64232322 05-rural-roads

RURAL ROADS

J.K. Mohapatra and B.P. Chandrasekhar

5A community without roads does not have a way out

—A poor man, Juncal, Ecuador

If we get the road, we would get everything else, communitycentre, employment, post-office, telephone

—A young woman, Little Bay, Jamaica

Many of the poor communities are isolated by distance, badroad conditions, lack of or broken bridges and inadequatetransport. These conditions make it difficult for people to gettheir goods to market and themselves to place of work, to handlehealth emergencies, to send children to school, and to obtainpublic services.

Narayan et al. 2000

INTRODUCTION

Rural Road connectivity is a key component of ruraldevelopment, since it promotes access to economicand social services, thereby generating increased

agricultural productivity, non-agriculture employment as wellas non-agricultural productivity, which in turn expands ruralgrowth opportunities and real income through which povertycan be reduced.

A study (Fan et al. 1999) carried out by the InternationalFood Policy Research Institute on linkages between governmentexpenditure and poverty in rural India has revealed that aninvestment of Rs 1 crore in roads lifts 1650 poor personsabove the poverty line. Public investment on roads impactsrural poverty through its effect on improved agriculturalproductivity, higher non-farm employment opportunities andincreased rural wages. Improvement in agricultural productivitynot only reduces rural poverty directly by increasing incomeof poor households, it also causes decline in poverty indirectlyby raising agricultural wages and lowering food prices (sincepoor households are net buyers of foodgrains). Similarly,

increased non-farm employment and higher rural wages alsoenhance incomes of the rural poor and consequently, reducerural poverty. This study estimated that while the ‘productivityeffect’ of government spending on rural roads accounts for24 per cent of total impact on poverty, increased non-farmemployment accounts for 55 per cent and higher rural wagesaccounts for the remaining 31 per cent. Further, of the totalproductivity effect on poverty, 75 per cent arises from thedirect impact of roads in increasing incomes, while theremaining 25 per cent arises from lower food prices (15 percent) and increased wages (10 per cent). Similar results arefound in other developing countries. The study by the sameinstitute (Fan et al. 2000)) in China revealed that with every10,000 Yuan (about $1200) spent on rural roads elevenpersons are lifted above the poverty line. Living StandardSurvey in Vietnam in 2002 showed that populations livingwithin 2 km of all-weather roads have lower poverty rates asnoted in the draft Vision Document for Rural Roads, 2006(MoRD, 2006).

Statistical evidence apart, the link between poverty and lackof accessibility is quite apparent. Nearer home, a householdsurvey (APERP, 1997) conducted in the state of AndhraPradesh indicated that the rural road improvements lead tosubstantial reduction in freight charges, increase in householdincome, more employment opportunities, and expansion ofcultivated land as shown in Figures 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3.

STATUS OF RURAL ROADS IN INDIA

Roads are classified under a time-honoured system intoNational Highways (NHs), State Highways (SHs), MajorDistrict Roads (MDRs), Other District Roads (ODRs), andVillage Roads (VRs), with well-recognized standards forconstruction and maintenance laid out in respect of each

110 India Infrastructure Report 2007

category. Generally speaking, there are clearly understooddemarcations of responsibility in terms of governmental officesexpected to deal with each category. However, while the activitymapping with respect to NHs and SHs is clear cut, with respectto MDRs, ODRs, and VRs, these distinctions are blurred.In many states, though PRIs are assigned responsibilities withrespect to ODRs and VRs, a plethora of agencies and linedepartments undertake formation and repairs of roads. Theseinclude the state government’s PWD wing, the AgriculturalProduce Marketing Committees (APMCs), parallel bodiescreated by multilateral agencies, Forest department, Developmentauthorities and so on.

There are several general funds that are used for roads,apart from special schemes tied to specific road projects. Thusroads are repaired using Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana

(SGRY), scarcity relief funds, and untied funds devolved byStates. Consequently, it is difficult, if not impossible, to assessthe exact amount that is being spent for the maintenanceand construction of ODRs and VRs. The overlapping ofresponsibilities and the fragmentation of funds betweenagencies for maintenance and development of roads is a sourceof inefficiency and confusion. Quite often, the only pointwhere all these responsibilities and funds converge is at thelevel of the local implementing officer, the Assistant ExecutiveEngineer, who is used by all agencies named above forimplementation. This thinly spread management structure isinefficient; it does not ensure good monitoring or downwardaccountability and unnecessarily complicates planning.

India has a rural road network of about 2.7 million kmdeveloped with an investment of almost Rs 35,000 crore,estimated to have a replacement value of about Rs 180,000crore. This constitutes over 80 per cent of the total roadnetwork, however, about a million km length of the roaddoes not meet the technical standards required. According togovernment statistics, by year 2000, India had connectivityto almost all villages with populations of over 1500, 86 percent with 1000 to 1500 inhabitants, and 43 per cent of villageswith less than 1000 population (Figure 5.4).

Successive plans aimed at achieving higher road densitiesand managed to over achieve it (Table 5.1). Even though,the total length of rural roads targetted at the end of theLucknow Plan appeared to be large, it must be noted thatalmost 100,000 km of the roads were constructed underdifferent employment generation schemes and povertyalleviation programmes such as Food for Work, National RuralEmployment Programme and Jawahar Rojgar Yojana. Theroads were of indifferent quality constructed by unskilledlabour. The objective of these programmes was provision ofsustenance support to the rural people. The technical standardsof asset quality were not insisted upon and construction wasoften restricted to earthen tracks with no provision even forFig. 5.3 Impact on Standard of Living from Improvement on Roads

Fig. 5.1 Comparative Average Income and Expenditure ofConnected and Unconnected Villages

Fig.5.2 Goods Transportation Cost on Different Types of Roads

3000030000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Rup

ees

Connected Unconnected

Annual Average Income and Expenditure per Household

Annual Average Income in Rs Annual Average Expenditure in Rs

3

2

1

0Rup

ees

Qui

ntal

per

Km

All Weather Roadsin Good Condition

Fair-WeatherRoads

Badly MaintainedRoads

Average Goods Transportation Cost

Impacts of Improvement on Roads

6% 10%

14%

21%24%

25%

Bringing outside TeachersBringing outside DoctorsPurchase of more fertilizers

Expansion of cultivated landMore seasonal work opportunitiesHigher intensity of cultivation

Source: Planning Commission & MoRD (2006).

Fig. 5.4 Connectivity Status

120

100

80

60

40

20

0Num

ber o

f villa

ges

conn

ecte

d (%

)

By 1980 By 1985 By 1990 By 1995 By 2000

Village Population

>1500 1000–1500 <1000 Total

Rural Roads 111

cross drainage or side drainage. Since water is the main enemyof the sustainability of roads, roads constructed under suchemployment generation schemes were often not durable.

Rural roads have suffered greatly due to lack of systematicplanning. While rural road development plans provided fora network structure and target lengths of different types ofroads, specific connectivity requirements of individual settlements(villages/habitation) and issues of regional imbalances werenot adequately addressed. This led to more than one connectionfor the same village resulting in redundancy and developmentof a large unmanageable network. While constructing ruralroads, adequate care was not taken in adopting need baseddesigns, parameters for pavement construction, qualityassurance, and quality control. Multiplicity of organizationsinvolved in the rural roads development led to uncoordinatedefforts, adhoc decisions, and a lopsided network structure.

Gaps in the Planning Process

The planning of the network structure was not taken seriously.The structure of the network was not subjected to evaluationthrough the assessment of indices concerning accessibility,connectivity, circuitry and so on. Though the conceptual plansand targets had been worked out, the absence of detailed workplans resulted in a non-integrated network, with several missinglinks and critical bridges. This invariably resulted in the lossof mobility due to discontinuities in the network and forcedcircuitous journeys. During the development of the roadsinterfaces among the hierarchical roads were not properlyaddressed, resulting in deficiency in the functionality andefficiency of the total network.

Need for Integrated Network Development

Conceptually, traffic flows from the lower order settlementsto the higher ones in pursuit of opportunities. If planningfails to capture this phenomenon with appropriate integration

of roads, the total system suffers often resulting in undesirablerural–urban migration. Investments are concentrated only inthe higher order roads for construction and maintenance withrural roads receiving less priority than they deserve. Ruralhouseholds are deprived of their legitimate right to basicaccess. This calls for policies and programmes that aim atdeveloping an integrated network with due priorities andnecessary interfaces.

In the context of rural roads, a higher degree of care isrequired at the planning stage to integrate connectivity needsof scattered settlements. The construction of a road connectinga habitation must be augmented by means of transportation,enhanced by appropriate facility creation in health, educationand so on. The utility of the network can be best appreciatedwith such integration of accessibility with social infrastructure.Keeping this in mind, the central government constituted theNational Rural Roads Development Committee (NRRDC)in January 2000. The report of NRRDC 2000 resulted inthe formulation of the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana(PMGSY) with an aim to provide all-weather roads to almostall rural habitations in the country (MoRD 2000).

PRADHAN MANTRI GRAM SADAK YOJANA

Launching and Operationalization of PMGSY

Based on the recommendations of NRRDC the GOIlaunched the PMGSY on 25 December 2000 under theMinistry of Rural Development, as a 100 per cent centrallysponsored scheme. Fifty per cent of the cess on high speeddiesel was earmarked for financing this scheme. The primaryobjective of PMGSY is to provide connectivity, by way of all-weather roads (with necessary culverts and cross drainagestructures operable throughout the year) to unconnectedhabitations in the rural areas in such a way that habitationswith populations of 1000 persons and above are covered inthree years (2000–3) and all unconnected habitations with a

Table 5.1Basis for assessment, assessed targets and expected densities in the Road Development Plans.

Targets Achievement Target densityName of the Plan Basis of fixation of targets km km (All roads)

Nagpur Plan Length of ODRs + VRs 332,335 500,802 0.32 km per sq km(1943–61) assessed on the basis of number of

villages with population 500 and less,501–1000, 1001–2000, and 2001–5000.

Bombay Plan Length based on the number of villages 651,780 912,684 0.46 km per sq km(1961–81) with population less than 500,

500–1000, 1000–2000, and 2000–5000

Lucknow Plan Length assessed on the basis of number 2,189,000 2,994,000 0.82 km per sq km(1981–01) of villages and towns.


population of 500 persons and above by the end of the TenthPlan Period (2007). In respect of the Hill States (North-East,Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Uttaranchal)and the Desert Areas (as identified in the Desert DevelopmentProgramme) as well as the Tribal (Schedule V) areas theobjective would be to connect habitations with populationof 250 persons and above.

Detailed guidelines were issued to all the states for theimplementation of PMGSY, identifying state nodal agencies,Executing agencies, and Programme Implementation Units(PIUs). Guidelines also envisaged the setting up of StateLevel Standing Committees (SLSCs) for monitoring andcoordinating programme implementation. Guidelines wereprovided for project preparation, scrutiny, tendering, execution,quality management, monitoring of the project, maintenance,as well as procedures for fund flow.

Institutional Development under PMGSY

To ensure efficient, streamlined execution of works underPMGSY, a series of interventions have been made to enhancethe programme implementation capacity of the states and toensure ‘on time’ completion, cost management, and rigorousquality control. These interventions are summarized below.

DRRP and Core Network

The concept of Core Network has been operationalized forthe first time, under PMGSY, in order to focus on the set ofroads considered essential to provide connectivity to allhabitations of the desired size. The District Rural Road Plan(DRRP) which inventorizes the entire Road Network is the

starting point of the exercise. The Core Network will be thebasic instrument for prioritization of construction, upgradation,and allocation of funds for maintenance.

The concept of DRRP and CN are important to achievenetwork efficiency (Box 5.1). A typical Block map withDRRP and Core Network are shown in Figures 5.5 and 5.6respectively.

Quality Control System

Under the PMGSY, quality is sought to be ensured througha three-tier Quality Control System, in which the Executing

Box 5.1The Concept and Utility of Core Network

The DRRP is a compendium of the existing and proposed road network system in the district which clearly identifies the proposedroads for connecting the yet unconnected habitations to already connected habitations or all-weather roads, in an economicallyefficient way. While selecting the connectivity to the unconnected habitation by single all weather road, optimization principle isapplied through Utility Value and Road Index for linkage of the selected habitation with an already connected habitation.

The Core Network (CN) is a subset of DRRP and represents the minimum network that ensures connectivity to all the eligiblehabitations through single all weather roads. This enables continuity with the nearest market centre (either existing or a potential one).This network is the minimum network that is to be kept in good condition. It consists of identified link routes and through routes.

Link Route: Link Routes are the roads connecting a single habitation or a group of habitations to through routes or district roadsleading to market centres.

Through Route: Through routes are the roads which collect traffic from several link roads or a long chain of habitations and leadit to marketing centres either directly or through the higher category of roads.

Source: Ministry of Rural Development.

Fig. 5.5 DRRP for a Typical Block

District Rural Roads PlanSimdega Block, Simdega District, Jharkhand

Chiarikani

KindardegaBanabiraHathabari

Kinbira

TaiseraKulkera

Sewai Bandojore

SunsewaiBirkera

BigariGuida

MerumloyaBarkichhapa

TumdegiPithara

KatukonaTina

Tilga

Kharwagartha

KasaidoharSarja

BaghlattaMadhuban Khotitoli

EhuSabera

BengarpaniHardibera

PurnapaniKaramukh Takaba

Asanbera

GondalipaniLelong

Katasaru

MaskeraDumardih Manesera

Sarkhutoli

Kochedega

Sogara

Kesalpu Pakartanr

Basatpur Kobang

Keondih

Khanjaloya

KairberaPaledih

Bhundupani SarlongaKuskela

Jamadori

GhaghariBhelwadih

PahargurdaDanargurdaKamtara

Kongseri

Sikiriatar ChiksuraTamara

Tabhadih

BangruGhosara

Koliadamar

Bhawarpani

BindhaitoliBarabarpani

Muia

JogbalraiBelgarChotabarpani

Thailkobera

Kudrum

HawatoliBirkera

BarkatangarAnkara

FulwatangaBiru Belkarcha

SokariArani

0 1 2 4 6 8Million less Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi

SE

NW

0–250

1000 and above501–1000251–500

POPTOTAL

Rural Roads 113

Agency is primarily responsible for maintaining qualitythrough its executive engineers, at the district level, as well asthrough an independent Quality Control Agency, whetherdepartmental or otherwise, which is responsible to the officersof the Executing Agency or the Nodal Department independentof the field engineers at the state level.

In addition, the NRRDA engages National QualityMonitors (NQMs) to verify at random the quality of roadworks. The reports of the NQMs are sent to the stategovernment for necessary action. About 21,000 inspectionshave been carried out so far, out of which about 18,000 workshave been found satisfactory. Any infringement/deficiency,detected by the NQMs, is rectified before the State Authoritiescan make further payments.

Online Management & Monitoring System

A web-based Online Management & Monitoring System(OMMS) is being used for the PMGSY. The website can beaccessed at www.omms.nic.in. A new website has also beendeveloped by the Rural Connectivity Division containingdetails of the PMGSY Schemes, Guidelines, Agencies involved,role and responsibilities, progress, and so on and can beaccessed at www.pmgsy.nic.in.

Streamlined Administration and Accounting

State Rural Roads Development Agencies (SRRDAs) have beenset up in all states with the task of functioning as the dedicatedagency of the state nodal department for rural roads to ensure

the integrated development of all rural roads schemes,including PMGSY. Funds for the PMGSY programme arerouted to these SRRDAs and are operated by the designatedofficers in each of the district PIUs, under a works accountingsystem specifically designed for PMGSY by the Institute ofPublic Auditors of India (IPAI).

Technical Agencies

Fifty State Technical Agencies (STAs), mainly National Institutesof Technology and Government Engineering Colleges ofrepute have been identified in consultation with the stategovernments to advise and assist the Executing Agencies byscrutinizing the project proposals prepared by the stategovernments, providing requisite technical support to the stategovernments, and undertaking training programmes.

The NRRDA has also identified seven Principal TechnicalAgencies (PTAs) to act as the Regional Coordinators of theSTAs as well as the extended arms of NRRDA in the pursuitof its objectives. The PTAs oversee the activities of the STAsin the region, carry out random checks of the Detailed ProjectReports (DPRs) scrutinized by STAs, evaluate specificationsand practices, develop course material for training programmes,and act as resource institutions. The PTAs are also to assistthe NRRDA in quality audit of roads. The identified PTAsare the Central Road Research Institute (CRRI), IIT, Mumbai,Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bangalore,IIT, Kharagpur, IIT Roorkee, Birla Institute of Technology,Pilani, and National Institute of Technology, Warangal.

Rural Roads Manual

The original manual, called Manual on Route Location,Design, Construction and Maintenance of Rural Roads wasbrought out by the Indian Roads Congress as a publicationin 1979 (IRC: SP:20–1979). Following the launch of thePMGSY, the Ministry of Rural Development constitutedthree Committees in January 2001 to go into various aspectsof rural road construction and the manuals on these differentaspects brought out by the committees were combined intoa separate ‘Rural Roads Manual’ and published as an IRCpublication (IRC:SP: 20–2002) in supercession of the earliermanual (MORD 2004a and 2004b). This manual is nowthe basis of all works under the PMGSY.

Standard Bidding Documents

To standardize the tendering process of the states, a StandardBidding Document has been prepared which is used by allstates for procurements of works under PMGSY.

Core Network PlanSimdega Block, Simdega District, Jharkhand

Fig. 5.6 Core Network for the Above Block

Chiarikani

KindardegaBanabiraHathabari

Kinbira

TaiseraKulkera

Sewai Bandojore

SunsewaiBirkera

BigariGuida

MerumloyaBarkichhapa

TumdegiPithara

KatukonaTina

Tilga

Kharwagartha

KasaidoharSarja

BaghlattaMadhuban Khotitoli

EhuSabera

BengarpaniHardibera

PurnapaniKaramukh Takaba

Asanbera

GondalipaniLelong

Katasaru

MaskeraDumardih Manesera

Sarkhutoli

Kochedega

Sogara

Kesalpu Pakartanr

Basatpur Kobang

Keondih

Khanjaloya

KairberaPaledih

Bhundupani SarlongaKuskela

Jamadori

GhaghariBhelwadih

PahargurdaDanargurdaKamtara

Kongseri

Sikiriatar ChiksuraTamara

Tabhadih

BangruGhosara

Koliadamar

Bhawarpani

BindhaitoliBarabarpani

Muia

JogbalraiBelgarChotabarpani

Thailkobera

Kudrum

HawatoliBirkera

BarkatangarAnkara

FulwatangaBiru Belkarcha

SokariArani

0 1 2 4 6 8Million less Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi

SE

NW

0–250

1000 and above501–1000251–500

POPTOTAL


Book of Specifications and Standard Data Book

In order to streamline the process of estimating and tostandardize contracts, a separate Book of Specifications andStandard Data Book have been prepared for rural roads. Stategovernments have been advised to publish Annual Scheduleof Rates for rural roads based on these documents.

Operations Manual

The NRRDA has prepared an Operations Manual which isutilized by all the Executing Agencies in the field in theimplementation of projects cleared under the PMGSY. Thisis expected to provide clear and uniform guidelines to theexecuting agencies in the states in regard to standards,specifications, guidelines, and prioritization criteria.

Maintenance Management

Huge assets are being created as a result of construction ofnew roads and upgradation of existing roads in order toprovide full farm-to-market connectivity. Guidelines providefor the ways and means to ensure regular and systematicmaintenance of the assets created under PMGSY. The stategovernments are expected to take steps to build up capacityin the District Panchayats and devolve funds and functionariesunto them to enable them to manage maintenance contractsfor rural roads.

All PMGSY roads (including associated main rural links/through routes of PMGSY link routes) are covered by 5-yearsmaintenance contracts entered into along with theconstruction contract, with the same contractor, as per thestandard bidding document. Maintenance funds to servicethe contract are to be budgeted by the state government andplaced at the disposal of SRRDA in a separate maintenanceaccount. The states have also been advised to preparecomprehensive maintenance management plans.

While these interventions have brought about some degreeof professionalism in the programme management and fostereda culture of quality in the rural roads sector, the absorptioncapacity of the states as well contractors is still well below thelevels required to achieve the targets set under Bharat Nirman.

Assessment of Targets

All states have been requested to prepare DRRPs ascompendiums of all existing roads and those roads proposedfor connecting the unconnected target habitations, startingfrom Block Maps and identification of the Core Network

Based on such maps which were prepared with full inventory,eligible habitations have been identified as per programmeguidelines and the length required as well as the costs atconstant prices assessed (Table A5.1). In tune with the

objectives, assessment was also made for the upgradation ofthe existing rural roads in all the states (Table A5.2).

The target for connectivity/upgradation includes newconnectivity to about 60,000 habitations of 1000 pluspopulation, to 81,000 habitations of 500 plus population andto 29,000 habitations of 250 plus population. Total cost ofnew connectivity is about Rs 79,000 crore. Upgradation ofabout 370,000 km rural roads at a cost of Rs 53,000 crore isalso planned. Thus, the total envisaged cost of the PMGSYis about Rs 132,000 crore.

Achievements under PMGSY.

Proposals under PMGSY prepared by the states are beingcleared in different phases since 2001. The physical andfinancial status and achievements so far under PMGSY aresummarized in Table A5.3.

While completion of over 90,000 km of roads under thescheme may appear impressive as compared to the past recordin the rural roads sector, actual achievements have fallenfar short of the targets originally envisaged. The original goalset under the scheme was to provide connectivity to allunconnected habitations with a population of 1000 or moreby 2003 and all unconnected habitations with a populationof 500 and above by the end of the 10th Plan period (by year2007). All habitations with a population of 250 or more inthe hill states, desert areas, and tribal areas were also targettedto be covered by 2007. As against these programme targetsoriginally set, the proposals cleared so far are expected toprovide connectivity to only 56,638 habitations. The statusof habitation coverage so far under this scheme has beenindicated in Table 5.2.

With only 15.8 per cent of habitations having been actuallyconnected so far, it is evident that the scheme would miss the10th Plan target by a huge margin. Recognizing this slippagethe time frame for providing full connectivity to habitationswith population above 1000 (above 500 in hill, desert andtribal areas) has been reset under Bharat Nirman.

Table 5.2Connectivity Status under PMGSY*

No. of habitations

No. of covered by No. ofPopulation eligible projects habitationscategory habitations approved connected

1000 and above 59,855 28,361 16,081

500–999 81,466 21,942 8602

250–499 31,451 6335 2620

Total 172,772 56,638 27,303

Note: *June 2006.Source: Ministry of Rural Development.

Rural Roads 115

PMGSY under Bharat Nirman

Announced as a time bound business plan for augmentingrural infrastructure, Bharat Nirman has rural roads as one ofthe six components. The targets announced by the FinanceMinister in his budget speech on 28 February 2005 seek toprovide all-weather connectivity to all habitations havingpopulation of 1000 or more (500 or more in hill, tribal anddesert areas) by 2009. While the primary objective of PMGSYhas been to provide ‘last mile connectivity’ to all eligibleunconnected habitations, in order to ensure full farm-to-market connectivity Bharat Nirman also includes anupgradation component. It is estimated that under BharatNirman 66,802 habitations would be provided newconnectivity with a road length of 146,185 km. Besides, 194thousand km of existing through routes of the Core Networkwould be upgraded/renewed. The total investment on ruralconnectivity under Bharat Nirman has been estimated at Rs48 thousand crore over 2005–9. The year wise targets fornew connectivity and upgradation have been detailed in TableA5.4 and Table A5.5.

Critical Evaluation of PMGSY

Evaluation by Planning Commission

An evaluation was carried out by the Planning Commissionin the year 2005 to:1. assess the extent to which objectives of the programme

have been achieved;2. make a qualitative assessment of the physical and financial

performance of the programme;3. assess the impact of the programme on socio-economic

conditions of the residents of villages provided with roadconnectivity under the programme; and

4. identify the constraints in the implementation of theprogramme and make suggestions to modify the same.The study covered ten states in the country with fourteen

districts selected for the micro level study. Physical performanceat the state level varied from as low as 28.77 per cent to wellabove 92 per cent with an average of about 60 per cent(Planning Commission, 2005). Similarly the achievementsin the selected districts varied from 78 per cent to about 98per cent. In many cases the performance at district level wasfound to be generally above the state performance. Theevaluation revealed that cost of construction per km variedfrom state to state as well as among the districts. Financialperformance at the state level exhibited similar trends withfund utilization varying from 33.89 per cent to over 90 percent in different states.

The evaluation study noted that the 3 Tier Quality ControlSystem prescribed by PMGSY yielded good results and thequality of roads constructed was generally rated as Very Good.

The reasons for shortfall in targets as identified by theevaluation team included procedural impediments, new workpractices that consumed more time, non availability of land,local panchayats not being taken into confidence, scarcity ofskilled labourers, and prolonged monsoons in certain states. Inorder to achieve targets the study suggested augmentationof resources, provision of cash compensation for acquisitionof land, speedier identification of unconnected habitations,periodic updation of on-line information, realistic fixationof upgradation target, complete involvement of Panchayatinstitutions, enhancement of time limit for completing projects,adoption of centralized tendering system, meticulous projectpreparation, avoidance of multiple agencies, deployment ofexclusive staff for PMGSY, utilization local labour, efforts forlowering of construction costs and constitution of a state levelvigilance committee.

In short, programme evaluation revealed that PMGSYhas succeeded in providing connectivity to most deservinghabitations, although the pace of implementation in some statesis rather slow. The selection strategy was found to be okay andquality was found to be generally good. PMGSY has improvedthe accessibility of beneficiary villagers and resulted in higherincomes. Notwithstanding the fact that there are certainmeasures required to be taken for meeting its objective, thecritical evaluation complimented the efforts that have goneinto and hoped for better performance in future.

Performance Audit by C&AG

A performance audit of the programme was conducted bythe Comptroller and Auditor General between January–June,2005, covering the period during 2000–5 (C&AG 2006).The services of CRRI New Delhi were commissioned fortechnical inspection of more than fifty roads for assessing thequality of the roads constructed under PMGSY (MoRD 2004).The audit also covered the effectiveness of operationalizationand utility of OMMS and focused on the deficiencies, problemsof software, validation checks, security features, and lack ofutilization of OMMS for monitoring the programme.

While the objective of the PMGSY at the time of its launchwas to provide connectivity to all 1000+ habitations, onlyabout 24 per cent of the target set was achieved during thefirst five years of the programme. The database used at thetime of launch appears to be inadequate for setting the targetsand also the guidelines were not firmed up properly. In theabsence of clarity in the guidelines, bias towards upgradationwas noticed in the project proposals of the first two phases.

The estimated fund requirement of Rs 58,200 crore wasalso found to be unrealistic in the light of the fact that therevised estimate for achieving the same objective was foundto be more than Rs 130,000 crore. Adequate measures havenot been taken for the mobilization of funds, in tune with thetargets set, which can be seen from the fact that only Rs 12,290


crore were mobilized up to March 2005. Discrepancies innon-utilization of funds in some states revealed spends inpurposes beyond those specified in the guidelines.

Efforts were not made to ensure integration of otherrelated on-going schemes in securing programme objectives.Abandoning of works sanctioned and incompleteness ofconnectivity came to light during the performance audit inalmost fourteen states.

Completion was found to have overshot by large margins,time limits set in the guidelines, providing evidence ofinadequate project management. The audit noticed poorcompetition among tenderers in more than ten states. Theabsorption capacities of states and PIUs were not adequatelyunderstood for the implementation of the programme. Theperformance audit also noticed certain deficiencies in thequality monitoring mechanism and quality of the finalproduct. Even though OMMS is a step in the right direction,its utilization as a monitoring tool is not achieved and severaldeficiencies in the system management were noticed.

Based on the deficiencies noticed in the evaluation process,CAG made the following recommendations:1. There is a need for firming up of targets on realistic database.2. The ministry should also firm up the targets on the basis

of funds that can be actually provided and utilized.3. The ministry in coordination with the state government

should ensure that the guidelines are scrupulously followed.4. States should be advised to support the project proposals

with correct and relevant documents proving the availabilityof land free of all encumbrances.

5. The states should be advised to take prompt action againstthe contractors in case of failure to honour to time orquality commitments.

6. The independent quality assurance should be reinforced byinvolving independent research and educational institutions.

7. Ministry should issue detailed directives for greater attentionto project preparation and exercise periodical checks.

8. Ministry should persuade the states to make suitableprovisions for maintenance.

9. All efforts must be made to correct the deficiencies in theOMMS to create an additional tool for monitoring andmanagement.Audit examination revealed that the performance of the

programme could have improved if1. The magnitude of the programme and the capacity of the

states had been assessed realistically, funds of the requiredmagnitude provided and frequent revision of guidelinesand the data on unconnected eligible habitations to becovered under the programme avoided;

2. The DRRP and the CN were complete and based onreliable data;

3. OMMS were introduced promptly along with theprogramme after ensuring and obtaining satisfactory proofof the reliability of all the features and facilities in the

software including validation checks and after impartingeffective training to the users; and

4. It was ensured through focused monitoring that there wereno deviations from sanctioned specifications to preventsub standard quality of work.

Impact Assessment of PMGSY on Rural Economy

Ministry of Rural Development commissioned a series ofquick assessments of socio-economic impact of PMGSY inAssam, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram,Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and WestBengal. These studies were conducted by independentagencies during January to February, 2004 (MoRD 2004).Major findings of these studies are as follows.

Impact on agriculture

Construction of the PMGSY roads has substantially benefittedfarmers. Prior to the construction of the PMGSY roads,farmers found it difficult to sell agricultural goods in biggermarkets located far away from their villages.

PMGSY road connectivity has led to a better transportsystems during all seasons. Farmers mentioned that theproblem of not being able to access the markets duringmonsoon has been solved by the construction of roads. Thisimpact has been greatly felt in the states of West Bengal,Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Assam and so on.

The PMGSY roads have made it easier to transportagricultural inputs to villages which has led some farmers toswitch from food crops to cash crops (such as ginger, jute,sugarcane, sunflower).

An increase in the number of families rearing goats/sheepfor commercial purposes was mentioned by beneficiaries inthe states of Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh.Many families have bought cycles after the constructionof the road to be able to carry dairy products for sale tonearby towns.

Employment generation

After the construction of PMGSY roads, an improvementin the employment situation in terms of more job opportunities,avenues for self-employment, and so on were observed. On-farm employment opportunities also increased due to shiftfrom grains to cash crops and also multiple croppingparticularly in the state of Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh,and Mizoram.

More people are going to nearby towns and villages forodd jobs like selling woods, vegetables, dairy products and locallymade items like pickles, papad and so on due to expansionof local industries, which in turn has generated employmentopportunities.

Rural Roads 117

Cottage industry

Beneficiaries reported that the pottery and brick makingindustry of Orissa has benefited from the PMGSY roads.Cottage industries of Tamil Nadu, Handloom industry ofWest Bengal, and agro industry in Assam also benefitted fromroad connectivity.

Health

There has been an overall improvement in access to healthfacilities like PHCs, sub-centres, and district hospitals in thestates of West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, Tamil Nadu,Himachal Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh. Positive impact wasobserved on accessibility to preventive and curative health carefacilities; better management of infectious diseases, andattending to emergencies and increase in frequency of visitsby health workers.

Improvement in antenatal and post-natal care was observedby beneficiaries, thereby decreasing obstetrics emergencies,in the states of Mizoram, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Tamil Nadu,Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal. Road connectivity and animproved transport system enabled families to opt forinstitutional deliveries in hospitals outside the village.Decrease in infant and child mortality especially in the statesof Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu,Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal was reported.

Education

With the construction of PMGSY roads, there has beenan improvement in the accessibility to education facilities.This has resulted in increased school enrolment and schoolattendance in all the states, especially, in the number ofgirls going to schools in Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa,Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal. Most parents mentionedthat they were now more confident about sending theirdaughters to schools unescorted. Moreover, regular attendanceof the teachers throughout the year is observed andgreater willingness is evident among parents to sendboys and girls for higher studies and college education outsidetheir villages.

Governance and public services

The road connectivity has increased the frequency of visitsby government officials and grass root level functionaries likehealth workers/Auxilliary Nurse and Midwives (ANMs),Village Level Workers (VLWs) and Village Anganwadi Worker(VAWs) in Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, andWest Bengal. There has been an improvement in accessibilityto banks, the Post and Telegraph offices, and quicker accessto the police.

Transport services

The benefits of rural connectivity have been felt most keenly inMizoram and Rajasthan where PMGSY roads have made iteasier for the beneficiaries to cope with the difficult terrain.There has been an increase in ownership of bicycles and twowheelers especially in the states of Assam, Rajasthan, West Bengal,and Tamil Nadu. Also, there has been an improvement in thepublic as well as the private transport systems in all the states.

Quality of life

An immediate and direct impact of providing rural roadconnectivity was observed in the quality of life as cookinggas became available in villages. The states of Mizoram, TamilNadu, West Bengal reported conversion of kuchcha housesto pucca houses. The connectivity led to sudden escalationof prices of land adjacent to the PMGSY roads. This also ledto an increase in the sale of land for commercial purposes.

Poverty alleviation

The roads, directly or indirectly have provided opportunitiesfor on-farm and off—farm employments as well as self-employment. With the improvement in on-farm and non-farmemployment opportunities, beneficiaries in all the statesreported increase in their average household income, thus,reduction in poverty.

Distributional and equity issues

Though it has been revealed through several impact studiesthat rural roads have multi–dimensional beneficial impactson the rural community, these benefits may not be equitablydistributed. Well-off households with better resourceendowments, capabilities, and skill sets generally derive morebenefits from the improved access as compared to poorhouseholds. This calls for prior indepth analysis of the potentialinput from the major stakeholders with a view to devisingappropriate mitigation measures to make this scheme ‘inclusive’in terms of its benefits.

Though rural roads provide accessibility, the assuranceon transport availability and affordability must be looked into.For instance, a rural road serving as a means of transportationmay permit people to use their own mode of transport, butunless public or intermediate public transportation is available,the benefit of the rural road will not reach all. Further, evenwhen public transport service is available, the affordabilityto use the services may once again put the very poor ata disadvantage.

In short, roads are clearly a critically enabling conditionfor improvement of living conditions and quality of life inrural areas. Distribution of economic benefits can now be


ensured to all sections through the creation of complementaryactivities for broadening livelihood opportunities toeconomically weak sections of the rural society.

Cost Trends under PMGSY

Cost of road construction is mainly determined by the typeof terrain, soil condition, projected traffic, availability ofconstruction materials, rainfall, and other environmentalfactors. As such, cost of construction under PMGSY varieswidely across states and even within a state and across districts.Cost of construction also depends on the choice of technologyused and labour–machine mix.

In a labour-surplus economy like India, it is, therefore,not only necessary to design the rural roads on the basis of

meticulous field investigations; it is also equally importantto adopt the ‘optimal’ technology for construction.

Under PMGSY, executing agencies are required to prepareDPRs, which are then scrutinized and vetted by the designatedSTAs (reputed engineering colleges). While this institutionaldevelopment in project planning and preparation is a markedimprovement over the previous practice, approving projectson the basis of ‘line-estimates’, the extent to which it hassucceeded in ‘optimizing’ the cost of construction is yet to beinvestigated in detail. Currently, cost varies from Rs 15–16lakh per unit length to as high as Rs 45–50 lakh per unitlength in different states (Table A5.6). Probable reasons forcost variation include topography of the local area, distancefrom the availability of construction material, earthworkrequired and so on (Box 5.2).

Box 5.2Why Cost varies across Regions

A typical rural road consists of compacted sub-grade, granular sub-base, base-course with graded aggregate and thin bituminoussurface course in the form of pre-mix concrete with a seal coat. In order to ensure the serviceability of the road through out the yearwith safety, necessary cross drainage (CD) structures, side drains, road signs, and other road furniture should be an integral part of therural road.

The detailed analysis of cost variation of rural roads was carried out at IIT, Roorkee covering 480 roads in 50 districts of Bihar,Uttaranchal, and Uttar Pradesh. The analysis decomposed the cost of construction into cost towards site clearance, retaining walls, CDstructures, earthwork, sub-base, base-course, and surface course. The average cost of different components per km of the sampleanalysed is presented in the table below.

Table B5.2.1Average Cost Variation of Rural Roads in Bihar, UP, and Uttaranchal

Cost per km of (in Rs lakh)

No. Av. Transp-Name of Avg. No. Dist. of ortationof the roads of CD Const- Site Retaining CD Earth quarry Cost/State analyzed structure ruction clearing wall structure work Sub-base Base Surface (km) km

Bihar 44 3 20.7 .06 0 1.05 1.83 5.56 7.97 3.79 108 7.61U.P. 382 3 19.2 .04 0.01 1.34 1.90 6.71 5.84 2.86 145 6.02Uttaranchal 54 8 26.6 2.47 2.76 3.54 1.59 4.77 6.01 3.88 37 4.76

The analysis clearly brought out that:1. Total cost of construction is 33 per cent higher in hill areas than in plain areas.2. On an average, the number of cross drainage structures required per km of road in plain area is 3, whereas in the hilly region this

requirement is 8. This explains the higher cost of CD works in Uttaranchal (Rs 6.3 lakh) as compared to the cost of these worksin Bihar and Uttar Pradesh (Rs 1.05 lakh and Rs 1.35 lakh respectively)

3. The cost of site clearance is a significant component of the total cost in hilly areas (Rs 2.47 lakh in Uttaranchal), whereas it isnegligible in plain areas (Rs 4000–6000 per km in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh).

4. The haulage cost for bringing construction material is more in the state of Bihar (Rs 7.61 lakh) followed by Uttar Pradesh (Rs6.02 lakh) compared to Uttaranchal (Rs 4.76 lakh). This explains higher cost of construction in Bihar as compared to UttarPradesh even though the regional and climatic conditions are similar.The analysis also revealed that even within a state, cost variation can be significant across the districts owing to the site specific

conditions. The findings of the study warrant greater attention to detailed site investigations and technology option study at thetime of preparing of DPR.

Rural Roads 119

ALTERNATIVES TO REDUCE COST OF

RURAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION

Moderation of Geometric Standards

Based on the recommendations of NRRDC, the widths offormation and pavement have been fixed at 7.5 m and 3.75m respectively, though, the Rural Roads Manual permit 6 mand 3 m roadway and carriageway when the expected trafficis 100 motorized vehicles. However, most states are adoptingthe higher widths, regardless of the traffic volume, resultingin higher cost of construction. Therefore, it is necessary toestimate the base year traffic realistically for adopting lowergeometrics to reduce the cost. Association of American StateHighway and Transport Officials (AASHTO), USA has suggestedlower geometric standards for very low volume roads.

Need-based Stage Construction

Under PMGSY, all roads are built with full provisions includingthe base and surface courses at one go. However, in many partsof the country on the new roads, connecting the habitations oflower population by link roads, the traffic expected definitelyis less and a good gravel surfaced road with necessary drainageand protection systems in place can serve the rural populationeffectively. As and when the traffic builds up over time the roadscan be strengthened through the provision of base and surfacecourses. This results in almost 40 per cent cost reduction inthe initial stage, enabling larger coverage in a given budget.

However, keeping in view the difficulties in themaintenance of gravel roads as well as the dust problem, effortsshould be made to develop appropriate sealing techniquesfor the gravel surfaces borrowing experiences from abroad aswell as R&D efforts in our country.

Use of Locally Available Material

The situation in many states indicates non-availability ofmaterials of requisite standards in nearby areas. Material haulageis resulting in very high cost. If the available technologies areexploited, it is possible to reduce the cost of long haulages byutilizing locally available materials, including the marginalaggregates and industrial waste material.

One of the proven technologies for the use of local soiland marginal aggregates is stabilization. The stabilization processcould be mechanical or chemical. Several types of stabilizingagents have proved to suit different conditions of soil andenvironment. Noteworthy among them are stabilization withlime or cement or a combination of lime and cement. Inaddition to these standard technologies, other types oftechnologies which are also being tried include the use ofrice husk ash, phosphogypsum, and sodium chloride.

A major constraint in the use of local material lies in theprocedures adopted by the field agencies and lack of awarenessand exposure. It is possible to popularize the use of stabilizationtechniques through appropriate training and capacity buildingof the field engineers. The reluctance of the field agencies todeviate from the conventional methods and to try out innovativetechnologies also calls for attitudinal changes through HRDinterventions.

In addition to the stabilization techniques, there is a largearray of technologies to promote the use of industrial waste/by products in road building. Use of the industrial wastematerials—fly ash, steel and copper slag, and marble dust—has already been field tested (Box 5.3).

In addition, techniques suitable for conditions of lowbearing capacity soils, marshy lands, location with drainageproblems are also available. Research studies indicate thatnatural geo-textiles such as coir have huge potential forapplication on rural roads in areas where subgrade is of poorquality. Based on the experiences of the use of Jute Geo Textiles(JGT), Ministry of Rural Development in collaboration withJute Manufactures Development Council is implementing apilot project to test the efficacy and cost-effectiveness ofdifferent types of JGT under different soil and environmentalconditions (Box 5.4).

Similar experimentation through pilot project for the othertechnologies will be tried in the construction of rural roads underPMGSY, so as to enable standardization and popularization ofcost effective solutions.

Recently, a number of environment friendly enzymes havecome into the markets such as fuzibeton, terrazyme, andearthzyme which are expected to provide excellent ridingsurfaces when mixed with in-situ or suitable borrowed soil.This technology is designed to eliminate the use of aggregates.As such, these materials can also be tried out in the ruralroads construction once their efficacy is proved in the localconditions through pilot projects.

Some field studies have shown that life cycle cost of cementconcrete roads under certain circumstances would be muchless than conventional bituminous construction. This maybe due to avoidance of huge routine maintenance and periodicalmaintenance costs in the conventional construction. Cost-effectiveness of cement concrete roads in rural areas should,therefore, be field-tested for life-cycle cost through a pilotproject under PMGSY.

MAINTENANCE OF RURAL ROADS

Rural roads need to be maintained at a minimum level ofacceptable serviceability. Lack of adequate and timelymaintenance is bound to accelerate the process of deteriorationof the roads, which in turn results in loss of time, agricultureoutput, access, and eventually the asset itself. Further,


Box 5.3Use of locally available materials

Anil Kumar Sagar

FLY ASH FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION WORKS

Coal is the most easily available fuel for power generation in India. Huge quantities of fly ash are produced as waste by-product of coalcombustion. The present annual generation of fly ash is estimated to be about 140 million tonnes. The physical and chemical propertiesof fly ash depend upon the type of coal, its grinding and combustion techniques, collection, and disposal systems. Fly ash reacts withlime in presence of moisture to form cementitious compounds. This is known as pozzolanic activity. The pozzolanic property of fly ashenables it to be used as an alternate binder in place of cement. While coarser fly ash can be used as fill material, the finer ash can beused for replacement of sand and cement in road construction works. Use of fly ash for rural road work has been covered in IRC:SP:202002 and Rural Road Manual (MoRD, 2004b and Vittal, 2000).

Sub-base course can be constructed using pond ash or bottom ash replacing conventionally used moorum. Laboratory and fieldstudies conducted in India and abroad have established that fly ash can be adopted for stabilization of sub-base/base. Fly ashes arecohesionless materials, and therefore non-plastic in nature while soil particles are generally cohesive. Mixing of soil and ash in suitableproportions improves the gradation and plasticity characteristics of the mix, thereby improving the strength. Addition of small amountsof lime greatly improves the strength characteristics of fly ash stabilized layers. 3 to 5 per cent of lime is used depending upon thequality of lime. The use of stabilized fly ash sub-base/base courses would be particularly attractive in locations where fly ash is easilyavailable and supply of aggregate is expensive. The proportion 1:2:9 of lime, fly ash and moorum or sand has been found to providethe best performance.

Fly ash can be utilized for constructing semi-rigid pavements in the form of lime-fly ash concrete, dry lean fly ash concrete.Pavements constructed using these mixes possess higher flexural strength than flexible pavements and hence they are classified as semi-rigid pavements. Fly ash can be used for construction of rigid pavements also by using cement-fly ash concrete, high performanceconcrete, roller compacted concrete and so on.

Fly ash can be used in place of soil to construct road embankments. Typically in developed urban and industrial areas, naturalborrow sources are scarce, and as a result borrow soil is very expensive. Environmental degradation caused due to use of top soil forembankment construction is also very high. Fly ash can provide an economical and suitable alternative material to earth for constructionof embankments.

Coal ash can be used for construction of embankments of rural road projects near thermal power plants. The notification issued byMinistry of Environment and Forests, Government of India dated August 27, 2003 has made usage of coal ash compulsory in allprojects being undertaken within 100 km radius of the thermal power plant. The notification states that, ‘No agency, person ororganisation shall, within a radius of 100 km of a thermal power plant undertake construction or approve design for construction ofroads or flyover embankments in contravention of the guidelines/specifications issued by the Indian Road Congress (IRC) as containedin the specification No. SP:58 of 2001’ (Kumar et al. 2005).

Various demonstration projects involving use of fly ash have been undertaken. One such project was the construction of Salarpur–Dadupur rural link road using fly ash. The project was taken up by the CRRI in collaboration with NTPC Ltd under the CanadianInternational Development Agency (CIDA) initiative. The site is situated at a distance of 5 km from National Capital Power Station(NCPS), Dadri in U.P. Salarpur and Dadupur villages are part of a same panchayat and have a combined population of about 2000persons. The length of the Salarpur-Dadupur link road is about 1.4 km. In this project bottom ash was used as embankment fillmaterial and fly ash collected in dry form was used for stabilization and as admixture in roller compacted concrete. The embankmentwas constructed using bottom ash as core material with soil cover of 30 cm thickness. Fly ash stabilized using cement (8 per centcement and 92 per cent fly ash) was used for laying base course (compacted thickness of 10 cm). Fly ash and cement were mixed in aconcrete mixer and water required to bring moisture content to Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) was added during mixing. Themix was manually laid to conform to grade and camber. Compaction was carried out using static roller. The stabilised layer was curedfor seven days by sprinkling water at frequent intervals before placing the subsequent layer. A total quantity of about 5000 tonnes ofash was used for both fill and pavement works in this project. Keeping in view the fact that the link road is located in a remote area andonly light traffic is expected to ply on the road, the pavement is providing satisfactory service. The construction work was taken up inMarch 2002 and completed in about 60 days. The total construction cost of the road was Rs 13.51 lakh. Since disposal of fly ash is aproblem for thermal power plants, it has also been argued that fly ash be provided at a negative cost to the TPP. In such cases, fly ashis provided free of cost to the road manufacturer and the cost of transportation of fly ash to the site is borne by the thermal power plant.

IRON AND STEEL SLAG FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION

Steel making is a strategic requirement of the economy of developing nation like India. Many steel plants have been set up in ourcountry. However, production of iron and steel is associated with the generation of waste materials like slag. Normally, production of

Rural Roads 121

one tonne of steel results in generation of one tonne of solid waste. Big steel plants in India generate about 29 million tonnes of wastematerial annually. In addition, there are several medium and small plants all over the country. Slag reduces the porosity and permeabilityof soil, thus increasing the water logging problem. It causes respiratory ailment among nearby residents, contaminates ground water,and adversely affects the landscape of the area. Slag can be used as pavement material in a variety of forms. It can be used as a base orsub-base material either in bound or unbound condition. It meets all the requirements set forth by the MoRTH. As per IRC:37–2001,Rs 5 lakh per km can be saved by using slag as road material (Kumar et al. 2002).

It is evident that steel plant by-products, either as such or in suitable combination, can be used in sub-base or base course layer ofa road pavement. In order to compare the structural performance of these materials test sections were constructed using slags atRourkela in 1996–7. Post construction performance monitoring showed that the test sections are comparable to control sectionsconstructed using conventional materials.

MARBLE DUST

Widely found in Rajasthan, it is a waste material of marble industry. It has been shown that the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of thesub-soil may be increased by upto 40 per cent to 50 per cent by mixing 15 per cent to 25 per cent of marble dust depending upon thenature of soil. Thus the cost of construction may be reduced considerably.

PHOSPHOGYPSUM

It is a by-product of phosphoric acid based fertilizer plants. It can be used to stabilize black cotton soils as it reduces the shrinkage and swellingof black cotton soil. The fertilizer plant of Indogulf Corporation located at Dalhej, Gujarat has demonstrated usage of this technology. Thecost of road after phosphogypsum stabilization is about 25 per cent less than the normal construction cost (Misra et al. 2004).

MUNICIPAL WASTES IN ROAD CONSTRUCTION

It is estimated that the average daily refuse generation in a metropolitan city like Delhi is approximately about 4000 tonnes. Disposalof this large quantity of wastes need careful planning. Presently, municipal corporations dispose these solid wastes mainly throughsanitary land fill method and composting. While organic wastes are used for composting to yield manure, inorganic wastes are difficultto dispose.

Under the aegis of Ministry of Environment and Forests, a project was taken up at CRRI to use inorganic part of the processedwastes in road construction. A small length of the road in north Delhi was identified for construction as test section. Soil samples werecollected from subgrade and borrow areas to study their strength and geotechnical characteristics in order to design suitable pavementcross sections using inorganic part of the municipal wastes in appropriate layers of the proposed test section. The processed waste notbeing a suitable material in itself, additives like local soil, cement, lime, fly ash were used in different proportions in sub-base/basecourse construction. Pavement specifications were developed for construction of test section at the identified site. The constructionwork was completed satisfactorily in May 1996.

Waste plastic has also been used in the construction of rural roads. A pilot road namely Saint Tirisulam road at Saint ThomasMount Panchayat Union in Kancheepuram district, Tamil Nadu was laid by the joint effort of Government of Tamil Nadu andGovernment of India. The technical support was provided by CRRI, IIT Chennai, and Theyagarajar College, Madurai. The road waslaid using waste plastic mixed bituminous mix. This road had better resistance to raveling and offered more resistance to stripping andformation of pot holes. The aggregates coated with plastics and binders presented better resistance to water.

USE OF DHANDLA IN CENTRAL RAJASTHAN

Due to non-availability of hard stone within economical distances in desert areas, particularly in Central Rajasthan, road constructionhas been posing serious problems, especially in rural areas. It is a common observation in desert areas that on account of the non-cohesive nature of desert sand sub-grade, the sub-base material has the tendency to sink into the subgrade resulting in deformationsof various shapes and sizes. These deformations are subsequently reflected in the road surface causing either immobility or hamperingthe vehicular traffic. It is, therefore, considered an essential pre-requisite to provide adequate support to the pavement for betterperformance. This could be achieved either by stabilizing the desert sand sub grade with additives or by providing additionalthickness in the sub-base. Such treatments would result in increased cost of road construction. The Central and Western parts ofRajasthan have, at present, quite thin density of population where the rate of growth in the volume of traffic on rural roads is notexpected to rise at a fast rate in the near future. It is quite imperative, therefore, to utilize the locally available road materials to themaximum possible extent.

A calcareous material locally known as ‘Dhandla’ is found in abundance under an overburden of 1.5 to 2.5 metres. Dhandla, beingquite soft, gets completely crushed under the road roller. It has been found that the bearing capacity of Dhandla was considerablyimproved when compacted manually and could be effectively used in the lower layer of low-volume roads. Test tracks have been laidusing Dhandla. It is seen that substantial economy can be achieved by using this low grade material for road construction.


Box 5.4 Pilot Project on Application of Jute Geo-Textile in Rural Roads

Jute Geo-Textile (JGT) is a natural technical textile laid in or on soil to improve its engineering properties. JGT is made out of yarnobtained from the jute plant. It has high moisture absorption capacity, excellent drapability, and high initial tensile strength. It isenvironment friendly, biodegradable, easily available, and economical. Use of JGT leads to natural consolidation of sub-gradesoil and has a potential to enhance the CBR value of the sub-grade by 1.5 to 3 times. Use of JGT dates back to as early as in1920s when it was tried in some sections of a road at Dundee in Scotland. It was also used in a major road in Calcutta by theBritish in 1934.

The NRRDA has taken up a pilot project in collaboration with the Jute Manufacturers Development Council (JMDC) todemonstrate the potential benefits of the use of JGT in construction of rural roads. This pilot project aims at standardization ofdifferent types of JGT. Under the pilot project, ten roads have been selected in Assam, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, and Orissacovering a length of 47.84 km (Table B5.4.1). Central Road Research Institute has been engaged as a technical consultant for thisproject for project preparation, quality control, monitoring, and performance evaluation.

Table B5.4.1Details of Jute Geo-Textile Pilot Projects

State Name of the Road Road Conventional Cost withLength Cost JGT(km) (Rs lakh) (Rs lakh)

Orissa Jaipur-Mahananagal 5.50 289 246

Orissa MDR14 to Chatumary 4.00 183 162

Madhya Pradesh Berasia to Semrakalan Approach road 5.10 141 140

Madhya Pradesh Ghelawan village to PMGSY Road 3.14 89.5 74

Chhattisgarh Kodavabani to Khursi 4.80 173 159

Chhattisgarh Khairjhiti to Ghirghoisa Road 5.50 189 171

West Bengal Notuk to Dingal 4.80 243 188

West Bengal Nandanpur to Marokhana High School 6.20 321 303

Assam Rampur Satra to Dumdumla 4.20 190 157

Assam UT Road to Jarabari/Barnagaon 4.60 205 193

Total Cost 47.84 2023 1783

Average Cost/km 42 37

The detailed projects reports indicate that use of JGT would reduce the total cost of construction by Rs 2.40 crore and the averagecost by Rs 5 lakh per km. All the projects are now in progress. CRRI would monitor performance of the roads upto 18 months aftercompletion of each road.

Source: National Rural Roads Development Agency.

rehabilitation cost is high with increase in the vehicle operatingcosts. In case of loss of asset there may be isolation.

Regular maintenance of rural roads is a critical pre-condition for sustaining the positive impacts that roads bringto rural communities. Routine minor maintenance is oftenneglected not only because of lack of funds, but also becausethere is little political capital, or mileage in maintaining roadsregularly as the outcome is not highly visible. Instead, politiciansprefer to authorize major rehabilitation or reconstructionafter the road has deteriorated considerably. Though this is a

universal phenomenon, it is time this issue of sustainable ruralroads maintenance is taken seriously.

The maintenance strategies adopted in PMGSY requirethat the maintenance cost be borne by the respective stategovernments. This strategy assures maintenance of the roadin the initial five years of construction. The problem ofmaintenance beyond that is still unresolved. The concept ofprojectized maintenance cost may be thought of and the optionsof mobilizing funds for maintenance need to be studied, inorder to keep up the sustainability of the rural roads.

Rural Roads 123

Strategies adopted in different countries enable us toidentify the main requirements for ensuring sustainable ruralroads maintenance as summarized below:1. Policy decision on maintenance and commitment of the

government for the preservation of rural road assetsdeviating from the bias towards new construction. Thereis an urgent need to projectize the cost of maintenance atthe time of planning the new construction itself, in orderto achieve sustainability.

2. Development of Technical Standards for design andconstruction along with a streamlined Quality AssuranceSystem as these have a bearing on subsequentmaintenance.

3. Adopting suitable Maintenance Management System forplanning, implementation for optimal use of constrainedresources, with clear policy of prioritization and supportedby well-defined documentation of database.

4. Institutional arrangements with clearly identified functionsand functionaries.

5. A dependable funding mechanism for maintenance.6. Capacity building for the institutions as well as contractors

with necessary training for improvement of technical skillsand adoption of innovative methods of executing themaintenance operations, in tune with the present daytechnology.

7. Involvement of local governments and community at theappropriate levels for undertaking maintenance of ruralroads with a systematically designed awareness programmebringing out the consequences of inadequate and deferredmaintenance.

8. Need based Research and Development (R&D) efforts.

Estimation of Fund Requirements for Maintenance

Annual routine maintenance for rural roads is estimated tobe around Rs 20,000 per km/year on an average and periodicrenewal may cost about Rs 4 lakh for a 5 year cycle amounting

to about Rs 80,000 per year (at current prices). As such, theannual requirement per km of the rural roads maintenancecovering routine and periodic maintenance is Rs 1 lakh perkm per year. Based on the length of the rural roads, particularlyof the CN, estimation of fund requirement can be workedout for budgeting purposes. However, with the availabilityof full or partial budget, the maintenance strategy that maybe adopted is presented below.

Organizational Shortcomings

As multiple agencies are involved in the construction andmaintenance of rural roads, there is dilution of responsibilityand lack of accountability for maintenance. Further, thereis virtual absence of an institutionalized mechanism forinventorization and pavement condition survey. There is noplanning and management system for rural roads foridentification and prioritization of the required maintenanceinterventions.

The Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), particularly theDistrict Panchayats are expected to ultimately take over theresponsibility of rural roads, particularly for maintenance.However, in most states, hardly any progress is noticeablewith regard to transfer of funds, functions, and functionariesto the District Panchayats. As a result, it has not so far beenpossible to put in place a decentralized community participationmechanism to ensure proper upkeep and maintenance ofrural roads.

Currently, the work of maintenance is being undertakenboth departmentally and through contractors. However, avery large percentage of the available funds is spent on salariesand wages leaving grossly insufficient amounts for non-wagemaintenance components. Though financial audit of publicexpenditure on maintenance is undertaken by the C&AGin the states, there is no formal arrangement in place fortechnical audit processes to enhance focus on assetmanagement. As a large part of rural roads network is withthe state governments and ultimately maintenance of PMGSYroads would also rest with state governments, there is a needto reevaluate and relook at the maintenance of rural roadnetwork (Box 5.5).

ROLE OF PANCHAYATI RAJ INSTITUTIONS

Keeping in view the Indian conditions a decentralizedmaintenance model has been suggested by Sikdar (2006) (Box5.6). This model defines the extent of responsibility at eachlevel, suggests how exactly each level would carry out itsmandated responsibilities and what kind of technical,financial, and organizational support would be required forbuilding the capacity at each level. The model needs to bepiloted to evolve a workable system of decentralizedmaintenance of rural roads through the empowerment of the

Table 5.3Alternate Maintenance Strategies for Rural Roads

Budget Maintenance Strategy

Full Requirement Carry out full length Routine Maintenance/Renewals in rural Core Network (CN).

50% of Full Carry out Routine Maintenance over fullRequirement length of rural CN. Carry out Renewals of

rural Through Routes.

25% of Full Carry out only Routine Maintenance forRequirement full length of rural CN.

Less than 25% of Carry out routine maintenance of RuralFull Requirement Through Routes in CN as per

prioritization based on PCI and AADT


Box 5.5Relook at Maintenance of Rural Roads

Anil Kumar Sagar

MAINTENANCE STRATEGY

The basic elements of the strategy based on the maintenance needs are as follows:

Road VisionThe state governments should formulate a long term vision covering all aspects of maintenance, the funds available through PMGSYand other poverty alleviation and employment generation programmes.

Norms for MaintenanceA study should be undertaken to determine the quantum of funds required for maintenance works. This would include routine andperiodic maintenance for earth, WBM, black-top roads in different traffic, and climatic conditions prevailing in various states. Minimumessential requirements and those considered desirable for better level of service should be spelt out including allowances for emergencyworks and special repairs. Not all roads are maintainable. It is necessary to identify the maintainable part of the road network andpreserve the assets by setting up an appropriate maintenance regime. Maintainable roads may be defined as ‘all roads with drainage andgravel surface that are in a reasonable condition, so that routine maintenance is possible without need for extensive rehabilitation.’

Fund AllocationA dedicated fund for maintenance of roads like the one in Uttar Pradesh needs to be set up in all states. The state governments shouldrealize that a decision to construct a road implies that it will be maintained subsequently. The source of these funds could be cess onpetrol and diesel, additional cess on agricultural produce, additional royalty on mining and quarries, road maintenance fee in the formof annual road tax on vehicles, and surcharge on insurance premium for vehicles. The fund should be managed in a transparentmanner and systems and procedures need to be established to ensure accountability.

Core NetworkThe State PWDs should identify the core roads for each district. It would be appropriate to give priority of maintenance to roads inthe core network. The states should formulate a five year plan for removing the basic deficiencies in the core road network in the firstinstance and other roads subsequently.

Improved MonitoringA system of performance evaluation should be introduced. Some of the performance indicators that can be considered for the purposeare percentage of maintenance expenditure to required expenditure as per norms, percentage of core road network actually subjectedto periodic maintenance, and percentage of core road network in poor condition. A few African countries which had set up dedicatedroad funds for maintenance are regularly monitoring improvements in road condition. Performance audits should relate financialflows and physical performance indicators to the condition of roads.

Creation of Maintenance Management SystemA simple but rational maintenance management system for rural roads should be developed. The system should help in providingnetwork condition, road inventory, and need based priorities based on deterioration prediction models, annual maintenance plans fora given budget, multi year road work programming, and impact on deterioration of roads for which funds are not allocated. A surveyshould be conducted to establish a pavement condition index (PCI) of village roads as a tool for prioritization. A further sub-prioritisationneeds to be done on the basis of annual average daily traffic (AADT). For roads that cannot be maintained, a systematic approach toappraisal is needed to determine whether they should be rehabilitated or upgraded. Such an approach should take account of the lifecycle costs of the road, its function and benefits and availability of resources.

Ensuring qualityOne of the factors leading to high levels of maintenance is lack of compaction of earthwork, sub-base and base courses, and poorattention to drainage works during construction of rural roads. Low crust thickness in some cases also contributes to early deterioration.

Review gang labour systemIn some countries, a system of mobile gangs and reorganization of maintenance operations for improved efficiency of the existinggangs either as a patrol gang system or area wide system has been introduced. A strategy for redeployment of existing gang labour intolabour cooperatives and outsourcing of maintenance work to medium and small contractors need to be looked into.

Rural Roads 125

Responsibility of PRIsPRIs could be made responsible for maintenance of some non-core village roads and gang labour transferred to them. Some functions,functionaries and funds (3 Fs) need to be transferred to PRIs. Experience of road maintenance in some of the South Americancountries where such strategies have been successful can serve as reference. A summary of contracting the work of routine maintenanceto community based micro enterprises in Peru is given in the following section.

DrainageProvision of adequate drainage is a critical requirement. A drainage audit must be undertaken for all existing rural roads and deficienciesin this respect removed in a time bound manner. Initial design for new roads should take into account such requirements in any case.

Maintenance of WBM roadsA good length of rural roads has Water Bound Macadam (WBM) surface. Their maintenance is a major problem. Generally, theseroads deteriorate very fast under the traffic and often develop poor riding surface. A thin gravel surfacing is found to be effective inAndhra Pradesh for the repair of these roads.

Financing of Road MaintenanceSome states have created a State Road Fund that is used for maintenance of roads. A part of this fund is also used for maintenance ofrural roads. Such funds are also used in African countries like Ghana and Zambia. However, the criteria for utilization of these fundsare not very clear. There is a need to support the management committee of the fund by a lean but strong professional cell for effectiveadministration of the fund and strengthening the operation process and putting in place scientific principles of prioritization ofmaintenance treatments based on regular condition survey of roads. The current system of monitoring of physical and financial targetsdoes not give a clue to the improvements achieved in condition of roads. Despite the creation of a dedicated fund for road maintenance,the amounts available for maintenance from all sources continue to be inadequate. There is a shortfall of over 60 per cent in availabilityof funds compared to needs. Practically, no funds are allocated for maintenance of roads constructed by departments other than thestate PWD. A detailed estimate of funds required for maintenance of rural roads on realistic basis is needed with clear break up forroutine and periodic maintenance for earth, water-bound macadam, black-top roads in different traffic and climatic conditions prevailingin different parts of the country. The norms should consider the frequency of various maintenance tasks required. Minimum essentialrequirements and those considered desirable for better level of service should be spelt out including allowance for emergency worksand special repairs. To begin with the MoRTH report on norms for maintenance can serve as a starting point (MoRTH 2000).

Renewal Cycle for Rural Road MaintenanceA disturbing feature in the maintenance policy laid down by the state governments relates to the renewal cycle provided for rural roads.In UP, a period of 8 year cycle has been indicated for rural roads. Technically, it is well known that not only traffic but also environmentplays a key role in the life of the top wearing coat with bituminous binder (because of oxidation effect of bitumen) and that is why, theRoad Maintenance Manual of UP provides for a renewal cycle of 4 years. The inadequacy of funds alone does not appear to be a soundlogic in giving a go by to the norms laid down as a result of experience and experimentation on the ground (Gupta 2003). The expertcommittee set up under the chairmanship of the Director General (Road Development) and Special Secretary to the Government ofIndia recommended norms for maintenance which are as follows:

Table B5.5.1Maintenance Norms for Rural Roads

Category SD-I PC MSS SDBC M R - Iof Roads Traffic Group Rainfall SD-II 20mm 20mm 25mm

ODR/VR 150–450 Less than 3000 mm 5 5

(Plains) More than 3000 mm 4 4

0–150 Less than 3000 mm 5 5 5

More than 3000 mm 4 4 4

SD = Surface Dressing; PC=Premix Carpet; MSS=Mix Seal Surface; SDBC=Semi-Dense Bituminous Carpet; MR=Metal Renewal.Source: (MoRTH 2000).

The cycle recommended by the Expert Committee of the MoRTH is ideal and could be the target to be achieved at least in respect ofthe core rural roads network.


In absence of a proper road inventory and condition survey, it is not possible to make a precise estimate of the maintenance fundsrequired annually in respect of rural roads. There is no organized data base for roads—inventory, condition, and traffic counts whichcan help in formulation of need based maintenance plan. The budget grants for maintenance are usually distributed in a lump summanner assigned to road length. Only financial monitoring of expenditure against allotment is carried out. Maintenance works are notsubject to strict budgetary discipline. The system of performance budget whereby details of physical achievements against prespecifiedtargets (activity and work-wise) does not exist in many states. Maharashtra has developed suitable formats for performance budgetingand can serve as a good reference.

Rural Road Co-operative for Maintenance—the Finnish experienceThe Government of Finland has promoted rural road maintenance using road cooperatives. A road cooperative is a rural road maintenanceorganisation whereby a road is maintained by the people living along it. The Finnish Government has provided a legal frameworkwhich stipulates the right-of-way, cooperative ownership, and the formula for distribution of maintenance costs amongst the roadusers and property holders along the road. Participation in the road cooperative is compulsory for property owners who use the road.The cost of road maintenance is shared amongst the members of the cooperative depending on the benefits to each member in theform of the size of the holding and the created traffic. Each cooperative holds an annual general meeting to decide the fees, to acceptnew members and to audit the previous year’s accounts. (Isotalo 1992)

Routine Maintenance by Community Based Micro-enterprises in PeruIn Peru, the Rural Roads Project (RRP) has set up a cost-effective routine maintenance system based on contracting out labour-intensive maintenance works to micro-enterprises, local cooperatives, and other community based organizations. The composition ofthe micro-enterprises varies according to the length of the road. Their average size is about thirteen people and the average length ofthe roads covered under a contract is about 34.6 km. Typically, micro-enterprises are made up of eleven to twenty people living closeto the road. Priority is given to unemployed people who have previous experience in construction works.

The micro-enterprises are engaged through performance based contracts with Peru Roads Department (PCR) and paid on amonthly basis. Micro-enterprise members designate their president and executive council, and determine how the monthly paymentis allocated to the various uses (wages, tools, rentals, transportation, savings, and other investments). On an average, wages account for89 per cent of the expenditure.

Micro-enterprises carry out simple works, continuously throughout the year, to clean the ditches and culverts, control vegetation,filling potholes and ruts, maintaining the surface camber, remove small landslides and undertake other emergency works. They havealso demonstrated capacity to build retaining walls and small bridges and handle El Nino emergency works under the guidance ofPCR. The micro enterprise is a cost effective way of keeping the roads rehabilitated in good condition. The programme generatesdirect employment for its members. The micro-enterprise becomes a focal point for community work and communal activities toensure continuous support from the community.

Lessons for IndiaUsing community based micro-enterprises has important lessons for India that has a very high percentage of unskilled labourers livingin rural areas. The study highlights the active involvement of people in maintaining their own roads. Importance of group work canalso not be neglected. It has been shown by people organized into groups that they can face the harshest of situations.

MoRD has started an ambitious programme ‘Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana’ (SGSY) wherein people in villages are organizedinto groups for self employment. These groups can provide a good beginning for taking up road maintenance works in rural areas.Since rural roads carry low volume traffic, the requirements for routine road maintenance will be minimal as compared to periodicmaintenance or rehabilitation. The Government also provides funds to generate employment in rural areas by schemes such as ‘SampoornaGrameen Rozgar Yojana’ (SGRY), ‘National Food for Work Program’ (NFFWP), and ‘National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme’(NREGS). However, under the present guidelines, funds available under these schemes cannot be spent for maintenance of existingassets. Moreover, the schemes stipulate formation of proper estimates before taking up any work. However, funds for routine maintenanceshould not wait for preparation of estimates. Under routine maintenance, funds should be given on a normative basis. Formation ofestimates would delay maintenance works and defeat its very purpose. The guidelines under these schemes can be suitably modified sothat groups of people can work for routine road maintenance. This would have the dual benefit of providing employment as well asensuring adequate maintenance of roads.

Typically, a village is connected by one road. In such cases, one group in the village may be given the task for maintaining thatroad. However, in villages with multiple connectivity, more than one group may be formed for routine maintenance works. A groupshould consist of eleven to twenty men who should be given preliminary training for taking up road maintenance works. The trainingcan be given by existing state PWD engineers or master trainers specially trained for this purpose. Funds for training can be providedthrough the SGSY scheme.

Rural Roads 127

As in Peru, the state PWD department may also enter into a contractwith these groups so that the groups are ensured a steady source of incomeand middlemen are eliminated. Depending on their performance, the groupsshould also be given incentives so that their needs for other equipment arealso taken care of. After gaining enough experience in routine maintenance,these people may also be considered for taking up periodic maintenance,obviously, under strict control of the state PWD. The above scheme wouldhave the benefits of routine road maintenance, employment in rural areas,poverty reduction, no extra requirement of funds for maintenance, feelingof ownership amongst the rural masses, a step towards decentralizationkeeping in spirit of the 73rd amendment, creation of workforce formaintenance in all rural areas, effective planning for road maintenance,and control on routine maintenance (Figure B5.5.1).

Note: Views expressed here are of the author of the box.

Fig. B5.5.1 Model for Rural Road Maintenance

Box 5.6A Proposed Model of Community Participation in Rural Road Maintenance

Ensuring sustainability of rural roads requires (i) rigorous planning and design, (ii) an effective delivery system, (iii) mobilization ofadequate resources, and (iv) appropriate technology and mechanism for the maintenance interventions. The three-tier Panchayati RajSystem (PRIs), which has come into existence by virtue of the 73rd Amendment of the constitution, offers an excellent opportunity toinstitutionalize a hierarchical, decentralized system of maintenance with more technical and complex operations assigned to the districtlevel and the most routine and low technology operations to be tackled by the village panchayats through the maintenance gangs(MGs). The model envisages formation of MGs with four or five able-bodied villagers to be selected from the village itself andimparted training on simple maintenance activities. The suggested model of allocation of maintenance responsibility is as follows:

Table B5.6.1Model of Allocation of Maintenance Responsibility

Admn./Orgn Extent of Road ResponsibilityUnit Length, km.

District 500–1000 Planning and assessment of maintenance needs regularly; rehabilitation and renewalworks periodically every 5–7 years.

Block (Inter- 50–100 Procurement of materials and equipment/implements & distribution to centralmediate panchayat) village gang (CVG).

Central village 8–10 Collection of materials and equipment/implements from Block HQ and storing forgang (for a group distribution to MG.of villages)

Maintenance 1–2 Execution of routine maintenance by the MG of the village.gang of village

Each MG would be made responsible for maintaining 1–2 km of road located very close to the village. The intermediate panchayatlevel set up will have the responsibility to procure and store materials (aggregates and cold bituminous emulsion) and implementsrequired for maintenance which will be distributed to the central village gangs (CVGs) for further distribution to the MGs of thevillages. Normal agricultural/household implements used by villagers would actually be utilized for carrying out maintenance works.A specially made push-cart will be used by the MG for transporting materials and implements to the sites for maintenance works. Amanually operated pug-mill fitted to the push-cart will be used for mixing the aggregates and bitumen for producing the cold mix tobe used in maintenance of bituminous layer. A calibrated small metal container of known volume can be used for batching of the mixand a normal rammer will be used for manual compaction of the repaired shoulder, side slope, side drain, or location of the crack

GROUP

NREGs

State PWD

SGSY

Routine Roads’ Maintenance


repaired. The proposed framework envisages availability of engineers at the district level to assess the maintenance needs and currentpavement conditions every 6 months in rotation and to pass on the status report to the intermediate panchayat for onward transmissionto the village panchayats. The district level maintenance unit will have facilities for periodic maintenance and renewal interventionsbased on pavement condition evaluation. Fair and equitable distribution of funds and material resources for operationalising thisarrangement will be ensured by the functionaries at the district and the intermediate level.

The proposed model allocates responsibility to the three-tiers of the panchayats commensurate with the capacity available at eachlevel. The model also envisages competition among the panchayats and MGs to increase effective community participation in maintenanceof rural roads through the PRIs.

Source: Sikdar (2006).

PRIs for which resources available under SGSY and NREGScan be pooled as suggested in Box 5.5.

Since construction and maintenance of rural roads isalmost exclusively funded through public expenditure, it isthe tax payer’s money that needs to be accounted for. Besides,the ultimate recipients of the service, the road users, shouldbe made aware of the investment made in the creation of theassets and they should also be entitled to assess the costeffectiveness and quality of the assets created for their benefit.Institutionalization of a system of social audit by the citizensand the road users is, therefore, essential, even though

monitoring road construction and maintenance involves ahigh degree of technical proficiency and competence. In thisconnection, it may be worthwhile to mention that underPMGSY, states have been advised to fix ‘citizen informationboards’ displaying physical and financial details of the project,quantity of materials to be used and persons responsible forconstruction and supervision. This is a measure to enhancethe level of transparency in programme implementation.Further a pilot project has been initiated through the PublicAffairs Centre, Bangalore, to involve the citizens in monitoringroad quality (Box 5.7).

Box 5.7Citizen Monitoring of Rural Roads

Citizens and taxpayers, being the ultimate users, have a right to ‘demand’ good quality roads. However, this right cannot be divorcedfrom their duty to exercise due diligence and vigilance in order to ensure proper utilization of funds spent and to ensure that thequality of the assets created meet the prescribed standards. It is, therefore, necessary to evolve and institutionalize a system of monitoringthe quality of road works by the citizens. For this purpose, however, the essential requisite and features of successful citizen participationneed to be demonstrated and validated experimentally. In this context, a pilot project has been taken up, under PMGSY, in collaborationwith Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore, to demonstrate the utility of involving the citizens in monitoring of road construction.

Under the pilot project, sixteen rural road projects will be identified in four districts in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu (two districts ineach state). Each of the identified roads will be ‘citizen monitored’ in sections up to 50 per cent of their length. Each critical stage of roadconstruction will be monitored by the citizen volunteers with appropriate quality checks. In each road, the citizen monitors will act asrelay teams handing over responsibility to the next monitoring team after construction of a section of the road is completed and monitored.

For each road project three to four citizens will be chosen to act as the core group of monitors. The monitors could be Civil Engineeringstudents from the nearby colleges, volunteers from civil society organizations, citizen associations, Gram Panchayats, Mahila Mandals, andso on. However, they must have minimum requisite literacy/education and should have commitment and enthusiasm to perform therequired tasks. These citizen monitors will be imparted basic training at convenient field locations by the experts with the help of a simplebooklet detailing their tasks relating to monitoring and quality control. They would also be provided with a basic field kit of testing devices.

A package of simple physical tests for monitoring and quality assurance of rural road projects will be designed under the guidanceof eminent domain experts specifying the devices and testing modalities. In-house and on-site training would be provided to thecitizen monitors for carrying out these field tests. Greater participation of rural citizens will be secured by treating the citizen monitorsas focal points of the local groups. The citizen monitors are expected to assume ‘leadership’ role and train others from the village toparticipate in the monitoring process.

Four road experts would be identified for each state, to provide peer guidance and to assist the citizen monitors. The experts willalso carryout certain tests which are beyond the competence of the citizen monitors and which require more sophisticated testingdevices not included in the standard tool kits. Each expert would undertake ten to fifteen field inspections during the pilot phase. Theduration of the pilot phase is expected to be six months. All the processes involved in this exercise would be fully documented for‘experience sharing’ and for developing a replicable model for citizen monitoring of infrastructure projects on a wider scale.

Rural Roads 129

WAY FORWARD

The debate is whether one ought to centralize or decentral-ize rural road development and maintenance. Protagonistsof centralization assert that roads have certain special char-acteristics that make them different from other dispersedrural infrastructure. First, good roads require a reasonablyhigh and uniform standard of construction and repair andsecond, roads are not necessarily used by the local residentsalone. In the pursuit of standardization and adherence tonorms, centralization can also be carried to extremes, put-ting wide powers in the hands of a few, totally eliminatingscope for community participation and flexibility for localinitiatives and innovations. PMGSY is a CSS and capital isprovided by the central government to the state governmentsto build the road network as per the central governmentnorms. The key issue remains of maintenance of this networkas it is handed over to the state government after construct-ing the road. State governments are obliged to provide fromtheir budgets for its maintenance.

Ensuring Community Participation

Intensive community participation is being widely recognizedas a major requirement for ensuring long term sustainabilityof investment on rural infrastructure. Participatory planningand management facilitates assessment of the needs of therural households in order to create integrated utilities for them.Such an approach also provides opportunities to the communityto reinforce their identity as a key stakeholder and to exercisetheir choices and rights freely. This promotes a sense ofownership of the assets created and provides incentive fortheir participation in construction and subsequently, in themanagement of the assets.

While designing systems for community participationand management, however, there is an important concernwhich needs to be properly addressed. When communitymanagement entails cash or labour contributions, theburden generally falls disproportionately on the poorhouseholds, since they may be forced to contribute freelabour time leaving less time for them to engage in theirprimary productive tasks. This might adversely affect theirability to meet subsistence needs and food security. Theymay also be forced to contribute towards maintenance ofinfrastructure assets, which they rarely use. What we shouldreally aim at in the involvement of the community is theassessment of needs and decisions regarding maintenance andmanagement. This will ensure that community participationis inclusive and pro-poor, since the poor will develop a stakein using and maintaining the appropriate roads which servetheir needs.

Promoting use of Labour Intensive Technology

While the poor households face fundamental deficiencies intheir assets to capture benefits of the opportunities that a ruralroad may bring, one aspect of the rural road development,which benefits the poor directly, is the opportunity thatconstruction and maintenance of these roads offer foremployment when labour intensive methods are used.Experience from Asian and African countries reveals that theprincipal gains for the poor from rural road programmes isthrough employment generated during the construction.Although employment on road construction is temporary innature, this provides an opportunity for the workers toaccumulate savings which can provide the necessary start upcapital to invest in alternative livelihoods to cross the thresholdof poverty. Labour intensive, intermediate technologies areexpected to generate five to six times more jobs in constructionof rural roads as compared to the highly equipment orientedmethods used for the highways. Furthermore, adoption oflabour intensive construction methods need not affect thequality of works adversely, contrary to the popular belief.It has been successfully demonstrated in Cambodia andPeoples’ Republic of China that the quality of works, usinglabour intensive methods, can be atleast as good as that ofthe contractors using heavy machineries. There is, therefore,a need to incentivize and promote use of labour intensivetechniques for rural road programmes with a focus on povertyreduction.

Decentralization of Maintenance

Rural roads, by their very nature, are small in size and aredispersed over a wide geographical area. Construction andmaintenance of rural roads are, therefore, not easily amenableto centralized supervision and monitoring. Efficiencyconsiderations weigh in favour of a decentralized system formaintenance and management of rural roads. Case studiesof different developing countries have shown that regularmaintenance of rural roads is a critical pre-condition forsustaining the positive impact which these assets generate forthe rural community. Ensuring adequate and timelymaintenance, both routine and periodic, however, requires notonly adequate availability of funds, but also major institutionalreform. This is because the institutional responsibility forrural roads is often not very clearly established. In many statesthere appears to be lack of clarity, at least in practice at thefield level, over who is responsible for maintaining whichroads and also over the sources of funding their maintenancerequirements. In the absence of proper institutional systems,very often there is no transparency and objectivity with regardto prioritization and selection of roads, maintenance


and rehabilitation. The ability to get a road included in theannual maintenance programme or a rehabilitation scheme,consequently, tends to depend heavily on the political strengthand influence that the beneficiary community can exert.Poorer and more backward areas and communities are likelyto suffer under such a regime since they are less likely to havethe capacity and the power to lobby effectively for better roads.There is a clear case, therefore, to move towards an efficientsystem of decentralized maintenance of the rural roads byempowering the PRIs. It is hoped that a clear road map for thispurpose would be set out at least in the 11th Five Year Plan.

Cost Benefit Framework for Investment on Rural Roads

It is a common perception that all-weather roads should benecessarily black topped. Black topping, no doubt, providesbetter riding quality and stability to the surface as well aspavement structure. It prevents water percolation and arreststhe dust problem. However, black topping of fully constructedcrust becomes necessary only on the roads carrying high trafficvolumes. Investment of this type on roads connecting smallerhabitations with low traffic volumes can be rarely justifiedon economic considerations. This calls for need based roadconstruction keeping in view the expected economic returnsfrom the investment. While the rural roads Manual treatsgravel road with necessary cross drainage and protection workas an all-weather road, almost all the roads under PMGSY

are currently being black topped irrespective of the projectedtraffic. Indeed a whole range of proven, cost effective pavementoptions are now available as alternatives to bitumen surfacefor low volume rural roads. Most of these paving optionsrequire relatively smaller capital investments and optimizeuse of local materials and use intermediate labour basedtechnology. A policy and institutional framework needs tobe developed to ‘mainstream’ these alternatives for rural roads.

Providing all weather connectivity helps in promotingeconomic growth and alleviates poverty. The PMGSY hasaccelerated works in connecting habitations all over thecountry and its impact on rural economy is perceptible notonly in economic life of people but in social life as well. Thereis no clear policy on maintenance of these newly created assets,though all PMGSY roads are covered by five years’ maintenancecontracts entered into along with the construction contract,with the same contractor. But as funds are to be providedthrough the state budget, there are no earmarked funds forthe maintenance of rural roads.

There is little doubt that rural roads are vital to agro-based industry and rural development, to create jobs, and tomake the country’s growth more broad based. As all-weatherroad network through PMGSY is expanding we are witnessingsocial and economic change beyond our expectations. Thougha watertight system to maintain this vast network is not inplace, it is unlikely that village community would let it fallinto disuse.

Rural Roads 131

Table A5.1Length and Cost of Rural Roads required for New Connectivity under PMGSY

Cost forEligible Unconnected Habitations connectivity

No. of 1000+ 500–999 250–499 Total length under S. Name Unconnected Length Length Length to be PMGSY

No. of State habitations No. (km) No. (km) No. (km) covered (km) (Rs million)

1 Andhra Pradesh 2679 167 668 417 1668 396 990 3326 4520

2 Arunachal Pradesh 2654 43 303 105 854 267 1954 3111 8390

3 Assam 15,786 6149 7900 4196 6671 2799 4416 18,987 51,950

4 Bihar 24,321 11,717 26,687 6203 6664 0 0 33,351 66,470

5 Chhattisgarh 24,202 2604 12,213 6313 14,709 3644 10,634 37,556 76,700

6 Goa 55 0 0 20 40 35 50 90 100

7 Gujarat 8127 472 1038 2288 4027 1493 2387 7452 10,210

8 Haryana 23 0 0 2 26 0 0 26 60

9 Himachal Pradesh 11,340 262 1734 853 3389 2379 7709 12832 34,900

10 Jammu & Kashmir 3946 785 3454 942 2722 1065 2236 8412 27,720

11 Jharkhand 21,036 2622 5298 4178 8943 3896 7204 21445 36,420

12 Karnataka 4608 156 103 118 397 602 1367 1867 2250

13 Kerala 440 117 116 303 323 18 21 460 950

14 Madhya Pradesh 34,771 5804 25,131 10,645 31,403 2043 3730 60,264 121,990

15 Maharashtra 6892 203 633 794 1961 754 1774 4368 7680

16 Manipur 1142 71 355 187 633 340 1143 2131 5170

17 Meghalaya 2752 9 31 150 553 597 2078 2662 6930

18 Mizoram 392 47 236 114 948 124 837 2021 5910

19 Nagaland 127 21 280 32 478 41 231 989 2490

20 Orissa 28,299 3850 7946 6738 13,652 3805 7776 29,374 69,620

21 Punjab 920 103 205 433 774 0 0 979 1610

22 Rajasthan 20,729 2906 7063 6073 19,468 2036 5417 31,948 40,630

23 Sikkim 410 16 78 138 541 164 488 1107 3280

24 Tamil Nadu 5318 577 1426 1825 3552 238 281 5259 7870

25 Tripura 3803 203 260 706 1205 1182 1516 2981 9610

26 Uttaranchal 8654 171 1299 667 4251 1767 4880 10,430 22,990

27 Uttar Pradesh 61,554 8839 16,300 15,358 22,300 87 125 38,725 87,560

28 West Bengal 35,667 11,941 13,192 11,668 9803 1679 657 23,652 70,200

Total 330,647 59,855 133,949 81,466 161,955 31,451 69,901 365,805 784,180

Source: www.pmgsy.org

ANNEXE


Table A5.2Length and Cost of Rural Roads Required for Upgradation under PMGSY

Length of Core Network (Rural Roads) Length of EstimatedThrough roads Link roads Total upgradation cost

S.No. State (km) (km) (km)to be covered (km) (Rs Million)

1 Andhra Pradesh 8576 57,495 66,071 17,201 25,820

2 Arunachal Pradesh 2750 9154 11,904 4123 7260

3 Assam 10,551 16,632 27,183 13,046 33,400

4 Bihar 12,746 38,898 51,644 18,581 27,770

5 Chhattisgarh 12,536 29,040 41,576 16,892 27,850

6 Goa 71 788 859 190 190

7 Gujarat 2982 40,668 43,650 9082 9720

8 Haryana 6567 6387 12,954 7525 13,150

9 Himachal Pradesh 5894 23,577 29,471 9431 16,600

10 Jammu & Kashmir 3585 15,238 18,822 5870 11,400

11 Jharkhand 7978 29,677 37,654 12,429 17,280

12 Karnataka 8141 58,539 66,679 16,921 18,720

13 Kerala 305 15,734 16,039 2665 4190

14 Madhya Pradesh 25,330 79,380 104,710 37,237 57,420

15 Maharashtra 8905 72,130 81,035 19,724 27,650

16 Manipur 1343 7284 8627 2435 3750

17 Meghalaya 2312 7120 9432 3380 6020

18 Mizoram 1117 2396 3513 1476 2650

19 Nagaland 805 6003 6807 1705 2510

20 Orissa 19,138 61,257 80,395 28,327 43,480

21 Punjab 7484 17,751 25,235 10,147 12,500

22 Rajasthan 14,821 75,304 90,125 26,117 27,750

23 Sikkim 485 2408 2893 846 1150

24 Tamil Nadu 14,317 52,561 66,878 22,201 30,190

25 Tripura 1637 4704 6341 2343 4760

26 Uttaranchal 4321 17,124 21,446 6890 12,100

27 Uttar Pradesh 40,363 111,404 151,767 57,074 99,720

28 West Bengal 13,410 36,991 50,400 18,958 45,330

Total 238,470 895,642 1,134,112 372,816 590,330


Rural Roads 133

Table A5.3Physical and Financial status and achievements under PMGSY

Statement showing Physical & Financial progress under PMGSY (Phases—I to VI + ADB/WB) (Rs in crores, length in kms)

No. of road Length of % of % Exp.Value Amount No. works road works completed % Length to amount

of released of Length completed completed road works completed Exp. released S. proposals (up to road of road (up to (up to (up to (up to up to (up to No. State cleared 25.05.06) works works May, 06) May, 06) May, 06) May, 06) May, 06 May, 06)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1 AP 1632.95 1011.47 4580.00 13284.10 3564.00 8535.35 77.82 64.25 914.62 90.42

2 Arunachal 437.74 179.46 446.00 1786.65 337.00 1096.08 75.56 61.35 127.36 70.97

3 Assam 1601.11 721.29 1294.00 4385.87 640.00 1558.26 49.46 35.53 609.50 84.50

4 Bihar 1384.03 592.80 1297.00 5239.60 613.00 1609.76 47.26 30.72 504.84 85.16

5 Chhattisgarh 2220.21 1078.26 2094.00 10993.84 914.00 4998.56 43.65 45.47 1088.23 100.92

6 Goa 9.72 10.00 90.00 178.16 72.00 158.70 80.00 0.00 5.32 53.20

7 Gujarat 438.34 284.87 1553.00 3250.02 1139.00 2373.75 73.34 73.04 274.54 96.37

8 Haryana 258.08 201.18 111.00 1575.51 77.00 1107.85 69.37 70.32 163.38 81.21

9 HP 1353.08 482.80 1506.00 7590.09 510.00 2742.21 33.86 36.13 359.57 74.48

10 J & K 312.40 145.35 277.00 1025.81 41.00 91.30 14.80 8.90 59.71 41.08

11 Jharkhand 633.03 504.41 629.00 3362.37 439.00 2317.95 69.79 68.94 411.28 81.54

12 Karnataka 759.36 506.24 1921.00 7240.01 1518.00 5015.49 79.02 69.27 403.63 79.73

13 Kerala 196.73 121.97 443.00 837.04 192.00 345.80 43.34 41.31 75.33 61.76

14 MP 5103.92 2102.50 5562.00 26456.59 2271.00 10529.22 40.83 39.80 2066.99 98.31

15 Maharashtra 684.75 596.21 2148.00 5146.84 1508.00 3245.59 70.20 63.06 485.94 81.50

16 Manipur 273.04 104.33 849.00 1266.84 525.00 688.84 61.84 54.37 98.01 93.94

17 Meghalaya 145.72 123.17 347.00 811.43 286.00 661.91 82.42 81.57 93.40 75.83

18 Mizoram 333.23 225.50 114.00 1526.83 67.00 978.60 58.77 64.09 163.75 72.62

19 Nagaland 194.43 161.56 208.00 1996.67 173.00 1582.37 83.17 79.25 107.74 66.69

20 Orissa 2240.95 1445.56 2880.00 9514.74 1663.00 5137.43 57.74 53.99 1147.02 79.35

21 Punjab 217.90 176.30 508.00 1282.78 412.00 815.11 81.10 63.54 166.77 94.59

22 Rajasthan 4490.81 2395.60 8865.00 30877.01 4374.00 15427.75 49.34 49.97 1926.34 80.41

23 Sikkim 298.37 111.26 182.00 1912.48 59.00 1503.68 32.42 78.62 85.13 76.51

24 Tamil Nadu 724.18 491.87 2604.00 5040.68 1738.00 3121.72 66.74 61.93 366.78 74.57

25 Tripura 200.99 96.39 311.00 841.38 205.00 437.07 65.92 51.95 77.60 80.51

26 UP 2916.29 2193.87 11186.00 21227.95 7957.00 13657.31 71.13 64.34 1624.25 74.04

27 Uttaranchal 360.83 215.33 292.00 1822.86 131.00 508.36 44.86 27.89 150.53 69.91

28 West Bengal 2328.20 1203.45 1274.00 7650.14 683.00 3471.40 53.61 45.38 929.36 77.22

Grand Total 31750.39 17483.00 53571.00 178124.29 32108.00 93717.42 59.94 52.61 14486.92 82.86



Table A5.4Bharat Nirman—Targets for New Connectivity

(Length in km, Habitations in Numbers)

Sl. Name of 2005–6 2006–7 2007–8 2008–9 Total

No. the State Length Habs Length Habs Length Habs Length Habs Length Habs

1 Andhra Pradesh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 Arunachal Pradesh 162.5 22 637.5 85 646.875 86 671.875 105 2118.75 298

3 Assam 605.852 421 2864.063 1988 3889.845 2701 5793.46 4022 13,153.22 9132

4 Bihar 1665.831 896 3928.75 2062 6121.425 3214 7230.306 3784 18,946.312 9956

5 Chhattisgarh 1501.365 478 4367.606 1310 6450.644 2007 8255.181 2514 20,574.796 6309

6 Goa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7 Gujarat 402.955 230 429.723 246 438.675 251 438.675 251 1710.028 978

8 Haryana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

9 Himachal Pradesh 464.583 127 795.833 209 638.542 166 479.167 123 2378.125 625

10 Jammu & Kashmir 169.972 57 1059.49 352 1781.869 593 1405.099 466 4416.43 1468

11 Jharkhand 1051.779 526 2594.39 1295 1812.298 901 2319.31 1155 7777.777 3877

12 Karnataka 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

13 Kerala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

14 Madhya Pradesh 2602.139 768 6162.451 1760 8326.848 2399 10,470.17 2905 27,561.608 7832

15 Maharashtra 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

16 Manipur 100 11 460.714 48 464.286 48 719.048 74 1744.048 181

17 Meghalaya 123.609 35 135.971 39 140.091 40 144.211 41 543.882 155

18 Mizoram 82.746 12 274.819 39 277.884 39 306.498 43 941.947 133

19 Nagaland 93.318 9 104.529 10 109.507 10 114.485 11 421.839 40

20 Orissa 1055.95 493 1985.609 874 2524.021 1087 4427.774 1993 9993.354 4447

21 Punjab 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

22 Rajasthan 2153.615 743 3629.519 1252 3554.217 1225 2123.494 732 11,460.845 3952

23 Sikkim 75.031 22 104.042 30 108.043 31 132.053 37 419.169 120

24 Tamil Nadu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

25 Tripura 94.774 66 261.74 183 354.701 248 447.661 313 1158.876 810

26 Uttar Pradesh 1966.416 1236 2390.632 1504 2059.213 1295 1378.701 867 7794.962 4902

27 Uttaranchal 380.609 95 422.008 106 1025.641 257 1020.299 255 2848.557 713

28 West Bengal 739.378 787 2572.767 2738 3265.307 3473 3643.359 3876 10,220.811 10,874

Total 15,492.42 7034 35,182.16 16130 43,989.93 20,071 51,520.83 23,567 14,6185.34 66,802


Rural Roads 135

Table A5.5Bharat Nirman Targets for Upgradation

(Length in Kms)

Sl. Name of 2005–6 2006–7 2007–8 2008–9 Total No. the State Length length Length Length Length

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Andhra Pradesh 1821.494 2258.652 2258.652 2258.652 8597.45

2 Arunachal Pradesh 0 0 0 0 0

3 Assam 0 2005.71 2269.808 2219.843 6495.361

4 Bihar 0 2393.617 3510.638 3390.958 9295.213

5 Chhattisgarh 0 1986.063 3240.418 3222.996 8449.477

6 Goa 190.114 190.114 190.114 190.114 760.456

7 Gujarat 0 1557.971 1557.971 1413.043 4528.985

8 Haryana 229.358 1146.789 1146.789 1238.532 3761.468

9 Himachal Pradesh 0 1515.923 1694.268 1503.185 4713.376

10 Jammu & Kashmir 0 1007.584 920.91 1007.584 2936.078

11 Jharkhand 0 2108.433 2123.494 1987.952 6219.879

12 Karnataka 2573.529 2573.529 2573.529 2573.529 10,294.116

13 Kerala 524.109 628.931 524.109 524.109 2201.258

14 Madhya Pradesh 0 5189.543 6614.379 6823.53 18,627.452

15 Maharashtra 4334.365 4334.365 4334.365 4334.365 17,337.46

16 Manipur 0 0 0 0 0

17 Meghalaya 0 587.583 587.583 665.189 1840.355

18 Mizoram 0 257.998 257.998 216.718 732.714

19 Nagaland 0 246.914 246.914 370.371 864.199

20 Orissa 0 4438.574 4663.144 5059.445 14,161.163

21 Punjab 423.729 1483.051 1483.051 1680.791 5070.622

22 Rajasthan 0 4764.543 4653.74 3656.51 13,074.793

23 Sikkim 0 196.85 137.795 98.425 433.07

24 Tamil Nadu 1297.71 2824.427 2824.427 4167.939 11,114.503

25 Tripura 0 373.737 383.838 414.141 1171.716

26 Uttar Pradesh 0 7158.962 6956.031 14,408.12 28,523.113

27 Uttaranchal 0 889.454 1283.354 1270.648 3443.456

28 West Bengal 0 2549.942 2878.965 4054.053 9482.96

Total 11,394.408 54,669.259 59,316.284 68,750.742 194,130.693



Table A5.6Cost Trends under PMGSY

2000–1 2001–3 2003–4 2004–5 2005–6 2006–7

State NC UP NC UP NC UP NC UP NC UP NC UP

1 Andhra 6.72 7.25 14.69 11.49 10.23 15.02 15.47 0.00 18.99Pradesh

2 Arunachal 0.00 12.88 12.29 0.00 No proposal 31.24 0.00 51.03 0.00Pradesh

3 Assam 41.74 0.00 26.06 25.55 24.96 0.00 32.57 0.00 40.36 19.08

4 Bihar 17.82 19.49 21.52 0.00

5 Chhattisgarh 0.00 9.61 16.03 0.00 19.59 0.00 22.03 0.00 23.00 22.79

6 Goa 0.00 3.19 16.81 0.00 No proposal 25.07 0.00

7 Gujarat 11.46 8.48 11.68 8.85 13.29 0.00 17.25 0.00 17.53 10.82

8 Haryana 0.00 5.50 0.00 17.04 0.00 17.48 0.00 21.97 0.00 23.28

9 Himachal 11.22 0.00 14.19 0.00 14.30 0.00 21.39 0.00 23.03 0.00Pradesh

10 Jammu & 18.78 23.45 24.99 0.00 30.95 24.36 34.90 0.00Kashmir

11 Jharkhand 26.18 3.67 19.18 0.00 20.85 0.00 23.73 0.00

12 Karnataka 8.09 6.17 10.55 8.49 0.00 10.80 0.00 16.53 0.00 17.48

13 Kerala 17.58 15.41 20.55 12.53 20.97 0.00 29.40 0.00 30.41 25.26

14 Madhya 12.07 10.51 14.85 9.63 20.67 0.00 21.00 0.00 20.31 17.45 22.45 19.88Pradesh

15 Maharashtra 0.00 8.76 16.05 11.55 18.01 11.03 19.56 11.30

16 Manipur NA 11.36 0.00 No proposal No proposal 26.08 33.25

17 Meghalaya 0.00 7.69 30.60 0.00 32.28 0.00 37.52 0.00

18 Mizoram 12.81 0.00 17.53 0.00 16.74 0.00 32.63 0.00 24.69 0.00

19 Nagaland 0.00 2.27 16.74 12.77 11.13 10.90 16.71 0.00 18.27 17.42

20 Orissa 17.17 12.69 20.70 12.98 18.39 0.00 26.40 21.29 28.42 33.11

21 Punjab 16.33 0.00 16.54 12.65 16.11 0.00 17.63 19.07

22 Rajasthan 11.62 7.68 9.06 0.00 12.37 0.00 13.28 0.00 17.01 0.00 18.81 0.00

23 Sikkim 0.00 1.21 33.03 11.31 33.32 0.00 43.67 0.00 46.09 0.00

24 Tamil Nadu 11.96 8.86 15.42 12.32 14.61 0.00 15.17 11.22 25.15 17.25

25 Tripura 0.00 5.98 25.16 0.00 48.91 0.00 55.17 0.00

26 Uttar 0.00 3.93 20.80 0.00 22.32 16.81 24.45 17.73Pradesh

27 Uttaranchal 25.17 18.70 28.55 20.26 13.83 0.00 18.02 23.52

28 West Bengal 17.45 16.73 27.12 0.00 29.12 0.00 31.92 35.03 38.86 0.00


Rural Roads 137

REFERENCES

APERP (1997). Rural Transport Survey 1997—Andhra PradeshEconomic Restructuring Project, World Bank, Washington D.C.

C&AG (2006). Performance Audit of PMGSY, C&AG Report No.13, 2006, GOI, New Delhi.

Fan, S., L. Zhang, and X. Zhang (2000). ‘Growth, Inequality, andPoverty in Rural China: The Role of Public Investments.’ ResearchReport 125, International Food Policy Research Institute,

Fan, Shenggen and Peter B.R. Hazell and Sukhdeo Thorat (1999).‘Linkages between Government Spending, Growth, and Povertyin Rural India,’ Research reports 110, International Food PolicyResearch Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC.

Gupta, D.P. (2003). ‘Maintenance of Rural Roads: DevelopingPolicy and Implementation Plan for Uttar Pradesh’, mimeo,Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

Isotalo, Jukka (1992). ‘Community Participation in Rural RoadMaintenance: Finnish Experience and Lessons for Sub-SaharanAfrica’, Transportation, Water and Urban Development Department,The World Bank, Transport No. RD-13. Washington, D.C.

Kumar, P., H.C. Mehndiratta and S. Rokade (2005). ‘Use ofReinforced Flyash in Highway Embankments’, Highway ResearchBulletin, 73, pp. 1–13.

Kumar, P., S.S. Jain and L.N. Singh (2002). ‘Use of Steel IndustrySlag in Bituminous Mixes—Indian Experience’, Highway ResearchBulletin, 67, pp. 13–26.

Misra, A.K., R. Mathur, P. Goel and V.K. Sood (2004). ‘Use ofPhosphogypsum—An Industrial By-Product in Stabilisation ofBlack Cotton Soils’, Highway Research Bulletin, 70, pp. 65–75.

MoRD (2000). Empowerment of Rural India through Connectivity,Ministry of Rural Development, May, 2000. (2004). ‘Impact Assessment of Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak

Yojana—PMGSY’, Ministry of Rural Development, 2004. (2004a). Specifications for Rural Roads, Indian Roads Congress.

Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi. (2004b). Rural Road Manual: IRC:SP:20–2002, Indian Roads

Congress. Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi. (2006). Rural Roads Development Plan: Vision—2025 (Draft),

Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, NewDelhi.

MoRTH (2000). MoRTH: Norms by the Expert Group 2000,Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi.

Narayan, Deepa, Raj Patel, K. Shafft, A. Rademacher and S. Koch-Schulte (2000). Voices of the Poor. Crying out for Change, TheWorld Bank, Oxford University Press.

Planning Commission (2005). A quick Concurrent Evaluation ofPMGSY, Project Evaluation office (PEO), Planning Commission,New Delhi.

Sikdar P.K. (2006). ‘Proposed model of Community Participationin Rural Road Maintenance’, Indian Highways, Vol. 34, No.6,Special No. June.

Vittal, U.K.G. (2000). ‘Use of fly ash in Roads and Embankments’,in Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Fly Ash Disposaland Utilisation organized by CBIP and Fly Ash Mission.