Politics and Processes of Local-level Dispute Resolution in Infrastructure Development Projects in Nepal: A Rapid Assessment

Abstract

Execution delays in large infrastructure development projects in Nepal are fairly common. There are multiple factors that contribute to the delays such as weak contract administration, design errors, local disasters such as floods and landslides, protracted contract-related disputes, delayed payments and red tape, political instability, delayed approvals on environmental controls, and, in many instances, local level disputes around land acquisition and cultural rights. This assessment focuses on local level disputes in infrastructure projects. It examines a set of cases to document prevailing typology of disputes, dispute resolution practices, legal basis and arrangements for resolving disputes, external political influences on the dispute resolution processes, and provides some evaluative commentaries on the efficacy of these arrangements. We find that the government has limited its role in the dispute resolution processes to determination and revision of compensation rates that too limited to cases of land acquisition and damages to private property. This narrow-scope approach leaves out of its purview a variety of grievances around social, cultural, and environmental claims. Without a clear legal basis or policy guidelines, individual projects try to address these often-intangible claims by using the limited authority they have and, in most cases, fail to reach a resolution for a long time. In some instances, affected communities employ political tactics to extract higher compensation than determined by the government. The government as well tends to respond with political rather than administrative measures in some instances. The politicizing of the process most often happens when there are extended delays in settling the compensation and other claims.