Isha Karki | 15th February, 2025
Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) is a major discourse in Nepal, often discussed in both policy and public forums. Despite various frameworks, policies, and programs designed to ensure equality, genuine progress seems elusive. While the country has made progress through legislation and international commitments, the real transformation required for social change remains superficial. This blog, as part of the project “Promoting Gender Equality and Social Inclusion in Schools: Building on What Children Value and Aspire to Do and Be,” funded by the Global Partnership for Education Knowledge and Innovation Exchange (GPEKIX) and the International Development Research Center (IDRC), aims to explore into the reasons behind this stagnation. It reflects insights shared during a Knowledge Exchange event, where researchers explored pressing issues in GESI implementation. While concrete solutions were not reached, the discussions illuminated persistent yet often overlooked challenges that continue to hinder progress in achieving true gender equality and social inclusion in our nation.
Policy and Commitments
GESI has been a focal point in policymaking in recent years, with the government introducing various frameworks, policies, and programs to ensure equality. The Constitution of Nepal (2015) guarantees equality and prohibits discrimination based on gender, caste, ethnicity, or religion, ensuring special provisions for marginalized groups, including women, Dalits, and indigenous communities. Key policies such as the Gender Equality Act (2006) and the National GESI Policy (2017) focus on eliminating discriminatory laws, addressing gender-based violence, and mainstreaming GESI into national and local governance. The Local Governance Operation Act (2017) mandates that 33% of local body representatives be female, promoting women’s participation in decision-making. Additionally, initiatives like gender-responsive budgeting (GRB), the School Educational Sector Plan (2022-2032), and affirmative action policies strive to ensure equitable access to education, public services, and economic opportunities for marginalized groups.
Moreover, Nepal is a signatory to international commitments such as UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), precisely Goal 5 (Gender Equality), and Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities), which align with its GESI objectives. Furthermore, Nepal ratified the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1991, committing to eliminate gender-based discrimination and promote women’s empowerment. The country has also reaffirmed its commitment to the Beijing Platform for Action (1995) and other global initiatives, reflecting its dedication to addressing systemic inequalities. Despite the best intentions embedded in national policies, real change remains obscure because the practical execution of these policies often falls short.
The Cycle of Repetitive Discourse
The ongoing discussions surrounding Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) in Nepal often fall into a repetitive cycle that undermines meaningful progress. While the focus tends to be on numerical participation and representation, particularly of women, the qualitative aspects of inclusivity frequently remain neglected. This superficial approach results in tokenism, where women’s participation serves more as a symbolic gesture than an opportunity for genuine contribution. As highlighted by various activists, inclusivity must extend beyond initial involvement to ensure that women are recognized as equal stakeholders throughout discussions and decision-making processes. A significant barrier to breaking this cycle is the lack of awareness and understanding of intersectionality, a term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw to describe the overlapping identities that shape individuals’ experiences of privilege and discrimination. In Nepal, discussions around intersectionality often stumble, as the complexities of caste, class, and gender intertwine. Activists have pointed out that dominant caste women disproportionately control resources and narratives, marginalizing the voices of women from lower castes and poorer communities. This failure to address the nuances of intersectionality perpetuates a monolithic understanding of women’s experiences, further entrenching existing inequalities. We need to seek to counter this cycle by actively documenting and preserving the diverse histories and contributions of women in Nepal, particularly those who have been obscured from public memory. Even though policies exist, the effectiveness of these strategies depends on consistent implementation and the presence of GESI focal persons who can advocate for inclusive practices. Despite these initiatives, the systemic challenges and ingrained societal norms continue to hinder significant advancements, necessitating a more profound commitment to transformative change rather than a mere reiteration of existing discourse. This stagnation is exacerbated by institutional resistance, cultural norms, and the siloed approach of local governments, which have traditionally viewed GESI as merely a women’s issue rather than a comprehensive social justice agenda.
The Role of Individual Will and Accountability
While policies and legal frameworks are necessary for promoting GESI, they alone cannot guarantee success. One crucial aspect often overlooked in policy discussions is the role of individual will. True change requires a shift in how people perceive their roles in society and their ability to drive that change. For Nepal’s GESI discourse to progress, it must focus on empowering individuals at all levels by building both policies and individual agencies.
An individual will refer to the personal determination and motivation to challenge discriminatory practices, reject harmful societal norms, and act in ways that promote gender equality and social inclusion. It means cultivating a sense of responsibility and ownership, where each person sees themselves as an active participant in the change process. Capacitating individuals, especially marginalized groups, ensure they have the tools, knowledge, and confidence to navigate and challenge societal structures. GESI discussions should move beyond top-down solutions imposed by policymakers and instead create a society where individuals, regardless of gender, can access opportunities, resources, and platforms for growth.
Even in a conducive policy environment, individuals must take responsibility for execution. For example, while legal protections exist against gender-based violence, their enforcement depends on the commitment of local authorities, educators, healthcare workers, and citizens. A key reason the discourse remains stagnant is that many fail to acknowledge the need for individual accountability. The conversation often centers on structural barriers without emphasizing the crucial role that every person whether a family member, teacher, or community leader can play in bringing about change. Without individual commitment to upholding the values of gender equity and social inclusion, policies will remain mere words on paper.
A Critical Reflection: What Next?
Despite policies, frameworks, and international commitments, real transformation in GESI requires individuals to step up. The question remains: Are we willing to disrupt the status quo, or are we waiting for policies alone to fix deep-rooted inequalities? The biggest challenge is not the absence of legal provisions but the inertia within society. How do we hold ourselves accountable for the inequalities we witness every day? The power to create change is not confined to policymakers it rests with teachers in classrooms, parents in households, and individuals in their daily interactions. Policies cannot fight discrimination; people do. Laws may prohibit exclusion, but they cannot force someone to treat a Dalit child equally in school or to listen to the concerns of a woman in a meeting. Do we challenge biases in conversations, workplaces, and education? Do we recognize our privilege and use it to amplify marginalized voices? GESI discussions often focus on institutional reform, but without individual will, institutions are lifeless structures. We must ask ourselves: Are we part of the problem or part of the solution? As civil rights activist Audre Lorde once said, “Your silence will not protect you.” Silence and inaction sustain oppression. Every individual choice either upholds or challenges existing inequalities.
Conclusion: Moving Beyond Policies to Action
For Nepal’s GESI discourse to evolve, individuals must be at the center of the conversation. Policies set the stage, but individual action and consistent, everyday choices can transition from rhetoric to actionable change. Change begins with each person deciding to challenge discrimination, question unjust traditions, and actively participate in creating a more inclusive society. If individual accountability does not become a core part of the GESI movement, Nepal risks remaining in the cycle of repetitive discussions without genuine progress. The time to act is now because policies alone will not build an equitable society; people will.
