Thank you for the invitation and for asking me to share my views on strengthening the ecosystem for scaling Indian investment in Nepal. Let me begin on a positive note by acknowledging something we all know: Indian investment in Nepal is longstanding, deep, diverse, resilient, and well-diversified across various sectors. It is rooted in geography, trust, and people-to-people ties, having endured political transitions, policy and regulatory changes, and various economic cycles. From a multilateral perspective, India is already Nepal’s most natural economic partner due to geography, market integration, and existing links. Therefore, the question is no longer whether Indian investment will come, but how much, how fast, and of what quality. While the "Investing in Nepal" handbook recently shared with me by President Sunil KC is a well-prepared document, I will focus my talk today on five core points and priority themes based on my own knowledge and experience rather than citing existing facts and

The first point concerns our current situation, which I view as a solid foundation that remains below its true potential. While Indian Foreign Direct Investment is significant, it is far below what Nepal’s proximity should suggest. Much of this investment is currently relationship-driven rather than ecosystem-driven; indeed, many investors suggest they are here despite the system, not because of it. This is both a warning and an opportunity, as my experience at the ADB showed that countries move much faster when they transition from relationship-based to system-based investment models. This leads to my second point regarding key bottlenecks: the primary issue for investors is not a lack of incentives, but a lack of predictability. Feedback across South Asia indicates that three issues matter more than tax holidays: policy stability to avoid frequent rule changes or retrospective interpretations, the elimination of regulatory fragmentation where too many overlapping agencies lack a single point of accountability, and reliable contract enforcement to prevent delays in dispute resolution and provide clear exit

Looking at what regional competitors do better provide a clear lesson: no country wins on incentives alone; they win on clarity, credibility, governance, and coordination. China excels at speed, scale, and strong state coordination once a decision is made. Bangladesh focused on the "big bet" of manufacturing exports with consistent policy over decades. Thailand prioritized deep value-chain integration and serious investor aftercare, while Singapore is known for absolute predictability and the belief that institutions matter more than incentives. To match this, Nepal needs a new way of thinking characterized by four major mindset shifts. First, we must move from "approval" to "facilitation," where the government acts as a partner and provides a single window or door for decisions rather than many corridors to walk. Second, we must shift from projects to platforms, building ecosystems like industrial parks and energy corridors because ecosystems, not just projects, attract investors. Third, we should move from offering incentives to providing "insurance" through risk-sharing instruments, currency hedging, and easy exit mechanisms, which is where multilaterals can assist. Finally, we must move from a bilateral to a regional logic, positioning Nepal as a trusted near-shore partner and a vital link in South Asian value chains, especially in energy, agri-processing, tourism, and digital services.

This moment matters because we are entering a world of trade fragmentation and supply chain reconfiguration. While this could be painful, it creates a unique opportunity for NICCI members as Indian firms look to de-risk and diversify. In this environment, near-shoring and trusted neighbors gain a distinct advantage. Nepal can benefit immensely if it offers policy certainty, speed, and reliability; otherwise, investment will bypass the country not because it is uncompetitive, but because it is unpredictable. In this context, NICCI has a unique role to play as a problem-solver. It should continue to aggregate investor pain points, provide structured feedback to the government with rigorous follow-up, and champion a small number of high-impact reforms. Public-private dialogues are most effective when they are focused and solution-oriented.

In closing, Nepal does not need to compete directly with the scale of India, China, or Singapore; it needs to compete with investor hesitation. Indian investors already have immense goodwill here. What they need now is confidence. If Nepal can offer predictability, coordination, good governance, and a sub-regional value-chain vision, I am convinced that Indian investment will not just increase—it will deepen and fundamentally transform the economy. Thank you.