Background

N epal, with a per capita income around US$ 200 per annum (World Bank, 1997), is one of
the least developed countries in the world. Adding to this, it has one of the most
scattered rural road networks in the South Asian sub-region which limits the effective
and comprehensive participation of rural population in the country’s economic growth
process. Almost 90 percent of the Nepali population lives in rural areas and much of the
employment and income generation in rural areas depends directly or indirectly on
agriculture. Therefore, the living standard of rural people cannot be improved unless the
reliable access to agriculture services and technological advancement as well as the markets
to agricultural products are guaranteed with respect to the growing demand. To improve the
living condition of rural people, or in other words, to reduce the rural poverty, the basic
human facilities such as health services, education and communication should also be made
available to these communities. A reliable rural road network, though an expensive
investment, is the answer to many concerns and will be the key factor in stimulating
economic activities in the rural areas. That is why the Government has given its top priority
to the eradication of poverty through the agricultural development and indicated its
commitment to the 20-year Agriculture Perspective Plan (APP).

In the Ninth National Development Plan (1998-2002), bringing rural population into the
mainstream of development through the sectors like agriculture, water resources, tourism,
rural infrastructure and agro-based industries receives a prime importance. The Ninth Plan
further highlights that the decentralisation of programmes (especially human resource
development and rural infrastructure) as a mechanism for involving local communities in the
development process is one of the meaningful means of alleviating the poverty. As
envisaged by the APP document, expanding the present road network from 6 km to 11 km
per 100 km2 and maintaining it to the operational standards or serviceable conditions should
receive the highest attention.

There is, at present, a network of about 14,000 km of rural roads (including motorable tracks)
in the country1. Rural roads represent about 68% of the entire public road length. These
roads link rural areas of 58 districts which are already connected by the national strategic
road network2. The strategic road network and the urban roads constitute about 6,600 km of
length by making the entire public road length to be 20,600 km (refer to Graph 1). It shows
the present road density of Nepal as 14 km per 100 km2, a rather surprising figure with
respect to the APP target. This indicates that most of the districts connected with the

1
Rural road network generally comprises of district roads (Class ’A’) and a network of agricultural and
village roads (mostly Class ‘B’). The Department of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural
Roads (DoLIDAR) is responsible for regulating the development of rural road network whereas the
respective District Development Committees (DDCs) are supposed to develop, own, operate and maintain
the network. Refer to Annex I. Out of 14,000 km of rural roads, there are about 6,600 km of district roads.
2
National strategic road network comprises of national highways, feeder roads and other roads of national
importance. The Department of Roads (DoR) is responsible for the development and maintenance of
strategic network.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 1

strategic road network have got enough length of rural road network against the planned
long-term targets !

Graph 1
National Road Network by Ownership
Total length 20,600 km

Strategic Road Network

4,740 km
68% 23%
Urban Roads
1,860 km

Rural Road Network

14,000 km
9%

Because of spontaneous efforts, ad-hoc construction methods and absence of proper technical
back-up, most of these roads are, however, of sub-standard quality and lack sufficient road-
side and cross-drainage structures. As such, they require a great deal of attention in order to
be qualified as serviceable roads. There are several reasons for this state of affair. Some of
the main reasons are as follows:

• The importance given to the opening up of more and more new motorable accesses at the
cost of maintaining the rapidly deteriorating existing ones;

• The practice of ad-hoc distribution of available funds amongst electorates rather than
allocating them on planned basis;

• Insufficient funds for road maintenance;

• Lack of interest to road maintenance;

• Inadequate technical capacity (manpower, equipment, skills, etc.);

• Lack of appropriate institutional and legal provisions supporting the maintenance aspects.

Given its steep and fragile mountainous terrain, varied climate and unstable geological
structure, Nepal has also inherited one of the most vulnerable environments for natural
disasters. Even the roads that are of standard quality are frequently subjected to natural
damages such as slips, land slides, run-off cuts, scouring of side slopes and uneven
settlements. Often, huge amounts of sediments and debris carried by the flood water block
the cross-drainage structures resulting a complete washout of structures as well as the
damages to road formations. Nearly 85% of rural roads is having earthen surface, and most
of which are operational only during the dry season. During the monsoon rains, all weather
earthen roads are the ones subjected to severe damages as no restrictions are imposed to
regulate the heavy vehicular traffic. In some cases, there has been a huge, recurrent

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 2

expenditure on the maintenance. However, in many cases, the maintenance aspect has been
completely neglected due to lack of resources. As a consequence, the backlog of road
maintenance is ever increasing rendering the present rural road network unserviceable.

During the last couple of years, His Majesty’s Government of Nepal (HMGN) has allocated
a substantial amount of funds to the local governing institutions in the form of block or
programme grants, a large chunk of which is being spent on rural roads. In addition, HMGN
allocates a considerable portion of its scarce resources every year for the maintenance of its
rural road network. Table 1 shows the present trend of allocation of different district block
grants (refer to Annex II for district-wise details).

Table 1 : Present Trend of Allocation of Different Block Grants

Year Annual Allocation (NRs. ’00,000)

Rural Road Grant Other Block Grant Total District Block Grant
1996/97 1,763 3,984 5,747
1997/98 1,763 4,489 6,252
1998/99 1,763 4,540 6,303

Despite these efforts, the public was not able to enjoy the desired benefits of the investments
mainly due to the above-mentioned reasons. Attending to this situation, HMGN formulated
the National Strategy for Rural Infrastructure Development in December 1997.
Following the strategy, the Department of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural
Roads (DoLIDAR) was established under the Ministry of Local Development (MLD),
particularly for regulating the development and maintenance of rural road network. On this
background, the Government has prepared a maintenance plan for increasing the efficiency
and effectiveness of road maintenance activities. The maintenance plan clearly addresses the
key issues of concerns such as allocation of adequate resources, proper utilisation of available
funds, enhancement of requisite skills and adoption of appropriate institutional arrangements.
The Government is confident that with the implementation of this maintenance plan, the
objectives laid down in the national strategy for the rural road sector will be fulfilled.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 3

 Introduction to Rural Road Maintenance
2

A road is a major capital investment and it is necessary to preserve it by means of an

appropriate maintenance done at an appropriate time. Failure to maintain the road
properly leads to rapid deterioration with subsequent increase in vehicle operating cost
and road accidents and eventually demands for an expensive reconstruction. Road
maintenance may be defined as a function of keeping the roadways, roadside structures,
cross-drainage structures and other facilities in the best possible condition to ensure reliable
and safe transportation along the roadways. It will (i) minimise the rate of deterioration of
the road and thus prolong its life; (ii) provide better running surface and thus reduce the cost
of vehicle operation; and (iii) ensure reliable and safe transport services.

2.1 Definition of rural road

A rural road may be defined as a motorable road or track owned, regulated and
maintained by the local governing institutions. These roads may have either earthen
or gravelled or paved surface and are operational either during a part of or throughout
the year.

In the districts, the key arterial roads linking the villages (often referred to as ‘District
Roads’) combined with other auxiliary network of village roads form the ‘Rural Road
Network’. The roads within the municipality areas (often referred to as ‘Urban
Roads’) are, however, not considered as rural roads. For the purpose of this
maintenance plan, all rural roads are supposed to be owned, regulated and
maintained by the local governing institutions. The roads in the district which are
either built and/or regulated and/or maintained under the jurisdiction of other
agencies like Department of Roads (DoR), Department of Irrigation (DoI), Nepal
Electricity Authority (NEA), Royal Nepalese Army, etc. are not eligible to become
rural roads until the ownership of these roads are handed over to the respective local
governing institutions.

2.2 Classification of rural roads

The rural roads may be classified according to the following criteria:

i. Serviceability condition

− All-weather roads (passable throughout the year)

− Fair-weather roads (passable only a part of the year)

ii. Pavement (or surface) material

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 4

 − Earthen roads (just the road formation; no pavement)
− Gravelled/WBM roads (having gravelled or WBM surface)
− Black-topped roads (paved with Asphalt as binding material)

iii. Importance

− Class ‘A’ (District Roads - main rural roads)

− Class ‘B’ (Village Roads - auxiliary rural roads)

2.3 Categorisation of rural roads according to maintenance needs

All rural roads in Nepal may fall under the following categories according to their
maintenance requirements.

i. Maintainable roads (roads built according to proper engineering standards)

• Routine or regular maintenance (required to keep the road operational at all

times; needs nominal funds)

• Periodic or planned maintenance (required to deal with major repairs demanded

over a set period of time; needs considerable amount of funds which basically
depends upon the frequency of its intervention)

• Rehabilitation (required when the road is not serviceable even after the routine
and periodic maintenance; needs a lot of resources and a great effort to bring it
to serviceable condition; may include the activities such as redesigning,
realigning, reconstruction and upgrading)

ii. Non-maintainable roads (These roads mainly refer to sub-standard roads or tracks
built through spontaneous efforts and ad-hoc construction methods without
following engineering standards; cannot bring them up to serviceable condition
simply by rehabilitation; require almost the same resources and efforts needed for
constructing a new road) This maintenance plan does not address these roads as
they need to be constructed as new roads.

2.4 Objectives of maintenance

It is important to recognise that, as with most infrastructure maintenance, road

maintenance is not intended to prolong the life of a road into perpetuity. Roads of any
type will deteriorate over time due to the twin forces of ageing and use. The
objective of maintenance, therefore, is to lessen the deterioration effects of these two
forces vis a vis providing for increased service performance of the road in the short
run.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 5

 From an engineering point of view, there is a set of interventions that are required
over the life of a road. The following are the key maintenance interventions in rural
roads:

• routine or regular maintenance;

• periodic or planned maintenance;
• rehabilitation (redesigning, realigning, reconstruction and upgrading).

Optimal timing of these interventions depends primarily on climate, traffic levels and
the original quality of construction. The specific activities to be carried out, however,
depend on the type of road surface.

2.5 Scope of various maintenance interventions

Routine Maintenance:

All minor maintenance works which are of regular nature and can not be accurately
estimated or measured are categorised under routine maintenance. It covers the work
involved in keeping the road in proper shape and in protecting it from deterioration.
Generally, routine maintenance does not require skilled labour.

The following works may fall under this heading:

• Safety inspection and removal of obstructions;

• Cleaning of culverts and bridges;
• Cleaning of mitre and side drains;
• Filling and compaction of potholes;
• Trimming of road edges for water shedding;
• Reshaping carriageway and compaction;
• Removal of small-sized slides/slips that fall on the road surface;
• Cutting grass, bushes and branches of trees for visibility splays;
• Maintaining trees along the road sides;
• Clearing of vegetation from drainage paths;
• Maintaining and placing of road signs and delineators;
• Any other simple works.

Periodic Maintenance:

All maintenance works that are of higher volume and to be carried out periodically
shall be categorised under periodic maintenance. These works, requiring skilled
labour can be planned and estimated. The following activities are common in
practice.

• Re-cambering and re-grading of the road surfaces for longer stretches, in case of
earthen and gravelled roads;
• Regravelling on carriageway and shoulders;

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 6

• Pavement repairs such as resealing, surface dressing or overlaying, in case of
black-topped roads;
• Removal of medium and large-sized earth slips and associated preventive
works;
• Repair of scour checks and the damaged portions of side drains;
• Repairing erosion on shoulders and planting grass;
• Repairing or replacing of earth retaining walls (dry stone, masonry or gabion);
• Repairing, replacing or adding of parapet walls and railings at bridges and
culverts;
• Repairing, replacing or adding of guard walls at road sides;
• Repairing works on abutments, wing walls or apron/cut-off walls at bridges and
culverts;
• Construction of small-scale river training structures; and
• Preparation of road-side nurseries and planting of trees, bushes and other
vegetative cover wherever necessary.

Many of the above activities can be delayed and consequently, their costs can be
diminished by proper application of routine maintenance activities. Nevertheless,
they will have to be undertaken lest the roads reach a state of deterioration where
even the routine maintenance activities are no longer beneficial.

Emergency repair works also fall under the category of periodic maintenance.
These repair works are necessary to ensure the free movement of traffic which is
either obstructed by or vulnerable to a rapid and unexpected deterioration of road
condition. Such accidental damages may occasionally be caused by natural calamities
or the sudden failure of structures. Dealing with a major or unexpected landslide just
after the road construction can be considered as an emergency maintenance.

Rehabilitation (redesigning, realigning, reconstruction and upgrading):

Routine and periodic maintenance programmes alone may not be sufficient all the
time to upkeep the road to the required standard. Upon heavy use, the road may be
subjected to a rapid deterioration mainly due to the fatigue failure of materials.
Sometimes, the unexpected natural causes such as landslides, earthquakes and floods
may also expedite this process, causing a sudden lowering of road’s quality with
respect to serviceability, comfort, reliability and safety. When a certain stretch of
such road requires a considerable intervention, it is subjected to a process called
rehabilitation which may comprise of activities such as ‘redesigning’, ‘realigning’,
‘reconstruction’ and ‘upgrading’. The following works may fall under rehabilitation.

• Reconstruction of road pavements for longer stretches;

• Reconstruction and/or addition of road structures;
• Reconstruction and/or addition of cross and road side drainage structures;
• Strengthening and/or construction of slope protection structures;
• Improvement of geometric standards of the road;
• Upgrading of road surfaces;
• Any other works deemed necessary to make the road intact.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 7

2.6 Unit maintenance cost

The deterioration of a road depends on the pavement standards used in original

construction, its traffic level, climate and the environment. Therefore, the
maintenance cost is, in part, a function of construction cost, itself. In addition, current
maintenance cost also depends, in part, on deterioration of road surface which, in turn,
is affected by past maintenance at any particular time. Thus, maintenance cost of a
rural road broadly depends on the following factors:

• Level of deterioration of road formation, its surface and structures;

• Available technology for maintenance;
• Quality of original design and construction;
• Prices of inputs; and
• Existing maintenance management practices.

Therefore, it shows calculating a unit maintenance cost is rather complicated task

with reference to the above-mentioned variables. However, for the purposes of
financial planning and realistic fund allocations, the following indicative unit costs
are adopted for routine maintenance, periodic maintenance and rehabilitation (see
Table 2(a) & 2(b)).

These indicative unit costs are derived on the assumption that the labour-based, local
resource-oriented, environment-friendly construction techniques are applied in rural
road maintenance. This is in line with the objectives set out in the National Strategy
for Rural Infrastructure Development as well as in the Ninth National Development
Plan.

Table 2 (a) : Indicative Unit Maintenance Cost

Type of Road Unit Maintenance Cost for

Routine Periodic Rehabilitation
Maintenance Maintenance NRs(US$)/km
NRs(US$)/km NRs(US$)/km
Earthen 14,000 (200) 100,000 (1,500) 300,000 (4,500)
Gravelled/WBM 21,000 (300) 150,000 (2,250) 600,000 (9,000)
Black-topped 42,000 (600) 300,000 (4,500) 1,200,000 (18,000)

Table 2 (b) : Frequency of Maintenance Intervention

Type of Road Frequency of

Routine Periodic Rehabilitation
Maintenance Maintenance
Earthen every year once in two years whenever required
Gravelled/WBM every year once in three years whenever required
Black-topped every year once in five years whenever required

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 8

 Rural Road Maintenance Plan
3

S tudies carried out in developing countries have shown that significant returns can be
achieved from investments on rural road maintenance. Such internal rate of returns has
been found varying from 17%, in case of regravelling, to as high as 74% in routine
maintenance. Not only due to this fact but also with a view to protect its ever expanding
rural road network, the Government has made its choice of investment on rural road
maintenance.

The aim of Maintenance Plan is to ensure conducive funding arrangement among the
stakeholders; to establish an effective and efficient management system under the jurisdiction
of local governing institutions; and to define the overall regulatory mechanism for
maintenance process. Such efforts made through the implementation of this maintenance
plan are expected to produce one or more of the following effects:

• reduced transport prices and increased use of roads;

• increased farm gate prices of produce;
• increased agricultural production and cropping intensity;
• lower prices of agricultural inputs;
• enhanced management capability of local governing institutions on road maintenance; and
• better serviceability and increased safety and reliability for road users.

3.1 National Rural Road Inventory

Out of the total rural road length3 of 14,000 km, there are about 11,650 km of earthen
roads, about 2,050 km of gravelled roads and about 300 km of black-topped roads in
Nepal. However, about 32% of the earthen road length, i.e., about 3,700 km, is
expected to be non-maintainable as they are required to be re-built as standard new
roads (refer to Table 3 for National Rural Road Inventory).

Table 3 : National Rural Road Inventory as of 1999

Type of Road Maintainable (km) Non-maintainable (km) Total (km)

Earthen 7,950 3,700 11,650
Gravelled/WBM 2,050 0 2,050
Black-topped 300 0 300
Total (km) 10,300 3,700 14,000

This plan primarily deals with the maintenance aspects of 10,300 km of present
maintainable roads. In due course of time, this length will be increased and thus, for
3
This data is based on the District Transport Master Plans-DTMPs and the District Rural Road Inventories
(wherever available) as well as the data provided by the DDCs. This is also supplemented by the road
statistics provided by the Road Management & Finance Reform Implementation Committee.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 9

 planning purpose, the annual increment of road length is assumed to be 5%. The rest
of 3,700 km of present non-maintainable roads are required to be reconstructed
properly in order to be eligible for maintenance investments. Therefore, the
reconstruction of these roads will also be a part of the assumed 5% growth.

3.2 Physical targets on maintenance

Yearly requirement Vs. base target

Given the present level of management and absorption capacity at the local level, and
the limited resources available at the centre, the Government has planned a
manageable workload (about 25% of total maintenance requirement) as the first
year’s base target on maintenance. Accordingly, the Government has fixed the annual
base targets so as to arrive at the full maintenance requirement (100%) over a period
of eight years with an expectation that the national economy and the local
management capacity will improve favourably as a result of proper management of
road maintenance. Table 4 provides the base targets against the actual maintenance
requirements for the next eight years (from 1999/00 to 2006/07), covering the
remaining period of Ninth Plan as well as the period of Tenth Plan.

Table 4 : Yearly Requirement Vs. Base Target

Year Maintenance (km)

Earthen Gravelled/WBM Black-topped Total
Reqd.* Target Reqd.* Target Reqd.* Target Reqd.* Target
1999/00 7,950 2,000 2,050 500 300 75 10,300 2,575
2000/01 8,350 3,315 2,155 840 305 125 10,810 4,280
2001/02 8,770 4,630 2,265 1,185 320 170 11,355 5,985
2002/03 9,210 5,945 2,380 1,525 335 220 11,925 7,690
2003/04 9,670 7,260 2,500 1,870 350 265 12,520 9,395
2004/05 10,155 8,575 2,625 2,210 370 315 13,150 11,100
2005/06 10,665 9,890 2,755 2,550 390 360 13,810 12,800
2006/07 11,200 11,200 2,895 2,895 410 410 14,505 14,505
* 5% annual growth of network is assumed.

Physical targets for each type of maintenance

Prior to fixing the financial targets on maintenance, it is necessary to fix the

individual target for each type of maintenance which is intended to be carried out in
each year for each category of road (refer to Table 5). For routine maintenance, it is
simply the same target as mentioned in Table 4 while for periodic maintenance, it is
fixed on the basis of frequency given in Table 2 (b). In case of rehabilitation, the
individual yearly target is fixed at 5% of the base target by assuming the life span of
road as 20 years.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 10

 Table 5 : Physical Targets for each Type of Maintenance

Type of Road and Yearly Target for each Type of Maintenance (km)
Intervention 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07
Earthen
Routine (100%) 2,000 3,315 4,630 5,945 7,260 8,575 9,890 11,200
Periodic (50%) 1,000 1,660 2,315 2,975 3,630 4,290 4,945 5,600
Rehabilitation(5%) 100 165 230 300 365 430 495 560
Gravelled/WBM
Routine (100%) 500 840 1,185 1,525 1,870 2,210 2,550 2,895
Periodic (33%) 165 280 395 510 625 735 850 965
Rehabilitation(5%) 25 40 60 75 95 110 130 145
Black-topped
Routine (100%) 75 125 170 220 265 315 360 410
Periodic (20%) 15 25 35 45 55 65 70 80
Rehabilitation(5%) 4 6 9 11 13 16 18 20

3.3 Financial targets on maintenance

Resource contribution on maintenance from different stakeholders

Nepal’s rural population is the key beneficiary of the rural road network. As the
VDCs and the DDCs are the first institutions to realise the impact of economic
stimulation resulted by the effective operation of rural road network, their active
participation in the road maintenance process should be an essential pre-condition for
its success. In line with its policies in promoting local participation in the
development process as well as in strengthening the decentralised local governance
process, the Government has decided to involve the local governing institutions
actively in funding the maintenance activities under this plan. As fixed by the
Government, the level of resource contribution for each maintenance intervention is
given in Table 6.

Table 6 : Resource Contribution

Type of Maintenance DDC/VDC HMGN

Routine Maintenance 50% 50%
Periodic Maintenance 33% 67%
Rehabilitation 25% 75%

Based on the proposed local contribution (counterpart funds) for each type of
maintenance, the Government will provide the supplementary funds as an attempt to
encourage local governing institutions for maintenance of their own networks. The
total amount of the local counterpart funds and the respective allocations for each
maintenance activity will indicate, (i) the prioritised maintenance needs of the district,
(ii) the readiness and the commitment of the local government, and (iii) their desire to
be partners in the development process. In the long run, such financial details could
even be used as a yard stick to measure the improved local capacity for road
maintenance.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 11

Financial targets

The problems of ensuring adequate maintenance spending within a budgetary process

are not new, nor are they unique to roads. As the present practice of allocating road
grants has not resulted in a significantly greater proportion of total road spending on
planned maintenance (new construction is more favoured than maintenance), the
Government will tie up the grant allocation mechanism with the local counterpart
funds made available for a specific maintenance activity. By doing so, a larger and
more certain spending on maintenance is guaranteed on the part of local governing
institutions. The following financial targets (refer to Table 7) are fixed with
reference to the physical targets given in Table 5.

Table 7 : Financial Targets for each Type of Maintenance

Type of Road and Yearly Target for each Type of Maintenance NRs ‘00000
Intervention (US$ ‘000)
(Cost per km) 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07
Earthen
Routine (NRs. 14,000) 280 464 648 832 1,016 1,201 1,385 1,568
(US$ 200) (400) ((663) (926) (1,189) (1,452) (1,715) (1,978) (2,240)
Periodic (NRs.100,000) 1,000 1,660 2,315 2,975 3,630 4,290 4,945 5,600
(US$ 1,500) (1,500) (2,490) (3,473) (4,463) (5,445) (6,435) (7,418) (8,400)
Rehab. (NRs.300,000) 300 495 690 900 1,095 1,290 1,485 1,680
(US$ 4,500) (450) (743) (1,035) (1,350) (1,643) (1,935) (2,228) (2,520)
Total 1,580 2,619 3,653 4,707 5,741 6,781 7,815 8,848
(2,350) (3,896) (5,434) (7,002) (8,540) (10,085) (11,624) (13,160)
Gravelled/WBM
Routine (NRs. 21,000) 105 176 249 320 393 464 536 608
(US$ 300) (150) (252) (356) (458) (561) (663) (765) (869)
Periodic (NRs.150,000) 248 420 593 765 938 1,103 1,275 1,448
(US$ 2,250) (371) (630) (889) (1,148) (1,406) (1,654) (1,913) (2,171)
Rehab. (NRs.600,000) 150 240 360 450 570 660 780 870
(US$ 9,000) (225) (360) (540) (675) (855) (990) (1,170) (1,305)
Total 503 836 1,202 1,535 1,901 2,227 2,591 2,926
(746) (1,242) (1,785) (2,281) (2,822) (3,307) (3,848) (4,345)
Black-topped
Routine (NRs. 42,000) 32 53 71 92 111 132 151 172
(US$ 600) (45) (75) (102) (132) (159) (189) (216) (246)
Periodic (NRs.300,000) 45 75 105 135 165 195 210 240
(US$ 4,500) (68) (113) (158) (203) (248) (293) (315) (360)
Rehab. (NRs.1,200,000) 48 72 108 132 156 192 216 240
(US$ 18,000) (72) (108) (162) (198) (234) (288) (324) (360)
Total 125 200 284 359 432 519 577 652
(185) (296) (422) (533) (641) (770) (855) (966)
Total
Routine 417 693 968 1,244 1,520 1,797 2,072 2,348
(595) (990) (1,384) (1,779) (2,172) (2,567) (2,959) (3,355)
Periodic 1,293 2,155 3,013 3,875 4,733 5,588 6,430 7,288
(1,939) (3,233) (4,520) (5,814) (7,099) (8,382) (9,646) (10,931)
Rehabilitation 498 807 1,158 1,482 1,821 2,142 2,481 2,790
(747) (1,211) (1,737) (2,223) (2,732) (3,213) (3,722) (4,185)
Grand Total 2,208 3,655 5,139 6,601 8,074 9,527 10,983 12,426
(3,281) (5,434) (7,641) (9,816) (12,003) (14,162) (16,327) (18,471)

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 12

 Maintenance Plan

Table 8 provides the Maintenance Plan with details such as yearly physical and
financial targets, the respective local (DDC/VDC) and HMGN contributions for each
type of maintenance, etc.

3.4 Resource mobilisation for maintenance

Total resources required

According to Table 8, the anticipated total resource requirement for the production of
road maintenance is NRs. 220.8 million (about US$ 3.28 million) in the fiscal year
1999/00 and it is expected to be increased up to NRs. 1,242.6 million (about US$
18.47 million) by the final fiscal year 2006/07. This excludes the funds requirement
for institutional capacity building which will be fully financed by the Government.

Local resource mobilisation

As envisaged in the previous section, the concerned local governing institutions must
arrange their share of contribution for the maintenance in order to be eligible for
receiving proportionate supplementary funds from central Government. The local
contribution may include resources generated by the DDC/VDC (under the provisions
made in Local Self-Governance Act 2055), the funds contributed by the participating
VDCs, the funds raised by the road beneficiaries, any other legal contributions made
by other organisations (INGOs, NGOs, Transport Entrepreneurs, etc.) or individuals
and block grants received from the central Government. These contributions should
not account any commitment made in kind or free labour.

According to Table 8, the anticipated total local contribution is NRs. 76 million

(about US$ 1.12 million) in the fiscal year 1999/00 and will be increased up to NRs.
427.7 million (about US$ 6.33 million) by the final fiscal year 2006/07. This
constitutes about thirty four percent of total fund required for maintenance.

HMGN contribution

The Government will provide NRs. 144.8 million (about US$ 2.16 million) as its
share of contribution (representing sixty six percent of total fund required for
maintenance) in the fiscal year 1999/00 and it will be increased up to NRs. 815
million (about US$ 12.14 million) by the final fiscal year 2006/07.

In addition to this allocation made available for road maintenance programme, the
Government plans to provide additional funds for institutional capacity building at
every level in order to perpetuate a well-institutionalised road maintenance at the
districts. Such funds will be spent on logistic supports to DDCs, human resource
development activities at all levels, technical resource bases such as quality control
facilities, equipment maintenance facilities, etc., various consultancy services

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 13

required for the design, supervision and management of maintenance works, and on
the preparation/updating of Transport Master Plans (DTMP), technical documents and
so on. These funds will, however, be provided by the Government for the initial eight
years, i.e., the period covered by this plan. Table 9 provides the details of total fund
requirement for the implementation of this maintenance plan.

Table 9 : Total Fund Requirement

Activity Fund Requirement NRs. ‘00000 (US$ ‘000)

1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07
Road Maintenance (x) 2,208 3,655 5,139 6,601 8,074 9,527 10,983 12,426
(3,281) (5,434) (7,641) (9,816) (12,003) (14,162) (16,327) (18,471)
Institutional Capacity 221 366 514 660 808 953 1,098 1,243
(328) (543) (764) (982) (1,200) (1,416) (1,633) (1,847)
Building (10% of x)
- Logistic Support
- Human Resource Develop.
- Technical Resource Base
- Consultancy services
Total Fund Required 2,429 4,021 5,653 7,261 8,882 10,480 12,081 13,669
(3,609) (5,977) (8,405) 10,798) (13,203) (15,578) (17,960) (20,318)
Local Contribution 760 1,259 1,768 2,271 2,777 3,278 3,778 4,277
(1,124) (1,865) (2,618) (3,364) (4,112) (4,853) (5,593) (6,331)
HMGN Contribution 1,669 2,762 3,885 4,990 6,105 7,202 8,303 9,393
(2,485) (4,112) (5,788) (7,434) (9,091) (10,725) (12,367) (13,987)
- For programme 1,448 2,396 3,371 4,330 5,297 6,249 7,205 8,150
(2,157) (3,569) (5,024) (6,452) (7,891) (9,309) (10,734) (12,140)
- For programme support 221 366 514 660 808 953 1,098 1,243
(100% from HMGN) (328) (543) (764) (982) (1,200) (1,416) (1,633) (1,847)

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 14

 Institutional Arrangements and Funding Mechanism
4

D ecisions concerning the use of resources made available for maintenance may be as
important and as difficult as the task of raising the funds. Most problems that exist with
road maintenance are institutional or managerial in origin, rather than technical. It is a
known fact that all local governing institutions are not equally capable with regard to
technical, financial and managerial aspects. Therefore, the institutional arrangements and
funding mechanism set forth in this plan have been so devised that the local governing
institutions will eventually become capable and feel responsible for the management of rural
road maintenance.

4.1 Policy reforms related to institutional aspects

Ownership of rural roads

The Government has already decided that the responsibility of developing and
maintaining the rural road network shall lie with the local governing institutions under
the technical guidance and facilitation of newly established Department of Local
Infrastructure Development and Agricultural Roads (DoLIDAR). As other
government agencies such as DoR, DoI, etc. are still holding the responsibility of the
development of a large portion of rural roads, there is a confusion over the
responsibility prevailing both at the central and district levels. Therefore, prior to
implementation of this maintenance plan, the ownership of all rural roads has to be
handed over to the respective DDCs so that these DDCs can prepare and implement a
comprehensive maintenance plan of rural roads within their jurisdiction.

Establishment of sectoral unit at district

Unlike the other technical departments, DoLIDAR does not have its technical office
at the district level. The technical unit at DDC, presently staffed with the employees
from the central Government, will likely be staffless once all central Government
employees are withdrawn according to the newly enacted Local Self-Governance Act
(2055). As per this Act, the DDCs could establish Rural Road Units by recruiting
their own staff based on the Local Service Act which is yet to be formulated. Adding
to this situation, not all DDCs may financially be able, in near future, to establish such
a new unit by affording the remuneration and other fringe benefits of employees.
Under these circumstances, it is very unlikely that these sectoral units will be
established at all candidate districts. Therefore, for the candidate districts who cannot
establish their sectoral units or who are not managerially capable, the DoLIDAR shall
establish its district office in order to assist those DDCs in implementing the

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 15

maintenance plan. This office will, however, be withdrawn once the respective DDCs
become capable in managing the road maintenance work.
Technical manpower at districts

National Strategy for rural infrastructure Development has specified the number of
technical personnel required for each category of districts. It envisages that these
technicians shall be in place at the DDCs for effective implementation of the rural
infrastructure programmes. The following Table 10 gives the required number of
technical staff in the districts as per the National Strategy. Therefore, staffing of
DDCs’ sectoral units with the adequate technical personnel shall be accomplished
prior to implementation of this plan.

Table 10 : Projection of District Technical Staff for Next Ten Years’ Period

District Projection of District Technical Manpower (Number)

At the beginning Phase I Phase II
in 2054/55 (1997/98) by 2059/60 (2002/03) by 2064/65 (2007/08)
Class No. SDE E Overseer SDE E Overseer SDE E Overseer
District Ilaka District Ilaka District Ilaka

A 26 - 26 104 81 15 52 104 81 26 52 104 81

B 32 - 32 96 - - 32 96 121 - 32 96 121
C 17 - 17 34 - - 17 34 - - 17 34 50
TOTAL 75 - 75 234 81 15 101 234 202 26 101 234 252
SOURCE...........National Strategy for Rural Infrastructure Development (1997)

Note : Class ‘A’ districts - Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusa, Mahottari, Sarlahi, Bara, Rautahat,
Nawalparasi, Rupandehi, Kapilbastu, Dang, Kailali (by Phase I) and Parsa, Chitwan, Banke,
Bardiya, Kanchanpur, Syangja, Kaski, Tanahu, Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Kavrepalanchok (by Phase
II)
Class ‘B’ districts - Taplejung, Panchthar, Ilam, Sankhuwasabha, Tehrathum, Dhankuta, Bhojpur, Khotang,
Okhaldhunga, Udayapur, Dolakha, Ramechhap, Sindhuli, Dhading, Nuwakot, Sindhupalchok,
Makwanpur, Gorkha, Lamjung, Baglung, Gulmi, Palpa, Rukum, Salyan, Rolpa, Pyuthan,
Dailekh, Surkhet, Achham, Doti, Darchula, Baitadi
Class ‘C’ districts - Solukhumbu, Rasuwa, Bhaktapur, Manang, Mustang, Myagdi, Parbat, Arghakhanchi, Humla,
Mugu, Dolpa, Jumla, Kalikot, Jajarkot, Bajhang, Bajura, Dadeldhura

SDE - Senior Divisional Engineer (Class II)

E - Engineer (Class III)

Annex III provides the district-wise staff requirements as specified in the National
Strategy.

Institutional support from the centre

As described in previous sections, the task of road maintenance needs a wide range of
managerial skills and demands a well co-ordinated approach amongst providers,
producers, financiers and the users of the rural road. Considering the present capacity
of the DDC, it is obvious that they, at least for sometime in future, require continued
technical expertise and guidance from the centre in managing their road maintenance
activities effectively. Adding to this, the DoLIDAR which was formed recently to
provide such technical support to local bodies, too needs further strengthening in
fulfilling its responsibility. To this end, the Government decides to seek external
donor assistance, both at the local and central level, for the management of road
maintenance.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 16

4.2 Institutional Arrangements

The following institutional arrangements are envisaged at different levels for effective
implementation of this plan.

At district level

The DDC (through its Rural Road Unit) will be the sole responsible agency for
implementing all road maintenance activities at the district. The functions of DDC
regarding the road maintenance are as follows:

• Prepare District Rural Road Inventory;

• Prepare District Transport Master Plan (DTMP) and get it approved by the District
Council;
• Identification of links to be maintained;
• Prioritisation of such links with reasonable justifications;
• Preparation of Annual District Maintenance Programme (ADMP) which includes
all designs and cost-estimates;
• Approval of ADMP by the DDC;
• Commitment and allocation of local counterpart funds for the programme;
• Submission of proposal (as per the specified format) for maintenance programme
to central Government, requesting proportionate HMGN supplementary funds;
• Co-ordinate all stakeholders (VDCs, users committees, road beneficiaries, NGOs,
CBOs, transport entrepreneurs, etc.) at district level for road maintenance;
• Resource mobilisation for road maintenance activities;
• Opening of the Bank Account for District Rural Road Maintenance Fund and its
regular operation;
• Assignment of technical staff and defining their roles, responsibilities and power;
• Preparation of specifications, tender documents, Terms of Reference (ToR), etc.
• Procurement of goods and services for road maintenance;
• Taking measurements of work; preparing bills; and settlement of payments;
• Supervision and Monitoring of the implementation of ADMP;
• Reviewing, auditing and reporting on the implementation of ADMP;
• Enactment of regulations for the management and proper use of rural transport
system;
• Operate and regulate the rural transport system.

At central level

DoLIDAR will be the main co-ordinating agency for the implementation of the road
maintenance programme throughout the country. The main functions of DoLIDAR
regarding the road maintenance are as follows:

• Preparation of the Annual National Maintenance Programme (ANMP) by

reviewing and accommodating the proposals submitted by the DDCs;

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 17

 • Ensuring and release of adequate supplementary funds from the central
Government;
• Monitoring and periodic review of the implementation of ANMP;
• Provision of technical and managerial support as and when required;
• Carrying out the periodic assessments on local institutional capabilities and
arranging the logistic support and technical resource bases accordingly;
• Conducting training needs assessments for various target groups at local level and
facilitating the organising of workshops, seminars and other training programmes
accordingly;
• Arranging the study tours, regional and central level seminars and other training
required for the implementation of ANMP;
• Assisting in formulating the Government policies and ensuring the exercise of such
policy decisions.

4.3 Funding Mechanism

Since, implementation of road maintenance plan is a cost-sharing, decentralised,

participatory process, the fund flow mechanism should be smooth and prompt for its
success. Therefore, it is essential to establish a separate fund called District Rural
Road Maintenance Fund at every programme district.
Local Contribution HMGN Contribution
Routine ........... 50% Routine ........... 50%
Periodic........... 33% Periodic........... 67%
Rehabilitation.. 25% Rehabilitation.. 75%

District
Rural Road
Maintenance
Fund

District Rural Road Maintenance Fund

The District Rural Road Maintenance Fund (DRRMF) mainly consists of local
counterpart contribution and the proportionate HMGN supplementary allocations
made available for the programme. The local counterpart contribution may consist of
the resources generated by the DDCs/VDCs (under the provisions made in Local Self-
Governance Act 2055), the funds contributed by the participating VDCs, the funds
raised by the road beneficiaries, any other legal contributions made by the other
organisations or individuals and block grants received from the central Government.

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 18

Upon the approval of the proposal for ADMP by the appropriate authorities, the local
counterpart funds mobilised by the respective DDCs shall be credited to the Bank
Account opened exclusively for the District Rural Road Maintenance Fund. Based on
the amount credited, the Government will release its specified share of contribution
(refer to page 11; Table 6 : Resource Contribution) from the programme allocation
to the respective DRRMF account. Prior to the release of HMGN funds, the
candidate district should, however, become a programme district by fulfilling the
following Preparedness Criteria.

Preparedness Criteria to become a programme district

In order to participate in this road maintenance programme, every candidate district

should prove its readiness by fulfilling the criteria given below.

Every candidate district should,

i. at least, prepare the District Rural Road Inventory;

ii. commit to prepare the District Transport Master Plan within the first two years of
its engagement with the programme;

iii. prepare and approve its ADMP by the DDC, with details such as
• identified links and their maintenance requirements;
• prioritisation with reasonable justifications;
• designs and cost-estimates of each road;
• total fund requirements for each type of maintenance and respective share of
local contribution;
• brief description of Rural Road Unit with details on its staff;
• description on available logistics and technical resource bases;
• selected implementation modality (force account, local contracting, users’
committee);
• work plan;
• etc.

iv. commit its share of contribution in cash and indicate its readiness to follow the
specified guidelines provided by the Government.

Any candidate district who fulfils the above criteria may submit a proposal in the
specified format (later to be provided by the DoLIDAR) to DoLIDAR by expressing
its willingness to participate as a programme district of the road maintenance plan. If
this proposal is acceptable to the Government, the district will become qualified for
the programme.

Candidate districts for the programme

The Government has identified 58 candidate districts which have already got access
to strategic road network. These districts may be eligible to become programme

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 19

districts once they fulfil the preparedness criteria to show their readiness for
participation. The list of candidate districts is given in Table 11.

Table 11 : Candidate Districts

EASTERN REGION 20. Dhading Dhaulagiri Zone

Mechi Zone 21. Nuwakot 42. Parbat
01. Taplejung 22. Kathmandu 43. Baglung
02. Panchthar 23. Lalitpur 44. Myagdi
03. Ilam 24. Bhaktapur MID WESTERN REGION
04. Jhapa 25. Kavrepalanchowk Rapti Zone
Koshi Zone Narayani Zone 45. Rolpa
05. Terathum 26. Makawanpur 46. Pyuthan
06. Dhankuta 27. Rautahat 47. Dang
07. Sunsari 28. Bara 48. Salyan
08. Morang 29. Parsa Bheri Zone
Sagarmatha Zone 30. Chitwan 49. Banke
09. Udaypur WESTERN REGION 50. Bardiya
10. Okhaldhunga Lumbini Zone 51. Surkhet
11. Saptari 31. Nawalparasi FAR WESTERN REGION
12. Siraha 32. Rupandehi Seti Zone
CENTRAL REGION 33. Kapilvastu 52. Kailali
Janakpur Zone 34. Arghakhanchi 53. Doti
13. Dhanusha 35. Palpa 54. Achham
14. Mahottari 36. Gulmi Mahakali Zone
15. Sarlahi Gandaki Zone 55. Darchula
16. Sindhuli 37. Syangja 56. Baitadi
17. Dolakha 38. Tanahu 57. Dadeldhura
Bagmati Zone 39. Gorkha 58. Kanchanpur
18. Sindhupalchowk 40. Lamjung
19. Rasuwa 41. Kaski

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 20

 Implementation Arrangements

H ow the road maintenance work is carried out, mainly depends upon (i) the
implementation approach - whether centralised or decentralised, labour-based or
equipment-based, etc. and (ii) the modality - whether direct employment of labour
through force account system or involvement of users’ groups through lengthman/labour
gang system or contracting of local firms/individuals. These factors further outline the extent
to which the public sector, private sector and the communities are involved in the road
maintenance activities. This chapter describes the Government position on such issues,
particularly with reference to its recent policies and strategies.

5.1 Implementation Approach

As stipulated in the National Strategy for Rural Infrastructure Development (1997),

all rural road maintenance works should be carried out by adopting the labour-based,
local resources-oriented, environment-friendly techniques and in accordance with the
HMGN decentralised, participatory approach. Adopting this approach in rural road
maintenance will ensure the achievement of Government’s prime goal of poverty
alleviation by lowering the rural unemployment and supplementing the level of rural
income.

5.2 Implementation Modalities

There are three distinct implementation modalities used in Nepal for rural road
maintenance work. These modalities and their respective characteristics are discussed
here so that each DDC (implementing agency) can choose the most appropriate option
with reference to the situation (availability of local labour, material and equipment;
interest of the local contractors for maintenance work; the degree of user involvement
in development works; etc.) prevailed at the respective district.

Direct employment of labour through force account system

Under this modality, the implementing agency directly employs labour (either as
permanent staff or as temporary basis) and uses this labour along with the agency’s
maintenance equipment to carry out maintenance activities. This is the most
traditional modality being used in Nepal, particularly by the Department of Roads
(DoR). Several factors have contributed to the frequent use of force account system.
First, the bias toward equipment-based technology, common in the past, created a
situation in which most contractors could not afford the necessary maintenance

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 21

 equipment. Second, it was often felt that alternative modalities such as contracting
would lead to a lowering of maintenance standards.
These views have, however, changed dramatically in recent years with more and more
agencies attempting to involve users’ groups or to use contracting as the alternative
modalities for road maintenance. As the force account system, a rather input-oriented
system, offers no or little incentives to improve the efficiency, most of them now
prefer to adopt the other alternative modalities. This modality may still be preferred
for emergency maintenance against other alternatives as it is extremely difficult, by
its nature, to plan for emergency work.

Involvement of users’ groups through lengthman/labour gang system

Under the supervision of a DDC technician, a lengthman or a labour gang can be

employed through the local road users’ committee which is accountable to the public
(local beneficiary community) regarding the operational condition of the road. The
chosen lengthmen or labour gang, paid generally on task basis, live adjacent to the
section of the road which is assigned to them. Since their road using neighbours
know that they are being paid to maintain the road, additional pressures can be placed
on them to carry out their tasks effectively. In this way they are likely to be more
effective in comparison to the labourers working under the force accounts modality.
Involving users in road maintenance (mainly for routine) may also take the form of
labour contributions popularly known as “Jana Sahabhagita”, particularly in districts
where raising of local counterpart funds (cash) is difficult. This modality is more
suitable for managing the routine maintenance work as, in most cases, locally
available skills could well be sufficient to carry out such type of activities.

Contracting of local firms/individuals

Most road maintenance activities are simple and can be undertaken by small local
contractors who tend to use labour rather than heavy equipment, and local resources
rather than imported ones. Contracting of local firms and individuals can have
additional advantages. As they have to compete each other to win the job, every firm
tends to perform better in order to ensure or maintain the reputation of its work. This
is more efficient and effective system to manage road maintenance as far as a
conducive environment, which allows adequate resource management and promotes
free and fair competition, can be guaranteed by the DDCs. The districts where the
labour is scarce can opt for this modality as the local contracting firms and individuals
could bring the labour from elsewhere. The DDCs who do not have enough technical
manpower to supervise a large number of labour groups (appointed by users’ groups
or employed under the force account system) can choose this modality as it requires
comparatively lesser technical staff from the part of DDC. This modality is more
preferred for periodic maintenance and rehabilitation.

5.3 Implementation Matrix

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 22

 The following matrix given in Table 12 describes various functions that each
stakeholder (public sector, private sector or community level) should perform while
implementing an effective system of road maintenance.
\

Table 12 : Implementation Matrix

S. Function Activities Responsible

No. Parties
1 PLANNING • Preparation of Rural Road Inventory DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
• Preparation of DTMP DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
• Identification of links against each maintenance intervention DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
2 PROGRAMMING • Prioritisation of links with justifications DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
AND • Preparation of ADMP including designs and cost-estimates DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
PRIORITISATION • Approval of ADMP District Councils
• Commitment and allocation of local counterpart funds DDCs
• Submission of proposal for maintenance programme DDCs
• Review and approval of the district proposals at centre DoLIDAR/MLD/NPC
DoLIDAR/MLD/NPC
• Preparation of ANMP
3 REVENUE • Co-ordination among local stakeholders DDCs
GENERATION • Local resource mobilisation DDCs
AND FUNDING • Opening of the bank account for DRRMF DDCs
• Credit the local counterpart funds as per the approved plan DDCs
4 BUDGETING • Annual budget allocation MoF/NPC/Parliament
• Release of proportionate HMGN funds DoLIDAR/MoF/FCGO
5 PREPARATORY • Preparation of specifications, tender documents, ToR, etc. DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
WORK • Preparation of labour and material schedules DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
• Formation and registration of users’ committees DDCs/NGOs
6 TENDERING • Bid notice DDCs
• Tender evaluation DDCs
• Procurement of goods and services DDCs
7 SITE • Assignment of technical staff DDCs
TECHNICAL • Technical guidance and assistance DDCs
SUPERVISION • Supervision/quality control of maintenance work DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
• Taking measurements DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
• Preparing bills DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
8 CONTRACT • Contract monitoring DDCs (thro’ Consultants)
MANAGEMENT • Payments DDCs
• Performance evaluation DDCs/DoLIDAR
9 MAINTENANCE • Supply of materials, tools and equipment DDCs/Contractors
WORK • Equipment rental Contractors/Suppliers
• Carrying out of maintenance activities Contractors/Labour
Groups/Lengthmen
• Dispute resolution/Mediation Legal System/UGs
10 TRAINING • Conducting training needs assessments DoLIDAR
• Conducting awareness campaigns for local leaders and users DDCs/DoLIDAR
• Conducting training for local contractors DoLIDAR
• Conducting training for technicians DoLIDAR
• Workshops, seminars and study tours DoLIDAR
11 TECHNICAL • Provision of technical and managerial support to DDCs DoLIDAR
AND • Assisting in formulating the policies and ensuring the exercise DoLIDAR

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 23

 MANAGERIAL of such decisions
SUPPORT • Arranging logistic support, technical resource bases, technical DoLIDAR/Donors
assistance, etc. to DDCs
12 MONITORING • Reviewing, auditing and reporting on the implementation of DDCs
AND ADMP
EVALUATION • Monitoring and periodic review of ADMP DoLIDAR
• Conducting periodic assessment on local institutional DoLIDAR/MLD/NPC
capabilities
• Performance evaluation studies DoLIDAR/MLD/NPC
13 REGULATING • Enactment of regulations for the management and proper use District Councils
THE USE of rural transport system
• Operation and regulation of the rural transport network DDCs

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 24

5.4 Monitoring and Evaluation

Regular monitoring of the implementation of rural road maintenance plan is very

important as it helps (i) to keep an eye on the progress of maintenance activities; (ii)
to check whether the stipulated approach and modalities are being followed by the
DDCs; (iii) to make periodic assessments on the built-up capacity of DDCs; and (iii)
to identify the areas where further policy reforms are deemed necessary. The
following flow chart describes the entire M&E mechanism suggested for this purpose.

NPC

Reports trimesterly
MLD

Reports trimesterly
DoLIDAR Amendments to
maintenance plan,
implementation
Review; issuing general Reports trimesterly approach, modalities,
instructions for better M&E system,
performance; and other DDC
contribution levels,
corrective measures funding mechanism
Sub-committee reports monthly and individual
responsibilities
DDC’s sub committee on
Infrastructure Development

Rural Road Unit reports monthly

Maintenance activities carried out

by the DDC Rural Road Unit at
district level as per the ADMP

The Government plans to perform two major reviews on the entire RRMP each at the
end of Ninth and Tenth Plan. In the reviews to be performed in August 2002 and
August 2007,

• the total length of rural road network will be re-assessed along with the number of
new candidate districts. With the completion of many DTMPs, this exercise will
compile the most realistic data base of the rural transport system;

• the performance of the DDCs and their Rural Road Units will be evaluated with
reference to their increased workload, resources, capacities, etc. This will provide
the basis for subsequent withdrawal of HMGN financial and technical assistance
from the DDCs;

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 25

 • the overall performance of the programme and its impact will be evaluated. The
key effect monitoring indicators used for this purpose will be travel time, travel
cost, length of roads in operation, level of local participation (both financially and
socially), socio-economic benefits, etc.; and

• views and opinions of stakeholders regarding the implementation aspects of the

programme and their contribution will be discussed on random sampling basis.
Outcome of these discussions will be considered in determining the future course
of action for the RRMP.

5.5 Options proposed for further decentralisation of maintenance work

Based on the outcome of these reviews, the ownership of certain rural roads (village
roads and agricultural roads) may be handed over to further grass root level agencies
such as VDCs, CBOs, NGOs, etc. Such action will promote and strengthen the
decentralisation process from district to further down with clearly demarcated
responsibility on regulation and maintenance of these roads.

Another option under the Government’s consideration is privatising some of the rural
roads which have a single principal user (or a user group with common interest) such
as the owner of a sugar mill, a garment factory or a similar enterprise. Such users,
however, should have a strong incentive to provide road maintenance and should
anticipate that no agency would be interested to take care of these roads.

Summary
6

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 26

E nsuring the effective maintenance of rural roads in Nepal is not a simple task. As the
existing rural road network is becoming so deteriorated, it is only with the massive
infusions of new investment and improved maintenance efforts that the rural roads will
be able to sustain economic development efforts. The roads can yield significant benefits to
users and constitute one critical portion of the public infrastructure needed to support
development. Despite the difficulties, problems and complexities prevailed in the sector,
continuing maintenance activities in real terms is, therefore essential, particularly for the
upliftment of rural economy and for the alleviation of poverty.

In summary, this maintenance plan ensures that the maintenance of rural roads in Nepal is
well-attended. It initially addresses twenty five percent of total maintenance requirement of
Nepal’s rural roads and eventually covers the entire network (about 11,200 km) by the year
2007. This time-bound plan outlines an effective funding mechanism which envisages the
importance of a joint effort from both the local governing institutions and the central
Government. As per the maintenance plan, there will be a local counterpart contribution,
ranging from 25% to 50% made available for this endeavour. According to the financial
plan, the total funds earmarked by the HMGN for Ninth Plan period is NRs. 831.6 million
(about US$ 12.39 million) as its contribution whereas NRs. 378.7 million (about US$ 5.61
million) is expected to be supplemented by the local governing institutions. For Tenth Plan
period, the shares of HMGN and the local governing institutions will be NRs. 3.6 billion
(about US$ 53.61 million) and NRs. 1.64 billion (about US$ 24.25 million), respectively.

The maintenance plan further outlines an institutional arrangement which supports and
strengthens the process of decentralisation. The framework proposed in this regard will
ultimately enhance the capacities of local institutions thus making them feel responsible for
the management of rural road maintenance. The plan spells out the implementation approach
for road maintenance and highlights the options for implementing various maintenance
interventions. The responsibility of monitoring the entire maintenance exercise lies mainly
with the DoLIDAR, MLD and the NPC. Furthermore, the Government intends to perform
two major reviews on the RRMP each at the end of Ninth and Tenth Plan. May it be a
change in the proportions of contribution or a complete withdrawal of HMGN assistance
from the district or a redefining of the implementation modality, these reviews will certainly
help the Government in determining the future course of action for the maintenance of
Nepal’s rural road network.

**************************

Rural Road Maintenance Plan (RRMP) 27