Pa ge 1 Pa ge 22 4 American Journal of Arts and Human Science (AJAHS) Federalism in Nepal: Integration and Accommodation of Ethnic Diversities Raju Kumar Rai1, Puspa Raj Rai1* Volume 4 Issue 2, Year 2025 ISSN: 2832-451X (Online) DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajahs.v4i2.4450 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Article Information ABSTRACT Received: January 31, 2025 Accepted: March 04, 2025 Published: May 10, 2025 Ethnic diversity rather than homogeneity is the defining feature of many countries around the world today. Ethnic diversity refers to the presence of different ethnic or cultural groups, coexistence and interaction of individuals from various social, cultural, religious, economic and political backgrounds in the community and society. Like ethnic diversity, federalism is a form of government in which sovereignty or political power is constitutionally divided between the central government and local governments. This paper examines that how federal system integrates, accommodates and acknowledge ethnic diversities and differences in multiethnic societies? Theoretically, this study is primarily informed by prominent scholar Will Kimlicka’s (2005) argument which deals federalism as a mechanism for accommodating and responding ethnic diversities in plural societies. At this point, this study is based on data collected from both primary and secondary sources of information. The secondary data has been gathered from several published and unpublished books, journals, articles and research reports. For primary information, in-depth interview, observation, key informant interview and focused group discussions were conducted with the local people’s representatives, political leaders, ethnic activists and civil servants. Informants of this study were selected through purposive sampling method. Finally, this study confirms that federalism serves as a key mechanism for accommodating and integrating ethnic diversity by decentralizing power and providing a platform for diverse communities to maintain and promote their distinct identities. As a result, federalism fosters a more inclusive and integrated society, where ethnic diversity is recognized as a strength, contributing to both national unity and social solidarity. Keywords Ethnic Conflict, Ethnic Group, Ethnicity, Federalism, Recognition 1 Tribhuvan University, Sociology Department, Patan Multiple Campus, Patandhoka, Nepal * Corresponding author’s email: raipusparaj@gmail.com INTRODUCTION Ethnic Diversity and Federalism: General Understanding Ethnic diversity rather than homogeneity is the major defining feature of many countries around the world today (Fessa, 2010). More than 90 per cent of the states in the world are ethnically plural in character and these states are home to almost 95 per cent of the world’s population (Gurr, 1993). Ethnic diversity refers to the presence of different ethnic groups within a society, community and a country. It encompasses the representation of individuals and groups from various ethnic backgrounds and contexts. It recognizes and respects the differences and uniqueness of various ethnic groups by promoting their diverse perspectives and experiences. Moreover, ethnic diversity can be conceptualized as ethnic fragmentation (fractionalization) and polarization of ethnic groups (Koopmans & Schaeffer, 2015; Dinesen, Schaeffer and Sonderskov, 2020). Like ethnic diversity, federalism is also an important issue that has fascinated scholar’s attention in multiethnic societies. As defined by Riker (1975) ‘federalism is a political organization in which the activities of government are divided between regional governments and a central government in such a way that each kind of government has some activities on which it makes final decisions’ (Lijphart, 1999). Drawing on the works of Garran (1929) federalism is a form of government in which sovereignty or political power is constitutionally divided between the central government and local governments (Paleker, 2006; Singh, 2005). For Burris (2001) & Borzel (nd) federalism is a set of institutional arrangements and spatial division of power between two or more levels of government in a given political system. It is, moreover, considered as a mechanism for accommodating ethno-cultural pluralism and seen as the most appropriate form of the state structure for ethnically plural and divided societies (Kymlicka, 2005). Hence, a multi-ethnic state is always confronted with the complex problem of managing, integrating and accommodating ethnic diversity (Fessa, 2010). In this regard, my discussions related to ethnic diversity and federalism is theoretically informed by prominent scholar Will Kimlicka’s (2005) argument which deals federalism as a mechanism for integrating, accommodating and responding ethnic diversities in plural societies. Being based on above argument, this paper primarily examines that how federal system integrates, responds and accommodates ethnic diversities in plural societies? or what are the key mechanisms of federal system to integrate, respond and accommodate ethnic diversities in plural societies? MATERIALS AND METHODS This study is based on earlier filed work carried out on September 2023 to November 2023 within the Hatuwagadhi Rural Municipality (ward no 2) of Pa ge 22 5 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts Hum. Sci. 4(2) 224-230, 2025 Bhojpur district in eastern Nepal. The diverse ethnic caste composition (Table 1) in terms of caste, ethnicity, language, religion, culture and occupation is the main reason behind the selection of this area. This study is primarily based on data collected from both primary and secondary sources of information. The secondary data has been gathered from several published and unpublished books, journals, articles and research reports. This study, methodologically, has employed a combination approach qualitative and quantitative to examine that how federal system integrates and accommodates ethnic diversities in multiethnic societies. The informants of this study were different ethnic and social activists, teachers and political leaders. Informants were selected through purposive sampling method to collect primary information and their perceptions towards ethnic diversity and federal system in plural society. The information of this study was gathered from different tools and techniques like structured interview schedule, observation, focused group discussion and key informant interviews based on descriptive and explorative research design. Despite the study area, I had conducted in-debt interview schedule with the different federal experts as key informants in this study to get more and additional information regarding the key mechanism of federal system to integrate, accommodate and respond ethnic diversities in plural societies. Table 1: Ethnic caste composition and population in Hatuwagadhi/study area. SN Social group Population SN Social group Population 1 Hayu 4 16 Bhote 1 2 Sunuwar 18 17 Bhujel 180 3 Sarki (Mijar) 247 18 Pariyar (Darji) 207 4 Sarki (Charmakar) 85 19 Pariyar (Damai) 185 5 Hill Brahman 66 20 Newar 466 6 Hill Chhetri 848 21 Dhimal 1 7 Biswokarma (Sunar) 42 22 Dhanuk 2 8 Biswokarma (Kami) 285 23 Danuwar 1 9 Bishwokarma (Oad) 12 24 Teli 4 10 Lepcha 11 25 Tamang 437 11 Limbu 8 26 Dom (Marik) 1 12 Rai 14714 27 Gurung 2 13 Mugal 5 28 Giri 7 14 Majhi 9 29 Kunwar 8 15 Magar 323 30 Others 2206 Source: Hatuwagadhi village profile, B.S. Ethnic Diversity and Federalism: Fusion or Fission This section primarily focuses on one of the most commonly cited and illustrated argument that federalism as a mechanism for integrating and accommodating ethno-cultural pluralism or socio-cultural recognition of ethnic group. It is seen as ‘the best way to achieve ethnic autonomy’ (Hangen, 2007) and the most appropriate form of the state structure for ethnically divided countries (Stepan, 1999; Kymlicka, 2005; Anderson, 2013). Moreover, (t)here are several scholars who argue that federalism as a means of power sharing (Bhandari, 2016), tool of dispute management (Sharma, 2019), conflict resolution (Hueglin, 1995; Anderson & Keil, 2017; Agnew, 1995; Babalola, 2019) and conflict settlement mechanism (Gromes, 2010; Huegline & Fenna, 2015), tool of secession settlement (Hachter, 2000; Lustick et al., 20049), tool for expanding power and maintaining unity (Aalen, 2002), way of establishing multi-ethnic countries (Gurr, 1993, 1994; Kymlicka, 2005, Stepan, 2005), means of managing or reducing ethnic conflicts (Horowitz, 1985; Saideman et al., 2002; Brancati, 2006; Birhan and Christopher, 2024), means of ensuring unity in diversity (Elazar, 1987), peace, stability and mutual accommodation (Bulmer, 2017; Kumar, 2018:46), means to manage ethnic diversities (McGarry & O’Leary, 1993; Berhane & Tefera, 2018) and overall management of ethnic diversity. In the same way, Bhattachan (2012), Gurung (2012), and Lawoti (2012) strongly recommend ethnicity-based federalization. They desperately argue that identity-based federalization is the only way of democratically restructuring the country by enhancing the political participation of Janajatis, Dalits and Madhesis and giving ethno-based rights to the previously oppressed people or nationalities in Nepal. On the contrary, other scholars (Aalen, 2006; Abbink, 1997, 2006; Ottaway, 1995; Vestal, 1999; Walle, 1997; Mishra, 2012; Chhetri, 2012; Kisan, 2012; Subedi, 2015) argue that ethnic federalism leads the country towards disintegration. It institutionalizes ethnic differences and diversity by legitimizing the politics of ethnic resentment. Ethnic federalism always reinforces tribalism (Kimenyi, 1998) by creating more ethnic conflicts and civil strife (Teshome & Zahoric, 2008). Therefore, ‘federalism is not a panacea to the multi-ethnic challenges. It is not Pa ge 22 6 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts Hum. Sci. 4(2) 224-230, 2025 enough to respond to the challenges of ethnic diversity’ (Fessha, 2010). Burgess (2006) in the same way notes that ‘federation is not a universal panacea. It is not the answer to any or every problem of human conflict.’ Moreover, Ake (1996), Egwe (2003), Fleiner (2000), Mamdani (2005) depict that ethnic federalism emphasizes ethnic conflicts, increases secession, suppresses individual rights and eventually leads to the disintegration of countries. Similarly, Nordlinger (1972) and Vile (1982) claim that federalism increases pressure for secession rather than regulating and accommodating of ethnic differences (Adeney, 2007). According to Kaufman (2011), and Osinubi, & Osinubi (2006) ethnic diversity leads to ethnic violence and civil strife. It is a primary cause of conflicts (Oyeniyi, 2011; Eriksen, 1994). Corresponding some scholars (Mishra (2012), Chhetri (2012), Shrestha (2012), Kisan (2012), Subedi (2015) that ethnic federalism institutionalizes ethnic differences and diversities by legitimizing the politics of ethnic resentment. Abebe (2014) in the same way denotes that ‘federal or decentralized forms of government have been largely considered a threat to national cohesion and unity.’ However, Erk and Anderson (2009) interestingly denote that federalism has both secession inducing and secession preventing characteristics. For instances, Nigeria, a country of more than 250 ethnic groups has adopted a federal form of government (Dent, 1995). The Swiss federation (1848) has remained a paradigm case of the successful accommodation of diversity (Bhattacharyya, 2010). In Asia, many countries (India, Malaysia, Pakistan, Myanmar and so on) are characterized by different socio- cultural and ethnically diverse and complex. Among above countries, India is the most notable and successful state that response to the problem of ethnic diversity poses in a country of 18 national languages and some 2,000 dialects and a dozen ethnic communities and seven national religious groups and some 60 socio-cultural sub regions spread over seven geographical regions (Majeed, 2005:180). Hence, the disintegration of Yugoslavia is also the result of the failure of Yugoslav state to incorporate various ethnic diversity (i.e. Serbian, Croatian, Slovenian and Kosovar Albanians) into single political structure and community (Singh, 2008). Ethnic Diversity and Federalism in Nepal: an Overview Nepal is a multi-ethnic nation with diverse languages, religions and cultural traditions comprising of 142 caste/ ethnic groups, 124 languages and 10 religions (NPHC- NSO, 2021). Government of Nepal has recognized 59 ethnic groups and the Gurung Commission has suggested that there are 75 ethnic groups. These recommendation and categories show that caste/ethnic identities are not fixed and nothing can be understood about Nepal without understanding its patterns and dynamics of ethnic diversity. However, there is no detailed sociological survey has been carried out in Nepal to date to identify different ethnic and caste groups and their cultures. Table 2: Ethnic Caste Composition and population in Nepal SN Caste/Ethnic Population Percentage 1 Chhetri 4796995 16.45 2 Brahmin-Pahadi 3292373 11.29 3 Magar 2013498 6.90 4 Tharu 1807124 6.20 5 Tamang 1639866 5.62 6 Newar 1341363 4.60 7 Bishwokarma (called Kami in 2011 1470010 5.04 8 Musalman 1418677 4.86 9 Yadav 1228581 4.21 10 Rai 640674 2.20 As reviewed by Dahal (2003) based on the 2001 census these diverse ethnic/caste groups were arranged into five broad cultural groups (i) the caste-origin groups; (ii) the Newar, (iii) the Adibasi/Janajati or nationalities, (iv) Muslim or Musalman and (v) Other. As these categories are slightly broad for the purpose of socioeconomic analysis, the author has further classified these cultural categories into 9 broad sub-cultural groups: (i) The caste –origin Hill groups, (ii) Hill Adibasi/Janajati groups, (iii) Hill Dalit, (iv) Madhesi caste-origin groups (Level 1), (v) Madhesi caste origin groups (Level 2), (vi) Madhesi caste- origin low caste groups or Dalits ( Level 3), (vii) Tarai (Madhesi) Adibasi/Janajati, (viii) Musalman or Muslims, and (ix) Other cultural groups (Dahal, 2014). Moreover, according to the 2021 census the ancestral languages, mother tongues and second languages of the population. The number of languages listed for Nepal’s censuses has increased from 31 in 1991 to 92 in 2001 and 123 in the 2011 Census. The 2021 census grouped 12 foreign languages together as ‘foreign languages’ and added 13 new languages. Similarly, in the context of religion, the majority of the populations identified as Hindus (81.19%), followed by Buddhists (8.21%), Muslims (5.09%) and Kirat (3.17%). The 2021 census found a slightly reduced proportion of Hindus, Buddhists, and Prakriti religion followers, while the proportion of Muslims, Kirats, Pa ge 22 7 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts Hum. Sci. 4(2) 224-230, 2025 Christians, and Bon followers increased. This could be a way of looking at the socio-cultural landscape of the country. However, federalism received a subject of scholarly debates and attention much later especially after the first amendment of Interim Constitution of Nepal in April 2007. Although, the debate of federalism in the context of Nepal can be traced back to 1950s (Thapaliyal, 2012; Serchan, 2012; Jha, 2018) and looking back the April uprising of 2006 whereas a decade long civil war ended with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement-CPA. The Maoist insurgency (1996-2006), the People’s Movement-II (April, 2006) (Bhattachan, 2010), the Madhesi movement of 2007 (Serchan, 2012; Sharma, 2019) and Terai Movement of 2007 (Bhandari, 2014) were the catalyst for including the federal agenda in the fourth amendment of the Interim Constitution 2007 by inserting provisions relating to federalism for establishing egalitarian society by empowering marginalized people (Sharma, 2019) and democratizing the country by making the state more inclusive (Karki, 2014). Mechanism for Integration and Accommodation of Ethnic Diversities It is primarily argued that federalism as a means and mechanisms for accommodating, acknowledging and integrating ethno-cultural pluralism or socio-cultural recognition of ethnic groups. Federal system basically promotes to achieve ethnic autonomy’ (Hangen, 2007) and responds ethnic diversities (McGarry & O’Leary, 1993; Berhane & Tefera, 2018) by ensuring peace, stability, integration and accommodation (Bulmer, 2017; Kumar, 2018). Despite these arguments, this section more intensely focuses and illustrates the mechanisms of federal system for accommodating and integrating ethnic diversities in multicultural societies. The constitution of Nepal 2015 transformed the country by establishing federal structure or ‘federal democratic republican state’ consisting of 7 provinces, 77 districts and 753 local bodies, making Nepal the ‘youngest’ federal state in the world (Sharma, 2019). With the promulgation of constitution, the journey of Nepal towards federalism has been enthused to resolve many existing issues related to the distribution of power and resources between the center, provinces and local levels (Baral, 2009) and to address different diversities of Nepal (Hachhethu, 2010). Moreover, federal system is established under the Constitution of Nepal 2015, designed to accommodate and integrate ethnic diversities by distributing power, resources and opportunities among the federal, provincial, and local levels of government. The federal government of Nepal plays a central role in integrating and accommodating ethnic diversity and fostering inclusivity within a federal framework. It has provided an opportunity for the federal government to distribute power to provincial and local levels, creating a structure intended to accommodate ethnic diversity and promote more equitable representation. According to the constitution of Nepal, provincial government has the authority to promote and preserve local languages, cultures, and traditions. The constitution grants provincial governments the power to tailor educational curricula to reflect local ethnic, linguistic, and cultural contexts. This includes the provision for education in local languages, especially at the primary level, which helps children from ethnic minority backgrounds access education in their mother tongue. Despite the federal and provincial governments, local governments operate as an essential layer of governance, focusing on community-specific issues and directly engaging with citizens. The structure of local governments are basically designed to ensure representation from various ethnic groups, especially in diverse regions. This includes provisions for proportional representation through elected positions in municipal and village councils. Seats are reserved for marginalized groups, such as indigenous communities, women, and Dalits, ensuring that these communities have a voice in local decision-making processes (Bhattachan, 2012). Within the framework of federal system, some mechanisms are mentioned for accommodating and integrating ethnic diversities in Nepal. Division of Power and Autonomy It is well known that division of power and autonomy is a central principle and mechanism of federal system. It refers to the allocation and distribution of authority, decision-making power, and responsibilities within a system. This federal framework is truly designed to accommodate and integrate ethnic diversities in plural societies. Nepal adopted a federal system with three levels of government: federal, provincial, and local. This system decentralizes power and allows for more autonomous governance at regional and local levels. The main purpose of the division of power and autonomy are to ensure representation and voice for marginalized communities, including the Madhesi, Janajati (indigenous groups), and Dalits. As discussed by Fessa (2010) if the needs and demands of ethnic groups are to be accommodaed and integrated, the state needs to recognize its multiethnic character. Although, federalism allows ethnic groups to have their own regional governments, which can address specific local concerns, cultural practices, and languages. In this context, majority of informants (as discussed in the group) agree that federalism is a political system involving the division of powers between a central government and multiple regional or state governments. Also, it is seen as a means of accommodating and integrating ethnic diversities within the society or a country by granting a degree of autonomy to govern themselves within their respective regions. Ethnic diversities often have unique needs and interests, and federalism provides an opportunity for ethnic groups to exercise of power and influence in the governance of their regions. By allocating local governments autonomy, federalism can Pa ge 22 8 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts Hum. Sci. 4(2) 224-230, 2025 accommodate the diverse needs and aspirations of ethnic groups. Recognition of Linguistic Diversity and Language Rights The recognition of linguistic diversity in federal system plays an essential role in social integration, cohesion and cultural preservation. The constitution of Nepal (2015) recognizes Nepali as the official language but also acknowledges the country’s linguistic diversity by listing several languages as national languages. The article 6 of Nepal’s constitution defines that all mother tongues spoken as national languages, emphasizing the importance of all languages as part of Nepal’s heritage. The Constitution of Nepal guarantees the right of all citizens to basic education in their mother tongue. Mother- tongue-based education in primary schools, especially in linguistically diverse regions have been initiated after the promulgation of federal system. By enabling people to use their mother tongues in education and governance, federal system fosters a sense of belongingness and togetherness in its diverse communities. Recognizing the linguistic diversity of Nepal, primary schools in ethnic regions are encouraged to teach in native languages. This policy helps to maintain cultural identity and improves educational outcomes by allowing children to learn in their mother tongue. For instaces, Bantawa Rai language curriculum has been introducing in so many schools for primary education in the study area. Recognition of Customary Laws and Practices In multicultural societies, the recognition of customary laws and practices is a significant aspect of federal system. These laws and practices are informal systems of rules and regulations developed by indigenous and local communities over generations and are integral to their identity and way of life. Majority of informants believe and claim that the recognition of customary laws and practices are important to the protection of indigenous rights, cultural heritage, and local autonomy in federal system. Moreover, the constitution of Nepal (2015) acknowledges the rights of ethnic groups and marginalized communities to practice and preserve their customs, traditions, and cultural uniqueness. The constitution mandates that the state shall protect and promote the cultural and social rights of indigenous and ethnic groups by ensuring their unique identity and customs. Being based on the the article 32 and 51of the Constitution, it is guareenteed that every individual the right to practice their culture, and mandates the government to pursue policies that protect and promote traditional knowledge, skills, and practices of ethnic and indigenous communities respectively. For instances, as discussed by the cultural expert Chandra Kumar Hatuwali, customary laws and practices like the Badghar system (in Tharu communities), the Mukhiya system (in various hill tribes) and Ten Dhuwa system (in Kirat Rai Bantawa communities) are traditional leadership structures that play an important role in decision-making, dispute resolution, communal integrity, solidarity and social governance within the communities. Therefore, preservation and recognition custommary laws and identities of ethnic people are very important aspects of federal system. These kinds of constitutional recognitions help to integrate and accommodate ethnic diversities in plural societies. Provision of Participation and Representation The Constitution of Nepal (2015), aims to ensure the participation and representation of all ethnic communities in government at all levels for various groups, including indigenous people, Madhesis, Tharus, Dalits, and other marginalized ethnic groups. Eventhough, the majority of informants agree that federalism as a tool or mechanism that can facilitate the representation and participation of ethnic minorities in the political process. Local governments provide opportunities for diverse groups to be involved in decision-making and governance, ensuring that their voices are heard and their interests are represented. As mentioned by Jeewan Darjee (48), with the promulgation of federalism, Dalits have gained representation at both the provincial and local government levels. This practice ensures that Dalits have a voice and representation in local and national decision- making processes. This has opened doors for greater social and political inclusion for the Dalit community. The constitution emphasizes the importance of inclusivity and proportional representation, aiming to provide equal opportunities for ethnic minorities, Dalits, Madhesis, and other historically marginalized communities in federal, provincial, and local governance. In the same way, Birhan and Christopher (2024) argee that ethnic federalism helps to reduce conflict between Ethiopia’s various communities by allowing minority groups greater representation at local and national levels. Recognition of Ethnic and Regional Identities The Constitution of Nepal (2015) explicitly acknowledges Nepal as a multi-ethnic, lingual, religious and multicultural nation. This acknowledgment simply enshrines the importance of ethnic diversity as part of Nepal’s federal identity, laying the groundwork for policies that support ethnic communities. This recognition validates the presence and importance of ethnic groups in plural societies. According to Shyam Kumar Rai, (Member of Ward, Hatuwagadhi Rural Municipality) government at all levels promoting and recognizing the cultural diversity by supporting the festivals, ceremonies, and cultural events of ethnic communities. These festivals are recognized as public events, and government support helps maintain cultural vibrancy and unity in diversity. Several ethnic and regional festivals, such as Maghe Sankranti, Lhosar, and Chhath, Ubhauli-udhauli, Indrajatra are officially recognized as public holidays, allowing ethnic groups to celebrate their heritage and traditions on a national level. Naming certain provinces, districts, municipalities, rural Pa ge 22 9 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts Hum. Sci. 4(2) 224-230, 2025 municipalities based on ethnic or historical identities allows local populations to feel represented and recognized. This identity-based federalism is intended to help groups with distinct ethnic identities feel more included in governance. Moreover, the majority of informants believed that ‘with the promulgation of federalism in Nepal, the ethnic people are recognized as one of the indigenous nationalities and gained recognition and representation in the provincial and local governments. Federal system is a way to address the ethnic issues or it is only way to maintain a multi-ethnic society democratically. It leads country towards peace, prosperity and development by enhancing the practice of self-rule, autonomy, cultural preservation and recognition.’ Thus, the recognition of socio-cultural practices of ethnic groups and identity is the most important aspect of federal system to integrate and accommodate ethnic diversity. Because most of the name or official identity of state or rural municipality, municipality and provinces have been changed and introduced by their own historicity and propinquity of local identity. The allocations of power, resources, opportunities and political participation in public sphere of ethnic people have been increased proportionately. CONCLUSIONS Federalism is a form of government in which sovereignty or political power is constitutionally divided between the central government and local governments. It is an institutional mechanism to recognize and accommodate socio-cultural practices of ethnic groups in Nepal. Federalism in Nepal serves as a vital mechanism for accommodating and integrating ethnic diversity, by decentralizing power to provincial and local levels, that allows ethnic groups greater autonomy over cultural, linguistic, and social matters to govern their own unique heritage and needs. Finally, this study concludes that federalism serves as a key mechanism for accommodating and integrating ethnic diversity by decentralizing power and providing a platform for diverse communities to maintain and promote their distinct identities. As a result, federalism fosters a more inclusive and integrated society, where ethnic diversity is recognized as a strength, contributing to both national unity and social solidarity. REFERENCES Aalen, L. (2002). Ethnic federalism in a dominant party state: The Ethiopian experience 1991- 2000. Bergen: Michelsen Institute. Aalen, L. (2006). Ethnic federalism and self-determination for nationalities in a semi-authoritarian state: The case of Ethiopia. International journal on minority and group rights, 243–261. Abbink, J. (2006). Ethnicity and conflict generation in Ethiopia: Some problems and prospects of ethno- regional federalism. Journal of contemporary African studies, 24(3), 389-413. Abebe, S. G. (2014). The last post-cold war socialist federation: ethnicity, ideology and democracy in Ethiopia. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Adeney, K. (2007). Comparative federalism and ethnic conflict: A theoretical examination. https://www.researchgate. net/publication/304690829. Ake, C. (1996). Democracy and development in Africa. USA: The Brooking Institution. Anderson, L. D. (2013). Federal solutions to ethnic problems: Accommodating diversity. London: Routledge. Anderson, P., and Keil S. (2017). Federalism: A tool for conflict resolution? 50 Shades of Federalism. http://50shadeso-ederal ism.com/category/ federalism-conflict/. Babalola, D. (2019). The political economy of federalism in Nigeria. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi. org//10.1007/978-3-030-05493-9. Baral, L.R. (2009). Federalism in Nepal: compulsions and pitfalls. Nepali Journal of Contemporary Studies, 1-18. Berhane, Z. and Tefera, S. (2018). Does federalism reduce ethnic conflict? evidence from the Ethiopian experience. Ethiopian journal of the social sciences and humanities, 14(1), 105-131, doi: https://dx.doi. org/10.4314/ejossah.v14i1.5. Bhandari, S. (2014). Self-determination and constitution making in Nepal: constituent assembly, inclusion and ethnic federalism. Singapore: Springer. Bhattachan, K. (2012). Indigenous people’s right to self- determination in Nepal. Ethnicity and Federalization in Nepal, 139-165. Bhattacharyya, H. (2010). Federalism in Asia: India, Pakistan & Malaysia. London: Routledge. Birhan, A. T. and Christopher, N. (2024). Decoding Ethnic (Multi-National) Federalism: Its Influence on Conflict Dynamics and Sustainable Peace in Ethiopia, Journal of Innovative Research, 2 (3), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.54536/jir.v2i3.3685 Borzel, T. A. (n.d). Federalism is dead-long live federalism. EPS forum: debating federalism and constitutionalism in European Union, University of Heidelberg. Brancati, D. (2006). Decentralization: fueling the fire or dampening the flames of ethnic conflict and secessionism. International Organization, 60(3), 651-685, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3877823. Bulmer, E. (2017). Federalism. Sweden: International IDEA. Burgess, M. (2006). Comparative federalism: theory and practice. New York: Routledge. Burris, A. (2001). Federalism. International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, 5440-5442, http:// www.sciencedirect .com/science/ar t icle/pii/ B0080430767011232. CBS. (2013). National Population and Housing Census: Caste, Ethnicity and Language. NPCS, Government of Nepal. Chhetri, R. B. (2012). Some thoughts on the bases for federalization in Nepal: Ethnicity, Natural Resources or...? Ethnicity and Federalization in Nepal, 210-223. Dahal, D. R. (2014). Social composition of population: caste/ethnicity and religion in Nepal. Population monograph of Nepal, 3, 1-50. Elazar, D. J. (1987). Exploring federalism. Tuscaloosa: Pa ge 23 0 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts Hum. Sci. 4(2) 224-230, 2025 Alabama Press. Erikson, T. H. (1994). Ethnicity and nationalism: anthropological perspective. Palgrave Macmillan. Erk, J., & Anderson, L. (2009). The paradox of federalism: does self-rule accommodate or exacerbate ethnic divisions?’ Regional & federal studies, 19(2), 191-202. Fessha, Y. T. (2010). Ethnic diversity and federalism: constitution making in South Africa & Ethiopia, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Gromes, T. (2010). Federalism as a means of peace- building: The case of postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 16(3-4), 354-374. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2010.526918. Gurr, T. R. (1993). Why minorities rebel: A global analysis of communal mobilization and conflict since 1945. International Political Science Review, 14(2), 161-201. Gurung, O. (2012). Evolution of indigeneity, identity and autonomy in federal Nepal. Ethnicity and Federalization in Nepal, 193-209. Hachhethu, K. (2010). Form and Structure of Federal Nepal. State Restructure and Constitutional Making, 211-245. Hangen, S. (2007). Creating a new Nepal: the ethnic dimension, East-West Center Washington DC. Hechter, M. (2000). Containing Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. London: University of California Press. Hueglin, T. & Fenna A. (2015). Comparative Federalism: A Systematic Inquiry. Ontario: University of Toronto Press. Hueglin, T. (1995). New wine in old bottles? Federalism and Nation states in the twenty first century: A conceptual overview. Rethinking Federalism: Citizens, markets and governments in a changing world. 203-223. Jha, D. (2018). Federal Nepal: Trials and Tribulations, Delhi: Aakar Books. Karki, B. (2014). State restructuring and federalism discourse in Nepal. The Federalism Kaufman, S. J. (2011). Ethnicity as a generator of conflict. Routledge Handbook of Ethnic Conflict, 91-102. Kimenyi, M. (1998). Harmonizing ethnic claims in Africa: A proposal for ethnic- based federalism. Cato Journal, 43-63. Kisan, Y. B. (2012). Federalization and Dalits: Aspiration and Suspicions. Ethnicity and Federalization in Nepal, 276-299. Kumar, M. (2018). Nature of Indian federalism: an analysis of historical basis and problems. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 7(1), 42-47, www.ijhssi.org. Kymlicka, W. (2005). Federalism, nationalism and multiculturalism. Theories of Federalism: A Reader, 269-292. Lawati, M. (2012). Making federalism work: Promoting societal and institutional congruence and balancing centripetal and centrifugal tendencies. Ethnicity and Federalization in Nepal, 166-181. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. USA: Yale University Press. Lustick, I. S., Dan M. and Roy J. E. (2004). Secessionism in multicultural states: Does sharing power prevent or encourage it? American Political Science Review, 209-229. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4145308. Majeed, A. (2005). Republic of India. Constitutional origins, structure and change in federal countries: A global dialogue on federalism, 1, 180–208. McGarry, J. and OLeary, B. (1993). The macro-political regulation of ethnic conflict. The Politics of Ethnic Conflict Regulation, 1-40. London: Routledge. Mishra, C. (2010). Ethnic upsurge in Nepal: implication for federalization. Ethnicity and Federalization in Nepal, 58-90. Osinubi, T. S., & Osinubi, O. S. (2006). Ethnic conflicts in contemporary Africa: The Nigerian experience. Journal of Social Sciences, 12(2), 101-114. https://doi.or g/10.1080/09718923.2006.11978376 Ottaway, M. (1995). The Ethiopian transition: democratization or new authoritarianism? Northeast African studies, 2(3), 67-84, http://www.jstor.org/ stable/41931114. Paleker, S. A. (2006). Federalism: a conceptual analysis. The Indian journal of political science, 67(2), 303-310. Saideman, S. M., David J. L., Michael C. and Samuel S. (2002). Democratization, political Institutions, and ethnic conflict: A pooled time-series analysis, 1985- 1998. Comparative Political Studies, 103-129. Serchan, S. (2012). The federal experience: Nepal and the World, Kathmandu: S-SIRF. Sharma R. (2019). Federal dispute settlement in Nepal, India and USA, New Delhi: Adroit Publishers. Singh, M. P. (2005). Federalism, democracy and human rights: some reflections. Journal of the Indian law institute, 47(4), 429-446, https://www.jstor.org/stable/43951994. Singh, P. (2008). Federalism, nationalism and development: India and Punjab economy. London: Routledge. Stepan, A. (2005). Federalism and democracy: beyond the U.S. model. Theories of Federalism: A Reader, 255-268. Subedi, M. (2015). Identity debate and ethnic federalization in rural areas of Nepal. Contributions to Nepalese Studies, 42(1), 107-143. Teshome B. & Zahorik, J., (2008). Federalism in Africa: the case of ethnic-based federalism in Ethiopia. International journal of human sciences, 5(2), 1-39, http:// www.insanbilimleri.com. Thapaliyal, S. (2012). The discourse of federalism in Nepal. Ethnicity and Federalism in Nepal, 238-250. The Constitution of Nepal, (4th ed. 2016) Vestal, T. M. (1999). Ethiopia: a post-cold war state. Westport: Praeger. Yang, P. Q. (2000). Ethnic Studies: Issues and Approaches. USA: State University of New York Press. Young, P. V. (2007). Scientific social surveys and research. New Delhi: Prentice Hall.