SWITCHING GEARS: FROM NEEDS TO ASSETS BASED

APPROACH TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN NEPAL

a

Raj Khadka a
School of Social Work, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
a
Corresponding author: rajkkhadka@hotmail.com

Ontario International Development Agency ISSN: 1923-6654 (print)

ISSN 1923-6662 (online). Available at http://www.ssrn.com/link/OIDA-Intl-Journal-Sustainable-Dev.html

Abstract: The mode of community development is

changing in Nepal. The increased flow of
international aid for local development, the rise of
grassroots organizations, and the political transition
to democratic system have created an environment
for the adoption and trial of different development
approaches. Currently, some of the widely practiced
approaches to poverty reduction and social
development are the needs-based approach, the
sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA), the rightsbased approach (RBA), and/or the participatory rural
appraisal (PRA). The rights-based approach is
gaining prominence mostly among non-government
organizations (NGOs). Despite the introduction of the
latter three development approaches the needs-based
approach to community development is still widely
practiced both by government and non-government
organizations. The needs-based approach, also known
as a traditional approach, is generally understood as a
deficit model which focuses on the communitys
needs, deficiencies and problems. The critics of this
traditional approach argue that such an assessment of
the community may help it internalize a negative
picture of itself and become powerless. Contrary to
this traditional model, the Assets Based Community
Development
(ABCD)
approach
empowers
community
members
and
strengthens
the
effectiveness of government agencies and NGOs by
drawing on the resources, abilities and insights of
local residents to find the ways of overcoming their
own challenges. This paper analyzes the ABCD
approach and argues for the need to combine the
ABCD with SLA, RBA and PRA. The inclusion of

the ABCD approach will have sustainable

development impacts on the community if
intentionally and consistently employed. The paper
analyzes theoretical literature on community
development in relation to approaches employed in
Nepal.
Keywords:
ABCD,
approaches,
development, development, poverty

community

INTRODUCTION
The Birth of Bikash

he idea of development was an alien concept

to the Nepali people until the early 1950s, and
so was the realization of relative poverty and
under-development.
Nepali anthropologist Dhor
Bahadur Bista (1991, 2008:132) writes Because of
their isolation from international affairs, the Nepalis
had no idea that they were relatively impoverished
until a few decades ago. In the early 1950s, Nepal
opened itself to the international world and
simultaneously initiated the modernization project in
the name of development to catch up to the Western
developed nations. The demise of Rana regime in
1951 paved a way to Bikash, a planned development.
The First Five-Year Plan (195661) allocated about
Five-hundred seventy-six million Nepali Rupees
(NRS) for development expenditures1. Transportation
and communications received top priority with over
Thirty-six percent of the monetary budget followed
by agriculture village development and irrigation. In
1

Currently 1 US $ = 78 NRS

82

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03: 12 (2012)

most cases, targets were missed by a wide margin.

Although, approximately 1,450 kilometers of
highways were targeted for construction, only about
565 kilometers were built (Savada, 1993).
Nepal with the inception of planned development
became the recipient of international aid for
development programming. For the first five years
Nepal received NPR 95 million in aid, all in the form
of grants from the Western Countries. A substantial
portion of development expenditure, averaging about
55% per year, has since been financed through
international aid (Joshi, 1996). However, an
interesting historical case regarding Nepals refusal to
accept the foreign aid seems ironic to contemporary
Nepal: During the earthquake disaster of January
1934, Nepals head, then Rana2 Prime Minister
Juddha Shamsher, declined an offer of financial
assistance from Britain and France (Pandey, 1987 in
Bista, 1991). The Ranas were skeptical of the
intention of the foreign aid and its impact in Nepali
society as any possible changes in the social system
represented a possible de-stabilizing threat (Bista,
1991, 2008:134).
After completing the Tenth Plan in 2007, Nepal is
running on the interim plan. This is happening
because the country is in the process of drafting a
new constitution following the historic social and
political movements of 2006. The current three year
interim plan (2010-2013) is the continuation of the
last three year interim plan (2007-2010). The
policies of interim plans have been strategically set
out to focus on Nepals ability to enhance the quality
of life of its people, with an emphasis on poverty
reduction,
post
conflict
peace
building,
reconstruction, and revitalization of the economy
with an increase in government expenditures on
social and physical infrastructure development. In
addition, this plan reaches out to marginalized
groups: women, and Dalits, Indigenous Janjatis, and
Madhesis . The following section will provide an
overview of the concepts utilized in the development
planning in Nepal.
Overview of Development trends and Applied
Concepts in Nepal
Various development concepts have been tried and
tested in Nepal to advance the nation. As a result
Nepal has been extensively used as a testing ground
of the theories related to the problems of
underdevelopment (Bhattachan ,1997:102). Nepali
planners followed the international trend of

Rana family ruled Nepal from 1846 until 1953,

reducing the Shah monarch to a figurehead and
making Prime Minister and other government
positions hereditary.

development theories popular in the developing

world. In the post World War II era of the 1950s and
1960s, a community development approach (a new
era of planned development in Nepal) had gained
popularity under the influence of modernization
theory, anchored on the trickle down strategy in
former colonies and third world countries, including
Nepal (Bhattachan, 1997). Physical infrastructure and
industrial development financing was provided under
Marshal Plan policy and under international aid
assistance. Modernization theory takes into account
internal factors of developing countries responsible
for their underdevelopment, keeping issues of
illiteracy, mode of agricultural productivity, and
population growth, and colonial legacy at bay
(Kunwar, 2006). Nepal was under the rule of the
Panchyat Regime, a monarchy, during this period.
In 1970s, development scholars expressed bitter
disappointment about the outcome of development,
and community development was considered a
failure. Community development programmes were
criticized for failing to improve the economic and
social well-being of rural people (Ruttan, 1984), as
well as for the failure to reform the power structure,
which directly benefitted the local elite (Korten,
1980). Early failure of development strategy and
approach were noticed in Nepal, and the same could
be said of other third world countries (Bhattachan,
1997). Such discontent and concern gave rise to two
new development approaches: integrated rural
development (IRD) and basic needs programmes
(Galtung and Wirak, 1976 in Bhattachan, 1997;
Ruttan 1984). The IRD programs typically aimed at
tackling rural poverty, emphasizing increased
agricultural productivity as the basis for raising rural
incomes, while giving attention to the synergistic
contribution of better education, health, and other
basic services to community (Kunwar,2006:358-59)
. But, central or blueprint planning of programmes
was often a part of integrated planning.
Unlike the concept of economic growth, the basicneeds approach emphasizes providing people with
their daily necessitiesfood, water, shelter/housing,
health and education for adequate lifestyle. Though
the basic needs approach lacks sustainability and
empowerment components, it is considered a quick
and short term intervention to address the immediate
needs and insecurity arising from the widespread
poverty (Overseas Development Institute, 1978). In
1986, Nepal launched an ambitious program to meet
the minimum basic needs of Nepali citizens by year
2000 (NPC, 1985 in Kunwar, 2006), but failed to
follow through with its commitment. Most of the
integrated rural development initiatives faced
problems because of irrelevant concept and program
delivery to the target groups and lack of a consistent
evaluation and monitoring system (Acharya, 2008).

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03:12 (2012)

Nevertheless, with the promulgation of the

Decentralization Act of 1982 and the adoption of
relevant regulations in 1984, local participation was
encouraged in the form of a users group at the local
level. Unfortunately, users groups were used for
instrumental purposes (such as to show the
community participation and social inclusion) to
achieve objectives of the programs (SAPPOROS,
1992 in Bhattachan, 1997). Consequently, in the
1980s the failure of conventional development
practice in developing countries gave rise to a new
development
paradigm
of
people-centered
development with greater local control. The paradigm
emphasized new development concepts. The core of
the concepts includes self-help, self-reliance,
accountability, institutional and social capacity
strengthening, and people-centrered development.
The new paradigm also was enhanced by the idea of
sustainable development. According to Our Common
Future, a report of the United Nations World
Commission on Environment and Development, the
new paradigm promotes a sustainable development
focused on ecologically-sensitive development, social
justice, participatory development planning, while
retaining the Basic Human Needs programmatic
goals.
With the restoration of democracy in 1990, in Nepal,
the concept of people-centered development entered
into a national policy. The Eight Plan (1992-1997)
emphasized -the objective of poverty alleviation,
including rural infrastructure building. Subsequently,
the Ninth Plan (1997-2002) emphasized integrated
development for agriculture and forestry, reduction of
economic and social inequality, and recognition of
co-operatives as a powerful instrument for the
development and expansion of economic sectors and
local development. The Tenth Plan, with the main
objective of poverty reduction, focused on
empowerment, human development, security, and
targeted programs aimed to increase the access of
marginalized groups and people living in remote
areas. One of the common objectives of planning
formulated after the 1990s was the emphasis on
private sector and economic liberalization. Similarly,
the actor with respect to development is not the State
alone, rather, it is now a partnership between state,
NGO and private sector. The state and NGOs
partnership has played a significant role in the local
development of Nepal.
Several achievements had a significant effect on the
transformation of development approaches and policy
in Nepal. These included the internal political
transition to a democratic system, the new legal
framework for decentralization, and the effective
implementation of external development policy based
on new international development conventions,
human rights, international practice, and/or

83

international aids conditions. The heightened wave

of people at the centre stage of development came
to Nepal with the above discussed change, which
involved both internal and external factors. There is
great variation in the concepts and approaches to
community development program and terms used to
refer the approaches, community, and people. In
Nepal, development practitioners and policy makers
synonymously use people and community
(Bhatachan, 1997). The concept people is a recent
arrival, and all the past and current plans, policies,
programs have either focused on community or
incorporated community development programs as
one of the key components of the overall program
package. Currently in Nepal, some of the most
popular approaches to poverty reduction and social
development are the needs based approach, the
sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA), the rightsbased approach (RBA), and/or the participatory rural
appraisal (PRA)3. The Sustainable Livelihoods (SL)
places people and their priorities firmly at the centre
of the development process while RBA integrates the
norms and principles of the international human
rights system into development work, enabling the
duty bearers and rights holders.
Nepals Failed Development
The results or outputs of development in last five
decades in Nepal are criticized for their failure to
alleviate poverty and to address social inequalities
based on gender, caste, ethnicity, and region.
Bhattachan (2008:9) argues Even community-based
development strategies implemented since the fifties
have been pseudo community-based. All these
development strategies have turned out to be
predatory or anti-developmental. Such a failure of
development is seen not only as a failure of the State
but of market-led and NGO-led development
strategies as well. Primarily for the market and NGOs
the result has been a failure to yield positive results
in the last twelve years (Bhattachan, 2008:9). Social
and political analysts point to the
failure of
development to address the social discrimination and
poverty as the root cause of the Maoist inspired civil
war which lasted for a decade and which claimed
13,000 lives (Dhakal,2006; NPC, 2008). Nonetheless,
the Maoist inspired Civil War also has political
underpinnings (Panday, 1999 in Dhakal, 2006). In the
midst of such failure and pessimism among Nepalis,
the new political development has generated some
hope for the sustainable peace and development.
However, to strengthen the optimism brought by the
restoration of democracy and the end of conflict, it is
also a prime time to redefine the local development

Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) is not discussed

in this paper.

84

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03: 12 (2012)

approaches of Nepal. Bhattachan, (2008:9) opines

that there is a need for an alternative development
strategy and suggests that community-based
development strategy as a best alternative if
implemented sincerely given diversity in social
structure of the Nepalese society.
Alternative Model: Inclusion of ABCD in the
current development model
This paper argues for the need to emphasize on the
strengths and indigenous mode of development at the
local level as an alternative to the previous
approaches based on needs and deficit models. Given
that the sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA) and
the Rights Based Approach (RBA) are already in use
in local-level development, the addition of the assetbased community development (ABCD) approach to
the existing model (consist of SLA and RBA) may
strengthen the utilization of communitys skills and
assets. In addition, the ABCD framework may be
used as a means of practical, local level application,
as both the SLA and the RBA are more of analytical
and conceptual framework to guide the thinking
behind development planning and intervention.
Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD)
The Asset based community development approach
was developed by John McNight, Jody Kretzmann,
and colleagues at Northwestern University. It begins
with a critique of the standard needs-based and
service-orientations to local development which
assume the community is broken and thus requires
external support to fix the communitys problems. In
contrast, the ABCD focuses on assets that empower
individuals and communities.
The ABCD ignores the needs-based and problemsolving approach, to which many organizations and
development initiatives adhere. A needs-based and
problem-solving approach assesses the needs of
communities through needs surveys to identify and
quantify deficiencies and to develop solutions to meet
the identified needs. In the process, participation of
community members is often ignored, and policies
are developed from top leaders, program managers
and exogenous people. It is argued that, until the
1970s, the participation of community members in
local development was overlooked in Nepal
(SAPPOS, 1992:1 in Bhattachan, 1997), and in later
years participants were sought for free labour or
support (Bhattachanm1997;Bista, 1991). Such a nonparticipatory and top down approach is against the
spirit of the right to development, which sees people
as citizens with rights (entitlements and capabilities),
rather than beneficiaries with needs (Moser, 2004).
Such a violation of the right to self-determination and
devolution of power may represent a negative view of
community which is already evident in Nepali

society. Development practioners often have the

attitude that people or community members are
stupid and that they are unable to think rationally, but
that they are willing to change; and that they,
therefore, need external help and support
(Bhattachan, 1997: 108). The source of such a
patronizing attitude can be linked to the dependency
of the communities on outsiders and their belief that
their ready-made solution can solve the social
maladies of the community. If the problems map is
the only guide to poor communities, the
consequences can be devastating (Kretzmann and
McKnight, 1993). It results in the community
internalizing the negative picture of their community
and becoming passive receivers of services. This can
lead the community to see themselves as people
with special needs to be met by outsiders
(Kretzmann and McKnight, 1996:1).
Similarly, the exogenous involvement, externallysourced policy, and externally-sourced solutions to
local problems in Nepal are blamed for destroying
indigenous development practices, specifically the
development carried out by the local people in
compliance with local needs and local resources
(Shrestha, 2000:155). Often development facilitated
by the Western thoughts emphasizes the rationality,
progress, and modernity, and empirically verified
ground. On the same grounds, the ideas of
development discount local knowledge as
unscientific (Escobar, 1995). A modern world view is
that social life is a technical problem and thus needs
rational decision and management skills for problem
solving. As a result, in developing countries, the
introduction of scientific agriculture, animal
husbandry, and water management have replaced
indigenous practices of agriculture and natural
resource management (Escobar, 1995, Bista, 1991)
In addition there is an increased economic,
psychological, and social dependency on foreign aid
in Nepal (Bista, 1991). International aid is the major
source of development financing. More than one
fourth of financing was expected to come from
foreign aid for the three-year Interim Plan in 2007
(People's Daily Online, 2007). At the local level
development practitioners and policy makers believe
that self-help programs with outside support can best
serve to reduce poverty, whereas traditional self-help
group organizations are seen as threat to society or
national sovereignty (Bhattachan, 1997). There might
be very little realization among development
practitioners that the interference of outsiders could
reinforce the notion only outside experts can provide
real help (Kretzmann and McKnight, 1993:4). The
external organizations interference in local issues
encourages local individuals and groups to deal more
with outsiders than with their own people and further
weakens neighbour to neighbour links(ibid,1),

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03:12 (2012)

which typically is evident in the absence of

community activities that increase social bond,
relationship, and communal feeling.
Contrary to the needs-based and problem-solving
approach, the ABCD develops policies and activities
based on the capacities, skills, and assets of local
people. It recognizes the capacities of local people
and their associations to build powerful communities.
According to Kretzmann and McKnight (1993:6), the
process of recognizing these capacities begins with
the construction of a new lens through which
communities can begin to assemble their strengths
into new combinations, new structures of
opportunity, new sources of income and control, and
new possibilities for production.
The ABCD is a set of methods that have been used to
mobilize community members around a common
vision or plan in both urban and rural communities. It
is still in the experimental phase, mainly in the
developing world, where various community
development approaches based on the rights based
approach, the needs based, and the livelihood
development are practiced. While there is no
blueprint for the ABCD, Mathie and Cunningham
(2003) suggested methods that typically include:
collecting stories of community successes and
analyzing the reasons for successmapping
community assets, forming a core steering group,
building relationships among local assets for
mutually beneficial problem solving within the
community, convening a representative planning
group, and leveraging activities, resources, and
investments from outside the community.
SLA and RBA
The main thinking behind sustainable livelihood
approaches is the need to understand, to build upon,
and to further develop peoples existing strengths.
Such an underlying principle of the SLA is
complimentary to the ABCD. The ABCD approach
helps to operationalize the SLA framework that
draws full range of resources (natural, economic,
human and social capitals) to generate a livelihood.
Through the means of social capital, the ABCD helps
to identify, access, and mobilize the capital within the
community. Similarly, the SLA contributes to the
framework of economic development crucial to
developing countries like Nepal, as it creates a clear
roadmap to economic development by identifying
both in response to a specific shock or crisis and to
the ongoing challenges of long-term poverty. Its core
strength is its focus on ensuring relevance in real
time (Russell and Smeaton, 2009:10).
Unlike the SLA frameworks attention to livelihood
development, the rights-based approach to
development is a framework that integrates the

85

norms, principles, standards and goals of the

international human rights system into development
planning and intervention. The elements of the rightsbased approach to development include: express
linkage to rights, accountability, empowerment,
participation, and non-discrimination and attention to
vulnerable groups. These principles are fundamental
and abstract, expressing values, and need to be
translated into practice, which could be a challenge.
The Rights-based and the ABCD approaches are
complementary perspectives that rest on the
principles of rights, participation, inclusion, and
empowerment and seek to achieve many of the same
goals. However, they diverge slightly in their
strategies. The ABCD emphasizes communitys
involvement in associational ways to achieve
justice, as justice is not created solely by individuals
or institutions of jurisprudence (Russell and
Smeaton, 2009:13), while the primary focus of the
rights perspective is on increasing the accountability
of local government and institution to their citizens.
In doing so the RBA aims to strengthen governance
and civil society. Though the livelihood approach
recognizes the importance of such links and the need
to enhance accountability towards the citizens, it
takes as its starting point a need to understand the
livelihoods of poor people in context (Haidar,
2009:8). Despite these strategic directions, all three
approaches discussed here complement each other in
order to achieve social justice, and empower citizens,
and enhance their livelihoods mobilizing the
community as a whole.
EVALUATION
The strengths-based integrated model would benefit
from a participatory evaluation framework. First, it is
important to realize that evaluation is an ongoing
process that demonstrates the effectiveness and
ability of the community to accomplish the goals and
objectives it has set. Some of the key steps in the
process of participatory monitoring and evaluation
are: (a) setting objectives and frames of reference (b)
identifying parameters and information needed (c)
developing methods to obtain that information and
data collection (d) analyzing data (e) documenting,
reporting and sharing (f) creating future scenarios,
and (i) evolving action plans. Some of the common
indicators for community development programs are
presented here to illustrate the degree and types of
empowerment that the community programme may
produce. These indicators are: social capital in the
communities, new social networks in the
communities, increased degree of trust in the
institutions, increased degree of participation of the
members of communities, the quality of participation,
self-esteem of the community members, inclusion
and social integration, local identity, sense of

86

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03: 12 (2012)

community, community knowledge, creation of

involvement opportunities, participation, problem
solving capacity, collective decision making,
collective ownership, income level, literacy, and
leadership. Evaluation would require that each
programme/community develop specific measures of
success and indicators in consultation with the
community as programs may have their own focus
and context.
LIMITATIONS
The ABCD has several limitations in its approach. It
is claimed that the ABCD approach does not
adequately address the role of external agencies and
institutions in the community development process,
nor how the community can avoid its dependency on
external agencies (Mathie and Cunningham, 2003).
Kretzmann and McKnight (1993) briefly discuss the
role of outside institutions, but the topic requires
more elaboration and thought. Mathie and
Cunningham (2003) also point out that the ABCD
approach does not deal with unequal power issues
that minorities and women face, which can exclude
them from the development process. In addition, the
ABCD approach does not address how to foster
community leadership in varying settings or how to
approach a situation in which there is a lack of a
favorable environment in which to enact the ABCD
strategies.
CONCLUSION
Despite its limitations, the ABCD approach builds on
the strength and assets of community to bring about
change in communities. It sees community as a
source of positive energy and of self-sufficiency that
can ensure social justiceand inclusiveness, and
manage changes. However, the effectiveness of the
ABCD depends not on the approach itself, but on
how the organizations, governments and practitioners
implement it in communities. As development
initiatives in Nepal may require financing from the
international community or NGOs their role therefore
becomes one of group capacity building to ensure
that local associations are defining the community
vision and mapping and mobilizing local assets and
resources to this end. The communities may need to
take into account the domination of community elites.
Similarly, external agencies providing community
facilitators may need to monitor whether their
facilitators are representing the interests of the local
elites. Also, they may need to ensure that the
facilitators are trained on this integrated model
comprised of the ABCD, RBA and SLA.
The ABCD is a not a blueprint for community
development. Therefore, application of the ABCD
framework or integrated model discussed in this
paper will require modification according to the time

and context as well as require borrowing ideas from

various theories and disciplines to enrich and/or fill
the gaps of the model. However, any development
should incorporate ethical issues that come to play in
development, which includes the sensitivity,
contextual focus, and responsiveness to local
populations and cultures. In order to make local
development transformative in Nepal, local
development should build on the strength and assets
of the community. In addition, the marginalized and
the poor must be the primary focus and the primary
owners of the development process.
REFERENCES
[1] Acharya, B.R. (2008). Dimension of Rural
Development in Nepal. Dhaulagiri Journal of
Sociology and Anthropology Vol.2 pp.181-192
[2] Bista, D.B. (1991). Fatalism and development:
Nepals struggle for modernization. Orient
Longman: Kolkota.
[3] Bhattachan, K.B. (2008). Indigenous Peoples &
Minorities
of
Nepal.
Retrieved
from
http://nefin.org.np/articles/dr-krishna-bbhattachan.html
[4] Bhattachan , K.B. 1997 People/communitybased development strategy
in Nepal.
Developmental practices in Nepal. Ed.
Bhattachan , K.B. and Mishra, C. Central
Depratment
of
Sociology/Anthropology,
Tribhuvan University: Kathmandy 100-48.
[5] Dhakal, T.N. (2006). NGOs in livelihood
improvement. Adroit Publishers: New Delhi
[6] Escobar, A .(1995). The Making and Unmaking
of the Third World. (P, 73-85) Eds. Rahnema,
M., &
Bawtree, V. (1997). The postdevelopment reader. London: Zed Books
[7] Haidar, M (2009:8). Sustainable livelihood
approaches the framework, lessons learnt from
practice and policy recommendations. Economic
and Social Council, United Nations. Retrieved
from css.escwa.org.lb/SDPD/1125/UNDP.pdf
[8] Joshi, B (1996). Foreign aid: Sifting the
statistical evidence. Institute for Integrated
Development Studies:Kathmandu.
[9] Korten, David C., (1980), Community
organization and rural development: a learning
process approach, The Plrblic Administration
Review, 40(5):480-511.
[10] Kunwar. K.B. (2006).Rural development in
developing countries. Meena Prakashan:
Kathmandu
[11] Kretzmann, J. and J. McKnight (1993) Building
Communities
from
the
Inside
Out,
Chicago:ACTA Publications.
[12] Kretzmann, J. and J. McKnight (1996). Mapping
community
capacity
(the
Neighborhood
Innovations Network funded by the Chicago
Community TrustInstitute for Policy Research

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03:12 (2012)

Northwestern University. Retrieved from Google

Scholar
[13] Mathie, A. and Cunningham, G.. (2003). From
Clients to Citizens: Asset Based Community
Development as a Strategy for CommunityDriven Development. Development in Practice
13: 474-486
[14] Moser, C. (2004) in Alsop, R (Ed.), Power,
Rights, and Poverty: Concepts and Connections.
2004(29-50).Washington D.C.: DFID and
the World Bank
[15] Muller, M. (2006). Discourses of postmodern
epistemology: radical impetus lost? Progress in
Development Studies, 6(4):306-320.
[16] NPC,2008). Three Years Interim Plan. Retrieved
from http://www.npc.gov.np
[17] Overseas Development Institute (1978). Basic
Needs - ODI Briefing Papers 5. Retrieved from
www.odi.org.uk/resources/docs/6616.pdf
[18] People's Daily Online (2007). Nepali interim
plan to focus on development. June 23, 2007
Retrieved
from
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200706/23/text
20070623_387029.html
[19] Russell, C., and Smeaton, T. (2009). From
Needs to Assets: Charting a sustainable path
towards development in sub-Saharan African
countries. Development (pp. 1-21). Retrieved
from http://tinyurl. com/abcdinstitute.
[20]
Sava
da, Andrea (1993). Nepal and Bhutan.
Washington: Federal Research Division, Library
of
Congress. Retrieved
from
http://rs6.loc.gov/frd/cs/nptoc.html
[21] Shrestha, N. R. 2000. In the name of
development: A reflection on Nepal. Educational
Enterprise: Kathmandu.

87

88

Khadka / OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 03: 12 (2012)