Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
A study on rural road development and maintenance management in nepal nasc-sedp field study group presen
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

A study on rural road development and maintenance management in nepal nasc-sedp field study group presen


A report prepared as the partial fulfillment of Senior Executive Development Program organised by Nepal Administrative Staff College for Class I officers of Government of Nepal

A report prepared as the partial fulfillment of Senior Executive Development Program organised by Nepal Administrative Staff College for Class I officers of Government of Nepal

Published in Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. WelcomeNamaste
  • 2. A study onRural Road Development & Maintenance Management in Nepal• Bhim P. Upadhyaya, DDG, DoLIDAR/MLD• Devendra Karki, SE, DoR/MoPPW• Mukunda Raj Prakash Ghimire, JS, MoST• Prem Kumar Shahi, DIG, APF• Rudra P Paudel, JS, MoHA• Shreedhar Sapkota, Joint Government Attorney, Office of Attorney General
  • 3. Content of Presentation1. Preliminaries & Objectives of the Study2. Introduction & Methodology3. Organizations Visit and Policy Documents’ Study, Status and Review4. Field Visits, Data Collection and Analysis5. Strategic Issues Identification & Environmental Scanning6. Strategic Recommendations & Implementation Plan: Policy, Organization and Human Resources7. Conclusions8. Appendices
  • 4. PreliminariesIntroduction, Methodology &Objectives of the Study Shreedhar Sapkota
  • 5. Objective of the study Study on policy implementation towardsrural road development and maintenance. status of the the networkHow is this rural road maintainedmanaged? maintenance & Improved system
  • 6. Study Methodology & process Methodology ProcessPrimary and Secondary Review of the PolicyData Collection Documents on RuralVisit to the relevant RoadOrganizations: NPC,RoD, DoLIDAR, DTOs- Analysis of data, maps,Ilam, Jhapa, Lalitpur SWOT analysis etc.Interaction with the Strategic IssuesOfficials Identified,Presentation from Report Writingofficials
  • 7. Limitation of the study Time and location, Limitation on review of different infrastructure policies Highly focused on Local Infrastructure Policy 2061 not consider other rural roads: RoD, irrigation, VDC, others
  • 8. Organizations Visit and PolicyDocuments’ Study, Status and ReviewRudra Prasad Poudel
  • 9. Policy Documents Reviewed1. Nepal Road Statistics 2010 (DoR)2. Local Infrastructure Development Policy (LIDP)3. Strategic Action Plan for Local Infra. Dev.4. National Rural Road Maintenance Plan DoLIDAR5. Rural Road Maintenance Directive, DoLIDAR6. 20 Year Agricultural Perspective Plan7. Rural Road Vision 2025 India8. Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana India- A Briefing Paper9. Rural Road Maintenance ILO report 200710. Yearly District Development Plans of DDCs
  • 10. Rural Road Development Agencies1. DoR2. DoLIDAR3. DDCs(DTOs)4. Department of Irrigation for Canal Roads5. National Planning Commission6. Ministry of Local Development7. Bi- & Multinational Donor/Lending Agencies
  • 11. Stakeholder Organizations Visited1. National Planning Commission( NPC)2. Department of Roads (DoR)3. Dept of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural Roads(DoLIDAR)4. District Technical Office, Lalitpur( DTOL)5. District Technical Office, Ilam( DTOI)6. District Technical Office, Ilam( DTOJ)
  • 12. u|fdL0f ;8s ljsf; ;DjGwL k|d"v /fli6|o sfo{s|d ljsf; ;DjGwL sfo{s| / ah]6===!!= ljs]Gb|Lt u|fdL0f k"jf{{wf/ tyf hLljsf]kfh{g ljs]Gb| fwf/ wf hLljsf]kfh{ kfh sfo{s| cj{ sfo{s|d ? ! cj{ &$ s/f]8 &* nfv lg{df{ df cfof]hgf@= u|fdL0f kglg{df{0f tyf kg{:yfkgf cfof]hgf ? @ cj{ cj{ (* s/f]8 (^ nfv :yfgLo f{wf/ qut sfo{s| wf#= :yfgLo oftfoft k"jf{wf/ If]qut sfo{s|d ? ! cj{ cj{ !) s/f]8 !* nfv sfo{s|$= u|fdL0f kx"r sfo{s|d ? ^# s/f]8 @@ nfv%= lhNnf ;8s ;xof]u sfo{s|d ?#! s/f]8 @& nfv ;xof sfo{s| xof]
  • 13. u|fdL0f ;8s ljsf; ;DjGwL k|d"v /fli6|o sfo{s|d ljsf; ;DjGwL sfo{s| / ah]6===@^= u|fdL0f kx"r ;wff/ tyf ljs]Gb|Ls/0f sfo{s|d ? (! s/f]8 @& nfv . wf/ w ljs]Gb| s/0f sfo{s| af] sfo{s|&= ;8s af]8{ sfo{s|d ? @%s/f]8 !( nfv . lhlj; sf]*= lhlj; cgbfg k"lhut -? !!# s/f]8 sf] $@ k|z_ ? $& s/f]8 $^ nfv . uflj; cj{(= uflj; cgbfg -? ^@^ s/f]8sf] $@ k|z_ ? @ cj{ ^@ s/f]8 (@ nfv . !) :yfgLo zf;g ;fdbflos ljsf; sfo{s|d -? #@* s/f]8sf] !% k|z_ :yfgLo ljsf; sfo{s| ? $($) nfv . cGtu{ !! ;8s ljefu cGtu{t ? ? !!% s/f]8 . s"n ah]6 M ? !@ cj{ &)s/f]8 !( nfv . cj{ dd{ ef/ ef dd{t;+ef/ ah]6M $& s/f]8 .
  • 14. lhNnfut u|fdL0f ;8s ljsf; ;DjGwL sfo{s|d / ljsf; ;DjGwL sfo{s|ah]6emfkf lhNnf s"n ? !$ s/f]8 ** nfv . dd{tdf ? @ s/f]8 .Onfd lhNnf ? !# s/f]8 ** nfv . dd{tdf ? ! s/f]8 $ nfv .nlntknlntk/ lhNnf ? !# s/f]8 #^ nfv . dd{tdf ? (* nfv .
  • 15. Field Visits, Data Collection,Analysis & Findings Bhim Upadhyaya
  • 16. Exponential Budget increase. The 70 % of total budget is for LocalInfrastructure, and 70 % of this for Rural Roads
  • 17. Local Dev InvestmentYear Between Expenditure Rs Crore038/39- 039/40 61040/41- 044/45 170045/46-049/50 230050/51- 054/55 1417055/56- 059/60 2116060/61- 063/64 3040064/65-066/67 7300067/068 budget* 4100 Total 1, 87,40 17
  • 18. :yf lj dGqfnosf] ;+u7gx? dGqL ;ldltx?, s]Gb| dGqfno lhlj; &% ljefu-8f]ln8f/_ cfof]hgf lhlj;sf] sfof{no sfof{no k|fljlws sfof{no &% gu/kflnsf cfof]hgf sfof{Gjog Ufflj;sf] OsfO{x? gu/kflnsf sfof{no %* sfof{no #(!% 18
  • 19. 8f]ln8f/sf] ;+u7g ;+/rgf DoLIDAR STRUCTURE dxflgb]{zs DIRECTOR GENERAL Gaz I U|ffdL0f s[lif ;8s Rural/Agri Roads Division General Admin Section DDG K|fzf;g zfvf Senior Admin Officer Section Officer 1 dxfzfvf Law Officer 1 U|Rural/AgriSDE 1 Section ff s[lif ;8s Roads Suspension Bridge Section Account Section zfvf Engineer 2 emf]n+u] k"n zfvf SDE 1 Engineer 4 n]vf zfvf Account Officer 1 of]hgf ;dGjo Planning,Monotoring & Donor Coordination Division dxfzfvf DDG /fk k| k|f M $Planning & Donor Coordination Monotoring,Environment & cgudg jftfj/0f /fk l4 k|f M *+ ! of]hgf ;dGjo Section Technology Promotion Section zfvf SDE 1 Engineer 2 Agri Economist 1 zfvf SDE 1 Engineer 2, Social Scientist 1 /fk l4 k| M ! Other Infras Development Division /fk t[ k|f M @& cGo k"jf{wf/ DDG /fk t[ k| M # dxfzfvf s"n $$ Rural Drinking water and Irrigation River control andVffg]kfgL ejgSanitation & Building Section l;+rfO{ / cGo Other Infras Section SDE 1 Engineer 2, ;xfos ## 19zfvf SDE 1 Engineer 2 zfvf Agri Engineer 1
  • 20. Road Accessibility
  • 21. Accessibility Status 1,2,3,4 hrs 1 hr 2 hr 3 hr 4 hr
  • 22. Lalitpur Road Access Total Rural Road 560 km; Popn 3.4 Lakh; 385 Sqkm
  • 23. Ilam Road AccessTotal Rural Road 1270 km;Popn 3 Lakh; Area 1703 Sqkm
  • 24. Jhapa Road AccessTotal Rural Road 1470 km;Popn 6.4 Lakh; Area 1606 Sqkm
  • 25. Roads and Poverty
  • 26. Strategic Issues Identification& Environmental ScanningMukunda Raj Prakash Ghimire
  • 27. Environmental ScanningStrength Weakness•Adequate Laws and •Contradictory and mutually nullifying policiesPolicies •Inadequate budget allocation for ever increasing projects•Budget allocation • Untargeted development of network fundedincreasing exponentially by local resources• Multiple technical •Un-integrated development of roadorganizations •Inadequate capacity of Local body•Local bodies •Non-compliance of DTMP •Political highhandedness in selection of road•Political participation alignment•Competent Human •Understaffing of technical officialsresources • Lack of competence building contractors,•Regular enrichment of •Donor driven policieshuman resources •Lack of career development opportunity•Beginning of ICT use • Lack of ICT manpower for effective e-•Sector-wide development governmentApproach begun •Lack of Emphasis in Maintenance of road .
  • 28. Environmental ScanningOpportunity Threat •Insecure feeling in the staff•Rural Road at the •Lack of policy in attracting competenttop priorities in the professional to work at the remote areaspeoples need. •Environment degradation due to•Donors’ priorities haphazard development of rural roadsand attraction in the •Political interference in budget allocation to the local roadsrural infrastructure •Lack of emphasis in maintaining ruralsectors roads from the local politicians•Active participation •Lack of ownership feeling in rural roadsand contribution of •Quasi contractor-ship in the name oflocal community users committee •Competing multiple organizations
  • 29. Strategic Issues Identified1. How to Optimally Develop Rural Road Network?2. How to ensure proper rural roads maintenance Management ?3. How to ensure providing transport service Delivery on the Roads?4. How to Appropriately re-organize Organizational System for effective management of Roads?5. How to Reinforce the organizations with adequate and competent Human Resources?
  • 30. Rural Road Density Area sq VDC Rural Road Populatio Rural Rural APP km No. + length km n million Road Road target Muni density density km cipali per 1 km per per ty Lakh 100 100 sq sqkm kmNepal 147,181 3915 40,000(+100 280 34.0 27 11 00=50,000 lakh SRN)Lalitpur 385 41+1 560 3.4 lakh 113.2 145.5 23Ilam 1703 48+1 1270 3 lakh 423.3 74.5 11Jhapa 1606 47+3 1490 6.9 216.0 92.8 23 lakh
  • 31. Road Network Development Indicators1. Road per 100 Land Area (APP) Terai 23 from 13km; Hill 11 from 6km; Mountain 4 from 1km)2. Road Indicator- Road per 10 Lakh population( Accessibility quality) Higher the Road density, higher the affluence3. Road Head Access by walking time( LID Policy) 2 hr for Terai; 4 hrs for Hill & Mountain4. Road Access to Cluster of human settlement( India’s policy) Paved Road for population threshold- all weather for all settlement cluster >500 population5. Economy: Road cost per capita ( World Banks feasibility for rural road in Nepal, RAIDP) < $100 per capita cost is feasible for IRR.
  • 32. Strategic Recommendations &Implementation Plan Devendra Karki
  • 33. Strategic How to address? Responsi TimeIssues bility Frame •Review of LID Policy GoN, MLD, 3 months DoLIDAR1. Optimization of rural road •Formulation of separate Rural Road MLD, 1 year DoLIDAR Policy on sector-wide approach •New DTMP focusing cluster DDCs, DTOs 6 months approach >1500 -1000-500 population criteria and all weather access •New Dedicated Rural Road Office in all MLD,DDC 6 months districts • Separate Road building and Maintenance MLD,DDC 6 months network Sections under the new office •Separate Bridge Directorate under DoLIDAR GoN, MLD 6 months •Adequate permanent technical officials MLD, MoGA 1 year staffing @ 1 Er, 2 sub-Er per 4 crore budget work load in all districts
  • 34. Strategic How to address? Respon TimeIssues sibility Frame •Review of LID Policy GoN, MLD, 3 months Rural Road Maintenance for DoLIDAR •Formulation of separate Rural Road MLD, 1 year DoLIDAR2. Maintenance Strategy for Policy with emphasis on maintenance better service Delivery •Maintenance Plan in the New DTMP focusing DDCs, 6 months cluster approach >1500-1000-500 population DTOs criteria and all weather access •Maintenance section under New MLD,DDC 6 months Dedicated Rural Road Office •Handing over provision of built road DDCs Within 3 mths of setting up of from building section to maintenance new road offices section regular basis •Separate Rural Road Budget line in Red MLD, MoF From the next fiscal year Book of MoF under MLD •Adequate separate staffing for regular MLD, 1 year MoGA maintenance management @ 1 Er ,2 SubEr for 100 km of rural roads
  • 35. Fikkal Shriantu Rural Road, Ilam Domukha Road, Jhapa
  • 36. Satashi Bridge Pier Failure across Dudhe – Birpur-Bagahachaudhari , Jhapa
  • 37. Surunga - Saranamati –Tagandubba-Digalbank, Jhapa
  • 38. Conclusion & Appendices Prem Kumar Shahi
  • 39. Conclusions 1. Total length of rural roads density exceeds minimum requirement to provide access to rural Nepal wherever the network exist. 2. Development of Road network is imbalanced between districts, regions, ecological zones 3. More than 40,000 km of rural road network are constructed which itself is a huge asset and investment 4. But effectiveness of rural road services due to disrepair deterioration, need protection & maintenance 5. Huge fund required for maintenance and up-keeping of the constructed roads and ensuring adequate fund is the main challenge. 6. Development of new road network at the cost of maintenance get priority over maintenance of rural roads.
  • 40. 7. Rural road development has also negative impact on environment through landslide, erosion, pollution etc which need attention.8. Adequate number of qualified, experienced technical human resources is the basis of quality works which is lacking9. Without quality works no roads can provide reliable, sustainable and enduring services.10. Opening of new roads is given highest priorities but provided public transport services is not sufficient.11. How to provide public transport services is the challenge.12. Providing 2/4 hrs accessibility can not address the rural access services, For there must be a regular public transport facilities.13. Providing all weather roads to the cluster of human settlement should be made the prime policy in Nepal. Settlement with more than 1500 -1000-500 population should be covered in the first phase and rest in the second phase.
  • 41. 14. Dedicated Rural road professional /government offices should be set up immediately to develop and manage rural road with enforcement rights.15. Workload versus man power availability norms should be established with adequate monitoring and supervision logistic facilities.16. One Engineer +Two Sub-Engineers should be made responsible for workload of maximum Rs 4 Crore/100 kms17. All the district should reformulate District Transport Master Plans in accordance with the recommendation.18. The master plan must have the information of all the settlement clusters. Those links which connect having more than 1500-1000-500 populations will be put in the top priority list.19. Nepal Government should reformulate Rural Road Development Policy addressing the recommendation herein
  • 42. 20 year Agricultural Perspective Plan and Rural Road Density Terai :13 to 23 km/100 sqkm Hill: 6 to 11 km/100 sqkm Mountain: 1 to 4km/100 sqkm Nepal: 6 to 11km/100 sqkm 2054 to 2074
  • 43. Agricultural Perspective Plan and Rural Road Length Terai 3,400km, Hill 1950km, Mountain 850km. Total 6,200km
  • 44. SEDP Training Snaps
  • 45. sg} k|Zg<sg} lh1f;f<hanks 50