Objectives

Nepal, a kingdom under a caste-based social order until the middle of the twentieth century, a centralized monarchy under a “party-less democracy” whose ideal citizens were Nepali speaking Hindus from 1960 to 1990, and a multiethnic, multilingual and multiparty Hindu kingdom until the recent past, is in the process of becoming a federal democratic republic. A variety of political claims have made by individuals and organizations claiming allegiance to a wide variety of ethnic, caste, regional, religious, and other intermediate groups. Moreover, people supposed to belong to these groups have acted in diverse ways, not necessarily according to their political claims. This project attempts to grasp and analyze the constellation of these discourses and practices, focusing on the concept of “samaveshikaran”, the Nepali translation of the English word “inclusion.” Our aim is to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the history and current situation of Nepal, through a multifaceted exploration of the relationships and inconsistencies among (1) various movements of intermediate groups partly mediated by relatively new globally or regionally circulating concepts such as “indigenous peoples” and “Dalit”; (2) policies and activities of political parties from Maoist to Royalist; and (3) actual situations of local people that should be revealed by anthropological fieldwork.

Research Results

During the three and a half years in which this research was conducted, Nepal experienced a political movement from the dissolution of the first constituent assembly to the election for and formation of the second constituent assembly. However, the process toward the enactment of a new constitution stalled. While the discussions conducted inside and outside Nepal about “inclusion” in the country considerably progressed in terms of both quality and quantity, various domestic responses to the movement of “inclusion” became clear. Premised on the above, this research clarified specific situations in “inclusion” in Nepal and its peripheral areas based on specific studies by members of this research, and had a great number of discussions to comparatively review these situations. Specifically, we firstly studied the history of law and censuses and then analyzed the institutional and substantive backgrounds of the issues in detail. Secondly, we clarified the movement premised on group categories such as castes and ethnic groups, which had been one of the focuses in the discussions of “inclusion” in Nepal. In so doing, we paid attention to the use of the concept beyond boundaries around the globe, such as “indigenous people” and “Dalit,” including the cases of choosing such a concept from plural conceptual frameworks and the cases of using such a concept among people who had not used it before. We also paid attention to the inner diversity of people within the mentioned society, including activists. Meanwhile, we showed the existence of issues in a new way in relation to the key concept of “inclusion” regarding people such as Christians, Tibetan refugees and victims of human trafficking, who are difficult to find using given frameworks such as nation states, ethnic groups, castes, and gender. It also became clear through this research that the factor of emigration and working abroad as a seasonal migrant laborer is essential to understand the current situation in contemporary Nepal including the issues derived from “inclusion.” This research involved discussions and an exchange of opinions with several leading Nepalese researchers and a study comparing the situations in India and Bhutan. We were able to clarify the process in a multi-faceted way from ethnographical statements in which the term “inclusion” had been translated and used in various ways, affecting the awareness and behaviors of people. By doing so, we were also able to present a new integrated understanding of the history and current situation of Nepalese society.