We know that urban violence not only affects people’s health and wellbeing, it has a
devastating impact on the social fabric and economic prospects of entire cities (Moser 2005).
It can also set recursive cycles of vulnerability in motion – violence-affected individuals find it
increasingly harder to be gainfully employed, while poverty is sustained through
inter-generational transfers. However, the mechanisms through which violent crime and
urbanisation are interconnected are not straightforward. While higher rates of violent crime
are generally seen in the larger urban centres, not all urban centres experience similar
degrees of violence. That is, the security and insecurity outcomes in a city are the result of a
complex range of socioeconomic, political and demographic factors, which can vary
temporally, spatially, as well as be significantly different for different individuals or groups.
Importantly, rapid urbanisation also brings with it a unique set of challenges, which has the
potential to overwhelm key government services, including policing and security provision.
There has been much debate about the role of the state in providing security in urban areas,
which are increasingly characterised by a diverse group of actors, and where non-state
actors also tangibly deliver security. In this report we use evidence from Nepal to look at the
key challenges for providing security in rapidly urbanising areas. We base our findings on a
review of existing evidence (including, in particular, perceptions surveys amongst youth
populations), consultations with key officials and civil society stakeholders, as well as focus
group sessions with young offenders, both inside and outside prison.
We find that since the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was established in 2006,
war-related killings have dramatically reduced. Yet, while these overall trends are improving,
there are reasons to be cautious. First, official data is not capturing the true extent of armed
violence, particularly criminal activity by gangs concentrated in and around Kathmandu and
other fast-growing mid-size cities in Terai. Second, the nature of existing violence – relating
to complex social and economic problems and perpetuated by a host of criminal groups –
makes it far more difficult for formal policing and security structures to address it on their
own. Thus, while the Nepal Police have a significant and often undervalued role to play in the
sustainable prevention of violent urban crime, a wider ‘developmental’ approach involving
state, and non-state actors (as well as armed groups themselves) is also needed. Given the
demographic shift occurring in Nepal, we find that youth issues are of particular importance,
with unemployment and involvement in organised crime being two primary concerns.