documents.worldbank.orgdocuments.worldbank.org/.../rwanda-pp...revised-final-nov30-e… · web...

Document ofThe World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No: PAD1904

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

PROJECT PAPER

ON A

PROPOSED ADDITIONAL GRANT

IN THE AMOUNT OF US$68 MILLION

TO THE

FOR THE FEEDER ROADS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

November 30, 2017

Transport and ICT Global PracticeAfrica Region

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective October 31, 2017)Currency Unit = Rwanda Franc (RWF)

RWF 853.98 = US$1

FISCAL YEAR

July 1 – June 30

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic ACCA Association of Chartered Certified AccountantsAF Additional Financing AfDB African Development BankBP Bank ProceduresCBR California Bearing RatioCDO Community Development OfficerCEDAW Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against WomenCO2 Carbone DioxideCPA Certified Public AccountantDA Designated AccountDAF Director of Administration and FinanceDBM Design Built and MaintainDDP District Development PlansDG Director GeneralDIME Development Impact EvaluationDPMTs District Project Management TeamsDPs Development PartnersEDPRS Economic Development and Poverty Reduction StrategyEICV Integrated Household Living Conditions SurveyESIA Environmental and Social Impact AssessmentESMF Environmental and Social Management FrameworkEU European UnionEWS Early Warning SystemFAs Framework AgreementsFBS Fixed Budget SelectionFM Financial ManagementFR Feeder RoadsFRDP Feeder Roads Development ProjectFRU Feeder Road Unit FS Feasibility StudyFSSP Free-standing Single Purpose Trust FundFY Fiscal YearGBV Gender Based Violence

GDP Gross Domestic ProductGIS Geographic Information System GoR Government of RwandaGRC Grievance Redress CommitteeGRM Grievance Redressing MechanismGRS Grievance Redress ServiceHDM Highway Development and Management Model HIMO Haute Intensité de Main D’OeuvreHIV/STD Human Immunodeficiency Virus / Sexually Transmitted DiseaseIBRD International Bank for Reconstruction & DevelopmentIC Individual ConsultantICB International Competitive Bidding ICT Information and Communication TechnologyIDA International Development AssociationIFAD International Fund for Agriculture DevelopmentIFMIS Integrated Financial Management Information SystemIPSAS International Public Sector Accounting StandardsIRR Internal Rate of ReturnISR Implementation Status and Results ReportISSAI International Standards of Supreme Audit InstitutionsITC Internal Tender CommitteeITCILO International Training Center of the International Labor OrganizationITRF International Terrestrial Reference FrameKoN Kingdom of NetherlandsLBT Labor Based TechnologyLCA Local Community AssociationLVSR Low Volume Sealed RoadsLVTP Lake Victoria Transport ProjectLWH Land Husbandry, Water Harvesting and Hillside IrrigationM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMCA Multi-Criteria AnalysisMDTF Multi Donor Trust FundMINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources MINECOFIN Ministry of Finance and Economic PlanningMININFRA Ministry of InfrastructureMT Motorized TrafficMTEF Medium Term Expenditure FrameworkNCB National Competitive BiddingNDF Nordic Development FundNFRPS National Feeder Roads Policy and StrategyNMT Non- Motorized TrafficNPF National Procurement FrameworkNPV Net Present ValueNR National RoadsOAG Office of Auditor GeneralOP/BP Operation Policy / Bank Procedure

OPCS Operation Policy & Country ServicesOPRC Output and Performance-Based Road ContractPAD Project Appraisal Document PAP Project Affected PersonPCR Physical Cultural ResourcesPDO Project Development ObjectivePEFA Public Expenditures Financial AccountabilityPFM Project Financial ManagementPforR Program for ResultsPIM Project Implementing ManualPS Procurement SpecialistPSTA Strategic Plan for Agriculture TransformationQCBS Quality-Based Selection and Cost RAI Rural Access IndexRAP Resettlement Action PlanRED Roads Economic DecisionRF Results FrameworkRFB Request for BidsRMF Road Maintenance FundRoW Right of WayRPF Resettlement Policy FrameworkRSSP Rural Sector Support ProjectRTDA Rwanda Transport Development AgencyRVP Regional Vice PresidentRWAMREC Rwanda’s Men Resource CenterRWF Rwanda FrancSDR Special Drawing RightsSORT Systematic Operations Risk Rating ToolSPIU Single Project Implementation Unit SSP Sector Strategy PlanTA Technical AssistanceTF Trust FundToR Terms of ReferenceTVET Technical and Vocational Education Training UC UnclassifiedUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentUSD United States Dollars VUP Vision 2020 Umurenge ProgramWBG World Bank Group

Regional Vice President: Makhtar DiopCountry Director: Diarietou GayeCountry Manager: Yasser El-Gammal

Senior Global Practice Director:Practice Manager/Manager:

Jose Luis IrigoyenAurelio Menendez

Task Team Leader(s): Muhammad Zulfiqar Ahmed, Emmanuel Taban

REPUBLIC OF RWANDA

ADDITIONAL FINANCING FOR THE FEEDER ROADS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT UNDER THE MULTI-DONOR TRUST FUND

ContentsI. Introduction................................................................................................................................1II. Background and Rationale for Additional Financing................................................................1III. Proposed Changes......................................................................................................................8IV. World Bank Grievance Redress...............................................................................................24Annex 1: Revised Project Results Framework..............................................................................25Annex 2: Revised Project Cost Estimates.....................................................................................31Annex 3: Economic/Financial Analysis and Technical Feasibility...............................................35Annex 4: Fiduciary........................................................................................................................75Annex 5: Detailed Description of Modified and New Project Activities......................................86Annex 6: Rural Roads Impact Evaluation...................................................................................102

ADDITIONAL FINANCING DATA SHEETRwanda

Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance (P158092)AFRICA

Transport and ICT Global Practice.

Basic Information – ParentParent Project ID: P126498 Original EA Category: A - Full Assessment

Current Closing Date: 30-Jun-2021

Basic Information – Additional Financing (AF)

Project ID: P158092 Additional Financing Type (from AUS): Restructuring, Scale Up

Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Proposed EA Category: A – Full Assessment

Country Director: Diarietou Gaye Expected Effectiveness Date: 28-Feb-2018

Senior Global Practice Director: Jose Luis Irigoyen Expected Closing Date: 31-Dec-2022

Practice Manager/Manager: Aurelio Menendez Report No: PAD1904

Team Leader(s): Muhammad Zulfiqar Ahmed, Emmanuel Taban

PHAppAuthTbl Approval AuthorityApproval Authority

RVP Decision

Please explain

Based on OPCS guidance, the approval authority of the Additional Finance (AF) Trust Fund (TF) would be with the Regional Vice President (RVP) following the AF instructions regarding TF management approval.

BorrowerOrganization Name Contact Title Telephone Email

Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning Nkusi Ronald

Division Manager, External Finance Division

+250252596130 [email protected]

i

Project Financing Data - Parent (Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project-P126498) (in US$ Million)

Key Dates

Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness

DateOriginal Closing Date

Revised Closing Date

P126498 IDA-54050 Effective 21-Mar-2014 03-Apr-2014 19-Jun-2014 30-Jun-2021 30-Jun-2021

Disbursements

Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed % Disbursed

P126498 IDA-54050 Effective XDR 29.40 29.40 0.00 10.08 19.32 34.28

Project Financing Data - Additional Financing Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance (P158092) (in US$ Million)

[ ] Loan [X] Grant [ ] IDA Grant[ ] Credit [ ] Guarantee [ ] Other

Total Project Cost: 84.00 Total Bank Financing: 68.00

Financing Gap: 0.00

Financing Source – Additional Financing (AF) Amount

Borrower 16.00

Free-standing Single Purpose Trust Fund 68.00

Total 84.00

Policy Waivers

Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant respects? No

Explanation

Does the project require any policy waiver(s)? No

Explanation

Team CompositionBank Staff

Name Role Title Specialization Unit

Muhammad Zulfiqar Ahmed

Team Leader (ADM Responsible)

Senior Transport Engineer

Transport GTI01

Emmanuel Taban Team Leader Highway Engineer Transport GTI01

ii

Mulugeta Dinka Procurement Specialist (ADM Responsible)

Senior Procurement Specialist

Procurement GGO01

Enagnon Ernest Eric Adda

Financial Management Specialist

Sr Financial Management Specialist

Financial Management

GGO31

Atsushi Iimi Team Member Senior Economist Transport Economics

GTI01

Benqing Jennifer Gui Team Member Senior ICT Policy Specialist

ICT GTI11

Carlos Bellas Lamas Team Member Transport Analyst Transport GTI01

Desta Wolde Woldearegay

Team Member Program Assistant Administrative and Client Support

GTI01

Emmanuel Muligirwa Environmental Safeguards Specialist

Environmental Specialist

Environment GEN01

George Bob Nkulanga Social Safeguards Specialist

Social Development Specialist

Social Development GSU07

Josefo Tuyor Environmental Safeguards Specialist

Senior Environmental Specialist

Environment OPSES

Karla Dominguez Gonzalez

Team Member Gender Specialist Gender GTI01

Lilian Wambui Kahindo

Social Safeguards Specialist

Social Development Specialist

Social Development GSU07

Maiada Mahmoud Abdel Fattah Kassem

Team Member Finance Officer Loan Operations WFALA

Mwiseneza Huguette Team Member Team Assistant Administrative and Client Support

AFMRW

Sofia De Abreu Ferreira

Counsel Senior Legal Counsel

Legal LEGEN

Tara Shirvani Team Member Transport Specialist Climate Change GTI08

Tatiana S. Daza Team Member Senior Program Assistant

Administrative and Client Support

GTI07

Zeina A. Samara Window Manager Cofinancing Officer Trust Funds GTI07

Extended Team

Name Title Location

Locations

iii

Country First Administrative Division

Location Planned Actual Comments

Rwanda Eastern Province Rwamagana X

Rwanda Western Province Nyamasheke X

Rwanda Eastern Province Gatsibo X

Rwanda Western Province Nyabihu X

Rwanda Southern Province Gisagara X

Rwanda Western Province Karongi X

Rwanda Western Province Rutsiro X

Rwanda Eastern Province Nyagatare X

Rwanda Northern Province Gakenke District X

Rwanda Southern Province Nyaruguru District X

Institutional DataParent (Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project-P126498)

Practice Area (Lead)

Transport & ICT

Contributing Practice Areas

Additional Financing Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance (P158092)

Practice Area (Lead)

Transport & ICT

Contributing Practice Areas

Consultants (Will be disclosed in the Monthly Operational Summary)Consultants Required? Consultants will be required

iv

I. Introduction

1. This project paper seeks the approval of the Africa Region Vice President to provide an Additional Financing (AF) in the amount of a US$68 million grant to the Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project (FRDP) P126498 (credit number: 54050RW) sourced from the Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) for Rwanda Feeder Roads Development (TF072348 and TF072847).

2. The proposed AF would help finance the costs associated with the scale-up of the parent FRDP which aims at enhancing road connectivity in selected districts of Rwanda. The AF would enable broadening the program from the existing four (4) districts to ten (10) districts of Rwanda. The grant would help both the rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of an additional 450 km of feeder roads in six (6) new districts.

3. The key objective of the MDTF is to stimulate the large, multi-donor, coordinated effort necessary to undertake responsible feeder road development in Rwanda. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Kingdom of Netherlands (KoN) joined the MDTF in April 2015 and May 2017 respectively. The World Bank will administer the funds on behalf of the contributing donors.

4. The scale-up of the program follows the Government of Rwanda’s (GoR) strong willingness to improve connectivity in rural areas and thus enable farmers to access input and output markets. Despite the importance of investments in road connectivity in the past decade, Rwanda still lacks a functional rural road network and this is slowing down rural development activities. Additional road rehabilitation will be implemented by new participating districts, some with very little experience and capacity in implementing similar development projects. Delays were experienced in launching the parent project due to delays in preparation of detailed design, bidding documents, updating and disclosure of social and environmental safeguards documents and initial mobilization of contractors. Based on the lessons learned from the parent project, the AF and restructuring has attempted to mitigate the high risk associated with the implementation through the use of Design, Build and Maintain (DBM) type contracting approach.

II. Background and Rationale for Additional Financing

Country Context

5. Rwanda comprises four provinces and the City of Kigali, all divided into thirty districts. According to provisional results from the fourth Population Census, 2012, the total population is 10.5 million, with a population density of 416 people per square kilometer, the highest in Africa. Rwanda has been experiencing impressive economic growth, with an average growth rate of 7.7 percent in the last decade, primarily driven by the service, agriculture and mining sectors. Despite this growth, Rwanda is rated among the poorest countries in the world. Rural areas are the poorest parts of the country, with 39 percent1 of the rural population living below the national poverty line. With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of US$697 (2015), the national poverty head count declined but was still high at 39.1 percent in 2013/14,

1 Source : Enquete Integrale des Conditions de vie des menages (Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey) (EICV4), 2015.

1

compared to 44.9 percent in 2010/11. For rural areas, it was higher at 48.7 percent and lower in urban areas at 22.1 percent in 2010/11. With 72 percent of the population residing in rural areas and relying on subsistence farming, agriculture is employing about three-quarters of the total employment and generating about 33 percent of GDP. Agriculture and food exports also amount to about US$290 million, contributing to about 40 percent of the total merchandise exports or 4 percent of GDP. On the other hand, Rwanda imports about US$480 million worth of food items every year, which account for about 7 percent of GDP.

6. The GoR has shown clear commitment to address development challenges with policies and strategies for economic and social transformation that would promote growth with shared prosperity. In particular, the GoR has assigned fundamental importance to the development of the economic infrastructure of the country, and in particular to road transportation. The Vision 2020 sets out the Government’s goal to promote Rwanda to middle income status. In order to achieve the long-term goals, the GoR has formulated a medium-term strategy, Second Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS II2), covering the period 2013 to 2018. EDPRS II has four strategic themes: (i) economic transformation; (ii) rural development; (iii) productivity and youth employment; and (iv) accountable governance. Development of the road infrastructure constitutes one of the economic development strategies for the reduction of poverty and for stimulating social-economic growth: facilitating access to domestic/international markets and ensuring favorable conditions for provision and distribution of imported products within the country. Improved road infrastructure increases internal production and, in general, economic welfare.

7. In recent years, the GoR has implemented several ambitious programs (e.g. crop intensification program, one cow per poor family, accessing fertilizers, etc.) to increase productivity in the agriculture sector. But poor physical infrastructure – exacerbated by hilly/mountainous topography – remains a major constraint to increasing access, diversifying production, and enhancing competitiveness. As a result of isolation, insufficient all-season connectivity and high transport costs, farmers have difficulties sourcing and transporting key inputs (like seeds or fertilizers) and marketing their products. Significant amounts of perishable products are lost or damaged in transit. The lower farm gate prices of agricultural products perpetuate basic subsistence agriculture since poor farmers cannot save enough to modernize.

Sectoral and Institutional Context

8. At national level, Rwanda has a well-established road network comprising about 30,000 km of classified and unclassified (UC) roads. This translates into a relatively high classified road density of 27 km per 100 km2 (or 58.4 km per 100 square km including District Roads Class II), when compared with neighboring countries. Under the conventional 2 km threshold, it is estimated that the current road network may cover about 80.3 percent of the country’s total population, if all roads were rehabilitated and well maintained. Although the GoR has been investing important resources in road projects, the network is still unsatisfactory. The concern is not so much the density of the network, rather the quality of the roads. In 2015/16, it is estimated that about 64 percent of District Roads Class II are in poor condition.

2 Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS II) was approved on May 8, 2013, and covers the period July 2013–June 2018.

2

9. The UC roads network, which is estimated at about 15,000 km, is also predominantly earth roads of low engineering standard; and more than 70 percent are in dismal state. Moreover, about 55 percent of District Roads Class I are considered to be in poor condition. The GoR has been investing significant resources in the road sector, however, many farmers are still not well connected to input or output markets. The poor condition of the non-primary road network is a major constraint to the mobility of the rural population. Based on a new method to measure rural access, it is estimated that about 3.9 million people are still unconnected in rural areas (the proportion of rural population who live within 2 km of an all-season road in good condition). The Rural Access Index (RAI) in 2016 was estimated at 55.3 percent—very close to the original estimate in 2006. The measured RAI by district varies significantly from 25.7 percent in Rutsiro to 79.2 percent in Nyarugenge; and it is generally high around the major cities, such as Kigali, Rubavu and Huye.

10. The GoR has expressed a strong desire to maximize connectivity in a greater area of agricultural production with higher standard feeder roads, but it has limited resources of its own. Furthermore, there is a significant challenge of constructing and maintaining roads in difficult terrain and geo-hazardous conditions. The proposed AF will create expanded opportunities to implement a broader program with harmonized standards and wider institutional capacity development at national as well as district levels. The expanded program will therefore strengthen government vision and strategy under the EDPRS II directly supporting three out of four strategic themes; (a) economic transformation; (b) rural development; and (c) productivity and youth employment.

11. In realization of the above, a National Feeder Roads Policy and Strategy (NFRPS) was developed under the parent project in the context of Vision 2020 and EDPRS II which aims among other things to promote productive high value and market oriented agriculture (Pillar 5, vision 2020) and to reduce the agricultural population from 90 percent in 2000 to 50 percent in 2020 which requires the creation of 200,000 new off-farm jobs each year (Vision 2020 revised in 2012). The mission of the NFRPS is to “maximize the direct feeder road stimulus as incentives for farmers to change their behaviour and rapidly increase the productivity of land, per farmer and per inputs; and thus, raise the quantity of marketed crops per kilometre of road”. The corresponding mid-term global objective of the Feeder Roads Policy is to bring a motorable road to within 2 km of all farms in Rwanda by 2027.

12. The NFRPS, which was approved on April 5, 2017, provides the following key policy statements and action plan for the implementation of the feeder roads program in the next 10 years: (a) the planned feeder roads network in the context of bringing a motorable road to within 2 km of farms in Rwanda requires a global road network of about 30,000 km; (b) all the improved roads must be maintained all the time before investing in any upgrading/rehabilitation and new constructions; (c) allow investment in staged feeder roads development (width, grades, depth) in upgrading of UC roads, to spread to more farmers the incentive of vehicle services in respect of the feeder roads standards and Road Act; (d) the local resources especially manpower must be used by promoting Labour Based Technology (HIMO3), this requires the establishment of a specialized training framework; (e) the presence of many stakeholders in the sector requires a streamlining of the institutional organization as per the proposed feeder road institutional set

3 HIMO (Haute Intensite de Main d`Oeuvre): A French word which means ‘Labor Based Technology’.

3

up; and (f) the Road Maintenance Fund (RMF) mandate needs to be extended to give it financial ability to finance the maintenance of all roads.

13. The Ministry of Infrastructure (MININFRA) is responsible for overall transport policy and strategic planning, the creation of a transport enabling environment, and setting of transport rules, regulations, standards and strategic planning. The Rwanda Transport Development Agency (RTDA) assists MININFRA with the management and administration of the transport sector, and the planning, prioritizing, approval, delivery, management and maintenance of infrastructure, including support to districts as the managing and implementing agencies. The RMF under MININFRA, which is funded from the public budget, is responsible for roads maintenance including rehabilitation. District Roads Class I and Class II and UC roads are under the supervision and management of the districts.

14. The Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MINECOFIN), by a letter to the World Bank dated October 10, 2017, has requested restructuring of the parent Feeder Road Development Project in line with changes to the institutional framework for road management. Accordingly, the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI), which was responsible for implementation and monitoring of the feeder roads program, will continue to lead policy formulation. The responsibility of implementation, management and monitoring of all feeder roads programs will shift to RTDA. A Feeder Roads Unit (FRU) that was established in MINAGRI has been coordinating Development Partners’ (DP) programs, including the World Bank’s, in feeder roads development and has been managing the feeder roads program steering committee. The FRU activities will shift to RTDA. MININFRA and MINAGRI will co-chair the feeder roads program steering committee, meanwhile RTDA will manage the feeder roads program implementation. The districts will remain responsible for feeder roads construction, rehabilitation and maintenance, as they have established Infrastructure Units responsible for the management of rural infrastructure, mainly roads, bridges and public buildings.

Project Description

15. The proposed AF is highly relevant and directly linked to the World Bank Group’s (WBG) twin goals of reducing extreme poverty and enhancing shared prosperity. The activities proposed under the AF are in line with the focus area of improving access and quality to infrastructure services of the Country Assistance Strategy (FY09-FY13). In addition, the AF is aligned with objectives under the new Country Partnership Strategy (FY14–FY18) (Report No. 87025-RW) discussed by the Executive Directors on May 1, 2014.

16. The parent FRDP was approved on March 21, 2014 for a total cost of US$49 million, including an IDA credit of US$45 million equivalent and US$4 million in counterpart funds. It became effective on June 19, 2014 with an original closing date of June 30, 2021 with an implementation period of seven years. The project was designed to carry out preparatory activities, rehabilitation works following unpaved gravel standards, followed by three years for the multi-year maintenance, and the remaining period for defects liability. With the proposed AF and six (6) additional districts, the project closing date is expected to be extended by another 18 months to allow for the additional activities making the new closing date December 31, 2022. The estimated cost of scale-up under the proposed AF is US$84 million, of which US$68 million

4

is a grant from the MDTF and US$16 million is government counterpart financing to cover compensation of Project Affected Persons (PAPs), multi-year maintenance works contracts in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts, and 18 percent Value Added Tax for all contracts. The overall revised project-financing will therefore be US$133 million.

Project Performance

17. The achievement of the Project Development Objective (PDO) and Implementation Progress of the project are currently rated as Satisfactory. As of November 20, 2017, US$12.89 million (28.23 percent of the total IDA Credit) has been disbursed. The project has already committed US$32.54 million (72.3 percent of the Credit signed amount) in signed contracts that are under implementation. The last implementation support mission of the project as managed by the MINAGRI Single Project Implementation Unit (SPIU) assessed the overall Financial Management performance, which was rated Satisfactory. The External Audit for the year ended June 30, 2016 has been completed in December 2016 and the audit report was unqualified. No audit report is overdue or delayed. The Project has complied with the legal covenants in the Financing Agreement inter alia MINAGRI-RTDA Project Implementation Agreement, MINAGRI-District Project Implementation Agreements and Counterpart Account. The overall environmental and social safeguard compliance has been rated Satisfactory. The appropriate safeguards policy instruments (discussed under the Social Analysis section) cleared by the World Bank are under implementation to ensure compliance of project activities. Instrument implementation is supervised by the MINAGRI SPIU safeguards team with assistance from the safeguards staff at the districts. To ensure compliance with the project’s safeguards requirements, the contractors are implementing Contractor’s Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs). The ESMPs are site specific and in line with the recommended actions of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA).

18. The overall procurement rating of the project in the last Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR) of July 2017 is Moderately Satisfactory. After the initial start-up delays (caused by delays in procurement and completion of detailed road designs, bid documents, and updated safeguards documents), the project is now back on track to achieve the Development Objectives and implementation is picking up momentum. Rehabilitation works contracts are in progress in Rwamagana, Gisagara, Karongi and Nyamasheke districts and the respective supervision consultancy services are in place. The Feeder Roads Policy and Strategy has been finalized by GoR and approved by the Cabinet on April 5, 2017. The procurement processes to hire consultancy firms to prepare a national feeder roads master plan and for the formation and training of Local Community Associations (LCAs) are ongoing.

19. Institutional development activities including trainings in procurement and contract administration, environmental and social safeguards, and financial management, inter alia, have been conducted for both MINAGRI SPIU and districts staff. The SPIU has created a Feeder Roads Technical Department (FRTD) under the parent FRDP which is being headed by a local Senior Engineer. The Technical Advisor to strengthen the FRTD has been onboard since March 2017. The project is currently supported by a Contract Management and Administration Specialist, an SPIU Feeder Roads Engineer, a Procurement Specialist, Financial Management Specialist/Accountant, four (4) district feeder roads engineers/project managers, two (2) district Safeguards Officers for Rwamagana and Gisagara and an M&E Specialist.

5

Rationale and Justification for Restructuring and Additional Financing

20. The GoR in a letter dated October 24, 2017 formally made a request to the World Bank to provide Additional Financing to the parent FRDP from the MDTF for Rwanda Feeder Roads Development, and extend the project closing date by 18 months from June 30, 2021 to December 31, 2022. The main rationale for the AF is to scale up the achievement of the original PDO through a broader application of the program, which is timely given the pace of the parent project. The original PDO of the FRDP will remain unchanged under the AF, which is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected districts. The AF would be used to expand the program to six (6) other districts, identified by the GoR as follows: (a) Gatsibo and (b) Nyagatare in the Eastern Province; (c) Nyabihu and (d) Rutsiro in the Western Province; (e) Nyaruguru in the Southern Province and (f) Gakenke in the Northern Province. The Western, Southern and the Northern Provinces have similar mountainous terrains while the Eastern Province is characterized by low lying flat areas. Annex 3 outlines in detail the economic, social and financial reasoning for the selection of districts and feeder roads within those provinces. Feasibility studies have been conducted for 1,200 km of an indicative list of feeder roads in the six (6) AF districts. Two districts, Nyaruguru and Nyagatare, were selected for full ESIA and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) prior to appraisal, which were prepared, cleared by the World Bank and disclosed both in-country and in the World Bank Infoshop along with the updated Environment and Social Management Plan (ESMF) and Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) as provided in Table 2 of the Environmental Analysis section.

21. As part of the restructuring and AF, the implementing agency will change from the MINAGRI to RTDA. Accordingly, RTDA will lead implementation, management and monitoring of all feeder roads programs at the national level and will be the focal institution for feeder road program coordination, as stipulated in the National Feeder Roads Policy and Strategy. The existing Feeder Roads Technical Department and the corporate staff in the safeguards and fiduciary departments within MINAGRI SPIU, will transition to RTDA. Implementation oversight and strategic guidance will be provided by the steering committee for feeder roads, consisting of MINAGRI and MININFRA as co-chairs, and other institutions as defined in Annex 5. The core task of feeder road rehabilitation, upgrading and spot improvement, as well as maintenance, will be implemented by the ten (10) participating districts through District Project Management Teams (DPMTs). As in the parent project, RTDA will sign implementation agreements with the six (6) new participating districts under the AF. The overall project implementation and coordination arrangements are mapped out in the chart provided in Annex 5.

Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design

22. Use of Design, Build and Maintain (DBM) using Lump Sum Type Contracting Approach. The rehabilitation works in the parent project started two years after effectiveness despite the availability of feasibility studies. The process to hire the detailed design consultancy firm including the period to conduct the detailed design study and procurement of contractors and supervision firms for the works took about two years. Based on the lessons learned from the parent project, the AF has opted for an approach of DBM where the contractor will be vested with the responsibility for road design, construction and maintenance prior to handing it over to the Recipient. The DBM approach will save the time needed for the recruitment of the design

6

consultancy and the time for the detailed design prior to procurement of civil works. In addition to time savings, there will lesser claims and disputes as the risks in the lump sum contract are shifted to the contractors. It is also anticipated that the quality of works will be improved since the contractor will be responsible for the multi-year maintenance. The contractors design will be reviewed and approved by the employer using the monitoring and supervision consultant. The DBM approach will be applied in the four (4) mountainous and hilly districts of Gakenke, Nyabihu, Nyaruguru and Rutsiro. Meanwhile, in Gatsibo and Nyagatare, the contractors will be responsible for the design and construction, with maintenance to be undertaken by LCAs following the parent project approach in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts.

23. Piloting Trial Sections of Surfaced Sealing of Gravel Road. It has been recognized that many sections of road constructed with a gravel wearing course, particularly on steep inclines, do not provide a durable solution and are frequently in poor condition again within a two (2) or three (3) year horizon. The project will consider the construction of trial sections of a variety of durable paved surfaces in order to gain important experience beyond the basic gravel wearing course. Experience in the region and beyond has shown that when whole life-cycle costs are considered, it can be economically justified to pave roads at much lower volumes of traffic than has typically been accepted previously. This has sparked a variety of techniques aimed at developing design standards and surfacing approaches specifically for Low Volume Sealed Roads (LVSR). Positive experience has been observed in Nicaragua on the use of heavy concrete brick paving known as adoquines. The application of this technology will be one of the options to be tried. Further proposed options for the trial sections include concrete strip roads, cobblestone surfacing, cold mix asphalt and the cape seal which had successful experiences in Malawi, Kenya and Mozambique. The application of these trial sections is in line with the NFRPS, specifically under Pillar 1, where the policy recommends piloting innovative technologies and approaches applicable to feeder roads rehabilitation and maintenance.

24. Road Width on Low Traffic Volume Roads in Mountainous Terrain. It was observed that significant slope cutting in mountainous terrain may occur on roads with very low volume of traffic leading to potentially negative impacts on mountain slopes and high cost of construction. To mitigate these potential adverse impacts, the parent project through the NFRPS has recommended the construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of UC roads Primary 4 (P4) and Primary 5 (P5) to be designed to a lesser width but to at least a width of 4.5 meters for traffic less than 100 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT). Therefore, the proposed AF will consider the implementation of these policy provisions in the additional districts.

25. Social and Environment Safeguards. The compensation approach taken in the parent project considered all the road lengths simultaneously for payments, which contributed to the delays in the completion of the compensation process, thereby delaying the start of civil works. The compensation in the proposed AF will be based on a road by road approach which will allow civil works to commence with minimum delays. On the issue of influx of labor, the AF will continue to adopt the parent project approach whereby maximum local labor was used thus mitigating environmental and social issues associated with the influx of labor. RAPs and Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) implementation will rely on the concerted and coordinated efforts of the safeguard specialists from the key implementation entities i.e. districts, RTDA, contractor, and supervising consultant. Refresher trainings will be provided by the project to reinforce and support this mandate. As learnt from the parent project, timely hiring

7

of safeguards specialists by the contractors to prepare the ESMPs prior to commencement of civil works, will ensure better implementation and monitoring of mitigation actions.

III. Proposed Changes

Summary of Proposed Changes

The AF funds will, among other activities, help to increase the rehabilitated feeder roads to a total of approximately 450 km in six (6) new districts plus 270 km under implementation in the ongoing four (4) districts. The Implementing Agency of the FRDP will change from MINAGRI to RTDA. The Results Framework (RF) has been updated and revised as part of this restructuring to reflect the proposed changes. The project description has also been revised to reflect the proposed changes. It is also proposed to extend the closing date of the original IDA Credit from June 30, 2021 to December 31, 2022.

Change in Implementing AgencyYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change in Project's Development Objectives Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Change in Results FrameworkYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Change of EA category Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Other Changes to Safeguards Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Change in Legal CovenantsYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change in Loan Closing Date(s)Yes [ X ] No

[ ]

Cancellations Proposed Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Change in Disbursement Arrangements Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Change in Disbursement EstimatesYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change to Components and CostYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change in Institutional ArrangementsYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change in Financial Management Yes [ X ] No

8

[ ]

Change in ProcurementYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Change in Implementation ScheduleYes [ X ] No

[ ]

Other Change(s) Yes [ ] No [ X ]

Development Objective/ResultsProject’s Development ObjectivesOriginal PDOThe objective of the project is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected Districts.

Change in Results Framework PHHCRF

Explanation:The RF has been updated and targets and indicators have been revised as part of this restructuring to reflect the proposed changes. New indicators have been introduced under (a) gender; (b) climate change; (c) road safety; and (d) citizen engagement. Specifically, the PDO indicator “Reduction in travel time” has been revised to “Reduction in travel time per kilometer”. Based on guidance of the Decision Meeting, the intermediate indicator “Number of contracts completed within available budget and time at district level” is being dropped. The intermediate results indicator “Manual for road maintenance fund allocation, maintenance planning and monitoring prepared” has been dropped as the activity to support the RMF is being financed by the African Development Bank (AfDB). The revised RF is provided in Annex 1.

Compliance

Covenants - Additional Financing (Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance - P158092)

Source of Funds Finance Agreement Reference Date Due Recurrent Frequency Action

FSSP GA Schedule 2, Section I.C.3 Yearly New

Description of Covenant

The Recipient shall cause RTDA to, not later than May 31 of each year, prepare and furnish to the World Bank, an annual program of activities proposed for implementation under the Project during the following Fiscal Year, together with a proposed budget for the purpose.

FSSP GA Schedule 2 Section I.C.5 10-Sep-2018 New


9

The Recipient shall cause RTDA to, not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date of the Grant Agreement, enter into implementation agreements with each Selected District detailing mutual responsibilities for the implementation of the Project and detailing other terms and conditions as may be approved by the World Bank (“District Implementation Agreement”).

FSSP GA Schedule 2 Section V.1 Yearly New


Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution. The Recipient shall cause RTDA to prepare and furnish to the World Bank, on or before May 31 in each year, or such other date as may be agreed with the Association, a proposed cash flow based maintenance plan for such year, detailing the maintenance works under Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project proposed to be carried out by the Recipient.

FSSP GA Schedule 2 Section V.2 Semi-Annually New


Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: For purposes of the Project, the Recipient shall maintain at all times during Project implementation, in Rwandan Francs, in its national bank, a separate account under terms and conditions acceptable to the World Bank (“Counterpart Fund Account”), to meet the cost of carrying out Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project and any resettlement activities.



Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: The Recipient shall deposit into the Counterpart Fund Account, not later than 90 days after the Effective Date of the Grant Agreement, an initial advance for purposes of carrying out Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project and any resettlement activities, as detailed in the Cash Flow Maintenance Plan, and shall thereafter replenish the Counterpart Fund Account.



Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: The Recipient shall ensure that funds deposited into the Counterpart Fund Account shall be used exclusively to finance expenditures under the Project and any resettlement activities under Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project.

FSSP GA Schedule 2 Section V.5 Continuous New


Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: For purposes of implementing Part A (3) and Part A (6)

10

of the Project, the Recipient shall enter into multi-year maintenance contracts, in form and substance satisfactory to the World Bank, with contractors whose qualifications, experience, and terms of reference shall be satisfactory to the World Bank.

Covenants - Parent (Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - P126498)

Ln/Cr/TFFinance Agreement Reference Date Due Status Recurrent Frequency Action

IDA-54050Financing Agreement (FA) Schedule 2 Section I

24-Jan-2015

Complied with

No Change


Project Implementation Agreement: The Recipient shall: (a) cause RTDA to provide technical support to MINAGRI; and (b) cause MINAGRI not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date, to enter into a Project Implementation Agreement with RTDA, in form and substance satisfactory to the Association, setting forth RTDA’s role and responsibilities with respect to the carrying out of Part B of the Project.

IDA-54050 FA Schedule 2 Section I. B 3

Complied with Yearly Revised


Implementation: The Recipient shall, not later than May 31 of each year prepare and furnish to the Association, an annual program of activities proposed for implementation under the Project during the following Fiscal Year, together with a proposed budget for the purpose.

IDA-54050

Amended and Restated FA Schedule 2 Section I.C.3

Complied with Yearly Proposed


Implementation Arrangements: The Recipient shall cause RTDA to, not later than May 31 of each year, prepare and furnish to the Association, an annual program of activities proposed for implementation under the Project during the following Fiscal Year, together with a proposed budget for the purpose.

IDA-54050 FA Schedule 2 Section V i

Complied with Yearly Revised


Undertakings- Recipient’s Contribution: The Recipient shall prepare and furnish to the Association, on or before May 31 in each year, or such other date as may be agreed with the Association, a proposed cash flow based maintenance plan for such year, detailing the maintenance works under Part A (3) of the Project proposed to be carried out by the Recipient during each quarter of the year.

11

IDA-54050Amended and Restated FA Schedule 2 Section V.1

Complied with Yearly Proposed


Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution. The Recipient shall cause RTDA to prepare and furnish to the Association, on or before May 31 in each year, or such other date as may be agreed with the Association, a proposed cash flow based maintenance plan for such year, detailing the maintenance works under Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project proposed to be carried out by the Recipient.

IDA-54050 FA Schedule 2 Section V ii

Complied with Quarterly Revised


Undertakings- Recipient’s Contribution: For purposes of financing Part A (3) of the Project, the Recipient shall maintain at all times during Project implementation, in Rwandan Francs, in its central bank, a separate account under terms and conditions acceptable to the Association, (“Counterpart Fund Account”).


Complied with

Semi- Annually Proposed


Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: For purposes of the Project, the Recipient shall maintain at all times during Project implementation, in Rwandan Francs, in its national bank, a separate account under terms and conditions acceptable to the Association (“Counterpart Fund Account”), to meet the cost of carrying out Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project and any resettlement activities.

IDA-54050 FA Schedule 2 Section V iii

After delay complied with

Quarterly Revised


Undertakings- Recipient’s Contribution: The Recipient shall deposit into the Counterpart Fund Account, not later than 30 days after the Effective Date of the Financing Agreement, an initial advance for purposes of carrying out Part A (3) of the Project and any resettlement activities, as detailed in the Cash Flow Maintenance Plan, and shall thereafter replenish the Counterpart Fund.

IDA-54050 Amended and Restated FA Schedule 2 Section V.3

After delay complied with



12

Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: The Recipient shall deposit into the Counterpart Fund Account, not later than 90 days after the Effective Date of the Financing Agreement, an initial advance for purposes of carrying out Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project and any resettlement activities, as detailed in the Cash Flow Maintenance Plan, and shall thereafter replenish the Counterpart Fund Account.

IDA-54050 FA Schedule 2 Section V iv

Complied with Quarterly Revised


Undertakings- Recipient’s Contribution: The Recipient shall ensure that funds deposited into the Counterpart Fund Account shall be used exclusively to finance expenditures under Part A (3) of the Project and any resettlement activities under the Project.

IDA-54050 Amended and Restated FA Schedule 2 Section V.4

Complied with



Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: The Recipient shall ensure that funds deposited into the Counterpart Fund Account shall be used exclusively to finance expenditures under the Project and any resettlement activities under Parts A (3) and A (6) of the Project.

IDA-54050 FA Schedule 2 Section V v

Not yet due Continuous Revised


Undertakings- Recipient’s Contribution: For purposes of implementing Part A (3) of the Project, the Recipient shall enter into multi-year maintenance contracts, in form and substance satisfactory to the Association, with contractors whose qualifications, experience, and terms of reference (ToR) shall be satisfactory to the Association.


Not yet due Continuous Proposed


Undertakings- Recipient's Contribution: For purposes of implementing Parts A (3) and A (6) of the project, the Recipient shall cause RTDA to enter into multi-year maintenance contracts, in form and substance satisfactory to the Association, with contractors whose qualifications, experience, and ToR shall be satisfactory to the Association.

Conditions

Source of Fund Name TypeFSSP Staff Transition Agreement EffectivenessDescription of Condition

13

GA Article V, Effectiveness; Termination: 5.01: The Staff Transition Agreement has been implemented, in a form and manner satisfactory to the Association.

Source of Fund Name TypeFSSP Subsidiary Agreement EffectivenessDescription of Condition

GA Article V, Effectiveness; Termination: 5.01: The Subsidiary Agreement has been executed on behalf of the Recipient and the Project Implementing Entity.

RiskRisk Category Rating (H, S, M, L)1. Political and Governance Moderate

2. Macroeconomic Moderate

3. Sector Strategies and Policies Moderate

4. Technical Design of Project or Program Substantial

5. Institutional Capacity for Implementation and Sustainability High

6. Fiduciary High

7. Environment and Social Substantial

8. Stakeholders Moderate

9. Other High

OVERALL High

FinanceLoan Closing Date - Additional Financing (Rwanda Feeder Roads

Development Project - Additional Finance - P158092)

Source of Funds Proposed Additional Financing Loan Closing Date

Free-standing Single Purpose Trust Fund 31-Dec-2022

Loan Closing Date(s) - Parent (Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - P126498)Explanation:The closing date for the project will be extended by 18 months from June 30, 2021 to December 31, 2022 to cater for the scale-up of project activities in the six (6) new districts.

Ln/Cr/TF Status Original Closing Date

Current Closing Date

Proposed Closing Date

Previous Closing Date(s)

IDA-54050 Effective 30-Jun-2021 30-Jun-2021 31-Dec-2022

Change in Disbursement (including all sources of Financing) Estimates CDE

Explanation:

14

The change in expected disbursement estimates is because of the proposed AF and the proposed change in the loan closing date

Expected Disbursements (in US$ Million) (including all Sources of Financing)Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Annual 3.00 4.00 6.00 15.00 27.00 22.00 20.00 8.00 8.00 0.00

Cumulative 3.00 7.00 13.00 28.00 55.00 77.00 97.00 105.00 113.00 0.00

Allocations - Additional Financing (Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance - P158092)

Source of Fund Currency Category of

ExpenditureAllocation Disbursement %

(Type Total)

Proposed Proposed

FSSP US$

Goods, Works, Consulting, Non-Consulting Services, Training and Operating Costs for the Project (except subcomponents 1.3 and 1.6)

68.00

Such percentage as agreed to among the World Bank and the Recipient, as per the Agreed Annual Work Plan

Total: 68.00

ComponentsChange to Components and CostExplanation:The project components will be as follows: Component 1- Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Indicative Feeder Roads; Component 2- Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility Improvement and Institutional Development Support; and Component 3- Project Management Support. Three subcomponents have been added under Component One and include: (a) rehabilitating and upgrading of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts; (b) rehabilitating, upgrading and maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Nyabihu, Nyaruguru, Rutsiro, and Gakenke districts; and (c) maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts, through multi-year (three years) contracts. The changes in Component 2 include: (a) new activities inter alia landslide resilience and hazard warning and road safety; (b) Provision of TA to RTDA has been moved from Component 3; and (c) the subcomponent “support to strengthening capacity of the Road Maintenance Fund” has been dropped. For detailed description, please refer to Annex 5.

The estimated cost of scale-up under the proposed AF is of US$84 million, of which US$68 million is a grant from the MDTF and US$16 million is government counterpart financing to cover compensation of PAPs, multi-year maintenance works contracts in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts, and 18 percent Value Added Tax for all contracts. The overall revised project-financing will therefore be US$133 million.

15

Current Component Name

Proposed Component Name

Current Cost (US$ million)

Proposed Cost (US$ million)

Action

Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Selected Feeder Roads

Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Indicative Feeder Roads

41.10 117.46 Revised

Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility Improvement and Support to Preparation of Follow-on Operations

Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility Improvement and Institutional Development Support

5.50 13.06 Revised

Support to Project Management

Project Management Support 2.40 2.48 Revised

Total: 49.00 133.00

Other Change(s)Change in Implementing Agency

Explanation:

The proposed restructuring and AF involves a change of the implementing agency of the FRDP from MINAGRI to RTDA. The existing MINAGRI SPIU, the Feeder Roads Technical Department and the corporate staff in safeguards and fiduciary departments will transition to RTDA. As a confirmation of Re-Appraisal, the GoR submitted to the World Bank a letter detailing the key staff positions that will transition from MINAGRI to RTDA. A Staff Transition Agreement between RTDA and MINAGRI that shall provide details of all the key staff positions existing at MINAGRI SPIU which will move to RTDA, including any new positions that will be required for smooth implementation of the project, has been submitted to the World Bank as a condition of Negotiation.

Implementing Agency Name Type ActionMinistry of Agriculture and Animal Resources Implementing Agency Marked for Deletion

Change in Institutional ArrangementsExplanation:MINAGRI will lead policy formulation and the responsibility of implementation, management and monitoring of all feeder roads programs will shift to RTDA. The FRU that was established in MINAGRI and coordinating feeder roads development and managing the feeder roads program steering committee will shift to RTDA. MININFRA and MINAGRI will co-chair the feeder roads program steering committee, and RTDA will manage the feeder roads program implementation.

16

The districts will remain responsible for feeder roads construction, rehabilitation and maintenance.

Change in Financial ManagementExplanation:The Financial Management (FM) responsibility of the project will shift from MINAGRI SPIU to RTDA as a result of the Project Restructuring and AF. The Designated Account (DA) under the original IDA credit at the National Bank of Rwanda, will be used for the AF sources. The DA type will be switched to become pooled with an increase to the ceiling to become US$4 million. Taxes are not eligible for financing under the MDTF, but are eligible under IDA. More detailed FM arrangements are provided in Annex 4.

Change in ProcurementExplanation:The RTDA will implement procurement activities to be carried out at national level while the six (6) districts with support from RTDA, will implement the procurement of road rehabilitation and maintenance works and associated consulting services.

Change in Implementation Schedule Phish

Explanation:The Recipient has prepared an implementation schedule acceptable to the World Bank. The Borrower has submitted an updated Project Implementation Manual (PIM), Procurement Plan, and RF acceptable to the World Bank. The plan confirms that all activities under the project will be completed by the proposed closing date of December 31, 2022, and thus the project development objectives will be achieved.

Appraisal SummaryEconomic and Financial Analysis PHHASEFA

Explanation:

Given the high level of demand for feeder roads and limited available resources, prioritization is necessary. Multi-criteria analysis was adopted to balance a wide variety of benefits from improved feeder roads against project costs. The feasibility study assessment of the benefits for the overall project was made in the following key domains; (i) Influence of improved connection to markets in villages facing more favorable prices for inputs and outputs; (ii) Impact on reducing the time spent travelling to and from school, and all weather roads should improve the attendance, not only of pupils, but also of their teachers, thus promoting the formation of human capital; and (iii) Improvement in the villagers’ access to timely treatment, especially in the event of accidents and bouts of acute sickness should lower mortality and morbidity.

The economic evaluation and prioritization of roads was based on multi‐criteria analysis using various indicators, including socio‐economic data. On the benefit side, eight parameters considered are presented in Table 1 below. A more detailed explanation of the prioritization process is provided in Annex 3.

Table 1: Prioritization Criteria and Weights

17

Indicator Weight1 Connectivity 0.102 Road condition 0.093 Remoteness 0.054 Traffic 0.115 Access to social and economic services 0.206 Agriculture potential 0.357 Community Priority 0.07

8 Vision 2020 Umurenge Program (VUP) Impact 0.03

Total 1.00

The Rural Sector Support Project (RSSP) (P126440) and the Land Husbandry Water Harvesting and Hillside irrigation (LWH) Project (P114931), both funded by the World Bank and implemented by the MINAGRI which is currently implementing the FRDP, have developed agriculture land consolidated sites in several districts including those targeted by the FRDP. The task of prioritizing roads linking to the LWH and RSSP agricultural developed areas was included in addition to the multi-criteria analysis explained above.

The project cost estimates were prepared based on unit construction rates, which were derived from recent prices for road, bridge and other structural works of a similar scope and nature, in the region and elsewhere, and also included the basic costs of materials, labor, equipment and transport. Each of the benefit parameters was evaluated and the weighted score calculated. The higher the scores, the greater the socioeconomic benefits.

Based on the multi-criteria analysis and local consultations (see Annex 3), about 590 km of indicative priority feeder roads were identified in the six districts. The project will support feeder road rehabilitation works, as long as resources are available. Given the resources allocated to Component 1 and readiness of required safeguard instruments, the project will be focused on a total length of about 450 km (Table 3.9a in Annex 3). Based on the preliminary cost estimates, the total rehabilitation costs are estimated at about US$46.86 million. In total, about 625,000 people are estimated to directly benefit from the project in the additional six (6) districts. Other priority roads (about 140 km) are also listed under Table 3.9b in Annex 3, which may be financed subject to resource availability.

Although feeder roads are often focused on social and rural development aspects, most of these indicative roads are also found economically viable. The Roads Economic Decision (RED) model is used to compare road user cost reductions with necessary investment costs. The simple average internal rate of return (IRR) is 13.5 percent, while the simple average net present value (NPV) is US$1.37 million per road when evaluated at a discount rate of 6 percent.

The emission calculation is also carried out. The contribution of rehabilitation of rural roads is generally modest because of their low traffic nature. The average traffic on the selected roads is about 185 vehicles per day. The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) that can be reduced is estimated at about 395,000 tons for 20 years, which would generate a social value of US$13.9 million at a carbon value of US$30 per ton.

18

Technical Analysis

Explanation:

The feasibility study of around 1,200 km of feeder roads for identified districts (average 200 km per district) was completed by the Government. For each district, a list of priority roads was elaborated to continue with the detailed designs. The feeder roads generally cross hilly to mountainous terrain with high rainfall and soft soils, which are often washed out during the rainy season. The feasibility study assignment included intensive field surveys, consultations, preliminary concept design, preliminary cost estimates and economic evaluation and prioritization of roads that will best satisfy the objective of the project. The program also proposes multi-year maintenance through an Output and Performance‐Based Road Contract (OPRC) for Gakenke, Nyabihu, Rutsiro and Nyaruguru districts. For the districts of Gatsibo and Nyagatare the maintenance is proposed to be done by LCAs. The preliminary design will serve as a concept design for the preparation of DBM type contracts. The concept designs and draft bidding documents will be reviewed by the World Bank to ensure implementation readiness. The project appraisal for US$68 million AF and restructuring of original activities was completed on October 18, 2017.

To the extent possible, while meeting country design criteria, the preliminary concept design aims to minimize the need for land acquisition and resettlement, and to maximize the length of roads that can be improved considering the available financial resources, commensurate with adopting economically and technically sound improvement methods. Adaptation with the incorporation of differentiated design approaches to include more hazard resilient measures in more vulnerable areas were also considered. Special considerations are integrated for road safety and drainage provisions.

One of the most important considerations in designing a gravel road is to ensure its all-weather access. The Rwandan national standards for feeder road guidelines and design were considered in the preliminary design. For some items, a comparison was made with design recommendations in pavement design manuals of South Africa, Tanzania, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe. To effect better construction economy, the design approach adopted for this project gives importance to the use of locally available gravel materials. This is ensured by extracting information about satisfactory local gravel borrow pits.

The usual selected design speed for the project roads is 60 km/h. There are however a few locations where the terrain is mountainous and the speed was reduced. The design speed was also set lower when necessary when traversing built‐up areas. The preliminary design takes into account: (i) Engineering surveys including traffic count survey, alignment survey, road inventory survey and geotechnical investigation; (ii) Traffic analysis and forecast; (iii) Identifying roads linking storage areas in LWH, RSSP and other agricultural projects to give higher priority for such roads; (iv) Preliminary concept design and preparation of linear diagrams, drawings, pavement design, analysis and design of side slopes etc.; (v) Geographic Information System (GIS) shape files of selected feeder roads using International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) 2005 Projection System; (vi) Identification of borrow areas based on geotechnical and material investigation; and (vii) Preparation of preliminary cost estimates based on market rates.

19

Construction of Trial Sections for Feeder Roads Surfacing Options

This will include the construction of trial sections of a variety of durable paved surfaces in order to gain important experience beyond the basic gravel wearing course. It has been recognized that many sections of road constructed with a gravel wearing course, particularly on steep inclines, do not provide a durable solution and are frequently in poor condition again within a 2 or 3-year horizon. At the same time, the availability of good quality gravel is becoming an issue as borrow pits are being exhausted and haul distances are increasing. The project anticipates experimenting with viable alternative solutions to durable road surfacing and hence proposes to construct a series of trial sections. Surface sealing options include concrete brick paving, concrete strip roads, cobblestone surfacing, cold mix asphalt and bituminous seals. The construction of trial sections aims to provide experience and data regarding the performance of the various options.

Contracting Methodology

The works will be implemented on the DBM basis in the four (4) districts of Gakenke, Nyabihu, Rutsiro and Nyaruguru which have difficult mountainous terrain. For the districts of Gatsibo and Nyagatare which have a flat and rolling terrain, the maintenance is proposed to be done by LCAs. The pavement design criteria with minimum strength parameters, cross section and horizontal and vertical alignment standards are included in the employer’s requirement in the bidding document. These contracts will be lump sum contracts. Should the contractor not maintain the levels of service during a specific period, the Government will reduce the relevant lump sum payment based on the extent of the non-compliance.

This DBM arrangement ensures that maintenance of the investment is guaranteed for the initial three (3) years after completion of the rehabilitation works and it will provide the local construction industry with an opportunity to improve their service delivery skills and competitiveness. Using the DBM type contracting, the project attempts to mitigate factors affecting planned implementation of the program adversely in terms of time and project costs involved. It will motivate contractors to build, integrate and optimize road improvement and maintenance works at the lowest possible cost and is expected to contribute to job creation along the road as local workers are employed during the maintenance part of the contracts.

Social Analysis

Explanation:

The project is Category A, which would be expanded to six (6) new participating districts under the AF. Five policies were triggered by the parent project: (a) Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01; (b) Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04; (c) Forests OP/BP 4.36; (d) Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11; and, (e) Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12. These policies remain triggered under the AF. Two districts, Nyaruguru and Nyagatare, were selected for full ESIA and RAP prior to appraisal. Four (4) districts have an indicative list of roads but final selection of roads for project financing has yet to be confirmed. The updated ESMF, RPF and the ESIAs and RAPs of the two (2) new districts under the AF have been submitted, reviewed and cleared by the World Bank and disclosed both in-country and on the World Bank website. The disclosure dates are shown in

20

Table 2 below. Consequently, there will be some land acquisition for road construction works for which compensation will be required. Privately-owned trees, crops and structures that are within the right of way will be compensated.

For Nyaruguru district, the total number of project-affected households (HHs) is 855 of which 84 HHs will be relocated while the remaining 771 HHs will be partially affected from land acquisition related to widening in some road sections. For Nyagatare district, the total number of project-affected households is 298 of which 71 HHs will be relocated while the remaining 227 HHs will be partially affected from land acquisition. All of the PAPs are covered by their respective RAPs.

The impacts on physical cultural resources (PCRs) within the Right of Way (RoW) are also anticipated. In Nyaruguru district, for example, road works could potentially affect the Nkanda Memorial Site and the Kibeho Square, which is considered a holy site. In order to avoid affecting PCRs, the road widening activity shall be limited within the existing carriageway without disrupting the PCRs. Where impacts cannot be avoided, a detailed PCR Management Plan shall be prepared by the contractor and reviewed by the RTDA and cleared by the World Bank prior to the commencement of works on Nyaruguru NRFR2, Kibeho-Mata-Ruramba.

Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM)

The Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) is one of the strategies that is put in place to monitor and resolve complaints that may arise during or after the project implementation by affected people. It ensures that complaints are received, reviewed and addressed by a Grievance Redress Committee (GRC). The GRC is established by the Project Affected Persons (PAPs) during a consultation meeting held between district officials, the project safeguards officer and the PAPs. The committee is based at the Cell4 level and comprises eight (8) members. The three executive members of the GRC that is, president, vice president and women’s representative, are elected through voting by PAPs. The other members of the GRC include: Village5 leader, Cell executive secretary, the contractor’s social and environmental officer, project safeguards officer, and supervision consultancy safeguards officer. The main objective of the GRC is to ensure faster and better resolution of Project related complaints. The Process of GRM from Cell to District Level

There are three levels of GRM currently under the project. These include: (a) Grievance redress at Cell level. The maximum duration for resolving a complaint at the cell level is four (4) days. This duration includes the day the GRC receives the complaint/grievance. Depending on the nature of the complaint, some are resolved immediately while others may require field visits. (b) Grievance redress at Sector6 level. The maximum duration for resolving a complaint at the Sector level is one week, which includes the day the Sector receives the complaint from the GRC. The Sector executive calls for a meeting with the aggrieved PAP, carry out field verifications and comes up with the decision on the recommended action to be taken upon arriving at a resolution.

4 The Cell is the second level of administrative unit in Rwanda.5 The Village is the smallest politico-administrative entity of Rwanda.6 The Sector is the third level of administrative unit in Rwanda.

21

(c) Grievance redress at District level. In case the PAP does not agree with the Sector’s decision, they are advised to go to the District level. The District receives the complaint and calls for a combined meeting with the GRC, the Sector representatives and the PAP. Field visits are conducted with involvement of the community. However, if the complaint is not addressed within two (2) weeks, the PAP is advised to seek Justice from the Court of Law. In case of extreme situations affecting road construction, the Contractor is advised to skip those sections of the road with the pending court cases.

Environmental Analysis

Explanation:

The disclosure dates of the updated ESMF, RPF and the ESIAs and RAPs of the two (2) new districts are shown below:

Table 2: Safeguards Documents Disclosure

Instrument Local Disclosure Date

World Bank Disclosure Date

Updated ESMF March 2, 2017 March 16, 2017Updated RPF March 2, 2017 March 13, 2017RAP for Nyaruguru March 29, 2017 April 3, 2017RAP for Nyagatare March 29, 2017 April 3, 2017ESIA for Nyaruguru March 10, 2017 March 13, 2017ESIA for Nyagatare March 10, 2017 March 13, 2017

Based on the ESIAs of the additional finance districts and the experience of the parent project, most impacts are expected to be positive such as increased employment during construction, increased accessibility and mobility and social interactions when these feeder roads are completed, increased rural incomes, and reduction in travel time and travel costs. Potential negative impacts expected during construction stage may include increase in soil erosion and risks of landslides especially in the Western, Southern and Northern provinces that are located in mountainous terrains, loss of land due to rehabilitation works, increase in local floods, temporary noise and air pollution nuisance due to construction works, sediment-laden runoff from exposed areas mainly due to vegetation clearing during construction; increase in solid waste, pollution from improper use and storage of waste oils from construction equipment, and health and safety issues especially during construction.

Institutional Capacity for Social and Environmental Safeguards

As a result of the Restructuring and AF, the implementing agency of the FRDP will change to RTDA. The current RTDA structure is composed of one social safeguards specialist and one environmental specialist. The RTDA is currently undertaking a World Bank-funded project but the capacity is not sufficient to cover the additional workload of the FRDP. Transferring the

22

Feeder Road project to RTDA will generate a workload that cannot be absorbed by the existing safeguards personnel at RTDA and this could potentially jeopardize the achievement of the project development objective, unless mitigation measures are put in place. It is required that the current safeguards team supporting the FRDP under MINAGRI SPIU should be transitioned to RTDA. Meanwhile, in the six (6) new participating districts, the Environmental and Social Safeguards Officers will follow the existing structure of the parent project with new staffing. Upon transition of the MINAGRI SPIU safeguards staff to RTDA, there will be adequate capacity for social and environment management for the project. The successful implementation, monitoring and reporting of the RAPs and ESMPs will rely on the district level safeguard staff including the district Environmental, Social and the Land Officers who will work closely with the environmental and social safeguard officers hired by the contractors and the supervision firms.

The contractor and supervising firm staff under the parent project have attended trainings on environmental and social safeguards compliance. The World Bank gives importance to access to information to the districts and communities, including safeguards instruments and reports on the project. Under the parent project, summaries of these documents, translated into local languages, were placed in accessible areas such as libraries and district offices, and also on the websites of the project in MINAGRI and district offices. Similarly, this will be applied to the AF districts. A practical training program for the RTDA, district level safeguard staff, supervision consultants and contractors will be developed for the project, including the AF. This will include, among others, training on the environmental and social management of construction impacts, health and safety, influx of labor, resettlement, land acquisition and livelihood restoration, grievance redress mechanisms, safeguards monitoring and reporting.

Risk

Explanation:

The overall risk rating remains High, and the project’s SORT risk matrix remains unchanged from the parent project. The road rehabilitation works are still expected to be implemented by new six (6) participating districts which have limited experience and institutional capacity for implementing development projects. Delays were experienced in launching the parent project due to delays in preparation of detailed design, bidding documents, updating and disclosure of social and environmental safeguards documents and initial mobilization of contractors. Based on the lessons learned from the parent project, the AF has attempted to mitigate the high risk associated with the implementation through the use of DBM type contracting approach.

The technical design of the project is rated Substantial due to risk of over-dimensioned road standards resulting in cutting of mountain slopes and high cost of construction. The parent project through the NFRPS has recommended the construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of UC roads to be designed to a lesser width for traffic less than 100 AADT. The proposed AF will consider the implementation of these policy provisions in the new additional districts using cost effective standards and specifications.

Institutional capacity for implementation and sustainability risk is rated High. The risk rating takes into account the delays which the ongoing transport projects are still experiencing in Rwanda, in particular the timely processing of procurement tasks with acceptable quality, as the challenge is expected to be more profound at district level. There is also currently no mechanism

23

for stable flow of funds for financing District Class 2/feeder roads and sustainability of the feeder roads network is at risk. To ensure sustainability of the road asset, the project has included multi-year (three years) maintenance contracting to be awarded with the construction contracts. The after-project long-term maintenance arrangement will be undertaken through financing of the RMF through LCAs with the oversight by the districts.

The overall FM risk is rated Moderate. The proposed FM arrangements for this project are considered adequate. The overall procurement risk of the proposed project is rated High due to lack of experience of the implementing agency, districts and contractors in DBM delivery method. Procurement trainings will be arranged jointly by RTDA and the World Bank, on World Bank procurement procedures, targeted to procurement officers and members of the Internal Tender Committee (ITC) at district level.

Environmental and Social Safeguards risk is rated Substantial as a result of the Category A status of the project. Potential negative impacts include inter alia risks of landslides, health and safety issues and land acquisition for road construction works. Mitigations measures include preparation of RAPs and appropriate compensation of PAPs according to the law, preparation and implementation of ESMPs during construction and providing actions and mitigation measures addressing landslide and drainage challenges and follow up during implementation.

Other risks the project is still likely to face include inter alia cost overruns due to unforeseen high frequency, low impact geo-hazards, such as landslides caused by hydrological and geological factors. Thus, the project risk at implementation remains high. The rehabilitation and upgrading works will involve significant earthwork and construction of slide protection and drainage structure.

IV. World Bank Grievance Redress

26. Communities and individuals who believe that they are adversely affected by a World Bank (WB) supported project may submit complaints to existing project-level grievance redress mechanisms or the WB’s Grievance Redress Service (GRS). The GRS ensures that complaints received are promptly reviewed to address project-related concerns. Project affected communities and individuals may submit their complaint to the WB’s independent Inspection Panel which determines whether harm occurred, or could occur, as a result of WB non-compliance with its policies and procedures. Complaints may be submitted at any time after concerns have been brought directly to the World Bank's attention, and Bank Management has been given an opportunity to respond. For information on how to submit complaints to the World Bank’s corporate Grievance Redress Service (GRS), please visit http://www.worldbank.org/GRS. For information on how to submit complaints to the World Bank Inspection Panel, please visit www.inspectionpanel.org.

24

http://www.inspectionpanel.org/

Annex 1: Revised Project Results Framework

Project Name:

Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance (P158092)

Project Stage: Additional Financing Status: DRAFT

Team Leader(s): Muhammad Zulfiqar Ahmed Requesting

Unit: AFCE2 Created by: Tara Shirvani on 19-Apr-2016

Product Line: Recipient Executed Activities Responsible

Unit: GTI01 Modified by: Emmanuel Taban on 30-Nov-2017

Country: Rwanda Approval FY: 2018

Region: AFRICA Financing Instrument: Investment Project Financing

Parent Project ID: P126498 Parent Project

Name: Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project (P126498)

.

Project Development Objectives

Original Project Development Objective - Parent:

The objective of the project is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected Districts.

Proposed Project Development Objective - Additional Financing (AF): The original PDO will remain unchanged. Results

Core sector indicators are considered: Yes Results reporting level: Project Level

.

Project Development Objective Indicators

Status Indicator Name Corporate Unit of Measure Baseline Actual(Current) End Target

Revised Direct project beneficiaries Number Value 0.00 295000.00 1064000.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has been revised

25

from 439,000 to 1,064,000 people.

No Change Female beneficiaries Percentage Value 0.00 51.00 50.00

Sub Type

Supplemental

Revised Roads in good and fair condition as a share of total classified roads

Percentage Value 15.00 33.00 48.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has been revised from 43 percent to 48 percent.

Revised Size of the total classified network

Kilometers Value 941.00 941.00 2141.00

Sub Type

Supplemental

Revised Share of rural population with access to an all-season road


Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has been revised from 47 percent to 50 percent.

Revised Number of rural people with access to an all-season road

Number Value 200000.00 500000.00 1510000.00

Sub Type

Supplemental

Revised Number of agricultural marketing centers connected by all season road

Number Value 0.00 17.00 150.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment The End target has been revised

26

from 89 to 150 agricultural marketing centers.

Revised Reduction in travel time per kilometer

Minutes Value 6.00 4.00 2.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment The indicator has been revised from “Reduction in travel time”.

Intermediate Results Indicators

Status Indicator Name Corporate Unit of Measure Baseline Actual (Current) End Target

Revised Roads rehabilitated, Rural Kilometers Value 0.00 172.00 720.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has been revised from 270km to 720km.

New Landslide management plan developed and operationalized

Yes/No Value No No Yes

Date 30-Apr-2017 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment

New Number of Early Warning Systems (EWS) stations installed along rural roads network

Number Value 0.00 0.00 5.00

Sub Type

Supplemental

New Citizen engagement surveys Number Value 0.00 0.00 3.00

Date 30-Apr-2017 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment

27

New Road safety sensitization campaigns conducted for schools, health centers and markets along project roads

Number Value 0.00 0.00 100.00

Date 30-Apr-2017 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment

New Workers trained on gender relations, healthy relationships and non-violent conflict resolution, HIV and STD during roads rehabilitation/maintenance (% of trained workers)

Number Value 0.00 0.00 100.00

Date 30-Apr-2017 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment

New Percentage of women trained on gender relations, healthy relationships and non-violent conflict resolution, HIV and STD


Sub Type

Supplemental

Revised Employment generated under rehabilitation contracts

Number Value 0.00 2800 5000.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has been revised from 2,000 to 5,000 people.

Revised Rural/feeder roads receiving maintenance


Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022


Revised Employment generated under maintenance contracts

Number Value 0.00 0.00 3750.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has

28

been revised from 1,500 to 3,750 people.

Revised Business plan for rural/feeder roads development prepared


Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment No change has been made, except for expected date of achievement of the target.

Revised Rural/feeder roads with readily available design and bidding document


Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022


Revised Local Community Associations (LCAs) established

Number Value 0.00 0.00 50.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment End target has been revised from 40 to 50 LCAs.

New Percentage of women employed in established LCAs


Sub Type

Supplemental

Marked for Deletion

Number of contracts completed within available budget and time at district level

Number Value 0.00 0.00 20.00

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2016 30-Jun-2021

Comment Indicator is being proposed

29

to be dropped as part of project restructuring.

Revised Project implemented according to planned time and budget

Yes/No Value No Yes Yes

Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Dec-2022

Comment The project is on track to complete all activities on time and within budget

Marked for Deletion

Manual for road maintenance fund allocation, maintenance planning and monitoring prepared


Date 31-Oct-2012 30-Sep-2017 31-Oct-2020

Comment The activity to measure this indicator is being dropped by the GoR as it is being financed through funding from AfDB.

.

30

Annex 2: Revised Project Cost EstimatesTable 2.1. Summary of Revised Project Cost Estimates

ComponentModified Parent

Project Cost (US$, millions)

MDTF AF (US$, millions)

Revised Total Project Cost

(US$, millions)IDA GoR MDTF GoR

1. Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Indicative Feeder Roads 37.10 4.00 61.58 14.78 117.46

2. Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility Improvement and Institutional Development Support

6.60 5.42 1.04 13.06

3. Project Management Support 1.30 1.00 0.18 2.48Total Project Cost 45 4 68 16.00 133.00

Table 2.2. Detailed Revised Project Cost Estimates

ItemNo. Component and Activity Description

Modified Parent Project Cost

(US$, millions)AF MDTF7

(US$, millions)

GoR

Revised Total

Project Cost (US$,

millions)IDA8 GoR

1 Component 1: Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of indicative Feeder Roads 37.10 4.00 61.58 14.78 117.46

1.1

Sub-component 1.1- Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of about 115 km of indicative feeder roads in Karongi and Nyamasheke districts

19.85 19.85

1.1 (a)

Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of about 115 km of indicative feeder roads in Karongi and Nyamasheke districts, including 15 percent contingencies (10 percent physical & 5 percent financial) - civil works and additional 15 percent contingency for unforeseen works

17.35 17.35

1.1 (b)Supervision services for rehabilitation and upgrading works as well as monitoring and supervision support to multi-year maintenance

2.50 2.50

1.2Sub-component 1.2 - Rehabilitation and upgrading of 155 km of indicative feeder roads in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts

16.40 16.40

1.2 (a)

Rehabilitation and upgrading of 155 km of indicative feeder roads in Rwamagana and Gisagara district, including 15 percent contingencies (10 percent physical & 5 percent financial) civil works and additional 15 percent contingency for unforeseen works

14.90 14.90

1.2 (b) Supervision services for rehabilitation and upgrading works 1.50 1.50

7 MDTF is not financing any taxes and duties, which will be paid by the GoR as counterpart financing8 IDA is paying for all indirect taxes and duties



(US$, millions)AF MDTF

(US$, millions)

GoR

Revised Total

Project Cost (US$,

millions)IDA GoR

1.3Sub-component 1.3 - Multi-year maintenance (three years) 155 km of indicative feeder roads in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts

4.00 4.00

1.3 (a)

Multi-year maintenance (five years) 155 km of indicative feeder roads rehabilitated and upgraded in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts -Civil works

3.00 3.00

1.3 (b) Monitoring and supervision of multi-year maintenance contracts 1.00 1.00

1.4 Sub-component 1.4 - Technical Services for project preparatory activities 0.85 0.85

1.5

Subcomponent 1.5- Rehabilitation and upgrading of about 157 km of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo (79km) and Nyagatare (78 km) districts

16.10 3.65 19.75

1.5 (a)Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of about 157 km of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts.

14.90 2.68 17.58

1.5 (b)

Supervision/monitoring services for rehabilitation and upgrading works as well as monitoring and supervision support to multi-year maintenance in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts

1.20 0.22 1.42

1.5 (c)Implementation of the Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) related to indicative feeder roads for Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts

0.75 0.75

1.6

Subcomponent 1.6- Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of about 293km of indicative feeder roads in, Nyaruguru (58 km) Rutsiro (77km), Nyabihu (90 km) and Gakenke (68 km) districts

45.48 10.04 55.52

1.6 (a)

Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of about 293 km of indicative feeder roads in Nyaruguru, Rutsiro, Nyabihu and Gakenke districts.

42.73 7.69 50.42

1.6 (b)

Supervision/monitoring services for rehabilitation and upgrading works as well as monitoring and supervision support to multi-year maintenance for Nyaruguru, Rutsiro, Nyabihu and Gakenke

2.75 0.50 3.25

1.6 (c)Implementation of the RAPs related to indicative feeder roads for Nyaruguru, Rutsiro, Nyabihu and Gakenke districts.

- 1.85 1.85

1.7Subcomponent 1.7- Multi-year maintenance (three years) 157 km of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts

1.10 1.10

2Component 2: Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility Improvement and Institutional Development

6.60 5.42 1.04 13.06

32




(US$, millions)

GoR

Revised Total

Project Cost (US$,

millions)IDA GoR

Support

2.1 Subcomponent 2.1 - Preparation of a national feeder roads development strategy and program 0.30 0.30

2.2

Subcomponent 2.2 - Preparation of district business plans for feeder roads development and maintenance, and improvement of rural transport services.

2.00 2.00

2.3

Subcomponent 2.3 - Building capacity of participating districts in rural feeder roads management, including provision of technical assistance (TA) to support district staff in Project implementation and strengthening government established entities

1.15 1.57 0.34 3.06

2.3 (a)

Training & Capacity building of districts and RTDA on procurement, FM, contract management, Project management, environmental and social safeguard, feeder roads maintenance and monitoring/evaluation

0.20 0.04 0.24

2.3 (b) TA project managers to support districts (one for each district) 0.80 0.51 0.09 1.40

2.3 (c) TA Technical Advisor to RTDA 0.35 0.25 0.05 0.652.3 (d) TA on contract management and administration 0.21 0.04 0.25

2.3 (e)TA environmental and social safeguards officer to support districts (one for each new six (6) district for 5 years)

0.40 0.12 0.52

2.4Subcomponent 2.4 – Strengthening the capacity of RTDA for feeder roads Development

1.35 2.75 0.51 4.61

2.4 (a) Provision of TA to RTDA 1.35 1.55 0.32 3.222.4 (a) i Feeder Roads Program Manager 0.11 0.03 0.142.4 (a) ii Feeder Roads Specialist (4No.) 0.45 0.36 0.08 0.892.4 (a) iii Financial Management Specialist 0.40 0.09 0.02 0.512.4 (a) iv M&E Specialist 0.20 0.09 0.02 0.312.4 (a) v Procurement Specialist 0.10 0.09 0.02 0.212.4 (a) vi Contract Management Specialist 0.10 0.09 0.02 0.212.4 (a) vii Social Safeguard Specialist (3 No.) 0.10 0.27 0.06 0.43

2.4 (a) viii Environmental safeguard Specialist (2 No.) 0.18 0.04 0.22

2.4 (a) ix GIS and Mapping Specialist 0.09 0.02 0.112.4 (a) x Accountant 0.09 0.02 0.112.4 (a) xi Community Development Officer (CDO) 0.09 0.02 0.11

2.4(b) Landslide resilience and hazards warning systems on feeder roads 1.00 0.15 1.15

2.4(c) Road Safety 0.20 0.04 0.24

2.5 Subcomponent 2.5 - Providing office to RTDA, 0.80 0.80 0.14 1.74

33




(US$, millions)

GoR

Revised Total

Project Cost (US$,

millions)IDA GoR

office and field inspection equipment to RTDA and Selected Districts

2.6 Subcomponent 2.6 - Support to strengthening of the Road Maintenance Fund (RMF) Dropped

2.7 Subcomponent 2.7 - Preparation of follow-on operations 0.60 0.30 0.05 0.95

2.7 (a) Feasibility study and ESIA for selected priority feeder roads for future improvement 0.50 0.30 0.05 0.85

2.7 (a) i Feasibility studies and bidding document preparation for future improvements 0.40 0.10 0.02 0.52

2.7 (a) ii ESIA and RAP for selected priority feeder roads for future improvement. 0.10 0.20 0.03 0.33

2.7 (b) Bidding document preparation for a second cycle multi-year maintenance contract. 0.10 0.10

2.8 Subcomponent 2.8 - Training and organization of LCAs 0.40 0.40

3 Component 3: Project Management Support 1.30 1.00 0.18 2.48

3.1

Providing advisory services and TA for financial management; monitoring and evaluation, and engineering aspects to MINAGRI

Moved to Component 2.4

3.2 Subcomponent 3.1 - TA for environmental, social and financial audit 0.40 0.40

3.3Subcomponent 3.2 - TA for baseline survey, impact evaluation, and Grievance Redressing Mechanism (GRM)

0.20 0.55 0.10 0.85

3.4 Subcomponent 3.3 - Support to operational costs 0.70 0.45 0.08 1.23

3.4 (a) Support to operational costs to central coordination entities and districts 0.40 0.30 0.05 0.75

3.4 (b) Support to operational costs to districts 0.30 0.15 0.03 0.48TOTAL 45.00 4.00 68.00 16.00 133.00

34

Annex 3: Economic/Financial Analysis and Technical Feasibility

Road Prioritization and Project Economic Analysis

Background

1. Rwanda has been experiencing impressive economic growth, with an average growth rate of 7.5 percent in the last decade, primarily driven by the service, agriculture and mining sectors (Figure 2.1). In Rwanda, agriculture remains of particular importance, contributing to about 35 percent of the GDP and providing employment to about 75 percent of the total labor force. Rwanda is also a traditional exporter of agricultural crops, such as coffee and tea. Agricultural exports amount to US$240 million a year or about 35 percent of the total merchandise exports from Rwanda.

2. Agricultural productivity in Rwanda is relatively high compared with its neighboring countries. Nearly all arable land has already been cultivated. Further agricultural growth must of necessity depend on intensification, diversification and commercialization of crop production. Therefore, market access—both input and output markets—is crucial to improve. Rural accessibility remains a significant constraint for many farmers. Based on a new methodology developed in the Sustainable Development Goals context,9 the RAI, which measures a proportion of the rural population who live within 2 km of a good road, is tentatively estimated at 55.3 percent in Rwanda, leaving about 3.9 million of the rural population unconnected.

3. Not surprisingly, most of these unconnected people live below the poverty line in remote and mountainous areas. In Rwanda, 39.1 percent of the total population is poor. To alleviate poverty, the FRDP aims at providing sustainable access to farmers and promoting agricultural growth in remote areas.

Figure 3.1. Rwanda: GDP Growth Rate Figure 3.2: Average Crop Yield (ton/ha)

Source : WDI. Source : FAOSTAT.

9 See more detailed discussion in World Bank (2016) ‘Measuring Rural Access: Using new technologies’.

35

Figure 3.3: RAI, 2015

Source: World Bank estimate.

Figure 3.4: Poverty Headcount, 2013/14

Source: National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (2015).10

Selection of the Districts

4. The parent project is focused on four districts where poverty is high but rural accessibility remains low: Rwamagana, Gisagara, Nyamasheke and Karongi. Other donors, such as AfDB and EU, are also selectively supporting rural road development.

5. The proposed AF will extend the scope of the project to another six districts: Rutsiro, Nyaruguru, Nyagatare, Gatsibo, Gakenke and Nyabihu, where other donors are not working or are not planning to support. These districts have relatively high poverty rates

10 National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (2015). Rwanda Poverty Profile Report: Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey 2013/14.

36

and possess certain agricultural potential, but do not have good rural accessibility. Districts that include major urban areas, such as Kigali City and Kayonza, are excluded from the selection of the project areas.

Figure 3.5: Targeted Districts by AF

Table 3.1: Poverty, Agricultural Production, and Rural Access by District

District Poverty Incidence11

AG Production (US$ million)12

Preliminary RAI (%) FRDP Other Donors

Nyamasheke 62 162.1 45.1 Ongoing —Gicumbi 55.3 124.6 56.1 — NetherlandsGisagara 53.3 53.7 44.6 Ongoing —Rutsiro 51.4 88.6 25.7 AF —Burera 50.4 115.6 76.5 — NetherlandsNgororero 49.6 94.5 52.7 — EURulindo 48.1 72.1 64.3 — EUNyaruguru 47.9 49.3 32.5 AF —Ngoma 46.8 116.5 41.2 — EUKarongi 45.3 74.4 50.9 Ongoing —Nyagatare 44.1 84.7 39.2 AF —Gatsibo 43.8 140.2 53.7 AF —Gakenke 42 92.2 32.3 AF —Kirehe 41.8 137.7 47.1 — IFADNyamagabe 41.5 61.7 53.6 — AfDB

11 National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (2015). Rwanda Poverty Profile Report: Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey 2013/14. 12 Total agricultural production value is calculated based on MINAGRI, Rwanda. (2013). Crop Assessment 2013A Season. To aggregate different crops, production prices are used from FAOSTAT.

37

District Poverty Incidence

AG Production (US$ million)

Preliminary RAI (%) FRDP Other Donors

Nyabihu 39.6 134.4 54.5 AF —Rubavu 35.5 147.9 73.4 — EURusizi 35.1 138.7 65.3 — NetherlandsMusanze 34.9 121.3 74.5 — NetherlandsBugesera 34.3 52.7 47.2 — EUHuye 32.5 53.2 76.7 — EUMuhanga 30.5 109.8 76.9 — EURwamagana 25.4 94.5 33.4 Ongoing —Nyanza 38 50.0 49.1 — —Ruhango 37.8 57.7 37.4 — —Kayonza 26.4 107.2 38.9 — —Kamonyi 25.9 74.8 23.1 — —Gasabo 23.4 19.4 ¶ 50.1 — —Nyarugenge 19.9 — 79.2 — —Kicukiro 16.3 — 73.7 — —The three districts in Kigali City are combined.

Socioeconomic Characteristics of the Project Districts

Rutsiro District

6. Rutsiro district is part of the Western Province. The district has a population of 324,654 (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 1159 sq.km including the share of Kivu lake pertaining to Rutsiro district, whereas the actual land area is 661.8 sq. km. The population density (referred to as the actual land area) accounts for 491 inhab/sq.km, ranking the district thirteenth country-wide, density is 18 percent higher than the national average (415 inhab/sq.km) and 17 percent higher than the Western Province average (420 inhab/sq.km), whereas the population growth 2002–2012 has been 2.1 percent, slightly lower than the national average (2.6 percent). The district is predominantly rural, the urban population accounts for only 2.2 percent of total district.

7. The population is unevenly distributed over the district area—the most populated area is the sector of Kivumu while the least populated sector is Mukura in the southernmost part of the district. In addition, the population density and demographic growth in decade 2002–2012 are contrasted among sectors. The growth rate ranges from 0.7 percent in Kigeyo sector to 3.5 percent in Boneza. Also population density varies with the minimum of 319 inhab/sq. km in the northern sector of Nyabirasi to 1138 inhab/sq. km in Kivumu sector. The average household size in Rutsiro district (4.6 persons/hh) is slightly above the national average household size (4.3 persons/hh).

8. In Rutsiro household income is driven by agriculture (49.4 percent), followed by wage income (23.2 percent) and business income (12.7 percent); the smallest contributor to household income is public transfers with 1.4 percent. In Rutsiro district, most people aged 16 years and above in Rutsiro have independent farmer as their main job (63 percent). The second most frequent main job is wage farm (14 percent), followed by wage non-farm (13 percent). Only 8 percent are independent non-farmers (that is,

38

businesses). The mean size of land cultivated per household in Rutsiro district is 0.57 ha slightly below the national average (0.59 ha); most households (84.4 percent) in this district cultivate under 0.9 ha of land. Commercialization of crop production overall, as measured by the share of harvest sold (including households selling zero crops), is 18.3 percent in Rutsiro district (c.f., 20.9 percent at national level and 20 percent in Kigali City). The mean share in Rutsiro district for cash crops (namely coffee and tea) is between 70 and 80 percent.

9. Access to basic services in Rutsiro district is lower than the national average. Walking distance to basic services can be considered an indicator of both provision and coverage of such services and the remoteness of households’ dwellings. Referring to the mean walking distance to primary school by district, it shows that Rutsiro is classified among eleven districts with a mean walking distance to a primary school within the interval of 28 to 33 minutes. The mean walking distance to primary school in Rutsiro district is 29 minutes; 38.7 percent of households are still between 30 and 59 minutes of a primary school. This walking distance to a primary school in Rutsiro district is higher than the mean distance in rural areas, and higher than the national level (27.2 minutes). The mean walking distance to a primary school is 28.6 minutes in rural areas, 19.4 minutes in urban areas and 27.2 minutes at national level. The mean walking distance to a health centre in Rutsiro district is 69 minutes and only 35.4 percent of households walk for under an hour on average to reach a health centre. At the national level distance is covered in 60 minutes and 44.3 percent of households walk for under an hour to reach a health centre.

Nyaruguru

10. Nyaruguru district is part of the southern Province. The district has a population of 294,334 inhabitants (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 1007.1 sq. km. The population density accounting for 292 inhab/sq.km ranks the district seventh from bottom country-wide, density is 30 percent lower than the national average (415 inhab/sq.km) and 33 percent lower than the Southern Province average (434 inhab/sq.km), whereas the population growth 2002–2012 has been 2.4 percent, slightly lower than the national average (2.6 percent). The district is predominantly rural, and the urban population accounts for 2.1 percent of total district.

11. The population is unevenly distributed over the district area—the most populated area is the sector of Nyagisozi while the least populated sector is Nyabimata in the western part of the district. In addition, the population density and demographic growth in the decade 2002–2012 are contrasted among sectors. The growth rate ranges from -0.5 percent in Munini sector to +6.4 percent in Ruheru; also population density varies from the minimum of 134 inhab/sq. km in the western sector of Nyabimata to 526 inhab/sq. km in Nyagisozi sector. The average household size in Nyaruguru district (4.6 persons/hh) is slightly above the national average household size (4.3 persons/hh).

12. In Nyaruguru district, household income is driven by agriculture (50 percent), followed by wage income (22 percent) and rents (9 percent). The smallest contributor to household income in Nyaruguru district is private transfer income (5 percent). Most people aged 16 years and above in Nyaruguru have independent farmer as

39

their main job (72 percent). The second most frequent main job is wage non-farm (11 percent), followed by wage farm (9 percent). Only 6 percent are independent non-farmers (that is, businesses). The mean size of land cultivated per household in Nyaruguru district is 0.44 ha. Consequently, Nyaruguru district is also among the districts that have a high percentage of households (87 percent) that cultivate under 0.9 ha of land. Commercialization of crop production overall, as measured by the share of harvest sold (including households selling zero crops), is 25 percent. The mean share for cash crops is 87 percent.

13. From the viewpoint of the basic services, Nyaruguru district ranks slightly lower than the national average. The mean walking distance to primary school is 28.5 minutes; 36.7 percent of households are still between 30 and 59 minutes of a primary school. The mean walking distance to a health centre is 72 minutes and only 31 percent of households walk for under than an hour on average to a health centre. When compared to rural areas, Nyaruguru district health centres are 7.6 minutes further from household dwellings than the average.

Nyagatare

14. Nyagatare district is part of the eastern Province. The district has a population of 465,855 (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 1929.5 sq. km. The population density accounting for 241 inhab/sq.km ranks the district seventh from bottom country-wide, density is 42 percent lower than the national average, whereas the population growth 2002–2012 has been 6.2 percent, significantly higher than the national average (2.6 percent). The district is predominantly rural, the urban population accounts for 10 percent of total district.

15. The population is unevenly distributed over the district area—the most populated area is the sector of Gatunda while the least populated sector is Karangazi in the south-eastern part of the district. Also the population density and demographic growth in the decade 2002–2012 are contrasted among sectors. The growth rate ranges from 0.4 percent in Kiyombe sector to 13.1 percent in Rwimiyaga, also population density varies with the minimum of 104 inhab/sq. km in the south-eastern sector of Karangazi to 585 inhab/sq. km in Rukomo sector. The average household size in Nyagatare district (4.4 persons/hh) is slightly above the national average household size (4.3 persons/hh).

16. Agriculture contributes the largest share of a household’s income. The smallest contributors to household income in Nyagatare district are private and public transfers, with 8.3 percent and 4.4 percent respectively. The mean size of land cultivated per household in Nyagatare district is 0.77 ha. The proportion of households cultivating under 0.3 ha land by district represents 29 percent in Nyagatare district. Commercialization of crop production overall is 27 percent. The mean share in Nyagatare district for cash crops is 99 percent.

17. From the viewpoint of the basic services Nyagatare district ranks lower than the national average. The mean walking distance to primary school in Nyagatare district

40

is 34.413 minutes; 35 percent of households are still between 30 and 59 minutes of a primary school. The mean walking distance to a primary school is 28.6 minutes in rural areas, 19.4 minutes in urban areas and 27.2 minutes at national level. The mean walking distance to a health centre is 35 minutes in urban areas and 64.4 minutes in rural areas, while it is one hour countrywide.

Gatsibo District

18. Gatsibo district is part of the Eastern Province. The district has a population of 433,020 (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 1584.1 sq. km. The population density accounting for 273 inhab/sq.km ranks the district third from bottom country-wide, density is 34 percent lower than the national average (415 inhab/sq.km) and equal to the Eastern Province average (274 inhab/sq.km), whereas the population growth 2002–2012 has been 4.3 percent, 66 percent higher than the national average (2.6 percent). The district is predominantly rural, the urban population accounts for 5.5 percent of total district.

19. The population is unevenly distributed over the district area—the most populated area is the sector of Gabarore while the least populated sector is Gasance in the southwestern part of the district. In addition, the population density and demographic growth in the decade 2002–2012 are contrasted among sectors. The growth rate ranges from -0.2 percent in Gasance sector to +11.6 percent in Kabarore, also population density varies with the minimum of 55 inhab/sq. km in the eastern sector of Rwimbogo to 531 inhab/sq. km in Muhura sector. The average household size in Gatsibo district (4.5 persons/hh) is slightly above the national average household size (4.3 persons/hh).

20. In Gatsibo district household income is driven by agriculture (60 percent), followed by wage income (16 percent) and business income (8 percent). The smallest contributor to household income in Gatsibo district is public transfer income (2 percent). In Gatsibo district, most people aged 16 years and above in Gatsibo have independent farmer as their main job (72.2 percent). The second most frequent main job is wage farmer (12.3 percent), followed by wage non-farm (8.9 percent). The average land cultivated per household (in ha), in Gatsibo district is 0.76 ha, slightly higher than the national average. Commercialization of crop production is 25.9 percent. The mean share of harvest sold for fruit and vegetables is lower (9.3 percent) than for staple crops (25.2 percent) in Gatsibo district.

21. Access to basic services in Gatsibo district is lower than the national average. Walking distance to a primary school ranges from 21.6 to 33 minutes, with a mean of 24.2 minutes. This is below the mean distance in rural areas, 28.6 minutes but above the urban average, 19.4 minutes. The mean walking distance to a health centre in Gatsibo district is 56.8 minutes and half (50 percent) of the households walk for under an hour on average to reach a health centre.

13 All data of Distance from basic services are drawn from: EICV-3, Nyagatare District Profile. Oxford Policy Management Ltd. October 2012.

41

Nyabihu

22. Nyabihu district is part of the Western Province. The district has a population of 294,740 (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 537.7 sq.km. The population density accounts for 548 inhab/sq.km, ranking the district seventh country-wide, density is 18 percent higher than the national average (415 inhab/sq.km) and 30 percent higher than the Western Province average (420 inhab/sq.km), whereas the population growth 2002–2012 has been 0.9 percent, significantly lower than the national average (2.6 percent). The district is rural with a significant share of urban population accounting for 13.8 percent of total district.

23. The population is unevenly distributed over the district area—the most populated area is the sector of Mukamira (744 inhab/sq.km) while the least populated sector is Muringa (335 inhab./sq.km) in the southernmost part of the district. In addition, the population density and demographic growth in the decade 2002–2012 are contrasted among sectors. The growth rate ranges from -0.1 percent in Kintobo sector to 3.0 percent in Jenda. The average household size in Nyabihu district (4.5 persons/hh) is slightly above the national average household size (4.3 persons/hh).

24. In Nyabihu, household income is driven by agriculture (43 percent), followed by wage income (25.7 percent) and business income (12.4 percent), the smallest contributor to household income are rents with 5.6 percent. Most people aged 16 years and above in Nyabihu have independent farmer as their main job (51.2 percent). The second most frequent main job is wage farmer (22.7 percent), followed by independent non-farm job (13.4 percent) and wage non-farm (10.7 percent). The mean size of land cultivated per household in Nyabihu district is 0.46ha far below the national average (0.59ha), half of households (49.9 percent) in this district cultivate under 0.3 ha of land. Commercialization of crop production overall is relatively high at 28 percent in Nyabihu district. The mean share of harvest sold for fruit and vegetables (6.5 percent) is lower than for staple crops (29.5 percent).

25. The mean walking distance to primary school in Nyabihu district is 28.7 minutes; 44.6 percent of households are still between 30 and 59 minutes of a primary school, slightly unfavourably compared with the national averages. The mean walking distance in Nyabihu district is 61.4 minutes and only 47.5 percent of households walk for under an hour on average to reach a health centre.

Gakenke

26. Gakenke district is part of the Northern Province. The district has a population of 338,234 (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 704.1 sq.km. The population density accounts for 480 inhab/sq.km, ranking the district sixteenth country-wide; this density is 16 percent higher than the national average (415 inhab/sq.km) and 9 percent lower than the Northern Province average (527 inhab/sq.km), whereas the population growth 2002-2012 has been 0.5 percent, significantly lower than the national average (2.6 percent). The district is rural with a negligible share of urban population accounting for less than 3 percent of total district.

42

27. The population is unevenly distributed over the district area - the most populated area is the sector of Cyabingo (726 inhab/sq.km) while the least populated sector is Minazi (286 inhab./sq.km) in the southernmost part of the district. In addition, the population density and demographic growth in the decade 2002-2012 contrasted among sectors. The growth rate ranges from -0.1 percent in Busengo sector to 1.5 percent in Ruli. The average household size in Gakenke district (4.2 persons/hh) is slightly below the national average household size (4.3 persons/hh).

28. In Gakenke district, most people aged 16 years and above have wage farm as their main job (75 percent). The second most frequent main job is wage non-farm (11 percent). Compared to the national level, the condition of independent farmer is similar whereas the independent non-farm account for more than one third of the national average. The mean size of land cultivated per household in Gakenke district is 0.62ha higher than the national average, 43.1 percent of households cultivate under 0.3 ha of land. About 1.9 percent of households cultivate 3ha or more.

29. Commercialization of crop production overall, as measured by the share of harvest sold (including households selling zero crops), is 19.2 percent in Gakenke district, similar to the national average. The mean share of harvest sold for fruit and vegetables (19.1 percent) is higher than for staple crops (18 percent) in Gakenke district.

30. The mean walking distance to primary school in Gakenke district is 30.9 minutes; 44.6 percent of households are still between 30 and 59 minutes of a primary school. The mean walking distance to a health centre is 56.3 minutes and only 51 percent of households can reach a health centre by walking for under an hour on average.

Feeder Road Inventory Survey

31. In the selected project districts, the detailed road inventory survey was carried out at 100m intervals in March to May 2016. In each district, approximately 200 km of feeder roads were identified, which are considered to cover almost all existing secondary feeder roads. There are no official figures on Feeder Roads Class II, because they are not classified. In total, 1,200 km of roads were surveyed in the six districts.

32. Most of the surveyed roads are located in mountainous areas. The vast majority of feeder roads are in poor or very poor condition. Only 8.8 percent are in good condition, and 23 percent are in fair condition. The shares of roads in poor and very poor condition are about 27 percent and 42 percent, respectively. The road condition was assessed based on the engineers’ riding quality assessment. The adopted criteria are as follows:

Table 3.2:Road Condition

Road Condition Description Comfortable

Ride Speed Reference IRI value

Good Some Swaying and Wheel Bounce 50 to 60 km/h 8Fair Significant Swaying 40 to 50 km/h 10Poor Consistently Rough 30 to 40 km/h 12

43

Very Poor Very Rough < 30 km/h 14

44

Table 3.3: Basic Characteristics of Feeder Roads in the Project Districts

District Road ID Road Name Length (m)

Avg carriage-

way width (m)

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)

Length of Built up (m)

Length of Low lying area (m)

No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m) Rise /

Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Fall

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

Left Right Very Poor Poor Fair Good

Rutsiro RTFR1

Mushubati-Koko-Musasa-Nkomero-Boneza-Mushonyi-Nkora

39730 `6 M 13525 21720 102 1500 9740 53.2 186 53.2 10220 21210 8300 0

Rutsiro RTFR2Boneza-Nyakabanda-Musasa

13900 5.7 M 4295 8220 13 200 500 59.6 118 871 7100 4850 1950 0

Rutsiro RTFR3

Kiruri-Karambira-Karuvariyo-Terimbere

16900 6.1 M 5900 3140 11 1080 1820 65.5 72 725 0 2600 10800 3500

Rutsiro RTFR4 Gakeri-Bitenga-Bwiza-Mungoti 24650 5.5 M 7125 290 21 1840 1250 55.7 142 1021 5950 9000 9700 0

Rutsiro RTFR5Nkomane-Kanyara-Ntebe y'Ingwe-Seka

26700 4.2 M 700 650 1 0 0 103.8 478 1356 26700 0 0 0

Rutsiro RTFR6

Terimbere-Mujebeshi-Ku Rutindo rwa Mujebeshi

12700 4.3 M 3695 4780 4 0 0 77.3 103 1484 4450 5150 3100 0

Rutsiro RTFR7 Murunda-Kajugujugu 17380 5.4 M 3640 3130 62 0 5320 65.6 71 1183 4020 8215 5145 0

Rutsiro RTFR8Kinihira-Kamina-Murambi

8600 4.3 M 3020 3100 12 100 500 108 137 1506 2700 300 36002000

Rutsiro RTFR9 Ruronde-Mungoti 18800 5.9 M 5765 5320 39 200 550 89.6 122 1434 10270 4130 4400 0

Rutsiro RTFR9-1 4300 5.9 M 250 560 0 0 0 87.6 113 2010 2700 1600 0 0Rutsiro RTFR9-2 275 5 M 137.5 0 0 0 0 62.5 0 432 275 0 0 0Rutsiro RTFR10 Mubuga-Gatovu 8200 6 M 4100 1530 40 2300 500 47.8 28 750 0 700 6500 1000

Rutsiro RTFR11Nkomero-Bushonyi-Boneza

8600 5.2 M 2310 1110 35 850 0 65.1 50 993 4800 2200 16000

Nyaruguru NRFR1 Ndago- 20100 6.1 M 1870 2400 80 11190 3500 45.4 47 684 110 1070 11490 7330


Avg carriage-

way width

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)


Length of Low lying area

No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m)

Rise / Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

Cyahinda-Nyagisozi-Ngoma

Nyaruguru NRFR2 Kibeho-Mata-Ruramba 17800 6.5 M 5350 1800 42 6990 4200 48.2 41 537 0 0 3600 14200

Nyaruguru NRFR3 Munini-Kanama-Gatunda, Remera 17820 6.1 M 6345 2500 37 5520 13370 62.2 48 632 0 400 0 17420

Nyaruguru NRFR4

Giswi-Rugogwe-Kabere-Nshili Tea Factory-Kabere(Ruheru)

21300 5.7 M 2625.5 2900 70 0 0 64 76 820 200 3704 15236

2160

Nyaruguru NRFR5

Muganza-Buruhukiro-Rubumburi-Rugerero- RDB Nyungwe

29130 4.9 M 2780 4400 88 11900 11730 84.2 117 758 11990 4550 10560

2030

Nyaruguru NRFR6 Rukore-Bigugu-Nyabimata 13495 4.9 M 1900 2300 27 0 1400 102.3 114 1057 6400 0 200 6895

Nyaruguru NRFR7Ryabidandi-Viro-Akanyaru-Giswi

10490 5.9 M 3315 2200 35 5170 7460 57.5 97 851 3700 1220 5390 180

Nyaruguru NRFR8Sheke-Akanyaru-Cyahinda

8560 5.9 M 1450 2900 5 1700 2100 73.4 117 1634 3900 3660 0 1000

Nyaruguru NRFR9 Cyahinda-Rusenge 13600 5.7 M 2545 2700 42 4690 7340 52.5 48 139 0 3070 5880 4650

Nyaruguru NRFR10 Huye-Rusenge-Ngera-Nyagisozi 11300 5.9 M 1815 1200 70 1000 200 49.1 101 806 100 720 10380 100

Nyaruguru NRFR11Ruyenzi-Uwimbogo-Remera

14960 3.4 M 1560 3200 41 2000 1100 70.6 143 634 5660 5000 4300 0

Nyaruguru NRFR13Ndago-Akavuguto-Rusenge

5205 5.7 M 717.5 1605 15 2200 1190 69.8 38 1514 0 620 3065 1520

Nyaruguru NRFR14

Runyombyi(Ryagwiza)-Nteko-Kirarangombe-Nkanda

10800 6.7 M 2875 1700 19 4400 6360 56.5 53 937 0 7800 0 3000

Nyagatare NGFR1 Nyagatare – Kanyinya –

36305 6.3 R 7740 0 42 1180 1680 24.5 279 426 15215 10650 10440 0

46


Avg carriage-

way width

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)



No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m)

Rise / Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

KagitumbaNyagatare NGFR2 Kagezi–Matimba 5005 7.7 R 2855 0 4 900 4500 20.1 24 169 0 1100 3505 400

Nyagatare NGFR3

Nyabitekeri-Nshuli-Nyagatare-Rwempasha

8070 6 R 3420 700 36 8570 5700 25.2 68 226 100 1200 6000 9370

Nyagatare NGFR3-1 1400 6.1 R 200 527 4 1000 1000 13.7 14 533 300 300 800 0

Nyagatare NGFR4 Nyagatare-Nyarupfubire 9800 5.7 R 1575 0 0 2100 2100 36 28 927 7700 0 2100 0

Nyagatare NGFR5Kijojo-Ntoma-Musheri-Nyamiyonga

17000 5.6 R 8900 0 0 4500 5200 44 59 180 1500 2800 12700 0

Nyagatare NGFR5-1 2200 6 R 2100 0 0 600 500 33.7 11 435 0 2200 0 0

Nyagatare NGFR6 Nyakigando-Mimuli 16200 6 R 12150 0 9 12800 10100 41.8 45 226 700 700 12200 2600

Nyagatare NGFR7 Rurenge-Bushara-Kabuga 15730 5.1 R 6960 400 2 700 500 33.7 98 744 7390 500 7840 0

Nyagatare NGFR8Cyenkwanzi-Gikagati-Nyakiga-Ndego

8800 5.3 R 5490 0 0 5840 3740 47.7 53 592 2400 60 240 6100

Nyagatare NGFR9

Nyabitekeri-Kibirizi-Ngoma-Gafaru-Kabusunzu

10800 5 R 7300 0 5 1600 800 43.4 35 146 3500 3800 3400 100

Nyagatare NGFR10

Mimuli-Mukama-Muhambo-Gatunda

18400 6.5 R 6922.5 3100 18 3875 10455 35.4 95 331 1895 4430 5255 6820

Nyagatare NGFR11 Nyarurema-Muhambo 1205 7 R 1005 0 0 0 0 28.2 8 350 0 300 905 0

Nyagatare NGFR12Karangazi-Ndama-Rwabiharamba

9600 8 R 2050 0 1 2500 2300 38.3 29 786 3000 6200 400 0

Nyagatare NGFR13 Matimba-Musheri-Bihinga 8800 4.5 R 1550 700 0 3600 2200 56.3 32 548 4400 0 4400 0

Nyagatare NGFR14 Gasinga-Kabindi 6200 4.8 R 750 0 0 0 0 27 16 183 6200 0 0 0Gatsibo FR1 Gabiro-

Rwangingo-Gatungo-Ngarama-

33100 3.4 M 15800 2800 406 12000 4700 40.5 275 370 23800 8200 1100 0

47


Avg carriage-

way width

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)



No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m)

Rise / Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

Bugamba-Nyagahita

Gatsibo FR2Finance-Rwimbogo-Munini-Gikobwa

28200 6 M 10550 740 15600 12500 27.3 0 24 0 28200 0 0

Gatsibo FR3Muhura-Gasange-Njume-Kiramuruzi

29200 2.7 R 19500 0 4300 1300 35.3 86 321 19800 6600 2800 0

Gatsibo FR4

Mugera-Nyabicwamba-Gatungo-Nyagihanga-Karungeri

19170 2.8 M 12050 700 6300 1500 42 101 436 16961 2200 0 0

Gatsibo FR5 Ndatemwa-Gisenyi-Ruwafu 7000 1.9 R 3500 3300 3770 12.9 75 187 5930 700 0 370

Gatsibo FR7Rwangingo-Kigasha-Ngarama

8600 5.3 R 1800 200 2000 0 37.7 39 344 2000 6600 0 0

Gatsibo FR8Kiramuruzi-Bwunyu-Nyamarebe

4400 3.5 R 1850 0 900 900 33.2 10 278 900 2200 1300 0

Gatsibo FR9Kiramuruzi-Rwabagenzi-Nduba

3910 5.5 R 1500 200 1400 1400 36.6 9 305 0 2810 0 1100

Gatsibo FR11Kabarore-Nyabikiri-Nyamatete

10100 6 M 1800 200 200 200 41.7 11 720 1100 9000 0 0

Gatsibo FR12

Kabarore-Kabeza-Marimba-Nyabicwamba

18610 2.3 M 7350 2000 2800 3000 27.3 39 366 17300 1000 300 0

Gatsibo FR13

Rugarama-Kanyangese-Matunguru-Byimana-Gihomvu

15100 5.8 M 2150 900 0 0 23.3 96 410 0 15100 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR1 Gasiza-Kibisabo-Muringa-Gitebe 13730 3.4 M 2700 1940 50 4500 4400 83.3 55 83.3 13530 100 100 0

Nyabihu NBFR2 Kibisabo-Masha-Arusha-Mizingo-

24510 4.4 M 1310 9180 66 9400 9150 67.4 215 1209 10650 11660 2200 0

48


Avg carriage-

way width

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)



No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m)

Rise / Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

Masha-Gatindori-Musenyi

Nyabihu NBFR2-1 8300 3.5 M 50 1990 36 4850 3050 78.1 104 1552 5700 2600 0 0Nyabihu NBFR3 Nteranya-Kareba 6050 2.1 M 2450 1120 2 450 0 66.7 91 1244 6050 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR4

Kibisabo-Kanyaru-Rugamba-Gihirwa

12050 2.9 M 0 6520 9 2300 1050 111.4 500 2366 12050 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR4-1 1600 3 M 0 910 2 0 600 29.6 21 671 1600 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR5

Kirogotero-Rurembo Centre-Guriro-Murungu-Nyakiriba-Tubungo-Nkotsi

27120 3.3 M 3950 6200 106 6400 10100 103.5 524 1609 11420 15700 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR5-1 9100 3.4 M 1725 4000 0 2250 0 106.1 326 2081 3600 5400 0 100Nyabihu NBFR5-2 12370 5.1 M 2625 2500 17 0 0 87.7 152 1235 12270 100 0 0Nyabihu NBFR6 Rambura-Gasiza 2300 4.8 M 700 500 3 500 2100 58.4 6 1198 0 100 2200 0

Nyabihu NBFR7

Kazirankara-Nturo-Kaburamba-Murago

5280 4.5 M 650 810 23 500 3700 102.1 72 1834 880 300 4100 0

Nyabihu NBFR8Rugera-Nyamitanzi-Gisizi

6400 3 M 520 1440 32 80 4850 99.7 42 1328 1780 4620 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR9 Gipfuna-Muringa 9250 2.8 M 2150 4400 28 1300 200 64.3 53 1272 9250 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR10Gatovu-Mburabuturo-Murungu

6360 3.9 M 250 920 22 0 300 99 164 2077 6360 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR11 Kajagari-Kabatwa 5980 3 M 4380 1960 0 0 0 51.2 92 1135 5980 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR12 Vuga-Kamiro-Gaharawe 2870 4.9 M 2320 1280 0 0 0 34.5 51 1190 0 2870 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR13 Rwaza-Kabara-Kazenzo 5100 3.1 M 1100 1900 2 150 50 165.8 208 2360 4100 1000 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR14 Rurembo Centre-Mubayu-Cyanika 6030 2.4 M 575 1740 8 0 0 138.3 248 1832 5130 900 0 0

49


Avg carriage-

way width

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)



No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m)

Rise / Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

Nyabihu NBFR14-1 5440 3.7 M 1240 500 0 0 0 91.7 34 1345 2940 2500 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR15 Gasura-Jomba-St Jomba-Dagaza 14310 4.3 M 1905 2890 56 910 6490 68.9 50 1106 3600 2100 7810 800

Nyabihu NBFR16Kagogo-Gakamba-Munzuri(pinus)

15600 3.2 M 700 2110 15 3600 1400 61.9 92 1140 15600 0 0 0

Nyabihu NBFR17 Gasiza-Birembo 950 5 M 250 140 2 0 100 102.3 8 1271 100 850 0 0

Gakenke GKFR1BURANGA-KAMUBUGA-RUTABO-BASE

31900 5 M 8530 5500 71 500 3400 55.1 193 968.4 27100 3900 700 200

GKFR1-1 9800 5.4 M 1550 0 38 5900 3600 63.1 34 860.9 7500 2300 0 0GKFR1-2 8300 5.1 M 1100 0 22 8300 1000 41.9 29 1168.9 5800 2500 0 0

Gakenke GKFR2

KAZIBA-KANIGA-MATABA-MUVUMBA

23300 5.5 M 3260 2800 50 8200 9990 56.8 111 809 0 7700 6400 9200

Gakenke GKFR3GASHENYI-KARAMBO-KINONI

10700 5.9 M 2350 2200 27 2100 6100 44.7 55 814.7 4300 4300 2100 0

Gakenke GKFR4 GAHIRA-RULI 7500 6 M 3750 1300 18 4500 2800 68.9 23 1168.2 0 0 7600 0

Gakenke GKFR5KAGOMA-GAHUNGA-GIKOKWE

8900 4.2 M 1050 2200 19 700 1000 55.7 88 1153.6 6700 2200 0 0

Gakenke GKFR6GASHENYI-KIYAGA-RUSHASHI

9800 5.9 M 2600 650 20 1350 3200 51.9 54 427.8 200 9600 0 0

Gakenke GKFR7 RUSHASHI-GISIZA-TARE 13800 5.9 M 3450 1350 47 4000 9000 70.6 42 905 300 9400 4100 0

Gakenke GKFR8

BUSORO-MBIRIMA NA MATOVU-MAYANGE-GAHIRA

14300 5.9 M 4825 700 27 5800 8500 78.7 43 894.4 0 400 14000 0

Gakenke GKFR9KABUYE-TARE-RUKURA

11900 4.4 M 3550 100 11 2200 0 59.8 63 848.9 11800 0 0 0

Gakenke GKFR10 RUHANGA-BIZIBA 7800 4.6 M 2990 0 16 0 0 44.9 43 918.8 6200 1600 0 0

Gakenke GKFR11 BUHUNGA-KAMINA-

19600 5.6 M 6590 0 92 4300 2730 49.7 91 869.8 9790 7580 2330 0

50


Avg carriage-

way width (m)

Terrain (Mountai-

nous; Rolling)


Length of Low lying area (m)

No of CD

Works

Length of drain (m)

Rise / Fall (m/km)

No of

Rise/

Fall

Curva-ture

(degree / km)

Road Condition

RUHANGA-GASEKE

Gakenke GKFR12BUSHOKA-GISIZA-BUMBA

19000 4.6 M 5000 1900 36 7100 1000 56.7 141 775.1 19000 0 0 0

Gakenke GKFR13 MUNINDI-MUHONDO 10300 6 M 3400 0 20 6800 3600 56.1 23 470.1 0 0 10300 0

Gakenke GKFR14KABIGANDA-NKOMANE-NYABITARE

12400 5.4 M 3000 1300 28 3100 8300 59 57 1029.5 9000 3300 0 0

GKFR14-1 600 5 M 100 0 0 0 500 66.9 4 4 0 0 500 0

51

Current Traffic

33. Traffic count surveys were also carried out along each feeder road. Each survey was conducted for three days including market days. Traffic for 12 hours was recorded for two days, with 24-hour traffic counted on one day. Both motorized and non-motorized traffic was observed. Normally, one station was selected on each road segment. However, if a road is longer than 30 km, traffic was recorded at two stations on the road.

34. The current traffic volumes vary significantly from one road to another. The average motorized traffic is about 190 vehicles per day.

Table 3.4: Current Traffic on Each Feeder Road

District FR ID KM

Motorized Total Traffic Non Motorized

MotorCycles Light Vehicles (L.V) Heavy Vehicles (H.V.)

W/O Motor Cycle

W/MotorCycle

Bicy-cles

Pedes-trıans

MotorBike Cars Pick-

UpsJeeps, 4WDS

Mini- Buses and

CoastersBuses

Dynas, Daihatsu (>3.5T)

Medium Tracks 2axles (>5T)

Trucks 3 Axles

Semi Trailer

Truck Trailer

Rutsiro 1 39.7 168 7 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 12 180 159 1568Rutsiro 2 13.9 74 3 2 4 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 18 92 82 1613Rutsiro 3 16.9 39 0 1 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 8 47 7 1270Rutsiro 4 24.7 142 12 1 1 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 43 185 67 1030Rutsiro 5 26.7 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 81 1122Rutsiro 6 12.7 17 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 15 3 334Rutsiro 7 17.4 50 4 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 58 40 789Rutsiro 8 8.6 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 24 2245Rutsiro 9 23.4 42 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 45 41 2515Rutsiro 10 8.2 349 0 3 5 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 14 364 71 1030Rutsiro 11 8.6 100 0 3 2 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 16 116 163 405Nyaruguru 1 20.1 132 4 7 11 2 0 7 0 3 1 0 35 167 286 1372Nyaruguru 2 17.8 522 115 112 126 83 6 89 1 1 3 2 538 1060 346 1820Nyaruguru 3 17.8 94 17 11 4 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 57 151 141 2014Nyaruguru 4 21.3 62 15 5 4 1 0 10 1 0 0 0 36 98 20 229Nyaruguru 5 29.1 115 9 11 9 5 0 2 6 1 0 0 43 158 236 2080Nyaruguru 6 13.5 305 5 0 10 13 2 9 11 5 1 2 58 363 49 2682Nyaruguru 7 10.5 152 16 19 11 37 0 12 0 0 0 0 95 247 609 1409

District FR ID KM



W/O Motor Cycle

W/MotorCycle

Bicy-cles

Pedes-trıans


UpsJeeps, 4WDS

Mini- Buses and

CoastersBuses



Trucks 3 Axles

Semi Trailer

Truck Trailer

Nyaruguru 8 8.6 23 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 32 40 792Nyaruguru 9 13.6 47 0 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 53 46 127Nyaruguru 10 11.3 135 12 20 13 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 56 191 308 1525Nyaruguru 11 15.0 56 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 60 58 657Nyaruguru 13 5.2 27 3 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 10 37 48 1092Nyaruguru 14 10.8 431 3 1 4 2 0 10 0 0 0 0 20 451 701 664Nyagatare 1 36.3 175 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 179 268 450Nyagatare 2 5.0 431 9 4 2 2 18 4 11 4 0 0 55 486 867 697Nyagatare 3 18.1 466 8 8 10 10 0 7 16 0 0 0 58 523 381 429Nyagatare 4 9.8 372 10 13 3 0 0 2 7 0 0 0 35 408 347 360Nyagatare 5 19.2 153 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 9 161 125 150Nyagatare 6 16.2 161 1 1 1 13 0 6 7 0 0 0 29 191 383 1153Nyagatare 7 15.7 125 19 12 10 5 0 5 11 0 0 0 57 181 855 2249Nyagatare 8 8.8 103 2 3 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 10 113 277 1311Nyagatare 9 10.8 91 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 94 224 556Nyagatare 10 18.4 85 6 2 1 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 20 103 199 249Nyagatare 11 1.2 118 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 124 355 795Nyagatare 12 9.6 361 4 9 2 1 0 0 5 1 0 0 24 385 341 881Nyagatare 13 8.8 202 2 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 208 185 845Nyagatare 14 6.2 81 2 1 2 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 10 91 81 107Gatsibo 1 33.1 358 9 18 8 8 0 14 13 0 0 0 70 428 419 874Gatsibo 2 28.2 215 7 5 3 33 0 18 5 1 0 0 70 285 184 537Gatsibo 3 29.2 799 21 20 8 3 0 64 24 2 0 0 142 941 757 2359Gatsibo 4 19.2 168 23 25 16 0 0 44 36 0 0 0 144 312 421 888Gatsibo 5 7.0 105 4 2 2 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 16 121 187 210Gatsibo 7 8.6 54 4 1 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 10 64 92 1386Gatsibo 8 4.4 93 3 2 7 1 0 12 5 0 0 0 30 123 396 1998Gatsibo 9 3.8 120 3 2 2 1 0 6 1 0 0 0 15 135 169 1000Gatsibo 11 10.1 528 29 17 24 2 0 52 50 0 0 0 174 702 708 1184Gatsibo 12 18.6 305 24 5 4 0 0 49 25 0 0 0 107 412 1712 3405

53

District FR ID KM



W/O Motor Cycle

W/MotorCycle

Bicy-cles

Pedes-trıans


UpsJeeps, 4WDS

Mini- Buses and

CoastersBuses



Trucks 3 Axles

Semi Trailer

Truck Trailer

Gatsibo 13 15.1 436 2 2 3 3 0 10 5 0 0 0 25 461 798 782Nyabihu 1 13.7 76 0 3 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 9 85 83 655Nyabihu 2 32.8 64 0 3 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 10 74 51 270Nyabihu 3 6.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 392Nyabihu 4 13.7 33 5 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 10 44 61 967Nyabihu 5 48.6 117 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 7 123 189 2440Nyabihu 6 2.3 29 1 18 10 1 0 10 4 1 0 0 44 74 29 0Nyabihu 7 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 533Nyabihu 8 6.4 18 14 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 16 34 16 318Nyabihu 9 9.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 522Nyabihu 10 6.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 369Nyabihu 11 6.0 18 0 5 5 1 0 21 10 1 0 0 42 61 36 328Nyabihu 12 2.9 38 19 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 22 60 160 698Nyabihu 13 5.1 41 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 11 52 77 426Nyabihu 14 11.5 104 0 3 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 12 116 117 1500Nyabihu 15 14.3 24 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 26 43 432Nyabihu 16 15.6 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 64 115 1674Nyabihu 17 1.0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 62 680Gakenke 1 50 115 13 5 2 4 0 15 5 0 0 0 45 160 114 1156Gakenke 2 23.3 168 0 3 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 175 244 2066Gakenke 3 10.7 58 1 2 3 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 12 71 271 990Gakenke 4 7.5 146 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 149 710 1579Gakenke 5 8.9 55 2 3 2 2 0 2 4 1 0 0 15 70 156 704Gakenke 6 9.8 143 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 149 210 287Gakenke 7 13.8 134 2 4 3 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 21 154 401 1933Gakenke 8 14.3 212 2 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 14 227 268 648Gakenke 9 11.9 25 1 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 30 37 737Gakenke 10 7.8 35 3 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 9 44 73 417Gakenke 11 19.6 33 1 5 3 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 14 46 40 605Gakenke 12 19 63 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 64 175 1635

54

District FR ID KM



W/O Motor Cycle

W/MotorCycle

Bicy-cles

Pedes-trıans


UpsJeeps, 4WDS

Mini- Buses and

CoastersBuses



Trucks 3 Axles

Semi Trailer

Truck Trailer

Gakenke 13 10.3 183 10 3 7 0 0 13 3 0 0 0 36 219 277 1875Gakenke 14 13 30 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 34 163 570

55

Prioritization of Feeder Roads

35. Given the significance of unmet demand for feeder roads and currently available resources, prioritization is a must. Multi-criteria analysis is adopted to balance a wide variety of benefits from improved feeder roads against project costs. In addition to the Multi-criteria analysis approach, the task of prioritizing roads linking to the LWH and RSSP agricultural developed areas was included.

Weighted Benefits for the Multi-criteria analysis

36. On the benefit side, eight parameters are considered

Table 3.5: Prioritization Criteria and Weights

Indicator Weight1 Connectivity 0.102 Road condition 0.093 Remoteness 0.054 Traffic 0.115 Access to social and economic services 0.206 Agriculture potential 0.357 Community Priority 0.078 VUP Impact 0.03

1.00

37. Connectivity. To take full advantage of road improvement, it is essential to ensure connectivity of roads as a network. Using district topographic maps, the number of intersections with other roads is counted. Both roads within and outside the district are considered. The connectivity indicator is calculated, assigning the score of 5 to the FR with the highest number of intersected/ connected roads per kilometre of the FR under evaluation. For the other FR the indicator is proportionally decreased in relation to their number of intersected or connected roads per kilometre of the FR. This indicator is factored by 0.83 (ratio 5m/6m) for the design variant of 5 m cross section to take into consideration the higher traffic side frictions due to the tapering of the roadway.

38. Road condition. The road condition has a significant influence on the transportation costs and thereby onto its use. The bad condition of a FR is a limiting factor to the development of economic and social activities in its direct and wider influence areas. As discussed above, the road condition has been assessed through the field inspection providing the assessment every 100 m of the carriageway, drains, culverts and bridges. The road condition indicator is calculated by computing the percentage of the road length falling within each condition class and then weighting the percentages by the assigned scores to the four condition classes: Very poor (5), Poor (3.5), Fair (1.5) and Good (1).

39. Remoteness. The Project aims at providing better access to remote areas. In this regard, two criteria are combined: (a) level of permanent or periodic inaccessibility of the FR under evaluation and (b) the distance from the closest national road (NR). Passability is rated in 5 classes: (a) All weather - all vehicle categories; (b) All weather with 4WD; (c) Seasonal - all vehicle categories; (d) Seasonal with 4WD; and (e) Non motorable. On the other hand, the distance from the closest national road (RN roads) is evaluated as the distance from the central point of the FR alignment under evaluation and the closest national road, and this is proportionally graded with a score of 5 assigned to the FR with the longest distance.

40. Traffic. To meet the demand as much as possible, the current and future transport demand is considered. Not only the current Motorized (MT) and Non-Motorized (NMT) Traffic but also the current potential transport demand as well as future MT & NMT traffic over the next 10 years are evaluated. Expected traffic of the FR under evaluation is mainly based on the economic potential of the served area and consequent transport demand. As discussed, current MT & NMT traffic data are available from a three-day traffic survey. Latent transport demand is estimated by the marketed agricultural/ livestock production drawn from district statistics disaggregated by sector. Future traffic is projected based on:

Marketed agricultural products projections: Consultant estimate; Expected production of large development projects (LWH-RSSP): Data drawn

from MINAGRI publications, and Passengers traffic on the basis of demographic growth and GDP per capita

growth.

41. Access to social and economic services. Facilitation of access and proximity to social services and markets or selling point, the greater is the number of services benefitting the FR improvement, the higher will be the priority of planned improvement. The objective of this indicator is to assess the impact of the FR improvement on the living condition of the served area population. The served area is defined as direct and wider influence areas encompassing the land up to 2 and 5km on each side of the FR respectively. Using topographic maps and spatial techniques, the total number of facilities (markets, schools, and health facilities) that would be connected is computed and divided by km of the FR length for normalization purposes.

42. Agricultural potential. Agriculture is the main driver of the transport demand in rural areas; the assessment of its potential can substantiate the socioeconomic justification for roads’ improvement. In this frame, agriculture development and support projects can play an important role in stimulating the transportation demand, hence the need for improved roads. Cultivated areas, yields, production and market shares of main agricultural crops (maize, bean, cassava, soya, and rice) are collected at the sector level. The future production level is projected in a 10-year time horizon with reference to the agriculture development objectives set out

57

by MINAGRI in the framework of PSTA-314. Crop production is assumed to increase by 5 percent for all crops but cassava, for which 2 percent is assumed. These sector-level future production estimates are aggregated along each road segment.

43. Community priority. It is important to ensure that the project would address the people’s actual demand. Public consultations were organized at the sector administrative centre with the presence of the leaders of at least four cells. After debating the condition of basic services and infrastructure, the participants were asked to establish a list of the first four (4) improvement needs and thereafter indicate the service or infrastructure deemed as the first priority for improvement. This indicator is expected to show what extent the road improvement is felt as a factor for improving living conditions. The consultations are complemented by the interview with the district officer in charge of feeder roads. The highest score of five (5) is attributed the first priority.

44. Impact on vulnerable sectors. The Vision 2020 Umurenge Program (VUP) beneficiaries in the Sectors are considered to be particularly vulnerable. Thus, the FR improvement is expected to produce more social impacts when the project road passes through VUP beneficiary areas. The lengths of the segments of the FR traversing one or more VUP sectors are measured and thereafter summed up along each FR. The FR with the longest stretch of traversed VUP sectors is attributed the score of five (5).

Costing

45. A preliminary concept design was prepared for each road. Technical standards and specifications were followed based on the Rwanda Feeder Road Design Manual, Rwanda Feeder Road Guidelines for Design and Rwanda Draft Road Geometric Design Manual, which are most suited for Rwandan conditions (see technical project description for more details).

46. Following the preliminary/concept design, project cost estimates were prepared based on unit construction rates, which were derived from recent prices for road, bridge and other structural works of a similar scope and nature, in the region and elsewhere, and included the basic costs of materials, labor, equipment and transport. The following items are priced with each district’s conditions considered. Accuracy of the estimate is of the order of +/15 percent.

Site Installation Topography Site Clearing and Cleaning Removal of Structures and Obstructions Earthworks (Ground Leveling, Waste, Borrow, Embankment from

Excavation, Rock Excavation) Bridges

14 PSTA-3 - Plan Stratégique pour la Transformation Agricole 2013/14 – 2017/18.

58

Pipe Culverts Box Culverts Lined Longitudinal Ditches Concrete Works Erosion Protection Gravel (lateritic) Wearing Course Road Furniture Miscellaneous Items

Table 3.6: Unit Rates of Individual Work Items

Item No. District Description Unit Gatsibo Nyaru-

guruNyag-atare Rutsiro Nyabihu Gake-

nke

1.2 Site Installation and Withdrawal of Site Equipment LS 15% of total costs

P TOPOGRAPHY

1.2 Topography Before, During, and After Works Km 200.00 200 200 200.00 200.00 200.00

PRELIMINARY WORKS201 Site Clearing and Cleaning m2 0.76 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.75

203c Removal of Culverts (wood, pipe) and Headwalls LM 200.00 200 200 200.00 200.00 200.00

203h Removal of Bridge Structure Wooden Deck/Abutments Ea. 500.00 500 500 500.00 500.00 500.00

EARTHWORK204c Rocky Cuts Put in Definitive Deposit m3 50.00 50 50 50.00 50.00 50.00

Added Cost to Price 403 (Distance >500m)

m3*Km 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

206 Re-levelling, Compaction and Finishing of the Formation m2 2.17 1.27 2.17 1.28 1.28 1.27

205b Fill from Borrow Pits m3 10.13 8.97 10.13 7.00 7.00 8.00

207 Added Cost of Transportation to Item 408 beyond 5km

m3*Km 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

204d Surplus UC Excavation m3 3.79 7 3.79 2.56 1.88 2.50

205a Embankment from UC Excavation (Cuts of Any Nature) m3 5.58 3.85 5.58 3.85 3.85 5.00

206 Added Cost to Price for 412 (Distance Greater Than 5Km)

m3*Km 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

ROAD PAVEMENT

301 Wearing Course with Murram 200mm Thick m3 14.90 11.15 14.9 15.60 25.00 18.75

301b Wearing Course with Murram, average 75mm Thick m3 14.90 11.15 14.9 15.60 25.00 18.75

207 Added Value to Items 501 of Transportation Beyond 10km

m3*Km 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

DRAINAGE

402 Supply and Laying of Concrete Culverts 100cm LM 171.00 180 180 180.00 180.00 180.00

405a Stone Masonry for Head Walls m3 72.00 53 72 53.00 53.00 53.00405b Masonry Head Walls with Ditch Block m3 72.00 53 72 53.00 53.00 53.00406 Stone Masonry Ditches m3 72.00 53 72 53.00 53.00 53.00

59

Item No. District Description Unit Gatsibo Nyaru-

guruNyag-atare Rutsiro Nyabihu Gake-

nke

404d Reinforced Concrete, Thick = 20cm (Stone Masonry Ditch Top Slab) m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404c Reinforced Concrete, Thick = 25cm (Box Culvert Approach Slabs) m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

203f Demolition and Disposal of the Existing Slab Bridge with Abutments LS 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Concrete Box Culvert 3 barrel 3mWx3mH7mL m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Concrete Box Culvert 3mWx3mH7mL (2 each) m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert 3mWx2.4mH7mL (2 each) m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert 3mWx2.1mH7mL (2 each) m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert 2.1mWx2.1mH7mL m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert 1.8Wx1.8mH7mL (2 each) m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

404a Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert 2 barrel 3mWx3mH7mL m3 400.00 400 400 400.00 400.00 400.00

403 Mitre Drains LM 10.00 10 10 10.00 10.00 10.00501 Steel Railing for Box Culverts LM 20.00 96 96 96.00 96.00 96.00509 Gabions with Filter Cloth m3 100.00 100 — 100.00510 Widening of Bridge m2 800 40.00 40.00 800.00511 Widening of Culvert Slab m2 600 30.00 30.00 600.00512 New Bridges m2 53.00705 Masonry Retaining Wall m3 53 53.00 53.00

MISCELLANEOUS502.2 Supply and Installation of Road Signs Ea. 100 100 100 100.00 100.00 100.00

502.1 Supply and Installation of Project Information Sign Ea. 100 250 250 250.00 250.00 250.00

47. With principal quantities estimated according to sections of the Standard Specifications, the total work costs are estimated for each of the road segments. The average cost is about US$112,000 per km, with a wide range from US$54,000 to US$381,000, primarily depending on site-specific conditions (Table 3.7).

Table 3.7: Investment Cost Estimates by Road Segment

District Road ID Length Unit Rate (US$1000/km) Total Cost (US$, thousands)Rutsiro RTFR1 39.7 88 3,502Rutsiro RTFR2 13.9 84 1,172Rutsiro RTFR3 16.9 79 1,327Rutsiro RTFR4 24.7 98 2,418Rutsiro RTFR5 26.7 91 2,442Rutsiro RTFR6 12.7 100 1,270Rutsiro RTFR7 17.4 146 2,545Rutsiro RTFR8 8.6 118 1,015Rutsiro RTFR9 23.4 108 2,533Rutsiro RTFR10 8.2 135 1,111

60

District Road ID Length Unit Rate (US$1000/km) Total Cost (US$, thousands)Rutsiro RTFR11 8.6 132 1,138Nyaruguru NRFR1 20.1 107 2,147Nyaruguru NRFR2 17.8 68 1,202Nyaruguru NRFR3 17.8 90 1,599Nyaruguru NRFR4 21.3 104 2,217Nyaruguru NRFR5 29.1 114 3,305Nyaruguru NRFR6 13.5 101 1,368Nyaruguru NRFR7 10.5 120 1,265Nyaruguru NRFR8 8.6 108 928Nyaruguru NRFR9 13.6 97 1,320Nyaruguru NRFR10 11.3 171 1,932Nyaruguru NRFR11 15.0 148 2,216Nyaruguru NRFR13 5.2 91 472Nyaruguru NRFR14 10.8 94 1,020Nyagatare NGFR1 36.3 63 2,301Nyagatare NGFR2 5.0 74 369Nyagatare NGFR3 18.1 74 1,337Nyagatare NGFR4 9.8 67 657Nyagatare NGFR5 19.2 82 1,567Nyagatare NGFR6 16.2 56 912Nyagatare NGFR7 15.7 69 1,090Nyagatare NGFR8 8.8 73 641Nyagatare NGFR9 10.8 73 783Nyagatare NGFR10 18.4 76 1,402Nyagatare NGFR11 1.2 70 84Nyagatare NGFR12 9.6 71 682Nyagatare NGFR13 8.8 86 758Nyagatare NGFR14 6.2 79 492Gatsibo GBFR1 33.1 70 2,317Gatsibo GBFR2 28.2 67 1,884Gatsibo GBFR3 29.2 72 2,108Gatsibo GBFR4 19.2 68 1,298Gatsibo GBFR5 7.0 66 462Gatsibo GBFR7 8.6 65 555Gatsibo GBFR8 4.4 66 289Gatsibo GBFR9 3.8 77 293Gatsibo GBFR11 10.1 63 637Gatsibo GBFR12 18.6 69 1,282Gatsibo GBFR13 15.1 86 1,301Nyabihu NBFR1 13.7 166 2,278Nyabihu NBFR2 32.8 150 4,934Nyabihu NBFR3 6.1 131 796Nyabihu NBFR4 13.7 197 2,703Nyabihu NBFR5 48.6 120 5,835Nyabihu NBFR6 2.3 121 279Nyabihu NBFR7 5.3 157 830Nyabihu NBFR8 6.4 203 1,296Nyabihu NBFR9 9.3 210 1,954Nyabihu NBFR10 6.4 187 1,194Nyabihu NBFR11 6.0 116 694

61

District Road ID Length Unit Rate (US$1000/km) Total Cost (US$, thousands)Nyabihu NBFR12 2.9 151 437Nyabihu NBFR13 5.1 197 1,005Nyabihu NBFR14 11.5 157 1,805Nyabihu NBFR15 14.3 165 2,356Nyabihu NBFR16 15.6 162 2,525Nyabihu NBFR17 1.0 341 341Gakenke GKFR1 50.0 109 5,428Gakenke GKFR2 23.3 110 2,570Gakenke GKFR3 10.7 116 1,237Gakenke GKFR4 7.5 79 591Gakenke GKFR5 8.9 158 1,410Gakenke GKFR6 9.8 75 737Gakenke GKFR7 13.8 98 1,353Gakenke GKFR8 14.3 82 1,177Gakenke GKFR9 11.9 94 1,122Gakenke GKFR10 7.8 97 754Gakenke GKFR11 19.6 96 1,887Gakenke GKFR12 19 114 2,166Gakenke GKFR13 10.3 86 888Gakenke GKFR14 13 110 1,435

62

Table 3.8: Prioritization Ranking Based on Multi Criteria Analysis (revised)

District FR No.

Weight 0.1 0.09 0.05 0.11 0.2 0.35 0.07 0.03

Weighted score

Final Ranking

Priority Indicators [5,1]

km Connectivity Road Condition Remoteness Traffic

Access to social and

econ. services

Agriculture potential

Community Priority VUP Impact

Rutsiro RTFR9 23.4 3.07 3.97 4.8 5 0.89 5 4.33 5 3.84 1Rutsiro RTFR11 8.6 5 3.97 4.48 1.54 5 0.53 4.67 0 2.76 2Rutsiro RTFR4 24.7 1.16 3.08 4.03 3.62 0.35 2.47 4.67 0.58 2.27 3Rutsiro RTFR1 39.7 1.44 3.47 5 3.41 1.64 1.39 4.56 0.71 2.24 4Rutsiro RTFR7 17.4 1.65 3.25 4.18 3.11 0.93 1.78 3.61 0.63 2.09 5Rutsiro RTFR2 13.9 3.09 3.99 2.92 1.33 1.65 0.39 4.74 0 1.76 6Rutsiro RTFR3 16.9 1.7 1.7 4.6 1.78 1.28 0.71 4.33 1.23 1.59 7Rutsiro RTFR8 8.6 5 2.55 2.79 1.16 0.28 0.47 5 0 1.57 8Rutsiro RTFR5 26.7 1.07 5 2.27 2.05 0.01 1.12 4 0 1.57 9Rutsiro RTFR6* 12.7 2.26 3.54 2.75 1.39 0.19 0.9 3.94 0.09 1.47 10Rutsiro RTFR10 8.2 3.5 1.61 2.02 2.21 0.14 0.45 5 0 1.37 11Nyarugur

u NRFR4 21.3 5 1.84 2.51 2.37 0.85 5 4.17 5 3.41 1

Nyaruguru NRFR2 17.8 1.09 1.11 1.98

5 4.122.72 1.25 0.7 2.74 2

Nyaruguru NRFR9 13.6 4.51 1.75 2.71

1.19 4.571.73 3.13 0 2.61 3

Nyaruguru NRFR14 10.8 1.49 2.8 3.23

2.25 4.921.18 3.33 5 2.59 4

Nyaruguru NRFR6 13.5 3.11 2.85 4.4 1.7 2.33 2.02 3.54 5 2.55 5

Nyaruguru NRFR7 10.5 4 2.97 2.6 1.78 5 0.55 4.38 0.84 2.52 6

Nyaruguru NRFR5 29.1 1.33 3.16 5 2.19 1.17 2.86 3.33 2.95 2.47 7

Nyaruguru NRFR1 20.1 1.93 1.5 1.95 2.12 4.79 1.61 3.33 1.06 2.44 8

Nyaruguru NRFR10* 11.3 1.71 1.66 3.38

2.33 1.412.85 5 0.73 2.4 9

Nyarugur NRFR13 5.2 1.86 1.57 3.01 1.82 4.97 0.76 2.08 0 2.08 10

District FR No.

Weight 0.1 0.09 0.05 0.11 0.2 0.35 0.07 0.03

Weighted score

Final Ranking




econ. services



uNyarugur

u NRFR3 17.8 1.63 1.06 1.91 1.51 3.33 1.68 1.88 3.07 2 11

Nyaruguru NRFR11 15 1.73 3.47 3.39 1.58 0.19 1.96 2.5 5 1.88 12

Nyaruguru NRFR8 8.6 1.51 3.89 2.29 0.33 3.51 0.2 3.33 0.74 1.68 13

Nyagatare NGFR1 36.3 1.58 3.55 4.6 3.21 0.29 4.84 5 0.71 3.19 1Nyagatare NGFR7 15.7 1.34 3.5 2.73 5 0.27 5 2.71 1.08 3.16 2Nyagatare NGFR11 1.2 5 3.33 1.58 1.43 5 0.35 3.33 5 2.54 3Nyagatare NGFR6 16.2 2.79 2.14 3.32 3.02 0.63 3.15 2.29 1.6 2.41 4Nyagatare NGFR3 18.1 1.67 1.38 2.05 3.36 0.75 3.03 2.64 0 2.16 5Nyagatare NGFR10 18.4 1.96 2.12 5 2.35 0.69 2.03 4.17 3.85 2.15 6Nyagatare NGFR9 10.8 1.67 3.21 3.79 1.84 0.47 1.7 3.33 0 1.77 7Nyagatare NGFR8 8.8 1.71 1.66 2.27 2.01 0.35 2.38 1.88 2.42 1.76 8Nyagatare NGFR5 19.2 0.78 4.25 3.09 1.81 0.31 1.97 1.67 1.54 1.73 9Nyagatare NGFR13 8.8 1.03 2 3.72 1.8 1.37 0.94 5 1.55 1.67 10Nyagatare NGFR4 9.8 0.31 2.68 1.95 2.55 0.93 1.53 3.75 0 1.63 11Nyagatare NGFR2* 5 1.81 1.9 1.37 3.62 1.43 1.01 2.29 0 1.62 12Nyagatare NGFR14 6.2 0.49 3.89 1.77 1.25 0.04 1.32 1.98 0.15 1.24 13Nyagatare NGFR12 9.6 0.63 2.16 1.9 2.19 0.7 0.64 2.92 0 1.16 14Gatsibo GBFR3 29.2 5 4.38 1.57 4.77 2.3 3.34 4.17 5 3.57 1Gatsibo GBFR1 33.1 2.65 4.51 3.54 5 2.78 3.62 4.17 0.75 3.54 2Gatsibo GBFR2 28.2 1.73 3.5 2.9 4.44 2.13 5 1.67 0 3.41 3Gatsibo GBFR12 18.6 3.84 4.87 5 3.48 2.82 2.96 5 0 3.4 4Gatsibo GBFR13 15.1 2.79 3.5 2.04 3.18 2.5 3.05 4.38 0 2.92 5Gatsibo GBFR11 10.1 4.82 3.64 4 2.34 4.02 1.88 1.67 0 2.85 6Gatsibo GBFR7 8.6 4.15 3.88 1.98 1.66 5 1.08 4.38 0 2.73 7Gatsibo GBFR4 19.2 3.39 4.82 2.02 2.17 2.7 1.56 3.89 2.04 2.53 8Gatsibo GBFR5 7 3.24 4.61 1.12 1.86 2.91 0.89 4.44 1.2 2.24 9Gatsibo GBFR9 3.8 3.4 3.5 1.71 1.01 4.71 0.49 2.5 0.65 2.16 10Gatsibo GBFR8 4.4 2.95 3.22 1.72 1.37 4 0.67 1.46 0.75 1.98 11

64

District FR No.

Weight 0.1 0.09 0.05 0.11 0.2 0.35 0.07 0.03

Weighted score

Final Ranking




econ. services



Nyabihu NBFR3 6.1 0.79 5 2.05 3.77 5 4.17 0.83 0 3.56 1Nyabihu NBFR5 48.6 0.44 4.34 8.22 5 1.16 5 1 0 3.45 2Nyabihu NBFR2 32.8 0.14 4.11 2.92 4.4 0.04 5.25 0.79 0.91 2.94 3Nyabihu NBFR10 6.4 0.75 5 4.91 3.91 0.05 3.49 0.78 3.57 2.59 4Nyabihu NBFR11 6 1.19 5 1.32 3.66 0.1 2.89 1 0.17 2.14 5Nyabihu NBFR13 5.1 0.93 4.71 4.39 0.59 4.63 0.34 1 0.05 1.92 6Nyabihu NBFR14 11.5 0.62 4.56 5 2.39 2.78 0.61 0.72 0 1.8 7Nyabihu NBFR15 14.3 0.5 2.65 2.68 3.57 1.65 1.11 0.72 5 1.73 8Nyabihu NBFR17 1 5 3.66 3.39 0.46 2.64 0.26 0.75 0 1.72 9Nyabihu NBFR8 6.4 0.74 3.92 3.7 0.7 3.65 0.58 0.83 1.32 1.72 10Nyabihu NBFR7 5.3 0.9 2.2 3.52 0.82 2.83 0.65 1 2.61 1.5 11Nyabihu NBFR16* 15.6 0.3 5 4.73 1.98 0.04 1.04 0.75 2.69 1.44 12Nyabihu NBFR1* 13.7 0.52 4.96 2.75 2.29 0.3 0.71 1 1.72 1.32 13Nyabihu NBFR4* 13.7 0.7 5 4.99 1.39 0.1 0.89 0.75 0 1.31 14Nyabihu NBFR9* 9.3 0.51 5 4.18 1.14 0.13 0.48 0.94 2.78 1.18 15Nyabihu NBFR6 2.3 2.07 1.59 2.7 0.38 1.18 0.26 1 0 0.93 16Nyabihu NBFR12 2.9 1.66 3.5 2.06 0.52 0 0.18 1 0.45 0.79 17Gakenke GKFR11 19.6 2.55 2.13 3.96 3.39 2.24 3.94 5 5 3.34 1Gakenke GKFR1 50 1.5 1.62 5 5 0.58 5 4.06 1.38 3.29 2Gakenke GKFR3 10.7 2.34 2.42 3.63 2.64 2.51 3.72 4.17 0.04 3.02 3Gakenke GKFR10 7.8 3.21 1.58 3.18 1.95 3.25 2.88 4.38 1.79 2.85 4Gakenke GKFR2 23.3 1.61 4.9 3.25 2.77 2.24 2.75 4.38 2.17 2.85 5Gakenke GKFR4 7.5 5 5 3.19 1.62 3.38 0.75 3.75 0 2.49 6Gakenke GKFR8 14.3 1.75 4.92 4.28 1.77 1.51 1.82 3.44 0 2.2 7Gakenke GKFR14 13 2.88 1.73 3.13 1.3 3.16 1.1 5 0 2.11 8Gakenke GKFR7 13.8 2.72 2.98 0.75 1.36 4.09 0.53 4.16 0 2.02 9Gakenke GKFR9 11.9 2.1 1.42 4.93 0.64 5 0.62 1.98 0 2.01 10Gakenke GKFR6 9.8 3.83 2.13 0.21 0.88 4.4 0.49 3.75 0 2 11Gakenke GKFR13 10.3 2.43 5 2.89 1.37 2.31 0.92 2.91 0 1.98 12Gakenke GKFR12 19 1.97 1.43 4.58 1.01 2.23 0.81 4.38 0 1.7 13Gakenke GKFR5 8.9 2.81 1.61 1.91 1.25 0.59 1.08 4.17 2.05 1.51 14

65

48. The ToR for the consultant included consultation with the districts and consideration of significant other agricultural linkages among other factors in the prioritization process. This evaluation was done subsequent to the Multi Criteria Analysis. Roads indicated with an asterisk* have been promoted in the selection by the consultant due to consideration of such agricultural/milk production and road linkage issues.

66

Summary of the Indicative Feeder Road Works

49. The multi-criteria analysis, outlined above, guided the initial preparation of a preliminary list of priority roads. This proposal was used as the basis for further consultation with the District Authorities and was also evaluated in relation to the links to the agriculture-developed areas by LWH/RSSP projects. The district consultations revealed strong support for certain roads that had been dropped in the ranking by the application of the cost per beneficiary despite having strong agricultural potential and high community priority among other multi-criteria indicators. Consideration of the links to previous and existing LWH/RSSP project interventions also pointed to some need to rework the initial prioritization proposal.

50. Table 3.9(a) below shows the list of indicative roads (first priority) that are to be improved. Given the resources available, the project aims to support rehabilitation works along 25 feeder roads, of which the total length is about 450km. Based on the preliminary cost estimates, the total rehabilitation costs are estimated at about US$46.86 million. In total, an additional 625,000 people are estimated to directly benefit from the Project because of the AF. Table 3.9(b) shows other first priority indicative roads that may be considered for project interventions should further financing become available.

Table 3.9(a): List of Indicative Roads to be Rehabilitated (First Priority with RAPs completed)

District FR ID Name km Rehab Cost (US$, millions)

Rutsiro RTFR1 Mushubati-Koko-Musasa-Nkomero-Boneza-Mushonyi-Nkora

39.7 3.502

Rutsiro RTFR4 Gakeri-Bitenga-Bwiza-Mungoti 24.65 2.418Rutsiro RTFR6 Terimbere-Mujebeshi-Ku Rutindo rwa Mujebeshi 12.7 1.27

Nyaruguru NRFR2 Kibeho-Mata-Ruramba 17.8 1.262Nyaruguru NRFR14 Runyombyi(Ryagwiza)-Nteko-Kirarangombe-Nkanda 10.8 1.071

Nyaruguru NRFR9 Cyahinda-Rusenge 13.6 1.386Nyaruguru NRFR10 Huye-Rusenge-Ngera-Nyagisozi 11.3 2.029Nyaruguru NRFR13 Ndago-Akavuguto-Rusenge 5.2 0.496Nyagatare NGFR11 Nyarurema-Muhambo 1.2 0.088Nyagatare NGFR7 Rurenge-Bushara-Kabuga 15.7 1.144Nyagatare NGFR6 Nyakigando-Mimuli 16.2 0.957Nyagatare NGFR8 Cyenkwanzi-Gikagati-Nyakiga-Ndego 8.8 0.673Nyagatare NGFR1 Nyagatare - Kanyinya - Kagitumba 36.3 2.416Gatsibo GBFR12 Kabarore-Kabeza-Marimba-Nyabicwamba 18.6 1.282

Gatsibo GBFR1 Gabiro-Rwangingo-Gatungo-Ngarama-Bugamba-Nyagahita

33.1 2.317

Gatsibo GBFR2 Finance-Rwimbogo-Munini-Gikobwa 28.2 1.884Nyabihu NBFR3 Nteranya-Kareba 6.1 0.796

67

Nyabihu NBFR2 Kibisabo-Masha-Arusha-Mizingo-Masha-Gatindori-Musenyi

32.8 4.934

Nyabihu NBFR4 Kibisabo-Kanyaru-Rugamba-Gihirwa 13.65 2.703Nyabihu NBFR1 Gasiza-Kibisabo-Muringa-Gitebe 13.73 2.278Nyabihu NBFR16 Kagogo-GakambaMunzuri(pinus) 15.6 2.525Nyabihu NBFR9 Gipfuna-Muringa 9.25 1.945Gakenke GKFR3 Gashenyi-Karambo-Kinoni 10.7 1.299Gakenke GKFR1 Buranga-Kamubuga-Rutabo-Base 50 5.428Gakenke GKFR10 Ruhanga-Biziba 7.8 0.754Total 453.48 46.857

Table 3.9b: List of other First Priority Indicative Roads

District FR ID Name KmRehab Cost

(US$, millions)

Rutsiro RTFR9 Ruronde-Mungoti 23.37 2,532.7Nyaruguru NRFR3 Munini-Kanama-Gatunda, Remera 17.82 1.598

Nyaruguru NRFR4 Giswi-Rugogwe-Kabere-Nshili Tea Factory-Kabere(Ruheru) 21.3 2.217

Nyaruguru NRFR6 Rukore-Bigugu-Nyabimata 13.5 1.368Nyagatare NGFR10 Mimuli-Mukama-Muhambo-Gatunda 18.4 1.472Nyagatare NGFR3 Nyabitekeri-Nshuli-Nyagatare-Rwempasha 18.07 1.337Nyagatare NGFR2 Kagezi - Matimba 5.01 0.369Gatsibo GBFR8 Kiramuruzi-Bwunyu-Nyamarebe 4.4 0.303Gatsibo GBFR7 Rwangingo-Kigasha-Ngarama 8.6 0.583Nyabihu NBFR11 Kajagari-Kabatwa 5.98 0.694Nyabihu NBFR12 Vuga-Kamiro-Gaharawe 2.87 0.436Total 139.32 12.91

Economic Efficiency of the Indicative Feeder Road Works

51. Most of the indicative roads are found to be economically viable. Although feeder roads are often evaluated and prioritized from the social and rural development point of view, as shown above, it is still important to ensure economic efficiency of investment. To see economic efficiency of interventions on the indicative roads, the Roads Economic Decision (RED) model is used under simplified assumptions, in which road user cost benefits are compared with necessary investment costs. The main assumptions made are as follows:

Type of vehicle: seven categories used: Medium passenger car, goods vehicles, small buses, light truck, medium truck, motorcycle and bicycles

Current traffic: Based on the actual traffic count as shown in Table 3.4. Traffic growth: Assumed depending on local agricultural production and population

growth in each district, i.e., about 0.9 percent growth per annum for passenger cars, 2.8 percent for goods vehicles, 5 percent for small buses, 3.5 percent for trucks, and 0.9 percent for motor- and bicycles

Intervention: Upgrade to 6-meter gravel road and maintain it at a roughness of 5

68

Baseline scenario: Do minimum, i.e., grading every 60 days Main economic benefits: Reduction in road user costs and travel time Emission reduction: Potential CO2 reduction is evaluated at a constant social value

of US$30 per ton and included as an additional benefit (also see the following section)

Project life: 20 years Discount rate: 6 percent

52. The results indicate that the select roads are largely economically viable, with an average IRR of 13.5 percent. Evaluated at a discount rate of 6 percent, the average net present value is estimated at about US$1.37 million, confirming the general economic viability of the Project (Table 3.10). Notably, however, some of the roads have a lower IRR than the threshold: For four road segments in 3 districts, Rutsiro, Nyaruguru and Nyabihu, the NPV is estimated to be negative, i.e., RTFR6, NRFR9, NRFR10, and NBFR9. The results are not surprising, because the above prioritization framework based on multi‐criteria analysis (MCA) takes into account not only efficiency in investment but also social benefits and community preference. These economically unviable roads tend to have either very low traffic or very high investment cost per km, while providing crucial accessibility to remote areas and enhancing access to social facilities.

Table 3.10: Economic Efficiency of Interventions on the Indicative Roads (first priority to be rehabilitated)

District FR ID Name ADT, including motorcycle

Unit cost (US$1,000/

KM)

IRR (%)

NPV (US$1,00

0 at 6%)

Rutsiro RTFR1

Mushubati-Koko-Musasa-Nkomero-Boneza-Mushonyi-Nkora 180 88.1 23.6 5,644

Rutsiro RTFR4 Gakeri-Bitenga-Bwiza-Mungoti 185 97.5 14.9 1,915

Rutsiro RTFR6 Terimbere-Mujebeshi-Ku RutindorwaMujebeshi 15 100.0 0.4 -494

Nyaruguru NRFR2 Kibeho-Mata-Ruramba 1,060 67.5 25.5 2,289

Nyaruguru

NRFR14

Runyombyi(Ryagwiza)-Nteko-Kirarangombe-Nkanda 451 94.4 18.9 1,148

Nyaruguru NRFR9 Cyahinda-Rusenge 53 97.0 2.1 -362

Nyaruguru

NRFR10 Huye-Rusenge-Ngera-Nyagisozi 191 171.0 1.3 -597

Nyaruguru

NRFR13 Ndago-Akavuguto-Rusenge 37 90.7 7.0 35

NyagatareNGFR1

1 Nyarurema-Muhambo 124 69.5 19.7 101Nyagatare NGFR7 Rurenge-Bushara-Kabuga 181 69.3 7.5 132Nyagatare NGFR6 Nyakigando-Mimuli 191 56.3 6.2 12

Nyagatare NGFR8Cyenkwanzi-Gikagati-Nyakiga-

Ndego 113 72.8 15.9 542Nyagatare NGFR1 Nyagatare - Kanyinya - Kagitumba 179 63.4 20.5 3,046Gatsibo GBFR1 Kabarore-Kabeza-Marimba- 412 68.9 14.2 908

69

District FR ID Name ADT, including motorcycle

Unit cost (US$1,000/

KM)

IRR (%)

NPV (US$1,00

0 at 6%)

2 Nyabicwamba

Gatsibo GBFR1 Gabiro-Rwangingo-Gatungo-Ngarama-Bugamba-Nyagahita 428 70.0 15.1 1,852

Gatsibo GBFR2 Finance-Rwimbogo-Munini-Gikobwa 285 66.8 11.7 888

Nyabihu NBFR3 Nteranya-Kareba 0 131.6 16.4 723

Nyabihu NBFR2Kibisabo-Masha-Arusha-Mizingo-

Masha-Gatindori-Musenyi 74 150.4 15.7 4,178

Nyabihu NBFR4 Kibisabo-Kanyaru-Rugamba-Gihirwa 44 197.3 20.0 3,275

Nyabihu NBFR1 Gasiza-Kibisabo-Muringa-Gitebe 85 166.3 15.9 1,899

Nyabihu NBFR16

Kagogo-GakambaMunzuri(pinus)64 161.9 14.4 1,735

Nyabihu NBFR9 Gipfuna-Muringa 0 210.1 4.5 -206Gakenke GKFR3 Gashenyi-Karambo-Kinoni 71 115.6 22.1 1,768Gakenke GKFR1 Buranga-Kamubuga-Rutabo-Base 160 108.6 13.5 3,501Gakenke GKFR

10 Ruhanga-Biziba 44 97.00 11.4 327

Average 185 107.4 13.5 1,370

Emission Reduction Calculation

53. In theory, road improvement can generally help to increase vehicle speed and enhance fuel efficiency, thus reducing carbon emissions within a giver speed parameter (such as the designed project speed: 60km/h). For instance, a Highway Development and Management Model (HDM) for RUC model for Africa shows that CO2

emission can be reduced by about 10 to 20 percent for most types of vehicles. However, the magnitude of reduction varies depending on vehicle type, vehicle speed and road conditions. For rural roads, the contribution to emission reduction is generally modest because of their low traffic.

54. The current levels of traffic on the indicative roads under the Project are mostly less than 200 vehicles per day. The baseline data for emission reduction come from the recent road project between Ngoma and Nyanza before the upgrading. The traffic levels and road condition are different across districts, which take into account the difference in traffic level and work specification, including surface treatment. The amount of CO2 that can be reduced is estimated at about 395,000 tons during a 20-year period (Table 3.11), of which the social value is estimated at about US$11.8 million when the World Bank’s recommended social value of carbon, i.e., US$30 per ton, is applied.15

Table 3.11: Expected Emission Reduction

District KMBaseline

(tons/km in the first year) 1

Pavement factor

Traffic factors

CO2 reduction (20 years)

(tons) (US$ million)

15 World Bank. (2014). Social Value of Carbon in project appraisal: Guidance note to the WBG staff.

70

Rutsiro 77.1 66.4 0.7 0.5 88,178 2.6Nyaruguru 58.7 66.4 0.7 0.5 67,158 2.0Nyagatare 78.2 66.4 0.4 0.5 51,146 1.5Gatsibo 79.9 66.4 0.3 0.5 39,178 1.2Nyabihu 91.1 66.4 0.7 0.5 104,206 3.1Gakenke 68.5 66.4 0.4 0.5 44,779 1.3Total 453.5 394,645 11.81 The baseline data is based on a HDM4 estimate in the recent road project: Ngoma-Nyanza Road, before the upgrading.

Technical Analysis – AF

Introduction

55. The feasibility study of around 1,200 km of feeder roads for identified districts16 (average 200km per district) was completed by MINAGRI. Then for each district, a list of priority roads was elaborated to continue with the detailed designs. The feeder roads generally traverse hilly to mountainous terrain with high rainfall and soft soils, which are often washed out during the rainy season. The technical study report encompasses the background and objective of the study, status of feeder road, socioeconomic set up and the methodological approach, engineering survey, design standards, preliminary concept design, project costing and prioritization.

Key Parameters of the Feasibility Study

56. The feasibility study assignment included intensive field surveys, consultations, preliminary concept design, preliminary cost estimates and economic evaluation and prioritization of roads that will best meet the objective of the project17. The programme proposes multi-year maintenance through an Output and Performance‐Based Road Contract for Gakenke, Nyabihu and Rutsiro. For the districts of Gatsibo, Nyagatare and Nyaruguru, the maintenance will be done by LCAs.

57. To the extent possible, while meeting country design criteria, the preliminary concept design aims to minimize the need for land acquisition and resettlement, and to maximize the length of road that can be improved for the amount of financial resources likely to be available, commensurate with adopting economically and technically sound improvement methods. Adaptation with the incorporation of differentiated design approaches to include more hazard resilient measures in more vulnerable areas were also considered. Special consideration has been taken into account to integrate road safety and drainage provisions.

58. One of the most important considerations in designing a gravel road is to ensure its all-weather access. The Rwandan national standards for feeder roads guidelines for design were considered as the base document for technical design. For some items, a

16 Identified districts include Gatsibo and Nyagatare (Eastern Province); Nyaruguru (Southern Province); Rutsiro and Nyabihu (Western Province) and Gakenke (Western Province)17 Refer to annex for key elements of the feasibility study

71

comparison was made with design recommendations in pavement design manuals of South Africa, Tanzania, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe.

59. To economize on the cost of construction, the design approach adopted for this project gives importance to the use of locally available gravel materials. This is ensured by extracting information about local gravel quarries/borrow pits which have performed satisfactorily in the past.

60. The usual selected design speed for the project roads was 60 km/h. There are however a few locations where the terrain is mountainous are the speed was reduced. The design speed was also set lower when necessary when traversing built‐up areas.

61. The study includes also the economic evaluation and prioritization of feeder roads based on MCA using various indicators, including socio‐economic data. The MCA methodology has been developed based on the previous Feasibility Study conducted on the four districts of Rwamagana, Gisagara, Nyamasheke, and Karongi, as well as on lessons learned from the recent EU‐funded Prioritization Study conducted by Planet. The MCA method includes the following indicators: Connectivity, Road Condition, Remoteness, Traffic, Access to social and economic services, Agricultural potential and Community priority.

Summary of the Study by District

Nyaruguru District

62. Nyaruguru District is located in the Southern Province of Rwanda with generally mountainous terrain. The district has fourteen administrative sectors with a total a population of 294,33418 (Census 2012 final data) and extends over an area of 1007.1 sq. km with a population density of 292 inhab/sq.km. The district is predominantly rural, and the urban population accounts for 2.1 percent of total district.

63. As compared to the national average, the Nyaruguru network can be considered of poor standard. The grid of feeder roads needs to be improved but it is not in very bad condition. Approximately 36 percent is in good condition and 31 percent is in fair condition. The real transport constraint is the scarce density of feeder roads namely in western sectors. Covering around 10 administrative sectors, 12 roads totaling 195 Km were selected for feasibility study whereby around 56 km are district road Class I (DC1), 134 km DC2 and 5 km UC. About 59 Km were selected to be rehabilitated after a prioritization study and a cost benefit analysis for this AF. In Nyaruguru District, most of the gravel sources identified satisfy the soaked California Bearing Ratio (CBR) where 14 borrow pits were identified. Blending gravel materials will be required to meet the shrinkage product and grading coefficient. On the other hand, to economize the cost of construction for the erosional slide problem in this district, retaining walls are proposed only for a length of approximately 5‐10 percent length while the ideal situation should be 25–30 percent length

18 Demographic data provided in this documents are from the report of the Census of 2012.

72

64. The main outflow of Nyaruguru District is generated by the agricultural surplus ranging from 30 percent to 40 percent of the total output. The surplus produce is transported by farmers to the sector markets to be sold to traders. More productive areas are concentrated in central and eastern sectors. Important origins of traffic outflow are the various tea and coffee points of selection and storage. The goods’ inflow consists of manufactured products for household’s consumption and agricultural inputs.

Gatsibo District

65. Gatsibo District is part of the Eastern Province and generally has rolling and mountainous terrain. The district has a population of 433,020 and extends over an area of 1584.1 sq. km. The population density accounts for 273 inhabitants per square km. The district is predominantly rural, and the urban population accounts for 5.5 percent of total district. As compared to the national average, the Gatsibo network can be considered of medium standard. The classified road infrastructure is fed by a grid of feeder roads denser in the central and north-western parts of the district. The structure and condition of feeder roads are insufficient and constitute a constraint, putting at risk the potential development of the district. Covering around 14 administrative sectors, 11 roads totaling 177 Km were selected for the feasibility study. Most of the nine gravel sources identified (except two gravel sources) satisfy the soaked CBR requirement. However, blending gravel materials will be required to meet the shrinkage product and grading coefficient.

66. No major erosional slides were observed in Gatsibo District

Nyagatare District

67. Nyagatare District is located in the Eastern Province. The district has a population of 465,855 and extends over an area of 1929.5 sq. Km. The population density accounts for 241 inhabitants per square km. The district is predominantly rural, and the urban population accounts for 10 percent of total district. In Nyagatare, 12 feeder roads of total length 184 km covering 14 Administrative sectors, were preselected, for feasibility study where around 72.47 km are DC1, 76.6 km DC2 and 33,2 km are UC. After prioritization and cost benefit analysis 78 km were selected to be rehabilitated under the AF. The main outflow of Nyagatare District is generated by the agricultural surplus ranging from 35 percent to 45 percent of the total output. The surplus produce is transported by farmers to the sector markets to be sold to traders. Areas that are more productive are concentrated in the central and eastern sectors. Important origins of traffic outflow are the various maize, beans and rice points of selection and storage. The goods’ inflow consists of manufactured products for household consumption and agricultural inputs. The origin of both types of goods is Kigali and are conveyed to Nyagatare through RN 24 and RN 22. The basic structure of the road network is sufficiently rational, and linkage to the national primary network is assured but not sufficiently dense. The classified district roads, serving to connect sectors to the national roads, fail to serve the western sectors efficiently, and the grid of feeder roads needs to be improved but it is not in very bad condition. Approximately 15 percent is in good condition and 35 percent is in

73

fair condition. The real transport constraint is the scarce density of feeder roads namely in western sectors. In Nyagatare District, eight borrow pits were identified and five of them can be adopted to meet requirements related to the shrinkage product and grading coefficient, blending analysis of gravel materials. No major erosional slides were observed in Nyagatare District.

Nyabihu District

68. Nyabihu District is part of the Western Province. The district has a population of 294,740 and extends over an area of 537.7 sq.km. The population density accounts for 548 inhabitants per square km. The district is rural with a share of urban population accounting for 13.8 percent of the total district.

69. In this district 17 feeder roads for a total length 198.4 km covering 14 Administrative sectors, were preselected for the feasibility study where around 50.9 km are DC1, 68.6 km DC2 and 78.9 km UC. After prioritization and cost benefit analysis 89 km were selected to be rehabilitated under the AF. The main outflow of Nyabihu District is generated by the agricultural surplus which is around 25 percent of the total output. The surplus produce is transported by farmers to the sector markets to be sold to traders. Areas that are more productive are concentrated in Bigowe, Jenda and Karago sectors. Important origins of traffic outflow are Irish potatoes and milk. The goods’ inflow consists of manufactured products for household consumption and agricultural inputs. The origin of both types of goods is Kigali and are conveyed to Nyabihu through RN2. The classified district roads, serving to connect sectors to the national roads, fail to serve the northern and eastern sectors efficiently, and the grid of feeder roads needs to be improved due to its very bad condition. Approximately 92 percent are in very poor and poor condition and only 0.4 percent are in good condition. In Nyabihu District, few borrow pits that meet requirements have been identified. To reduce the haulage distance from borrow pit to the construction sites, blending analysis of gravel materials will be required to meet shrinkage product and grading coefficient. Erosional slides have been detected on many stretches of selected roads in the district, necessitating provision of retaining structures. Mortared random rubble masonry retaining walls are proposed for indicative feeder roads. To economise on the cost of construction, retaining walls are proposed only for limited stretches.

Rutsiro District

70. Rutsiro District is part of the Western Province. The district has a population of 324,654 and extends over an area of 1,159 sq.km including the share of Lake Kivu pertaining to Rutsiro district, whereas the actual land area is 661.8 sq. km. The population density (referred to the actual land area) accounts for 491 inhabitants per square km. The district is predominantly rural, and the urban population accounts for 2.2 percent of total district. The main outflow of Rutsiro District is generated by the agricultural surplus of around 20 percent of the total output. The surplus produce is transported by farmers to the sector markets to be sold to traders. Areas that are more productive are concentrated in central and western sectors. Important origins of traffic outflow are the various tea and coffee points of selection and storage. The surplus,

74

consisting of foodstuffs and cash crops is conveyed to Muhanga and namely Kigali markets. The cash crops (coffee and tea) produced in the district are transported entirely to the collection and storage plants located in the district and thereafter transported to the main markets of Kigali and Muhanga The classified district roads, serving to connect sectors to the national roads, fail to serve the northern and eastern sectors efficiently, and the grid of feeder roads needs to be improved because is in very bad condition. Approximately 70 percent are in very poor and poor condition and only 3 percent are in good condition. In Rutsiro District, 11 feeder roads for a total length of 200 km covering 11 administrative sectors, were preselected for the feasibility study where around 70 km are DC1, 63 km DC2 and 67 km UC. After prioritization and cost benefit analysis, 77 km were selected to be rehabilitated under the AF. In Rutsiro District, 12 borrow pits were identified. To meet requirements related to shrinkage product and grading coefficient, blending analysis of gravel materials is required. Erosional slides have been detected on many stretches of selected roads in the district, necessitating provision of soil retaining structures. Mortared random rubble masonry retaining walls are proposed for indicative feeder roads. To economise the cost of construction, retaining walls are proposed only for limited length of stretches.

Gakenke District

71. Gakenke District is one of the five (5) Districts of the Northern Province with an area of 704.06 sq. km and mountainous terrain. The District has a population of 338,234 with 53 percent women. The mean household size is 4.5. Gakenke has a population density of 481 people per sq. km. Three (3) Sectors out 19 are considered urban; these are Gakenke, Nemba and Ruli; with a total population of 9,347 representing about 3 percent of the District population. About 56 percent of the population is dependent on agriculture as the main source of income. Gakenke farmers produce mostly beans (96 percent of the households) and sweet potatoes (96 percent); others are maize (83 percent), vegetables (83 percent), cassava leaves (82 percent), cooking banana (77.5 percent) and beer banana (74 percent). Coffee is the main export crop produced in the District. The District has four (4) main minerals; Wolfram, Cassiterite, Coltan and Lime. Fourteen feeder roads totaling about 219.9 km covering 16 Sectors in Gakenke were selected for the feasibility study. The final ranking will use a cost-benefit analysis and prioritization to determine the roads to be rehabilitated under the AF.

Main Parts of the Feasibility Study

72. The feasibility study assignment includes intensive field surveys, consultations, preliminary concept design, preliminary cost estimates and economic evaluation and prioritization of roads that best meet the objective of the project.

73. The feasibility study includes:

Comprehensive socioeconomic survey of existing basic services of affected communities.

Engineering surveys including traffic count survey, alignment survey, road inventory survey and geotechnical investigation.

75

Traffic analysis and forecast. Identifying road linking storage areas in LWH, RSSP and other agricultural projects

to give higher priority for such roads. Preliminary concept design and preparation linear diagrams, drawings, pavement

design, analysis and design of side slopes and so on. Providing GIS shape files of indicative feeder roads using ITRF 2005 Projection

System. Identification of borrow areas based on geotechnical and material investigation. Preparation of preliminary Engineer’s Estimate based on market rates. Assessment of the benefits for the overall project in the following domains. Influence of improved connection to markets in villagers facing more favorable

prices for inputs and outputs. Impact on reducing the time spent travelling to and from school, and all-weather

roads should improve the attendance, not only of pupil, but also of their teachers, thus promoting the formation of human capital; and

Improving the villagers’ access to timely treatment, especially in the event of accidents and bouts of acute sickness should lower mortality and morbidity.

Economic evaluation and prioritization of roads based on multi‐criteria analysis using various indicators, including socio‐economic data.

Identifying pilot projects for Output and Performance‐Based Road Contract.

76

Annex 4: FiduciaryProcurement Arrangements

1. The procurement of road rehabilitation and maintenance works under the AF will be implemented by the six (6) participating districts. The RTDA will implement procurement activities to be carried out at national level while the six districts with support from RTDA implement the procurement of road rehabilitation and maintenance works and associated consulting services. Each district has two procurement officers and in terms of number they are adequate. However, they lack qualification and experience to manage high value contracts and hence strong support from RTDA is necessary. The RTDA has a procurement department in charge of procurement of Works, Goods, Consulting and Non-consulting services. Two (2) procurement offices are in charge of government funded projects and two (2) procurement specialists in the RTDA are responsible for implementation of DP funded projects. In addition, there are two (2) procurement consultants financed by AfDB with mandate to support all the procurement functions in RTDA. All procurement staff are qualified. One of the staff is a highly experienced and certified for procurement by ITCILO (International Training Center of the International Labor Organization) and has a master’s degree in Engineering, all others have master’s degrees in Public procurement and more than five years of experience in public procurement. In anticipation that one procurement specialist is moving to RTDA from MINAGRI-SPIU with the FRDP-AF project, and given that additional procurement staff are recommended to be hired under the Lake Victoria Transport Program (LVTP), the existing procurement staff of RTDA will be adequate to manage the project.

2. The overall procurement risk of the proposed project is rated High due to (a) lack of experience of the Borrower and contractors operating in the country, in the DBM delivery method; (b) limited capacity of districts in implementing large civil works and engineering consultancy services; (c) potential turnover of procurement unit at Districts; and (d) irregularities in consultant selections at districts, inadequate records keeping and irregularities in the composition of members of the independent review panel at districts (proportion of members from public and private).

3. The following are the proposed mitigation measures to address the weaknesses to bring the risk to moderate during the project implementation. To mitigate the risks (i) procurement trainings will be arranged jointly by RTDA and the World Bank, on the World Bank procurement procedures, targeted to procurement officers and members of the Internal Tender Committee (ITC) at district level; (ii) a system by which expedited replacement of procurement specialists/officers will be put in place; and (iii) a procurement and contract management sub-component, in the form of TA will be introduced when necessary.

4. Major procurement activities are: (i) Rehabilitation, upgrading and three years maintenance of selected feeder roads in the six districts; (ii) Supervision services for rehabilitation, upgrading and multi-year maintenance contracts of selected feeder roads in the six districts; (iii) Feasibility study and bidding documents preparation, ESIA and RAP studies for selected future feeder roads; (iv) various TAs; and (v) Individual Consultants (IC) for various positions as institutional strengthening of the RTDA at the national and at Districts level.

77

5. The concept review for the AF took place in March 2016, and therefore, the old procurement guidelines still apply to this project.

6. World Bank’s Review Thresholds. Please refer to the table below.

Table 4.1: Thresholds for Procurement Methods and Prior Review

No Expenditure Category Contract Value Threshold (US$)

Procurement Method

Contracts Subject to Prior Review (US$)

1 Works

≥ 10,000,000 ICB All Contracts

< 10,000,000 NCBEach contract of value equal or above US$5,000,000 equivalent.

≥ 200,000 Shopping None

All values Direct Contracting

Each contract of value equal or above US$100,000 equivalent.

2 Goods and Services (other than Consulting Services

≥1,000,000 ICBEach contract of value equal or above US$1,500,000 equivalent.

< 1,000,000 NCB None

< 100,000 Shopping None

All values Direct Contracting


3 IT Systems, and Non-Consulting Services

≥1,000,000 ICBEach contract of value equal or above US$1,500,000 equivalent.

< 1,000,000 NCB None

4 Consulting Services

≥ 500,000 firms All All Contracts

< 500,000 All Only ToRs

≥ 200,000 individualsIC (Based on Comparison of CVs)

All contracts

All ValuesSingle Source Selection


5 Training, Workshops, Study Tours All Values

To be based on Annual Work Plan and Budgets and training plan

—

Community Participation in Procurement acceptable to the Association and described in the PIM

— — —

78

7. Procurement Plan. RTDA and districts will finalize the global 18-month procurement plan (simplified procurement plan) presented below, which will provide the basis for the procurement methods. This plan has been concluded and agreed on by the Government and the project team at negotiations. It will also be available in the project’s database and in the World Bank’s external website. The procurement plan will be updated in agreement with the project team annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity.

Table 4.2: Procurement Packages with Methods and Time Schedule

Ref No Contract DescriptionCost Estimate (US$)

Procurement/ Selection

Method

Review by World Bank (Prior/Post)

Expected Bid/Proposal Submission Deadline

Expected Contract Completion Date

I WORKS

1 Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of indicative feeder roads

1.1Rehabilitation and upgrading of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo District– 79 km

8,770,000 NCB Prior April 2018 June 2020

1.2Rehabilitation and upgrading of indicative feeder roads in Nyagatare District– 78 km


1.3Rehabilitation and upgrading of indicative feeder roads in Nyaruguru District– 58 km


1.4

Rehabilitation, upgrading and multiyear maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Nyabihu District – 90 km

19,280,000 ICB Prior May 2018 December 2022

1.5

Rehabilitation, upgrading and multiyear maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Rutsiro District – 77 km


1.6

Rehabilitation, upgrading and multiyear maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Gakenke District – 68 km


1.7Multiyear maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo District.

226,000 TBD N/A July 2020 December 2022

1.8Multiyear maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Nyagatare District

224,000 TBD N/A July 2020 December 2022

79



Method




Total for Works 0000000

II CONSULTANCY SERVICES

2.1

Supervision services for rehabilitation, upgrading and multi-year maintenance contracts of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare Districts, Eastern Province

1,420,000 QCBS Prior April 2018 December 2022

2.2

Supervision services for rehabilitation, upgrading and multi-year maintenance contracts of indicative feeder roads in Nyaruguru District/Southern Province and Gakenke District/Northern province.


2.3

Supervision services for rehabilitation, upgrading and multi-year maintenance contracts of indicative feeder roads in Rutsiro and Nyabihu Districts/Western Provinces respectively.


2.4

Capacity building of Districts RTDA on highway engineering and management, procurement, FM, contract management, Project management, environmental and social safeguard, feeder roads maintenance and monitoring/evaluation

240,000 QCBS Prior TBD TBD

2.5TA for landslide resilience and hazard warning study on feeder roads

1,150,000 QCBS Prior February 2019 April 2020

2.6Project manager/District feeder roads engineer for Nyagatare District

100,000 Individual Consultant Post February

2018December

2022

2.7Project manager/District feeder roads engineer for Gatsibo District

100,000 Individual Consultant Post

February 2018 December

2022

2.8 Project manager/District feeder 100,000 Individual Post February December

80



Method




roads engineer for Gakenke District Consultant 2018 2022

2.9Project manager/District feeder roads engineer for Nyabihu District



2022

2.10 Project manager/District feeder roads engineer for Rutsiro District


2018December

2022

2.11Project manager/District feeder roads engineer for Nyaruguru District.



2022

2.12

Feasibility studies, and preparation of design-build bidding document for future improvements


2.13ESIA and RAP for selected priority feeder roads for future improvement.


2.14 Feeder Roads Program Manager 140,000 Individual Consultant Post TBD TBD

2.15 Provision of RTDA Feeder Roads Specialist (contract 1) 110,000 Individual

Consultant Post February 2018

December 2022

2.16 Provision of RTDA Feeder Roads Specialist (contract 2)


2018December

2022



2018December

2022



2018December

2022

2.19 FM Specialist/Project Accountant 110,000 Individual Consultant Post TBD TBD

2.20 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) specialists 110,000 Individual

Consultant Post TBD TBD

2.21 Technical Advisor/TA for FRDP-PIU 300,000 Individual

Consultant Prior TBD TBD

2.22 TA on Contract Management and administration 250,000 Individual

Consultant Prior TBD TBD

2.23 Procurement Specialist 110,000 Individual Post TBD TBD

81



Method




Consultant

2.24 Contract management Specialist 110,000 Individual Consultant Post TBD TBD

2.25 Environmental safeguards specialist (contract 1) 110,000 Individual


2.26 Environmental safeguards specialist (contract 2) 110,000 Individual


2.27 Social Safeguards Specialist (contract 1) 110,000 Individual






2.30 GIS and Mapping Specialist 110,000 Individual Consultant Post TBD TBD

2.31 Project Accountant 110,000 Individual Consultant Post TBD TBD

2.32 Safeguard officer for Gatsibo District 87,000 Individual

Consultant Post February 2018

November 2022

2.33 Safeguard officer for Nyagatare District


2018November

2022

2.34 Safeguard officer for Nyaruguru District


2018November

2022

2.35 Safeguard officer for Gakenke District


2018November

2022

2.36 Safeguard officer for Nyabihu District


2018November

2022

2.37 Safeguard officer for Rutsiro District


2018November

2022

2.38

Support to monitoring and evaluation of the project. output, outcome, impact and Grievance Redressing Mechanism (GRM)


2.39TA to conduct road safety audit and Road Safety Inspection Action Plan in the all the 10

240,000 Individual Consultant Prior TBD TBD

82



Method




districts

Total for Consultancy 19.6

3 GOODS

3.1 Purchase 8 Vehicles (for the six districts and RTDA) 350,000 NCB Post June 2018 December

2018

3.2 Supply of fuel (Framework Contract) 82,600 NCB Post June 2018 December

2022

3.3 Acquisition of insurance services for project vehicles 8,200 Request for

Quotations Post December 2018

December 2022

3.4 Acquisition of insurance services for project assets 8,000 Request for

Quotations Post June 2018 December 2022

3.5

Hiring hotel services for conferences, trainings and workshops at head office and in districts (framework contract).

41,300 NCB Post June 2018 December 2022

3.6 Purchase office stationery (framework contract) 29,500 NCB Post June 2018 December

2022

3.7 Purchase of IT Equipment 90,000 NCB Post June 2018 February 2019

3.8 Supply of furniture and equipment 70,000 NCB Post June 2018 February

2019

3.9 Purchase of equipment for LCAs in the 2 districts 59,000 NCB Post July 2019 February

2020

Total Goods 19.619.6

Note. NCB: National Competitive BiddingICB: International Competitive Biding

QCBS: Quality and Cost Based SelectionIC: Individual ConsultantSS: Single Source

TBD: To Be Determined

Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements

83

8. In compliance with the Financial Management Manual for the World Bank-financed Investment Operations dated March 1, 2010 and the World Bank Policy and Directive for Investment Financing Project, dated July 23, 2017, the assessment of the FM arrangements of the ten (10) participating Districts and national level implementing entity (RTDA) has been conducted. The RTDA is managing a World Bank financed project.

9. The objective of the assessment is to determine whether the implementing entities have acceptable FM arrangements, which will ensure: (a) that funds are used for the intended purposes in an efficient and economical way; (b) the preparation of accurate, reliable and timely periodic financial reports; and (c) safeguarding of the entity’s assets. The assessment concludes that the RTDA have adequate FM systems.

10. RTDA is staffed with one FMS and two accountants. The FMS (ACCA) and the accountants (Certified Public Accountant - CPA) are qualified accountants. They work under the supervision of the Director of Administration and Finances (DAF) who reports to the Director General (DG) of Corporate services. The DAF oversees the work of the procurement specialist, the Budget Officer and the Accountant Secretary. The overall financial management risk rating is Moderate. There are no overdue project financial audit reports (the first audit report is due on December 2018) and the initial FM performance is satisfactory. Nevertheless, given the workload at RTDA, the accountant in charge of the Feeder Road Project at MINAGRI SPIU, shall move to RTDA. The Project Implementation Manual (PIM) has been updated and the signatories of the DA shall be revised to reflect the changes in institutional arrangements. Subject to the above, the FM system is adequate as per the World Bank Policy and Directive on Investment Project Financing.

Accounting Arrangements

11. The project will comply with GoR accounting policies, modified cash basis of International Public Sector Accounting Standard that is considered acceptable. An Integrated Financial Management Information System (SMART-IFMIS) rolled out by MINECOFIN is in use by the districts. The proposed project would use the IFMIS that will be rolled out at RTDA level for the AF. Finance staff has been trained in its use but ongoing and refresher training will be necessary since new module on planning was added in 2016–2017. There have been some connectivity problems and other technical issues with IFMIS (balance not carried forward) which were resolved in July 2017.

Internal Control and Internal Auditing

12. The Internal Auditor position is filled at RTDA and the Annual Work Program was approved by the Audit Committee in July 2017. However, the Work Program needs to be updated to include the project activities.

13. Each district has one or two internal auditors in post instead of the three (3) required. This will prevent the internal auditor from providing adequate review of identified risks. Thus, the recruitment of the additional internal auditor and regular trainings are required. Newly established Audit Committees provide independent oversight and review internal audit reports. Nevertheless, the independence of the Audit Committee members shall be strengthened to ensure

84

compliance with the independence charter developed by MINECOFIN in 2017. These mitigating measures are monitored by the Chief Internal Auditor at MINECOFIN, via the Public Finance Management (PFM) basket Funds and the World Bank PfoR Public Sector Governance Project (P149095).

Funds Flow Arrangements and Lending Instrument

14. The flow of funds arrangement (chart below) will be similar to the ones adopted for the majority of the ongoing projects of a similar nature in Rwanda in that the project will receive funds from IDA and the MDTF using the transaction based method of disbursement also known as the Statement of Expenditure (SoE) method of disbursement.

15. The Designated Account (DA) under the original credit IDA 5450, at the National Bank of Rwanda, will be used for the AF sources, i.e. TF TFA5256-RW and TFA5145. The DA type will be switched to become pooled with an increase to the ceiling to become US$4 million. Taxes are not eligible for financing under both TFs, but are eligible under IDA.

16. All withdrawal applications and payments would be processed at RTDA level. Where applicable, Direct Payments and Special Commitments could be made to service providers.

Table 4.1. Table Cost by Disbursement Category

IDA Credit

Category Amount of the

Financing Allocated (expressed in SDR)

% of Expenditures to be Financed (Inclusive

of Taxes)Category 1: Goods (including vehicles), works, non-consulting services, consultants’ services, Training and Operating Costs for the Project, except for sub-component 1.3 thereof. 29,400,000

Such percentage as agreed to among the World Bank and the Recipient, as per the Agreed Annual Work

Plan

TOTAL AMOUNT 29,400,000

MDTF Grant

Category Amount of the Financing Allocated

(expressed in US$)% of Expenditures to

be Financed (Exclusive of Taxes)Portion A Portion B

Category 1: Goods (including vehicles), works, non-consulting services, consultants’ services, Training and Operating Costs for the Project, excluding sub-components 1.3 and 1.6 thereof.

48,000,000 20,000,000

Such percentage as agreed to among the World Bank and the Recipient, as per the Agreed Annual Work

Plan

TOTAL AMOUNT 48,000,000 20,000,000

85

IDA/MDTF

Pooled DA at National Bank of Rwanda

SoE based

Service Providers

Direct payment

Special Commitments

Figure 4.1. Chart of funds flows

LegendTransfers of fundsFlow of documents Payment to suppliers

Financial Reporting Arrangements

17. The RTDA will prepare a monthly financial report as per the GoR requirement but only one semester report will be submitted to the World Bank within 45 days after the end of the calendar Semester and shall include:

Sources and Uses of Funds (Revenues and expenditures statements) Financial Position Statement Cash Flow Statement Uses of Funds by Project Activity/Component DA Activity Statement Budget Execution Report Notes on Accounting Policies and Annexes

18. Financial statements shall be prepared in accordance with the GoR accounting policies which operate on the modified cash basis of International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS).

External Auditing Arrangements

86

19. There is a well-established Supreme Audit Institution (OAG) in place in Rwanda which provides external auditing of Government expenditure and which also provides external auditing of World Bank projects. The audits are undertaken in accordance with International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAI). Audit reports would be produced on the financial statements for the project and would be submitted to the World Bank within six (6) months following the end of the fiscal year. The audit report should be inclusive of a management letter setting out any internal control weaknesses. In line with the new access to information policy, dated July 1, 2010, the project will comply with the World Bank disclosure policy of audit reports, and make publicly available, promptly after receipt of all final financial audit reports.

20. Conclusions of the FM Assessment. The overall residual FM risk is considered Moderate. The proposed FM arrangements for this project are considered adequate and meet the World Bank’s minimum fiduciary requirements under World Bank Policy and Directive on Investment Project Financing, July 23, 2017.

87

Annex 5: Detailed Description of Modified and New Project Activities

Project Development Objective (PDO)

1. The original PDO is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected districts. The original PDO will remain unchanged. The proposed AF would fund rehabilitation of the following six new districts: (a) Gatsibo and (b) Nyagatare in the Eastern province, (c) Nyabihu and (d) Rutsiro in the Western Province, (e) Nyaruguru in the Southern Province, and (f) Gakenke in Northern Province.

2. The Project consists of the components described in the following paragraphs.

Component 1 – Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Indicative Feeder Roads (US$117.46 million of which IDA Credit US$37.10 million, MDTF Grant US$61.58 million and GoR Counterpart Fund US$18.78 million).

3. This component will finance the rehabilitation, upgrading and multi-year maintenance of selected feeder roads improving connectivity to agricultural marketing centers in the ten (10) participating districts, namely: (a) Karongi, (b) Nyamasheke, (c) Rutsiro and (d) Nyabihu (Western Province); (e) Rwamagana, (f) Nyagatare, and (g) Gatsibo (Eastern Province); (h) Gisagara and (i) Nyaruguru (Southern Province); and (j) Gakenke (Northern Province). The objective is to rehabilitate and/or upgrade feeder roads to a total of approximately 450 km in six (6) districts plus 270 km under implementation in the parent FRDP four (4) districts. The works contract will have a provision for Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired immune-deficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS) prevention, road safety awareness/sensitization, training on gender, healthy relationships and non-violent conflict resolution. Depending on availability of resources the civil works contract for selected roads will have provision storage facilities, road side market places, and road side rural transport service hubs, including gender informed environmental design (e.g. openness, solar powered lightning, security perception). This component also caters for provision of supervision services and includes the following subcomponents:

4. Subcomponent 1.1 – Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Karongi and Nyamasheke districts – will remain unchanged.

5. Subcomponent 1.2 – Rehabilitation and upgrading of indicative feeder roads in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts – will remain unchanged.

6. Subcomponent 1.3 - Maintenance of indicative feeder roads, in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts, through multi-year (three years) contracts – will remain unchanged.

7. Subcomponent 1.4 – Rehabilitation and upgrading of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts(new). To improve approximately 157 km of indicative feeder roads, in the two relatively flatter districts. Depending on the final cost estimate of the engineering designs, approximately 79 km and 78 km of priority roads would be improved in Gatsibo and Nyagatare, respectively. This subcomponent includes implementation of Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs).

88

8. Subcomponent 1.5 – Rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Nyabihu, Nyaruguru, Rutsiro, and Gakenke districts (new). To improve approximately 297 km of indicative feeder roads, in the three predominantly mountainous districts, through rehabilitation and upgrading plus multi-year (three years) maintenance contracts. Depending on the final cost estimate of the detailed engineering designs, approximately 58 km, 90 km, 77 km and 68 km of priority roads would be improved in Nyaruguru, Nyabihu, Rutsiro and Gakenke districts, respectively. This subcomponent includes implementation of Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs).

9. Subcomponent 1.6 - Maintenance of indicative feeder roads in Gatsibo and Nyagatare districts, through multi-year (three years) contracts (new). About 157 km of roads rehabilitated and upgraded in the three districts with the financial support from the GoR.

Component 2: Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility Improvement and Institutional Development Support (US$13.06 million of which IDA Credit US$6.60 million, MDTF Grant US$5.42 million and GoR Counterpart Fund US$1.04 million), including:

10. Subcomponent 2.1 - Preparation of a national feeder roads development strategy andprogram. – will remain unchanged.

11. Subcomponent 2.2 - Preparation of district business plans for feeder roads development and maintenance, and improvement of rural transport services (revised). This will be extended to all the ten (10) districts.

12. Subcomponent 2.3 - Building capacity of Selected districts in rural feeder roads management, including provision of TA to support district staff in Project implementation and strengthening government established entities in rural feeder roads management (revised). This will be expanded to all the ten (10) districts and includes.

13. Subcomponent 2.3 (a) - Support to the Selected districts capacity building, through provision of training of districts and RTDA on procurement, FM, contract management, project management, road safety, environmental and social safeguards, feeder roads maintenance and monitoring/evaluation.

14. Subcomponent 2.3 (b) - Provision of TA (project managers) for the participating districts to provide support to the district staff during the implementation of the project.

15. Subcomponent 2.3 (c) - TA Technical Advisor RTDA for technical coordination to provide technical support in project implementation.

16. Subcomponent 2.3 (d) - TA on contract management and administration, including training on Performance-Based Maintenance Contracts, Monthly Inspections and Application of Penalties.

17. Subcomponent 2.3 (e) - Provision of TA on safeguards officers to support districts.

89

18. Subcomponent 2.4 – Strengthening the capacity of RTDA in feeder roadsdevelopment, maintenance, planning and monitoring, including inter alia, on landslide resilience and hazards warning and road safety. (revised). The AF will include:

19. Subcomponent 2.4 (a) - Provision of TA to RTDA (revised) including: (i) Feeder Roads Program Manager, (ii) Feeder Roads Specialist (4 No. Contractual Staff), (iii) Financial Specialist, (iv) M&E Specialist, (v) Procurement Specialist, (vi) Contract Management Specialist, (vii) Social Safeguard Specialist (3 No.), (viii) Environmental safeguard Specialist (2 No.), (ix) GIS and Mapping Specialist, (x) Accountant, and (xi) CDO.

20. Subcomponent 2.4 (b) - Landslides resilience and hazards warning on feeder roads. The main objective of this activity is to determine the prefeasibility of an early warning system (EWS) for the selected study area in Rwanda, pilot the installation of EWS stations along the rural road network and operationalize a landslide emergency management plan.

21. Subcomponent 2.4 (c) - Road Safety which will include: (i) road Safety audit and inspection action planning in the ten (10) districts– which involves conducting a systematic assessment of all the proposed feeder roads for rehabilitation with respect to safety features, and identifying hazards and suggesting remedial measures, (ii) implementation of priority/pilot road safety action plan, and (iii) capacity building on roads safety and inspection audit for districts and RTDA, including preparation of a road safety manual.

22. Subcomponent 2.5 - Providing office space to RTDA, field inspection and office equipment to RTDA and Selected Districts (revised). This will be extended to all the ten (10) districts.

23. Subcomponent 2.6 - Support to strengthening of the capacity of the Road Maintenance Fund (RMF) for the financing of the roads network (dropped). The GoR has proposed to drop this activity as it being financed through funding from the AfDB.

24. Subcomponent 2.7 - Preparing follow-up feeder roads investment operations including carrying out design feasibility studies on indicative feeder roads, and preparation of associated environmental and social safeguard instruments (revised). This includes: (a) feasibility study and ESIA - for indicative priority feeder roads for future improvement, including roads under the second priority package; and (b) bidding document preparation for a second cycle multi-year maintenance contract.

25. Subcomponent 2.8 - Training and organization of LCAs from the road side rural population to undertake road maintenance (revised). This includes preparation of the feeder roads inspection manual. The objectives of the road inspection manual are to define the inspection according to the type of roads, recommend the procedures for a minimum frequencies of inspection used to determine routine and periodic maintenance tasks, to encourage consistency in the standards for inspections by centralized and decentralized institutions and to attempt extract data from inspection to produce statistics which might be used for further training and research.

90

Component 3 - Project Management Support (US$2.48 million of which IDA Credit US$1.30 million, MDTF Grant US$1.00 million and GoR Counterpart Fund US$0.18 million), including:

26. Subcomponent 3.1 - Providing advisory services and TA for financial management; monitoring and evaluation, and engineering aspects to MINAGRI. This has been moved to and merged with subcomponent 2.4a.

27. Subcomponent 3.2 - Providing TA for environmental, social, technical and financial audit. Will remain unchanged.

28. Subcomponent 3.3 - Support to the monitoring and evaluation of the project. Will remain unchanged.

29. Subcomponent 3.4 - Financing of Operating Costs. This will remain unchanged.

Project Implementation Arrangements

30. As part of the Restructuring and AF, the implementing agency will change from the MINAGRI to RTDA. Accordingly, RTDA will lead implementation, management and monitoring of all feeder roads programs at the national level and will be the focal institution for feeder road program coordination, as stipulated in the National Feeder Roads Policy and Strategy. The existing Feeder Roads Technical Department and the corporate staff in safeguards and fiduciary departments within MINAGRI SPIU, will transition to RTDA . Implementation oversight and strategic guidance will be provided by the steering committee for feeder roads, consisting of MINAGRI and MININFRA as Co-chairs, and other institutions as defined in the chart below. The core task of feeder road rehabilitation, upgrading and spot improvement, as well as maintenance, will be implemented by the ten (10) participating districts through District Project Management Teams (DPMTs). As in the parent project, RTDA will sign implementation agreements with the six (6) new participating districts under the AF. The overall project implementation and coordination arrangements are mapped out in the chart provided below.

91

Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MINECOFIN)

Rwanda Transport Development Agency (RTDA)-Implementing Agency

Feeder Roads Program Steering Committee: MINAGRI (Co-Chair), MININFRA (Co-Chair)

Single Project Implementation Unit(SPIU): District Project Management team (DPMT) (x 10 Districts):

Feeder Roads Program Manager District Executive SecretaryFeeder Roads Specialist (4) TA/Project Manager - Feeder Roads Engineer (from SPIU)M&E Specialist District Infrastructure EngineerSocial Safeguard Specialist (3) TA/Environmental and Social Safeguard Officer (from SPIU)Environmental safeguard Specialist (2) District Procurement OfficerProcurement Specialist District AccountantContract Management Specialist District Agronomist GIS and Mapping Specialist District Land Valuer Financial SpecialistAccountantCDO (LCAs)TA/Technical Advisor TA/ Procurement - Contract Administration

92

Road Safety

31. Rwanda does not have a road safety policy or a strategy at the present time. In this context, the feeder roads project provides an excellent opportunity to prepare and implement road safety improvement strategies for the rural transport sector and facilitate the involvement and commitment of the private sector and civil society in road safety activities. This policy and strategy will provide Rwanda a direction to address the complex road safety issues in a comprehensive manner for feeder roads in the country.

32. Road safety aspects under the project will also include measures such as traffic signs in built-up areas, increasing the space available for pedestrians and non-motorized traffic in populated areas, installation of roadside safety barriers including tree planting, and concrete guardrails, improvements of dangerous curves and intersections including by installing crash-barriers and working on geometry of the roads, and traffic signs at hazardous locations. The project will also sensitize local communities on road safety and provide adequate pedestrian crossing signs and speed calming measures in sensitive areas, including towns, villages and customary local people and animal crossing locations.

33. In order to improve the measures of effectiveness of road safety education, a training on road safety will be designed and provided during the project implementation, to key stakeholders such as centralized and decentralized institutions and community members. A training manual will be designed for a multidisciplinary audience and a continuous training after the project end, specifically for community members, roads users, and roads engineers among others.

Citizen Engagement 34. There were extensive public consultations carried out during the preparation of the ESMF and RPF for the AF. This will continue throughout project implementation with the involvement of civil society, project-affected people (PAP), and various stakeholders. Before the commencement of works, community meetings will be organized at village level on the importance of the road with regard to its socioeconomic benefits, encouraging community members to participate in road works to increase their cash flow income while allowing them to be enrolled in other initiatives such as inputs for works. During project implementation, the districts will be conducting annual awareness campaign and meetings. LCAs will be engaged in preparation of tree nurseries, tree planting along the feeder roads and road maintenance.

35. The project also will undertake community meetings chaired after the completion of the basic socioeconomic infrastructures (produce collection centers, storage facilities, etc.) and selected road safety interventions to analyze community satisfaction and address any concerns. The project will implement a social communication strategy for the non-road components to gather general data regarding citizen feedback and social outcomes. The survey will use gender disaggregated data to measure and assess how the roads in particular are changing women’s lives, particularly in reducing travel times, improved road safety and access to markets, and enhancing social capital. The findings will serve as a tool to define road network social issues and recommendations for further improvements in the sector as well as progress satisfying the gender indicator.

93

36. Citizen involvement should be analyzed at different levels including through the bottom up planning of the District Development Plans (DDPs), then during the design, ESIA, and very importantly during maintenance by LCAs. More specifically, citizen involvement is organized during the feasibility study, baseline survey, community meeting with local leaders and community members, and safeguard related consultations, during or after rehabilitation and maintenance.

37. At the baseline stage, the community is involved through focus group discussions, household surveys and interviews. The main information collected relates to the productivity, access to market with regard to time, distance, gender, and so on. Before the commencement of works, community meetings are organized at the village level on the importance of the road with regard to its socioeconomic benefits, encouraging community members to participate in road works (HIMO)19 to increase their cash flow income while allowing them to be enrolled in other initiatives such inputs for works20, and so on.

38. Safeguards-related consultations: safeguards-related consultation can be organized at the level of the feasibility study where community members are consulted to discuss different hazards that used to happen in their community and along the road, expropriation issues, and so on. Consultations should also happen just before, during and after the road improvement for joint learning, risk management, and course correction as needed.

Enabling Factors

19 HIMO (Haute Intensite de Main d`Oeuvre): A French word which means ‘Labor Based Technology’.20 Input for Work: is an initiative of MINAGRI which consists in enrolling community members in feeder road rehabilitation and maintenance to save a portion of their wages (30 percent) for the provision of agricultural inputs and fertilizer. This initiative started in February 2016 in most of the districts of the Northern Province and is anticipated to expand in other districts very soon.

94

Figure 5.1. Adapted from ‘Citizen Guide’ 2014–2015 MINECOFIN

39. To enable citizen participation, the program anticipates using not only program activities but also existing platforms available at decentralized level to enable an effective citizen participation. This includes community meetings at the decentralized level, open days organized at the district level and different home grown initiatives to allow community members access to information. For this purpose, leaflets will be developed through different channels mentioned above.

40. On the other hand, RTDA is anticipating putting in place a sustainable data recording and monitoring MIS system which will include also feeder road related data. The current programme will ensure that its related data are embedded in the whole system and made available online for reporting and monitoring purposes. That said, community and cooperative representatives will be involved in this kind of data collection but also should be used as information sharing channels to community members on a periodic basis on key information about existing data.

41. Capacity building is also considered as an enabler toward effective citizen participation. Local Community Associations will be trained on community based road maintenance using the HIMO (LBT) approach. This training includes introduction to road maintenance, road maintenance operations, social (gender) safeguards in road works, environmental safeguards in road works.

42. It is worth mentioning that the use of the HIMO approach is one of the key enablers in the involvement of the population in rehabilitation and maintenance of feeder roads, especially those with low income. The program will have to maximize where applicable, the involvement of community members not only to increase their cash flow income, but also ownership.

43. The Policy and Strategy paper which is in the process of being approved anticipates an ongoing capacity building with many options such as the creation of an LBT training centre or embedding the same interventions into an existing Technical and Vocational Education Training (TVET) centre. So, it is anticipated that the creation of this centre will significantly increase and strengthen skills in a sustainable way not only to LCAs, but also to community members, leaders, CSOs and the private sector; which will contribute to citizen engagement and ownership.

Visibility Through Radio Talk, TV

44. The Rural Feeder Road Programme has developed a concept note related the ‘Communication Strategy for Visibility of achievements in Rural Feeder Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance’ by calling for action as the programme moves forward.

45. Indeed, people will feel the magnitude of the road construction when activities are ongoing but after, they will forget easily. Moreover, the capacity building mentioned above, raised awareness on the importance attached to the activity related road construction and its maintenance as important in the move towards ownership. The program has developed a communication plan which encompasses the audience analysis and other communication activities under the theme ‘Fata Neza Umuhanda Wawe Campaign’ that is, own your road.

Gender

95

46. The GoR has worked hard to reduce the gender gap in the country. It has signed and ratified the main international conventions on Women’s Rights as the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and its Constitution recognizes equality between all marginalized groups and empowers the state to provide resources to mainstream gender equality. It grants 30 percent quotas for women in decision making structures. Beyond the normative structure, the GoR has had substantial achievements in terms of gender equality, such as being the first country in the World to have a majority of women in Parliament. Some of the latest socioeconomic data also shows that the ratio of female to male force participation of the low-income cohort was 88.3 percent by 2014, and the school enrolment of primary school for women was 94 percent by 2013. Maternal mortality has decreased from 1070 death per 100,000 live births in 2000 to about 290 deaths per 100,000 live births by 2015. By 2015, Rwanda has been recognized as one of the countries with the highest average rate reduction of maternal mortality; however, efforts need to continue to reach the sustainable development goal of 70 per 100 000 live deaths (with no country having a maternal mortality rate of more than twice the global average).

47. In addition to these advancements, the following gender gaps were identified, through the gender analysis, which the project can contribute to close: (a) more men than women are remunerated from non-farm jobs, like construction industry, where salaries are significantly higher; (b) Gender Based Violence (GBV) is still a problem in Rwanda where data shows that 35 percent of women aged 15-49 have experienced physical violence since age 15; (c) lack of capacity and skills for women farmers which have stuck them with subsistence agriculture, receiving low prices for their products; and (d) restrictions to women’s mobility which affects women’s access to economic opportunities and health facilities (e.g. bad quality of feeder roads and long geographic/mountainous distances, which they use mainly for their daily activities and access health facilities; lack of access to intermediate forms of transportations, and unequal norms and attitudes).

48. In this context, the following actions will be implemented during the project: (a) employing at least 30 percent of women in the LCAs (percentage has been a principle followed in Rwanda for different policies); (b) trainings on gender relations, healthy relationships and non-violent conflict resolution, and HIV/STD prevention to construction workers; (c) depending on availability of resources, design and construction of Storage Facilities in selected areas with suitable spaces for adequate selling of products closer to women’s households, including a community space that can be used for training women on marketing, agri-business, GBV prevention and HIV/STD prevention; this space will also help women to congregate in privacy and support each other and will consider gender informed environmental design (e.g. openness, solar powered lightning, security perception); (d) qualitative research study to identify the mobility barriers that women face to access markets and health facilities, which will inform Component 2; and (e) trainings to women farmers in the intervened area on marketing and agri-business skills (courses already being developed by MINAGRI). Moreover, considering the current distribution of health facilities, the project has the potential to improve accessibility by women and their children to health facilities.

49. In terms of mitigating the risk derived from the project related to the impacts of labor influx on GBV and child abuse, the grievance redress mechanism will be structured to cover not only safeguards, but also non-safeguards grievances, considering potential concerns such as GBV and child abuse. For these cases, the grievance redress mechanism will have the capacity to refer the victims to the corresponding One Stop Center. Moreover, for the supervision of the project, grass roots organizations such as the National Women’s Council

96

will be mobilized to participate. A Code of Conduct will be required in the bidding documents.

50. At the institutional level, the GoR has integrated gender into policy and strategic planning instruments. The country’s Gender Action Policy illustrates its political will to ensure the same opportunities and human endowments for men and women through different sectors. As for its Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS), gender is highlighted as a cross cutting issue in all sectors. A Gender Responsive Budgeting Project was initiated by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning in Partnership with the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion to ensure budget allocation to government interventions are gender sensitive. Other sectors, as the Ministry of Agriculture, count with their own gender strategy, which proposes a strategy for mainstreaming gender in policies, programs, projects and activities to form the foundation for equal rights and equal opportunities between women and men in agriculture.

51. In terms of actions to prevent and respond to gender based violence (GBV), the ISANGE One Stop Centers for GBV survivors care in medical, psychosocial, legal support have been established around the country. Currently 23 Districts have a One Stop Center running and fully staffed. It strives to ensure the best possible response for victims of gender based violence and child abuse, including for refugees. A law preventing and punishing gender based violence has been promulgated since 2009. There are GBV and child protection committees from the grassroots levels to the national level, a Gender Desk in Rwanda National Police and free hotlines in Rwanda National Police to report cases of GBV. Moreover, civil society organizations, such as Rwanda’s Men Resource Center (RWAMREC) have conducted extensive work around the country to sensitize the population to further prevent the use of violence against women.

52. However, gender based violence and violence against children is still a problem in Rwanda. The latest Demographic and Health Survey 2014-2015 found that 35 percent of women aged 15-49 have experienced physical violence since age 15. The same survey demonstrates that overall, 48 percent of women who have ever experienced any type of physical or sexual violence from anyone sought help to stop the violence; 28 percent of women never sought help but told someone, while 23 percent never sought help and never told anyone. Women and girls that are victims of violence are at greater risk of unwanted pregnancy, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections. This risk might increase with the influx of migrant workers for the rehabilitation of the roads of the project.

53. In this sense, it should be signaled that preventive mechanisms and supportive mechanisms already exist in the Districts to be supported by the project. RWAMREC has already conducted community trainings on violence prevention in the Districts of Gatsibo, Nyabihu, Nyaruguru and Gakenke. In five of the six Districts of the AF (Nyabihu, Gatsibo, Nyagatare, Gakenke and Nyaruguru), there is a One Stop Center within the District or one nearby, and for all survivors there is a hot line that provides guidance on what to do if one has experienced GBV. Moreover, experience has shown that, on average, from past road projects, between 80 and 95 percent of the workers are from the community, which diminished the risk of cases of GBV in work camps. To enhance this structure for the prevention and response to GBV, the project will provide trainings to workers on gender relations, healthy relationships and non-violent conflict resolution (and HIV and STD prevention).

54. As for agriculture, the third integrated household living conditions survey in Rwanda shows that Agriculture is the most important sector in Rwanda, generating over 30

97

percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) (37.4 percent in 2008), over 80 percent of employment (especially for women), 70 percent of export revenues, and 90 percent of national food needs.21 Women contribute significantly to agriculture production; they provide labor for planting, weeding, harvesting and processing in addition to the household and community activities that they perform on a daily basis. This contribution is rarely recognized at household level or national statistics.22 Besides the strong contribution of women to agriculture, there are still many gender disparities that lead to a poor performance of the sector. For instance, women employed by the agriculture sector are typically poor (86 percent) with lowest levels of schooling and highest rates of illiteracy (23.3 percent), and they lack market and agri-business skills. In this sense, women are stuck with subsistence agriculture, receiving low prices for their products.23 To address these issues, the Collection Centers and Storage Facilities to be built by the Rwanda Feeder Roads Rehabilitation Project will include a room, a safe space for women, which will house different activities including trainings and group discussions. This safe space will be part of a larger construction with proper facilities for selling products.

55. In terms of the rehabilitation and maintenance of feeder roads, women and other groups in a situation of vulnerability will benefit from better access to markets. Additionally, quality of rural health, education, and other services might improve with better accessibility. For instance, the Strategic Plan for the Implementation of the National Gender Policy has signaled that while men use main roads that connect key economic areas, women will benefit from feeder roads improvement, as they use them more to carry out their reproductive activities. Better roads might reduce women’s travel time, mainly during the rainy season, which at the same time will provide them with more flexibility to carry out other activities. Moreover, the Demographic and Health Survey 2014-2015 establishes that distance is the second main barrier cited by women (22 percent) between 20-34 years old in accessing health care.

56. As for employment opportunities, more men than women are remunerated from non-farm jobs, like the construction industry, where salaries are significantly higher The maintenance of rural roads means also economic opportunities for women. As a requirement from the transport policy, women and men are employed through road maintenance; the latter being recruited more to perform road related labor.24 In this sense, through the project, women will have the opportunity to participate in the road maintenance through LCAs. To increase women’s participation and deal with information constraints, local representations of National Women’s Councils will provide women in the intervened area with information to participate in the LCAs.

57. These potential economic benefits are not so straight forward for women if gender norms are not addressed. For instance, women’s mobility can be restricted by their multiple tasks and because they are less likely to afford the cost of transportation. When there is a single mode of transport at home, it is generally used by men, while women walk to perform their daily activities, which takes them more time and restricts them from performing other economic activities. There are issues to be explored in the project given that in Rwanda women are still overworked with a continued imbalance on the household burdens of unpaid

21 USAID, Rural Feeder Roads Improvement Program. Gender Assessment and Integration Plan. Rwanda: USAID, p. 6.

22 Loc. cit.23 Ibid., 8.24 Strategic Plan for the Implementation of the National Gender Policy, p. 13.

98

care work.25 To inform the project and future operations (including Component 2: Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility and Institutional Development Support), a qualitative study will be carried out to identify the mobility barriers that women face to access markets and health facilities.

Climate Change and Road Resilience Action

58. Rwanda is subject to extreme climate events for which frequency and intensity is likely to increase because of climate change. These climatic events have serious adverse effects on economic activity and cause large direct and indirect losses. Today’s intense rainfall can lead to large-scale mudslides, flooding, and roadway erosion, sometimes severing large sections of the road network.

59. Rwanda is currently highly vulnerable to climate change as it is strongly reliant on rain-fed agriculture both for rural livelihoods and exports of tea and coffee. It also depends on hydropower for half of its electricity generation, a driver of economic growth. Rwanda has experienced a temperature increase of 1.4°C since 1970, higher than the global average, and can expect an increase in temperature of up to 2.5°C by the 2050s from 1970. Rainfall is highly variable in Rwanda but average annual rainfall may increase by up to 20 percent by the 2050s from 197026. Projections for East Africa over Rwanda and Burundi show an increasing trend in rainfall intensity for both rainy seasons which is likely to cause floods and storms which can result in landslides, crop losses, health risks and damage to infrastructure. Extreme weather already negatively impacts the economy and climate change could result in annual economic costs of just under 1 percent GDP by 2030. Rwanda has one of the lowest annual emissions per capita in the world, estimated at 0.4 tCO2e/person, compared to an annual global average of 6.7 tCO2e/person, including land use change, in 200527. CO2 emissions are mostly from transport and industrial processes though forest sequestration made Rwanda a net carbon sink in 2005. Six of the ‘V20’ or ‘Vulnerable 20’ group of top nations globally which are most affected by the catastrophes rooted from climate change are African with Rwanda being one of them.

60. Economic impacts from climate change are likely to grow. Increased floods, landslides and droughts are likely to increase damage to infrastructure and property. In particular, recorded major flood events took place in Rwanda in 1997, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009, where rainfall resulted in infrastructure damage, fatalities and injuries, landslides, loss and damage to agricultural crops, soil erosion and environmental degradation. Since then, intensive floods across the country also took place in 2012. The impacts of these events are economically significant. The floods in 2007, for example, incurred an estimated direct measurable economic costs of US$4 to US$22 million (equivalent to around 0.1 – 0.6 percent of GDP) for two districts alone. These losses included damages to roads and bridges28.

61. In the transport sector, both existing and future infrastructure is susceptible to damage. Increased temperature can increase pavement buckling and changing rainfall patterns can increase landslides, potholes and materials losses to the structures and cause road and bridge failures. Rwanda’s vulnerability to climate change is a cumulative result of multiple influences, most notably its highly mountainous topography, which is an ecosystem that is particularly vulnerable to climate change; erosion due in part to torrential rains and 25 USAID. (2011). USAID Rwanda. Gender Assessment. Rwanda: USAID, 12.26 Rwanda Green Growth and Climate Resilience National Strategy October 2011.27 Rwanda Green Growth and Climate Resilience National Strategy October 2011.28 Stockholm Environment Institute, The Economics of Climate Change in Rwanda 2009.

99

floods, particularly in the Northern region. These ecosystems are highly vulnerable to heavy precipitation that, combined with low vegetative cover, intensive agriculture and high population density, propagates land erosion and landslides, resulting in road damage and service interruptions. Climate change is expected to exacerbate these existing threats. In addition, increased temperatures are also a risk to the durability of road pavements, putting at risk existing paved roads. If these changes in climate are not incorporated into planned infrastructure development, the risks will continue to grow. This together with the costs of maintaining infrastructure due to damages from intense rains makes transportation costs in Rwanda some of the highest in Africa. It is currently estimated that transportation costs contribute up to 40 percent of the value of imported and exported goods in Rwanda29. The time is opportune to integrate climate change adaptation and disaster risk management at the early stages of infrastructure development.

Ongoing National Climate Change Proofing Initiative Funded by Nordic Development Fund

62. The Nordic Development Fund (NDF) together with the GoR and the AfDB have recently initiated the first national climate-proofing initiative for the transport sector in Rwanda through the establishment of a US$4.5 million dollar Trust Fund agreement. The NDF TF initiative will build on existing efforts to further strengthen and operationalize tools that result in real reductions in vulnerability for the sector as a whole, and for the population that relies on it for their livelihood. NDF is well placed, given its existing portfolio of projects in the region and on this subject, to provide assistance to the GoR to achieve this objective. The AF project is strongly aligned with the NDF’s TF activities through a designated sub-component which aims to determine the pre-feasibility of an early warning system (EWS) for the selected study area in Rwanda, pilot the installation of EWS stations along the rural road network and operationalize a landslide emergency management plan. Through close collaboration the projects support each other in the national roll-out of several outcomes with a particular focus on landslide hazard forecasting and early warning systems. An outline of the NDF TF components are given below in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: NDF Funded Climate Change Resilience Components

NDF TF Outputs Final Deliverable1.1 Detailed country-wide GIS vulnerability mapping for the transport sector GIS maps and data sources

1.2 Targeted technical training on climate change and disasters in the transport sector

Training materials and training reports

1.3 A program for student internships and excellence awards established Student study papers and award provided

1.4 Detailed technical assessment and recommendations in Western Province Report

1.5 Integration of climate change adaptation and disaster risk management into existing and upcoming technical standards Revised technical standards

1.6 Awareness raising program with local populations and labor based maintenance crews

Training materials, report on sessions

2.1 Evaluation and identification of best practices for right-of-way erosion control measures Report

2.2 Implementation of small-scale pilot projects for improved environmental management along the Base-Rukomo corridor, and lessons learned developed

Lessons- learned report

29 World Bank working Paper 2010, Budgeting for Effectiveness in Rwanda: From Reconstruction to Reform.

100

NDF TF Outputs Final Deliverable2.3 Strengthened performance indicators, including for environmental protection, developed, integrated and monitored by RTDA for supervision consultants and construction companies

Performance reports

2.4 Small-scale pilot projects for technological engineering innovations in identified ‘hot-spots’. Lessons- learned report

3.1 ‘Build-back-better’ guidelines developed by RTDA, focusing on bridged Guidelines

3.1b A mechanism for coordination with communities affected by transport post-reconstruction efforts will be established to ensure that reconstruction efforts aid locally affected populations.

Report

3.2 Specifications for floating pontoons for large vehicle river crossings during bridge collapse developed Specifications

3.3 Disaster Risk Management and Adaptation to Climate Change incorporated into revisions of the Transport Sector Policy Transport Policy revised

3.4 Develop a road asset management system, incorporating data on hazards and hot-spots

System established, staff Allocated

Climate Change Component Outlines Added under the Rwanda Feeder Roads AF project.

63. While the AF project recognizes that all the activities included in the NDF are well structured and aligned with the climate change related needs of the country, the following transport-related elements have been added as part of the Feeder Roads project with a focus on maintenance and landslide hazard forecasting. The main objective of this sub-component is to determine the prefeasibility of an early warning system (EWS) for the selected study area in Rwanda, pilot the installation of EWS stations along the rural road network and operationalize a landslide emergency management plan. Because of the spread of location of the districts and the relatively small geographical area of Rwanda, it is recommended to conduct the evaluation at national level. Specific objectives are:

(a) Map out sections of rural road network at a high risk of landslide occurrence. Include results into a risk assessment showing the chance of occurrence severity.

(b) Characterization of landslide hazards in the study area, focusing on types of processes, causes and identification of possible risk thresholds.

(c) Identification of existing databases, measurements and tools in the study area relevant for the development of a EWS (i.e. meteorological stations, hydrological stations, landslide database etc.) as well as possible data gaps.

(d) Determine the threshold levels for precipitation and flooding that will cause landslides in the selected areas

(e) Pilot the installation of early-warning systems which monitor flooding and precipitation thresholds

(f) Develop and operationalize a landslide management plan which includes emergency response actions to landslide occurrences along the rural road network.

(g) Identification of relevant institutions and stakeholders that can be responsible for the management of the EWS systems.

(h) Build capacity for landslide hazard evaluation within the designated institution in charge of managing the EWS stations.

(i) Surface sealing through trial sections and lining of drains where the road need to be protected against rainfall erosion

64. An outline on the proposed outputs to be funded and implemented under this sub-component is given below in Table 5.2:

101

Table 5.2: Landslide Hazard Forecasting and Early Warning Systems Outputs

Output Possible total duration/When

Institution involved

Output 1.1: Pre-feasibility study for landslide early warning system (national level) and identify hotspot at local level that could need local warning.

4-6 months/1st year of the project

International consultants/partners with experience in operational EWS

Output 1.2: National hydro-meteorological database – National landslide database - GIS, hydrological modeling and susceptibility maps for Rwanda’s feeder road network.

4 months/1st year of the project

International consultants/partners with experience in operational EWS+ Rwandan partners 30

Output 1.3: Identify authorities and national institutions where early warning system can be implemented and human resources that can be trained.

4 months/1st year of the project

International consultants/partners with experience in operational EWS+ Rwandan partners

Output 1.4 Identify section of feeder roads network that most urgently require local monitoring and warning systems

6 months-1 year/1st

and 2nd year of the project


Output 1.5: Development of common decision tools, applications as well as crowdsourcing technologies to monitor events and evaluate/communicate natural hazards.

6 months-1 year/1st

and 2nd year of the project


Output 1.6: Developing capacity for managing hydrometric networks and analyzing hydrometric data within RDTA and other landslide hazard monitoring stations

6 months-1 year/1st and 2nd year of the project


Output 1.7: Development of landslide thresholds based on analysis of historical landslides

6 months-1 year/1st and 2nd year of the project


Output 1.8: Building capacity for landslide hazard evaluation and assessment within RDTA

6 months/2nd year of the project


Output 1.9: Roll-out pilot of early warning system for an identified pilot area of the feeder roads network.

6 months-1 year/3rd year of the project


Output 1.11: Evaluating the 6 months-1 year/4th International consultants/partners

30 (could be representatives of national or local institutions).

102

performance of the system and the communication with end-users

year of the project

with experience in operational EWS+ Rwandan partners

65. Moreover, the project will further address basic adaptation/climate resilience effects including slope stabilization, drainage, vegetation, lining of drains as part of the construction contracts. As the principal project activities relate to the rehabilitation and maintenance of gravel roads, the project will consider the construction of trial sections of a variety of durable paved surfaces in order to gain important experience beyond the basic gravel wearing course. As maintenance is the key to efficiency of investment planning for the road sector, especially under conditions of onset climate vulnerabilities, the underscoring of smarter infrastructure investments by climate vulnerability studies becomes pivotal. Road network resilience constitutes an important component of increased competitiveness particularly for African countries. A strong investment into building and maintaining a resilient road infrastructure network can allow governments to focus capital expenditure on the expansion of the infrastructure base rather than the rehabilitation and upgrading of road sections damaged by the impact of poor maintenance coupled with the onset of climate change. In the long-term the investment into road maintenance will lead to the reduction of overall transport costs and thus better and cheaper access to domestic and international markets which in turn will reduce overall export costs.

103

Annex 6: Rural Roads Impact Evaluation

1. Rural road infrastructure is considered a major bottleneck to rural development, yet there is little rigorous analysis backing up this claim. The World Bank Development Impact Evaluation (DIME) is partnering with the GoR and multiple international DPs to analyze the impact of the Rural FRDP on market functioning and household welfare in Rwanda. The identification strategy consists of an event study design taking advantage of the quasi-random timing of the rollout of rural road upgrading across Rwandan districts. The key outcome variables are product prices in rural markets, land prices, household consumption and production. The key explanatory variable is road roughness before and after the road upgrading.

2. To account for the diverse array of impacts expected from upgrading rural feeder roads, the impact evaluation data collection strategy will rely on three types of data: household data, market data, and administrative data.

3. Household Data. Household-level outcomes will be measured through a standard multi-module household survey. The baseline household survey was completed in FY17. Follow-up household surveys are scheduled for FY18 and FY19 (as delays are expected between start of construction and measurable impacts at the household level, there is no household survey planned for FY17). For the household survey, two villages were sampled per road segment, and 10 households sampled per village, for a total of 4,000 households.

4. Market Data. Market-level outcomes will be measured through an annual market listing and high frequency price data collection. The market listing will inform the size and composition of the market, capturing changes in the number of type of traders participating. Market price data will be collected for a list of key food items, agricultural inputs, and household goods. The high frequency (monthly) data will allow the project to clearly track trends over time, and identify changes around the specific rehabilitation event.

5. Administrative and Monitoring Data. The impact evaluation will also utilize existing administrative data collected by the GoR. Road segment-level data (international roughness index and traffic count) will be collected by RTDA annually. Land and migration records are collected by local government. By working with data already collected by the GoR; we will sustainably build the capacity of existing data collection systems. The fees included here are for a local consultant to aggregate the various sources of data and prepare them to be used for analysis in the impact evaluation.

6. The key research questions of this project are:

(a) How are market prices of village imports and exports affected by improvements in rural roads?

(b) How do households adapt to these price changes with regard to goods produced and purchased? Using changes in prices and quantities, the impact evaluation will calculate welfare effects of rural roads for households by estimating changes in consumer welfare.

(c) What is the market valuation of improved road access as measured by aggregate land value changes? This is another way of assessing welfare effects with an asset pricing approach.

104

(d) To what extent do roads help a region develop as measured by total population? This tells to what degree roads attract population. This is a welfare measure from urban economics.

Table 6.1: Main Variables of InterestOutcome Name Definition Measurement Level

Output

International Road Roughness Index (IRI)

(A laser and GPS enabled hitch trailer) Measures roughness of the road defined as vertical travel per kilometer (measured using IRI)

Road segment level (measurements per kilometer)

Speed and quantity of vehicles (cars, buses, bicycles, pedestrians)

Standard traffic survey Sample of segments

Intermediate

Input prices on local market Price of main agricultural inputs Local market (one per segment); bi-monthly

Output prices on local market Price of local agricultural produce Local market (one per segment); bi-monthly

Quantities traded in local market

Amount of local production brought to the local market

Local market (one per segment); bi-monthly

Primary

Local agricultural productivity Agricultural record, crop by cropHousehold survey sample along each segment

Post-harvest managementShare of production sold; share of production processed; price and location of sale

Household survey sample along each segment

Labor allocation On and off-farm labor supply; on-farm labor demand; wage


Land use and transaction Plot by plot record of land purchases, sales, rental and usage


Land transactions Changes in ownership from the land cadaster; land values per hectare Village-level records

Household consumptionRecord of expenditures across different categories (goods produced within/outside the district)


Migration inflows and outflows Biennial population counts Village level (Ubudehe listing)

7. Evaluating the impact of large-scale road upgrading on market conditions in remote rural areas presents a complex methodological challenge, for two main reasons. First, road development is rarely assigned in a randomized or quasi-randomized manner easily amenable to impact evaluation. Second, roads are typically rehabilitated in small numbers due to substantial construction costs which implies that statistical power is often insufficient to warrant a rigorous evaluation. As it addresses both these issues, the proposed study presents a unique opportunity for research and policymaking. The research team has been working with Rwanda’s Rural Feeder Roads Steering Committee since 2012 to develop a common evaluation strategy across donors. This implies that, not only is the selection of the segments that will be rehabilitated in Rwanda in the coming four years extremely well documented and moving forward very soon, but also that the total number kilometers of

105

roads included in the analysis is far greater than has been afforded by previous, single-donor road improvement efforts in Africa.

8. Gender is important in the Rwandan context, as female mobility is likely to be disproportionately affected by increased access to markets and (off-farm) economic activities, as well as basic services (health, schooling, local government, and so on). The data analysis will be disaggregated by gender of the respondent.

9. The direct audience for this impact evaluation and its outputs consists of MINAGRI, RTDA, the World Bank operations team, and the DPs involved with the Feeder Roads program including USAID, The Netherlands, EU, and the World Bank. Beyond the direct stakeholders, the research will be of interest to the wider community of policymakers in Africa, aid agencies and academic economists. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal.

106

PROJECT MAP

107