尼泊尔的联邦制实践:是否在预期的轨道上发展?

K. Acharya
{"title":"尼泊尔的联邦制实践:是否在预期的轨道上发展?","authors":"K. Acharya","doi":"10.3126/dsaj.v15i01.41923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines how far Nepal's current practice of federalism has progressed toward people's aspirations, based on power separation, public trust, power equalization, and intergovernmental relationships. Primary data was collected on purposively 72 key informant interviews, which were then triangulated by the KII response. Finding demonstrates that functions and authorities were devolved in accordance with the principle of separation of powers at all three levels of government. However, the constitutional provisions were completely disregarded, and power was centralized by an unholy alliance of political leadership and bureaucracy. Second, people expected the democratic government to take a welfare approach to ensure greater pluralism and alliances, but special interests of politicians for their election constituencies, as well as identity-based issues, caused havoc in the effective operation of federalism. Third, the provision of three tiers of power-sharing mechanisms was based on coexistence, cooperation, and coordination. However, the federal government appears hesitant to support sub-national governments due to the centralized mindset of bureaucrats and politicians. Fourth, the constitution has focused on intergovernmental relations, but such relationships fail due to imbalances in vertical and horizontal relationships, fiscal dependency, and the bureaucracy's power-seeking attitude. In the end, two key questions for the discussions are raised. First, the institutionalization of accountability at the local level is it a true commitment, or is it merely an ivory tower? Second, the provision of autonomy has been used as a means of transformation or simply as a bargaining tool at the local level?","PeriodicalId":30105,"journal":{"name":"Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Federalism Practice in Nepal: Does it Move in the Expected Course?\",\"authors\":\"K. Acharya\",\"doi\":\"10.3126/dsaj.v15i01.41923\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examines how far Nepal's current practice of federalism has progressed toward people's aspirations, based on power separation, public trust, power equalization, and intergovernmental relationships. Primary data was collected on purposively 72 key informant interviews, which were then triangulated by the KII response. Finding demonstrates that functions and authorities were devolved in accordance with the principle of separation of powers at all three levels of government. However, the constitutional provisions were completely disregarded, and power was centralized by an unholy alliance of political leadership and bureaucracy. Second, people expected the democratic government to take a welfare approach to ensure greater pluralism and alliances, but special interests of politicians for their election constituencies, as well as identity-based issues, caused havoc in the effective operation of federalism. Third, the provision of three tiers of power-sharing mechanisms was based on coexistence, cooperation, and coordination. However, the federal government appears hesitant to support sub-national governments due to the centralized mindset of bureaucrats and politicians. Fourth, the constitution has focused on intergovernmental relations, but such relationships fail due to imbalances in vertical and horizontal relationships, fiscal dependency, and the bureaucracy's power-seeking attitude. In the end, two key questions for the discussions are raised. First, the institutionalization of accountability at the local level is it a true commitment, or is it merely an ivory tower? Second, the provision of autonomy has been used as a means of transformation or simply as a bargaining tool at the local level?\",\"PeriodicalId\":30105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v15i01.41923\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v15i01.41923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

这项研究考察了尼泊尔目前的联邦制实践在权力分离、公众信任、权力平等和政府间关系的基础上,朝着人们的愿望发展了多远。收集了72次关键线人访谈的主要数据,然后根据KII的回应进行三角测量。调查结果表明,职能和权力是根据三级政府分权原则下放的。然而,宪法条款被完全无视,权力被政治领导层和官僚机构的邪恶联盟集中起来。其次,人们希望民主政府采取福利方式,以确保更大的多元化和联盟,但政客们对其选举选区的特殊利益,以及基于身份的问题,对联邦制的有效运作造成了严重破坏。第三,提供三级权力分享机制是基于共存、合作和协调。然而,由于官僚和政客的集权心态,联邦政府似乎对支持地方政府犹豫不决。第四,宪法关注的是政府间关系,但由于纵向和横向关系的不平衡、财政依赖以及官僚机构的权力追求态度,这种关系失败了。最后,提出了讨论的两个关键问题。首先,地方一级问责制的制度化是一项真正的承诺,还是仅仅是一座象牙塔?第二,提供自治权是作为一种转型手段,还是仅仅作为地方一级的谈判工具?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Federalism Practice in Nepal: Does it Move in the Expected Course?
This study examines how far Nepal's current practice of federalism has progressed toward people's aspirations, based on power separation, public trust, power equalization, and intergovernmental relationships. Primary data was collected on purposively 72 key informant interviews, which were then triangulated by the KII response. Finding demonstrates that functions and authorities were devolved in accordance with the principle of separation of powers at all three levels of government. However, the constitutional provisions were completely disregarded, and power was centralized by an unholy alliance of political leadership and bureaucracy. Second, people expected the democratic government to take a welfare approach to ensure greater pluralism and alliances, but special interests of politicians for their election constituencies, as well as identity-based issues, caused havoc in the effective operation of federalism. Third, the provision of three tiers of power-sharing mechanisms was based on coexistence, cooperation, and coordination. However, the federal government appears hesitant to support sub-national governments due to the centralized mindset of bureaucrats and politicians. Fourth, the constitution has focused on intergovernmental relations, but such relationships fail due to imbalances in vertical and horizontal relationships, fiscal dependency, and the bureaucracy's power-seeking attitude. In the end, two key questions for the discussions are raised. First, the institutionalization of accountability at the local level is it a true commitment, or is it merely an ivory tower? Second, the provision of autonomy has been used as a means of transformation or simply as a bargaining tool at the local level?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Payment and Motivation: Female Community Health Volunteers in Nepal Sampling and Trustworthiness Issues in Qualitative Research Interview with Professor Dilli Ram Dahal Ecological Implications of Local Curriculum: Lessons Learned from a Participatory Action Research Project in a School in Nepal Indigenous Rodhi Culture of Gurung and Factors of its Transform at Ghandruk Kaski in Nepal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1