Bhutan: Nature of Development and Emerging Paradigm
A relatively small country located in South Asia, Bhutan has many distinctive features in its wake with respect to its geography, history, political-economy and socio-cultural milieu of the country. Bhutan is a mountainous terrain located in the Eastern Himalayan Region and hence the physical space available for economic activity is greatly limited. It is a landlocked country and has been isolated from other countries of the South, and Central Asian Regions, historically. The geo-environmental constraints and the resultant spatial isolation of the country have over the period of time impacted the overall development of the country negatively. The population in the country is distributed across remote settlements, to take the advantage of the limited suitable physical space, to carry on their basic economic activity. Further, Bhutan has a relatively smaller number of populations with the result that the supply of manpower has always been a major constraint.
It is interesting to learn that this country is one of the very few fortunate South Asian countries that did not come under the onslaught of direct colonalisation of the Western Powers. Further, Bhutan deliberately remained isolated from the outside world in the process of development in terms of political, economic and socio-cultural interactions until very recently. As a genuine Buddhist Kingdom Bhutan preferred to remain closed, inward looking and self reliant. Its small size as compared to her immediate giant neighbours like China and India was one of the pertinent forces that compelled her to remain closed and recessive in the region. In the process, however, this Himalayan Kingdom kept its socio-cultural features and her environmental parameters relatively intact as compared to her South Asian sisters who have been facing various onslaughts of development dynamics for quite some time now.
The Process of Change in Bhutan: march towards modernisation and development
The perception and attitude of the ruling elite of Bhutan underwent a fundamental change after 1952 when King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck assumed powers in October 1952 (Upreti 2004). In the early 1950s the third Druk Gyalpo Jigme Dorji Wangchuck (1952 –72), a farsighted emperor of Bhutan realised that the world was changing rapidly and if Bhutan kept on looking inward and remained isolated henceforth in the same intensity as hitherto, it would not be fruitful to the future development of the country. He is regarded as the architect of modern Bhutan. His rule has been dedicated to the reform and restructuring of the existing political and economic system to allow the kingdom, in the world that was rapidly changing outside, to adapt to new challenges (Mathou Thierry, 1999, 115).
This was the period when the whole of Asia was undergoing social and political transformations with the newly independent states eagerly aspiring for democracy, development and modernisation. India and China- two immediate giants- were also passing through socio-cultural, economic and political transformations. Besides, many other south Asian countries were also gradually moving upward on the path of modernisation and development. Change had, in fact, become basic policy issues in the whole of the South Asian region during the period. Hence, Bhutan although relatively isolated in many respect could not ignore such changing environment vehemently taking place in the region. Bhutan, however, followed a cautious approach while stepping on the path of development and modernisation. This was precisely because of the fact that the country was featured with numerous negative historico-socio-cultural and economic forces besides geo-environmental constraints. Hence, jumping madly into the open forum of development and the associated challenges would not be fruitful to this tiny inward looking and isolated Himalayan kingdom. Bhutan, thus, pursued the path of planned economic development and introduced its First Five Year Plan in 1961.
The fourth, that is the present, Druk Gyalpo Jigme Singhe Wangchuck followed the footpath left by his father since his accession to the throne in 1972. With result, the last three decades of the 20th century saw some dramatic changes in the economy, polity and socio-cultural attributes of Bhutan.
“During the past twenty seven years, the Bhutanese economy has undergone dramatic structural changes evinced by the export of electricity, one of the most significant natural resources of the country. The monetized sector has grown rapidly. Social indicators have improved significantly. The expansion of basic health services and primary health care throughout the kingdom has had a major impact on the overall health and well being of the population. Life expectancy has risen from 37 years in 1960 to 66 years in 1994. Achievements in education have also been impressive, with more than 80% of primary age children in school. At the same time, Bhutan has adopted a cautious but constructive policy of participation in international affairs and socio-economic co-operation with the outside world” (Mathou, Thierry, 1999).
Further, Bhutan in the last two decades or so has evolved an altogether different conceptual paradigm (framework) for development and modernisation of the country. The country has sought to envisage a system that would ensure development through self-reliance and the preservation of its tradition and religio-cultural values. The idea is to seek a balance between materialism and spiritual dynamics. It was King himself who proposed such innovative concept called Gross National Happiness (GNH) as against the popular Gross Domestic Product (GDP), specifically to capture the less quantifiable forces like emotional and spiritual well being of the people and thus has made explicit commitment to preserve Bhutan’s cultural heritage and natural environment.
Today the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGB) considers Gross National Happiness (GNH) as the cardinal concern of the Bhutanese strategy of development planning. By GNH the government meant that: 1) economic growth and development; 2) preservation and promotion of cultural heritage; 3) preservation and sustainable use of environment; and 4) good governance, are nodal points of the philosophy of national planning. This strategy of planning specifically views the development as a continuous process of balancing between the material and intangible needs of individual and society. It is pleaded that this should be seen against the universal concern for measuring the achievements of development in a country through statistics invariably forgetting the individual (Sinha, A.C. 2004).
Issues in Bhutan’s Development Dynamics
The paradigm of development followed by Bhutan over the years is not without criticism, however. Some of them may be listed below.
1.Although, the country has recently been talking of introduction of the written Constitution (draft constitution circulated in mid-2005) Bhutan is a still a hereditary monarchy. The King exercises strong, active, and direct power over the Government. The Government prohibits political parties, and none operate legally. The Government has over the year’s repeatedly restricted freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association. Freedom of religion is limited. NGOs and human rights organizations are illegal. Approximately three-fourths of population is composed of Buddhists with cultural traditions akin to those of Tibet. The remaining one-fourth of the population, ethnic Nepalese locally referred to as Lhotshampas, most of whom are Hindus, living primarily in the country's southern districts.
Government policies in the late 1980s and early 1990s caused approximately 100,000 ethnic Nepalese to leave, sometimes forcibly. Many went to refugee camps in Nepal, where they remained. A significant refugee problem still persists. Bhutan turned out to be a theater of ethnic strife during 1980s and 1990s when the Lhotshampa issue became the most important political question for the country. In addition, democratic aspirations of the Lhotshampas have led the Drukpa establishments to further withdraw to their ethnic particularism. The whole process of ethnic Nepalese, both in the refugee camps across the Indo-Nepal boarder and those loyal Lhotshampas who are still residing in the Drukpa Kingdom and who are often harassed, is handicapped by the lack of appropriate forum for dissenting voices and seek debates and discourses at various levels. Hence, it goes without saying that structural reforms in the styles of representation are badly needed.
2.The loyal Lhotshampas (i.e. those ethnic Nepalese still living in Bhutan who are not against the royal establishment) continue to be the victims of various types of harassments both within the establishment and through the forces outside the Bhutanese establishment. The Royal Government of Bhutan has not been able to address this pertinent issue as yet. Although Bhutan is a Buddhist Drukpa Monarchy by tradition, it is also a country inhabited by the ethnic Nepalese immigrants for over a century now, constituting a major chunk of the subsistence farmers in the southern foothills of the country. They have actively contributed to the economic development of Bhutan turning the negative southern area into a vibrant zone of prosperity (Sinha, A.C. 2004). They have also brought in the majorly homogenous Himalayan country socio-cultural and political diversity.
Earlier the government had sought for the policy of ethnic assimilation in which cash grants of Nu 5000/-, which was further, increased to Nu 10000/-, were given by the government to encourage inter-ethnic marriage. The provision, however, was withdrawn subsequently. Instead, aware of the possible threat to Monarchy, religion and the traditional laws of Bhutan; the royal government compelled the immigrants to accept the national traditions and be incorporated into the system. Such political card of the government resulted in an ethnic flare up leading to the flight of thousands of Lhotshampas to refugee camps across the border of India and Nepal. The regime tends to forget that such aggressive ethnic policy and false sense of absorptive capacity is bound to affect the pace of economic and social transformation.
One interesting argument in this context is that, Bhutanese feel the immigrants must accept the national tradition and be a part of Bhutan, which they did not, to begin with. Once they do not accept the system and withdraw from it they cease to have any claim for the Bhutanese indulgence. The Drukpa cultural door, which was kept ajar, is being closed for the Nepalese and an aggressive policy of Bhutanisaton is being pursued. This may be seen in the discontinuation of Nepali and Sanskrit teaching in the schools, stoppage of cash incentives to the inter-ethnic marriage and a move to change the names of Nepalese places into Dzongkha: Samchi- Samtse, Sarbhang- Sarpang, Tashigong-Tashiyangtse etc (Sinha, A.C. 2004).
3.The economy of Bhutan is predominantly government-controlled. Further, Bhutan’s economy is majorly dependent on India. As a least developed country Bhutan depends on foreign aids for financing its developmental programmes and establishment costs. India has been the largest donor of external aid to Bhutan and its main development partner. Bhutan’s first Five Year Economic Development Plan (1962-67) was totally funded by India. India committed Nu/Rs.9000 million (US $ 215 million) for the Eighth Plan (1997-2002). Once totally dependent on India for its development assistance and government’s establishment expenses, Bhutan has been increasingly turning to various bilateral, multilateral, and international finances. The United Nations, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Australia, Austria, Finland, Denmark, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Sweden, Republic of Korea, United Kingdom and the United States provide foreign aid to Bhutan.
The crux of the problem here has been while the royal government of Bhutan on the one hand still talks of self-reliance and taking the middle path of development apparently to conserve its tradition, religion, social structure and environmental resources, on the other hand recent capitalistic development ventures in the Himalayan kingdom like massive Hydel projects, infrastructures development, foreign funding/aid etc contradict its very idea of self reliance and Gross National Happiness.
4.Critics have, moreover, seen the Bhutanese efforts towards the concept of Gross National happiness (GNH) as a uniquely indigenous Buddhist tradition of concern for all forms of life. They see the royal approach as a camouflage for its poor showing as a developing country. The country is counted among the least developed countries (LDCs) of the world. Further, it is argued that “Bhutan seeks the concept of GNH for the Drukpas and they maintain a different yardstick for the leftover Lhotshampas. And thus one could look at the plight of the Lhotshampas in Bhutan, who continue to remain on the margin of the existence, beyond the scope of the GNH (Sinha A.C. 2004)”
5.Further, the controversial claim the Bhutan has about 600,000 bonafide subjects raised some pertinent questions in the late 1990s. The human development report issued by the UNDP had listed Bhutan among the least developed if its 186 member counties. However, by adjusting the above claimed population figure, per capita income, literacy and life expectancy, Bhutan’s ranking went up from 162 to somewhere around 130. Scholars argue, however, that Bhutan is one of the few countries in the world whose statistics do tell lie.
6.There are several other modern challenges of development faced by the country in recent times that deserve a systematic research and plausible policy options.
References
Mathou, Thierry 1999. Bhutan Political Reform in a Buddhist Monarchy. The Journal of Bhutan Studies. Vol 1 No 1. Autumn.
Sinha, A.C. 2004. Himalayan Kingdom: Bhutan- Tradition, Transition and Transformation. Indus Publishing Company (second edition), New Delhi.
Upreti, B.C. 2004. Bhutan’s Strategy for Development and Self-reliance: The Objectives and Operationalisation of Gross National Happiness. Asian Profile. Vol 32 No 6. December. Pp 558-569.
Important Links:
1.http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/802/65/
2.http://www.opendemocracy.net/arts/hutt_3151.jsp
3.http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116006400400.htm
4. http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116004401200.htm
5. http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116005101500.htm
6.http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116003801700.htm
A relatively small country located in South Asia, Bhutan has many distinctive features in its wake with respect to its geography, history, political-economy and socio-cultural milieu of the country. Bhutan is a mountainous terrain located in the Eastern Himalayan Region and hence the physical space available for economic activity is greatly limited. It is a landlocked country and has been isolated from other countries of the South, and Central Asian Regions, historically. The geo-environmental constraints and the resultant spatial isolation of the country have over the period of time impacted the overall development of the country negatively. The population in the country is distributed across remote settlements, to take the advantage of the limited suitable physical space, to carry on their basic economic activity. Further, Bhutan has a relatively smaller number of populations with the result that the supply of manpower has always been a major constraint.
It is interesting to learn that this country is one of the very few fortunate South Asian countries that did not come under the onslaught of direct colonalisation of the Western Powers. Further, Bhutan deliberately remained isolated from the outside world in the process of development in terms of political, economic and socio-cultural interactions until very recently. As a genuine Buddhist Kingdom Bhutan preferred to remain closed, inward looking and self reliant. Its small size as compared to her immediate giant neighbours like China and India was one of the pertinent forces that compelled her to remain closed and recessive in the region. In the process, however, this Himalayan Kingdom kept its socio-cultural features and her environmental parameters relatively intact as compared to her South Asian sisters who have been facing various onslaughts of development dynamics for quite some time now.
The Process of Change in Bhutan: march towards modernisation and development
The perception and attitude of the ruling elite of Bhutan underwent a fundamental change after 1952 when King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck assumed powers in October 1952 (Upreti 2004). In the early 1950s the third Druk Gyalpo Jigme Dorji Wangchuck (1952 –72), a farsighted emperor of Bhutan realised that the world was changing rapidly and if Bhutan kept on looking inward and remained isolated henceforth in the same intensity as hitherto, it would not be fruitful to the future development of the country. He is regarded as the architect of modern Bhutan. His rule has been dedicated to the reform and restructuring of the existing political and economic system to allow the kingdom, in the world that was rapidly changing outside, to adapt to new challenges (Mathou Thierry, 1999, 115).
This was the period when the whole of Asia was undergoing social and political transformations with the newly independent states eagerly aspiring for democracy, development and modernisation. India and China- two immediate giants- were also passing through socio-cultural, economic and political transformations. Besides, many other south Asian countries were also gradually moving upward on the path of modernisation and development. Change had, in fact, become basic policy issues in the whole of the South Asian region during the period. Hence, Bhutan although relatively isolated in many respect could not ignore such changing environment vehemently taking place in the region. Bhutan, however, followed a cautious approach while stepping on the path of development and modernisation. This was precisely because of the fact that the country was featured with numerous negative historico-socio-cultural and economic forces besides geo-environmental constraints. Hence, jumping madly into the open forum of development and the associated challenges would not be fruitful to this tiny inward looking and isolated Himalayan kingdom. Bhutan, thus, pursued the path of planned economic development and introduced its First Five Year Plan in 1961.
The fourth, that is the present, Druk Gyalpo Jigme Singhe Wangchuck followed the footpath left by his father since his accession to the throne in 1972. With result, the last three decades of the 20th century saw some dramatic changes in the economy, polity and socio-cultural attributes of Bhutan.
“During the past twenty seven years, the Bhutanese economy has undergone dramatic structural changes evinced by the export of electricity, one of the most significant natural resources of the country. The monetized sector has grown rapidly. Social indicators have improved significantly. The expansion of basic health services and primary health care throughout the kingdom has had a major impact on the overall health and well being of the population. Life expectancy has risen from 37 years in 1960 to 66 years in 1994. Achievements in education have also been impressive, with more than 80% of primary age children in school. At the same time, Bhutan has adopted a cautious but constructive policy of participation in international affairs and socio-economic co-operation with the outside world” (Mathou, Thierry, 1999).
Further, Bhutan in the last two decades or so has evolved an altogether different conceptual paradigm (framework) for development and modernisation of the country. The country has sought to envisage a system that would ensure development through self-reliance and the preservation of its tradition and religio-cultural values. The idea is to seek a balance between materialism and spiritual dynamics. It was King himself who proposed such innovative concept called Gross National Happiness (GNH) as against the popular Gross Domestic Product (GDP), specifically to capture the less quantifiable forces like emotional and spiritual well being of the people and thus has made explicit commitment to preserve Bhutan’s cultural heritage and natural environment.
Today the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGB) considers Gross National Happiness (GNH) as the cardinal concern of the Bhutanese strategy of development planning. By GNH the government meant that: 1) economic growth and development; 2) preservation and promotion of cultural heritage; 3) preservation and sustainable use of environment; and 4) good governance, are nodal points of the philosophy of national planning. This strategy of planning specifically views the development as a continuous process of balancing between the material and intangible needs of individual and society. It is pleaded that this should be seen against the universal concern for measuring the achievements of development in a country through statistics invariably forgetting the individual (Sinha, A.C. 2004).
Issues in Bhutan’s Development Dynamics
The paradigm of development followed by Bhutan over the years is not without criticism, however. Some of them may be listed below.
1.Although, the country has recently been talking of introduction of the written Constitution (draft constitution circulated in mid-2005) Bhutan is a still a hereditary monarchy. The King exercises strong, active, and direct power over the Government. The Government prohibits political parties, and none operate legally. The Government has over the year’s repeatedly restricted freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association. Freedom of religion is limited. NGOs and human rights organizations are illegal. Approximately three-fourths of population is composed of Buddhists with cultural traditions akin to those of Tibet. The remaining one-fourth of the population, ethnic Nepalese locally referred to as Lhotshampas, most of whom are Hindus, living primarily in the country's southern districts.
Government policies in the late 1980s and early 1990s caused approximately 100,000 ethnic Nepalese to leave, sometimes forcibly. Many went to refugee camps in Nepal, where they remained. A significant refugee problem still persists. Bhutan turned out to be a theater of ethnic strife during 1980s and 1990s when the Lhotshampa issue became the most important political question for the country. In addition, democratic aspirations of the Lhotshampas have led the Drukpa establishments to further withdraw to their ethnic particularism. The whole process of ethnic Nepalese, both in the refugee camps across the Indo-Nepal boarder and those loyal Lhotshampas who are still residing in the Drukpa Kingdom and who are often harassed, is handicapped by the lack of appropriate forum for dissenting voices and seek debates and discourses at various levels. Hence, it goes without saying that structural reforms in the styles of representation are badly needed.
2.The loyal Lhotshampas (i.e. those ethnic Nepalese still living in Bhutan who are not against the royal establishment) continue to be the victims of various types of harassments both within the establishment and through the forces outside the Bhutanese establishment. The Royal Government of Bhutan has not been able to address this pertinent issue as yet. Although Bhutan is a Buddhist Drukpa Monarchy by tradition, it is also a country inhabited by the ethnic Nepalese immigrants for over a century now, constituting a major chunk of the subsistence farmers in the southern foothills of the country. They have actively contributed to the economic development of Bhutan turning the negative southern area into a vibrant zone of prosperity (Sinha, A.C. 2004). They have also brought in the majorly homogenous Himalayan country socio-cultural and political diversity.
Earlier the government had sought for the policy of ethnic assimilation in which cash grants of Nu 5000/-, which was further, increased to Nu 10000/-, were given by the government to encourage inter-ethnic marriage. The provision, however, was withdrawn subsequently. Instead, aware of the possible threat to Monarchy, religion and the traditional laws of Bhutan; the royal government compelled the immigrants to accept the national traditions and be incorporated into the system. Such political card of the government resulted in an ethnic flare up leading to the flight of thousands of Lhotshampas to refugee camps across the border of India and Nepal. The regime tends to forget that such aggressive ethnic policy and false sense of absorptive capacity is bound to affect the pace of economic and social transformation.
One interesting argument in this context is that, Bhutanese feel the immigrants must accept the national tradition and be a part of Bhutan, which they did not, to begin with. Once they do not accept the system and withdraw from it they cease to have any claim for the Bhutanese indulgence. The Drukpa cultural door, which was kept ajar, is being closed for the Nepalese and an aggressive policy of Bhutanisaton is being pursued. This may be seen in the discontinuation of Nepali and Sanskrit teaching in the schools, stoppage of cash incentives to the inter-ethnic marriage and a move to change the names of Nepalese places into Dzongkha: Samchi- Samtse, Sarbhang- Sarpang, Tashigong-Tashiyangtse etc (Sinha, A.C. 2004).
3.The economy of Bhutan is predominantly government-controlled. Further, Bhutan’s economy is majorly dependent on India. As a least developed country Bhutan depends on foreign aids for financing its developmental programmes and establishment costs. India has been the largest donor of external aid to Bhutan and its main development partner. Bhutan’s first Five Year Economic Development Plan (1962-67) was totally funded by India. India committed Nu/Rs.9000 million (US $ 215 million) for the Eighth Plan (1997-2002). Once totally dependent on India for its development assistance and government’s establishment expenses, Bhutan has been increasingly turning to various bilateral, multilateral, and international finances. The United Nations, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Australia, Austria, Finland, Denmark, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Sweden, Republic of Korea, United Kingdom and the United States provide foreign aid to Bhutan.
The crux of the problem here has been while the royal government of Bhutan on the one hand still talks of self-reliance and taking the middle path of development apparently to conserve its tradition, religion, social structure and environmental resources, on the other hand recent capitalistic development ventures in the Himalayan kingdom like massive Hydel projects, infrastructures development, foreign funding/aid etc contradict its very idea of self reliance and Gross National Happiness.
4.Critics have, moreover, seen the Bhutanese efforts towards the concept of Gross National happiness (GNH) as a uniquely indigenous Buddhist tradition of concern for all forms of life. They see the royal approach as a camouflage for its poor showing as a developing country. The country is counted among the least developed countries (LDCs) of the world. Further, it is argued that “Bhutan seeks the concept of GNH for the Drukpas and they maintain a different yardstick for the leftover Lhotshampas. And thus one could look at the plight of the Lhotshampas in Bhutan, who continue to remain on the margin of the existence, beyond the scope of the GNH (Sinha A.C. 2004)”
5.Further, the controversial claim the Bhutan has about 600,000 bonafide subjects raised some pertinent questions in the late 1990s. The human development report issued by the UNDP had listed Bhutan among the least developed if its 186 member counties. However, by adjusting the above claimed population figure, per capita income, literacy and life expectancy, Bhutan’s ranking went up from 162 to somewhere around 130. Scholars argue, however, that Bhutan is one of the few countries in the world whose statistics do tell lie.
6.There are several other modern challenges of development faced by the country in recent times that deserve a systematic research and plausible policy options.
References
Mathou, Thierry 1999. Bhutan Political Reform in a Buddhist Monarchy. The Journal of Bhutan Studies. Vol 1 No 1. Autumn.
Sinha, A.C. 2004. Himalayan Kingdom: Bhutan- Tradition, Transition and Transformation. Indus Publishing Company (second edition), New Delhi.
Upreti, B.C. 2004. Bhutan’s Strategy for Development and Self-reliance: The Objectives and Operationalisation of Gross National Happiness. Asian Profile. Vol 32 No 6. December. Pp 558-569.
Important Links:
1.http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/802/65/
2.http://www.opendemocracy.net/arts/hutt_3151.jsp
3.http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116006400400.htm
4. http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116004401200.htm
5. http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116005101500.htm
6.http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2101/stories/20040116003801700.htm
posted by Vimal Khawas at 10:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home