𝐆𝐃𝐆 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐒𝐤𝐞𝐰𝐞𝐝 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐈𝐧 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠

…𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒇𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒓𝒂𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒔𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒔 𝒄𝒓𝒖𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒔, 𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒄𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒔 𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓 𝒇𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕

By Lhendup Wangmo

A recent review of the Gewog Development Grant (GDG) has revealed significant disparities in resource allocation across key result areas, raising concerns about financial planning, oversight, and prioritization in developmental activities. The findings highlight a strong inclination toward infrastructure projects, particularly farm road and Lhakhang development, at the expense of critical sectors such as health, education, and livestock support.

Over the three financial years from 2021 to 2024, farm road development emerged as the highest-funded sector, with expenditures amounting to Nu. 2,880.149 million. Lhakhang development followed with Nu. 834.03 million, while agriculture support received Nu. 634.895 million. In contrast, health and education received significantly lower allocations at Nu. 589.329 million and Nu. 482.924 million, respectively. Livestock development was the least funded sector, with only Nu. 220.367 million allocated over three years.

The study found that farm road development was prioritized in almost all 20 Dzongkhags, except for Haa and Gasa, where Lhakhang development received higher allocations. Furthermore, the review revealed that several projects categorized under farm road development, such as approach roads to Lhakhangs and private residences, did not align with the intended objectives outlined in the Farm Road Development Guidelines. A notable example includes the Pangringku to Thrichu Goenpa road in Trashiyangtse, which was completed in May 2024 to connect Therichu Goenpa rather than serving human settlements or agricultural land.

The declining trend in livestock development funding over the years was also a cause for concern. The allocation dropped from Nu. 101.77 million in FY 2021-22 to Nu. 87.35 million in 2022-23, further declining to Nu. 30.03 million in 2023-24. This shift in priorities suggests a lack of focus on the economic potential of the livestock sector, which plays a crucial role in rural livelihoods.

Gewog authorities have frequently cited insufficient budgets as a key reason for slow progress in health, education, and agriculture. At Shali Primary School in Shumar Gewog, Pemagatshel, students continue to use desks and chairs from the 1980s and 1990s due to the Gewog’s minimal investment in education only Nu. 2.4 million over three years, accounting for a mere 4% of the total budget. Similarly, a case of inadequate health funding was observed in Merak Gewog, Trashigang.

Despite the presence of clear guidelines on resource allocation, the review found that the Capital Grant’s Resource Allocation Formula was not applied in implementing the Five-Year Plan. A significant portion of the Capital Block Grant 51.05% was funneled into farm road development, overshadowing essential sectors like agriculture (food security), health, and education. Lhakhang development accounted for 14.78% of the capital grant, leaving only 34.17% for other priority areas.

The findings suggest that the current expenditure pattern is misaligned with the objectives outlined in the Local Government Key Result Areas (LGKRAs). The 2024 Annual Grants Guidelines emphasize achieving balanced developmental progress by 2029, but the current trend raises concerns about the feasibility of meeting these targets. Without corrective measures to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources, key developmental goals in education, healthcare, and agriculture may remain unattainable.

The review also identified significant lapses in implementation and monitoring. Despite provisions in the Annual Grant Guideline 2024 mandating responsibility, accountability, and transparency in project execution, a lack of status reports and inadequate supervision have hindered progress. Clause 11 of the guideline allows Gewogs to focus on their annual priorities rather than addressing all LGKRAs simultaneously, but this flexibility has resulted in an uneven distribution of resources, with repeated allocations favoring infrastructure projects over other essential services.

As local governments continue to manage public resources, the findings highlights the need for improved financial planning, stricter adherence to guidelines, and a more balanced approach to funding allocation. Ensuring that all key sectors receive adequate attention will be crucial in achieving sustainable development and addressing the pressing needs of communities across the country.

The report highlights key concerns in Gewog planning, resource allocation, and monitoring. While prioritization through community meetings may be beneficial, the absence of scientific assessment tools, such as SWOT analysis and Participatory Rural Appraisal, has led to unstructured planning. Many Gewogs do not document or review their use of these tools, making it difficult to ensure alignment with Local Government Key Result Areas (LGKRAs). Additionally, there is no segregation of duties between those prioritizing and those approving activities, raising accountability concerns.

Gewogs are required to evaluate the outcomes of implemented activities, but impact assessments are either not conducted or not documented. This lack of monitoring undermines the ability to refine future planning cycles and weakens adherence to development guidelines.

Gewogs invest significantly in agriculture and livestock, but the sustainability and impact of these investments remain unclear. A total of Nu. 634.895 million was spent on seeds, seedlings, and agricultural support activities across 20 Dzongkhags in the past three financial years. While distribution records exist, reports on crop yields, survival rates, and economic returns are missing. Specific cases, such as unaccounted cardamom rhizomes in Khar Gewog, failed avocado saplings in Jamkhar Gewog, and unused corn flake machines in Tongmizangtsha Gewog, illustrate inefficiencies.

Additionally, a lack of coordination between Gewog administrations and RNR offices, which operate under Dzongkhag supervision, further complicates oversight.
Despite the Annual Grant Guidelines capping Lhakhang-related spending at 10% of the annual grant, Gewogs allocated 14.78% (Nu. 834.03 million) toward Lhakhang development between 2021 and 2024, making it the second-highest expenditure category after farm road development. Mongar Dzongkhag had the highest spending at Nu. 111.46 million. The disproportionate allocation of funds to religious structures has reduced investments in other critical sectors, indicating non-compliance with financial guidelines.

The report recommends strengthening the Gewog Planning Cycle by enforcing the use of scientific tools, aligning resource allocation with LGKRAs, and distributing funds equitably across all sectors. Improved monitoring mechanisms are necessary to track progress and assess impact. Leveraging technology for real-time reporting and performance tracking could enhance transparency and efficiency.