In Nepali discourse, the pulse of the digital age resonates with the infectious energy of “viral trends.” These trends have become the lifeblood of national unity, galvanising the public to engage with policymakers until the next catchy phrase captures the spotlight.

Recently, following the protests that led to the downfall of the KP Sharma Oli government, the buzzword of the hour is “Gen Z.” It’s hackneyed to see how media outlets are ablaze with coverage, and nearly every political leader, business mogul and organisational head is eager to align themselves with this dynamic. The call to “Reform according to the needs of Gen Z” has echoed through the corridors of these opinion-shapers. Yet, when I press for clarity on what that truly means, many respond with broad strokes about catering to “youth demands.”

Let’s take a step back and revisit the backdrop of these events: The social media ban ignited the frustration of Gen Z. Tired of the never-ending game of musical chairs among the same trio vying for the prime ministerial seat, along with rampant nepotism, corruption and kleptocracy, the youth took to the streets. In a tragic response, the government killed 19 protestors, igniting a firestorm of nationwide anger. Protests erupted across the country, resulting in the vandalisation of numerous iconic establishments, both public and private, including the renowned Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court and major media houses such as Kantipur Media Group. The toll is stark: 72 lives lost, including 59 protestors, 10 prisoners, and three police officers (till this writeup). Deepest condolences go out to the grieving families. In the wake of this upheaval, we now have an interim government led by Sushila Karki, Nepal’s first female Chief Justice, marking a historic moment worth celebrating.

Following the incineration of key government buildings, business centres and major public-private properties, Nepal once again finds itself staring down the long road of reconstruction. But this is not unfamiliar terrain. We have rebuilt before, following the Maoist conflict, the devastating 2015 earthquake and numerous rehabilitation efforts after periodic water-induced disasters. Yet, despite this extensive experience, one question continues to haunt us: Have we ever truly considered the sustainability of our reconstruction efforts? The honest answer is no.

We have leaned too heavily on conventional civil engineering approaches, leaving little room for other critical dimensions, such as safety systems, adaptive design and long-term resilience. Let me begin with the case that struck me most, the Singha Durbar fire. This iconic administrative building, severely damaged in the 2015 earthquake, was fully reconstructed by 2021. As the central seat of government, I had assumed it would be equipped with modern fire safety systems, advanced surveillance and layered security protocols; a fortress against both natural and human-induced threats. But the recent incident shattered that assumption. It revealed that the reconstruction was guided by traditional building codes and outdated norms, with little attention to hazard mitigation or technological integration. And it’s likely that the other buildings that burned followed the same narrow construction philosophy, technically strong, iconic on paper, but vulnerable in practice.

Nepal operates under a three-tiered system of government: Federal, provincial and local, each with its own sectoral infrastructure policies shaped by the priorities of respective ministries. Yet, when it comes to building construction, nearly all authorities default to the Nepal National Building Code (NBC 205:2024), creating a uniform but narrowly focused framework. What needs to be highlighted is what our infrastructure policies should incorporate, which are not only structurally sound but also resilient, viable and fit with public accountability.

Transformative infrastructure policy is a less discussed domain in Nepal, even among scientific, technological and policymaking communities. Infrastructure planning here is still predominantly driven by structural integrity and occasionally by aesthetic appeal rather than by resilience or adaptability. This traditional approach has led to structures that may survive minor shocks but often crumble under major disasters such as earthquakes, inundations, or political unrest, exposing our vulnerability. Considering the recent vandalism and destruction, reconstruction must go beyond restoring physical structures. Nepal urgently needs a shift towards transformative infrastructure policies to embrace resilience, adaptability and long-term sustainability.

Infrastructures must be reimagined not as static structures but as dynamic systems that respond to environmental, social and technological shifts. Instead of focusing solely on concrete strength or visual grandeur, future infrastructure should be designed with people at the centre. It must integrate climate responsiveness, energy efficiency and multi-hazard resilience. This requires need-based assessments that go beyond structural and architectural norms, embedding purpose-driven design, risk responsiveness and community-centred utility into every layer of planning. It should also incorporate safety management frameworks that address not only natural calamities but also human-induced threats. Social equity and inclusiveness must also be embedded in design, allowing buildings to serve multiple purposes, from administrative functions to public libraries, think-tank chambers to tourist attractions, as seen in many European parliamentary buildings.

Such multifunctionality fosters community ownership, turning infrastructure into a shared asset that strengthens social cohesion and local stewardship. Additionally, people-centric design encourages individuals to view infrastructure as an integral part of their lives, rather than as distant government/private projects. Equally important is the integration of innovation and technology. Smart monitoring systems, hazard modelling and advanced construction techniques can significantly reduce vulnerabilities and long-term costs. Embedding these tools into infrastructure makes them more self-reliant and capable of acting as protective barriers.

With the newly appointed minister calling for a rehabilitation fund and public willingness to contribute, now is the time to shift our infrastructure policies toward a transformative model. Without such a shift, we risk squandering yet another opportunity, just as we did in the aftermath of past events. This time, we must rethink and reform our infrastructure policies to embed resilience, adaptability and sustainability at their core.

Transformative policies should not be viewed merely as technical upgrades; they represent a moral and strategic imperative. By embedding resilience into the very DNA of our infrastructure, Nepal can break free from the reactive rebuilding cycle and move toward proactive preparedness. This shift will not only reduce the human and economic toll of future disasters but also foster a more inclusive and equitable built environment. Collaboration and knowledge transfer among national and international experts can play a vital role in helping Nepal leapfrog outdated practices by blending global best practices with local context.

In doing so, Nepal can withstand future shocks and become a model for developing nations to achieve sustainable, equitable and forward-looking development. However, for this to work, the foundation must be built on good governance, institutionalising transparency, participatory planning and rigorous oversight. Only then can policymakers ensure that infrastructure investments extend beyond mere visible monuments to become functional assets that serve the community. It is time to reconsider how infrastructure is conceived, constructed and governed.

Instead of merely hopping on the “viral mode” bandwagon, it is time for experts and policymakers to adopt a forward-thinking approach that prioritises sustainability. This transformative policy framework is necessary not only in the infrastructure sector but also across various domains to fundamentally revamp systems for the benefit of future generations. It is also crucial that we streamline regulatory processes by minimising bureaucratic hurdles that can hinder progress. Let us come together to forge a more sustainable future.