𝐎𝐏𝐈𝐍𝐈𝐎𝐍 – 𝐇𝐚𝐬 𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐮𝐥𝐮𝐬 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝? 𝐀 𝐌𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐇𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

Karma Thinley

Months after the rollout of Bhutan’s Economic Stimulus Plan (ESP), its impact on the ground remains largely invisible. Conceived as a recovery initiative for individuals and sectors affected by the COVID-19 pandemic- not to launch new businesses- the ESP was expected to restore livelihoods, reinvigorate economic activities, and generate employment. Yet, judging by the current economic climate and lived realities, these expectations remain unmet for a large portion of the population.

There is a lingering sense that the economy has yet to be set in motion. People continue to wait- for jobs, for income stability, for some sign that recovery is underway. Many sectors that bore the brunt of the pandemic, particularly tourism, agriculture, and small-scale services, still seem far from bouncing back. Employment opportunities remain scarce, especially for young people and those in rural areas. If the ESP was meant to act swiftly to bring about change, then the current situation calls for serious reflection.

While the plan’s intentions were widely welcomed, there appears to be a gap between what has been promised and what has been delivered. Although funding has been approved on paper for various sectors, the disbursement has been slow and often complicated. Complex application procedures, vague eligibility criteria, and long wait times have discouraged many potential beneficiaries. From the perspective of an ordinary citizen, the process seems more suited to scrutiny than to support.

This has led to a situation where access feels uneven. While some individuals or groups with stronger networks or institutional familiarity have managed to benefit, others- particularly those in more remote or marginalised communities- remain left out. In such contexts, where real lives are at stake, the inability to reach the most affected groups defeats the fundamental purpose of a stimulus plan.

Tourism and agriculture, two of Bhutan’s core livelihood sectors, were expected to receive a revival boost through ESP. Yet in daily conversations with workers and observers from these areas, the narrative remains consistent: there has been little change. Rural farmers continue to struggle with low productivity and limited market access. Tour guides, drivers, and small hotel operators speak of dwindling incomes and uncertain futures. Many feel abandoned during a time they believed would offer recovery.

Perhaps one of the biggest shortcomings lies in the ESP’s centralised approach. In countries where economic recovery packages were effective, the efforts were often decentralised and tailored to local needs. Local governments and financial institutions were empowered to assess cases and disburse support quickly. In Bhutan, however, decisions appear to have remained concentrated, resulting in bureaucratic slowdowns that erode the very urgency a stimulus demands.

Youth unemployment stands out as a particular concern. Young people were among the hardest hit during the pandemic, many of them having lost jobs in hospitality, retail, and private services. Today, many remain unemployed or underemployed. The ESP was intended to offer them a path back to the workforce. Yet, the absence of targeted employment initiatives or skills-based rehabilitation under the plan has left many with no real opportunity for recovery. As a result, some are turning to opportunities overseas while others wait in growing frustration.

Transparency also remains an issue. To this day, there has been no clear, accessible update on the plan’s outcomes. How many jobs have been restored? How many families have seen their income return to pre-pandemic levels? What has been the measurable impact in each sector? Without such information, it becomes difficult for the public to trust or even understand the ESP. A stimulus plan that lacks public visibility and data-based accountability cannot truly serve its purpose.

The situation is especially disheartening because the ESP is not inherently flawed in design. It is a well-intended policy aimed at a critical moment in Bhutan’s economic trajectory. However, intention must be matched with implementation. Good policies without effective delivery can result in missed opportunities. Recovery is not just about paperwork or approved credit- it is about real people returning to work, rebuilding lives, and gaining back lost income.

To move forward, the ESP needs a reset- not in its vision but in its delivery. The system should be made more inclusive and responsive. Simplified procedures, clearer communication, and decentralised decision-making would go a long way in ensuring the support reaches those who need it most. There is also a pressing need for labour-based recovery projects, public works employment, and wage subsidies that directly address joblessness.

From a personal observation, the ESP feels more like a delayed promise than a dynamic recovery tool. People continue to live in economic uncertainty, and the sense of urgency that surrounded the plan’s announcement has dissipated. If it does not adapt and respond soon, the ESP risks becoming another example of a well-meaning initiative that failed to make a meaningful difference.

Disclaimer: This opinion reflects the personal observations and opinions of the writer and does not represent the views of any organization or entity.