Climate Policy Reform in Nepal through the Lenses of the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The authors try to address important issue of climate action, commitments made by countries and their implementation.
2. Implementation of global/regional commitments is an important issue
3. The paper tries to touch on everything- aid dependency, democracy and development, and national institutions. It would be good to have a focus area – may be reflect on the title and abstract- it is too generic.
4. It would be good to include some of the commitments made in Nepal’s first (2016) and second NDCs submission (2020). Nepal aims to be carbon neutral by 2050.
5. The paper uses the IAD framework, but only institutional arrangements is discussed. It would have been good to identify some the institutes and organizations involvement in implementing climate policy. Only Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Law and FECOFUN are mentioned.
6. The data used from interview 2015 and 2016- is old?
7. Nepal currently has surplus of hydroelectricity. There not much discussion on this while clean and renewable energy.
8. Not sure if the analysis is bit old, as there is not much discussion on three layers of governments in Nepal (section 5.2.3) and how the new state restructuring has gone with the implementation of climate policies. However, much discussion is on community and forestry.
9. Not sure how the conclusion to build more science institutions was drawn (Abstract but not in 6. Conclusions).
10.  

Author Response

1. The authors try to address important issue of climate action, commitments made by countries and their implementation.
2. Implementation of global/regional commitments is an important issue
3. The paper tries to touch on everything- aid dependency, democracy and development, and national institutions. It would be good to have a focus area – may be reflect on the title and abstract- it is too generic.

We like to thank all the reviewers of the valid critique.

Title changed to Climate policy reform in Nepal—Analysis with the IAD framework

Aid dependency, pursuit to democracy and development are the foundations and key components of Nepal institutions.

1. It would be good to include some of the commitments made in Nepal’s first (2016) and second NDCs submission (2020). Nepal aims to be carbon neutral by 2050.

Carbon neutrality commitment by 2045 added. This commitment was made in 2021.

1. The paper uses the IAD framework, but only institutional arrangements is discussed. It would have been good to identify some the institutes and organizations involvement in implementing climate policy. Only Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Law and FECOFUN are mentioned.

Institutions identified include Coordinate LTS implementation through the Environment Protection and Climate Change, Management National Council, Inter-Ministerial Climate Change Coordination Committee, (IMCCCC), Thematic and Cross-Cutting Working Groups, and Provincial Climate Change Coordination Committees.

1. The data used from interview 2015 and 2016- is old?

Latest strategy document from 2021 added

1. Nepal currently has surplus of hydroelectricity. There not much discussion on this while clean and renewable energy.

In 2021, the long-term strategy document discussed the possibility to export clean hydropower to neighboring countries, but clear steps for that remained unreported.

1. Not sure if the analysis is bit old, as there is not much discussion on three layers of governments in Nepal (section 5.2.3) and how the new state restructuring has gone with the implementation of climate policies. However, much discussion is on community and forestry.

In the latest strategy document in 2021 Nepal announced to develop clear lines of communication between different levels of governance (local, provincial, national, andinternational) and across different sectors and stakeholders. However, the delegation of responsibilities remained unclear.

1. Not sure how the conclusion to build more science institutions was drawn (Abstract but not in 6. Conclusions).

The word science removed.

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

Firstly, I highly commend the methodology of the paper. It is exemplary. The policy analysis is careful, the structure is excellent, the rationality and flow is well considered. The writing is very clear, and well articulated.

I have only minor points of enquiry. At one stage, the author's commend Nepal for being on track to remain within the 2C window advocated by the COP in Paris in 2016. However, since then, science and the most recent COP in Glasgow, 2021, has made a strong push for a goal of 1.5C above preindustrial norms. Thus, the question arises whether the Nepalese government is on track for 1.5 or going to go higher, to 2C?

The analysis of forest cover and clean energy is excellent, including the need for firewood amongst communities with no access to clean electricity.

I particularly like the important work on policy implementation. This is a very important paragraph:

" The implementation of the NDCs is considered to happen via local communities, even if this brings out challenges such as uncoordinated fragmentation, competition that undermines global norms, and the neglect of important global targets. Local communities do not always play by the same rules as global institutions."

What's more, there is significant cognitive dissonance within global organisations like the World Bank which are both advocating climate measures and yet also supporting continuous economic growth with commensurate correlation with global emissions growth. That is outside the scope of the paper but an important arena for problematic policy generation and implementation. Local communities are very aware of this in some places.  – aaah, you subtly mention this a page later.

You make a very important point that climate funding needs to be utilised across a range of activities, including " climate funding should serve science, education, and technology, and not merely forestation projects at the local level." The emphasis on capacity building is really valid.

This article is a pleasure to read. The English language is of the highest standard and the material is clearly laid out and very pertinent to climate issues. The generalisations about effective local governance probably extends to the 'developed' world as well. Thanks for the work. It’s a great contribution to the field.

Author Response

Firstly, I highly commend the methodology of the paper. It is exemplary. The policy analysis is careful, the structure is excellent, the rationality and flow is well considered. The writing is very clear, and well articulated.

I have only minor points of enquiry. At one stage, the author's commend Nepal for being on track to remain within the 2C window advocated by the COP in Paris in 2016. However, since then, science and the most recent COP in Glasgow, 2021, has made a strong push for a goal of 1.5C above preindustrial norms. Thus, the question arises whether the Nepalese government is on track for 1.5 or going to go higher, to 2C?

Response: Nepal has updated the commitments with a long-term strategy 2011. This has been added to the analysis

The analysis of forest cover and clean energy is excellent, including the need for firewood amongst communities with no access to clean electricity.

I particularly like the important work on policy implementation. This is a very important paragraph:

" The implementation of the NDCs is considered to happen via local communities, even if this brings out challenges such as uncoordinated fragmentation, competition that undermines global norms, and the neglect of important global targets. Local communities do not always play by the same rules as global institutions."

What's more, there is significant cognitive dissonance within global organisations like the World Bank which are both advocating climate measures and yet also supporting continuous economic growth with commensurate correlation with global emissions growth. That is outside the scope of the paper but an important arena for problematic policy generation and implementation. Local communities are very aware of this in some places.  – aaah, you subtly mention this a page later.

You make a very important point that climate funding needs to be utilised across a range of activities, including " climate funding should serve science, education, and technology, and not merely forestation projects at the local level." The emphasis on capacity building is really valid.

This article is a pleasure to read. The English language is of the highest standard and the material is clearly laid out and very pertinent to climate issues. The generalisations about effective local governance probably extends to the 'developed' world as well. Thanks for the work. It’s a great contribution to the field.

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript titled “Climate Collective Action in Nepal—Policy Driven by Natural Resources” is systematic and well designed. The concept and objectives are very clear. Conclusions are also relevant. However, some minor modifications are needed and are as follows:

• Some texts may be converted into figures or tables.
• All the tables should follow a single format.
• Some local examples (case studies) may be cited.
• Comparison with the other low-income SAARC countries may be incorporated.
• The role of governmental and non-governmental organizations may be discussed separately.

 

 

 

Author Response

The manuscript titled “Climate Collective Action in Nepal—Policy Driven by Natural Resources” is systematic and well designed. The concept and objectives are very clear. Conclusions are also relevant. However, some minor modifications are needed and are as follows:

• Some texts may be converted into figures or tables.

Response: Figure 2 added and table 6 added

• All the tables should follow a single format.

Response: Tables are converted to a single format

• Some local examples (case studies) may be cited.

Response: Two case studies cited

• Comparison with the other low-income SAARC countries may be incorporated.

Response:

Similar barriers and enablers have been recognized in other countries. Bangladesh, there is a need to systematically address the challenges of institutional coordination and cooperation, identify and harness climate finance opportunities, explore climate change opportunities and not only risks, and examine the capacity needs of local institutions to adequately inform climate capacity-building strategies.

In Bhutan the financial constraints emerged as one of the key challenges for upholding carbon neutrality.

• The role of governmental and non-governmental organizations may be discussed separately.

Response:

The governmental and non-governmental organizations work in slightly different fields. The analysis here is focused on how well official governmental organization can tackle climate change in all relevant sectors.

Reviewer 4 Report

  

    Successful climate change mitigation requires the commitment of rapidly developing low-income countries. With the aim of  identifying the dynamics underpinning  low implementation of mitigation policies, using Nepal as a case study.

   Methodologically, the authors applied an institutional analysis and development framework as well as an institutional grammar tool to analyze national climate policy. And the results show that the current national institutions did not enable effective climate change mitigation, with some implications discussed.

    Overall, the research is good. And I suggest the authors to revise the manuscript as follows.

    First, revise the title. The current title, "Climate Collective Action in Nepal—Policy Driven by Natural Resources" is some ambiguous. What does this research analyze？I can't get the information from the current title. So, please revise the title to highlight the issues discussed in the research.

    Methodologically, the authors  focused on analyzing the government’s policies as reported in the formal documents that describe both the strategic and political decisions, as well as the implemented actions. As we know, collective actions are affected by various factors , so I do not think formal documents are enough to support the research topic.

Author Response

      Successful climate change mitigation requires the commitment of rapidly developing low-income countries. With the aim of  identifying the dynamics underpinning  low implementation of mitigation policies, using Nepal as a case study.

   Methodologically, the authors applied an institutional analysis and development framework as well as an institutional grammar tool to analyze national climate policy. And the results show that the current national institutions did not enable effective climate change mitigation, with some implications discussed.

    Overall, the research is good. And I suggest the authors to revise the manuscript as follows.

    First, revise the title. The current title, "Climate Collective Action in Nepal—Policy Driven by Natural Resources" is some ambiguous. What does this research analyze？I can't get the information from the current title. So, please revise the title to highlight the issues discussed in the research.

Response: The title has been changed to Climate policy reform in Nepal—Analysis with the IAD framework

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Title expand IAD to  institutional analysis and development

2. Noticed that few additional references were added and references rearranged in the manuscript

3. The revision is not through- the suggestion was to have focused analysis and have major revision- but the authors tried to respond/address the comments individually ( e.g. comment on data - added reference to one more report).

4. The paper identifies the gaps between strategy and implementation, but fails to offer how that could be improved or what types of institutions are effective in implementing climate actions. 

Author Response

We thank for the constructive review which helped us to improve the manuscript. Our detailed responses to each comment are below. 

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

1. Title expand IAD to institutional analysis and development

Authors’ response: The abbreviation was expanded in the title as requested.

 

2. Noticed that few additional references were added and references rearranged in the manuscript

Authors’ response: We thank for the acknowledgement.

 

3. The revision is not through- the suggestion was to have focused analysis and have major revision- but the authors tried to respond/address the comments individually ( e.g. comment on data - added reference to one more report).

Authors’ response:  We have now responded to each point of the reviewer suggestions in the Review 1, as specified below.

 

4. The authors try to address important issue of climate action, commitments made by countries and their implementation.

Implementation of global/regional commitments is an important issue

Authors’ response: We highly appreciate this comment.

 

5. The paper tries to touch on everything- aid dependency, democracy and development, and national institutions. It would be good to have a focus area – may be reflect on the title and abstract- it is too generic.

Authors’ response: Our research questions cover all the key components of the institutions that define the degree of the implementation of the climate strategy. Also, these themes mentioned derive from the analytical framework that we use (the IAD framework). Aid dependency and pursuit to democracy and development are the foundations and key components of Nepal institutions and determine the implementation of the Paris Agreement (why).

 

6. It would be good to include some of the commitments made in Nepal’s first (2016) and second NDCs submission (2020). Nepal aims to be carbon neutral by 2050.

Authors’ response: Thank you for this comment which critically improved the manuscript. The analysis of the Second Nationally Determined Contribution (2020) has been added to our analysis in Table 5.  Carbon neutrality commitment by 2045 was now added. This commitment was made in 2021.

 

7. The paper uses the IAD framework, but only institutional arrangements is discussed. It would have been good to identify some the institutes and organizations involvement in implementing climate policy. Only Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Law and FECOFUN are mentioned.

Authors’ response: Thank you for this helpful comment. The institutes have been identified as added in Table 5.

 

Authors’ response: The analysis has been expanded with the Second Nationally Determined Contribution to support our findings.

The document was added to table 1 and he following text was added under 4.1 (p.9-10)

“The NDC was prepared as declaration of shared values to commit to the Paris Agreement rather than a solution to the climate problem. The expectation was that Nepal would receive international aids for policy reform. The aim was to assure the international community that Nepal is on the right track of tackling the collective action problem of climate change.

Mitigation targets stated in the NDC are related to contextual improvements in the country. Most of the targets are related to the energy sector (mitigation) while two of the targets focused on forestry sector. In addition, targets were set on research and development and pollution reduction. The energy related targets are expressed with quantitative measures and time frame. However, the targets related to policy, institutional, and financial arrangement for climate change mitigation have not been expressed in NDC. However, the scale and extent of these arrangements are not in line with other targets.“

 

8. The data used from interview 2015 and 2016- is old?

Authors’ response: We applied a dynamic approach including the temporal development of the commitments and strategies. Therefore, also the earlier situation is important. However, we also included a national discussion as late as 2019. Now, we also added the latest strategy document from 2021 including its analysis as reported in the findings (Table 1)

 

9. Nepal currently has surplus of hydroelectricity. There not much discussion on this while clean and renewable energy.

Authors’ response: In 2021, the long-term strategy document discussed the possibility to export clean hydropower to neighboring countries, but clear steps for that remained unreported  as stated under 4.1 p. 12.

Other documents did not discuss this matter.

 

10. Not sure if the analysis is bit old, as there is not much discussion on three layers of governments in Nepal (section 5.2.3) and how the new state restructuring has gone with the implementation of climate policies. However, much discussion is on community and forestry.

Authors’ response: The new state restructuring took place in 2015. The commitments what we are looking at were made in 2015 and therefore we are looking at the policies and decisions made after 2015. The state restructuring is beyond the temporal target period of our analysis.

In the latest strategy document in 2021 Nepal announced to develop clear lines of communication between different levels of governance (local, provincial, national, and international) and across different sectors and stakeholders. However, the delegation of responsibilities remained unclear (4.1, table 5)

 

11. Not sure how the conclusion to build more science institutions was drawn (Abstract but not in 6. Conclusions).

Authors’ response: Education is a significant part of climate strategy in mainstreaming climate change and raising awareness. (as stated in table 3) However, according to our results education has not gained much attention (as stated in table 5). A closer look in the documents reveals that education is focused only on lower levels (As stated in  4.2)

And the improving education appears to be a means of introducing new topics into secondary school curricula and preparing materials for secondary levels. However, investing in science and upper level education is a long term investment that is ignored in the strategy documents.

The following part of discussion was added Section 5.2.3 p.19:

”The climate institutions have strenghtened in Nepal especially in terms of monitoring and coordination accroding to the climate strategies. The institutional capacity regarding climate mitigation in Nepal could support initial progress on climate mitigation mainstreaming, particularly in transport, agriculture, and industry sectors. Nepal considers the social issues, fairness and development in their climate commitment. Therefore, it can be argued that addressing development and social justice of climate mitigation actions via sectoral policies could benefit the implementation of climate chnage mitigation strategy. The institutions should link climate change and development while endorsing authority and decision-making power to the local communities. Inclusive and participatory approaches to both policy design and implementation should be considered.”

In order to discuss more about the quality of institutions an analysis, the following was added under 4.21.(p. 14-15):

”The tasks for formal institutions dealing with forestry, energy, agriculture and industry have not changed much, even if the names of sectoral ministries have changed. At the same time, environmental issues have been added for sectoral ministries. These sectoral ministries have strengthened their engagement with other government organizations at local level especially in terms of capacity building.

In addition to these sectoral ministries, high level institutions such as Climate Change Council and a dedicated Climate Change Management Division in Nepal have been established to manage climate change mitigation.

At the same time tasks of the formal institutions have specialised in climate change mitigation the financial resources have been allocated to climate change mitigation as well. Dedicated financial resources to implement climate change mitigation actions have been established by both central government and international organisations. The aim of these financial resources has been to empower local communities in climate action.”

 

12. The paper identifies the gaps between strategy and implementation, but fails to offer how that could be improved or what types of institutions are effective in implementing climate actions.

Authors’ response: Our research aim was to identify the degree of the implementation of the nationally determined contributions in the climate strategies and to identify the underlying dynamics leading to that degree (‘why’). Consequently, solutions were not at the core of our research questions. However,  in the discussion we shed light on these issues as well (5.2.3, p. 18). This discussion is backed up by the design principles based on Ostrom’s findings, that determine whether institutions are effective or not. We now expanded that discussion with the following:

”The climate institutions have strengthened in Nepal especially in terms of monitoring and coordination according to the climate strategies. …A condition for success of the institutions is that they link climate change and development while endorsing authority and decision-making power to the local communities, because inclusive and participatory approaches to both policy design and implementation should be considered (Ostrom, 2009).”

The institutions have shifted towards more participatory process as stated under section 4.2.1

“Implement the LTS through federal, provincial, and local governments, in collaboration with other relevant stakeholders including youth, women, indigenous people, private sector as well as international bodies as it covers multidisciplinary areas.”

However, climate change as an issues has not been mainstreamed through all institutions. as stated under section 4.2.3

”The international commitments have not been clearly recognised in sectoral policies but the Climate Change Policy (2011) and (2019) were created to answer the international commitment. Also, The Long Term Strategy is strongly based on international commitment”