Strengthening local leadership and peer-learning can improve education in Nepal

A long-standing practice in Nepali governance is neglecting (and sometimes actively avoiding) knowledge-sharing across its 753 municipalities (called “palikas”). Our recent research on the mid-level of education governance in low- and middle-income countries, to be released in a full report in December, found that some municipalities in Nepal are succeeding with local innovations, but these are implemented in isolation—and there’s no existing framework or resources for systematic peer-exchange across the country. Additionally, political rivalries and frosty relations between education officials discourage municipalities from learning from each other.

Why does this isolationism persist?

One reason for this lack of collaborative learning is a Nepali governance culture that discourages sharing—a practice of “going it alone” that originated long before the 2015 federalism. Over decades, the local governmental practice of not sharing work or knowledge with each other has become a bureaucratic norm and is by now standard operating procedure. One education expert we interviewed said, “Departments, municipalities, and even ministries work in silos. [It’s like] in schools where you might notice a teacher teaching really well, but other teachers aren’t even aware that their colleague has exceptional skills. A sharing culture is absent in our country. I don’t know if it is an ego thing or something else, but the practice of sharing and learning from others needs to grow.”

A second reason for this isolationism is rivalry. Some mayors, we were told, refuse to adopt successful models from neighboring municipalities simply because they were first initiated by political opponents or leaders of other local units. Egos can be strong and political divides run deep in Nepal, and the tendency to oppose an idea introduced by the other party’s leader is common. And some elected representatives don’t want to be seen as “copying” other leaders. One local official told us, “Local governments tend to operate in silos, reluctant to learn from others or to showcase their own work beyond their own boundaries. This sense of rivalry translates into a lack of appreciation for the successes of neighboring municipalities.”

A third reason is the lack of government support or funding for collaboration. Written into the Constitution of Nepal is the promotion of what is called “cooperative autonomy” and collaboration among local, provincial, and federal levels of government. The Local Governance Operations Act (LGOA) encourages coordination among municipalities. But because collaborative learning is not prioritized by the government, provisions for officials visiting or sharing with one another across the country do not appear in the policies or funding allocations that derive from these laws. Moreover, municipalities aren’t provided funding to facilitate their own professional development. One official said, “Decisions about education policies, programs, and resource allocation continue to be made unilaterally at the federal level with little consultation from local governments. This disconnect is particularly important in education, where local context and community needs ought to drive decision-making.”

This lack of interest in sharing across locations in Nepal is unfortunate both because it neglects a useful lever for increasing the capacity of local officials and because it misses opportunities to benefit from others’ experiences and spread successful innovations across the country.

What’s the best way forward?

Drawing on our research, we propose a few solutions to increase productive collaboration.

1. Build out the few sharing networks that already exist. Nepal does have two formal associations for strengthening relationships among local officials: the Municipality Association of Nepal (MUAN) and the National Association of Rural Municipalities in Nepal (NARMIN). Our interviews revealed that insufficient funding constrains these networks from carrying out the peer-learning and knowledge-sharing for which they’re ostensibly responsible, although some steps are being taken. For example, NARMIN established a “knowledge hub” on its website to showcase exemplary practices from rural municipalities. The organization also signed a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MOEST) to support collaboration around some education improvements. A few local units are also beginning to put their resources on the internet for others to use (for example, in Kathmandu, Gauriganga, and Gaidakot). Funding and building on these initial steps to strengthen MUAN and NARMIN is a good start.
2. Leverage external development partners. Development partners and external nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) can promote cross-national peer exchange and strengthen local education leadership by including municipal education officials in their work and establishing learning hubs for knowledge-sharing. Our respondents lamented that local governments have no website or platform to learn about innovations currently being piloted or implemented in Nepal. Most either learned about promising innovations informally or developed their own in isolation. To cut through some of the political and cultural divides among municipalities and between local and federal government, external NGOs or funding partners can step in to map, publicize, and host learning events about promising innovations occurring across the country. Such a move would not only encourage municipalities to learn from one another but also increase visibility of those locations that are currently succeeding with education innovation.
3. Transform the non-sharing culture around education innovation. Sometimes the first move to solve an identified problem is to begin talking about it. Acknowledgment of the historical lack of local leaders sharing with one another and collaborating across locations in Nepal can initiate new solutions and a recognition that locations inside and outside a country’s boundaries can do well by learning from each other. Conferences and online peer-exchange networks, interlocking sets of WhatsApp group chats, learning tours within Nepal and to neighboring countries for local education officials—these are just a few of likely many ways to change mindsets and establish a new collaboration culture for education. Initiating and coordinating them is a low-cost way to spark culture change.

Geographies needn’t separate their education leaders

The recent protests in Nepal came from a new generation that is unsatisfied with how things have been. They want change and change often results from exchange. A spirit of exchange can extend to education governance, but only if Nepal finds ways to create and sustain systems and cultures for local leaders to talk with each other and share what they’re doing to improve education in their locations. In this way—consistent with the interconnectedness of people and places in the 21st century—learning from others, leaning into collaboration, and sharing successes with others can collectively improve education for all.