KATHMANDU: Roads are a vital mode of transportation in Nepal and are among the most accessible means of mobility for the general public. Yet, many roads across the country are in disrepair, with some deteriorating even before construction is fully completed.
Why are Nepal’s roads—especially those designed, supervised, and monitored by professional engineers—failing so frequently? Who is responsible for these issues, and where does the system fall short?
Khabarhub spoke with Roshan Karki, Associate Professor at Pulchowk Engineering College, to gain insights into these pressing questions.
Are Nepal’s roads and infrastructure being built the way you studied or teach in universities?
Not exactly. What we teach in classrooms is the ideal scenario—what should happen in theory. But in practice, it doesn’t translate the same way. There’s a noticeable gap between what is taught and how projects are implemented on the ground. That’s why infrastructure often isn’t as durable as it should be.
You’ve studied Nepal’s transport system closely. What key problems are undermining infrastructure quality?
This is what we call a “multi-party relationship” in engineering. It applies to roads and all other infrastructure projects. Construction involves multiple stakeholders: the client (typically the government), the consultant (designer/supervisor), and the contractor (builder).
Ideally, each party has a clearly defined role—the client funds the project, the consultant designs and monitors, and the contractor builds. But in practice, coordination among these stakeholders is often poor.
In some cases, one party might handle multiple roles, which can compromise checks and balances. When coordination fails, the quality of the infrastructure suffers.
Importantly, it’s not just the contractors who are at fault. For instance, if the government delays payments or fails to allocate promised funds, that can disrupt timelines and compromise materials or workmanship. If the design stage itself is flawed, then blaming the contractor alone for construction problems is unfair. Failures often result from shortcomings across all phases—design, funding, and execution.
So, is negligence present across all levels of the construction process?
Negligence is certainly one factor, but another major issue is lack of awareness or expertise in proper construction methods. Nepal’s public procurement process relies heavily on bidding, and contracts are often awarded to the lowest bidder. While this seems cost-effective, it can severely impact quality.
If a contractor wins a bid well below the estimated cost, compromises are likely during execution. Engineers are aware of this, and many of us raise these concerns even at policy levels.
At our university, for instance, we regularly organize discussions to highlight the real-world challenges our graduates face. We look at international best practices, successful case studies, and analyze what went wrong in local projects.
However, there is a deeper systemic issue. Engineers have limited influence in policymaking. The political and bureaucratic landscape makes it difficult for technical voices to be heard.
Even when engineers are present in technical departments or ministries, their inputs may not be adequately considered during budget planning or project prioritization.
Do non-technical policymakers struggle to understand engineering realities?
Absolutely. There’s often a communication gap between engineers and policymakers or bureaucrats with non-technical backgrounds. While we aim to introduce innovation, sometimes new technologies don’t perform well in Nepal’s unique environment.
That doesn’t always mean the project was handled unprofessionally. In fact, in engineering, failed projects are also seen as learning opportunities.
From an academic perspective, we must distinguish between pilot projects and those using proven technologies. If a widely accepted method fails, we investigate and hold accountable whoever is responsible. But if a new technique is still being tested, failures can be part of the learning curve—even for the engineers involved.
You mentioned contract management. Is cost estimation also a problem?
Yes, and I teach Engineering Estimation and Costing myself. Cost estimation is both a technical and financial exercise. Engineers are responsible for calculating quantities and designing cost estimates, but final cost decisions also involve financial and administrative factors. Poorly estimated costs can lead to under-budgeted projects and quality compromises.
In short, we need better alignment between technical planning and financial decision-making. Until that happens, even the best engineering designs may fail to deliver durable infrastructure.
How are costs estimated during infrastructure planning, and what is the engineer’s role?
We make an average estimate based on what an investor or client might need and follow the prescribed procedures. However, engineers do not have the authority to set prices. For example, if we want to determine the cost of one cubic meter of PCC (Plain Cement Concrete), we must refer to the official district rate.
So how are these district rates determined?
This is a key issue. While the tendering process itself might not be flawed, district rates can sometimes be inaccurate. Contractors may miscalculate, or fluctuating market prices might result in bids being submitted below the estimated cost.
There’s a common misunderstanding in the market—that a lower bid automatically leads to poor quality. That assumption is not always accurate.
Some major highways in Nepal also show signs of poor quality. How does our practice compare internationally?
When we talk about roads, we divide them into two basic types: blacktop (paved) and sloped (unpaved or gravel) roads. These have entirely different engineering concepts. Within blacktop roads themselves, there are sub-classifications based on load-bearing capacity, traffic volume, and vehicle weight. Unfortunately, in Nepal, we often generalize all blacktops as being the same.
However, not all roads have failed. Some, like the East-West Highway, Araniko Highway (Koteshwor–Dolalghat), and Prithvi Highway, have lasted for 15–20 years. While floods and monsoon damage have affected some sections, on the whole, these roads have performed relatively well.
Problems have become more prominent in recently built roads, particularly after the adoption of federalism, when road construction ramped up but quality control and R&D were not prioritized.
While documentation might show that quality testing was done, we suspect that it wasn’t always carried out properly in the field—otherwise, roads wouldn’t deteriorate so quickly.
Is Nepal using appropriate design guidelines?
That’s another issue. We tend to adopt design guidelines from India, the US, or Europe, but their environments are different from ours. Just because a standard works in one country doesn’t mean it will work here.
Design and diagnosis are one side of the equation; construction and quality control are another. If we streamline both, many of the problems we face today could be resolved.
Does weather affect road durability and construction methods?
Absolutely. Blacktopping is a weather-sensitive process. Asphalt acts like chewing gum—it binds aggregates together. Its effectiveness depends on temperature and climate conditions.
In high temperatures, asphalt softens. Under heavy traffic, it can deform or get crushed. In cold temperatures, it becomes brittle and cracks under pressure.
This is called the temperature range. The quality of bitumen (tar) varies based on climate—bitumen used in warmer climates differs from that used in colder regions. If we choose the right type of bitumen based on the season and region, many of the issues we currently face could be avoided.
People often say blacktopping shouldn’t be done during the rainy season, and that’s generally true—heated tar and water don’t mix well. But alternatives exist. Emulsion and cutback bitumen are more water-resistant and can be used when conditions aren’t ideal.
There’s also growing discussion around cold mix asphalt, which doesn’t require heating and is more suitable for rainy or dusty conditions. So, selecting the right technology and materials at the planning stage is crucial.
Roads are the most accessible mode of transportation in Nepal. Has the university explored alternatives?
Yes. We teach students the broader concept of construction materials and infrastructure planning, which includes intermodal planning. We differentiate between accessibility (how easily you can reach a place) and mobility (how quickly you can get there). In countries like India, you can clearly see how different transport systems connect: roads link with metros, railways, airports, and waterways.
We refer to these as line infrastructures—roads, railways, and metros are all linear networks. But the difference is that roads offer door-to-door service, unlike metros or railways, which require access to stations. Understanding and planning around these differences is key to building an integrated, sustainable transportation network.
So where do people go? Roads are essential—they connect everything. They are the foundation upon which all other modes of transport rely. That’s why planning for roads, airways, railways, metros, and ropeways should be integrated into a single, cohesive transportation strategy.
The key question is: how efficiently can we move people from one place to another? In transport planning, we refer to this as trip generation and trip distribution.
The number of trips largely depends on passenger volume. Running trains in areas with low population density is not viable. To determine whether rail transport is sustainable in Nepal, we must first assess whether it can recover its operational and infrastructure costs. Without sufficient demand, large-scale transport systems become economically unfeasible.
Comment