Jenik Radon is founder and director of the Eesti and Eurasian Public Service Fellowship. Radon taught access to medicine, human rights, privatization and international investment management at Stanford University and "Dynamics of Corruption" at the Indira Gandhi Institute for Development Research in Mumbai, India as a visiting professor. Radon participated in the constitutional peace process in Nepal and served as a drafter of the interim peace constitution. He served on the UN Global Compact Academic Initiative taskforce which seeks to have business schools incorporate the Compact's 10 human rights principles into their curriculum and teaching. He was recently in Nepal to attend the Nepal Economic Summit 2014. Siromani Dhungana of New Business Age spoke to him on a range of business and economy issues. Excerpt: 

 

In Nepal Economic Summit 2014, you were panellist for the session "successful Reform in Clean Energy: Harvesting the Potentials". What's your say about clean energy for the economic growth?

Yes, Nepal can achieve clean energy. In the present context, the issue of clean energy in Nepal is hydro. Nepal has significant hydro potential. In fact, Nepal is blessed with the fact that it has the potential for clean energy. Very few places in the world have that luxury. In Nepal, the question is not of clean energy; rather it is of necessary energy. 

 

You say that Nepal is blessed with natural potential. But, some people believe that we have been facing the problem of resource curse. Do you agree to this belief?

No, I do not agree to this because you have not had the curse yet as you have not developed anything. The countries that have to bear the resource curse are those who are rich in natural resources, start to develop it and misuse it. In case of Nepal, the resources have not been misused because they have not been used in the first place. The resource curse is basically associated with the environmental degradation, corruption, impact on minorities and indigenous and other such sort of issues. But, if you have not developed your resource, you cannot be bearing the resource curse. So, you can actually avoid it if you go ahead with the resources properly. 

 

There are so many complexities in the field of hydropower like political conflict, conflict between contractors and so on. What is your opinion on it?

There will always be differences in opinions. Nepal’s possibilities with hydro are clean energy and useful energy. Hydro is a national asset and not an individual’s asset. Therefore, there should be a plan regarding the development of hydro. The potentials and priorities have to be analysed. As per my knowledge, Nepal has had many hydro plans. That’s a problem. It is almost like fashion. Every time there is a new government, there is a new plan. So, this issue must be de-politicized and have a plan of action. 

 

All the potential costs are negative. But, fortunately, they are not as negative as oil and gas. Nepal has potential environment as well. The larger the dam, there is more potential degradation depending on the storage. Similarly, the silt and everything collected in the dam could cause an impact. So, these are things that need to be studied. Also, the people who live nearby the storage are also impacted. They need to be made as well off after as they were before or they have to be moved. The local inhabitants also have to be given some benefits locally because they are affected by the various construction works. The net result is that you can develop and you should develop. The question is how and the answer is the requirement of a full-fledged plan. 

 

You must have met many of the stakeholders at the summit. How did you find their attitude towards developing hydro projects? 

The corporate houses seem to be interested in developing hydro projects. Similarly, the government officials say that they want to develop it. So, the question here remains that why is so little happening? The part of it is the cost money. For this, Nepal will have to export a large amount of electricity that will be generated. So, striking deals with India and Bangladesh is a requirement.  The net result is that Nepal clearly needs to export while concerning development of hydropower sector in Nepal. 

 

Attracting foreign investment has been quite rhetorical in Nepal. What tangible measures should be taken to attract foreign investors in Nepal?

Clear laws and good legal system are the primary measures required to attract foreign investors. Besides that, it is necessary to cut down needless bureaucracy. The situation should be such that there is less government and more governance. Investment climate depends a lot on regulatory bodies. In the United States, a company can be created in a matter of minutes. But, it is a lengthy and complicated process here. So, the complication begins when registration is being regulated. You should not be regulating registration, rather conduct should be regulated. The same is the mistake in case of attracting foreign investors. For attracting foreign investors, you need clear property rights and laws. A non-corrupt judiciary is another requirement. 

 

There are two prevailing beliefs. The first is that the private sector should pay tax and the government should carry out all the social responsibility activities. Another is that the private sector should be involved in corporate social responsibility. What is your view?

I am a believer in the first. That is the vision which does not always happen. It does not particularly work in the emerging nations where the government frequently does not have the capacity. Therefore, corporations cannot take a western standard.  

 

One of my complaints in Nepal is the heap of garbage lying scattered here and there on the sides of the roads. Two things can be done to this. You can either wait for the government to pick it up or organize a community and get your neighbourhood clean. Corporations have to ask the government about the application of the taxes that they have paid, which does not happen. They do not ask the government and also don’t complain if the government does not do anything.  They only campaign for lower taxes. My answer to your question is the number one option but unfortunately it does not practically exist.