declaration of 2000 were eight MDGs, each with a clear set of targets to be achieved by 2015. These included the goal to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger (MDG1), achieving universal primary education (MDG2), promoting gender equality and empowering women (MDG3), reducing child mortality (MDG4) and improving maternal health (MDG5), combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other deadly diseases (MDG6). There were two further goals — environmental sustainability (MDG7, which included targets of reducing by half the proportion of population without improved water and sanitation), and developing a global partnership (MDG8).
The performance on a few MDGs has been spectacular. According to the UN’s 2015 MDG report, extreme poverty (proportion of population living below an income of $1.25 per day, popularly known as the “dollar a day” poverty line) has decreased from 1.9 billion (47 per cent of the population) in 1990 to less than 840 million (14 per cent) in 2015. Critics argue that much of the success is owed to countries such as China and that the lives of millions who have moved just above $1.25 per day are not necessarily great, since any poverty line is an artificial construct.
With regard to universal primary education (MDG2), the report notes that the net primary school enrolment rate in developing countries is above 90 per cent in 2015, as compared to 83 per cent in 2000. The number of children of that age not in school has decreased to around 54 mn, from around 100 mn in 2000. With regard to MDG3, the report notes that gender equality in primary, secondary and tertiary education in developing countries has improved significantly, with the enrollment ratios for boys and girls now more or less comparable.
In 90 per cent of countries, there are more women in parliament now than in 1995. However, according to the Inter Parliamentary Union dataset, as of June 2015, worldwide (both Houses combined) there were 34,000 male MPs compared with some 9,800 women MPs (22 per cent). In the Nordic states, 41 per cent parliamentarians were women — 19 per cent in Asia and 16 per cent in the Pacific countries. Currently, only 22 countries have a woman president or prime minister. Just five of the top 100 corporate firms in the FTSE 100 have female CEOs. According to an ILO report called “Women in Business and Management: Gaining Momentum”, less than 5 per cent CEOs are women. Thus, it seems that the MDG on gender equality remains far from being realised. There appears to have been some progress on infant and child mortality (MDG4) — seven million fewer children die from preventable causes.
While significant progress has been made on some MDGs, the main criticisms were that MDGs were arbitrary, lacked a theory of change, were chosen without consultation and imposed on developing countries. By 2015, development assistance provided by non-OECD countries like China, India and Brazil is significant. For instance, according to this writer’s estimates based on AidData 2.0, in 2000, Africa received some $33bn from OECD Development Assistance Committee donors, while China’s aid to Africa was about $3.5bn. By 2006, China’s aid had peaked to $22bn, as compared to the OECD’s approximately $60bn.
That the drafting of the new set of goals was done by wide consultation, over two years and through open fora, is an amazing achievement in itself. However, opinions differ on the fact that there are 17 goals and 169 indicators. Sceptics argue that having many goals is fine, as long as there is clarity as to whether there should be any priority and weights attached to the goals. However, sustainable development of a society cannot be achieved with outstanding performance in some dimensions but appalling performance in others. As Sir Richard Jolly pointed out at a recent conference in Helsinki, for the first time since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, these goals will be universal and apply to both developed and developing countries.
On September 28, it is quite possible that we will enter a new era of global consensus that sustainable development would be closer by climbing all 17 steps proposed and agreed by nations big and small.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/seventeen-steps-to-a-better-world/#sthash.6pu7OCKg.dpuf

Constitutional error ,Nepal

When Nepal was struck by a major earthquake in April this year, there was hope that the scale of the disaster and the urgent task of rehabilitation and reconstruction would persuade its squabbling political parties to reach an early consensus on the long-stalled process of finalising and adopting a new constitution. Impatience among its people and frustration within the international community had sharpened in the aftermath of the earthquake. However, instead of making a genuine effort to forge a broadbased consensus, the major political parties, representing the old high-caste-and-hill elite, saw this as an opportunity to push a flawed constitution through the Constituent Assembly, even reversing some of the already settled features of the interim constitution of 2007 and the 16-point agreement reached among the parties, including the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum on June 9 this year. The Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, which had all along espoused an inclusive political and social agenda as well as a federal structure that would reflect Nepal’s ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity, did a neat about-turn. A deeply entrenched and feudal mindset trumped egalitarian ideology. This is now sought to be hidden behind abusive anti-Indian rhetoric. It should have come as no surprise that the blatantly discriminatory features of the constitution should spark widespread opposition and protest. The often brutal and repressive measures visited upon hapless demonstrators have already resulted in over 40 deaths. A vicious cycle of confrontation and violence appears to be taking hold. Instead of dealing with this dangerous situation through an early and sincere dialogue with its own aggrieved citizens, the Nepal government and some of its political leaders are again indulging in ultra-nationalist and anti-India rhetoric, alienating the one friend and well-wisher they have, and one that only recently extended much-needed relief to the people of Nepal who were ravaged by the earthquake.
Nepal’s polity has failed to keep pace with the multiple and far-reaching transitions that have been taking place in the country over the past two decades and more. One, despite the efforts of its traditional hill-based elite, the democratisation process that commenced in the early 1990s and is still ongoing has spread political awareness and led to the assertion of identities and aspirations of the many ethnic and culturally diverse groups that comprise Nepal. The monochromal hill identity imposed upon its diverse people and upheld by a feudal monarchy could no longer be sustained in the more plural politics that is the reality of contemporary Nepal. The acceptance of the principle of federation was an acknowledgement of this plurality, but the new constitution has robbed it of its substance. As long as almost half the country’s population feels it has been shortchanged and subjected to institutionalised discrimination, political stability will continue to elude Nepal.
Two, there is a generational transition in Nepal that the country’s politics continues to neglect. Nepal has a demographic profile that is even younger than India’s. More than 50 per cent of its population is below 25 years of age. There is also a high net migrant rate of 61 per 1,000 of the population, reflecting the limited job opportunities available in the country. It is estimated that six to eight million Nepali nationals live and work in cities across India alone. Unlike in the past, the new generation of Nepalis are literate, have been exposed to external influences and, like India’s own youth, are aspirational and forward-looking. This includes bright young women who continue to chafe under the feudal patriarchal attitudes that still define the political elite. Consider the provisions relating to citizenship in the constitution: Children of a Nepali male marrying a foreigner will enjoy citizenship rights, but not those of a Nepali woman marrying a foreigner. The constitution perpetuates old prejudices and mindsets, instead of helping to create a political and social environment able to generate the opportunities its younger generation deserves. It is this generation that can transform Nepal’s prospects and make it one of South Asia’s most affluent countries.
Three, there is a significant change in Nepal’s external environment that its political dispensation has failed to leverage to the country’s advantage. Nepal, until recently, was a relatively isolated country, its high mountains to the north and thick forests to the south engendering a sense of mistrust, even hostility, to outsiders. Prithvi Narayan Shah, the famous king who united Nepal, is reputed to have described his country as a “yam between two rocks”, the two rocks being India and China. That sense of vulnerability, and of being under siege, still drives much of Nepal’s political behaviour. But Nepal’s proximity to the two fastest-growing and continental-size economies of the world should be seen as an asset few developing countries enjoy. India, in particular, represents a huge opportunity, rather than a threat, should its leaders begin to see their southern neighbour in a different light. One frequently hears how Nepal has suffered from having an open border with India, but whenever movement across this border has been disrupted, as one hears is becoming the case again due to violence in the Terai, it is the people of Nepal who suffer. It is the open border that allowed a large number of Nepali citizens to escape violence and economic deprivation during the decade of Maoist insurgency and seek shelter in India. The tourism and hotel industries in Nepal benefit from the several thousand Indians who travel there for leisure or pilgrimage. This dense network of relations between the two countries does not square with the yam complex, which still colours our neighbour’s perception of India.
India is right to be concerned about the spillover effect of political instability and violence across the border in Nepal. But the current crisis also exposes a continuing weakness in India’s neighbourhood policy: An attention deficit that is only episodically shaken when a crisis erupts. It also appears that there may have been mixed political messages conveyed to the Nepali side, which may have underestimated India’s reaction. Both these aspects need to be addressed in order to avoid similar crises in the future.
The writer, a former foreign secretary, was India’s ambassador to Nepal,

Statement by Prime Minister at the UN Sustainable Development Summit

"मै उस संस्कृति का प्रतिनिधित्व करता हूँ जहां धरती को माँ कहते है और मानते हैं। "माता भूमि: पुत्रो अहं पृथिव्या" ये धरती हमारी माता है और हम इसके पुत्र है।: प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी का संयुक्त राष्ट्र में सम्बोधन
आधुनिक महानायक महात्मा गांधी ने कहा - ‘हम उस भावी विश्व के लिए भी चिंता करें जिसे हम नहीं देख पाएंगे।‘
जब-जब विश्व ने एक साथ आकर भविष्य के प्रति अपने दायित्व को निभाया है मानवता के विकास को सही दिशा और एक नया संबल मिला है।
सत्तर साल पहले जब एक भयानक विश्व युद्ध का अंत हुआ था। तब इस संघठन के रूप में एक नयी आशा ने जन्म लिया था। आज हम फिर मानवता की नई दिशा तय करने के लिए यहाँ एकत्रित हुए हैं। मैं इस महत्वपूर्ण शिखर सम्मलेन के आयोजन के लिए महासचिव महोदय को ह्रदय से बधाई देता हूँ।
Agenda– 2030 का विज़न महत्वाकांक्षी है और उद्देश्य उतने ही व्यापक हैं। यह उन समस्याओं को प्राथमिकता देता है, जो पिछले कई दशकों से चल रही हैं। साथ ही साथ यह सामाजिक, आर्थिक और पर्यावरण के विषय में हमारी परिपक्व होती हुई सोच को भी दर्शाता है।
यह ख़ुशी की बात है की हम सब गरीबी से मुक्त विश्व का सपना देख रहे है। हमारे निर्धारित लक्ष्यों में गरीबी उन्मूलन सब से ऊपर है। आज दुनिया में 1.3 billion लोग गरीबी की दयनीय जिंदगी जीने के लिए मजबूर है।
हमारे सामने प्रश्न केवल यह नहीं है की गरीबो की आवश्यकताओं को कैसे पूरा किया जाये। और न ही यह केवल गरीबो के अस्तित्व और सम्मान तक ही सीमित प्रश्न है। साथ ही यह हमारी नैतिक जिम्मेदारी मात्र है ऐसा मानने का भी प्रश्न नहीं है। अगर हम सब का साझा संकल्प है की –
- विश्व शांतिपूर्ण हो
- व्यवस्था न्यायपूर्ण हो
- और विकास sustainable हो

तो गरीबी के रहते यह कभी भी सम्भव नहीं होगा। इसलिए गरीबी को मिटाना यह हम सब का पवित्र दायित्व है।
भारत के महान विचारक पंडित दीनदयाल उपाध्याय के विचारो का केंद्र अन्त्योदय रहा है। UN के एजेंडा 2030 में भी अन्त्योदय की महक आती है। भारत दीनदयाल जी के जन्मसती वर्ष को मनाने की तैयारी कर रहा है, तब यह निश्चित ही एक सुखद संयोग है।
भारत environmental goals के अंतर्गत climate change और sustainable consumption को दिए गये महत्व का स्वागत करता हैं। आज विश्व Island States की चिंता कर रहा है और ऐसे राष्ट्रों के भविष्य पर ध्यान केंद्रित करता है, यह स्वागत योग्य है। और इनके ecosystem पर अलग से लक्ष्य निर्धारण, मैं उसे एक अहम कदम मानता हूँ।
मैं Blue Revolution का पक्षधर हूं, जिसमें हमारे छोटे- छोटे Islands राष्ट्रों की रक्षा एवम समृद्धि, सामुद्रिक संपत्ति का नयोचित उपयोग और नीला आसमान, ये तीनो बातें सम्मलित है।
हम भारत के लोगों को लिए ये संतोष का विषय है कि भारत ने विकास का जो मार्ग चुना है, उसके और UN द्वारा प्रस्तावित Sustainable Development Goals के बीच बहुत सारी समानताएं हैं। भारत आजाद हुआ तब से गरीबी से मुक्ति पाने का सपना हम सबने संजोया है। हमने गरीबों को सशक्त बनाकर गरीबी को पराजित करने का मार्ग चुना है। शिक्षा एवं Skill Development, यह हमारी प्राथमिकता है। गरीब को शिक्षा मिले और उसके हाथ में हुनर हो, यह हमारा प्रयास है।
हमने निर्धारित समय सीमा में Financial Inclusion पर mission-mode में काम किया है। 180 million नए बैंक खाते खोले गए। यह गरीबों का सबसे बड़ा empowerment है। गरीबों को मिलने वाले लाभ सीधे खाते में पहुंच रहे है। गरीबों को बीमा योजनाओं का सीधे लाभ मिले, इसकी महत्वाकांक्षी योजना आगे बढ़ रही है।
भारत में बहुत कम लोगों के पास पेंशन सुविधा है। गरीबों तक पेंशन की सुविधा पहुंचे इसलिए पेंशन योजनाओ के विस्तार का काम किया है। आज गरीब से गरीब व्यक्ति में गरीबी के खिलाफ लड़ाई लड़ने की उमंग जगी है। नागरिकों के मन में सपने सच होने का विश्वास पैदा हुआ है।
विश्व में आर्थिक विकास की चर्चा दो ही sector तक सीमित रही है। या तो Public sector की चर्चा होती है या Private sector की चर्चा होती है। हमने एक नए sector पर ध्यान केंद्रित किया है और वह है personal sector. Public sector, Private sector और Personal sector. भारत के लिए Personal sector का मतलब है कि individual enterprise, जिसमें micro finance हो, innovation हो, start-up की तरह नया movement हो।
सबके लिए आवास, बिजली, पानी, शिक्षा, स्वास्थ और स्वच्छता हमारी प्राथमिकता हैं। ये सभी एक गरिमामय जीवन के लिए अनिवार्य हैं। इन लक्ष्यों को प्राप्त करने के लिए एक ठोस योजना और एक निश्चित समय सीमा तय की गई है। महिला सशक्तिकरण हमारे विकास कार्यक्रमों का एक महत्वपूर्ण अंग है। जिसमे हमने ‘बेटी बचाओ – बेटी पढाओ’ इसे घर घर का मंत्र बना दिया है।
हम अपने खेतों को अधिक उपजाऊ तथा बाजार से अच्छी तरह से जुड़ा हुआ बना रहे हैं। साथ ही प्राकृतिक अनिश्चितताओं के चलते किसानों के जोखिमों को कम करने के लिए अनेक कदम उठाये जा रहे हैं।
हम manufacturing को revive कर रहे हैं, service sector में सुधार कर रहे हैं। Infrastructure के क्षेत्र में हम अभूतपूर्व स्तर पर निवेश कर रहे हैं और अपने शहरों को smart, sustainable तथा जीवंत development centers के रूप में विकसित कर रहे हैं।
सम्रद्धि की ओर जाने का हमारा मार्ग sustainable हो, इसके लिए हम कटिबद्ध है। इस कटिबद्धता का मूल निश्चित रूप से हमारी परम्परा और संस्कृति से जुड़े होना है। लेकिन साथ ही यह भविष्य के प्रति हमारी प्रतिबद्धता को भी दिखाती है।
मै उस संस्कृति का प्रतिनिधित्व करता हूँ जहां धरती को माँ कहते है और मानते हैं। वेद उदघोष करते है -
"माता भूमि: पुत्रो अहं पृथिव्या"
ये धरती हमारी माता है और हम इसके पुत्र है।

हमारी योजनाएं महत्वाकांक्षी और उद्देश्यपूर्ण हैं, जैसे :
• अगले 7 वर्षों में 175 गीगावॉट (GW) renewable energy की क्षमता का विकास
• Energy effeciency पर बल
• बहुत बड़ी मात्र में वृक्षारोपण का कार्यक्रम
• कोयले पर विशेष टैक्स
• परिवहन व्यवस्था में सुधार,
• शहरों और नदियों की सफाई।
• Waste to wealth की movement

मानवता के छठे हिस्से का sustainable development समस्त विश्व के लिए तथा हमारी सुंदर वसुंधरा के लिए अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण है।
निश्चित रूप से यह दुनिया कम चुनौतियों और व्यापक उम्मीदों वाली दुनिया होगी। जो अपनी सफलता को लेकर अधिक आश्वस्त होगी।
हम अपनी सफलता और resources दूसरो के साथ बांटेंगे। भारतीय परम्परा में पूरे विश्व को एक परिवार के रूप में देखा जाता है।
"उदारचरितानाम तु वसुधैव कुटुंबकम"
उदार बुद्धि वालों के लिए तो सम्पूर्ण संसार एक परिवार होता है, कुटुंब है

आज भारत, एशिया तथा अफ्रीका और प्रशांत महासागर से अटलांटिक महासागर में स्थित छोटे छोटे Island States के साथ development partner के रूप में अपने दायित्व का निर्वहन कर रहा है।
Sustainable development सभी देशों के लिए राष्ट्रीय उत्तरदायित्व का विषय है। साथ ही उन्हें नीति निर्धारण के लिए विकल्पों की आवश्यकता होती है।
आज हम यहाँ संयुक्त राष्ट्र में इसलिए हैं, क्योंकि हम सभी यह मानते हैं कि अंतरराष्ट्रीय साझेदारी अनिवार्य रूप से हमारे सभी प्रयासों के केंद्र में होनी चाहिए। फिर चाहे यह development हो या climate change की चुनौती हो।
हमारे सामूहिक प्रयासों का सिद्धांत है – common but differentiated responsibilities.
अगर हम climate change की चिंता करते है तो कही न कही हमारे निजी सुख को सुरक्षित करने की बू आती है। लेकिन यदि हम climate justice की बात करते है तो गरीबो को प्राकतिक आपदाओ में सुरक्षित रखने का एक संवेदनशील संकल्प उभर कर आता है।
Climate change की चुनौती से निपटने में उन समाधानों पर बल देने की आवश्यकता है जिनसे हम अपने उद्देश्यों को प्राप्त करने में सफल हो सकें। हमें एक वैश्विक जन-भागीदारी का निर्माण करना होगा। जिसके बल पर technology, innovation और finance का उपयोग करते हुए हम clean और renewable energy को सर्व सुलभ बना सकें।
हमें अपनी जीवनशैली में भी बदलाव करने की आवश्यकता है, ताकि ऊर्जा पर हमारी निर्भरता कम हो और हम sustainable consumption की ओर बढ़े।
साथ ही एक Global Education Programme शुरू करने की आवश्यकता है। जो हमारी अगली पीढ़ी को प्रकृति के रक्षण एवं संवर्धन के लिए तैयार करे।
मैं आशा करता हूँ कि विकसित देश development और climate change के लिए अपनी वित्तीय प्रतिबद्धताओं को पूरा करेंगे, without in anyway putting both under the same head.
मैं यह भी आशा करता हूँ कि technology facilitation mechanism, technology और innovation को विश्व के कल्याण का माध्यम बनाने में सफल होगा। यह मात्र निजी लाभ तक सीमित नहीं रह जायेंगे।
जैसा कि हम देख रहे हैं, दूरी के कारण चुनौतियों से छुटकारा नहीं है। सुदूर देशों में चल रहे संघर्ष और अभाव की छाया से भी वे उठ खड़ी हो सकती हैं। समूचा विश्व एक दुसरे से जुड़ा है, एक दुसरे पर निर्भर है और एक दुसरे से सम्बंधित है। इसलिए हमारी अंतरराष्ट्रीय सांझेदारिओं को भी पूरी मानवता के कल्याण को अपने केंद्र में रखना होगा।
सुरक्षा परिषद समेत संयुक्त राष्ट्र में भी सुधार अनिवार्य है। ताकि इसकी विश्वसनीयता तथा औचित्य बना रहा सके। साथ ही व्यापक प्रतिनिधित्व के द्वारा हम अपने उद्देश्यों की प्राप्ति अधिक प्रभावी रूप से कर सकेंगे।
हम एक ऐसे विश्व का निर्माण करें जहां प्रत्येक जीव मात्र सुरक्षित महसूस करे, उसे अवसर उपलब्ध हों और सम्मान मिले। हम अपनी भावी पीढ़ी के लिए अपने पर्यावरण को और भी बेहतर स्थिति में छोड़ कर जाएँ। निश्चित रूप से इससे अधिक महान कोई और उद्देश्य नहीं हो सकता। परन्तु यह भी सच है की कोई भी उद्देश्य इससे अधिक चुनौतीपूर्ण भी नहीं है।
आज 70 वर्ष की आयु के संयुक्त राष्ट्र में हम सब से अपेक्षा है कि हम अपने विवेक, अनुभव, उदारता, सहृदयता, कौशल एवं तकनीकी के माध्यम से इस चुनौती पर विजय प्राप्त करें।
मुझे दृढ विश्वास है कि हम ऐसा कर सकेंगे।
अंत में मै सबके कल्याण की मंगल कामना करता हूँ –
सर्वे भवन्तु सुखिनः सर्वे सन्तु निरामयाः।
सर्वे भद्राणि पश्यन्तु: मा कश्चिद्दुःखभाग्भवेत्।।
सभी सुखी हों, सभी निरोगी हों, सभी कल्याणकारी देखे , किसी को भी किसी प्रकार का दु:ख न हो।

इसी मंगल कामना के साथ आप सब का बहुत बहुत धन्यवाद!
Statement by Prime Minister at the UN Sustainable Development Summit
Mahatma Gandhi had once said, "One must care about the world one will not see”. Indeed, humanity has progressed when it has collectively risen to its obligation to the world and responsibility to the future.
Seventy years after the end of a tragic war and birth of a new hope for our age, we are meeting to chart a course for our humanity and our planet. I consider this a very important summit and thank UN Secretary General for organizing it.
Just as our vision behind the Agenda 2030 is lofty, our goals are comprehensive. It gives priority to the problems that have endured through the past decades. And, it reflects our evolving understanding of the social, economic and environmental linkages that define our lives.
We live in an age of unprecedented prosperity, but also unspeakable deprivation around the world.
I am pleased that elimination of poverty in all forms everywhere is at the top of our goals. Addressing the needs of 1.3 billion poor people in the world is not merely a question of their survival and dignity or our moral responsibility. It is a vital necessity for ensuring peaceful, sustainable and just world.
A great Indian thinker, Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyay, placed the welfare of the poorest at the centre of his thoughts. This is what we also see in the 2030 Agenda. It is a happy coincidence that we are beginning the celebration of Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyay’s 100th anniversary today.
The goals recognize that economic growth, industrialization, infrastructure, and access to energy provide the foundations of development.
We welcome the prominence given to environmental goals, especially climate change and sustainable consumption. The distinct goal on ocean ecosystem reflects the unique character of its challenges and opportunities. Equally important, it focuses our attention on the future of the island states.
I speak about Blue Revolution, which includes the prosperity, sustainable use of marine wealth and blue skies.
Today, much of India’s development agenda is mirrored in the Sustainable Development Goals.
Since Independence, we have pursued the dream of eliminating poverty from India. We have chosen the path of removing poverty by empowering the poor. We have placed priority on education and skill development.
Our attack on poverty today includes expanded conventional schemes of development, but we have also launched a new era of inclusion and empowerment, turning distant dreams into immediate possibilities: new bank accounts for 180 million; direct transfer of benefits; funds to the unbanked; insurance within the reach of all; and, pension for everyone's sunset years.
The world speaks of private sector and public sector. In India, we have defined a new personal sector of individual enterprise, micro enterprises and micro finance, drawing also on the strength of digital and mobile applications.
We are focusing on the basics: housing, power, water and sanitation for all – important not just for welfare, but also human dignity. These are goals with a definite date, not just a mirage of hope. Our development is intrinsically linked to empowerment of women and it begins with a massive programme on educating the girl child that has become every family’s mission.
We are making our farms more productive and better connected to markets; and, farmers less vulnerable to the whims of nature.
We are reviving our manufacturing, improving our services sector, investing on an unprecedented scale in infrastructure; and, making our cities smart, sustainable and engines of progress.
We are committed to a sustainable path to prosperity. It comes from the natural instinct of our tradition and culture. But, it is also rooted firmly in our commitment to the future.
We represent a culture that calls our planet Mother Earth. As our ancient text say:
"Keep pure! For the Earth is our mother! And we are her children!"
Our national plans are ambitious and purposeful: new capacity of 175 GW of renewable energy over the next seven years; energy efficiency; a tax on coal; a huge afforestation programme; reforming our transportation; and, cleaning up our cities and rivers. The energy intensity of our growth will continue to decline.
Sustainable development of one-sixth of humanity will be of great consequence to the world and our beautiful planet. It will be a world of fewer challenges and greater hope; and, more confident of its success.
Our success will give us more resources to share with our friends. As India’s ancient saying goes, the wise look at the world as one family.
Today, India is fulfilling its responsibilities as development partners in Asia and Africa and with small island states from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
Nations have a national responsibility for sustainable development. They also need policy space.
However, we are here today in the United Nations because we all believe that international partnership must be at the centre of our efforts, whether it is development or combating climate change.
And, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities is the bedrock of our collective enterprise.
When we speak only of climate change, there is a perception of our desire to secure the comforts of our lifestyle. When we speak of climate justice, we demonstrate our sensitivity and resolve to secure the future of the poor from the perils of natural disasters.
In addressing climate change, it is important to focus on solutions that can help us reach our goals. We should forge a global public partnership to harness technology, innovation and finance to put affordable clean and renewable energy within the reach of all.
Equally, we must look for changes in our lifestyles that would make us less dependent on energy and more sustainable in our consumption.
It is equally critical to launch a global education programme that prepares our next generation to protect and conserve Nature.
I hope that the Developed World will fulfil its financing commitments for development and climate change, without in any way putting both under the same head!
I also hope that the Technology Facilitation Mechanism will turn technology and innovation into an effective instrument for global public good, not just private returns.
As we see now, distance is no insulation from challenges. And, they can rise from the shadows of conflict and privations from distant lands.
So, we must transform international partnerships on the strength of solidarity with fellow human beings and also our enlightened self-interest.
And, we must also reform the United Nations, including its Security Council, so that it carries greater credibility and legitimacy and will be more representative and effective in achieving our goals.
There is no cause greater than shaping a world, in which every life that enters it can look to a future of security, opportunity and dignity; and, where we leave our environment in better shape for the next generation. And, no cause that is more challenging.
At 70, we are called to rise to that challenge, with our wisdom, experience, generosity, compassion, skills and technology.
I am confident that we can.
In the end, let me express my hope for everyone’s well with a few lines from our ancient texts:
May all be happy, may all be healthy, may all see welfare, may no one have any sorrow.
Thank you.
 

Getting close to an integrated South Asia

Despite being one of the fastest growing regions, South Asia continues to remain the most disconnected region in the world. Membership of SAARC has not made a significant difference to the intraregional trade and connectivity in this region. Besides differences on the bilateral front, there are various structural, geographical, ethnic, political and historical factors which have resulted in lack of cooperation among SAARC countries. As a result, the subregional cooperation as envisaged in the SAARC Charter (Article VII) is on the rise. The idea of subregional cooperation goes as far back as 1996 when the idea of the South Asia Growth Quadrangle (SAGQ) was initiated. Since then, there have been several attempts to integrate transport and improve connectivity at the subregional level.
In recent years, one such sub-grouping which has gained importance is the Bangladesh-Bhutan-Nepal-India (BBIN).
To start with, the four countries have sealed a Motor Vehicle Agreement (MVA) for the “regulation of passenger, personal and cargo vehicular traffic” on June 15, 2015, in Bhutan with the aim to provide impetus to trade and other economic activities. The agreement has been endorsed by the Cabinets of the four countries. The ministry of road transport and highways notes that the “BBIN countries will be benefit through mutual cross-border movement of passengers and goods for overall economic development of the region. The people of the four countries will benefit through seamless movement of goods and passengers across borders.”
According to the joint statement, the BBIN MVA aims at regulation of passengers, personal and cargo vehicular movement between Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal, which was drafted on the lines of SAARC MVA. On the finalisation of BBIN MVA, land transport arrangements between and among the four countries will be initiated. The agreement seeks to facilitate easy cargo, vehicle and people movement across the borders and ensure traffic rights.
However, the draft stated that all the countries will require permits for the movement across the border based on the specific terms and conditions which will be fixed bilaterally, trilaterally or among the four countries. The agreement also stated that the admission of the non-regular vehicles will be granted temporary admission on a case-to-case basis for a period of up to 30 days and the permit for regular passenger transportation and cargo for multiple entries will be valid for one year and is renewable every year subject to a maximum of five years. This complementary instrument is expected to significantly reduce trade and transaction costs in this subregion and hence give a boost to the region’s trade.
The pact will promote safe, economical, efficient and technologically-sound road transportation in the region through the creation of an institutional mechanism. The agreement will also permit passengers and cargo movement in the four countries without the need to change vehicle at the border based on each country’s terms and conditions.
For instance, three routes for bus service have been identified between India and Nepal which can make the movement without any break at the border posts and changing vehicles.
* Kathmandu-Bhairahawa-Sunauli-Gorakhpur-Lucknow-New Delhi.
* Kathmandu-Bhairahawa-Sunauli-Azamgarh-Varanasi-New Delhi.
* Pokhara-Bharahawa-Sunauli-Gorakhpur-Lucknow-New Delhi.
The agreement also ensures financial independence as each party will bear its own costs arising from the implementation of this agreement and, in case of any implementation difficulties, BBIN MVA platform provides for a mechanism to resolve the issue based on the provisions in the agreement.
The transport ministers have prepared a six-month working plan from July to December 2015 for the implementation of BBIN MVA. Before the agreement gets rolled out, it will undergo three phases of preparation. The first will include the preparation of necessary protocols and bilateral, trilateral or quadrilateral agreement for implementation of the MVA. The second includes negotiations and approval of additional agreements and protocols by September this year. This will also require upgrading and installation of IT systems, regulatory systems and necessary infrastructure to be approved in the third phase by December 2015.
However, effective implementation is hugely dependent on the finance and technical capacity of the least developed countries. Given the lack of experience of the least developed countries of the group (Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal), the role of aid for trade is extremely vital for the subregional MVA for staged implementation from October 2015.
BBIN MVA is a positive development for the subregional grouping and India’s willingness to lead and persuade its ambitious goal for South Asian integration is the need of the hour. Seen as a major diplomatic victory for India, it is a serious effort put in by the group which may influence Pakistan to join the initiative, though it had opposed SAARC MVA in the SAARC Ministerial in Nepal in November 2014. The implementation of this agreement will not just guarantee accessibility to the member countries and their markets but also to the larger ASEAN market, thereby generating new economic opportunities, particularly in border areas. However, the BBIN countries would need to provide impetus to each other’s infrastructure development and extend support in terms of financial and technical knowhow to reap the benefits of economic integration objectified by the MVA.
The ministers of the four countries have laid out a sound draft of the agreement. However, it remains to be seen how effectively the MVA gets translated on the ground. Efficient and speedy implementation of all the modalities of the BBIN will help the region realise the full benefits of the agreement and strengthen regional cooperation.
The author is senior fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, and policy lead, Knowledge Partnership Programme, IPE Global and DFID India