Content uploaded by Dilli Prasad Poudel
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dilli Prasad Poudel on Sep 09, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Poudel et al. Urbanisation and disaster risks in the Himalaya
EDITORIAL: URBANISATION AND DISASTER RISKS IN THE HIMALAYA
DilliP.Poudel1*,AnushiyaShrestha1,DilKhatri1,JonathanEnsor2
ABSTRACT
Haphazardurbanexpansionandpoorlyplannedinfrastructuredevelopmenthaveincreasedand
intensieddisasterrisksinthegeologicallyfragileHimalaya.Againstthisbackdrop,consolidang
andinterprengthendingsfromfourarclesincludedinthisspecialissueon“urbanisaonand
disaster risk in the Himalaya”, this paper analyses the interrelaon between urbanisaon and
disasterriskinrapidlyurbanisingareasofNepalHimalaya.Thekeyndingsthatwepulltogether
from the papers are: (1) large-scale construcon acvies, including the real estate boom in
peri-urban Nepal, increasingly delink tradional communies from their land and culture; (2)
disconnectedpoliciesandcontradicngimplementaonintheinformaltoformaltransionshave
sustained informality and deepened risk in urban Nepal; (3) instuonal inera sustains poor
coordinaonbetweenstakeholdersinrelaontoknowledgesharing,technologyand resources
whichhinder proacvedisastermanagementat the community level; and(4) operaonaland
knowledge gaps emerge from failures to delineate authority, responsibility and accountability
betweenconcernedinstuons,andweakinstuonalcapacitybetweenagencies,impedingthe
adopon of early warning and acon system in Nepal. Based on these ndings, we conclude
thatwhilethepolicalrestructuringanddecentralisaonofthelocalgovernmentshaveprovided
authories with the legimacy to devise disaster management policies, enhancing overall
instuonal capability in terms of access to and mobilisaon of knowledge, technologies and
resourcesisneededtoreducedisasterrisksintheHimalaya.
Keywords: early-warningand acon; haphazardurbanisaon; Himalayandisaster;instuonal
limit;neoliberalurbanism;urbaninformality
1SouthasiaInstuteofAdvancedStudies(SIAS),Nepal
2UniversityofYork(UoY)andStockholmnEnvironmentInstute(SEI),UK
*Correspondingemail:dilli.poudel@hotmail.com
NEw
ANgLE
Nepal Journal of
Social Science
and Public Policy
Published by SIAS
Available at newangle.sias-southasia.org
2021, Vol. 7 ( 1 ), pp.1-10
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.53037/na.v7i1.74
© Poudel et al., 2021
2
New Angle: Nepal Journal of Social Science and Public Policy Vol. 7 ( 1 ), 2021
1. INTRODUCTION
The Himalaya is always in a process of geomorphological changes with acve geology and
dynamicgeography(Panday,1984; Rusk etal.,2022; WymannVonDachet al., 2017).Studies,
however, suggestthat the recentanthropogenicintervenonsin theHimalayadriven byrapid
buthaphazardurbanisaonanduncontrolledconstruconalacvies (Gurung,2021;Kargelet
al.,2016;Rimaletal.,2020)haveoverlooked“mountainspecicies”i.e.inaccessibility,fragility,
marginalityandheterogeneity(seeJodha,1992;WymannVonDachetal.,2017;Anbalagan,1993).
Thefragilegeophysicalcondionscoupledwithhaphazardlygrowingurbanisaonandrampant
construconacviesinmountaingeographyhavetriggeredmul-hazards3(e.g.,landslide,ood)
andsimultaneouslyelevatedexposureoftheHimalayandwellerstotheriskofdisasters(Tiwari
etal.,2018;Walker,2011;Westeretal., 2019;Poudeletal.,2021;Rusketal.,2022)whichare
likelytointensifyinthefuture(Mestaetal.,2022;Westeretal.,2019).IntheNepalHimalaya,an
averageof500naturalandnon-naturalhazardsoccurannuallywhichonanaveragekill900and
aectaround6,40,000peopleeveryyear(NPC,2019).
Figure 1: Disaster events and casuales in Nepal Himalaya
(Sources BIPAD portal(bipadportal.gov.np/)andUNDRRDesInventar(www.desinventar.net/)
Note:No.ofincidentsincludesbothnaturalandnon-naturalhazards
Ofthe total240millioninhabitantsoftheHimalayancountries(alsocalledHinduKushregion),
around30 - 50% ofthetotalpopulaonliveinurbancentres(Singhetal.,2019;Westeretal.,
2019),andtheurbanisaonisgrowing(UNDESA,2014;Westeretal.,2019).InNepal,contributed
3AccordingtoUNDRR,thetermmul-hazard,whichincludesbiological,environmental,geological,hydrometeorologicalandtechnologicalpro-
cessesandphenomena,refers(1)theseleconofmulplemajorhazardsthatthecountryfaces,and(2)thespeciccontextswherehazardous
eventsmayoccursimultaneously,cascadinglyorcumulavelyoverme,andtakingintoaccountthepotenalinterrelatedeects(www.undrr.
org/terminology/hazard).Itposesarangeofaddionalchallengesduetothedieringcharacteriscsofprocesses,andthegoalofmul-hazard
assessmentistoreducetheriskofdisasters(Kappesetal.,2012).
3
Poudel et al. Urbanisation and disaster risks in the Himalaya
primarilyby the ruraltourban migraon,urbanpopulaon increased atan annual averageof
about six percent between 1970s and 2013 (Gabriela, 2013). The recent staggering increase
in the urban populaon of the country from 17% in 2013 to 40% in 2014/15, and to 66%in
2021is(seegure2),however,alsodrivenbythepolico-administraverestructuringaerthe
federalismin2008anddesignangruralareasasmunicipalies4(Timsinaetal.,2020;Ishaque
etal.,2017).Withrapidurbanisaon,theinformalpopulaonlivinginslumsandriverbankshave
alsosubstanallyincreasedduringthelasttwodecades(Sengupta,2011;K.C.andPahari,2011;
Shresthaetal.,2021, Shresthaetal.,2020).Andexpandingisthespectrumofrisk thatimpact
everydaylivesinurbanNepal(Ruszczyk,2018).Therapidgrowthinurbanpopulaonintandem
withgrowingurbanslumdwellersandmul-hazardriskdemandstudyonthenuancesofurban
disastersintheregion.
Figure 2: Urbanisaon trend in Nepal (Source: Central Bureau of Stascs (CBS), (cbs.gov.np)
Manyoftherecenturbangovernanceiniavesandinfrastructuredevelopmentacvies(ledby
bothgovernmentaland non-governmentalorganisaons)inNepalhaveincreasinglypriorised
improveddisastermanagementindevisingandimplemenngprojects,plans,policies(Poudeland
Blackburn,2020).However, not allurbandwellershavereceivedequalaenon,leavingsome
morevulnerablethanothers(BhaaraiandConway,2010;Mestaetal.,2022).Giventhenature
of Himalayan people’s exposure to mul-hazard risks, understanding diverse experiences and
perceponsofrisks,rootcausesofrisks(biophysical,socio-technicalandpolical-instuonal),
andthe underlying narravesthatinform dierenal responses and abilies to dealwith and
reducesuchrisks arecrucial.Such scrunycanhelp inembracinga widerperspecveon risk,
and enhancing the risk management abilies, including those of marginalised dwellers and
4InNepal,municipaliesareconsideredasurbanareas.Presently,Nepalhas293municipalies,includingsixmetropolitanand11sub-metro-
politancies(hps://www.mofaga.gov.np/).
4
New Angle: Nepal Journal of Social Science and Public Policy Vol. 7 ( 1 ), 2021
theirrepresentaves,therebysengthe groundformoreequitableandresilientcies(Man
et al., 2018; Ruszczyk, 2018). Furthermore, such nuanced interpretaons help to expose how
risk management instuons and actors interact, and how urban governance assemblages
explicitlyorimplicitlypriorisedevelopmentacviesinmul-hazardscontexts.Exploringlocal
risks,urbandwellers’needs,narraves,instuons,andpracceswilltherefore,notonlybean
instrumenttoco-produceknowledgeonmul-hazardriskbutalsoinformrelatedstakeholdersto
adoptinnovavepolicysoluonstoaddressexisngandavertpotenalhazardsanddisastersin
thefuture.
Urbangovernance,parcularlyin thenewlydeclaredurban areas,frequentlylackinstuonal
capacity,illustratedbyalackofauthority,knowledgeandaccesstoresources(Khatrietal.,2022),
parcularly in relaon to the disaster preparedness, exposing dwellers to mul-hazard risks
(Aryal,2014).Addionally,theexposuretomul-hazardriskandeectsofdisastersonresidents
vary based on class, caste/ethnicity, gender which is co-shaped by social sgma and uneven
capabiliestoaccessandinuencethedisastermanagementpoliciesandpraxisinthecountry.
Understandingdisasterriskandsocialvulnerabilitycan,therefore,beapragmacentrypointto
foreseesaferfuturecies.Againstthisbackdrop,throughthisspecialissueentled“Urbanisaon
andDisasterRisksintheHimalaya”,wetrytounderstandhowhaphazardurbanisaonincreases
disasterriskintheHimalaya.Specically,weconsolidateknowledgeonurbanisaonandurban
policies aecng formal and informal populaons of urban core and peripheries, the extent
to which local instuons can deal with local hazards, exploring ‘instuonal limits’, and the
importanceofearlywarningsystemtoreducedisasterrisk.Theanalysisanddebatesinthisissue
willhelpimproveourunderstandingontheinterlinkedprocessesthatgeneraterisks,dierenate
experiencesofrisksandriskreduconstrategies,contributetoenhancingknowledgeondisaster
governance, and help diverse stakeholders- parcularly state actors - to undertake necessary
stepstoplanforandreducetherisksexperiencedinpresentandfuturecies.
Thisspecialissuecompilesfourempiricallygroundedandtheorecallyinformedpapers.Inthe
rst paper, Timsina et al. analyse the polical economy of urban change in KathmanduValley
(KV).Specically,authorsexaminethecontradiconsandcontestaonsbroughtbythecentrally
planneddevelopmentandconstruconalprojectsasapartofurbanisaonprocessinKhokana,
a suburb located in the southern part of Lalitpur Metropolitan City (LMC) in KV. The massive
owofcapitalandlabourinthe1990sandduringandaertheMaoistemergency(1996-2006)
framedanenablingenvironmentforthecapitalinvestmentinland,housingandrealestatewhich
acceleratedtheconversionofproducveagriculturallandintobuiltupareasin KV,parcularly
in the periurban areas such as Khokana. Consequently, the rapid urbanisaon densies the
corecies andincreases an uncontrolled urbansprawl ofunplanned growthof built-upareas
in the periphery, which authors categorise as ‘haphazard urbanisaon’. The real estate boom
inducedmanyperiurban farmersto sell theirland, alienang themfromagriculturalacvies.
InKhokana,centralgovernment’siniaonofimplemenngseverallarge-scaleprojectssuchas
theFastTrackandOuterRingRoads,electricitytransmissionlines,andtheBagmaCorridorand
5
Poudel et al. Urbanisation and disaster risks in the Himalaya
SmartCitydevelopmentwithlileornocommunityvoices,hasgeneratedsignicantcommunity
dissasfacon. These phenomena of urban change have brought tension and contradicons
in the communies in various forms, including protests against the public spaces captured by
thepowerfulindividuals,companies,andtheinfrastructuredevelopmentprojectimplemented
by the central government. Consequently, several community members consider themselves
alienatedfromtheirland,tradion,andculture.Authorsanalysesuchurbanisaonasaproduct
ofneoliberal urbanismbecause theywere drivenby theforces of marketand capitaland the
liberalpoliciesadoptedbythecountryaerthe1990s,whichfacilitatedinvestorstobuyahuge
chunkoflandforotherlandusepurposes.Althoughthepolicaleconomyofurbanchangehas
shiedurbanisaonfromcoretoperiphery,manyissuesidenedbythelocalcommunityremain
unresolved.Thus,inthecontextsofstaterestructuringandurbanisingNepaliruralsociees,the
Khokanacaseprovidesanimportantavenuetorethinkurbanisaonpoliciestoachieveinclusive
futurecies.
Inthesecondpaper,Shresthaetal.unfoldtheparadoxofprolongedurbaninformalityissuesand
associateddebatesinNepalbasedon theanalysesofurbaninformality-relatedformalpolicies,
literature, and media publicaons. The paper demonstrates that although there have been
progressiveandparadigmacshisingovernmentpoliciesinaddressingurbaninformalityissues,
policiesissuedbydierentgovernmentauthoriesaredisconnected.Thegovernmentdominantly
framesinformalselersasthe“encroachers”andlegalisaondenestheirselementasarisk.
Hence,formalpraccesoencontradictapparentlyprogressivepolicies,creangambiguityand,
paradoxically, generangnew risks(ofevicon) fortheinformalselersin urban sengs.The
authorsarguethatsuch(dis)conneconsbetweenpoliciesandpraccesandcontradiconswithin
policiessmulatetheselerstoseekpolicalprotecon-sustaininginformalityinNepalamid
therhetorical priority for informal toformaltransion. Inthese contexts,the authors suggest
thattheiniavestoseekapermanentsoluontoproliferangurbaninformalityshouldprevent
instuonalinconsistenciesandbuildontheco-learningprocessesthatenablethepercepons
andambionsofallthestakeholders,includingtheinformalselers-tobeexplored,understood
and reconciled. It is equally important that such iniaves should also pay aenon to the
underlyingsocial,economic,andpolicalfactorsthatinterlinkandsustaininformality.
Thethirdpaper,Ojhaetal.drawingonthecaseofalandslideatDhamilikuwavillageofRainas
Municipality(Lamjung district)and advancing theconcept of ‘instuonallimit’,examinesthe
extenttowhichlocalinstuonscandeliveradaptaonoutcomesintermsofprovidingresponses
totheclimate-induceddisasters.Theauthorsshowthelimits ofexisngpublicandcommunity
instuonstoaddressingclimate-relatedrisksandthevulnerabilityofpeopletodisasterrisks.As
thecasestudyshowed,thescaleandthenatureofriskposedbythelandslide,whichwastriggered
byariveroodbutalsolinkedtoanumberofsocialandenvironmentalfactors,wasbeyondthe
capacityofthelocalcommunityandaectedhouseholdstohandle.Whiletheaectedhouseholds
struggledtoadaptto the landslides,instuonsoperangatthreelevels– community,village
andthe district–delivered too lileto reduce andmanage the landsliderisk andits impacts.
6
New Angle: Nepal Journal of Social Science and Public Policy Vol. 7 ( 1 ), 2021
Whatisparcularlyworryingisthatdespiteradicalpolicsofinclusionanddemocracyspurred
bythecivilwarinNepal,theinstuonalresponseswereextremelylimitedforthepeopleinthe
lowerstrataofthesocialstructure.Theauthorsidenedatleastfourlimitsoflocalinstuons:
a) inera created by the social norms and structure embedded in the exisng instuons; b)
redundancywhereinconvenonalformalandinformalinstuonsarelessrelevanttotacklethe
newchallengesposedbyclimatechange;c)fragmentaonofinstuonaleortsinvolvingpoor
horizontal and vercal coordinaon among organisaons; and d) accountability lapses rooted
inthewiderpolicalsystem.Thiscasestudyrepornginstuonallimitcomesinstarkcontrast
tothehighlevelofexpectaonfromthenewlyinstutedlocalgovernments(municipalies)to
managedisasterrisks.Theauthorsarguethatthenoonof‘instuonallimit’canenhanceour
understandingofwhatinstuonscan(orcannot)deliverforeecvelocal responsetourban
disaster.Thesendingshavemajorimplicaonsfortheopmismplacedontheroleandcapacity
oflocalinstuonstoadapttoclimate-induceddisasterrisks.
Taking into account increasing frequency and severity of risk in urbanising Nepal, in the last
paper, Bhandari et al. discuss the importance of forecast-based ancipatory approaches for
eecvedisasterpreparednessandresponsesandreectonthechallengestoshithedisaster
managementapproachinNepalfrompost-eventrescueandrelieftoforecast-basedapproaches
andacons.Theirobservaons,arguments,andreeconsarebasedonthereviewofliterature
oninternaonalpraccesandapproachestoForecast-basedearlyAcon(FbA)andForecast-based
Financing(FbF),analysisofthe naonal policy documents,andinsightsfromtheirprofessional
engagementsin community-centredoodearlywarningsystemsinNepalandothercountries.
Theauthorspointtothelackofproperdelineaonofauthority,responsibilityandaccountability
betweendierentlevelsofthegovernmentsandlackofadequateinstuonalcapacity,including
thesocio-technologicalknowledgeandoperaonalgapsbetweenagenciesasthemajorbarriers
toproacveearlyacons.Thesechallenges,theyargue,canbeovercomethroughpragmaclegal
provisions, technical guidelines, and protocols to clarify the roles, responsibilies, and strong
policalwill,instuonalcommitment,accountabilityoftheauthoriesandbeerunderstanding
ofthecommunity.Theauthorsconcludebreakingdownexisngsilosbetweendierentdisaster
management agencies and creang enabling instuonal environment to adopt advanced
forecast-based technologies is the key to improving disaster preparedness and responses and
achievingthetargetsoftheNaonalDisasterRiskReduconStrategicAconPlan(2018-2030).
2. CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATION
This special issue analysed disaster risk producon and management in the context of rapid
urbanisaonintheHimalayanregion.Indoingso,our intenonwasto understandandreect
ontheinterrelaonsbetweencurrenturbanisaonanddisastermanagementtrendswithafocus
onthe NepalHimalaya.The fourcasesin thiscollecon exemplifyhow rapidand unregulated
urbanisaonisexposingcommunies,infrastructure,development,andsocietytomultudeof
risks.
7
Poudel et al. Urbanisation and disaster risks in the Himalaya
The cases are social phenomena specic to me and place (Ragin, 1992) so their selecon is
inherently parcularintermsofsociety,placeandtheirimportancetothecommunity(Burawoy,
1991).Allstudiedcasesconsistently and explicitlydocumentthe existence of a lack of coordinaon
(in terms of sharing knowledge, capacity and resources) among governing instuons of
urbanisaon and disaster risk management which in turn exacerbate mul-hazard risks. The
rstcasestudyunpacksthelackofpolicalcommitment,instuonalcapacityandcoordinaon
reinforcedundertherubricofneoliberalurbanpolicy,thusthestate-ledintervenonsconnue
to accelerate rather than control haphazard urbanisaon. Such unplanned, haphazard and
capitalist urbanisaon has been termed “a disaster waing to happen” (Madden, 2021). The
lack of commitment, capacity and coordinaonis further evidenced in the second case study
whichtakesacloserlookattheparadoxofprolongedurbaninformalityissuesinNepal.Thisstudy
uncoversthepolicalandpolicyentanglementsofinformaltoformaltransioning,whichworkto
undermineeortsatresolvingurbaninformalityissues(seealsoSharp,2022;Banksetal.,2019).
In line with Allen’s (2006) warnings that treang community-based instuons as a panacea
to disaster management can be problemac, the third paper points to the limits of local risk
governance in the contexts of entrenched social norms and structures, and poor instuonal
capacity,coordinaonandaccountability.Finally,thefourthcasestudyfurthersubstanatesthat
theoperaonalgapsbetweenagenciesandthelackofinstuonalcapacityandproperdelineaon
ofauthority,responsibilityandaccountabilitybetweendierentlevelsofthegovernmentsarethe
majorbarrierstoproacveimplementaonofearlywarningaconsinNepalwhichundoubtedly
increasethevulnerabilitytofuturedisasters.
Althoughtheestablishmentofthe federalstructurehas opened awaytodevolveauthorityto
localgovernments,studieshavehighlightedthereisalackofinstuonalcapabilitytoundertake
the roles entrusted to them (Khatri et al., 2022). Consequently, the governing instuons at
mulplescaleslacktheabilitytoregulatehaphazardurbanisaonandassociatedriskproducon.
Byanalysingthecasesincludedinthisspecialissue,weconcludethatwhilepolicalrestructuring
and decentralised local governance have improved authority to devise policies and acons,
enhancingoverallinstuonalcapabilityremainsacrucialandunmetneed.Thisneedsclarityin
distribuonofauthorityacrossdierentlevelsofgovernmentsandrobustmechanismsforsharing
knowledge,technology,andotherresources,which,subsequently,willhelpenhanceinstuonal
capacity to understand local risks and prepare for and respond to mul-hazard disaster risks
interfacinghaphazardurbanisaon.
3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The editorial team would like to thank the United Kingdom Research Iniave (UKRI) Global
ChallengesResearchFund (GCRF) grant“Tomorrow’sCies“ (Urban Disaster Risk) Hub project
(NE/S009000/1)forthenancialsupportforthepublicaonofthisspecialissue.Therst,second
andfourthauthors’involvementinthisspecialissuewasalsoparallyfundedbytheUKRI-GCRF-
8
New Angle: Nepal Journal of Social Science and Public Policy Vol. 7 ( 1 ), 2021
EconomicandSocialResearchCouncil(ESRC)grantES/T00259X/1“PolicalCapabilies”project.
Special thanks and congratulaons to all the contribung authors for their perseverance and
paence. We aregrateful to the anonymous reviewers who provided valuable comments and
feedbackandalsothankeverybodywhoresponsedtothiscallforpaper.Weextendourthanksto
Mr.BinodAdhikariandMs.RojaniManandharfortheirhelpingenerangguresforthiseditorial
paper.AbigthankstoMs.GyanuMaskey,Ms.AvipshaRayamajhi,Ms.ParbaPandey,Ms.Monika
Giri,andMr.PradipDhakalfortheirecienttechnicalandadministravehelpsthroughout.
4. REFERENCES
Allen,K.M.,2006.Community-baseddisasterpreparednessandclimateadaptaon:Localcapacity-
buildinginthePhilippines.Disasters,30,pp.81-101.
Anbalagan,R.,1993.Environmentalhazardsofunplannedurbanizaonofmountainousterrains:Acase
studyofahimalayantown.Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology,26,pp.179-
184.
Aryal,K.R.,2014.DisastervulnerabilityinNepal.Internaonal Journal of Disaster Risk Reducon,9,
pp.137-146.
Banks,N.,Lombard,M.andMitlin,D.,2019.Urbaninformalityasasiteofcricalanalysis.The Journal of
Development Studies,56,pp.223-238.
Bhaarai,K.andConway,D.,2010UrbanvulnerabiliesintheKathmanduvalley,Nepal:Visualizaonsof
human/hazardinteracons.Journal of Geographic Informaon System, 2,pp.63-84.
Burawoy,M.,1991.,Theextendedcasemethod.In:M.Burawoy,A.Burton,A.A.Aferguson,K.J.Fox,
J.Gamson,N.Cartrell,L.Hurst,C.Kurzman,L.SalxingerandJ.Schiman,eds.1991.Ethnography
unbounded: Power and resistance in the modern metropolis.California:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Coppola,D.P.,2011.Introducon to internaonal disaster management, Boston,Buerworth-
Heinemann.
Gabriela,M.E.a.A.,2013.Urban growth and spaal transion in Nepal an inial assessment,Direcons
inDevelopment.Washington,DC:WorldBank.doi:10.1596/978-0-8213-9659-9.License:Creave
CommonsAribuonCCBY3.0.
Gurung,P.,2021.Challenginginfrastructuralorthodoxies:Policalandeconomicgeographiesofa
himalayanroad.Geoforum,120,pp.103-112.
Ishaque,A.,Shrestha,M.andChhetri,N.,2017.Rapidurbangrowthinthekathmanduvalley,Nepal:
MonitoringlanduselandcoverdynamicsofaHimalayancitywithlandsatimageries.Environments,4,
p.72.
Jodha,N.S.,1992.Mountainperspecveanditsulity:Aframeworkfordevelopmentstrategies.The
Himalayan Review,XX-XXIII,pp.11-24.
K.C.,K.andPahari,K.,2011.AstudyonsquaerselementsofKathmanduusingGIS,aerialphotography,
remotesensingandhouseholdsurvey.Nepalese Journal of Geoinformacs,10,pp.1-8.
Kargel,J.S.etal.,2016.GeomorphicandgeologiccontrolsofgeohazardsinducedbyNepal’s2015Gorkha
earthquake.Science,351,aac8353.
Khatri,D.B.,Nighngale,A.J.,Ojha,H.,Maskey,G.andLama‘Tsumpa’,P.N.,2022.Mul-scalepolicsin
9
Poudel et al. Urbanisation and disaster risks in the Himalaya
climatechange:Themismatchofauthorityandcapabilityinfederalizingnepal.Climate Policy,pp.1-
13.
Madden,D.J.,2021.Disasterurbanizaon:Thecitybetweencrisisandcalamity.Sociologica,15,pp.91-
108.
Man,N.,Forrester,J.andEnsor,J.,2018.Whatisequitableresilience?World Development,109,pp.197-
205.
Mesta,C.,Cremen,G.andGalasso,C.,2022.Urbangrowthmodellingandsocialvulnerabilityassessment
forahazardousKathmanduValley.Scienc Reports,12(1),pp.1-16.
NPC,2019.Fieenth plan - approach(inNepali).Kathmandu:NaonalPlanningCommission(NPC).
Panday,R.K.,1984.Physical geography of Nepal(inNepali), Jawalakhel,Lalitpur,TethisPandey.
Poudel,D.P.andBlackburn,S.,2020.MappingDRRinstuonsandactorsacrossscalesfromcentreto
local:Kathmandu,Nepal.SIAS,Tomorrow’sCies,UKRI&GCRF.
Poudel,D.P.,Ensor,J.andAlejandro,B.,2021.ProduconofrisksandlocalriskgovernanceinKathmandu
valley.SIAS,Tomorrow’sCies,GCRF&UKRI.
Ragin,C.C.,1992.Introducon:Casesof“Whatisacase?”In:C.C.RaginandH.S.Becker,eds.1992.What
is a case?: Exploring the foundaons of social inquiry.CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.1-17.
Rimal,B.,Sloan,S.,Keshtkar,H.,Sharma,R.,Rijal,S.andShrestha,U.B.,2020.Paernsofhistoricaland
futureurbanexpansioninNepal.Remote Sensing, 12,p.628.
Rusk,J.,Maharjan,A.,Tiwari,P.,Chen,T.K.,Shneiderman,S.,Turin,M.andSeto,K.C.,2022.Mul-hazard
suscepbilityandexposureassessmentoftheHinduKushHimalaya.Sci Total Environ,804,150039.
Ruszczyk,H.A.,2018.Aconnuumofperceivedurbanrisk–fromtheGorkhaearthquaketoeconomic
insecurity.Environment and Urbanizaon,30,pp.317-332.
Sengupta,U.,2011.Thedividedcity?:Squaers’strugglesforurbanspaceinKathmandu.In:J.S.Anjaria
andC.McFarlane,eds.2011.Urban navigaons: polics, space and the city in South Asia. Routledge,
pp.105-137.
Sharp,D.,2022.Haphazardurbanisaon:Urbaninformality,policsandpowerinEgypt.Urban Studies,
59,pp.734-749.
Shrestha,A.,Poudel,D.P.andKhatri,D.,2020.Development, disasters and squaer selements in
urban Nepal: A review of characteriscs and challenges.WorkingReport.hps://sias-southasia.org/
development-disasters-and-squaer-selements-in-urban-nepal-a-review-of-characteriscs-and-
challenges/
Shrestha,A.,Poudel,D.P.andKhatri,D.B.,2021.Recognionandreconciliaonremainpivotalto
resolveissuesofinformalselers.NepalPress,[online]Availableat:hps://english.nepalpress.
com/2021/06/03/recognion-and-reconciliaon-remain-pivotal-to-resolve-issues-of-informal-selers/
[Accessed03June2021].
Singh,S.,TanvirHassan,S.M.,Hassan,M.andBhar,N.,2019.Urbanisaonandwaterinsecurityinthe
HinduKushHimalaya:InsightsfromBangladesh,India,NepalandPakistan.Water Policy, 22,pp.9-32.
Timsina,N.P.,Shrestha,A.,Poudel,D.P.andUpadhyay,R.,2020.TrendofurbangrowthinNepalwitha
focusinKathmanduvalley:Areviewofprocessesanddriversofchange.Tomorrow’s Cies Working
Paper 001.DOI: hp://dx.doi.org/10.7488/era/722
10
New Angle: Nepal Journal of Social Science and Public Policy Vol. 7 ( 1 ), 2021
Tiwari,P.C.,Tiwari,A.andJohsi,B.,2018.UrbangrowthinHimalaya:Understandingtheprocessand
oponsforsustainabledevelopment.Journal of Urban and Regional Studies on Contemporary India,
4,pp.15-27.
UNDESA,2014.Worldurbanizaonprospects:The2014revision.
VanAsselt,M.B.A.andRenn,O.,2011.Riskgovernance.Journal of Risk Research,14,pp.431-449.
Walker,B.,2011.Urban peaks in the Himalayas.ChinaDialogue,[online]Availableat:hps://
chinadialogue.net/en/cies/4306-urban-peaks-in-the-himalayas/
Wester,P.,Mishra,A.,Mukherji,A.andShrestha,A.B.,eds.2019.The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment:
Mountains, climate change, sustainability and people, Kathmandu:ICIMOD,HIMAP,Springer.
WymannVonDach,S.,Bachmann,F.,Alcántara-Ayala,I.,Fuchs,S.,Keiler,M.,Mishra,A.andSötz,E.,
eds.2017.Safer lives and livelihoods in mountains: Making the sendai framework for disaster risk
reducon work for sustainable mountain development, Bern,Switzerland:CentreforDevelopment
andEnvironment(CDE),UniversityofBern,withBernOpenPublishing(BOP).