Skip to Main Navigation

Nepal - Bridges Improvement and Maintenance Program Project (English)

Ratings for the Bridges Improvement and Maintenance Program for Nepal were as follows: outcomes were satisfactory, risk to development outcome was substantial, Bank performance was satisfactory, and borrower performance was also satisfactory. Some lessons learned included: The PforR can be an effective tool for supporting a Government with a vision and plan. The Program suffered in its early phase due to political economy and transparency-related issues. The Program design could not adequately assess the risks linked to the LRN bridges program. This affected the Program negatively, although eventually the issues were resolved. The BIMP’s implementing agency, DoR, has extensive experience of working with the World Bank. The department has been found to be capable of managing fiduciary, social and environmental risks, and technical aspects of the Program. However, the PforR was a new instrument whose processes and mechanisms took time to adapt to, Clear understanding of the client’s Program/appropriate timing of the Program. One of the fundamental issues of a PforR operation is the ability to track expenditures under the Program. This ensures that the Program resources are used for the intended purposes and are not diverted for non-Program purposes. So, developing a tool for tracking expenditures is essential. Achieving some basic milestones before Program inception. Limiting ambition during Program design and careful assessment of the Program.Implementation agency’s capacity in the PforR requirements, procurement management, and monitoring the quality of the physical works. The PforR instrument allowed a focus on systemic change and institutional development with positive implications for sustainability beyond the ambit of the Program itself. Ensuring citizen engagement in such a Program, which involves mainly small-value interventions in widely dispersed and remote areas, has been found to be extremely challenging. The Program made good progress in preparing and adopting modern bridge technology, including the increased use of prestressed concrete technology and network arch bridges. However, one of the lessons learned from the Program is that it is necessary to prepare a long-term plan for a significant shift toward modern bridge technologies to take root. The main reason for the poor construction was the lack of resources in terms of the number of the DoR supervision staff and the limited experience of the DoR staff to supervise the construction of new bridges. The poor enforcement of OHS has led to two fatal accidents in the construction sites during the five years of Programimplementation.

Details

  • Document Date

    2018/01/11

  • Document Type

    Implementation Completion and Results Report

  • Report Number

    121710

  • Volume No

    1

  • Total Volume(s)

    1

  • Country

    Nepal,

  • Region

    South Asia,

  • Disclosure Date

    2018/01/19

  • Disclosure Status

    Disclosed

  • Doc Name

    Nepal - Bridges Improvement and Maintenance Program Project

  • Keywords

    Environmental and Social Management Framework;Economic Internal Rate of Return;Occupational health and safety;nominal gross domestic product;access to health facility;Environmental and Social Safeguard;Land Acquisition and Resettlement;social and environmental;quality assurance mechanism;detailed engineering design;significant adverse impact;bridge construction work;road and bridges;maintenance of road;macroeconomic and fiscal;lack of connectivity;quality health care;vehicle registration fee;transport sector investment;technical assistance program;role of development;reduction in poverty;adverse social impact;standard and guideline;law and regulation;shortage of funds;national planning commission;net present value;travel time saving;environmental risk mitigation;quality assurance process;quality control process;bridge construction site;contract monitoring system;social and gender;international labour organization;lack of resource;number of meters;Country Partnership Strategy;government procurement process;reducing maternal mortality;annual procurement;delivery of service;disbursement linked indicators;bridge maintenance;bridge work;civil works;management capacity;contract management;performance management;evaluation study;price adjustment;public entity;Capital Investments;labor influx;road sector;routine maintenance;bridge infrastructure;verification process;consulting service;Consulting services;environmental environmental;bridge improvement;rural transportation infrastructure;poor road;trail bridge;Armed Conflict;development partner;remote area;institutional responsibilities;capital program;Bridge Failure;social criterion;asset inventory;construction quality;government funding;environmental benefit;baseline data;bridge inspection;grievance redressal;fatal accident;forecast expenditures;social issue;operational requirement;fiduciary assessment;quantitative targets;bridge crossing;labor management;resource availability;systems development;rolling basis;existing asset;common problems;reasonable assurance;fiduciary arrangement;socioeconomic impact;primary basis;nepalese rupee;exchange rate;precast concrete;indigenous community;indigenous communities;future need;reconstruction work;main road;data verification;innovative design;construction technique;Child Mortality;carbon fiber;social accountability;subsequent years;nondestructive testing;credit proceeds;physical planning;prestressed concrete;investment program;Exchange Rates;gender parity;monitoring process;sector programs;environmental issue;institutional strengthening;geographic extent;conservation area;organizational behavior;donor financing;river training;environmental planning;environmental provision;limited resources;vehicular access;funding mechanism;fuel levy;commercial practice;limited revenues;urban roads;national highway;fiscal priorities;remote community;road transport;walking time;social integration;education service;adequate maintenance;household income;income equality;social indicator;political transition;emergency measure;project budgets;political uncertainty;road access;allocation process;budget cycle;separate budget;political expediency;budget expenditure;road connection;physical infrastructure;budget process;Education Services;debt level;fiscal discipline;paved road;political instability;social infrastructure;increased spending;fiduciary framework;high remittance;fiduciary risk;sound investment;budgetary resource;contract implementation;anecdotal evidence;business process;physical asset;investment approach;rehabilitation need;rural area;environmental system;adversely impact;financial resource;institutional mechanism;uninterrupted access;budget activity;procurement capacity;consultancy service;complementary activities;social outcome;educational institution;primary source;construction activities;limited capacity;budget allocation;construction supervision;total credit;local contractor;fair share;rainy season;physically challenged;disbursement arrangement

Downloads

COMPLETE REPORT

Official version of document (may contain signatures, etc)

Citation

Nepal - Bridges Improvement and Maintenance Program Project (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/190621516371769416/Nepal-Bridges-Improvement-and-Maintenance-Program-Project