Environment

Friendly Rural Roads

Poverty and Environment
Friendly Rural Roads
Roads are an important priority for local bodies in
Nepal. This is because, if operational, they will open
up a multitude of opportunities to enhance local
livelihoods. Historically, rural communities have
created local roads and other necessary infrastructure
using both voluntary and paid local labor. Since the
early 1990s, when resources and authority began to
be channeled through local bodies, the use of heavy
equipment for road construction such as bulldozers
and excavators started to increase. Furthermore, the
desire to establish road connections quickly also
resulted in the increased use of unsustainable road
construction approaches and methods. Unsustainable
roads are those that have: (i) no drainage arrangements;
(ii) high gradient; (iii) no protection structures in critical
places; (iv) no biological protection; (v) no operation
and maintenance arrangements or fund; etc.
The Ministry of Local Development through Poverty
and Environment Initiative Programme under Local
Governance and Community Development Programme
carried out a study in Makawanpur and Dolakha
Districts on Economic Analysis of Local Government
Investment in Rural Roads in Nepal in 2011.

Objective of Study
The overall objective of this study was to inform
policy-makers on the costs and benefits of alternative
road construction approaches, including social and
environmental concerns, and propose specific
recommendations on sustainable rural road
construction tailored to different stakeholderscentral
government agencies, District Development
Committees, Village Development Committees
(VDCs) and communities. Development of road
network is a consensus priority at local levels, which
has expedited with promulgation of Local Self
Governance Act, 1999. The country spends nearly 40
Mill US$ annually on rural roads and each VDC spends
nearly 1 mill NRs annually.

Government of Nepal

Ministry of Local Development

Approaches of Road Construction

Rural road construction has been guided by two
approaches in Nepal; i) Well planned, with complete
feasibility and environmental studies and transparent
participation process and ii ) Political or elite-influenced,
without serious studies and open transparent process.
In terms of technology; two technologies are in
practice; Labor Based (LB) Road or Equipment Based
(EB) Road. LB technology (green road) has been
gradually replaced by EB technology (non-engineered
road) over the last 10-15 years with use of heavy
equipments like bulldozers and excavators.

Conclusions
Rural road construction will continue to be a priority
at the local levels in future. It was revealed that heavy
equipment based construction have started to
substitute the traditional labor based and green road
construction technologies in Nepal. Both technologies
have their respective plus and minus points. Labor
based technologies are considered environmentfriendly and pro-poor with economic returns of 30%
more than equipment based technology, but the
technology is awfully slow and expensive. On the other
hand, the heavy equipment based technologies
generally have exactly opposite characteristics.
Equipment based roads, can give good results, if
planned properly. Wherever possible a combination of
both approaches should be used (equipment based
technology are cheaper and faster while the labour
based technology are more sustainable and pro-poor).

Recommendations
1. Promote Labor Based Technology
` Labor based technology should be encouraged and
particularly emphasized in poverty-ridden areas.
` Local road maintenance skills should be developed
through training and work during road construction.
` Discourage the use of heavy equipments specially
bulldozers and rock-blasting materials. However,
there are certain situations when equipment based
technology can be efficient and less damaging.
These situations are in (i) road widening; (ii) ridge
alignments; and (iii) long alignments through
unpopulated areas that require the establishment
of labor camps under LB methodology.
` Beneficiary participation in planning, monitoring
and evaluation should be reinforced.
` Social mobilization of communities in the
influence area of roads should be mandatory.
2. Mainstream Environment
in Planning Process
` Roads should be a part of the District Transport
Master Plan (DTMP). No road should be financed
by local bodies, unless it is included in the DTMP.
` Adopt various tools like Rapid Environment
Assessment, Initial Environment Examination and
Environment Impact Assessment as and when
needed.
` Prepare simple guidelines for planning, design
and construction as well as for operation and
maintenance.

` While designing the road, prepare public service

packages in agriculture and the social sectors
(health, education, etc.)
` Public forest and land needs to be protected from
exploitation.
3. Fund Management
` No roads should be started without sufficient funds
at hand or without having assured funding sources.
` All rural roads should have adequate operation and
maintenance funds and such funds must be
complemented by beneficiary contributions raised
from the increased income resulting from the road.
A system of reasonable taxing of vehicles and
goods movement can also be developed for this
purpose.
` Adequate compensation arrangements should be
made for the losers of land to road alignments or
of crops destroyed during construction.
` Maintain transparency through undertaking annual
and public auditing.
` Ensure timely release of fund.
` Feasibility study and environmental assessments
should be mandatory.

Empowered lives.
Resilient nations.

For more information: www.lgcdp.gov.np, LGCDP Programme Coordination Unit, Pulchowk, Lalitpur, Nepal, Tel: 977-1-5545077, 5523556, Fax: 977-1-5546280

European Commission

DANIDA