Transparency and accountability should not be looked and perceived as a guiding principles but should be looked as a tools to be applied wherever every stakeholders can be benefited. IN our country Nepal it has been a trend and a culture to look every activities as a Debit and credit of financial statement. That means everyone is expecting positive cash flows and Net profit after tax. If nothing in hand then no dedication and interest on the respective task.
Humanity also need to be considered ,this has slowly being a rare issues. This has also some how created the big questions about transparency and accountability of INGO’S.INGO motive is to pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interest of poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services or undertake the community development. Where there is written that INGO should exploit the budget? no where.so the originality and ethics of INGO must be implemented rather than deriving materialistic definition of INGO. Otherwise misleading perception may create a perception error and ambiguity about INGO working methodology.
Yes, I think the decision made by social welfare council will create transparency and accountability for INGO in Nepal. Let us not put every INGO in a one bucket and generalize. But the positive message and carefulness it spread in every steps of INGO activities will spread a positive vibrant of INGO activities.Bank regulations are a form of government regulation which subject banks to certain requirements, restrictions and guidelines. This regulatory structure creates transparency between banking institutions and the individuals and corporations with whom they conduct business, among other things.Given the interconnectedness of the banking industry and the reliance that the national and global economy hold on banks, it is important for regulatory agencies to maintain control over the standardized practices of these institutions. Supporters of such regulation often hinge their arguments on the "too big to fail" notion.There are important controversies and critiques of the effectiveness of INGOs.
The first critique is that money provided by INGOs does not actually reach the neediest people. Especially when administrative costs are high within an organization, people wonder whether their money is going to help developing nations or into a CEO’s pocket. If a country’s government is corrupt, there is also the possibility that INGO funds are being siphoned off by the government. if NRB regulated effectively and efficiently then the desired group can be benefited.The NRB also will disclose its financial statemetnt then the question of fraud would not be arised.
This world is also bio informatic and technical age.The use of social sites,websites can also be used for monitoring and regulation the activities of INGO in nepal.Websites like Charity Navigator and GiveWell are intended to provide information on the breakdown of money and donations spent within the organization. Along with the approval of the UN based on its criteria of the NGOs, these websites promote transparency and accountability in international non-governmental organizations so that people looking to make a donation can make an educated decision based on what they want to support and if their money will be used effectively. These website knowledge need to be spread on everyone in Nepal.There is also another argument regarding the accountability of INGOs. These nongovernmental organizations need to account for possible consequences. For example, INGOs such as Oxfam and Greenpeace influence many people's lives as they provide important social and relief services. These people who rely on INGOs, however, do not have the means to affect the activities of these INGOs. Thus, in order for these INGOs to exercise their power responsibly and work for the sake of the people who are affected by their activities, they need to have accountability for their activities. How the funds were used and how much their aims were achieved should be exposed.
So in Nepal if INGOS financial transaction is brought under NRB then it would be fruitful.There are many examples that shows that after being supervised by concerned authority many activities has been improved.
Humanity also need to be considered ,this has slowly being a rare issues. This has also some how created the big questions about transparency and accountability of INGO’S.INGO motive is to pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interest of poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services or undertake the community development. Where there is written that INGO should exploit the budget? no where.so the originality and ethics of INGO must be implemented rather than deriving materialistic definition of INGO. Otherwise misleading perception may create a perception error and ambiguity about INGO working methodology.
Yes, I think the decision made by social welfare council will create transparency and accountability for INGO in Nepal. Let us not put every INGO in a one bucket and generalize. But the positive message and carefulness it spread in every steps of INGO activities will spread a positive vibrant of INGO activities.Bank regulations are a form of government regulation which subject banks to certain requirements, restrictions and guidelines. This regulatory structure creates transparency between banking institutions and the individuals and corporations with whom they conduct business, among other things.Given the interconnectedness of the banking industry and the reliance that the national and global economy hold on banks, it is important for regulatory agencies to maintain control over the standardized practices of these institutions. Supporters of such regulation often hinge their arguments on the "too big to fail" notion.There are important controversies and critiques of the effectiveness of INGOs.
The first critique is that money provided by INGOs does not actually reach the neediest people. Especially when administrative costs are high within an organization, people wonder whether their money is going to help developing nations or into a CEO’s pocket. If a country’s government is corrupt, there is also the possibility that INGO funds are being siphoned off by the government. if NRB regulated effectively and efficiently then the desired group can be benefited.The NRB also will disclose its financial statemetnt then the question of fraud would not be arised.
This world is also bio informatic and technical age.The use of social sites,websites can also be used for monitoring and regulation the activities of INGO in nepal.Websites like Charity Navigator and GiveWell are intended to provide information on the breakdown of money and donations spent within the organization. Along with the approval of the UN based on its criteria of the NGOs, these websites promote transparency and accountability in international non-governmental organizations so that people looking to make a donation can make an educated decision based on what they want to support and if their money will be used effectively. These website knowledge need to be spread on everyone in Nepal.There is also another argument regarding the accountability of INGOs. These nongovernmental organizations need to account for possible consequences. For example, INGOs such as Oxfam and Greenpeace influence many people's lives as they provide important social and relief services. These people who rely on INGOs, however, do not have the means to affect the activities of these INGOs. Thus, in order for these INGOs to exercise their power responsibly and work for the sake of the people who are affected by their activities, they need to have accountability for their activities. How the funds were used and how much their aims were achieved should be exposed.
So in Nepal if INGOS financial transaction is brought under NRB then it would be fruitful.There are many examples that shows that after being supervised by concerned authority many activities has been improved.
