Summary of Book Discussion: Nepali Economy and Globalization
A discussion session was held among 38 second-year BBA students as part of their Nepali Economy class. The session began with an engaging activity involving a game. Students were divided into groups of four, with each group consisting of two sellers and two buyers. Each participant wrote a number between 1 and 100 on a piece of paper, representing their price threshold.
In Round 1, trades were restricted within each group of four. The objective was for sellers to negotiate a selling price higher than their written number and for buyers to secure a buying price lower than theirs. Only two trades were successfully completed.
In Round 2, students were free to trade across groups, resulting in 11 successful trades.
This activity set the stage for a discussion on the differences between controlled and free markets. The conversation then shifted to the book under discussion and the broader concept of globalization as it applies to Nepal. The discussion began with the debate on whether Nepal should focus on self-sufficiency or embrace global trade. Students explored the concept of comparative advantage, concluding that complete self-sufficiency is not viable for Nepal, given its inability to meet the diverse demands of its population.
Protectionist policies were another focal point of the discussion. While such policies are often justified as necessary to support infant industries, the students debated their long-term implications. It was noted that these policies can disincentivize Nepali businesses from improving their competitiveness. An example was cited from the dairy industry, where dominant brands allegedly lobby the government to restrict foreign competition. This not only limits consumer choice but also impacts the quality and pricing of products, leaving Nepali consumers disadvantaged.
Labor exploitation in the context of globalization was also a significant topic. Students examined the thin line between exploitation and the risk of mass unemployment in poor countries. They highlighted the power consumers hold in boycotting unethical businesses, emphasizing that such decisions are ultimately personal and moral. An example from Nepal was discussed, where the mandatory Social Security Fund (SSF) intended to ensure stable income for workers has instead led employers to hire Indian laborers to avoid compliance, undermining the policy’s objectives.
Cultural preservation in the face of globalization sparked an engaging debate. One perspective argued that globalization has led to a significant erosion of Nepali culture and identity, with a noticeable shift toward adopting Western cultural practices. On the other hand, the opposing view maintained that while globalization undeniably influences cultural practices, the ultimate decision to preserve, adapt, or abandon traditions lies with individuals.
The discussion also addressed the broader question of whether globalization has helped Nepal. The students observed that the real issue lies not in globalization itself but in Nepal’s weak institutional foundations. Challenges such as red tape, insufficient capital and labor, and inadequate infrastructure prevent Nepal from fully benefiting from globalization. They argued that with stronger governance and better policies, globalization could significantly boost Nepal’s economic prospects.
The discussion concluded with thought-provoking, open-ended questions:
As future business leaders, would they rely on protectionist policies or compete fairly based on quality and pricing
As consumers, do current protectionist measures genuinely safeguard their interests, or do they primarily serve those lobbying for selfish gains?
The session provided an engaging platform for students to analyze the implications of globalization and reflect on their roles as future business leaders and informed consumers.