This study analyzes the impact of the 2015 Nepal earthquake on economic growth and evaluates the effectiveness of humanitarian aid in mitigating the damage caused by the disaster. In the aftermath of natural disasters, emergency relief funds are quickly allocated to support victims, particularly in developing countries that face challenges in responding to such crises. These funds help with immediate survival and recovery efforts while also contributing to societal stability and long-term reconstruction. As the frequency of environmental disasters increases due to climate change, the demand for humanitarian aid has grown significantly.

The economic impact of natural disasters varies depending on the affected country’s capacity and the scale of financial assistance it receives. Developing nations, with limited disaster response capabilities compared to developed countries, tend to experience more severe consequences. Emergency relief funds are designed to address this disparity, and their effect on economic growth can vary based on the scale of the funding provided. This study investigates the effects of the 2015 Nepal earthquake and assesses the role of emergency relief funds in mitigating the damage.

Chapter 2 of this study examines the concept and definition of emergency relief funds, provides examples of their application, and outlines their operational mechanisms. Emergency relief funds are established to provide rapid humanitarian assistance during emergencies such as natural disasters, wars, and accidents. These funds, sourced from contributions by international organizations, governments, and NGOs, are used for the provision of emergency supplies, recovery efforts, and medical assistance, ensuring the protection of lives and safety. One key example is the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which manages the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF). This fund mobilizes resources during crises and issues Flash Appeals to the international community. Allocation plans are determined through discussions within the UN OCHA’s cluster system, where sector-specific agencies collaborate, exchange information, and make decisions.

Chapter 3 explores the economic impact of the 2015 Nepal earthquake, investigates potential resource allocation distortions, and analyzes the role of emergency relief funds. The study begins by identifying the earthquake’s impact on economic growth. According to the literature on natural disasters and economic growth, four hypotheses exist: the “trend recovery hypothesis,” where the economy temporarily declines but eventually returns to its original trajectory; the “irreversible loss hypothesis,” where the economy fails to recover; the “sustainable recovery beyond the trend hypothesis,” where the economy grows beyond its original trajectory due to disaster-induced reforms; and the “creative destruction hypothesis,” where the destruction of outdated capital leads to increased productivity. The findings of this study align with the “irreversible loss hypothesis,” as the affected regions in Nepal failed to return to their original economic trajectory, showing a relative decline compared to unaffected regions.

The economic impact of the earthquake was more severe in areas with a lower proportion of upper-caste populations compared to regions with higher proportions. Possible explanations for this discrepancy include imbalances in resource allocation or differences in disaster recovery capabilities. Upper-caste populations are more likely to have connections with groups responsible for resource distribution. However, this study finds no significant differences in the amount of emergency relief funds allocated between regions with higher and lower upper-caste populations. This suggests that the internal processes of UN OCHA, which assess sector-specific funding needs and priorities, minimize the potential for caste-based bias in resource distribution.

The disparity in disaster recovery capabilities could account for the differences in economic impact. In Nepal, caste-based differences in income levels, asset ownership, and access to information contribute to varying recovery capacities. The study further examines the effects of emergency relief funds, revealing that in regions with lower upper-caste populations, emergency relief funds positively affected economic growth, unlike in areas with higher upper-caste populations. This is attributed to diminishing returns on resources in regions with relatively lower human and physical capital. By focusing support on regions with lower upper-caste populations, more efficient and equitable outcomes can be achieved.