Nepal’s AI Policy: A Bold Step, But Built on Fragile Ground

On August 16, 2025, the Government of Nepal unveiled its first-ever National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy - a move hailed as “ambitious” and “visionary.” But beneath the celebratory headlines lies a harder truth: this policy risks becoming another decorative strategy, heavy on promise but light on enforceable action. If not critically examined, it may entrench the very inequalities it claims to solve.

Globally, AI is projected to add $15.7 trillion to the world economy by 2030. Nepal, with a GDP of just $44 billion, cannot afford to sit idle. Yet we must ask: does our current institutional capacity allow us to meaningfully participate in this technological shift, or are we simply drafting policy to signal modernity without the muscle to implement it?

The policy talks at length about human capital development, but this feels disconnected from reality. Every year, Nepal produces roughly 50,000 ICT graduates, yet fewer than 20 percent are considered employable in advanced technologies like AI. Where is the roadmap to overhaul university curricula, incentivize AI-focused research, and retain talent that is fleeing abroad? Without structural reform in higher education, this policy will produce eloquent documents, not competent engineers.

The government also proposes a National AI Centre and an AI Regulation Council. On paper, this sounds impressive. But let us not forget: Nepal’s regulatory bodies, from the Telecommunications Authority to the Cyber Bureau, already struggle with enforcement. Adding new councils without clarity on authority and accountability only bloats bureaucracy. Who will actually protect citizens when deepfakes undermine elections, or when AI-driven loan algorithms discriminate against women and Dalits? The policy provides no answers.

The emphasis on data centres in the Himalayas borders on wishful thinking. Yes, colder climates reduce cooling costs, but who will invest when we still grapple with electricity shortages, weak optical fiber networks, and frequent political instability? It is easy to dream of cloud infrastructure; it is harder to pay the electricity bills.

Startups are another buzzword in the document. According to FNCCI, Nepal has around 300 tech startups, but fewer than 10 percent receive venture funding. Compare this with Vietnam, which secured over $1 billion in startup investment in 2022. Without serious reforms to taxation, foreign investment rules, and bureaucratic red tape, what investor will take Nepal’s AI rhetoric seriously? Our brightest young entrepreneurs will continue to migrate to Bangalore, Singapore, or California, while “support for startups” remains a bullet point in government memos.

The most glaring weakness, however, is equity and inclusion. Women make up just 24 percent of Nepal’s ICT workforce. If this policy does not actively embed inclusion targets, scholarships, gender audits of AI systems, and incentives for women-led startups, it will replicate the biases of the offline world in the digital one. AI does not erase inequality; it automates it. Through Project Abhaya, I have witnessed how quickly women and marginalized youth can be excluded from new systems when digital literacy is not prioritized. We have worked with 4,500 young women across 47 districts, giving them tools to engage politically and digitally. Imagine what happens when AI begins shaping governance, health, or finance, if these same communities are left behind.

The government promises a two-year review of the policy. Reviews without enforcement are meaningless. Nepal’s history with ICT and e-governance policies is littered with half-finished initiatives and stalled implementation. Unless the state allows genuine public-private partnerships and independent oversight, this AI policy risks becoming just another addition to the archives.

Nepal does not need a symbolic AI policy, it needs a grounded one. That means:

• Restructuring higher education to build real AI capacity.

• Fixing electricity and internet infrastructure before chasing cloud dreams.

• Reforming tax and investment rules to retain startups.

• Setting measurable gender and inclusion benchmarks, not vague aspirations.

• Establishing grievance redressal mechanisms for citizens affected by AI harms.

AI is not neutral. It is shaped by who designs it, who funds it, and who regulates it. If Nepal’s AI policy sidelines its people, especially women, rural youth, and marginalized groups, it will deepen inequality under the guise of innovation. If, however, we confront these gaps head-on, Nepal can carve out a unique space as a regional leader in ethical and inclusive AI.

The question is blunt: will this policy empower citizens, or simply flatter elites? Nepal cannot afford another “ambitious” strategy that collapses at the first test of implementation.

(Ishika Panta is the Founder and Chairperson of Project Abhaya, a youth-led initiative advancing gender-inclusive political and digital literacy in Nepal. She leverages AI to improve governance, streamline policy-making, and maintain data on Members of Parliament, while developing ethical and inclusive frameworks for digital policymaking.)

पछिल्लो अध्यावधिक: भदौ ८, २०८२ १४:२०

टिप्पणीहरू