Remittance Case

Remittance should be included in the national development agenda to keep an eye on its use. Apart from monitoring and facilitating the use of this income, the government should encourage migrants to hold their income in financial properties in the country rather than abroad. Though the remittance we receive today is remarkably higher than what we received a decade ago, Nepal’s poverty level has not declined significantly. A decade ago, one-third of the population used to live below the poverty line and now one-fourth lives do so. Other indicators too, such as quality of education and health care are deteriorating because of the absence of experienced people.

Remittances may not be sustainable. So, relying on remittances may not be a wise policy. Any decline of remittances could have had severe impacts on exchange rates, foreign currency deposits and consumption all at once. This could have a negative multiplier effect on the economy. While we should encourage remittances, we should also create employment opportunities within the country. In addition, most of the evacuation is restricted to a limited number of countries. Nepal should try to diversify its export of labor, if it wants to ensure that the remittances are sustainable.

The government should work towards creating better opportunities for investment of remittances. It should ease investment by building infrastructures. There should be construction of roads and bridges to relieve transportation. All these developments would facilitate commerce and trade & then encourage more employment within the country. More employment gradually helps to reduce poverty in long term.

As mentioned in the article, Social Safety Net Programs can be another solution. Social welfare services provided by a community of individuals at the state and local levels These services are geared toward eliminating poverty in a specific area. Social safety networks in combination with a