One of Nepal's key priorities is to transition to a more industrialised nation, positioning itself as an attractive market within the group of Emerging Markets and Developing Economies (EMDEs). The way this ambition unfolds will significantly shape the country's level of prosperity over the next 10 to 15 years.

While it is easy to read prepared speeches about development and climate justice, having an industrial policy capable of driving this transformation is quite a challenge. How will the indispensable policy-making process to achieve this paramount goal unfold? Can the federal government create sector-specific policies and legislation that foster sustainable industrial growth? How will the provinces and the local governments take part in this journey? Will this process unfold inclusively and actively support the involvement and engagement of local youths? Last but not least, will Nepal be able to do a better job at working at par with other members of the international community?

Answering these questions might help the country develop a green and sustainable economy. But Nepal needs to have a credible plan to translate in action both the ambitious goals of the recently approved 16th Five Year Plan and its upcoming third Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC 3.0). Both documents must be interlinked and interconnected, and each should mirror the other.

The latter, the NDC 3, while being an international obligation for Nepal as part of its commitment to implement the Paris Agreement, should reflect the ambitious vision set forward by the former, an ambitious document that aims to increase the nation's GDP to Rs 8.6 trillion in a timeframe of five years. Attracting investments is fundamental to ensuring that increase in national prosperity occurs in a balanced, inclusive, sustainable fashion.

Political stability has been largely blamed for hampering Nepal's ambitions to become an important investment destination. But politics at the national level should not be seen as an excuse.

That's why it is essential that the quest to become an EMDE must happen in an inclusive, holistic manner, embracing a 'whole of government' and 'whole of society approach'.

The political leadership must have the vision and foresight to open up the development process by involving non-state actors, including organised civil society, the private sector and committed individuals. The central goal should be to ensure that any future investment in the country is either net-zero or follows a clear, 'science-based' pathway towards achieving it.

While it is true that Nepal contributes only a negligible portion of global carbon dioxide emissions, the country cannot use this as an excuse to avoid responsibility in its pursuit of an ambitious growth agenda. Likewise, it cannot claim (and correctly so) direct access to the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD).

Investments are key, but Nepal needs the right type of investments. If, for example, an international conglomerate shows interest in developing another cement factory or a steel production facility, both heavy energy consuming sectors, how would Nepal deal with them?

It is certainly true that the country boasts almost endless hydropower energy that is considered 'green' per se. But we should not forget that the related constructions that come with such investments have negative consequences, especially for local indigenous peoples.

In order for Nepal to truly become an emerging economy that aims to become a lower middle-income powerhouse, it might be useful to imagine some sort of new consultative mechanisms that could involve and engage the best minds of the nation, starting from the youths.

Negotiating investment deals is one of the most sensitive operations, and potential foreign players want certainty, speed and confidentiality. The more a prospective investment is discussed and scrutinised in an open and transparent way, the higher would be its probability of success.

Why not establish a Joint 16th Plan and NDC 3 Implementation Commission, which includes non-state actors such as NGOs, scientists, business sector representatives, and independent experts? This body could be named the Sustainable Future Commission. It wouldn't require new legislation, but simply a decision by the Federal Cabinet. The primary role of this Commission would be to provide a streamlined platform for discussing and debating the federal government's progress on its two most critical strategies.

It should be headed by an independent and recognised expert, an academician, not affiliated with the State. The Commission would have two key functions: First, it would serve as a check and control body, ensuring that both the federal executive and other levels of government are effectively implementing the 16th Plan and NDC 3.0. It could also provide feedback and recommendations to the Investment Board Nepal to help bring only the right type of investments.

Second, the Commission could provide feedback and suggestions on possible ways for Nepal to better engage the international community. For example, should Nepal explore the opportunity to join the Global Clean Power Alliance that is taking shape under the leadership of the British Government?

Implementing ambitious plans is going to be paramount. International development aid to Nepal will be less and less relevant in the years ahead. That's why the nation cannot miss the opportunities enshrined in the planet's efforts towards a net zero society. It will need a lot of investments, and involving non-state actors could be one of the smartest and boldest decisions the Federal Government could take.