RSDP 24 Years Assesment

THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
OF ETHIOPIA
MINISTRY OF URBAN AND
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION
24 RSDP
Years ASSESSMENT REPORT
VISION
Global competence and best roads to prosperous
Ethiopia by 2030.
MISSION
Develop and manage sustainable roads through
institutional competency and optimal utilization of
resource.
VALUES
FOREWORD
The road sector remains to be among the priority sectors for Ethiopia and this has been
reflected by the commitment of the Government, who has been allocating significant
portion of the country’s capital budget for road development. Throughout the 24 years
of RSDP implementation, significant achievements have been registered and this, I
believe, has contributed to the overall economic growth of the country and subsequent
improvements in the well-being of our people.
The Road Sector Development Program Performance Assessment Report has been
prepared on yearly basis for the last 24 years. The performance evaluation is done
based on the key annual performance indicators set out in the strategic program.
In addition to this, the performance of other sub-programs which have sectoral
implication is also evaluated and included in the document.
This report covers the overall performance of The Road Sector Development Program
since it was commenced in new form and approach in 1997 G.C., i.e., five programs and
the first year of the sixth phase of the program. As usual, the document records the
performance as well as the results achieved at national level both in terms of physical
works and institutional developments.
The report, as it captures the whole journey of RSDP, can be used as a basic reference
and resource document for policy makers, sector actors, and the academia who want
to understand the road sector of Ethiopia.
Before I close my foreword, it is appropriate to reiterate that the Ethiopian Roads
Administration and Regional/City Road Agencies are among key institutions bestowed
with a huge responsibility of not only improving the living condition of our people
through providing road access but also enhancing the development of the whole
economy. Hence, the institutional reform and capacity building initiatives started
should be further augmented and encompass other sector actors, like local contractors
and consultants.
Finally, I would like to thank all who involved in up-keeping the legacy of preparing this
historical document and also urge all sector stakeholders to work closely and look for
innovative ways to improve road infrastructure delivery and management in Ethiopia
Eng. Habtamu Tegegne,
Director General,
Ethiopian Roads Administration
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Road Sector Development Program Performance Assessment Report has annually
been prepared for the past 24 years. However it is for the first time that ERA is publishing
the 24 years RSDP performance assessment report in 2022. ERA Management members
have been directly involved in the process of publishing the report.
Therefore, we would like to express our deepest appreciation to all ERA management
members, at all levels for their unreserved contribution. Among all participants, the
following deserve special thanks and appreciation for the crucial role they had in
closely following-up, enriching with valuable inputs and reviewing of the report:-
Ato Yetemgeta Asrat, Deputy Director General, Office of Director General ; Ato Daniel
Mengiste, Executive Advisor to the Director General ; Ato Six Abrar, Team Leader, Road
Information Analysis and GIS Team ; Ato Endashaw Tesfaye, Team Leader, Strategic
Planning & Management Team and Eng. Nebiyu Kassahun, Team Leader, Regional Roads
Support Team.
Further acknowledgement is extended to all staff of Plan and Program Management

Directorate who, in one way or another, contributed to the successful preparation of
this report.
Finally, heartfelt appreciation goes to W/ro Konjit Alemu, Plan and Programme
Management D/ Director, W/ro Sadia Beshir Team Leader, Road Network Planning Team,
Tesfaye Shiferaw (Lead Economist), W/t Adanech Degu (Lead Economist), and Ato Abdi
Shifera (Economist) for their unreserved dedication during the report preparation and
Ato Philosophi Nurilign for the skill and commitment demonstrated in designing the
report.
ERA DOCUMENT APPROVAL FORM
ERA Document Approval Form
Document Title 24 YEARS RSDP ASSESSMENT REPORT
1. W/o. Sadia Beshir Date

Roads Network Planning Team Leader
Prepared By: -
2. Ato. Tesfaye Shiferaw
Lead Economist
W/o. Konjit Alemu Date
Reviewed by: - Director; Plan and Program Management
Directorate
Ato. Yetimgeta Asrat Date:

Endorsed by: -
DDG, Director General Office
Eng. Habtamu Tegegne Date:

Approved by:
ERA Director General
ACCRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
AC Asphaltic Concrete
AfDB African Development Bank
BADEA Bank of Arab for Economic Development in Africa
BMS Bridge Management System
DBST Double Surface Treatment
DCI Domestic Construction Industry
DFID Department for International Development, U.K.
ECWC Ethiopian Construction Works Corporation
EFY Ethiopian Fiscal Year
ESRI Environmental System Research Institute
ETB Ethiopian Birr
EU European Union
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIS Geographical Information System
GOE Government of Ethiopia
GTP Growth and Transformation Plan
ICT Information Communication Technology
IDA International Development Association
JICA Japanese International Corporation Agency
KfW Kreditanstalt Fur Wiederanfbaw (German Development Bank)
MCA Multi Criteria Analysis
METEC Metal and Engineering Corporation
MoWIE Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
NDF Nordic Development Fund
Non-ZORI Non-Zone of Road Influence
OFID OPEC Fund for International Development
OHS Occupational Health and Safety
PIAs Project Influence Areas
RAI Rural Access Index
RC Road Corridor
RRAs Regional/Rural Roads Authorities
RoW Right of Way
RSDP Road Sector Development Program
SFD Saudi Fund for Development
SNNPR Southern Nations and Nationalities Peoples Region
TA Technical Assistance
TPO Transport Poverty Observatory
U.K. United Kingdom
URRAP Universal Rural Road Access Program
USD United States Dollar
WROs Woreda Road Offices
ZORI Zone of Road Influence
Table of content
ACCRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS IV
LIST OF TABLE X
LIST OF FIGURE XI
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
1.1. Introduction 1
1.2. Physical and Financial Performance of RSDP 2
1.3. Impact of RSDP 6
1.4. Capacity of Local Contractors and Consultants 8
1.5. Financing Pattern of RSDP 10
2. CONCEPTION OF RSDP AND PROJECT SELECTION FRAMEWORK IN RSDPS 13
2.1. Background and Rationale for RSDP 13
2.2. Objectives of RSDP 14
2.3. Project Selection framework in RSDPs 14
2.3.1. Project Selection and Prioritization from Phase I – V 14
2.3.2. Project Selection and Prioritization in Phase VI 18
3. PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF RSDP (1997 – 2021) 25
3.1. Performance of RSDPs 25
3.1.1. Performance of RSDP I 25
3.1.2. Performance of RSDP II 27
3.1.3. Performance of RSDP III 29
3.1.4. Performance of RSDP IV 31
3.1.5. Performance of RSDP V 32
3.1.6. Performance of RSDP VI 34
3.2. Overall Performance of RSDP 36
3.3. Overview of URRAP Performance 38
3.3.1. Performance of URRAP under RSDP 38
3.3.2. Performance of URRAP under RSDP V 42
3.3.3. Performance of URRAP under RSDP VI 46
3.3.4. Challenges Faced in the Implementation of URRAP 47
3.4. Cost and Financing of RSDP 50
| VII
Road Sector Development Program: 24 Years Assessment
4. RSDP AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT 53

4.1. RSDP and Policies 53
4.1.1. The Road Sector Policy 53
4.1.2. Participatory Project Planning 55
4.1.3. Monitoring of RSDP Indicators 56
4.2. Institutional Capacity Building 56
4.2.1. Restructuring and Modernization of ERA 56
4.2.2. Performance Quality and System Management 61
4.2.3. Establishment of Toll Roads Enterprise 63
4.2.4. Establishment of the Federal Integrated Infrastructure Development and
Coordinating Agency (FIIDCA) 64
4.2.5. Human Resource Development 64
4.3. Road Asset Preservation in RSDPs 65
4.3.1. Axle Load Control System 65
4.3.2. Bridge and Culvert Asset Management System 68
4.4. Environmental and Social Management 72
4.4.1. Establishment of the Environmental, Social Management and Occupational
Health and Safety Directorate 72
4.4.2. The Social and Resettlement Management Team 75
4.4.3. Occupational Health and Safety Management Team 77
4.4.4. Development of Environmental, Social and OHS Management Frameworks 78
4.4.5. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) 79
4.4.6. Site Specific Environmental Management Plan 80
4.4.7. Environmental Auditing 80
4.4.8. External Monitoring of Environmental, Safety and Social Aspects 81
4.4.9. Awareness and Capacity Building on Environment, Social and Safety
Aspects 82
4.4.10. Non-Transport Projects EAHS (Emergency Access to Health Service) 83
VIII | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

4.4.11. Enhancing the Capacity of Roads and Hydropower Sub sectors towards
Climate Resilience 84
4.5. Research and Development and RSDP 85
5. IMPACT OF RSDP 90
5.1. Impact on Accessibility 91
5.2. Impact on Mobility Strategy 94
5.3. Impact on Quality 95
5.4. Impact on Domestic Construction Industry 97
5.5. Impact on Poverty 104
5.5.1. Impact of URRAP Roads 104
5.5.2. Impact of Investment on Road Corridors 105
6. LESSONS LEARNED AND THE WAY FORWARD 115
6.1. Lessons Learned 115
6.1.1. Overall Planning Approach and Practice 115
6.1.2. Project Financing 115
6.1.3. The Growth of Domestic Construction Industry 116
6.1.4. Improved Rural Accessibility 117
6.1.5. Sector Reform Issues 118
6.2. The Way Forward 118
6.2.1. Implementing Key Policy and Strategy Documents 118
6.2.2. ERA’s Journey to Global Competency 119
6.2.3. Proper Delineation of Mandates between Federal and Regions (ERA &
RRAs) 123
6.2.4. Improve Project Management Practice and Structure 124
6.2.5. Fully Financing All Types of Road Maintenance from Road User Charge 125
6.2.6. Gradual Shift from Government Financing to Private Financing 125
6.2.7. Full Scale Utilization of ArcGIS Software 126
7. ANNEX 128
7.1. List of construction contracts awarded in RSDP I - VI (1997-2021) 128
7.2. List of RSDP and SDG Indicators 164
| IX
LIST OF TABLE
Table 1: Summary of 24 Years Performance of RSDP 3
Table 2: Performance by Implementers (in %, Plan & Acc, in Km) 4
Table 3: Share of Expenditure by Implementers (1997-2021) 6
Table 4: Change in Selected Indicators 7
Table 5: Financing Pattern of RSDP (in million ETB) 10
Table 6: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP I 26
Table 7: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP II 28
Table 8: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP III 30
Table 9: Summary of Accomplishment for RSDP IV (5 years) 32
Table 10: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP V (5 years) 33
Table 11: : Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP VI (1st Year) 35
Table 12: Summary of Accomplishment of 24 years of RSDP 37
Table 13: SME development, training and manual distribution 38
Table 14: URRAP Performance under RSDP IV 40
Table 15: Level of Kebele Connectivity by All Weather Roads 41
Table 16: URRAP Performance under RSDP V 43
Table 17: kebele connectivity under URRAP 44
Table 18: URRAP Performance under RSDP VI 47
Table 19: Disbursement by Financiers (1997-2021) in mil ETB 51
Table 20: Total Checked Front and Rear Axles (2002/03 – 2020/21) 67
Table 21: Summary of Bridge/Culvert Stock 69
Table 22: Bridge Stock and Condition after major inspection 69
Table 23: Repair and Replacements of Bridge and Culvert 70
Table 24: List of in-house and collaborative road research projects and deliverables to date by
ERA/RRC 87
Table 25: Growth of the Classified Road Network and Change in Road Density (1997 – 2021) 91
Table 26: Rural Access Index Values 93
Table 27: Traffic Trend over the Period of the RSDP 94
Table 28: Road Condition Improvement (in %) 96
Table 29: Total Contract Cost of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors 98
Table 30: Cost of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants 99
Table 31: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors 101
Table 32: Awarded Projects to local and foreign consultants from July 1997 to June 2021 102
Table 33: Transport and Poverty Observatory Study I projects 106
Table 34: Transport and Poverty Observatory Study II projects 108
Table 35: Transport and Poverty Observatory Study III projects 112
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 1: Physical plan Vs Accomplishment 3
Figure 2: Financial Plan Vs Disbursement 4
Figure 3: Share of Expenditure by Implementers 5
Figure 4: Participation of local and foreign Contractors cost in million ETB (1997-2021) 9
Figure 5: Total Cost of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants (1997/98-2021) 9
Figure 6: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors (1997-2021) 10
Figure 7: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants (1997-2021) 10
Figure 8: Internal and External Finance Sources in the RSDPs 11
Figure 9: Perccentage of Illigal Axle Load 67
Figure 10: Condition of Bridges, in % 71
Figure 11: Traffic Trend from 1997 to 2020 94
Figure 12: Road Condition Trend 97
Figure 13: Cost of Projects to Local and Foreign Contractors 99
Figure 14: Cost of Projects awarded to local and foreign consultants 100
Figure 15: Number of Projects awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors 102
Figure 16: Number of Projects awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants 103
| XI
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1. Introduction
In the context of Ethiopia, road is the most important infrastructure that provides
access to rural and urban areas in the country. Road plays crucial role to reduce
transportation cost and support economic growth in the country. However, in the late
1990’s; the road network coverage was limited to major urban areas and to some rural
areas. Most areas in the country were isolated from economic centers, market and
basic social services. The existing road network was largely deteriorated and in poor
condition.
The Government of Ethiopia has well recognized that limited road network coverage
and poor condition of the existing road network has been an impediment to economic
recovery and economic growth. Therefore, to address the problems in the road sector;
the Government has launched the Road Sector Development Program (RSDP) in 1997.
Since then, five phases of RSDP were implemented over the period of 1997 – June 2020
and the sixth phase; RSDP VI has been launched and implemented since July 2020.
» RSDP I - From July 1997 to June 2002 (5 years plan)
» RSDP II - From July 2002 to June 2007 (5 years plan)
» RSDP III - From July 2007 to June 2010 (3 years plan)
» RSDP IV - From July 2010 to June 2015 (5 years plan)
» RSDP V - From July 2015 to June 2020 (5 years plan)
» RSDP VI - From July 2020 to June 2025 (ongoing)
Over twenty-four years of RSDP, physical works consisting of rehabilitation and
upgrading of trunk and link roads, construction of expressway, construction of new link
roads, construction of rural and Woreda roads and maintenance of federal and regional
roads have been carried out by Ethiopian Roads Administration (ERA), Regional Roads
Authorities (RRAs), Municipalities Woreda Road offices (WRO) and the Community.
Series of policy and institutional reforms have been implemented in the sector, which
have enhanced execution capacity of road projects and effectiveness of Road Asset
Management. RSDP has been financed from domestic sources including Government
of Ethiopia (GOE), road users through Road Fund Office and Community, and foreign
sources including bilateral and multilateral institutions.
|1
Domestic source (GOE and Road Fund) has been major financer of the RSDP followed
by the World Bank. Development partners consisting of the World Bank (WB), European
Union (EU), the Government of China, African Development Bank (AfDB), Nordic
Development Fund (NDF), Bank of Arab for Economic Development in Africa (BADEA),
OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) and the Governments of Japan,
Germany, U.K, Ireland, the Saudi Fund for Development (SDF), the Kuwait Fund, Abu
Dhabi Fund and Korean Exim Bank have been involving in the financing of the Program.
Twenty-four years have passed since the launch of the RSDP. This report summarizes
and highlights both the major accomplishments of the program over its 24 years in
general and first year performance of RSDP VI in particular.
1.2. Physical and Financial Performance of RSDP
Over the twenty-four years of the RSDP, physical works have been undertaken on
a total of 166,382 km of roads excluding routine maintenance work and Community
roads. The total budget for the planned works during this period amounted to ETB 584.8
billion. The total amount disbursed including for all maintenance work and for policy
& institutional studies in the same period, is ETB 468.1 billion. Physical and financial
performance of RSDP over the past 24 years against plan is 66% and 80% respectively.
Because of the implementation of Woreda roads in RSDP IV and V, the overall physical
plan and accomplishment were increased from the previous two RSDPs. Table 1 shows
the 24 years physical and financial performance summary of RSDP.
Azezo - Metema
2 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

KM Total Physical
> 166 accomplishment of RSDP 24
Thousand years
ETB
Total financial disbursement
> 468 of RSDP 24 years
Billion
Table 1: Summary of 24 Years Performance of RSDP
Physical Plan Vs. Accomplishment, Financial Plan Vs. Disbursement, in

Program km million ETB
Plan Actual % age Budget Disb. % age
RSDP I 8,908 8,709 98 9,812.9 7,284.6 74
RSDP II 8,252 11,589 140 15,985.9 18,112.8 113
RSDP III 14,686 12,395 84 34,643.9 34,957.9 101
RSDP IV 97,517 85,860 88 125409.2 158,333.3 126
RSDP V 114,846 40,665 35 334,514.4 196,051 59
RSDP VI (1st year) 9,609 7,164 75 64,476. 53,352.3 83
Total RSDP (24 years) 253,818 166,382 66 584,842.3 468,091.9 80
Figure 1: Physical plan Vs Accomplishment
|3
Figure 2: Financial Plan Vs Disbursement
Physical performance of RSDP by implementers shows that accomplishment against

plan for Federal roads is 90%; Regional roads are 99% and Woreda/URRAP Road is 50%.
Table 2 shows physical performance by implementers.
Table 2: Performance by Implementers (in %, Plan & Acc, in Km)
Federal Regional Woreda/URRAP Overall
Program
Plan Actual %age Plan Actual %age Plan Actual %age Plan Actual % age
RSDP I 3777 2709 72 5131 6000 117 8908 8709 98
RSDP II 5375 7483 139 2877 4106 143 8252 11589 140
RSDP III 8956 7996 89 5730 4399 77 14686 12395 84
RSDP IV 14782 13633 92 11212 9814 88 71523 62413 87 97,517 85,860 88
RSDP V 16786 13973 83 8060 9299 115 90000 17394 19* 114846 40665 35
RSDP VI (1st
4305 2520 59 2649 1679 63.4 2655 2965 112 9609 7164 75
year)
Total RSDP 53981 48313.6 90 35659 35296.8 99 164178 82772.4 50 253818 166382 66
* During RSDP V; the implementation of URRAP was very low compared to the targets
set. The reason is that unlike RSDP IV (GTP I), the federal government’s budget
support to the program as part of the MDGs was suspended. Due to this budget
support problem the regional governments faced the budget constraint for full
financing and the continuation of the program. Subsequently, this budget shortage
largely contributed to poor performance of the program.
The Sixth Phase of RSDP has been implemented since July 2020; the physical plan
during the first year of RSDP VI was 9,609 km of which 4,305 km for Federal, 2,649 km
Regional and 2,655 km Woreda roads. During the past one year of RSDP VI, a total of

7164 km physical work has been carried out, of which 2520 km by Federal Roads, 1679
km by Regional Roads and 2965 km by Woreda Road Desks.
Considering the outbreak of COVID 19 and the conflict of in Northern part of the country
75% performance could be considered satisfactory. In addition to the construction
works, regular routine maintenance was conducted on all types of roads and supporting
studies and services have been undertaken, including policy and capacity building
projects, technical assistance, detailed design/design review studies, feasibility and
EIA studies.
Over the past 24 years, 32.7% of the total RSDP expenditure was on rehabilitation and
upgrading roads, 33.9% was on construction of link roads, 4.6% was on construction of
expressways, 4.4% on maintenance of federal roads, 11.5% on regional road construction
and maintenance and 9.9% on Woreda roads and 2.8% was on institutional support
projects and other activities at the federal level and 0.2% for maintenance of urban
roads. Figure 3 and Table 3 show the RSDP expenditure by category and implementers.
Figure 3: Share of Expenditure by Implementers
|5
Table 3: Share of Expenditure by Implementers (1997-2021)
Expenditure Category Share of Expenditure (%)

Federal Roads 78.4
Rehabilitation of Trunk Roads 5.2
Upgrading Trunk & Link Roads 27.5
Construction of Link Roads 33.9
Construction of Expressways 4.6
Maintenance 4.4
Others (including Institutional Support) 2.8
Regional Roads 11.5
Construction of RRAs Gravel Roads 10.2
Emergency and Routine Maintenance 1.3
Others (Bridge, feasibility, policy & Capacity and Ordinary budget) 0.02
Woreda / Community Roads 9.9
Urban Roads /only maintenance 0.2
Total 100
1.3. Impact of RSDP
Overall, RSDP is achieving satisfactory progress against its objectives and benchmarks.
Substantial results have been achieved in improving rural accessibility and the
condition of the road network. The capacity of ERA has been strengthened over the
years and demonstrated its leadership in the sector despite huge works, various
technical sector issues and staff turnover.
Improvement in the Road Network: the country‘s road network has increased from
26,550 km in 1997 to 155,830 km in 2021 (average annual growth of 7.9 percent).
As a result, the road density per 1000 sq. km has increased from 24.1 km in 1997 to
135.8 km in 2021. The proportion of road network (only federal and rural gravel road
network) in good condition in 1997 was 22% and this figure declined to 20.8% in 2020
and 2021 excluding urban roads. The decline in the proportion of road network in good
condition in 2021 compared to the proportion of road in good condition in 1997 (after 23
and 24 years of RSDP) is due to introduction of scientific measurement of roughness
of roads in 2020 which replaced the long practiced visual inspection of roads which
in turn led to significant reduction in the proportion of road in good condition in 2020.
The introduction of scientific measurement of roughness led to set new base line of
roads in good condition in 2020 which was 20.1% against which to compare future
improvement in the condition of country road network. Accordingly, the proportion of
road network in good condition in 2021 showed slight increase by (0.7%) from 2020.
Similarly, the proportion of road network in acceptable condition (Good + Fair) in 2021
has increased slightly by 3.9% from 2020.
Road Density KM Average Distance to

KM
Per 1000 sq. km In
> 135 >4 All Weather Road In
RSDP 24 years RSDP 24 years
Table 4: Change in Selected Indicators
Indicators 1997 (RSDP Start) 2021 (End of RSDP VI)

Proportion of Asphalt roads in Good Condition 17% 26%*
Proportion of Gravel Roads in Good Condition 25% 14%*
Proportion of Rural Roads in Good Condition 21% 31.8%
Proportion of Woreda Roads in Good Condition - 14.7%
Proportion of Total Road Network in Good Condition 22% 20.8%
Proportion of Total Road Network in Acceptable
- 62.5%
Condition (Good + Fair)
Road Density per 1000 sq.km 24.1 km 135.8 km
Road Density per 1000 population 0.46 km 1.42 km
Proportion of area more than 5 km from allweather
79% 33.1%
road
Average distance to all weather road 21km 4.5 km
Road Network length (in km) including URRAP and
26,550 km 155,830.1 km
Municipality Roads
* Good to note that the drop in the percentage condition of the roads in the year 2021
was, due to the change in parameter used for rating the roads. Previously, the rating
was done visually with no clearly distinguishing criterion for rating a particular road
|7
good, fair or poor except for Inspector’s experience. However, through the years, ERA
tried to modernize the approach with the advancement on Road Asset Management
and clear parameter was set to differentiate among the ratings, based on objectively
verifiable criterion and relate those to Condition Indexes. Moreover, with the current
development stage of the country, the definition of the ratings, say “good” has also
changed; roads which could be considered in good condition some years back may
no more be accepted so. This has created the drop in the condition of the roads from
what was reported before.
Policy and Institutional Reforms under RSDP: Substantial progress has also been
made in implementing institutional and policy reforms, which were intended to build
institutional capacity of the road sector. The capacity of ERA has been strengthened
over the years and demonstrated its leadership in the sector despite huge works,
various technical sector issues and staff turnover. Similarly, RRAs and WROs capacity
has been built continuously over the RSDP years.
1.4. Capacity of Local Contractors and Consultants
The impact of the program on building the capacity of the domestic construction
industry is encouraging. Over the last twenty-four years of RSDP, participation of
the local construction industry has increased in terms of both value and number of
projects. Accordingly, the total value of contracts awarded to local contractors is
about ETB 260.1 billion, which accounts 52.9% of the total contract amount awarded
since July 1997. In addition, some local contractors are now taking bigger contracts,
with values amounting as much as ETB 3.6 billion. Figure 4 below shows total cost of
projects awarded to local and foreign contractors.
Shire - Mystebrie

# of Projects # of Projects
Awarded to Local 766* 198* Awarded to Foreign
Contractors Contractors
* Routine Maintenance projects are considered on Number of Projects awarded to
local/ foreign
Figure 4: Participation of local and foreign Contractors cost in million ETB (1997-2021)
Participation of local consultants has been particularly encouraging. In terms of

contract value, local consultants have received around 66.2% of the consultancy
services during the twenty-four years of RSDP. Local consultants have also been
awarded a total of more than ETB 9.9 billion contract value of the total consultancy
services.
Figure 5: Total Cost of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants (1997/98-
2021)
In terms of number of projects, of the 2,158 contracts (both construction & consultancy)
awarded over the last twenty - four years of the RSDP, some 1,708 (close to 80%)
contracts were awarded to local companies of which 55.2% were for consultancy
services and 44.8% for construction contracts.
|9
Figure 6: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors (1997-2021)
Figure 7: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants (1997-2021)
1.5. Financing Pattern of RSDP
The RSDP financing over the last twenty - four years came from Internal and External
sources, where the GoE has financed 78.6%, 5.6% from the office of the Road Fund and
the Community has contributed 0.9% of the total finance of RSDP. So, these internal
sources have contributed 86.1% of the finance for the implementation of RSDP and
the remaining 13.9% was pooled from the development partners. The share of the
Government of Ethiopia was the highest (78.6%), followed by the Road Fund office
(5.6%), then IDA (4.4%), China (3%) and AfDB (2.2%). Table 5: - shows financing pattern
of RSDP.
Table 5: Financing Pattern of RSDP (in million ETB)
Financing from Local Financing from External
RSDP Program Sources Sources Total
Amount Percentage Amount Percentage
RSDP I 4,433.7 61 2,850.9 39 7,284.6
RSDP II 11,497.4 63 6,615.5 37 18,112.8

RSDP III 26,298.2 75 8,659.6 25 34,957.9
RSDP IV 130,949.9 83 27,383.6 17 158,333.3
RSDP V 178,939.4 91 17,111.6 9 196,051
RSDP VI (1st Year) 50,908.2 95 2,444.1 5 53,352.3
Total 403,026.7 86 65,065.2 14 468,091.9
While the share of external finance has a declining trend while going from RSDP I to V,
the overall external finance in monetary terms is increasing except while going from
RSDP IV to V; in which case it decreased from 27.3 billion ETB to 17.1 billion ETB.
Figure 8: Internal and External Finance Sources in the RSDPs
Regarding phase VI, it has been implemented only for one year but with the expected
large flow of foreign finance from development partners; it is expected that the share
of development partners will rise. The steady decline in the share of development
partners during each five successive phases of RSDP is due to faster rise in government
expenditure than the rise in expenditure by development partners.
Jimma - Bonga
| 11

2. CONCEPTION OF RSDP AND PROJECT SELECTION
FRAMEWORK IN RSDPS
2.1. Background and Rationale for RSDP
Ethiopia, the second most populous country in Sub-Saharan Africa is well endowed
with natural resources, with 60% of its total land area estimated to be potentially
arable, but has had a road density amongst the lowest in Africa and other developing
countries. Similarly on the basis of road accident statistics, Ethiopia has also ranked
as one of the world’s worst, indicating road safety must be a major concern. Despite
of this, more than 95% of the movement of people and goods had been carried out
and still carried out by road transport. Road transport provides the means for the
movement of people, agricultural products & industrial goods. Road transport also
provides a means for the utilization of land and natural resources, increase access to
social services, and opportunities for sustainable growth.
Besides of the low road density and high road accident rates, deteriorating roads
become a major economic problem, not only in Ethiopia, but also in Sub-Saharan Africa
as a whole. The experiences of many international organizations and of the major donor
groups during the 1960’s and 1970’s had established that this problem results from
poor management and maintenance although it was also contributed to by the lengthy
periods of insecurity, violence, political and economic problems of the countries in
the area. Hence, massive investments by donors in road and highway infrastructure
in the 1960’s and 1970’s had not provided sustainable economic benefits as a result of
beneficiary governments failing to accord maintenance the priority it requires both in
terms of funding and quality of management.
To protect and rehabilitate existing infrastructure, to improve financial self-sufficiency

and to develop efficient rural transport infrastructure and services, designing a
program have been inevitable. In response to this, with the support of development
partners the Government of Ethiopia commenced in mid-1994 the preparation of a
comprehensive program aimed at the development of the road sector, which is resulted
in the formulation of the Road Sector Development program (RSDP).
| 13
2.2. Objectives of RSDP
The objectives of RSDP are to:

» I mprove transport operating efficiency and reduce road transport costs for
freight and passengers so as to encourage production, distribution and export;
» Provide access to previously neglected food deficit rural areas to support
efficient production, exchange and distribution throughout the country, and
» Develop adequate institutional capacity of the road sub-sector both at central
as well as regional level.
2.3. Project Selection framework in RSDPs
2.3.1. Project Selection and Prioritization from Phase I – V
Selection of projects that have been implemented under the RSDP over the past 24
years had passed through different stages of preparation. The early stages of project
selection and preliminary prioritization were based on a Multi-Criteria Approach (MCA),
described in the sections below. After preliminary selection, using the MCA approach,
the project preparation moved to feasibility studies where a detailed economic and
environmental analysis is carried out.
2.3.1.1. Preliminary Selection of Road Upgrading Projects
Five criteria were used for preliminary selection of road upgrading projects. These

criteria were traffic level of the proposed road; network connectivity; road condition;
investment potential and import-export road.
Traffic Level: Roads are built with a design capacity to accommodate a given volume of
traffic per day. When traffic levels exceed the design capacity, roads reach to the point
where maintaining them is no longer economical. Roads with high traffic were given
priority for upgrading or rehabilitation - 30% weight.
Network Connectivity: Existing roads, particularly main roads, are connected with
other roads that collect and feed in traffic. Roads which improve the efficiency of the
road network connectivity were given priority for upgrading - 20% weight.
Road Condition: Some gravel and asphalt roads had passed their initial design life
and had deteriorated to the point where maintaining them is no longer economical.
In such cases, it was impossible to restore them to their original condition by heavy
maintenance and reconstruction and/or upgrading was necessary to bring them back
to a serviceable standard. Priority was given to roads or sections of road that were in a
poor condition - 20% weight.
Investment Potential: The number of medium and large-scale industries under a
licensing phase or under implementation in emerging towns of the country was
accelerating.
Absence of road infrastructure was frequently cited as the main impediment to existing
industries and this was also an investment restraint to attract new industries. Lack of
adequate road infrastructure also hampered growth of the economy at the national
level and priority was given to upgrading roads, connecting with these towns - 10%
weight.
Import/Export Corridor and Regional Integration Roads: Ethiopia imports and exports
goods through the port of Djibouti and to some extent through ports of Barbara in
Somali Land and the port of Sudan. Ethiopia is also planning to use the port Mombasa
in Kenya as an alternative outlet.
Upgrading roads linking to ports of neighboring countries was important as they provide
alternatives and promotes competitiveness. Ethiopia also needs to ensure links with
neighboring countries to improve trade and promote regional integration. Priority was
given to upgrading import/export and regional integration corridors - 20% weight.
| 15
2.3.1.2. Preliminary Selection of New Roads
Five criteria were applied for preliminary selection of new roads. These criteria were
roads leading to economic development potential areas; roads leading to surplus food
crop and cash crop growing areas; missing links between main roads or shortcuts; new
access to large population centers and roads in emerging regions.
Economic Development Potential: Ethiopia is endowed with natural resources in

different parts of the country, mainly irrigable potential agricultural land and minerals,
which were not exploited. Priority was given to the construction of new roads providing
access to areas with unexploited natural resources - 20% weight.
Surplus Food Crops and Cash Crops Growing Areas: Some areas grow and supply surplus
food crops to urban and rural markets and food deficit areas. In addition, there are
areas producing exportable crops. Not all of these surplus food crops and cash crops
growing areas were connected by roads. To improve supply of food crops to urban and
rural markets and increase the volume of exportable crops, construction of new roads
linking to these areas was vital. Priority was given to the construction of new roads
creating access to these areas - 20%.
Missing links: Several towns in the country are linked to each other by circuitous roads
and connectivity of the road network was not optimized. Consequently, transportation
cost and travel times were high between these towns. Costs and time of travelling
could be reduced significantly by constructing link or short access roads between
some towns in the country and priority was given to the construction of link roads -
20% weight.
New Access to Population Centers: There were large rural communities in different
parts of the country which were totally isolated from the rest of the country because of
the absence of roads. These communities needed to become socially and economically
integrated with the rest of the country.
By the virtue of this, priority was given to the construction of new roads providing
access to large isolated rural communities in the country - 30% weight.
Emerging Regions/Isolated Areas: There are four emerging regions in the country namely
Gambella, Benishangul - Gumuz, Afar and Somali. Due to neglect in the past, distribution
of main roads in these regions and some pastoral areas of the country are minimal.
To bring about balanced development
amongst the regions in the country, roads
provision should be equitable. Priority
was given to construction of new roads in
these emerging regions - 10% weight.
2.3.1.3. Final Prioritization and Se-
lection
It was during the feasibility stage that

final project selection was made on
the basis of economic viability. All new
construction and upgrading projects used
a conventional producer surplus or HDM
project level model approach to compare
the total costs with the total benefits of the
project discounted at 10.23%. Total project
costs included the construction and the
maintenance cost of the road during the
service period of the road. Benefits took
into account vehicle operating cost and
travel time savings. Each project was
assessed on its Economic Internal Rate of
Return (EIRR) and Net Present Value.
Feasibility studies for most of the
roads ear-marked for upgrading or new
construction were well underway or well
advanced. Finalization of procurement
for civil works and consultancy for those
projects scheduled to start in the early
years of the program was well advanced.
The Roads Economic Decision Model (RED),
developed by the World Bank, was used
to improve the decision-making process
for the development and maintenance
of low-volume regional roads. The model
| 17
performs an economic evaluation of road investment options using the consumer
surplus approach and was customized to the characteristics and needs of low-volume
roads.
2.3.2. Project Selection and Prioritization in Phase VI
The 5- and 10-years master plan for Federal Roads used multi criteria framework to
set priority for new missing links whereas it used HDM IV model for upgrading and
rehabilitation of existing roads. The multi criteria framework was discussed repeatedly
among team of professionals as well as relevant stakeholders and accordingly a
weight was assigned to each criterion. The basic principles used by the plan to set
criteria are as follows.
Basic principles adopted for selection of criteria are:

» Contribution for traffic generation, such as population size, number of urban
centers;
» Contribution to GDP and roles to economic growth, such as amount of surplus
production, cash crops, livestock, number of industries etc.;
» Priority to develop untouched areas and low lands;
» Contribution to Tourism development;
» Contribution for connectivity and regional integration within the Country and
with Neighboring Countries;
» Priorities for regions which have relatively low federal road networks; and
» Priorities for roads which provide access to borders and ports
The details are explained below.
The 10 years Federal Road Master Plan is focused on for short term (5 years) and long
term (10 years), it is envisaged to deal with upgrading and rehabilitation of existing
roads and identification of missing link roads. In all cases, the identified roads had
to be evaluated and prioritized for future implementation based on the availability of
budgets.
Accordingly, a number of existing roads for upgrading and rehabilitation and missing
link roads for new construction were identified. The prioritization of existing roads
was performed using the Highway Development and Management (HDM 4) Tool that

was developed by the World Bank and have been underutilization for more than twenty
years. In this respect, the required data were acquired from pertinent organizations
and sources. These data included road construction and maintenance costs as well
as vehicle related costs. The data were analyzed using HDM 4 and the presumed
parameters were generated and then the projects were prioritized. The main criteria
of prioritization were net present value (NPV), benefit-cost ratio (B-CR) and internal
rate of return (IRR).
In the case of missing links however, the benefits are more of qualitative and there
are no readily available tangible data for processing. In this case, the most common
methodology of project evaluation is multi criteria analysis (MCA). The MCA approach
considers parameters such as social, economic, environmental and pavement condition
as the main criterion and some sub-criteria to find the best suitable parameters and
their corresponding weights.
The ERA utilizing MCA in the case of the missing links, the following were dealt with
Main Criteria (MC), Sub Criteria, Criteria Range, and marks (points) with respect to
specifics and overall. Overall, there were eight (8) main criteria, eleven (11) sub criteria,
and thirty (30) criteria ranges. These are succinctly described below:
MC 1: Population and Urban Center
This main criterion comprises of two sub criteria which are: populations served by
road crossing Woredas with criteria ranges from least population per kilometer to
highest population per km. In allocating points for roads, the roads get marks based on
| 19
proportion of their population to the maximum population of road crossing Woredas. A

road which crosses highest population per km gets 10 points. Therefore, the maximum
point/mark allocated in this case is 10.
MC 2: Surplus Crops Production
In this case, there are two sub criteria that are surplus crops for domestic consumption,
surplus crops for export.
MC 2.1: Surplus Crops for Domestic Market
Similar with population the allocation of the mark used in the case of roads crossing
surplus producing Woredas is the size of surplus production. The maximum mark is
determined by the maximum total surplus producing Woredas crossed by the proposed
roads. And the maximum mark in the case of surplus crop production is 10 marks.
MC 2.2: Surplus Crops for Export (Cash crops)
Under this multi criterion the consultant has followed the same procedure with the

Addis Ababa
above multi criteria for surplus production. The maximum point allocated is 8 and the
remaining roads get proportionally with the total.
MC 2.3: Arable land
Arable land is land which is capable of being ploughed and used to grow crops but
not currently cultivated. Under this multi criterion, measured size of arable land found
in the Woredas crossed by newly identified missing links is used for comparison. The
maximum mark/point assigned for road crossing high size of arable land is 7 marks.
MC 3: Livestock
Livestock in Ethiopia are domesticated animals commonly raised to produce labor and
commodities such as meat, eggs, milk, leather, and wool. Under this criterion, the total
number of livestock (in Tropical Livestock Unit) is the measurement of comparisons
between roads crossing livestock potential areas. The total marks/points allocated for
road having high livestock population is 10 marks.
| 21
MC 4: Mining
There are two sub criteria under mining and these are metallic and placer gold; and
industrial mineral. The total allocated mark/points for mining is 8 mark/points.
MC 4.1: Metallic and Gold
Under this multi criteria the consultant has evaluated the volume of metallic and
placer gold crossed by the identified missing links. The total mark/point allocated for
metallic and gold is 5 marks.
MC 4.2: Industrial Mineral
Under these multi criteria the consultant has evaluated the volume of industrial
mineral crossed by the identified missing links. The total mark/point allocated for
industrial mineral is 3 marks.
MC 5: Industries
This multi criterion is evaluated with the number of Medium scale, large scale and
agro-industries found in the Woredas crossed by newly identified missing links. The
maximum mark/point allocated for road crossing high industrial Woredas is 10 marks.
MC 6: Tourism
Under these multi criteria, the total number of major tourist attraction sites crossed
by the future missing link is considered. The total mark allocated for road crosses high
number of tourist attraction Woredas is 6 marks.
MC 7: Federal Road Density
The Federal Road Density is measured in km per 1,000 sq. km. The maximum mark is
allocated for road crossing very low federal road density Woredas which is 6km per
1000 sq km. This is to privilege future missing links crossing less federal road density
Woredas. Roads crossing very low density Woredas which is 6 km per 1000 sq km or
less get 10 marks. Roads crossing high density Woredas get less mark. The remaining
roads get proportionally by dividing 6 to the density of the Woredas crossed by the
roads multiplied by 10.

Moyale one stop border post
MC 8: Network Connectivity
There are two sub criteria in this case and these are: Transport Corridor and Regional
Integration.
MC 8.1: Transport Corridor
There are four criteria ranges under the Transport Corridor. The first one is corridor road
that connect feeder or unclassified road; the second one is corridor road that connect
collector roads; the third one is corridor road that connect main access roads; and
lastly, corridor road that connect trunk or link roads. Correspondingly, the allocated
points/marks are 1.25; 2.50, 3.75 and 5 respectively.
MC 8.2: Regional Integration
Under this sub criterion, there are four criteria ranges and these are: roads connecting
Woredas within one zone; roads connecting two zones within one region; roads
connecting two regions; and lastly roads connecting two Borders and Posts. The
corresponding allocated points/marks are: 2.5, 5.0, 7.5 and 10.0.
It can be concluded that, the identified missing links have been evaluated for
prioritization purposes using the above criteria, sub criteria and criteria ranges after
thorough professional exercise and sufficient discussions with the clients and other
stakeholders. The Consultant feels that the exercise was iterative and can be revised
at point of time.
| 23
Meki - Ziway Road Project

3. PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF RSDP
(1997 – 2021)
3.1. Performance of RSDPs
3.1.1. Performance of RSDP I
During RSDP I, a total of 8709 km of roads were rehabilitated, upgraded, constructed

and maintained of which 2709 km of roads were federal roads, 6000 km of roads were
regional roads. During RSDP I, ETB 7.3 billion was disbursed of which 5.5 billion was on
federal roads and ETB 1.7 billion was on regional roads.
With regard to the federal road network, 975 km of trunk roads were rehabilitated,
549 km of trunk and link roads were upgraded and 928 km of new link roads were
constructed during RSDP I. In parallel with these works, a total of 257 km of heavy/
emergency maintenance work was carried out on federal paved and gravel roads.
Physical and Financial performance against plan during RSDP I was 98% and 74%
respectively. In addition, detailed design studies, design reviews, feasibility and EIA
studies were undertaken for a number of pipeline road projects.
By the end of RSDP I, in 2002 achievements were registered in improving rural

accessibility and condition of the road network. The road network of the country
increased to 33,297 km in 2002 from 26550 km in 1997. As a result, Road density per1000
sq. km increased to 30.3 km in 2002 from 24.1 km in to 1997. Table 6 provides a summary
of the accomplishment of the RSDP I.
Gohatsion - Dejen
| 25
Table 6: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP I
Length in km, Budget & Disbursement in million ETB
RSDP I, 5 Years
Item Types of Work Physical Financial
Plan Acco. % Budget Disbu. %
I. Federal Roads
1.1 Rehabilitation of Trunk Roads 1259 975 77 3161.4 2543.3 80
1.2 Upgrading of Trunk Roads 822 540 66 1332.9 894 67
1.3 Upgrading of Link Roads 0 9 200.1 176.7 88
1.4 Construction of Link Roads 930 928 100 768.8 878.1 114
1.5 Heavy/Emergency Maintenance 766 257 34 313.8 92.1 29
1.6 Routine Maintenance 701 676.2 97
1.7 Feasibility & EIA Study 15.6 5.5 35
Procurement of Equipment and
1.8 304.2
Spare Parts
Bridge & Structures Maintenance
1.9 63.2 32.6 51
& construction
1.10 Policy and Capacity Building 156 129.9 83
1.11 Recurrent Expenditure 96.4
Sub – Total 3777 2709 72 7017.4 5524.8 79
II. Regional Roads
Construction of Rural Roads &
2.1 5131 6000 117 2588.7 1500 58
Bridges
2.2 Maintenance 206.7 170 82
Sub – Total 5131 6000 117 2795.4 1670 60
III. Community Roads /ERTTP/
Studies/Pilot Woreda
3.1 Implementation/Main Road 0.1 2.7 >100
Program (Roads Component)
Sub– Total 0.1 2.7 >100
Urban Roads Maintenance 87 > 100
Grand Total 8908 8709 98 9812.9 7284.5 74

3.1.2. Performance of RSDP II
During RSDP II, a total of 11,589 km of roads were rehabilitated, upgraded, constructed
regional roads. During RSDP II, ETB 18.1 billion was disbursed of which 14.7 billion was on
federal roads and ETB 1.8 billion was on regional roads.
With regard to the federal road network, 970 km of trunk roads were rehabilitated, 1,702
km of trunk and link roads were upgraded and 612 km of link roads were constructed
during RSDP II. In parallel with these works, a total of 4,199 km of heavy/emergency
maintenance work was carried out on federal paved and gravel roads.
RRAs managed to construct 4106 km of rural roads, disbursing around ETB 1.8 billion.
In addition, 58,114 km of community roads were constructed by Woredas, with an
expenditure of ETB 1.4 billion. Table 7 provides a summary of the accomplishment of the
RSDP II. Physical and Financial performance against plan during RSDP II was 140% and
113% respectively. Performance of RSDP II was remarkable as physical performance
was much higher than plan and financial performance was also higher than plan.
By the end of RSDP II, in 2007 achievements were registered in improving rural
accessibility. The road network of the country increased to 42,429 km in 2007 from
33,297 km in 2002. As a result, Road density per 1000 sq. km increased to 38.6 km in 2007
from 30 km in 2002.
Addis - Jimma
| 27
Table 7: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP II

RSDP II, 5 Years
I. Federal Roads
1.2 Upgrading of Trunk Roads 1163 1413 121 3726.1 4913.4 132
1.3 Upgrading of Link Roads 295 289 98 1365.5 1414.4 104
1.4 Construction of Link Roads 662 612 92 2292.3 1919.7 84
1.6 Routine Maintenance 606.1 848.3 140
1.7 Feasibility & EIA Study 25.6 41.2 161
1.8 41.2 208.1 505
Spare Parts
Bridge & Structures Maintenance &
1.9 116.7 121.3 104
construction
1.10 Policy and Capacity Building 363.7 295.7 81
1.11 Recurrent Expenditure 118.8 142.5 120
Sub – Total 5375 7483 11708.9 14688 125
II. Regional Roads
2.1 2877 4106 143 1808.4 1174.1 65
Bridges
2.2 Maintenance 454.8 513.4 113
Sub – Total 2877 4106 142 2466.2 1802.9 73
3.1 Implementation/Main Road 1708.1 1426 84
Sub– Total 1708.1 1426 84
IV. Urban Roads Maintenance 102.7 196 191
4 Urban Roads Maintenance 102.7 196 191
Sub – Total 102.7 196 191
Grand Total 8252 11,589 140 15,985.9 18,112.9 113

Harar - Jijiga
3.1.3. Performance of RSDP III
During RSDP III, a total of 12,395 km of roads were rehabilitated, upgraded, constructed
regional roads. During RSDP III, ETB 34.9 billion was disbursed of which 31.4 billion was
on federal roads and ETB 2.4 billion was on regional roads.
With regard to the federal road network, 344 km of trunk roads were rehabilitated, 2,723
km of trunk and link roads were upgraded and 1603 km of link roads were constructed
during RSDP III.
In parallel with these works, a total of 3,326 km of heavy maintenance work was
carried out on federal paved and gravel roads. RRAs managed to construct 4399 km of
rural roads, disbursing around ETB 2.4 billion. In addition, 42,270 km of community roads
were constructed by Woredas, with an expenditure of ETB 0.9 billion. Overall, physical
and financial performance against plan during RSDP III was 84% and 101% respectively.
Table 8 provides a summary of the accomplishment of the RSDP III.
By the end of RSDP III, achievements were registered in improving rural accessibility
and condition of the road network. The road network of the country increased to 48,793
km in 2010 from 42,429 km in 2007. As a result, Road density per 1000 sq. km increased
to 44.4 km in 2010 from 38.6 km in 2007.
| 29
Table 8: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP III
RSDP III, 3 Years
I. Federal Roads
1.2 Upgrading of Trunk Roads 1547 1082 70 6224.7 6123 98
1.3 Upgrading of Link Roads 1968 1641 83 8255 8570.3 104
1.4 Construction of Link Roads 1980 1603 81 7760.8 6264 81
1.6 Routine Maintenance 750 1369.8 183
1.7 Feasibility & EIA Study 4.1
1.8 16.7
Spare Parts
Bridge & Structures
1.9 135.0 183.4 136
Maintenance & construction
1.10 Policy and Capacity Building 109.7 383.3 349
1.11 Recurrent Expenditure 96 190.9 199
Sub – Total 8956 7996 89 29549.2 31439.2 106
II. Regional Roads
2.1 5730 4399 77 2865 1759.3 61
Bridges
2.2 Maintenance 450 439 98
2.3 Recurrent Budget 340 188.2 55
Sub – Total 5730 4399 77 3655 2386.5 65
3.1 Implementation/Main Road 934.7 867.1 93
Sub– Total 65 934.7 867.1 93
III. Community Roads /ERTTP/ 505 265 53
Sub – Total 505 265 53
Grand Total 14686 12395 84 34643.9 34,957.8 101
3.1.4. Performance of RSDP IV
During the five years of RSDP IV, a total of 85,860 km physical work has been carried
out, of which 13,633 km by Federal roads; 9814 km by regional roads and 62,413km of
roads were URRAP roads. During RSDP IV; ETB 158 billion was disbursed of which 118
billion was on federal roads and ETB 12.2 billion was on regional roads and 28 billion
was on URRAP roads.
With regard to the federal road network, 575 km of trunk roads were rehabilitated,
4,500 km of trunk and link roads were upgraded and 3,894 km of new link roads were
constructed during RSDP IV. In parallel with these works, a total of 4,664 km of heavy
maintenance work was carried out on federal paved and gravel roads.
The overall physical and financial performance against plan during of RSDP IV was 88%
and 126% respectively. Table 9 shows a summary of the accomplishment of the RSDP IV.
By the end of RSDP IV, in 2015 achievements were registered in improving rural
accessibility and condition of the road network. The road network of the country
increased to 110,414 km in 2015 from 48,793 km in 2010. As a result, road density per
1000 sq. km increased to 100.4 km in 2015 from 44.4 km in 2010. The proportion of the
road network in good condition increased to 70 % in 2015 from 56% in 2010.
Gendeweyn - Mekaneselam
| 31
Table 9: Summary of Accomplishment for RSDP IV (5 years)
Length in km, Budget and Disbursement in million ETB
RSDP IV
Types of Work
A. Federal Roads
Rehabilitation of Trunk Roads 728 575 79 4757.8 4757.8 143
Upgrading of Trunk Roads 1089 1268 116 8541.5 15432.3 181
Upgrading of Link Roads 3,934 3232 82 26029.8 34735.5 133
Construction of New Link Roads 4331 3894 90 35078.9 54589.8 156
Periodic Maintenance 4700 4664 99 4636.3 2056.7 44
Performance Based Maintenance 931.2 73.4 8
Routine Maintenance 2700 2370.3 88
Others 2941.9 3873.1 132
Sub Total 14,782 13,633 92 85,617.4 117888.8 128
B. Regional Roads
Construction 11212 9814 87.5 13341.8 10765.5 81
Maintenance 1049.9 1433 136

Sub Total 11,212 9814 88 14391.7 12198.6 85
C. Woreda Roads
Construction of URRAP 71523 62,413 87 26431.8 27964.7 106
Sub Total 71523 62,413 87 26431.8 27964.7 106
D. Urban Roads 398.9 281.2 70
Sub Total 398.9 281.2 70
TOTAL 97,517 85,860 88 126,839.8 158,333.3 126
3.1.5. Performance of RSDP V
During the five years of RSDP V, a total of 40,624 km physical work has been carried
out, of which 13,973 km by Federal Roads, 9,299 km by Regional Roads and 17,352 km
of URRAP roads by Woreda Road Desks. About ETB 196 billion was disbursed of which
152.3 billion was on Federal Roads and ETB 29.7 billion was on Regional Roads and 13.98
billion was on URRAP Roads.

With regard to the Federal Road Network, 1,240 km of trunk roads were rehabilitated,
2,699 km of trunk and link roads were upgraded, 4,140 km of new link roads were
constructed and 98 km of expressway roads were constructed in the five years of RSDP
V. In parallel with these works, a total of 5,795 km of heavy maintenance work was
carried out on federal paved roads.
The overall physical and financial performance against plan during the five years
of RSDP V was 35% and 59% respectively. The low physical performance is mostly
attributed to the unrest and insecurity in the country, outbreak of COVID 19 and mainly
due to low performance of Woreda roads.
Table 10: Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP V (5 years)
RSDP V
Types of Work
A. Federal Roads
Upgrading of Trunk Roads 577 567 98 9912.8 10196.1 103
Upgrading of Link Roads 3442 2132 62 60324.4 35204.8 58
Construction of New Link Roads 6050 4140 68 130639.5 79532.7 61
Construction of Expressway Roads 329 98 30 37887.1 7552.2 20
Periodic Maintenance 5063 5795 114 3119.3 3507.9 112
Routine Maintenance 4100 3013.2 73
Others 10489.5 5261.6 50
Sub Total 16,786 13,973 83 264,741.8 152,345.2 58
B. Regional Roads
Construction 8060 9299 115 20,150 27,256.5 135
Maintenance 2,541.1 2,474.2 97
Sub Total 8060 9299 115 22,691.1 29,730.7 131
C. Woreda Roads
Construction of URRAP 90,000 17,352 19 45,000 13,355.8 30
Maintenance 2,081.6 619.2 30
Sub Total 90,000 17,352 19 47,081.6 13,975 30
TOTAL 114,846 40,624 35 334,514.4 196,051 59
| 33
Dire dawa - Dewali
3.1.6. Performance of RSDP VI
During the first year of RSDP VI, a total of 7,164 km physical work has been carried out,
of which 2,520 km by Federal Roads, 1679 km by Regional Roads and 2,965 km of URRAP
roads by Woreda Road Desks. About ETB 53.4 billion was disbursed of which 45.1 billion
was on Federal Roads and ETB 5.9 billion was on Regional Roads and 2.3 billion was on
URRAP Roads.
With regard to the Federal Road Network, 18 km of trunk roads were rehabilitated, 366
km of trunk and link roads were upgraded, 761 km of new link roads were constructed
and 22 km of expressway roads were constructed in the first year of RSDP VI. In parallel
with these works, a total of 756 km of heavy maintenance work was carried out on
federal paved roads.
The overall physical and financial performance against plan during the first year of
RSDP VI was 77% and 83% respectively. The Medium physical performance is mostly
attributed to the conflict in the Northern part, unrest and insecurity in the country,
critical shortage created in the supply of key construction materials, outbreak of
COVID 19 and the subsequent low performance of Federal roads.

Table 11: : Summary of Accomplishment of RSDP VI (1st Year)
RSDP VI
Types of Work
A. Federal Roads
Upgrading of Trunk & Link Roads 458 366 80 13302.2 11042.1 83
New Link Road Construction 1174 761 65 30241.4 25367.9 84
Expressway 31 22 70 3744.3 3187.7 85
Federal Overlay Roads 855 597 70 3184.8 1309.4 41
Federal Roads Periodic Maintenance 1763 756 43 944.2 407.8 43
Federal Roads Routine Maintenance 557.1 1035.3 186
Others 2892.7 1937.5 67
Sub Total 4,305 2,520 59 55,704.4 45,102.5 81
B. Regional Roads
Construction of RRAs Gravel Roads 2349 1679 71 501.7 5,067.9 1010
RRAs Upgrading to Asphalt 300 4,515 -
Regional Roads Maintenance 810 851.6 105
Sub Total 2,646 1679 64 5,826.6 5,919.5 102
C. Woreda Roads
Construction (URRAP) 2655 2965 112 2180.3 1680.2 77
Maintenance (URRAP) 765 650.1 85
Sub Total 2655 2,965 112 2,945.3 2,330.3 79
TOTAL 9,609 7,164 75 64,476.4 53,352.3 83
Dicheto - Galaafii
| 35
3.2. Overall Performance of RSDP
The twenty-four years performance of RSDP has brought significant improvements

in the restoration and expansion of Ethiopia’s road network. Physical achievements
have been matched by significant improvements in the condition of the network,
strengthening of the management capacity of the road agencies and delivery on policy
reform.
A total of 166,383 km of major physical road works excluding routine maintenance

was carried out of which 48,314 km was on Federal Roads, 35,297 km was on Regional
Roads construction and 82,772 km URRAP Roads. Overall, physical accomplishment
against plan was 66% and total disbursement was about ETB 468.1 billion, and this
disbursement was 80% of the plan.
With regards to Federal Roads, 4,124 km of rehabilitation of trunk roads and 12,537
km of upgrading of trunk and link roads and 11,852 km construction of new link roads
and 207 km of construction of expressway roads and 597 km of heavy maintenance
were carried out under the program. In parallel with this, 18,997 km of Federal periodic
maintenance was also carried out. Table12 shows summary of performance of RSDP
over the past twenty-four years.
Table 12: Summary of Accomplishment of 24 years of RSDP
Total RSDP 24yrs
Types of Work
A. Federal Roads
Rehabilitation of Trunk Roads 4,431 4,124 93 21460.5 24439.7 114
Upgrading Roads 15,295 12,537 82 139215 128702.8 92
New Link Road Construction 15,042 11,852 79 201116.7 158816.5 79
Expressway 445 207 47 47296.4 21728.6 46
Federal Overlay Roads 855 597 70 3184.8 1309.4 41
Federal Roads Periodic Maintenance 17,914 18,997 106 12419.6 9680.7 78
Federal Roads Routine Maintenance 9414.1 9313 99
Performance Based Maintenance 931.2 73.4 8
Others 17870.2 12923.8 72
Sub Total Federal Roads 53,982 48,314 90 452,908.5 366,987.9 81
B. Regional Roads
Construction of RRAs Gravel Roads 35,359 35,297 99.8 41,255.6 47,523.3 115
RRAs Upgrading to Asphalt 300 - 4,515 -
Regional Roads Maintenance 5,852.4 6,069.4 104
Others - - 203 115.4 57
Sub Total Regional Roads 35,659 35,297 99 51,826 53,708.2 104
C. Woreda Roads
Construction (URRAP) 164,178 82,772 50.4 72211.7 42948.5 59
Maintenance (URRAP) 4247 1321.5 31
Sub Total Woreda Roads 164,178 82,772 50.4 76,458.6 44,270 58
D.ERTTP/Community Road
Community Roads 2,642.9 2,295.9 87
Sub Total Community Roads 2,642.9 2,295.9 87
E.Urban Roads 1,006.6 829.3 82
Sub Total Municipalities Maintenance 1,006.6 829.3 82
TOTAL 253,819 166,383 66 584,842.6 468,091.2 80
| 37
3.3. Overview of URRAP Performance

3.3.1. Performance of URRAP under RSDP
As major component of the RSDP-IV, Universal Rural Road Access Program (URRAP)
was launched envisaging connecting all Kebeles by standard and affordable all-
weather roads that provide year-round access. Within the first phase of the program
implementation period, it was planned to construct 71,523 km of all-weather roads
throughout the country at an estimated cost of more than ETB 26.4 billion. The full-
fledged implementation of URRAP was supposed to ensure year-round access to road
for about 80% of the total rural population. The program has been designed to be fully
financed by the Government of Ethiopia. During the first year of implementation, which
was largely a year of preparation, only 854 km of roads were constructed. Some of the
preparation works were even extended to second quarters of the 2nd year of RSDP
IV budget year in some regions. Though the preparation work took more time than
anticipated, it had laid the foundation for the success of the program and same was
reflected by the promising performance being observed in the following years. Table 13
shows some of the preparatory activities.
Table 13: SME development, training and manual distribution
SME Development Training No. of LVR

No. Region provided by ERA Design Manuals
Consultants Contractors in RSDP IV Distributed
1 SNNPR 98 254 686 1546
2 Amhara 35 151 920 1345
3 Oromia 120 470 1436 2946
4 Tigray 11 34 1150 400
5 B/Gumuz 6 17 58 245
6 DireDawa 2 11 34 95
7 Harari 1 2 34 112
8 Gambella 2 6 72 154
9 Somali 40 382
10 Afar 22 216
Total 275 945 4452 7461

As can be seen from Table 13; the following preparatory activities had been carried out
to effectively implement URRAP.
» More than 7461 Low Volume Roads Design Manuals were distributed to all
Regions, Woredas, and consultants involving in URRAP.
» More than 8000 small and medium capacity equipment, including tractors,
trailers, towed rollers, towed graders, water tankers, fuel tankers, and pick-
ups, were manufactured/assembled and distributed to Regions by Metal and
Engineering Corporation.
» More than 1220 medium Enterprises, consultants and contractors, were
developed, trained, and are involving in the program.
On top of the above, during RSDP IV, Regions managed to construct 46,810 km of (by
6m wide) all weather roads, which is 65% of planned for the period of the 5 years. In
addition, regions have also managed to maintain 535 km of the constructed URRAP
roads. It is to be recalled that URRAP roads are planned to be constructed with the
minimum standard of 4.5 m wide surfacing. Due to some design and structural changes
by the implementing regions; almost all roads are constructed by considering 6 m
wide. So, it has its own implication on construction costs as well as on the physical
accomplishments. If the whole roads were constructed by 4.5 m wide, the physical
accomplishment could have been 62,413 km which yields an accomplishment of 87%
against the plan. The Regional disaggregation of same is presented in Table 14.
| 39
Table 14: URRAP Performance under RSDP IV
Accomplishment Accomplishment
Community
5 Years (By 6m wide (By 4.5m wide Employment
Participation
No. Region Plan surfacing) surfacing) Opportunity
(in man
(Km) In In in number
In Km In Km -days*)
Percent Percent
1 SNNPR 14,003 7,185 51 9580 68 5,082,223 522,978
2 Amhara 18,003 9,415 52 12,553 70 4,661,630 165,728
3 Oromia 30,007 27,158 91 36,211 100 18,339,648 663,903
4 Tigray 2,500 2,283 91 3,044 100 2,517,294 133,818
5 B/Gumuz 1,800 366 20 488 27 2,360 2543
6 DireDawa 159 214 ›100 285 100 645 3326
7 Harari 50 144 ›100 192 100 280 1416
8 Gambella 200 45 23 60 30 573 428
9 Somali 3,001 - -
10 Afar 1,800 - -
Total 71,523 46,810 65 62,413 87 30,604,653 1,494,140
*Man-days are a unit of one day’s work by one person
As a whole, more than 30 million man-days had been contributed as a free labor
contribution during the first phase of the implementation years of URRAP. The monetary
value of this contribution plus the voluntary monetary contribution by those who can’t
contribute their labor because of different reasons was well above ETB 2.7 billion.
As far as the overall financial performance of URRAP is concerned, including the

community contribution is about ETB 28 billion was expended during RSDP IV. This fairly
substantiates the extent of low cost per km investment on URRAP roads. Including all
direct (construction) and indirect (training, supervision, operational, etc.) costs; per km
cost of roads under URRAP was around ETB 689,025.
Another important achievement of the program is the employment opportunity it was

creating for the rural population. The program, reflecting the broad-based development
strategy of the country, has created more than 1,494,140 permanent and temporary
job opportunities in the five years period. It is to be recalled that with the limited
road network coverage, many Kebeles of the country were remained inaccessible by
motorized transport and several areas inhabited by relatively large rural populations
were isolated from the rest of the country. URRAP was launched for the mission of
connecting all these rural Kebeles throughout the country, 15,619 in total, by all weather
roads at the end of 2014/15. Detail of kebele connectivity before and after URRAP to the
nearest main road is presented hereunder. Table 15 shows level of Kebele Connectivity.
Table 15: Level of Kebele Connectivity by All Weather Roads
Kebeles connected
Number Kebeles connected by all-
Number by all-weather roads
No. Region of rural of rural weather roads so far
before URRAP
Woredas Kebeles
In Km In Percent In Km In Percent
1 SNNPR 134 3,808 1553 41 2,531 66
2 Amhara 129 3,217 1,132 35 2,030 63
3 Oromia 295 6,478 2,714 42 6,028 93
4 Tigray 35 714 383 54 565 79
5 B/Gumuz 20 377 95 25 252 67
6 DireDawa 1 38 19 50 38 100
7 Harari 3 17 - 25
8 Gambella 11 198 67 34 87 44
9 Somali 50 401 95 24 122 30
10 Afar 29 371 164 44 193 52
Total 707 15,619 6,222 40 11,871 76
| 41
Maintenance (sustainability), everyone’s concern while thinking about URRAP, was also
given the proper attention. The two important inputs for sustainable maintenance and
service of URRAP roads are finance, and most importantly institutional arrangement
and capacity. In this, regard there was clear and shared direction that the roads will
be owned by the respective Woreda Road Offices (WROs). As far as the maintenance
modality is concerned, the Woreda road office, whenever possible, mobilized the
community for routine maintenance while allocated budget for periodic maintenance,
which was be handled by URRAP contractors. The maintenance booklet (one volume
from the LVRs Design Manual Series) was another step ahead for ensuring sustainable
maintenance.
This had two - fold implications: one thing it creates sense of ownership on the
community and another it drives the effort to build the capacity at Woreda level as it
will no more be an option. The investment and road asset at Woreda level fairly justifies
any capacity building initiative at that level. ERA played the leading role in this regard,
especially by continuing provision of training in its training centers to technicians and
professionals from RRAs and WROs.
Last, but not least, ERA hired two consultants which captured baseline data and
subsequently undertake impact assessment study on URRAP roads. Till the end of June
2015, one consultant had submitted the draft baseline survey report of its respective
regional study areas and the other was being expected to submit the same report of
its own study areas. This did not only show the commitment of the Government to
closely monitor the impact of infrastructure investments, but also its strong will and
readiness to improve future polices based on lessons from the past.
3.3.2. Performance of URRAP under RSDP V
The second phase of URRAP has continued in RSDP V with a target of constructing
90,000 km of URRAP roads. For the Five years of RSDP V; the following tasks have been
implemented.
» More than 1,220 medium Enterprises, consultants and contractors that were
developed and evolved in first phase of URRAP under RSDP IV have also
continued their participation in the first three years of RSDP V.
» Training has been given to about 929 persons to the various consultants and
contractors across different regions
» Training has been given to about 505 persons to the sector stakeholders and
Regional Roads Authority staffs across different regions.
» The training has been given on the URRAP for around 796 professionals’ staffs
who come from 10 Regional Roads Authorities.
Meanwhile, regions managed to construct 17,352 km of all-weather URRAP roads in
RSDP V till the end of 2019/20 fiscal year. The encouraging impact of URRAP roads has
already been reflected on the improved accessibility situation of the rural population
as the average hour’s households have to travel to get all weather road reduces from
2.9 hours (8.7 km) in year 2011/12 to 1.52 hours (4.6 km) in 2019/20. In addition, more
than 9 million man-days have been contributed as a free labor contribution during the
implementation years of URRAP under RSDP V. Regarding the financial performance
of URRAP in RSDP V, about ETB 14 billion was expended. Further, the program created
employment opportunity for more than 459.2 thousand people including the rural
population which are permanent and temporary jobs.
Table 16: URRAP Performance under RSDP V
Five years Community Employment

5 years plan
No. Region participation (in Opportunity in
(km)
Plan Acco. man-days*) number
1 SNNPR 18,722 18,722 4048.5 4,269,279 56,372
2 Amhara 20,488 20,488 3610.3 2,431,315 175,946
3 Oromia 35,005 35,005 8965.5 928,815 147,439
4 Tigray 5,164 5,164 329.8 1,586,496 64,494
5 B/Gumuz 1,126 1,126 268.7 24,201 6,782
6 DireDawa 286 286 99 400 8,148
7 Harari 135 135 22
8 Gambella 428 428 8
9 Somali 6,619 6,619 -
10 Afar 2,027 2,027 -
Total 90,000 90,000 17,352 9,240,506 459,181
*Man-days are a unit of one day’s work by one person.
Regarding kebele connectivity in the second phase of URRAP; 404 kebeles were
connected in the five years of RSDP V; which total the kebeles connected so far to
12,275. Details of kebele connectivity before and after URRAP to the nearest main road
are presented hereunder. Table 17 shows level of kebele connectivity.
| 43
Table 17: kebele connectivity under URRAP
kebeles
kebeles connected connected by
Kebeles connected
Number Number by all-weather all-weather
by all-weather
No. Region of rural of rural roads in RSDP IV roads in
roads so far
Woredas Kebeles under URRAP RSDP V under
URRAP
In Percent In Km In number In Km In Percent
1 SNNPR 134 3899 2,531 66 104 2635 68
2 Amhara 185 3862 2,030 63 247 2277 59
3 Oromia 29 6,478 6,028 93 30 6058 94
4 Tigray 34 737 565 79 8 573 78
5 B/Gumuz 20 475 252 67 12 264 56
6 DireDawa 1 38 38 100 - 38 100
7 Harari 9 36 25 100 - 25 69
8 Gambella 13 248 87 44 3 90 36
9 Somali 93 1444 122 30 - 122 8
10 Afar 34 413 193 52 - 193 47
Total 552 17630 11,871 76 404 12,275 70

It is to be recalled that ERA hired two consultants which captured baseline data and
subsequently undertake impact assessment study on URRAP roads. The service was
divided for two lots: - lot1- Amhara, SNNP,Tigray and BenishangulGumz region and
lot-2 Oromia, Dire Dawa, Gambella regions. By the end of 2016/17, both services were
completed.
Similarly, in order to support RRAs for effectively delivering rural and URRAP roads, the
institutional capacity building technical assistance service for RRAs had commenced
on October 8, 2018 with EU fund. The consultant mainly worked on three issues, the first
is institutional capacity assessment and providing institution restructuring of RRAs and
the second is preparation of manuals and guidelines and the third is capacity building of
RRAs through training and education. The consultant had proposed three new optional
institution capacity set-ups that will be selected by regional governments. In relation
with the second aspect, the consultant has provided modules, manuals, documents
and materials which are used for addressing the training. The list of manuals developed
include the following:
» Volume 1: Human Resource Manuals & Guidelines
» Volume 2: Planning and Procurement Manuals & Guidelines
» Volume 3: Standard Bidding Documents
» Volume 4: Contract Administration Manual & Guidelines
» Volume 5: Service Contract Administration Manual
» Volume 6: Claims and Dispute Resolution Manual & Guidelines
» Volume 7: Environmental and Social Management Manual & Guidelines
» Volume 8: Programme Performance Review Manual & Guidelines
» Volume 9: Tool Kit (Design)
The third issue is training and capacity building component for RRAs were categorized
in eight sessions, and all trainings were held for RRAs trainees and as per the schedule.
After proposing new organizational structure for all RRAS and Dire Dawa City
Administration, preparing over 25 manuals and delivering 8 trainings for RRA experts,
the consultancy service was effectively closed on October 7, 2020. The entire
consultancy’s deliverables are being distributed to relevant stakeholders in hard and
soft copies.
| 45
3.3.3. Performance of URRAP under RSDP VI
The Third phase of URRAP has continued in RSDP VI with a target of constructing
23,897 km of URRAP roads. For the First year of RSDP VI; the following tasks have been
implemented.
» More than 1,220 medium Enterprises, consultants and contractors that were
developed and evolved in first and the second phase of URRAP. In the third phase
of URRAP, the first-year implementation period, more than 257 consultant and
contractor are participated in the program.
» Training is given to 17 machinery operators from the Regional Roads Authorities
across different regions.
» Training has been given on the implementation of URRAP for 349 professionals’
from Regional Roads Authorities.
Meanwhile, regions managed to construct 2,965 km of all-weather URRAP roads in
RSDP VI till the end of 2020/21 fiscal year. The encouraging impact of URRAP roads has
already been reflected on the improved accessibility situation of the rural population
as the average hours’ households have to travel to get all weather road reduces
from 2.9 hours (8.7 km) in year 2011/12 to 1.51 hours (4.5 km) in 2020/21. In addition,
more than 9 million man-days have been contributed as a free labor contribution
during the implementation years of URRAP under RSDP V. During RSDP VI first year
implementation more than 2 million labors contributed as a free labor. Regarding the
financial performance of URRAP in RSDP VI, about ETB 2.9 billion was expended. Further,
the program created employment opportunity for more than 92.2 thousand people
including the rural population which are permanent and temporary jobs.

Table 18: URRAP Performance under RSDP VI
5 First year of Community

Community Community Employment
years RSDP VI participation
No. Region participation
(in monetary
Contribution Opportunity
plan (in number) (in money) in number
(km) Plan Acco. term)
1 SNNPR 5,577 619.6 853.11 1,563,777 137,000,000 155,540,041 5,080

2 Amhara 4,961 551.2 262 642,517 60,568,013 305,716,825 24,502
3 Oromia 12,359 1,373.1 1846.09 383,469 124,435,605 235,897,581 62,404
4 Tigray 453 50.4 - -
5 B/Gumuz 370 41 - 203 20,300 222
6 DireDawa 136 15.1 3.23 30 500,000 37
7 Harari 30.2 3.4
8 Gambella 11 1.2
9 Somali
10 Afar
Total 23,897 2,655 2,965 2,589,996 322,023,918 697,654,447 92,245
3.3.4. Challenges Faced in the Implementation of URRAP
URRAP, in many ways, being a program with its own peculiar nature, has been facing
different challenges since it was launched back in 2015. .The challenges may vary from
year to year; but there are some key challenges which have to be resolved for the
program to continue and be successful. The following are among the major challenges;
√ Capacity Gap
There is a capacity gap observed both from the side of implementing agencies (Regional
Road Authorities and Woreda Road Offices) and the implementers (consultant and
contractors). In most regional road offices, the capacity gap is mostly reflected in
the areas of design review, contract management, financial management, and rural
road asset management. Also, most of the contractors and consultants involved in
the sector, among others, lack project management skills. Following their project
management skill gap, it is not uncommon to see projects deviating from the intended
quality, time, and cost. Some of the quality gaps observed are somehow attributed to
capacity gaps at both levels.
BEST ROADS FOR PROSPEROUS ETHIOPIA | 47

√ Frequent Turnover of Experienced and Trained Employees

The challenge is that the turnover of experienced and trained staff at regional
and Woreda level makes it difficult for the relevant office to manage the works in
reasonable time. With newly substituted staff, the following work and the preparation
of action plans & report would usually be late until they get the experience to do so.
The newly hired staffs may also lack the experience and skill to properly support
consultants and contractors. This will also have its own impact on the overall
performance of contractors.
√ Shortage of Budget
Some of the regions mostly will have an annual plan which is by far lower than what
they can actually perform had it been with their full capacity. One of the main reasons
for such below capacity plan and performance is shortage of budget. Considering the
low financial position of URRAP contractors and consultants, shortage of payments
will have significant adverse effect in their cash flow and ultimate performance of
the project. At the beginning of the program, the budget support from the Federal
Government in the form of MDG support was very instrumental. However, as there is no
or very limited such support, the regions are trying to cover the cost of the program by
themselves and this is well below what is actually required. As the result of shortage
of budget, in some regions the implementation of the program is totally suspended and
hence the consultants and contractors are not getting suffieient job and subsequently
vanishing.
√ Delay and Quality Issues of Locally Assembled Construction Equipment’s
One of the success stories of URRAP is that it was made possible to manufacture and/
or assemble more than 8,000, small and medium capacity construction equipment’s
and their accessories locally, mainly by the state-owned Metal and Engineering
Corporation. But the delay in providing these equipment’s to regions and the quality
issues raised afterwards contributed for not achieving the target as planned. Absence
of maintenance capacity has been also mentioned as a concern.
√ Rent Seeking Behavior
Such a behavior is reported to exist in some regions among the government structure,
consultants and contractors. According to reports, lack of good governance starts

from the very beginning (of the selecting the consultants and contractors to involve in
the program) and it goes to effecting payments which are not in accordance with the
work done.
√ Community Participation/contribution
URRAP as a program is praised for involving a wide range of community at different
levels in different ways. But still the community participation is not free from
drawbacks. The first thing to be mentioned here is that there are regions who could not
totally participate the community and even those who do they are mobilizing below the
potential. Second, the level of productivity of mobilized people is very low that their
contribution to the project is minimal. Absence of close supervision by consultants on
community activities has also contributed for the low productivity and quality of works
done by the community.
√ Delay of Project Handover
There was a gap observed in some regions to properly handover and accept completed
projects timely. This will have its own implication in terms of opening the roads to the
society and contractual complications which were resulting to disagreement between
contracting parties.
| 49
√ Relationship between Consultants and Contractors

The expectation is that contractors and consultants will work hand in hand without
compromising their professional integrity. However, there were quite many cases
appeared because of disagreements between these two parties. In some case the
disagreements result from lack of experience and absence of skill of organizational
management.
√ Reporting and Documenting
The challenge here is putting in place systems that enable for documenting and
reporting well-structured to get quality information on the lesson learnt by the lead
implementers at different level. Also obtaining timely reports and action plans are
very critical and are considered as major challenge.
√ COVID – 19
COVID-19 has affected the implementation of the program, mainly by altering the
supply chain of both construction materials and experts. One typical example can be
that the dedicated consultant through European Union (EU) fund that was supposed to
provide continuous on-site backstopping to regional roads Authorities could not do so
because of the outbreak of COVID-19.
√ Capacity Building Training
ERA has been providing capacity building training for Regional, Zone and Wereda road
experts through its Ginchi labor-based training center using its own budget (finance)
source. However, the agencies are not getting the most of these trainings because
of many reasons. Moreover, lack of comprehensive and sustainable capacity building
initiative at all levels is a concern.
3.4. Cost and Financing of RSDP

An assessment of contribution of finance to the implementation of the RSDP shows
that 86.1% came from internal sources (the Government, the Road Fund and the
Community). The remaining 13.9% has been pooled from the international community.
Specifically, the share of the Government of Ethiopia was the highest (79.6%), followed
by the Road Fund (5.6%), IDA (4.4%), China (3%), AfDB (2.2%) and EU (2%). The overall

disbursement over 24 years of RSDP is about ETB 468.1 billion. The contributions by GOE
and the Road Fund are growing at the fastest rate in recent years. Error! Reference
source not found.19 gives a breakdown of the RSDP disbursements by financier.
Table 19: Disbursement by Financiers (1997-2021) in mil ETB
Total Total Total RSDP

RSDP IV Total RSDP
RSDP I RSDP II RSDP III V (FIVE RSDP
(5yrs, 24 Years %
Financiers (5yrs, (5yrs, (3yrs,
2010/11-
Years, VI (1St
(1997/98-
1997 /98- 2002 / 2007/08- 2016- Years) age
2015) 2021)
2002) 03-2007) 2010) 2020)
GOE 3455.5 8056.7 20584.5 121817.6 164615.9 49465.1 367995.3 78.6
Road Fund 978.2 2555.8 5030.1 6383.6 9614.6 1443.1 26005.5 5.6
Community 884.8 683.5 2748.7 4317.1 0.9
World Bank 1432.9 3135.3 2544.2 8648.2 4269.5 580.0 20610.1 4.4
European
678.1 1662.6 3255.2 3612.2 4708.9 13917.0 3.0
Union *
China 1252.7 8558.2 3787.9 334.5 13933.3 3.0
African
Development 506.4 517.8 496.4 3787.9 4760.9 241.3 10310.6 2.2
Bank
Japan 164.9 380.0 307.1 1317.7 2169.7 0.5
Korea 1993.1 351.0 2344.0 0.50
OFID 0.3 293.3 213.6 108.7 1010.4 20.7 1647 0.4
Germany 27.7 302.6 67.0 45.2 0.0 0.0 442.5 0.1
BADEA 59.9 175.2 457.1 496.2 17.0 1205.4 0.3
Saudi
Fund for 39.3 123.2 199.7 303.9 666.0 0.1
Development
Kuwait Fund 49.9 437.1 348.4 835.4 0.2
Abu Dhabi 4.6 77.8 82.4 0.0
Various 40.6 224.8 175.1 207.0 63.7 899.6 1610.8 0.3
TOTAL 7284.6 18112.9 34957.8 158333.5 196051.0 53352.27 468091.92 100
*EU Sector Budget Support contribution is considered
** ETB 281.1million is disbursement for Municipality from Road Fund.
| 51

4. RSDP AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
4.1. RSDP and Policies
4.1.1. The Road Sector Policy
Road transport is the most dominant mode of transport in Ethiopia, accounting for
over 92 to 93 percent of passenger travel and freight movement, which has a critical
bearing on sustainable development. Despite the progress made in road network
development over a period of more than two decades, the efficiency, effectiveness
and sustainability of the sector are not yet to good standards in terms functional and
performance standards, partly due to lack of a road sector policy that should guide the
formulation of strategies, and medium – and long – term plans, to optimally improve
access and mobility in an integrated manner and preserve road assets, contribute to
addressing the problem of road safety, negative environmental and social impacts, as
well as climate change response through mitigation and adaptation.
Lack of road sector policy has limited the scope for re-defining the functions and
responsibilities of road sector agencies vis –a – vis the role of the relevant ministries
and regulatory bodies (principally separating the policy, legal, regulatory, planning,
management and operational functions) and modernizing the governance structure
and institutional framework to respond to customer – focused, efficiency - based
management, with sufficient autonomy, and appropriate accountability mechanism
that provides for business like service delivery, while also assuring sustainable
financing mechanism.
The Draft Road Sector Policy has been developed to guide sustainable road development,
laying down responsive governance structure and institutional framework, financing
modalities, comprehensive asset management, and coherent and integrated planning.
It is essentially based on the development agenda of the GoE, and the objectives for
sector modernization and institutional transformation.
√ The Objectives of the Road Sector Policy
The main objectives of the road sector policy are to help;
» Facilitate road transport of efficiency;
| 53
» Improve governance structure and institutional environment, to achieve
progress in efficiency out comes (business like management);
» Clarify the roles of sector agencies, relevant regulatory authorities and
ministries
» Foster transparency, accountability and stakeholder participation;
» Introduce an appropriate road network planning system and design procedures
to optimize resources and investments, with a strategic shift towards
comprehensive asset management and preservation;
» Streamline negative environment and social impact mitigations;
» Strengthen climate change adaptation and mitigation;
» Improve the delivery of regular and proper maintenance of the road network to
achieve progress in terms of efficiency, reliability and sustainability;
» Introduce a sustainable financing re – enforcing mechanism, through user –
pays principle (cost recovery for asset preservation), and greater Private
Sector Participations (PSP) and Public – Private – Partnership (PPP) to reduce
the size of public sector budgetary allocations and external borrowing;
» Enhance the strategic orientation of road and transport research; and
» Build the capacity of road sector agencies, with emphasis on meeting future
needs for managerial, professional and skilled manpower, and the use of
integrated management information system, ICT and ITS, and focusing on
new project preparation, procurement, contract preparation, contracting,
negotiation, commercial management, finance and contract administration

relating to Output and Performance contracts, and PPP as a source of financing,
and delivery of infrastructure.
√ Strategic Issues – in Brief

The following are the strategic issues to be addressed in the road sector policy:
» Overall inadequacy in establishing a responsive sector governance structure,
institutional arrangements and efficiency, hindering progress towards outcome
based and user focused management; as a key factor of sustainability;
» Gaps in economic and financial sustainability, particularly related to planning
and project development, road safety, asset management and preservation,
financing mechanisms, constraining progress towards desired outcomes, as
well as inadequacies in the interaction between project planning and design,
and limitations in the preparation of design contributing to time – and cost –
overruns;
» Lack of sufficient attention to the integration of environmental and social
impact mitigation measures, and climate change mitigation and adaptation,
from the initial stages of project identification, screening, pre - feasibility and
feasibility studies to detailed design and preparation of contract documents,
and ensuring compliance to environmental clauses in works contracts;
» Lack of strategic approach to guide road and transport research, and
standardized procedures for selecting and setting priorities, as well as
systematically evaluating outcomes and disseminating results, and
» Limitations to responsiveness of capacity building in a holistic manner, in
order to meet present and future needs for modernization and institutional
transformation.
4.1.2. Participatory Project Planning
The Government of Ethiopia builds roads primarily to support local community

development. Local communities have the right not only to know about the project but
also to have their say on the project so that their interests, concerns and expectations
are addressed before & during the project construction. Therefore, local communities
are consulted during Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and Detail
Engineering Design especially during route selection stage.
| 55
Local communities’ interest, concerns and expectations which they raise during the
consultations are well documented and reported to ERA by consultants whom ERA hired
to undertake engineering design and other project studies. Local communities that are
consulted include local administration officials and other groups as necessary. Local
communities’ participation during project planning has played important role to ensure
local peoples all round support to the project during construction of the road project
and protect the project from damage after construction is completed and opened to
traffic. Local communities’ participation at road project planning stage also has made
important contribution to maximize local peoples benefit from the project during and
after construction.
4.1.3. Monitoring of RSDP Indicators
Monitoring of RSDP indicators and MDG (later SDG) indicators has been going on yearly
since 1999 by local consultant to verify the objectives of RSDP are achieved with the
finance from European Union. The consultant has been submitting reports on the trend
of RSDP and MDG (SDG) indicators each year since 1999.
The findings of the monitoring of the trend of RSDP and MDG (SDG) indicators has
served as basis for actions by Government and Development Partners to improve
performance of indicators.
ERA signed contract agreement with same consultant for consultancy services for
monitoring of RSDP and SDG indicators over the period 2016 – 2020. The list of RSDP and
MDG indicators that have been monitored annually are attached as annex.
4.2. Institutional Capacity Building

4.2.1. Restructuring and Modernization of ERA
To cope up with rapidly increasing number of road construction and upgrading projects
with successive phases of RSDP, reform in the role and organizational structure of ERA
has been introduced. The reform is intended to build institutional capacity of ERA to
efficiently implement road projects and effectively manage road asset.
The ERA is a legally autonomous organization established on January 26, 1951. Ever since
its establishment, the Administration has gone through a series of structural changes,
the most recent one being in July 2011 by the Council of Ministers Regulation No.

247/2011. This regulation corroborates the
split of the operational and regulatory wings
as two independent entities, leaving ERA to
focus on road network development and
asset management rather than construction
and maintenance of same. Consequently,
ERA’s operations Department which was
responsible for carrying out routine and
heavy maintenance of federal roads and
construction of road projects with more than
10 thousand employees was established
as independent public contractor
named as Ethiopian Road Construction
Corporation (ERCC), now part of the
Ethiopian Construction Works Corporation
(ECWC). Despite several reestablishments,
the Authority’s major responsibility, i.e.,
development and management of roads, has
never been substantially altered.
ERCC/ECWC had operated as profit making

public parastatal. ERA has been awarding to
ERCC/ECWC road projects that would be too
expensive if awarded to private contractors
because of reasons such as difficult terrain
and remoteness. ERA was also awarding to
ERCC/ECWC most of the routine and heavy
maintenance of federal roads through
direct negotiation. ERCC/ECWC’s 70 years’
experiences in the construction of both
gravel and asphalt roads as force account
of ERA would enhance its competitiveness
in bidding. ERCC/ECWC as government
parastatal plays crucial role in stabilizing
cost of road construction in the sector.
BEST ROADS FOR PROSPEROUS ETHIOPIA | 57

Considering the significant deterioration of Federal Roads administered by ERA

and in order to solve the absence of bidders for maintenance projects due to its
unattractiveness to contractors because of its nature and volume of work., Government
has decided the return of maintenance districts to ERA. the same was effected in
2019/20. Currently, ERA is undertaking the majority of routine maintenance and part of
the periodic maintenance required on its network through these maintenance districts.
This withstanding, the policy direction and position of both Government and ERA is firm
on attracting and encouraging private contractors to involve in maintenance works.
√ Restructuring of Construction Contract Administration
To enhance capacity of construction contract administration, ERA was reorganized
under seven Contract Administration Directorates in 2011. Five of these directorates
are organized geographically as North, South, West, East and Central region contract
administration Directorates to take the responsibility for administering construction
& design contracts under their respective jurisdiction the other two Directorates were
established to administer Design & Build contracts. and Construction of expressways
in the country.
Following the National and ERA level reform initiatives in 2019, the contract
Administration Directorates were restructured again in the spirit of moving from
contracts administration to project management. Subsequently, the previous Design
– Build directorate is dissolved and the Expressway Directorate was restructured
to Expressway & Special Projects Management Directorate. After ERA’s Contract

Administration Directorates were restructured to be Construction Project Management
Directorates, the number of contract engineers, team leaders and directors is
substantially increased and hence the efficiency of contract administration
substantially improved. .
√ Other Directorates
A quality Assurance Directorate has been set up to ensure Road Safety and quality
of design implementation process as per the established standards and procedures.
Research and Development Directorate has been set up for providing the necessary
material and manpower resources to undertake research projects on key areas in
the road sector in order to reduce construction costs and improve quality. Training
Directorate was formed to administer ERA’s training centers and training needs of
employees. Later in 2019 ERA’s internal restructuring, the training directorate was
dissolved and the training centers of Alemgena and Chancho/Ginchi has become
self-standing directorates. Women’s and Youth Affair Directorate has been formed
to administer gender issues. In addition, Strategic Management and Institutional
Transformation Directorate is restructured hand merged with Systems Directorate to
be named as Change Management & Institutional Development Directorate.
√ Restructuring of Road Asset Management
To enhance the capacity of road asset Management, the previous Road Network
Management Directorate has been upgraded to Department level headed by Deputy
Director General reporting to the Director General. The Department has Road Network
& Bridge management Directorate under its direct supervision. The Directorate in
turn has 10 Road Network Branch Directorates in different parts of the country which
directly administer roads under their respective jurisdiction. This restructuring has
improved effectiveness of road asset management.
√ Overall Internal Restructuring of ERA Since 2019
Following the National reform initiatives in 2019 and as per ERA’s reform roadmap, the
organization has made major internal structural change. The main governing principle
behind this restructuring was, to establish department based on the different stages
of project implementation cycles. Accordingly, the previous Engineering Operations
Deputy Director General (DDG) department was split into two DDGS; namely Project
Development DDG and Construction Projects Management DDG in order to properly
manage works according to their project lifecycle.
| 59
Currently, there are five Deputy Director Generals reporting to the the Director
General, who is the CEO of the Administration, and two Directorates that are directly
accountable and reporting to the Director General. These Deputies are in charge of
Director General’s Office, Project Development, Construction Projects Management,
Road Asset Management and Corporate Services. The Director General Office and the
Project Development DDGs are mainly responsible for the preconstruction stage of the
project, which mainly involves project identification, project formulation, feasibility
study, design, RoW clearance, and Engineering Procurement. IBesides, in order to
manage issues related to design and Right of Way (ROW); the Design Management and
ROW Management Directorates are established as separate Directorates under the
Project Development DDG. The Road Research Center is also brought under the same
DDG to insure interface and alignment. Further, to effectively manage the environmental
and social impacts of road projects; a separate Directorate is established under
Construction Projects Management Directorate DDG.
The Directorates directly reporting and accountable to the Director General are Internal
Audit and Ethics and Customer Service Management. Directorates such as:- Planning
and Program Management, Legal Service, Communication Affairs, Performance,
Quality and System Management, and Women’s and Youth Affairs Directorates report
to the DDG of the DG office.
√ Modernization of ERA
Besides the change in organizational structure ERA has been in the process of
modernizing itself to ensure organizational excellence in order to better satisfy its
customers’ needs.
As part of the modernization effort, ERA commissioned technical assistance on the

study of ERA and Road Sector Modernization and Institutional Transformation on June
24, 2018 with Nathan Associates Inc in Association with Hifab AB. Accordingly, the
Consultant had executed the draft and final report output for ERA and the technical
assistance is completed and launched to be implemented which is helping ERA to
transform itself institutionally.
Modernizing the core processes like Engineering Procurement, Design Management,

Contract Management, Asset Management, Quality Assurance and Performance
Monitoring; and key enablers such as Engineering Innovation and Research, Right of
Way Management, Project Handover, Human Resource Development and Management,
Financial Management, Facility Management, etc. is important. Accordingly, most of
the studies undertaken by in-house capacity on the above-mentioned areas have been
finalized and are under implemention. Also, modernization of axle load control has been
undertaken. This, beyond improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the Authority,
will be decisive to enhance transparency and accountability. The overall process of
modernizing and transforming ERA has been guided by the Road Map developed
particularly for this purpose. The overall transformation of ERA to the envisioned level
of excellence may take from three to five years.
With respect to the hard structure of modernizing the work environment, ERA signed
a Consultancy Service contract agreement for Partition and Interior Design with
Individual Architect on August 23, 2016 to design and supervise the implementation
of the interior and partition works of the new ERA buildings. Accordingly, the interior
design for the new buildings as well as the implementation was completed. In addition,
Consultancy Service for Design Optimization and Revision of Technical Specification
for Partitioning and Interior Design of ERA’s New Head Office Buildings, Furniture
Supply, Installation and Furnishing of Office and Related Facilities was signed with
the same Architect on May 30, 2018. Subsequently, all the ergonomics works of the
buildings as well as compound on the head office have been substantially compound.
Similar works have also been continuing in the districts.
4.2.2. Performance Quality and System Management
Performance, Quality and System Management Directorate is organized under the

functional area of Office of the Director General main Department. The Directorate’s
main tasks include conducting road quality and safety audit, follow-up the
implementation of Performance, Quality and System related initiatives of ERA (Quality
Management Systems & Manuals Development, Implementation and Audit), and
administration and ensuring sustainable implementation of ERA Management System
(ERAMS) for engineering directorates of the Ethiopian Roads Administration. The
Directorate has three independent teams, two of Performance and Quality Inspection
Teams; and Road Cost and System Monitoring Team, organized under it to execute its
duties, responsibilities and corresponding assignments.
The PQSM Directorate’s Performance and Quality Inspection Teams are responsible to
perform the following tasks: conduct road quality and safety audit; quality manual
improvement and usage assessment; administering of consulting service contracts for
| 61
technical audit of on-going and completed road construction, design and maintenance
projects; reviewing and commenting quality assurance manual prepared/proposed
by supervision and monitoring consultants (as forwarded by regional construction
projects management directorate); participating and conducting joint quality
inspection for substantially/fully completed road projects for provisional/final taking-
over; and design departure review and comment.
The prime function of the Road Cost and System Monitoring Team is to arrange
maintenance of the system and co-ordinate any improvement or changes to ERAMS
and provide a Help Desk for any member of staff requiring advice on the system. The
activities that are undertaken through managing ERAMS are summarized below.
» Provides centrally connected data storage, designed to allow additional systems to
link with data already stored.
» Applying Performance Appraisal System (PAS) to improve performance of those
performing services or works for ERA and in deed for improving the performance of
ERA itself in managing the projects and contracts.
» Providing management information from a single source enabling better
management responsibility and accountability giving better assurance in budget
allocation by validating estimates through the Estimate Validation System (EVS).
» Implementing Works Monitoring System (WMS), as its purpose is in the first

instance to provide a central store of key information on a Works or Maintenance
contract, which is easily accessible to the Project Engineer whilst at the same time
allowing Senior Managers access to key data through a series of reports containing
analysis of contracts across the ERA.
» Implementing Tender Analysis System (TAS) to provide historic rates and at the
same time allow checking of bid amounts and a simple analysis rate by rate.
4.2.3. Establishment of Toll Roads Enterprise
One of the RSDP program objectives is improving transport service efficiency and
reduces costs for fright and passengers so as to encourage production, distribution, and
export. After building the Addis - Adama expressway, ERA set the tariff, the management
works and established Toll Road Enterprise. The Addis - Adama expressway had then
transferred to the enterprise for operations and administration purpose. The express
way was built to be operated as toll road while the existing Addis – Adama road remain
a free high way.
Starting from the end of 2018/19, the number of toll roads has increased to two by
the upgrading and opening of the Dire Dawa – Dewelle highway in 2018/19. ERA will
extend the toll roads by constructing the Modjo - Hawassa express way in the coming
fiscal year. The first two lots of this express way (Modjo – Meki and Meki – Ziway) is
completed and opened to traffic at the end of 2021.The Ethiopian Toll Roads Enterprise
was established to administer Addis- Adama Express way including toll collection and
traffic management. The objectives of the Enterprise are: -
Addis Adama toll plaza
| 63
» T o provide toll road services to road users
» To operate and ensure the maintenance of toll roads
» To operate service stations constructed within the boundaries of toll roads
» To undertake other related activities necessary for the attainment of its
objective
4.2.4. Establishment of the Federal Integrated Infrastructure Development
and Coordinating Agency (FIIDCA)
Lack of coordination among road, railway, power, telephone, water developing and
operating institutions has been responsible for large in efficiency & wastage of
resources and public dissatisfaction. Government has set up Ministerial Steering and
Technical committees to ensure coordination among ERA, Ethiopian Power Corporation
(EPCO), Ethiopian Telecom Corporation (ETCO) & Ethiopian Rail Way Corporation during
planning and construction and operation of their projects.
According to the new coordination arrangement, each institution incorporate right

of way clearance plan of all the other institutions in its annual physical action plan
and implement it within the planned time frame of the other concerned institution.
Accordingly, EPCO, ETCO and Railway Corporation will incorporate ERA’s right of way
clearance plan, in their respective action plan and implement the same as planned by
ERA. ERA also incorporate Row clearance plan of EPCO, ETCO Railway Corporation in
its annual plan if any and will implement the same as planned by the other respective
institutions. The integration would address delay in row clearance due to lack of timely
cooperation by EPCO, ETCO, Water authorities in clearing Row for constriction to
commence and proceed as planned by ERA.
Following this need of integration; the Federal Integrated Infrastructure Development

Coordinating Agency was established in 2015/16 fiscal year with proclamation number
of 857/2014.
4.2.5. Human Resource Development
√ Training of Professionals with M.Sc
One of the major constraints identified in the road sector during the preparation of
GTP I (RSDP IV) was shortage of qualified experts in the sector. ERA, being the leader
of the sector, took the initiative to train engineers in different areas of specialization.
Accordingly, quit a number of engineers have been trained in seven engineering fields
in seven local universities under M.Sc program since 2010 with ERA’s sponsorship
Engineers have been trained in seven engineering fields in seven local universities
under M.Sc program in 2010 with ERA’s sponsorship. The initial target was to train 3000
engineers with M.Sc. by 2015. Since July 2010 to June 30, 2021, 9571 engineers were
registered for the studies of which 4877 are attending the M.Sc program among them 7
are overseas new registration. So far, 4,524 engineers have been graduated with M.Sc.
√ Training of Technicians
Starting from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2021; 53,551 technicians have been trained in ERA’s
training Centres and Technical and Vocational Education and Training centres, of which
12,400 technicians have been tested. In the first year of RSDP VI; 1,101 technicians were
trained and 585 were tested and 485 were certified.
4.3. Road Asset Preservation in RSDPs

4.3.1. Axle Load Control System
Special attention has been given to the enforcement of axle load limits by the ERA.
To assist with effective enforcement, the operation of the weighbridge stations falls
under the direct supervision of ERA. Fourteen stationary weighbridges operate at
strategically important sites throughout the country. The weighbridges operate full
time, 24 hours a day and 7 days a weekend are located in such a way that they cover
most of the main routes. Enforcement is further strengthened by employing the use of
mobile weighbridges for random axle load control activities. Three mobile teams are
dedicated to this task, operating in different areas of the country and covering those
routes missed by the stationary weighbridges.
Data on individual axles of each heavy vehicle is recorded, with each station sending
summary reports of the recorded data to ERA headquarters. Reports are sent on a
monthly basis and are collated and analyzed at head office. A summary of the annual
axle load information forms part of the annual road condition report. These reports
provide detailed information on the level of overloading at each station. Off-loading
of excess loads commenced in March 2004 at all weighbridge stations. Vehicles, found
to be overloaded, are forced to offload excess cargo and operators can be penalized
at the nearby courts. This has brought a significant improvement in the enforcement
effort. However, the level of penalty is so small that it does not have a serious effect
| 65
Axle Load Control
on persistent offenders. Maintenance of weighbridges, renovation of stations to

improve the working conditions at the stations, regular monitoring and intensive use
of the mobile weigh scales are some of the activities that has been being undertaken
by ERA. With the exception of 2006/07 and 2015/16 fiscal year, the number of checked
front and rear axles had increased from year to year. Because of conflict and closure of
weighbridge stations; the number checked front and rear axles had declined in 2017/18.
The number of illegal axles has decreased from 38% (in 2003/04) to 6% (in 2015/16).
Starting from 2016/17 - 2017/18, the portion of illegal axle load has increased which
could be due to the lower level of total axles checked compared to the previous year,
i.e., 2015/16. The monitoring system has been more strengthened than before both by
increasing number modernization of the weighbridge stations.
ERA has conducted the “Project for Improvement of Axle Load Control on Trunk Roads”
in collaboration with JICA from 2015 to 2018, on all its 14 stations with the objective of
modernizing the system by changing the single-axle manual weighbridge system to
multiple-axle automated weighbridge control system and ultimately to improve the
efficiency and transparency of axle load control. The trend in the Illegal Axle Load data
from the 2002/03 to 2020/2021 is presented in Table 20 and Figure 9 below.

Table 20: Total Checked Front and Rear Axles (2002/03 – 2020/21)
Axles
Year Total Checked
Illegal Illegal %
Front Rear Total
2002/2003 86,122 216,279 302,401 113,708 38
2003/2004 88,427 228,528 316,955 109,987 35
2004/2005 105,476 309,422 414,898 149,145 36
2005/2006 113,876 320,997 434,873 157,688 36
2006/2007 99,477 317,303 416,780 136,944 33
2007/2008 115,565 378,107 493,672 159,598 32
2008/2009 141,359 459,950 601,309 179,181 30
2009/2010 148,046 485,947 633,993 89,940 14
2010/2011 142,253 473,406 615,659 76,013 12
2011/2012 132,344 493,160 625,504 36,897 6
2012/2013 173,024 556,258 800,504 71,222 9
2013/2014 180,384 619,871 851,249 50,994 6
2014/2015 196,719 642,626 909,700 70,355 8
2015/2016 81,014 256,497 337,511 20,537 6
2016/2017 189,879 641,196 831,075 114,021 14
2017/2018 142,253 473,406 615,659 76,013 12
2018/2019 78,194 288,279 366,473 81,044 22
2019/2020 149,562 538,731 688,293 158,752 23
2020/2021 145,565 551,866 697,431 233,080 33
Figure 9: Perccentage of Illigal Axle Load
| 67
Abay Bridge (Hidassie)
4.3.2. Bridge and Culvert Asset Management System
The construction costs of bridges and culverts are very expensive in Ethiopia. Before
the implementation of RSDP, the trends of ERA in this regard, once those structures
were built, and open to the service, no give proper attention for the inspection and
maintenance of the asset, until it faces huge damage or collapse. Thus, the Ethiopian
Roads Administration recognized that; the problem is critical and it needs more focus
to keep the assets until the end of the design life. Accordingly, during the second
phase of RSDP ERA had given more attention for bridge/culvert asset management on
federal roads.
In RSDP II; the Bridge Asset Management concept and task was widely introduced
in ERA. In 2004, after the in - house developed Bridge Management System (BMS)
software has become official after getting approval of the top management and
``Bridge Management Branch (team now) `` which was established under Road
network Management Division (Directorate now).
Then after the branch has immediately launched the first ever Nationwide ``Bridge/
Culvert Inventory and Inspection``, which enabled ERA to have the bridge/culvert
database and producing clear and comprehensive bridge improvement plan to be
attached with the successive RSDP plans. Then the branch regulatory prepares the
work schedule where all ERA bridges and culverts are inspected and prioritized for the
required type of interventions.
The first nationwide bridge/culvert inventory and inspection was carried out in 2005/06.

Consecutively, similar works were carried out in 2010, 2013, 2016 and 2020. Table 21
shows the number of bridge/culvert stock.
Table 21: Summary of Bridge/Culvert Stock
Total RSDP III (3yrs, 2007/08-

Types 2006 2020/21
2010)
Road Length, Km 18322 28252 20584.5
Bridge Stock 2768 5287 5030.1
Culvert Stock 25604 39148 683.5
Bridge and Culvert stock value, Bill. ETB 21.6 2544.2
European Union * 678.1 1662.6 3255.2
As per the Bridge inspection manual all components shall be inspected and given ranks
for each type of damage. Then, the software analyzes and prioritizes bridges based on
the given ranks which are assumed to reflect condition and severity of the damage.
Table 22: Bridge Stock and Condition after major inspection
Years of inspection
Service Condition, %
2006 2010 2013 2016 2020
Stock 2768 3265 3542 3806 5287
Good 54 60 67 74 75
Fair 36 22 11 6 20
Bad 10 18 22 20 5
4.3.2.1. Improvement in Bridge Plans and Achievements
In the bridge improvement Master Plan, a number of bridges are prioritized and selected
for replacement and repair. Bridge replacement program was planned to be entertained
either by formulating individual projects or covered by the road upgrading projects if
the selected bridges are found there. But usually, the road upgrading projects are not
focused to accommodate many bridges for replacement due to financial issue as well
as less interest to carryout detail condition survey.
This can be tackled by planning of bridges centrally by construction contract and road
asset management and by making contractors shall enter in to contractual obligation
| 69
to replace bridge and culverts. In the past 10 years more than 700 bridges are selected
for replacement and so far, only 47% of them were replaced off which 90% is covered
by the road upgrading projects. It has to be noted that currently more than 100 bridges
are under design process for replacement and only few are under construction.
Table 23: Repair and Replacements of Bridge and Culvert
RSDP IV -From July RSDP V - From July

Description Total
2010 to June 2015 2015 to June 2020
Planed 390 326 716
Bridge Replacement, No. 59% 35% 47.0%
Actual 230 114 344
Budget for bridge Planed 2,240 3805.7 6045.7
99.6% 37.8% 60.7%
replacement, ETB Mil Actual 2,232 1440 3672
Planed 964 1968 2932
Bridge Repair, No. 39.1% 31.20% 35.2%
Actual 377 614 991
Budget for bridge repair, Planed 106.4 241.6 348
64.4% 81% 75%
ETB Mil Actual 65.3 195.7 261
Culvert Replacement, Planed 707 540 1247
31.3% 37.40% 34.4%
No. Actual 221 202 423
Budget for culvert Planed 40 240 280
100+% 33.9% 54.4%
replacement, ETB Mil Actual 71 81.4 152.4
Planed 500 690 1190
Culverts Repair, No. 100% 100% 100%
Actual 500 690 1190
Budget for culvert Planed 5 7.9 12.9
100+% 100+% 100+%
repair, ETB Mil Actual 8.7 10.3 19
Planed 2,389 4295.2 6,684
Total expense, ETB Mil 99.5% 40.2% 61.4%
Actual 2,377 1727.4 4,104

Figure 10: Condition of Bridges, in %
As we can see here, ``Good`` condition is growing because there are significant
numbers of bridge that are being newly injected to the stock. ``Bad`` condition,
on the other hand, also increased due to poor achievement in bridge repair plan and
significant numbers of bridges are deteriorating from year to years due to absence of
actual repair intervention.
4.3.2.2. General Attributers and Challenges
As seen above, the general physical accomplishment of the Bridge Master Plan is less
than half of that anticipated to achieve specifically in bridge replacement and repair.
Some of the strengths and suitable, which are environment for bridge management: -
» A vailability of a well-developed, functioning and reliable Bridge Management
System (BMS) in ERA, which is pioneer and exemplar in Africa.
» Availability and use of ERA – Bridge Inspection manual and bridge repair
specification, which are mandatory to conduct bridge condition survey followed
by bridge repair intervention.
» Capacity building activities, which have been running for long time in
ERA accompanied by on job training in bridge inspection, repair and asset
management courses,
» Tireless effort of the Bridge Management Team to disseminate the bridge asset
management concept to all ERA branch offices/ Districts, and
» Allocation of the necessary budget by ERA for bridge asset management
and improvement works.
| 71
On the contrary, there are also challenges presented as follow: -
» Very slow and time taking procurement process from Request for Proposal
(RFP) preparation to final awarding of the contract.
» Less attention to bridge projects in procurement periodization,
» Re tendering of projects due contract termination,
» Non responsiveness and negligence of designers in delivery and contractors in
the course of project implementation,
» Poor capacity, experience and poor project management of bridge contractors,
» Lack of experienced engineers from ERA side to review and comment design
and other engineering documents on time, which leads to variation and disputes
at construction period as well as delay in project acceptance.
» Delay in payment release from ERA and some financer side,
» Lack of interest by contractors to take bridge projects due to small volume of
the work (Repair or Construction),
» Less attention for bridge asset management and follow up of bridge works in
general compared to road maintenance activities at district level.
4.4. Environmental and Social Management

4.4.1. Establishment of the Environmental, Social Management and Occu-
pational Health and Safety Directorate
Immediately following the commencement of the implementation of the first Road

Sector Development Program, in 1998 the Environmental and Social Management Team
(ESMT) was established under the Planning and Program Management Directorate.
Following the 2019 internal restructuring, the team is structured at directorate level
as Environmental, Social, Occupational Health and Safety Directorate encompassing
the three teams of Environment Management, Social Management and Resettlement
Management, and Occupational Health and Safety Management. The Directorate is
accountable to the Construction Projects Deputy Director General.
Since July 2015 the two teams are separated with in the Planning and Program
Management Directorate and as Environment Management Team (EMT) and Social

ERA Green legacy
Management Team. The following are the major duties and responsibilities of the
Environment Management team.
» Ensuring the incorporation of Environmental issues in the road planning and
implementation procedures,
» Review Environmental Impact Assessment Studies and Resettlement Action
Plans for newly built road projects, rehabilitation and upgrading,
» Carryout coordinated environmental monitoring activities on on-going projects
so as to check the implementation of mitigation measures proposed in the EIA
and EMP.
» Build the in-house capacity to conduct Environmental Impact Assessment
Studies Resettlement Action Plans for emergency cases.
» Mainstream and ensure the incorporation of HIV/AIDS Prevention and control
activities in the road sector.
» Review, Update and Prepare Road Sector Environmental Frameworks, Guidelines
and Manuals based on the existing national, international and financers
safeguard policies.
» It is involved in the preparation and review of the Terms of Reference for EIA
(Environment Impact Assessment) study.
» Review Manuals and Guidelines on Environment management in accordance
| 73
with the national statuary requirement, financers’ policies, and the prevailing
environment and propose recommendations for updating.
» The Team is responsible to check the incorporation of recommendations on
environment management in the contract documents.
» The team is Reviewing ToRs and Contract Documents to ensure national and
donor environmental and social safeguards requirements are adequately
addressed.
» As needed the Team is also responsible to apply for clearance /approval of the
EIA reports from the concerned bodies.
» During project implementation period the team is responsible to review and
comment the site specific EMPs and other project related status reports on
environment management.
» Participating with the responsible teams on the selection of consultant’s and
contractor’s camp site and material source site selection (borrow pit, quarry
site, disposal area, crusher and asphalt plant areas and etc…)
» Involved in the consultation of PAPs and concerned stakeholders when there
are environmental related issues in the road project development process.
» Conduct monitoring (site visits) on the implementation of EMPs and other
safeguards requirements (will conduct environmental compliance monitoring).
» Review and comment environmental audits.
» Review and comment implementation completion reports of projects with
respect to environmental compliance as per stipulated in the EMP.
» Advise ERA’s management on environmental impacts related to design and
implementation of road projects.
The Team is also involved as part of project hand over team during handing over process
of substantially completed and completed Road projects.
4.4.2. The Social and Resettlement Management Team
In 2016, the Social Management Team has separated from the Environmental and Social
Management Team and was established as a team under the Planning and Program
Management Directorate. Currently, with the new ERA structure the team is operating
under Environmental, Social and Occupational Safety Management Directorate. The
| 75
following are the major general duties and responsibilities of the team: -
» Ensuring the incorporation of social safeguard compliance issues in the road
project planning and implementation procedures,
» Administer projects’ social safeguard programs such as Livelihood Restoration
Plans and its respective implementations, Gender Based Violence, Resettlement
Management Plan Implementation Audits etc.
» Consulting and advising top management on social problems arising from
different road projects,
» Ensure the proper consultation and awareness creation of local communities,
woreda administrations and concerned stakeholders in general who are highly
influenced and interested by the concerned road project,
» Reviewing Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Studies and Resettlement Action
Plans (RAP) for new, rehabilitation and upgrading road projects,
» Carryout coordinated social safeguards compliance monitoring activities on on-
going projects so as to check the proper implementation of mitigation measures
proposed in the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) and Social Management Plan
(SMP),
» Provided socially less impact material and camp construction sites and hand
over to the construction contractors for new projects,
» Participate in the provisional and final project taking over as project taking over
team member,
» Build the in-house capacity to conduct Social Impact Assessment Studies,
Livelihood Restoration Plans (LRP) and Resettlement Action Plans (RAP) for
emergency cases,
» Review, Update and Prepare Road Sector Social Frameworks, Guidelines and
Manuals based on the existing national, international and financers safeguard
policies.
» Develop Terms of References (ToR) for social safeguards related works of the
road projects to be out sourced to external consultants.
» Prepare and develop capacity building trainings to ERA staff and awareness
creating trainings for project hosting key stakeholders and different project
related committees.
» In general, the social management team has done the following activities since

its establishment.
» Drafted ERA Social Policy, Guidelines and different checklists
» Reviewed and provided comments on project related documents such as
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), SIA, SMP, SSSMP documents of many road
projects,
» On-going projects were regularly monitored, evaluated and feedback reports
were prepared and send to CPMs for further improvements,
» Prepared Terms of References for Individual Consultancy Services for Detailed
Need Assessment and Develop Livelihood Restoration Plan and for Gender
Based violence (GBV),
» Administer the contracts of Individual Consultancy Services for Detailed Need
Assessment and Develop Livelihood Restoration Plan for different projects
» Participated on substantial and final handing over of projects with project
handover team as per the handover guideline,
» Provided socially less impact selected material and camp construction sites
and handed over to the construction contractors for new projects.
4.4.3. Occupational Health and Safety Management Team
The Occupational Health and Safety Management Team is a newly established team
under the Environment, Social and Occupational Safety management directorate on
the month of January/2019. The team is established in an aim of maintain a safe working
environment for employees working in ERA projects. The team basically coordinates
both the HIV/AIDS prevention and control activities and OHS related activities. The HIV/
AIDS Prevention and control activity has been undertaken in a construction project by
incorporating the prevention package (complying KAP assessment, awareness creation
sessions, condom distribution etc…) in Works Contract document and coercing the
main contractor to assign a consultancy firm that can execute the service for the
project workers as well as the community dwelling around the construction sites.
Before the commencement of HIV/AIDS prevention and control activities within ERA,
many staffs were left helpless and families were disintegrated; children were left
uncared. ERA had also recently revised the TOR for HIV/AIDS prevention and control
program in order to enable consulting firms provide a quality work and also to create
a platform where new consulting firms and NGOs join the industry. So far, awareness
| 77
work on HIV/AIDS was done and 269,329 condoms and 105,379 IEC/BCC materials like
brochures, fliers were distributed. Around 1000 peer educators from project workers
and local communities were trained in order to expand the network of awareness
provided. Care and support for 800 people with HIV was made at an amount of 200
birr per month, tested and linked to nearby hospitals and clinics for further treatment
through networking and referral linkages. The OHS management team has also
developed an OHS policy and guideline based on the national and international Health
and Safety practices in an aim of developing a comprehensive Occupational Health
& Safety system within the authority. The team basically undertakes monitoring
activities to closely follow-up the overall OHS performance of every consultant and
contractor of projects administered by ERA. Since the team focuses on the proactive
measures that should be taken to protect employees and the surrounding community,
it is helping the Administration in saving huge amount of compensation paid due to
encountering accidents and different health impacts. The OHS team also complies
awareness creation sessions on general health & safety practice and traffic safety.
The team strongly believes in frequent sensitization of employees in order to achieve
a cultural and attitude shift.
4.4.4. Development of Environmental, Social and OHS Management Frame-

works
ERA has developed guidelines to attain the required quality of EIA. Its effective
implementation is also improving from time to time. In addition, ERA also prepares
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) as inseparable tools from EIA to ensure the livelihood
of the project affected persons maintain pre-project status or even improved. Similar
to EIA, the standard and quality of RAP is improving from time to time.
Since the establishment of the environmental and social management team in 1998,
the Ethiopian Roads Administration has prepared the following environmental and
social management manuals and guidelines in order to standardize methods and
procedures which are the key references to conduct the Environmental Impact
Assessment studies and Resettlement Action Plans. The manuals provide a step-by-
step approach to environmental management activities to be conducted during each
phase of the project cycle. In this regard, the following manuals and guidelines have
been developed.

» E nvironmental Impact Assessment Procedural Manual (2002)
» Road Safety Audit Manual (2004)
» Sectoral Policy for HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control in the workplace of ERA
(2004)
» Resettlement /Rehabilitation Policy Framework (2006)
» Environmental and Social Management Manual (2008)
» Drafting the Road Sector Environmental Policy is under progress, soon it will be
finalized.
» Drafting of OHS-Guideline
» Environmental Management Policy
» Environmental Management Performance Rating Criteria.
Moreover, ERA also works closely and implements the safeguard policies of key
financers in the sector, like the World Bank Group, African Development Bank, the
European Union, JICA and EXIM banks of China and Korea.
4.4.5. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
ERA is one of the pioneer organizations in using EIA, though; its effective implementation
still needs improvement.
One of the main challenges of environmental management in the road sector is the
shallowness of the study emanated from and the little emphasis given to environmental
matters (EIA findings) by design consultants. As a result, EIA findings have not been
reflected in the design of the roads as required. Lack of adequate consultation has
impaired the design consultants to reflect the needs and aspiration of the local
community in the design.
In order to incorporate environmental considerations properly clauses and associated

costs for the effective implementation of environmental and social mitigation
measures has been fully addressed in the contract agreements. Moreover, the technical
standard specification of ERA which was prepared in 2002 is revised in 2013.
| 79
Traning on OHS
4.4.6. Site Specific Environmental Management Plan
Despite the availability of many tools, there are enormous gaps to be bridged regarding
the implementation. Most of the environmental impacts are actually temporary in
nature. Some of these are borrow pits and quarry sites development and reinstatement,
spoil material handling, dust pollution, preservation of roadside vegetation, handling of
solid and liquid wastes, occupational health and safety, provision of access for the
community, cut and fill section treatment, etc. Most of these impacts are causes of
grievance by local community. Out of this, cut surface treatment by contractors show
improvement currently. Most of the road projects are implementing roadside grassing.
As a temporary solution; ERA is supporting project contractors to develop Environmental

Management Plan (EMP) in advance of construction commencement, regularly
monitoring projects and finally making reinstatement works as a precondition for
project hand-over.
4.4.7. Environmental Auditing
Road construction projects involve several phases, parties and activities that
potentially affect the environment. ERA has prepared guidelines and set different
requirements in line with existing national standards. In order to ensure compliance

to these requirements, it would be better to introduce Environmental Compliance
Audit (a systematic scrutiny and objective evaluation of environmental performance
throughout the authority’s existing operation) and awarding environmental clearance
certificate for good conduct and compliance to environmental care and respect shown
by contractors and supervision consultants.
The scope of the audit can vary from simple compliance testing to rigorous evaluation.
The process of conducting audit and awarding environmental clearance certificate is
a continuous process (not snap shot) and involves both internal and external auditing.
The ongoing projects are too much in number and it is crystal clear that, these large
numbers of projects cannot be monitored by ERA’s own force i.e. the Environmental
and Social Management Team and the respective regional contract management
directorates. Moreover, Currently, Web Based Ethiopian Roads Administration
Management System-ERAMS is ensuring quality and monitor the progress achieved in
implementation of the road delivery and management core process.
4.4.8. External Monitoring of Environmental, Safety and Social Aspects
It is crystal clear that the large number of ongoing projects cannot be monitored
by ERA’s environmental and social management teams only. Cognizant of this fact,
ERA has outsourced consultancy services on October 2018 for an independent local
consultant namely CORE Consulting Engineers PLC to monitor projects which are being
financed by the World Bank. The service has 42 months contract period, which includes
two phases: preparation of monitoring plan and inception report during phase-I and
quarterly performance monitoring during phase-II. The major tasks of the team are the
following:
» Carrying out baseline survey study on the environment, social and occupational
health safety including livelihood restoration and gender mainstreaming,
which consist of gathering of the basic information required for subsequent
assessment or monitoring of how efficiently the activity is being implemented
and the eventual results are achieved.
» Regular Environmental, Social and Safety Performance Monitoring
» Carrying out non-routine surveys in response to requests made by ERA staff or
key stakeholders as required
| 81
Traning on OHS
» Identifying undesirable effects (problems related to environmental, social and

OHS) on the projects
» Reviewing different management plans prepared by the contractors, in
consultation with the contractor and carefully monitor its implementation
» Provide recommendations as what enforcement measures should be put in
place to implement the recommendations for the on-going projects as well as
an input for future project planning.
4.4.9. Awareness and Capacity Building on Environment, Social and Safety

Aspects
To integrate environmental and social management to road construction, providing

trainings and creating awareness is critical. Awareness creation through training is
a crucial tool to reach all the stakeholders. However, in terms of training, ERA’s EMT
and SMT have used few stages prepared by the organization to convey recurring
environmental and social problems, contract requirements and general awareness on
the environment. These should be conveyed to the contractors, consultants, ERA own
staffs, regional road construction experts specifically in areas of occupational health
and safety, basic concepts and principles of environment impact assessment, policies
and guidelines, environmental auditing, land acquisition, resettlement and social
sustainability in home and field. It is believed that these have to be continued regularly
to bring result driven change.

4.4.10. Non-Transport Projects EAHS (Emergency Access to Health Ser-
vice)
Genesis of the EAHS goes back to a World Bank mission that traveled to Ethiopia from
August 30 to September 13, 2004 to carry out activities under the Japanese Social
Development Fund (JSDF) for a project that would address the role of transport in
preventing obstetric fistula, in particular, and providing Emergency Access to Health
Services, in general. During same period, a workshop organized under the theme
“Preventing Fistulas: Transport’s Role in Empowering Communities in Ethiopia”
combined with series of stakeholder and community consultations were undertaken
with the objectives of discussing and identifying the range of social, health and
transport issues underlining fistula, the possible intervention and opportunities
for collaboration, and institutional framework as well as monitoring mechanism.
Subsequently, the EAHS pilot project emerged as a three-pronged intervention that
could effectively address:
» The transport,
» Health and
» Social problems inhibiting (EAHS) in interconnected way.
Accordingly, in order to pilot these projects, 2 Woredas from the Southern Nations
Nationalities and Peoples Regional State [Lokeabaya and Hula] Woredas and from the
Amhara National Regional State [Dangila and Mecha] Woredas were then selected as
areas for the project’s pilot intervention based on a number of criteria including:
» Prevalence rates of fistula,
» Creation of fistula outreach centers at regional hospitals (in Bahirdar and
Yirgalem), and
» Potential for aligning efforts with ongoing Rural Road Access (RRA) program.
The Baseline Survey, Preparation of IEC/BCC materials, community level manual,
M&E technical tools, Emergency Access Cards Dissemination and TOTs for EAHS
pilot project and Management consultancy service for provision of EAHS, Trainings
on IEC/BCC, Community referral manual, and on community level data collection and
analysis; upgrading of existing roads, new construction and replacement new bridge
or construction activities are fully accomplished. Maintenance hand tools for minor
civil works and Goods for Monitoring and Evaluation were procured and distributed.
Procurement of three-wheel motor bike ambulance, emergency kit and animal driven
cart were a challenge for different reasons.
| 83
4.4.11. Enhancing the Capacity of Roads and Hydropower Sub sectors to-
wards Climate Resilience
Ethiopia did not cause climate change, but we are confronted by the threat that it
poses, and should recognize the opportunity that it presents. Climate change is not a
future possibility for Ethiopia, it is a present reality. That is why it is imperative that we
start now to protect our people and our environment, while at the same time building
a green economy that will help to realize the ambitions set out in the Growth and
Transformation Plan. The largest problems facing the current Ethiopian road network
seem to be overloading and missing maintenance and repair. The most influential
climate impact on roads will come from changes in rain patterns and only to a smaller
extent from increased temperatures.
Cognizant of this fact, the Ethiopian Roads Administration has signed a Memorandum
of Understanding on 22 of August 2013 with Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy
(MoWIE) and Sustainable Land Use Forum (SLUF), a local NGO, to implement a project
entitled “Enhancing the Capacity of Road and Hydropower Sub-sectors towards
Climate Resiliency”. The following consultancy services and one project have been
successfully accomplished.
» Capacity building training to the environmental and social management teams.
» Experience sharing visit in Vietnam on road side slope stabilization using
biological measures for EMT, SMT and Road Asset.
» Review of EIA Application Practices in the Road Sector
» Assessment of Joint Planning and Implementation Practices of Road and
Hydropower Subsectors in Ethiopia.
» Review of Road Asset Elements Management Manuals and Guidelines of the
Road Sector.
» Review of existing institutional program and operational manuals.
» Demonstration on Roadside Slope Stabilization using vetiver grass on the 5 Km
Ambo–Gedo and Gedo-Bako Road Corridors.
Moreover, ERA currently implements the climate resilient green transport strategy in
the road sector and the following activities are ongoing.
» Afforestation program on Bedele - Metu road upgrading project,

» Ongoing preparatory work to execute afforestation program using indigenous
road side tree plantation on the Modjo - Hawassa Expressway,
» Ongoing work on finalizing the proposal for NDF (Nordic Development Fund)
support related to climate change adaptation on the new Ethiopia Integrated
Transport Program Phase -I (Jimma - Chida and Sodo - Sawla) Road Upgrading
Project. The program is expected to be executed in collaboration with the AfDB,
and
» There is also an ongoing consultancy service with the aim to increase climate
resilience of Ethiopia’s road network in collaboration with the World Bank
Group.
4.5. Research and Development and RSDP
As part of the Road Sector Development Programme (RSDP), it has become

increasingly obvious that the national road research and development capacity has
to be strengthened and expanded to support the goals and objectives of the RSDP.
Accordingly, the Research and Development Directorate was established to support
the RSDP to achieve its goals through research and technology transfer activities.
Aligned with the Growth and Transformation Plan I (GTP I), various research and
technology transfer activities have been carried out since the establishment of the
ERA Research Laboratory
| 85
Landslide on Baku - Shambo Road
Research and Development Directorate in 2010, now called the Road Research Centre
(RRC). Studies have been conducted by in - house research staffs, and in collaboration
with others. The research projects mainly depend on the previously identified and
formulated and based on the current key issues in the road sector. Besides to this,
individual interests for the research area have been also taken into account for the
study of the problems associated with the sector.
The preparatory study for establishment of the RRC was conducted by an international
consultant that was hired to this end. As part of this study, the concept design and
related organizational and technical necessities were studied, accordingly, detailed
design for the main infrastructure was carried out and construction works of the RRC
main facility was started on November 2016. Currently, the physical construction of
this main facility at Kality has exceeded 93.42% and when it is finalized it is planned
to be equipped with state-of-the-art laboratory facilities, and the process to grant
funding is under progress.
The organizational structure of the RRC has also been growing in the systems
established, structure, technology and number of staff from time to time. Currently,
the Research Centre is working towards equipping its human resource as per the
final structure as studied and specified by the international consultant for the
establishment of the research centre. The RRC also has an updated five years strategic
plan to go about its future.
To highlight the achievement of the RRC, the list of research projects that have been

accomplished to date are summarized in Table 24 below. This does not include the new
research projects that are commenced this year, which will be endorsed and included
in the list after their final proposal is approved by ERA.
Table 24: List of in-house and collaborative road research projects and deliverables
to date by ERA/RRC
√ Completed - - - - Ongoing projects
Status of
Research Project Title Area of Study Remark
Research
Ongoing In-House Research Projects
Assessment of poor performance of Road Construction Research Design
----
Contractors in Ethiopia Management completed
Assessment of Landslide Causes of Federal Execution data
Landslide and
Road Projects: the Case of Gohatsion Dejen ---- collection, monitoring
Slope Stability
Road Project. and testing
Assessment of poor performance of Road Construction Research Design
----
Contractors in Ethiopia Management completed
Causes and remedial measures for defects
Pavement Reporting Stage
on Asphalt Concrete Surfacing: case of ----
Material (Writing project report)
Goha-Tsion-Dejen Trunk Road
Reporting
Pavement Stage(Writing project
Causes and Remedial Measures of
Material
Premature Asphalt Concrete Pavement ---- report)
(Highway
Failure on Federal Roads of Ethiopia
Design)
Development of a national database of

Material Data Base developed
natural road construction materials in terms ----
Database (lunching is expected)
of quality, quantity and location
Development of Mechanistic - Empirical
Pavement Execution: literature
Pavement Design Guide in Ethiopian: Phase 1: ----
Material review completed
Literature review
Economic and social impact of driving
Transport Execution. Data
behavior and traffic congestion in Addis ----
Engineering analysis stage
Ababa
Monitoring Natural lateritic gravel base
(Assosa) Asphalt concrete and hot rolled Material Execution and
----
asphalt severe condition: Otta seal (Combel Pavement Reporting Phase
and Gerado)
| 87
Protocols for Improving the Proficiency of Material
---- Data collection stage
Materials Testing Laboratories in Ethiopia Pavement
Approved and Disseminated Final In-House Projects
Road
Constructability of surface treatment in Disseminated on Report
Ethiopia
Construction √ and Conference
(Paved)
Claim analysis and approval prices: case
Construction Disseminated on Report
study of Ethiopian federal road projects
Management
√ and Conference
phase 1
Reliability Assessment of design practice: Construction Disseminated on Report
Road design projects in Ethiopia Management
√ and Conference
Causes and Remedial measures for
Pavement
Pavement Failure along Dejen-Lumame Road
Material
√ Final Paper submitted
Segment'.
Causes and remedial measures of traffic Road Safety
accidents in completed federal roads and Transport
Causes of cost and time overrun on ERA road Construction

construction projects Management
Correlation between dynamic cone

Final Paper submitted
penetrometer and laboratory California Material
bearing ratio for different type of soil in Pavement
√ (Re-Analysis is
expected)
Ethiopia
Evaluation of lime and RHA stabilization
Material
techniques to improve expansive sub-grades
Pavement
in Ethiopian road projects
Performance assessment of emulsified
cold-mix asphalt concrete for low volume Pavement
roads in Ethiopia: Phase-1: Laboratory Material
performance assessment
Utilization of industrial waste(Bagasse
Material
ash) in flexible pavement construction in
Pavement
Ethiopia(as Filer and as sub base)
Approved and Disseminated Final Collaborative Projects
Can Humans predict the future?
Transport Published on
Consequences of inaccurate Traffic
Engineering
√ international journal
forecasting

Common surface defects in asphalt road Pavement Published on
pavements and unexpected causes. material
Engineering geology of cinder gravel
Pavement Published on
in Ethiopia: Prospecting, testing and
Material
application to low volume roads.
Impact of Road surface condition on Rural Transport Published on
Transport Services Engineering
√ International journal
Method for increasing the use of locally
Published on
available materials for road construction in Environment. √ international journal
Ethiopia by allowing for climate variations
Performance of Foamed bitumen pavement Pavement Published on
in Ethiopia Material
√ International journal
Climate Adaptation: Risk management
and resilience optimization for venerable
road across in Africa(climate adaptation
Climate Collaborative research
handbook, climate threats and venerability
Adaptation
√ with AFCAP
assessment guidelines, Engineering
Adaptation guidelines, and change
management guideline)
Pavement
Design,
Low Volume Roads Manuals,2016(Part Collaborative research
A,B,C,D,E,F)
construction √ with AFCAP
and
maintenance.
Best practice manual development on Thin Surface
Bituminous surfacing Treatment
√
Development of Landslide Handbook for
road engineers [ through JICA assistance]
Landslide √
Development of landslide countermeasure
guideline (design and construction) [through Landslide √
JICA assistance]
Improving performance of Rhyolite wearing
Pavement
course and low-cost surfacing in Ethiopia
material
√
southern region.
Improving the performance of Hot Mix
Hot Mix
Asphalt Concrete through Refusal Density
design: Design and Construction report
Concrete √
Asphalt
(AFCAP project)
| 89
5. IMPACT OF RSDP
Aposto - Erebamuda - Wadera
As a result of road sector investment under the RSDP, the total road network of the
country and its condition has improved. The impact of the RSDP on accessibility, quality
and mobility is discussed below.
KM
Total Federal Road
Network of RSDP 24 years > 28
Thousand
KM
Total Rural Road Network
> 38 of RSDP 24 years
Thousand
KM
Total Woreda/URRAP Road
Network of RSDP 24 years > 59
Thousand
KM Total Municipality Road

> 28 Network of RSDP 24
Thousand years

5.1. Impact on Accessibility
Network Expansion: Since its inception in 1997, the RSDP has focused on rehabilitation
and expansion of the main paved and unpaved roads and important regional roads. The
total road network has expanded from about 26,550 km at the beginning of the RSDP to
its current 155,830.1 km including Woreda and municipality roads, increasing the road
density from 24.1 to 135.8 km per 1000 sq. km area and from 0.46 to 1.42 km per 1000
population in 2020/21. The growth of the classified road network over the RSDP period
is summarized in Error! Reference source not found. 25.
Table 25: Growth of the Classified Road Network and Change in Road Density (1997 –
2021)
Road Network in km Road

Growth
Municipality Density
Year Rate
Paved Gravel Rural Woreda Total /1000
Cobble (%)
Paved Gravel Stone popn.
1997 3,708 12,162 10,680 26,550 0.46

1998 3,760 12,240 11,737 27,737 4.5 0.46
1999 3,812 12,250 12,600 28,662 3.3 0.47
2000 3,824 12,250 15,480 31,554 10.1 0.50
2001 3,924 12,467 16,480 32,871 4.2 0.50
2002 4,053 12,564 16,680 33,297 1.3 0.49
2003 4,362 12,340 17,154 33,856 1.7 0.49
2004 4,635 13,905 17,956 36,496 7.8 0.51
2005 4,972 13,640 18,406 37,018 1.4 0.51
2006 5,002 14,311 20,164 39,477 6.6 0.53
2007 5,452 14,628 22,349 42,429 7.5 0.55
2008 6,066 14,363 23,930 44,359 4.5 0.56
2009 6,938 14,234 25,640 46,812 5.5 0.57
2010 7,476 14,373 26,944 48,793 4.2 0.58
2011 8,295 14,136 30,712 854 53,997 10.7 0.66
2112 9875 14675 31550 6983 63083 16.8 0.75
| 91
2013 11301 14455 32582 27628 85966 36.3 1.0
2014 12640 14217 33609 39056 99522 15.8 1.1
2015 13,551 14,055 30641 46810 1693 2814 850 110414 10.9 1.23
2016 14632 13400 31620 48057 1693 2814 850 113066 2.4 1.23
2017 15886 12813 33367 52,748 1693 2814 850 120171 6.3 1.27
2018 15886 12813 35985 56,732 1693 2814 850 126773 5.5 1.27
2019 15,886 12,813 35,806.4 55,808 1734 16182 5798 144,027.8 13.6 1.43
2020 15,886 12,813 35,806.4 55,808 1734 16182 5798 144,027.8 - 1.41
2021 16225.2 12491.3 38546.8 59603.8 1771 20624 6568 155830.1 7.9 1.42
Average Road Network Growth 7.9
Indicators of Accessibility: Accessibility, measured in terms of average distance

from the road network and proportion of area farther than 5 km from an all-weather
road, shows that substantial progress has been made in expanding the road network.
Specifically, due to the construction of new roads, the average distance from a road
has been reduced from 21 km in 1997 to 4.5 km in 2021 it is excluding municipality roads.
The proportion of area farther than 5 km from an all-weather road, which was 79% in
1997, has been reduced to 33.1% in 2021. And area further than 2 km from all-weather
road shows that reduced from 91% in 1997 to 64.3% in 2021.
Rural Access Index: Isolation is a key characteristic of poverty. Improved road access
offers for the rural poor the ability to reach, visit or use services effectively and also
contributes to the country’s economy and development. Improving rural road access
can provide an effective poverty alleviation catalyst by reducing constraints and
providing access to new opportunities.
Improving access to transport for rural men and women is considered essential to
promote rural development, to increase uptake of human development services
(educational and health), to facilitate inclusion of different ethnic and other groups,
to improve employment opportunities, and to stimulate growth for poverty reduction.
The Rural Access Index, RAI, measures the number of rural people who live within two
kilometers (typically equivalent to a walk of 15-20 minutes) of an all-season road as a
proportion of the total rural population. An “all-season road” is a road that is memorable

all year round by the prevailing means of rural transport. Occasional interruptions of
short duration during inclement weather (e.g. heavy rainfall) are accepted, particularly
on lightly trafficked roads.
The RAI is one of the indicators of access that is recommended by the World Bank
in 2003 and RAI is accepted by the African Ministers of Transport as a comparative
measure of rural access in Africa. Table 25 shows the current level of accessibility of
the rural population to an all-weather road as measured by the RAI and the progress
made to improve accessibility through successive RSDP implementation years. The
average RAI for the whole country is currently around 64%, a significant improvement
compared to the situation at the outset of the RSDP. Table 26 shows rural access index
for the country.
Table 26: Rural Access Index Values
Inhabited
Country Road Rural
Area Rural Rural Pop’n
Total Area Total Rural Network Access
(80%) Year Pop’n. Within 2km
(‘000 km2) Population Population (excluding Index
(‘000 Density Access
Municipality) (%)
km2)
1997 58,117,000 46,493,600 58 26,550 6,203,041 13
2002 67,220,000 53,776,000 68 33,297 8,997,887 17
2007 74,186,830 61,259,132 77 42,429 13,061,124 21
2010 79,777,690 65,680,187 83 48,793 16,104,158 25
1,176 796 2011 82,100,000 68,143,000 86 53,997 18,483,797 27
2012 84,500,000 70,135,000 88 63,083 22,232,795 32
2013 86,000,000 71,380,000 90 85,966 30,835,443 43
2014 87,000,000 72075,185 91 99,522 36,045,561 50
2015 89,887,957 73,228,102 92 105,057 38,658,918 53
| 93
2016 91,865,492 74,839,120 94 107,709 40,506,768 54
2017 94,253,995 76,784,938 96 114,416 44,301,437 58
2018 100,000,000 81,465,977 102 121,416 49,705,054 61

1,176 796
2019 101,000,000 82,280,637 103 120,313 49,746,046 60
2020 102,266,665 83,312,538 105 120,313 50,369,923 60
2021 110,000,000 89,612,575 113 126,867 57,130,088 64
5.2. Impact on Mobility Strategy
Classified traffic counts have been undertaken on most of the road network since
the 1950s. An assessment of traffic on the main roads reveals a rapid and continuous
increase in the volume of motorized traffic. Vehicle kilometer of travel increased from
3.8 million in 1997 to 30.7 million in 2020, showing an average annual increase of 9.3%.
Error! Reference source not found. and the Error! Reference source not found. below
show the trend in vehicle kilometer of travel during RSDP.
Figure 11: Traffic Trend from 1997 to 2020
Table 27: Traffic Trend over the Period of the RSDP
Year Vehicle Kilo Meter Growth Rate (%)

1997 3,771,565
1998 4,121,402 9
1999 4,499,496 9
2000 4,505,138 0.1
2001 4,711,689 5
2002 5,007,451 6

2003 5,604,395 12
2004 6,092,633 9
2005 6,769,424 11
2006 7,715,397 14
2007 9,324,985 21
2008 9,639,445 3
2009 11,752,452 22
2010 12,127,535 3
2011 14,203,046 17
2012 14,683,918 3
2013 16,273,619 11
2014 17,291,368 6
2015 18,917,205 9
2016 24,017,568 27
2017 27,119,110 13
2018 29,381,115 8
2019 29,476,224 0.3
2020 30,726,197 4.2
Average % 9.3
5.3. Impact on Quality
Improving the condition of the road network was a challenge. In the first year of the
RSDP, 52% of the federal road network was in poor condition and only 22% was in good
condition. The rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance intervention efforts under
RSDP have improved the proportion of the federal, regional rural and road network in
good condition till 2019. However, roads in fair condition are consistently declining till
2019 as seen in table below. In 2021, from the total federal, regional and URRAP road
network (which is 126,867 km), 20.8% is registered to be in good condition. As compared
with previous RSDP years, the proportion of the road network in good condition seems
to decrease in 2020. In 2020 there is a change in categorization of the road condition, in
| 95
addition to that 2020 used to a bench mark year for the upcoming years. Therefore, road
network in acceptable condition is (Good plus Fair) 58.6% in 2020.
The proportion of road network (only federal and rural gravel road network excluding
urban roads) in good condition in 1997 was 22% and this figure declined 20.8% in
2021. The decline in the proportion of road network in good condition in 2020 and
2021 compared to the proportion of road in good condition in 1997 (after 24 years) is
due to introduction of scientific measurement of roughness of roads in 2020 which
replaced the long practiced visual inspection of roads which intern led to significant
reduction in the proportion of road in good condition in 2020. The introduction of
scientific measurement of roughness led to set new base line in 2020 which was
20.1% against which to compare future improvement in the condition of country road
network. Accordingly, the proportion of road network in good condition in 2021 showed
slight increase by (0.7%). Also, when we consider the proportion of road network in
acceptable condition (Good + Fair) in 2021 increased slightly by 3.9%. The trend in the
condition of the classified road network during RSDP from 1997 to 2021 is presented in
Table 28 and Figure 12 below.
Table 28: Road Condition Improvement (in %)
Year Good Fair Poor

1997 22 26 52
1998 23 26 51
1999 25 30 45
2000 28 32 41
2001 28 29 43
2002 30 30 40
2003 32 30 38
2004 37 28 35
2005 39 26 35
2006 47 22 31
2007 49 22 29
2008 53 20 27
2009 54 24 22

2010 56 23 21
2011 57 24 19
2012 64 22 14
2013 70 20 10
2014 70 21 9
2015 70 21 9
2016 72 20 8
2017 72 21 7
2018 73 20 7
2019 71 19 10
2020 20.1 38.5 41.4
2021 20.8 41.7 37.4
Figure 12: Road Condition Trend
5.4. Impact on Domestic Construction Industry
Domestic Construction Industry Development: The impact of the program in building

the capacity of the domestic construction industry is encouraging. Specifically,
participation of the local contracting industry has increased, in terms of both the value
and number of projects awarded over the last twenty-four years of the RSDP. ERA had
been carrying out a small number of civil works to its previous own force account,
which is now independent public contractor, particularly in areas where the private
industry was not willing to work. Table 29 depicts the cost of contracts awarded to
local and foreign contractors over the period of the RSDP.
| 97
Table 29: Total Contract Cost of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors
Value in Million ETB

Year Local Contractors Foreign Contractor Total
1998 - 311 311
1999 180. 3351 3531
2000 94 - 94
2001 531 514 1045
2002 252 396 648
2003 659 173 832
2004 514 286 800
2005 1053 1461 2514
2006 3774 3356 7130
2007 3267 4751 8018
2008 7527 4953 12480
2009 3088 12660 15748
2010 6428 745 7174
2011 8607 4798 13406
2012 8471 4676 13147
2013 5594 17816 23409
2014 4941 17249 22190
2015 10039 13233 23272
2016 17720 12036 29755
2017 28352 20182 48533
2018 18627 11557 30183
2019 33,101 37,365 70,467
2020 49,040 28,091 77,131
2021 48242 31761 80003
Total 260,102 231,719 491,820
% 52.9 47.1 100

Figure 13: Cost of Projects to Local and Foreign Contractors
Table 30: Cost of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants
Value in Million ETB

Year Local Consultants Foreign Consultants Total
1998 07.81 33.52 41.33
1999 41.85 97.89 139.75
2000 11.70 63.53 75.23
2001 09.04 85.78 94.82
2002 33.77 46.26 80.03
2003 21.78 31.66 53.45
2004 32.56 87.46 120.02
2005 54.19 73.77 127.96
2006 145.51 305.99 451.51
2007 234.12 57.32 291.44
2008 213.13 166.63 379.76
2009 163.71 220.99 384.70
2010 663.59 198.82 862.41
2011 183.32 273.80 457.13
2012 462.58 134.78 597.37
2013 354.60 152.96 507.56
| 99
2014 290.95 121.19 412.13

2015 723.09 81.64 804.74
2016 281.34 186.06 467.39
2017 492.54 251.71 744.24
2018 800.66 491.23 1291.89
2019 836.21 496.64 1332.84
2020 1145.55 470.95 1616.51
2021 2670.57 919.58 3590.15
Total 9874.18 5050.17 14924.36
% 66.2 33.8 100
Figure 14: Cost of Projects awarded to local and foreign consultants
While observing the total amount of cost of contract awarded to foreign and local
contractors, 52.9% of the total cost of projects is awarded to local contractors.
Meanwhile, complex and huge projects are still awarded to foreign contractors like
expressways and projects which have difficult terrain. Private local companies are
constructing all maintenance projects and other new projects. As discussed under
section 4.2.1, the maintenance districts have been returned to ERA from Ethiopian
Construction Works Corporation (ECWC) for maintaining roads since the last quarter
of 2020 following the internal restructuring made in the Administration. It is to be
recalled that local companies are post 1991 phenomena in Ethiopia and their capacity
has been built throughout the RSDP which still requires further improvement.

Table 31: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors
No of projects Contracted to No of projects Contracted

Year Total
local contractors to foreign Contractors
1998 0 1 1
1999 6 12 18
2000 4 4
2001 4 2 6
2002 11 1 12
2003 18 1 19
2004 17 2 19
2005 19 6 25
2006 19 7 26
2007 21 11 32
2008 29 10 39
2009 15 10 25
2010 29 2 31
2011 32 7 39
2012 32 3 35
2013 23 18 41
2014 58 13 71
2015 39 11 50
2016 80 6 86
2017 71 18 89
2018 55 10 65
2019 93 21 114
2020 47 15 62
2021 44 11 55
Total 766 198 964
% 79.5 20.5 100
| 101
Figure 15: Number of Projects awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors
Table 32: Awarded Projects to local and foreign consultants from July 1997 to June
2021
No of projects Contracted to No of projects Contracted

Year Total
local consultants to foreign Consultants
1998 7 9 16
1999 21 15 36
2000 5 7 12
2001 10 10 20
2002 20 11 31
2003 17 6 23
2004 18 16 34
2005 18 5 23
2006 46 26 72
2007 37 13 50
2008 46 12 58
2009 22 18 40
2010 11 8 19
2011 28 8 35
2012 83 7 90
2013 50 7 57
2014 37 9 46

2015 68 4 72
2016 32 12 44
2017 66 7 73
2018 60 8 68
2019 43 8 51
2020 76 8 84
2021 121 18 139
Total 942 252 1194
% 78.9 21.1 100
Figure 16: Number of Projects awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants
| 103
5.5. Impact on Poverty

5.5.1. Impact of URRAP Roads
The Government of Ethiopia designed a five-year programme to link each kebele centre
with the nearest all weather roads through construction of 71,532 km in 2010; which
further extended to other five years under GTP II; and included construction of other
90,000 km roads by 2020 and in RSDP VI, 23,897 km road will construct through 2025.
Access to all weather road and vital institutions supporting the livelihood of the poor
is greatly improving under URRAP. Most of Kebeles and communities have access to
primary schools, extension services, cooperative societies, health extension services
within their reach. Institutions such as health centres, hospitals, Woreda major markets;
however, need households to spend much of their income. The expansion of URRAP
roads and consequently the transition from traditional mode of transportation (on foot
and pack animals) to intermediate and modern transportation system has changed the
rural livelihood landscape. Traffic flow is increasing on these roads and in many areas;
households have easy access to transportation. The construction of these roads is
also changing the settlement patterns attracting large number of households across
the road. Daily markets, shops, pharmacies and veterinary drug shops, merchandise

trade, food and catering services and others are expanding at a rapid rate in most of the
roads. Diversification of employment is also rising as many poor households engaged
in construction activities and petty trade.
Despite significant strive towards improving access through road infrastructure

investments; welfare indicators that can be used for informed decision and policy
making are inadequately documented. Accordingly, a baseline survey has been
designed to monitor the impact evaluation and benchmark indicators on the welfare
of the society accessed by the Universal Rural Road Access Program (URRAP).
Accordingly, ERA has been undertaking a study on impact of URRAP roads since 2013 in
order to monitor the socioeconomic changes on the Woreda roads influenced areas as
discussed under section Error! Reference source not found..
5.5.2. Impact of Investment on Road Corridors
Globally there are empirical results indicating that road Investment alleviates
poverty. Affordable access and adequate mobility of people and goods and principal
road investment outcomes, together with other socio-economic improvements, are
believed to be the keys to improving quality of life notably in developing countries
| 105
like Ethiopia. Thus, cognizant that road investment has positive impact on poverty
mitigation; it has also the ability to complement investments in infrastructures
like power, telecommunications, schools, health facilities, development of tourism
attractions, etc. Hence, panel studies aimed at drawing the impacts of road investments
on poverty would help to come up with ideas and propositions of policy and strategy
importance for Ethiopian Road Agencies intended to enhance their contribution to
poverty reduction process in Ethiopia. Accordingly, the Ethiopian Roads Administration
has been carrying out the Transport and Poverty Observatory Studies since 2007 in two
phases as presented below to demonstrate the impact of roads on poverty empirically.
Concerning the first study, a baseline was carried out by an Indian Consulting Firm
namely, Inter Continental Consultants (ICT) in association with two local consulting
firms. The study, “Road Corridor Community Development Plan and Poverty Impact of
Transport Operations”, covered four road corridors.
Table 33: Transport and Poverty Observatory Study I projects
Road Project Length (Km) Regional State

Alemgena-Butajira-Sodo 309 SNNPR
Dera-Mechara 240 Oromiya National Regional State
Assosa-Guba 221 BenishangulGumuz
Woreta-Woldiya 300 Amhara National Regional State
The study had two components: (1) Preparation of Community Development Plan
Connected to Road Investment, and (2) Assessment of Poverty Impact of Transport
Infrastructure and Operation. The overall objective was to establish empirical basis to
monitor social, economic and environmental outcomes of road transport investments.
The study also sought other objectives including identification of relationships between
transport investments and poverty alleviation. Further it was tasked to:
» Prepare a road corridor community development plan;
» Examine the impact of road investments on poverty and using the lessons
learned as inputs to policy decisions and project design;
» Identify transport service characteristics along the study road corridors; and
» Develop a set of policy recommendations.

Impact of road investment on local people socio-economic life was studied on four
corridors which are mentioned are mentioned below
1. Assosa-Guba
2. Worota-Woldya
3. Dera-Mechara
4. Alemgena-Butajira-Sodo
The findings from the study showed that quality of life of local people has improved as
a result of investment on the roads in the following ways.
The annual household income in 2011 in all the four-project corridor PIAs averaged Birr
30,780 which is equivalent to current US$ 1,710 per household. This means a per capita
annual income of Birr 4,870.25 or US$ 270.55. Compared to the baseline HH average (US$
243), the reported income has shown a net increase of some 604% (in Dollar terms)
and 1,361% (In Birr Terms).
Household Consumption Cattle Feed Seed Reserve Marketable Surplus
Corridor
Baseline Current Baseline Current Baseline Current Baseline Current
Assosa - Guba 62.0 57.8 0.7 7.0 7.2 30.0 35.0
Worota -Woldya 74.7 47.0 0.4 12.4 23.7 12.5 29.3
Dera - Mechara 45.1 28.3 1.0 13.4 7.4 40.5 64.2
Alemgena
49.0 40.4 0.5 0.7 13.4 9.2 37.4 49.7
-Butajira - Sodo
Percentage Distribution of Markatable Surplus in the PIA
| 107
The second study was carried out in 2005 by a UK-based consultancy firm, WSP-impc,
Inc. association with a local consulting firm. It involved the Kombolcha-Gundo Wine
Road Corridor, located in the Amhara National Regional State. The study was conducted
under the title, “Road Area Community Development and Study of Poverty Impact of
Transport Infrastructure and Operations.”
It had two components similar to the first study. The first was to develop a road area
community development plan that included enhancements to improve accessibility in
the road project area, interventions necessary to improve connectivity with adjacent
communities, benefits accruing from interventions, opportunities to motivate
community-driven development, and costs estimates including funding arrangements.
The second component was to assess poverty impact as a result of the road investment.
The third study carried out a series of annual impact monitoring surveys on the
basis of the baseline report on the four roads of the first study. Selam Development
Consultants, a locally based consulting firm, carried out the surveys. This assignment
included the task of updating monitoring outputs, outcome and impact indicators.
The TPO study also continued in RSDP-IV. In December 2011, the Ethiopian Roads
Administration (ERA) commissioned Sheladia Associates, Inc. of the USA and two
other local associates- Development Studies Associates and Hitcon Engineering
PLC to undertake a panel study on Transport and Poverty Observatory. The study went
operational in early 2012, and it is completed June 2017. Four road projects have been
covered for the study.
Table 34: Transport and Poverty Observatory Study II projects

Aposto-Wondo-Negele 267 SNNPR/ONRS
Kombolcha-Bati-Mille 130 Amhara and Afar National Regional States
Mekenajo-DembiDollo 181 Oromiya National Regional State (ONRS)
*Ankober-AliyuAmba-
89 Amhara& Afar National Regional States
AwashArba Road
*Control Road

The study sought the following three
main objectives:
» To carry out a baseline survey;
» To monitor annual changes
occurring that are attributable to
the project roads; and,
» To recommend measures capable
of enhancing policy/strategy
making capability of the client
The study made use of both quantitative
and qualitative methods to collect data
needed for performance monitoring
and contribution of the road investment
towards reducing poverty.
The following main findings have been

noted:
» About 300% increase was
observed in the total traffic
volume between 2016 and 2012
with the highest percentage
change recorded among small
buses and large buses in all the
four road corridors.
» The upgrading of the road projects
has created significant economic
and social benefits to the
population residing in the study
road corridors either directly or
indirectly. With the upgrading
of the project roads some of
the positive impacts observed
include creation of employment
opportunities, increased business
| 109
activities, improved transport services, and ease of access to social services.
» The trunk roads induced the construction of link roads including URRAP roads,
which increased demand for road transport. The increased demand attracted
transport service providers to invest in three-wheelers and motorbikes as well
as small and medium size passenger and freight vehicles. All of this suggests
that affordability prevailed among the beneficiaries of the road investment,
which in turn is indicative of improved overall wellbeing in project communities,
and thus reduction of poverty in the project areas.
» Qualitative data gathered following the completion of the road upgrading works
reveals that micro and small-scale enterprises seem to have increased in
number, which in turn must have created new jobs for the local populations. New
business opportunities and in particular in the service sector have also started
to pick up following the road improvement in the corridors. Several youths are
engaged in micro enterprises, such as, wood and metal works, electronics, crop
marketing, vehicle workshops, and others.
» Mean household income growth averaged 35% per annum for inhabitants in
the four road corridors. While mean per capita income growth averaged 31%
per annum. Access to safe water coverage was higher by 13% for the people
living in the four road corridors in 2016 compared to the base year. Access to
pit latrine facility coverage was higher by 5% in 2016 completed to 2012. These
changes are sufficiently indicative of reduced poverty for the inhabitants of the
communities inhabiting the four road corridors.
» Opinions and views of primary stakeholders in all of the road corridors
expressed positive sentiment regarding the considerable contribution of
the road investment had on: (1) increased visits to nearby markets of project
communities from far places, (2) favorable terms of trade the buyers offer to
sellers of livestock, (3) empowerment the road investment gave to communities
in the project areas to freight livestock to bigger markets located further away.
Since, quantifiable knowledge is limited about the socio-economic benefits of road
investment at both macro and micro (house hold and community) levels and adequate
impact measuring methods are yet to be fully developed. There are efforts being made
to assess the overall impacts of the road investment in terms of economic return,
contribution to social development and its environmental consequences. These efforts
are found to be indispensable.

Similar to the previous phases, TPO continued in RSDP V. ERA in collaboration with
the African Development Bank, initiate similar socio-economic baseline and post-
completion impact assessment surveys and evaluation, designed to cover the Modjo
– Moyale road corridor, a section of the Mombasa- Nairobi-Addis Ababa Road corridor
that forms part of the Trans - Africa Highway. Hence, starting from January 15, 2018 TPO
is ongoing on this corridor with contract period of 14 months within 5 years.
The Modjo – Moyale road can serves as import - export corridor and also connects
southern part of Ethiopia, which is an important coffee growing part of the country
with the regional and national capital, Hawassa and Addis Ababa respectively. In
addition to enhancing trade and strengthening regional integration, the road is
expected to contribute to poverty reduction in both countries by increasing access
to markets and social services for the people living along the corridor. The road will
also avail an economically viable alternative outlet to Ethiopia through the seaport
of Mombasa, and when the construction of the road is completed, it will also link with
the proposed Lamu Port in Kenya, known as Lamu Port South Sudan Ethiopia Transport
Corridor (LAPSSET). In this regard, the project road will have significant contribution
to the economic growth of the country and also to the local population residing in the
project road corridor.
In line with the above, the Transport and Poverty Observatory Study on the Modjo-
Moyale Road Corridor is designed to capture the impact of the construction in the
corridor on the socio-economic environment and regional integration.
| 111
Table 35: Transport and Poverty Observatory Study III projects

Modjo - Hawassa 203 Oromiya National Regional State (ONRS)
Southern Nations Nationalities People
Hawassa - Hageremariam 198
Region (SNNPR)
Oromiya National Regional State (ONRS)
Hageremariam - Moyale 300 and Southern Nations Nationalities People
Region (SNNPR)
The objectives of the study are:-

» To carry out baseline survey and impact studies and assess the overall benefits
of the road investment contribution to economic growth and poverty reduction.
» To Enable ERA, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and the African
Development Bank (AfDB) to have a better understanding of the impacts of
road investments on poverty alleviation, investment promotion and regional
integration in terms of performance in development and social outcomes at
national, community and household levels.
The consultant has submitted the draft and final version of the inception, preliminary
and findings report and workshop was held on the draft baseline report with internal
and external stakeholders. With incorporating the given comments, directions and
additional elaboration the final base line report is submitted. The study employed a
mix of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods and the data collection
process utilizes both primary and secondary sources as well.
Main findings from the Baseline Study
Recently a study on impact of road investment on Modjo-Hawassa-Moyale road corridor

has been conducted; it showed investment on the corridor has brought positive impact
on local, regional and national development similar with the previous cases which
include the following
√ Generally, a 27.4% increase in household income has been observed over a year
period among residents of Modjo-Moyale road corridor.

√ In general, access to market within 30 minutes along the Modjo-Moyale road
corridor showed very minimal decrease (3%) since the baseline period
√ Overall, animal drawn cart and motor cycle usage have increased by 26.2% and
5.0% respectively since the baseline period.
√ Male headed households in ZORI and Non-ZORI areas showed more or less
similar increment in annual income in 20919 (about 25%). However female
headed households in ZORI areas showed much better increment in 2019 than
their non-ZORI counter parts (52% and 10.3% increment in ZORI & non-ZORI
areas respectively).
√ Expenditure in 2019 was observed to have shown 30.5% increase compared with
2018 with a slightly higher change recorded in ZORI areas (31.0%) than Non-ZORI
areas (29.7%).
√ About 5 in 6 households (83.1%) during the baseline and about 6 in 7 households
(85.9%) during the 1st year monitoring were observed to have access to eat
meal at least three times a day.
All case studies on impact of road investment consistently showed road investment
has positive impact on local development and has improved quality of life of people.
The findings leads to the conclusion, the same positive impact has arisen as a result of
investments on all other road rehabilitation, road upgrading and construction of new
link roads across the nation. Therefore, the momentum on investment on the main road
network in the country has to be maintained as way of stimulating local regional and
national development in the short, medium and long term.
| 113

6. LESSONS LEARNED AND THE WAY FORWARD
6.1. Lessons Learned
6.1.1. Overall Planning Approach and Practice
The planning practice of the road sector has been hailed for so long. It has a long-
established practice of preparing five years program and implementing the same with
discipline. This has contributed for effective monitoring, support, and evaluation of
the program at all levels, from Federal to Regional. The strong database in ERA and
the established reporting culture of the sector at national level can be exemplary
for other sectors. Without undermining this impressive practice, there were issues
raised recently regarding the planning and endorsement process of road projects.
Particularly, the issue of transparency and equity has become serious and needed
immediate intervention. This in mind, in the last three years significant measures were
taken to ensure transparency and engagement of all relevant stakeholders in the
preparation and endorsement of annual budgets. This is further strengthened in the
process of preparing the next 10 years plan of the sector.
6.1.2. Project Financing
As indicated earlier, the investment in the sector in the last twenty-four years is living
witness of the commitment of the Government to the sector. The sector has been
consuming from 25 to 30 percent of the annual capital budget of the country. Besides,
the involvement and trend of financing of projects from external sources, development
partners, has also been encouraging. However, the modality of project financing
through domestic sources by Government and from that of development partners is
different. Basically, projects financed by development partners have secured budget
and cash flow throughout the project implementation period whereas projects
financed by Government are likely to face cashflow shortage during implementation.
One lesson which shall be learnt from this is that it is vital to make sure midterm
project financing is secured before commencing project implementation. Otherwise,
project implementation will continue to be significantly jeopardized by payment delays
for works executed.
| 115
6.1.3. The Growth of Domestic Construction Industry
The Five phases of RSDP that have been implemented in the past twenty-four years
have created enormous opportunity for the domestic construction industry to grow.
The numbers of local contractors and consultants have increased rapidly. Not only the
number of local contractors and consultants grown rapidly but also the capacity of local
contractors and consultant also grown. Local contractors have been awarded 51.4% of
the total road construction total contract amount awarded and local consultants have
been awarded 63.6% of the total value of consultancy services across the 24 years
of RSDP. Local contractors have been awarded construction project with a cost of as
high as ETB 3.6 billion. Local contractors are in a better position to be awarded not
only construction of new gravel roads, as in the case towards the start of RSDP, but
also upgrading of existing roads with high standard asphalt and construction of new
asphalt roads.
Performance of the local contractors has also shown significant improvement. Some
local contractors have been able to complete construction projects on time and even
earlier. Regarding local consultants, they are awarded almost all of consultancy services
financed by Government. They are also participating in consultancy services conducted
by foreign consultants as local associates. URRAP which has been implemented since
2010 has also been creating opportunity for small and medium labor base contractors
to emerge and grow. Since 2010, more than 1,220 small & medium contractors have
been set up & operating. On RSDP VI; first-year implementation period, more than 257
consultant and contractor are participated in the program.

The above withstanding, the local construction industry requires serious attention
and support so that the achievements registered so far will be maintained and further
strengthened. Currently, a number of projects and local contractors working on the
same are facing mounting challenges which are not only affecting the progress of
the projects but also the existence of the contractors. In this regards, addressing the
issues of timely settling of IPCs, construction material supply, foreign currency, RoW,
and security need special attention.
6.1.4. Improved Rural Accessibility
It is recognized that expanding link roads which are gravel road by Federal Government
is not sufficient to improve access to rural population with scattered settlements.
Expanding lower standard gravel roads (rural roads) is understood as essential to
improve rural accessibility. Therefore, the responsibility to build and maintain rural
roads has been decentralized to Regional Governments since 1993. Each regional
government established its own Rural Road Agency with responsibility to construct
and maintain rural roads under its jurisdiction with budget allocated by the respective
regional government. Rural Road Agencies played instrumental role in expanding the
road network of the country and improving access to the rural population. Construction
and maintenance of rural roads has been an integral component of RSDP since 1997.
Rural roads construction by Rural Road Agencies, account for 26.8% of the increase
in the road network of the country. As part of continued effort to improve rural
accessibility, attention is given to the construction of all-weather community roads,
which are low standard gravel roads in the fourth and fifth phases of RSDP under
URRAP.
| 117
The responsibility of constructing and maintaining all weather community roads
under URRAP is further decentralized to Woreda Administrations under each regional
government. Construction of all-weather community roads in RSDP IV and its
continuation in RSDP V and RSDP VI has made important contribution to the growth of
the road network of the country and to improve access to rural population. Therefore,
the strategy to the decentralize responsibility of rural road construction to Regional
Governments and the responsibility for all weather community roads to Woreda
administration has increased the road network of the country and improved rural
accessibility within reasonable period of time. Such programs are very instrumental to
further enhance rural accessibility and hence shall continue by properly capturing the
lessons from the implementation so far.
6.1.5. Sector Reform Issues
The construction sector of Ethiopia, in general, and that of the road sector, in particular,
has been showing promising growth in the last two decades. However, recently the
sector has been facing mounting challenges which need serious attention at all levels.
It has been noted that the sources of the challenges are different and hence the
interventions shall also be different and from different perspective. The encouraging
participation of local contractors and consultants in RSDP shall be backed by conscious
and coordinated interventions to enhance their capacity so that the country can rely
on domestic capacity. In this regard, particular attention will be given to promote
corporate thinking in the companies, address the shortage of construction materials
by promoting import substitution, look for ways to avail reasonably sufficient and
sustainable finance, take serious measures to address critical project implementation
problems such as ROW and security.
6.2. The Way Forward

6.2.1. Implementing Key Policy and Strategy Documents
It is not questionable that the road sector has registered encouraging achievements in
the last two decades or more. These promising achievements shall be sustained with
clear policy direction and strategy. Amon others, the sector needs to have national
policy document which will be the umbrella for all policy and strategy related issues,
roads proclamation which will be the legal framework and backup of the sector,
proclamations and regulations at all levels giving clear mandate to agencies in the
sector, integrated and responsive long-term plan, etc. Hence, it is expected that the

following documents will be endorsed, approved, and issued for implementation in the
near future:
» National Road Sector Policy
» Road Functional Classification
» Roads Proclamation
» ERA Reestablishment Proclamation
» Next Generation (10 Years) Master Plan
6.2.2. ERA’s Journey to Global Competency
As indicated earlier, ERA is among the well-established Government institutions in

Ethiopia. Since its establishment, the organization has been passing through different
change and reform initiatives with different underlying objectives. This has not only
given ERA the capacity to cope with the ever-changing different challenges of the
sector but also maintained its continuous institutional growth in the process.
Following the National change and coming to power of the reform Government in 2019,
ERA has also clearly redefined its vision and journey to be road agency with global
competency. To this end, based on international best practice, and most importantly,
critical assessment and evaluation of internal strengths, weaknesses as well as
overall situations national and institutional situations, “ERA Competency Model” is
developed. The main assumption behind is that “we cannot create strong and resilient
sector without making our institutions strong and resilient.”
| 119
The main components of ERA Competency Model and the status of implementation are
discussed hereunder:
As can be seen from the picture above, the model has seven major components which
are are key areas of intervention. If effective intervention and transformation is
done on each of these components, then it’s for sure that ERA will be among globally
competent Road Agencies which can effectively and efficiently perform its mandate.
There will not be any issue or corner left without being addressed with this model; the
content and status of each component is discussed hereunder:
I. Policy and Strategy: - the sector reform initiative shall entirely be based on
and dictated by key policy and strategic documents. These documents can be
legal documents, long term plans and/or key strategic documents up on which
sector actors will base their decision. Among the most important policy and
strategy concerned documents: National Roads Policy, Roads Proclamation, ERA
reestablishment regulation, Road Functional Classification Study and Manual,
Next Generation Road Sector (10 Years) Plan, Sector Assessment Study, Different
Internal Policies and Strategies (such as: Road Asset Management Policy and
Strategy, Human Resource Policy and Strategy, Environment, Social, Occupational
Health and Safety Policy and Strategy, Communication Policy and Strategy, Quality
Policy, etc.) are worth mentioning. These important Policy and Strategy Documents
are now either under implementation or completed and waiting for Government
approval.
II.Structure: - for organizations like ERA who manage hundreds of projects,

implementing the right structure is vital. This in mind, ERA has made revision
on its structure so that it will be responsive enough and can ensure effective
management of its projects. The main governing principle behind the most recent
restructuring was, to stablish departments based on the different stages of
project implementation cycles: preconstruction, construction, and Road Asset
Management. Accordingly, the previous Engineering Operations Deputy Director
General (DDG) department was split into two DDGS; namely Project Development
DDG and Construction Projects Management DDG to properly manage works
according to their project lifecycle. On top of this, the new structure has given
proper attention to key sector issues like: RoW, Design Management, and
Safeguards.

III.Human Resource and Leadership: - HR and
Leadership Development is among the most
important and critical components of the
competency model. All the initiatives and
interventions cannot be realized and sustained
without strong HR and Leadership base. Having
this in mind, ERA, consciously and with clearly
defined approach, is working on continuous
human resource and leadership development.
The different (in thousands) trainings provide
in the areas of attitude, knowledge, skill, and
leadership are reflections of this strong position
of ERA to continuously develop its staff.
IV.Core Processes: - continuous improvement in

core processes is fundamental to ensure and
achieve efficiency in project implementation.
Realizing this, ERA has been during a series of
improvements in different processes which can
directly influence project efficiency and overall
outcome. With this regard, the studies undertook
and implemented in the areas of Design
Management, Engineering Procurement, Contract
Administration, Road Asset Management, etc. are
worth mentioning. Moreover, ERA has prepared
and implemented Standing Operating Procedures
(SOPs) for all its major processes and work units.
V. Digitizing ERA and Technology: - the digitization

of ERA is being implemented in three phases.
Accordingly, phase one encompasses, among
others: Vehicle Tracking System, Security Camera,
BioMetric Attendance, Digital Displays, WiFi at
Head Office. Phase two is the stage to lay the
main foundation for the digitization initiative and
it includes: Data Center Facility (Tier 3 Standard),
Hyper Converged Infrastructure (HCI), Virtual
| 121
Desktop Infrastructure, Microsoft Share Point, Outlook Email, [email protected],
Unified Communication & Collaboration, Video Conferencing System and IP Phones.
SO far, the two phases are fully completed and the third phase, implementation of
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) will continue shortly.
Moreover, ERA is acquiring different equipment and devices which enables the
Administration to equip itself with modern technology and facility.
VI. Environment and Ergonomics: - good and well-organized working environment is
beyond comfort of staff. It has direct implication on productivity, efficiency, and
effectiveness of projects as well as at institutional level. This in mind, continuous
overall office renovation has been done in the last three years starting from head
office and then going to the centers and branch offices. The important aspect of
the initiatives in environment and ergonomics is that it, beyond renovation, goes to
bringing important facilities on board. Among such facilities: ERA Standing Digital
Exhibition, Audiovisual Center, GIS Studio, discussion and meeting spaces, Day Care,
initiatives in Road Research Center and Training Centers are worth mentioning.
VII. Culture: - Every organization has cultural attributes that need to be recognized,
acknowledged and considered during the review, planning and implementation
stages. One single culture should not dominate and by respecting diversity,
workplace transition can occur more effectively. To deliver a consistent and
effective change strategy across the organizations, management has established
the ERA Organizational Culture (value system) and infusion strategy for the same.
The values which constitute ERA culture are Candor, Family, School, Army,
Sustainability, Excellence, and Innovation.

6.2.3. Proper Delineation of Mandates between Federal and Regions (ERA
& RRAs)
ERA commissioned international consultancy service for review of functional

classification of ERA’s roads that was conducted in 1997, classify ERA’s roads built
since 1997 and classify rural roads under administration of RRAs until 2019/20. The
consultancy service classified all federal roads under administration of ERA as
Expressway, Trunk, Link, Main Access, Collector and Feeder & Regional Roads under
RRAs as Main Access, Collector and Feeder.
» Expressways and Trunk roads have the function of connecting Addis Ababa, the
capital of the country, with capital of Regional states and other major urban
centers and neighboring countries and ports.
» Link roads have the function of connecting with capitals of Administrative
Zones of Regional states and other medium urban centers in the country.
» Main access roads are characterized as the highest class of access roads
connecting with large uncultivated fertile land that can be cultivated with
irrigation from nearby rivers, potential mineral sites, food crop surplus and cash
crop areas and rural areas with high population density.
» Collector and Feeder roads are defined as roads connecting capitals of
administrative zones with capitals of Woredas within the zone, neighboring
Woredas with each other, capital of Woredas with other major towns in the
Woreda and capital of Woredas with rural kebeles in the Woreda.
The functional classification showed that ERA owns and administer not only higher-
class roads namely Expressway, Trunk and Link roads but also lower-class roads
namely Main Access, Collector and Feeder that are in different category of basic
access roads. The functional classification also showed that RRAs own and administer
different access roads consisting of main access, collector and feeder roads.
The fact that both ERA and RRAs own and administer main access, collector and feeder
roads which are all different class of access roads shows that there is overlap and
duplication of responsibility between ERA & RRAs. The duplication of responsibility has
occurred because ERA has been deeply involved in construction and administration of
lower-class roads consisting of main access, collector and feeder roads. The major
function of ERA is to provide access to economic development potential areas, food
crop and cash crop growing areas and to Woreda capitals from zone capital and
| 123
other areas. To avoid this duplication of responsibility, the study has recommended
ERA to limit itself to construction and administration of higher-class roads namely
expressway, trunk & link roads only and transfer ownership of all class of access roads
that are under its administration namely main access, collector and feeder roads to
RRAs.
RRAs will also have to be empowered not only to build higher standard gravel roads
but also to upgrade existing lower and higher standard gravel roads with asphalt
standard. Therefore, RRAs need to build institutional capacity to exercise power
rested on them to build and administer higher standard gravel and asphalt roads and
ERA has to assist RRAs in this regard. RRAs have adopted new organization structure
proposed by consultancy service aimed at building capacity of RRAs with the finan-
cial support from European Union in 2019 and 2020. The new organizational structure
has addressed all the gaps identified in construction projects management, roads
asset Management and other areas. The consultancy service along with new structure
proposed new staffing plan for RRAs, which significantly increased the number of
engineers and other experts to be hired by RRAs. Accordingly, RRAs are in the process
of recruiting professionals as proposed by the staffing plan which will boost institu-
tional capacity of RRAs.
ERA’s withdrawal from construction and administration of access roads will create
opportunity to concentrate on construction and management of strategic roads only
consisting of expressways, outer ring roads, and trunk and link roads across the county.
As RRAs are entitled to build and manage asphalt roads it will create opportunity to
speed up development of paved road network in the country. Also, when RRAs are
empowered to build higher class access roads, this will create opportunity to expand
roads opening up development potential areas and other food crop & cash crop surplus
areas within reasonable time period.
6.2.4. Improve Project Management Practice and Structure
The road sector is characterized by a galaxy of complex projects which involve a total
portfolio of more than half a trillion birr. It is becoming more and more complex as well
as difficult to successfully implement projects with their original time and cost. It is
not uncommon to see many projects with significant time and cost overrun as well as
quality concerns.
The success of a typical road project relies on the coordinated effort of the client,

the consultant, the contractor, the community, and the local administration. If one of
these five parties default and do not properly play its role, it is highly likely that project
performance and success will be jeopardized. As a way forward, there is a change
in orientation from contract management to project management from ERA side.
Rather than focusing on only contractual issues and try to be procedurally correct,
we shall think to bring all these parties on board and make sure the project will be
successful, i.e., effective project management. To this end, beyond the reorientation of
perspectives and measures taken in the business process, some practical interventions
are being considered to redefine project management structures so that the project
management team will be very close to, if not on, the project site.
6.2.5. Fully Financing All Types of Road Maintenance from Road User
Charge
The road fund office has disbursed ETB 24.6 billion for maintenance of roads in the
country which accounts for 5.9% of the total disbursement during implementation
of the past five phases of RSDP. However, ETB 24.6 billion allocated by the road fund
office was not enough to cover all the costs of maintenance of federal, regional and
municipality roads in the country. Specifically, the office was not able to finance
the cost of heavy maintenance of all federal, regional & municipality roads in the
country. So, the short fall in financing had been compensated by government treasury.
The estimated cost of heavy and routine maintenance of federal, regional, Woreda &
municipality roads in the 10 years plan is ETB 64.4 billion. During implementation of the
next 10 years road development plan, the road fund office is expected to finance the
full cost of heavy maintenance including overlay and routine maintenance of federal,
regional, Woreda & municipality roads in the country (ETB 64.4 billion) which accounts
for 5% of the total cost of the plan. The road fund office has planned to increase its
annual revenue from ETB 2.97 billion in 2019/20 (base year) to ETB 14.2 billion in 2029/30.
The office also planned to collect a total of, ETB 92 billion revenue over the 10 years
period.
6.2.6. Gradual Shift from Government Financing to Private Financing
The Government of Ethiopia is introducing new project delivery arrangement; this is

Public Private Partnership (PPP). The Ministry of Finance coordinates the program
and established new organization by director general level through proclamation No.
1076/2018. Therefore, the Ethiopian Roads Administration (ERA) takes its own part and
incorporates PPP for roads construction in the next 10 years master plan.
| 125
Unlike the financing pattern of the past five phases of RSDP, the private sector is
expected to invest its financial resources on the construction of planned alternative
expressway projects under Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) modality. Institutional,
policy and legal framework has been in place for PPP in the road sector. Participation
of the private sector in the construction of planned expressway projects will reduce
the investment burden on government during implementation of the next 10 years road
development plan. So far, there is no past experience in involving the private sector in
the road sector investment and traffic development on most trunk roads is still at its
lowest level.
Expressway projects are planned to be built as alternative to existing trunk roads

radiating from Addis Ababa in different direction towards capital cities of the regional
states and other major urban centers and borders of neighboring countries. Trunk roads
for which alternative expressway project will be built play pivotal role in supporting
sustained and accelerated economic growth and ensuring national integration. Being
major economic and national integration roads, trunk roads accommodate the highest
level of traffic in the country. Some trunk roads are already congested and some
other trunk roads are going to be congested in the near future. One of the objectives
of constructing alternative expressway projects is to address traffic congestion on
the existing trunk roads. So, expressway projects when built would attract substantial
traffic from the existing trunk roads even when drivers are charged road toll for using
the expressway. Thus, some planned expressway projects are attractive for the private
sector to invest the financial resources on their construction and operation.
6.2.7. Full Scale Utilization of ArcGIS Software
History of GIS in ERA dates back to 2006 when ArcGIS Arc Info, the oldest version was
used to produce map of existing federal roads. The use of ArcGIS Software merely for
mapping of roads had lasted long from 2006 to 2021.
Currently, ERA intends to widen application of ArcGIS Software from merely producing
road map to road network planning, road asset management, road projects design
and other purposes. Broadening application of ArcGIS Software, it needs building
institutional capacity in terms of skills and number of GIS experts, organizational set
up and appropriate technology. Having realized such need, ERA has accomplished

three major tasks in order to build the required capacity for broadening utilization of
ArcGIS Software.
Firstly, ERA has upgraded the previous GIS Unit to a team level and staffed the team
with appropriate GIS experts as per the structure of the team. Secondly, ERA has hired
local GIS consultant in order to build the skills of GIS experts of the team, develop
Geodatabase consisting of federal, regional and local road network and to undertake
different types of road network analysis. The contract price of the consultancy Service
is ETB 16 million and financed by Ethiopian Government. The consultancy service will
last for three years from 2021 to 2023.
Last but not least ERA procured the latest Version of ArcGIS Software from Environmental
System Research Institute (ESRI) which is the sole developer, manufacturer and
distributor of ArcGIS Software. The existing ArcGIS ArcInfo Software was not updated,
maintained and license has expired and lacks updated and current standard.
The latest versions of ArcGIS Software that ERA Procured from ESRI, ranges from
ArcGIS Enterprise (Advanced), ArcPro with different types of extensions and Roads and
Highway Solution. The procurement of the latest versions of ArcGIS Software coasted
ERA USD $ 366,965 and is financed by World Bank.
ERA’s GIS experts and the consultant are developing Geo-database consisting of
spatial and non-spatial data of the current road network of the country using the
ArcGIS Enterprise, ArcGIS Pro and Esri Roads and Highway Solution.
The Geo-database of the current entire road network of the country will serve as central
source of data which in turn leads to standardize data and to avoid data inconsistency,
currently experienced in the road sector. The central database allows different types
of road network analysis to be easily carried out by ERA GIS experts and the consultant
to have accurate and reliable information on size of the country’s road network and on
the level of access to road and market, hospital, school at country, regional and local
levels. Also, the central database allows stakeholders including donors and the wider
public to easily access road network information through web application of ArcGIS
Pro.
| 127
7. ANNEX
7.1. List of construction contracts awarded in RSDP I - VI (1997-2021)
Start Length
Project Name Total (in ETB) Contractor Name Financier
Year in Km
SUR CONSTRUCTION
Abala - Shigube 2015 63 707,955,759 GOE
P.L.C.
Abi Adi- Debregenet- Semema-
SUR CONSTRUCTION
Benako- Endabaguna ; Contract 2017 87.4 1,748,000,000 GOE
P.L.C.
1: AbiAdi Semema
China Railway Seventh
Abobo-Km76 2016 76 960,130,379 GOE
Group
Macro General
Adaba-Angetu 2017 100 1,249,684,231 Contractor & trading GOE
Plc
Adaitu River Bridge 2007 96m 76,544,489 Homa Construction GOE
Adama - Awash 2008 18 162,408,607 ECWC GOE
Adama-Awash Overlay 2017 60 1,363,644,915 ECWC GOE
Addia Abeba-Gohatsion Cont3:- Amhara Road Work
2015 75 731,698,230 GOE
Fiche-Gohatsion Enterprise
Addis - Tarmaber (Contract 1) 2016 70 867,449,421 CRBC GOE
China Communication
Addis Ababa - Adama GOE/
2017 80 6,967,130,400 Construction
Expressway China
Company(cccc)
Addis Ababa - Adama Toll China Communication
Motorway phase II: Lebu - Akaki 2017 28 4,601,734,383 Construction GOE
- IT Park outer Ring Road Company
Addis Tarmaber(contract 2) 2014 115 556,610,135 Sinohydro Corp. GOE
Addis-Ginchi-Ambo 2009 112 172,533,963 Sinohydro Corp. KFW
Addis-Gohatsion (Phase II) 2014 90 560,132,498 KAJMA Japan
Addis-Jimma 2013 342 405,973,872 DRAGADOS EU
Addis-Modjo-Awassa 2012 265 310,979,873 DRAGADOS EU
Afro-Tsion
Adi Abun -Rama- Mereb 2015 47.5 807,500,000 GOE
Construction plc.

Adigrat - Adwa - Shire Cont. 1
2013 83 428,988,369 CGGC IDA
Shire Adiabun
China Railway
Adigrat- Adiabun 2011 108 283,224,199 IDA
Engineering Corp.
SUR Construction
Adiremet-Adihardi-Beaker 2016 69.57 1,025,550,000 GOE
P.L.C.
Adura Akobo & Adura Burbe 2015 125 823,697,031 SATCON GOE
Afdera - Irebti Junction - Erta
Ale Junction - Ahmed Ela ; Lot
2017 48 1,366,207,614 China WuYi Co.Ltd GOE
I: Afdera-Irbeti Junction-Km
48+000
Afdera - Irebti Junction – Erta
Ale Junction - Ahmed Ela ; Lot II: Defence Construction
1994 0 0 GOE
Km 48+000 - Erta Ale Junction - Enterprise
Ahmed Ela
Afdera Abala cont 1 Hawsewa Jiangxi Zhongmei Eng.
2015 94 746,341,435 GOE
Abala const.co Ltd
China Railway
Afdera Abala Cont 2. Irbeti
2015 139 727,930,964 Seventnth Group ADB
Afdera
Co.Ltd.
Ageremariam –Mega,Contract
2015 95 740,685,321 The Arab Contractor ADB
1:Ageremariam -Yabelo
Ageremariam –Mega,Contract 2: China Tiesiju China
2015 97 770,007,997 GOE
Yabelo-Mega Engineering Group
Defense Construction
Agula - Shaigubi - Berahile 2016 69 969,916,753 &Engineering GOE
Enterprise
Akesta-Tenta-Dawnt 2005 150 34,060,189 AEC GOE
Alaba Alemgebaya Wulbareg 2012 60 389,838,762 Sunshine Construction GOE
Alaba Humbo Arbaminch cont 1 Road
2013 86 460,306,935 Keangnam
Alaba Humbo Fund
Alaba Humbo Arbaminch cont 2 Road
2012 100 380,204,197 DMC Const
Humbo-Arbaminch Fund
Alamata Korem Betemera 2012 121 369,900,000 Own Force GOE
China Common
Alamata Mehone Hewane 2015 114 645,000,000 Construction. Co. Ltd. GOE
(CCC)
Alamata-Muhane-Maychew 2006 67 67,502,988 SUR Construction GOE
| 129
Alberekete-Gelemso 2016 58.00 1,012,102,686 Al Asab GOE

Alemgena-Butajira 2010 120 223,651,990 CRBC ADB
Alemketema - Akista 2006 153 40,000,000 Own Force GOE
Alemketema-Akesta 2006 162 40,951,050 AEC GOE
Alemayehu Ketema
Aleta Wondo Daye 2011 52 279,878,094 GOE
G.C.
Alewha-Diko 2002 36 16,474,725 Sunshine Const. GOE
Ambo - Gedo 2012 65 301,963,167 Keangnam KFW
UTE Elsamex -EC
Ambo-Weliso 2017 63 1,203,462,411 GOE
OASFALT ETHIOPIA 35
Ambule River Bridge and
2019 NA 49,317,731 ECWC GOE
Approach Roads Project
Ankober -Awash Arba Junction
2015 52 693,519,820 ECWC GOE
Cot2;-Dulecha-Awash
SunShine
Ankober -Dulecha 2016 40 858,761,476 GOE
Construction
Ankober-Awash
Atayol Aspalt
ArbaJunctionCont2:-Dulecha 2014 53 595,984,359 GOE
Contracting
-Awash Arba Junction
Aposto Wondo Negele Cont. 1
2015 109 660,938,029 Keangnam IDA
Aposto Irba Moda Road Pr.
Aposto Wondo Negele Cont. 2
2014 109 617,731,977 Aydeniz KMC IDA
Irba Moda Wadera Road Pr.
Aposto Wondo Negele cont.3 China No.17
2011 65 289,868,712 IDA
Wadera Negele Metalurgical Co. Ltd
Arbaminch - Delbena (Cont.1) 2008 56 137,675,763 Sur construction GOE
Arbaminch - Delbena (Cont.2) 2008 56 147,879,135 Sur construction GOE
Diriba Defersha
Arbaminch - Kemba - SawlaLot2
2014 30 623,018,347 road & water works GOE
Belta -Otolo
contractor
Arbaminch - Kemba - SawlaLot3 FAL Trading General
2013 51 453,990,619 GOE
Otolo- Sawla (50.8Km) Contractor
Arbaminch Deibena (Connecting
2012 34 312,230,347 Own Force GOE
Gidole Town)
Arbaminch -jinka ,Jinka Town MAN General
2007 4 79,185,451 GOE
Section Contractor

Arbaminch Jinka Lotll:-Jinka
2007 0 82,342,123 ECWC GOE
Town section
Arbaminch -Kamba - Sawla,
2014 60 562,946,553 Berhe Hagos GOE
Contract 1:Arbaminch - Delta
Assaita-Dichotto 2001 74 12,045,063 Zula Construction GOE
Assosa – Daleti – Baruda Road
Enyi General Business,
Project; Contract – II: Km 36 + 2015 69 731,580,997 GOE
Enyi Construction
000 - 105 + 000
Assosa - Sherkole - Guba Cont.
2009 70 200,027,416 Sinohydro Corp. IDA
1 Sherkole - Blue Nile
Assosa - Sherkole - Guba Cont.
2011 66 240,648,447 Sinohydro Corp. IDA
2 Blue Nile - Guba
GOE/
Assosa Kumruk 2013 100 502,877,507 Sinohydro Corp. BADEA/
SFD
Assosa-Daleti-Baruda ContI:-
2010 36 227,400,423 Senan Construction GOE
Assosa-Km36+000
Shandong Highway
Atat Mazoria – Gunchire – Kose Engineering
2017 81 1,165,299,596 GOE
– Geja – Lera Construction Group
Co., LTD
Awash - Gewane 2008 20 137,600,282 ECWC GOE
CGC Overseas
Awash Arba turning (Access -
2012 22 341,798,502 Construction Group GOE
Kesem Sugar Factory)
Ltd
Awash Arba-Gewane 2009 135 192,002,716 Keangnam GOE
Awash- Mille (Cont1 From
2014 52.5 557,917,484 ECWC IDA
Km0+000-Km52+000)
Awash- Mille (Cont2 From Defence Construction
2015 73 655,522,535 GOE
Km72+500-Km145+500) Enterprise
Awash -Mille Con3:-
2013 75 458,954,871 ECWC GOE
Km145+500-Km220+500
Awash -MilleCon4:-
2012 74 381,830,205 Defence Construction GOE
Km220+500-Km294+416
Awash River Bridge under
2006 0 67,847,576 ECWC GOE
Tendaho Suger
Awash-Hirna 2011 140 256,542,439 CRBC GOE
Aykel-Zufan LotI:-Aykel-
2017 69 1,954,142,082 Sur Construction IDA
Km69+000
| 131
Azezo - Gorgora 2015 53 720,000,000 Gemshu Beyene G.C GOE

Azezo-Metema Lot-1 2011 87 271,911,030 Keangnam GOE
BADEA/
Azezo-Metema Lot-2 2011 98 273,831,450 Keangnam
SDF/OFID
BADEA/
Bahirdar_ Gondar 2006 157 63,396,978 ECWC
SDF/OFID
SINDHYD RO
Bahirdar-Zema River Bridge 2017 91.75 1,236,755,640 GOE
Corporation Ltl.
Bearhale - Dalol 2017 79 1,245,261,242 &Engineering GOE
Enterprise
Hawk International
Bedele-Metu Lot1:Km0+000 -
2015 60 696,807,379 Finance & GOE
Km61+000
Construction
China International
Bedele-Metu Lot2:Km61+000 -
2014 51 610,019,298 water & Electric Corp. AfDB
Km111+659
(CWE)
Beles- Mekane Birhan 2016 39 1,018,952,363 Defence Construction AfDB
Betemariam-Wukro 2009 117 203,410,056 CHINA WON. GOE
Bilbala Sekota 2017 98 2,042,059,919 China First Highway IDA
Bishan Guracha ( Tikur Wuha) - Teklebirhan Ambaye
2014 12.18 589,395,779 GOE
Hawassa Construction
Bishoftu Factory Access 2004 2 21,513,409 ERCC GOE
CGC Overseas
Bonga - FelegeSelam 2015 51.8 842,661,582 Construction Group GOE
Ltd
Bridge project Under
Shashemene on Sarole-Dolo 2003 0 16,711,745 Nahit Business Plc GOE
Odo Road
Bridge project Under Adigrate
2005 77m 27,447,125 Megelte Con.PLC GOE
District.
Bridge project under Combolcha
1999 0 10,513,407 ECWC GOE
(Sereytu&Eraso River)
One
Bridge project under Combolcha 8m &
2002 14,190,549 Merid Tadesse BC GOE
package 2 two
10m

Bridge project under Combolcha
1999 0 8,319,684 Teodros Nikodimos GC GOE
Package2(Two Bridges)
Bridge Project under
Gonder(Abagenene River 1999 9.4 5,824,345 Solomon Beyene G.C GOE
Bridge)
Bridge Project under Nekemte
2000 17 11,157,574 Fuad Mohamed G.C GOE
,Henna River Bridge
Bridge Project under PackageXI
Mesfin Solomon Road
Alemgena&Diredawa(Lot 1:- 2002 0 15,459,480 GOE
Contructor
Chefie (Senbete)River Bridge)
Bridge Project under PackageXI
Alemgena&Diredawa(Lot 2 1999 0 3,211,012 Tewodros Simeneh G.C GOE
Abagari River Bridge)
Bridge projects under Gonder Solomon Kassa Water
1999 0 6,833,460 GOE
District,Abagenen River Work&G.C
Bridge Projects under
Lilac Construction
Jimma LotI:Kosho/Kojo
2000 17 10,861,171 Engineering Service GOE
RiverBridge&Bekere River
plc
Culvert
Bridge Projects under Jimma Lilac Construction
LotII:Simini river Bridge&Kore 2005 21 28,561,144 Engineering Service GOE
River Culvert plc
Bridge projects under Nekempt
1999 0 10,263,540 Werkneh Mekonen G.C GOE
PackageVII:-Henna River
Lilac Construction
Bridge Projects under Nekemte
1999 10 7,121,037 Engineering Service GOE
Buchi River
plc
Bridge under Alemgena
packageXI & Diredawa(
3G General
LotV:Awash3-Fluwuha River 1999 0 8,079,923 GOE
Construction PLc
Bridge &Awash4 River Bridge
onGedamitu -Gewane
Bridge under Combolcha
package1 ( Bekel Dear-1River 2001 0 11,673,661 Megelta Construction GOE
Bridge )
Tayam Engineering &
package1 ( Erasso River 1999 0 10,340,897 GOE
Commerce Plc
Bridge )
Tayam Engineering &
package1 ( Serayatu River 2000 0 10,790,870 GOE
Commerce Plc
Bridge )
| 133
Bridge under Package XI
Alemgena & Dire Dawa ( lot
1999 0 4,271,296 Tewodros Simeneh G.C GOE
III River Bridge in Sodere _
Nureara)
Bridge maintenance Alemgena
1997 0 2,646,043 Gadissa Biya G.C GOE
(Cont 1)
Building for Gondar Dist 2008 0 740,166 Towey GOE
Bure-Assab(Cont.3) 2007 58 85,616,935 Sogea
Butajira - Hossana 2010 95 217,465,179 CRBC IDA
Chancho - Derba 2014 29 553,453,126 ECWC ADB
Chancho Ground Water 2008 0 780,423 Saba Engineering GOE
Chanka-Kaki-Kebe-Begi 1999 259 3,585,043 Coffe Tech.
Chelelektu-Konso 2007 192 71,750,000 BATU Construction GOE
Chida-Sodo(Contract I) 2007 80 93,325,438 SALINI GOE
Chida-Sodo(Contract II) 2007 86 101,501,970 SALINI ADB
Chifra-Wekshit 2006 60 38,732,000 SUR Construction ADB
CGC Overseas
Chole - Magna 2016 22 869,512,570 Construction Group GOE
Ltd
Combolcha-Bati-Mille Cont1: Zhongmei Engineering
2017 60 1,588,240,441 GOE
Kombolcha-Burka Group
Combolcha-Bati-Mille Cont2: Shandog highway
2017 73 1,285,666,666
Burka-Mille Engineering
China
JiJiga-Gelelesh-Deghmedo-
Communications World
Segeg Contract-I:Km 0+000-Km 2017 55.4 1,064,407,803
Construction Bank
55+400(55.4Km)
Company Ltd.
Yabelo Metagefersa Shakiso Cross Land World
2018 36 3,286,648,948
cont.2 Oblo - Dermi Construction Bank
Abi Adi-Debre Genet-Semema-
Benako-Endabaguna SUR CONSTRUCTION
2017 95 2,252,000,000 GOE
, Contract 2: Semema - P.L.C.
Endabaguna
Adama –Assela Relocation and
2019 13 185,032,661 ECWC GoE
Gully Rehabilitation works

Mazoria - Durame - Durgi - Omo
Nada Road Project, Lot II: Durgi Bridge Construction
2013 27.4 474,662,802 GOE
- Gibe River, Contract II: Km PLC
97+700 - Km 125+400
Abobo – Meti , Contract II: CHINA GEZHOUBA
Kubito Mazoria – Meti – Km76 2017 82 1,298,029,525 GROUP COMPANY GOE
(82km) LIMITED
Abomesa-Aseko-Bedeyi-
Tekleberhan Ambaye
Cheleleka, Contract 1: 2018 51.5 991,721,997 GOE
Construction Plc
Abomesa-Aseko - Dibu River
Abomesa-Aseko-Bedeyi-
Cheleleka , Contract 2: Dibu Tekleberhan Ambaye
2018 58.7 725,621,428 GOE
River (KM 58.7)-Bedeyi- Construction Plc
Cheleleka
Yencomand
Adiarkay-Tselemt 2019 76 1,981,378,050 GoE
Construction plc
Melcon Construction
Adiremet Kulita - Adigoshu 2016 56.5 953,000,000 GoE
Plc
Gemshu Beyene
Alem Ketema – Degolo (85Km) 2017 0 1,280,770,840 GOE
Construction Plc
Zhongmei Engineering
Ambo - Gedo Asphalt Overlay 2013 65 483,546,135 GOE
Group, LTD
Defence Construction
Ambo - Woliso Road 2019 63 1,264,907,396 GOE
Enterprise
China
Arsi Robe – Agarfa – Ali , Lot
Communications
1: Ali Town – Wabe Bridge (Km 2019 54 2,153,060,672 GOE
Construction
193+040 – Km 136+500)
Company
Asaita Afambo Djibouti border 2019 49 1,518,683,761 ASER construction plc GOE
RAMA Construction
Azezo – Gondar Town 2016 12.6 871,565,791 GOE
PLC
Babile - Fik, Lot 1: Babile - Km FAL General
2013 36 408,482,768 GOE
36+000 Contractor
Babile - Fik, Lot 2: Km 36+000 - Yotek Construction
2013 30 451,210,334 GOE
Km 66+000 PLC
2013 27 400,937,784 GOE
Km 93+000 PLC
2013 33.34 447,937,109 GOE
Fik (Km 126+335) PLC
| 135
MELCON Construction
Bahirdar tis esat 2019 22 767,050,000 GOE
Plc.
China
Communications
Bilalo - Kersa - Arsi Negele 2019 93 1,565,358,431 GOE
Construction
Company
Rama Construction
Bishoftu Chefe Donsa Sendafa 2019 55 914,847,890 GOE
PLC
Bole Junction - Weterdino ESHETU LEMMA ROAD
2012 30.5 359,826,774 GOE
Horticulture and Bole-Abomsa CONTRACTOR
China
Chereti - Goroboksa-
Communications
Gorodamole , Lot 2018 86 1,558,150,706 GOE
Construction
2:Hageremoker - Kundi
Company Ltd.
Chida - Sodo Road , Lot 3:
INVESTSTROYPROEKT
Tercha - Chida (Km 58+000 - Km 2017 58 1,171,155,715 GOE
LLC
0+000)
Daye-Chiri-Nansebo (73.377KM) 2017 73.377 1,682,275,009 China Wu Yi Co Ltd GoE
Debre Markos – Debre Elias
– Kuch , Lot 1: Debre Markos –
Debre Elias – Temcha (Km 0+000 FAL General
2019 81 1, 299,644,371.61 GOE
– 75+000) and 5.9 Km Chemit Contractor
Spur (Chemit Junction – End of
Chemit Town)
Sunshine Construction
Debrebirhan – Ankober (Rebid) 2018 42 1,083,570,868 GOE
Plc.
Dengoro Kingi Mekabila 2019 30 416,237,136 Samson Chernet GC GOE
Diri - Masha Lot1 : from Gibmo -
2015 61 780,178,625 Orchid Buisness Group GoE
km 61+9600
Sunshine Construction
Dogolo – Kelela , (71.58km) 2017 71.58 1,299,846,199 GOE
Plc
Edo - Sorofta - Werka 2019 73 1,687,343,877 Alemayehu Ketema GC GOE
China
Fik - Hamero, lot 2: Hamero - Communications
2019 135 1,544,036,614 GOE
Immi Construction
Company Ltd.
Ginchi -Kachise -Chuletie , Gemshu Beyene
2016 59 898,273,177 GOE
Contract 1: Ginchi - Shikute Construction Plc

Construction works of Gore - Hyunday Development
2019 140 3,860,420,263 GOE
Masha - Tepi Company
Yoseph Teketel
Hosaena Town Section 2009 5 194,630,000 GOE
General Contractor
Corea
China Railway No.3
Iteya - Robe - Seru , Lot I: Iteya Exim
2017 75.6 1,324,234,510 Engineering Group
- Robe (Km 0+000 - Km 75+600) Bank/
Co., Ltd.
Loan
Iteya - Robe - Seru; Lot 2 : Robe Tekleberhan Ambaye
2019 68 993,181,495 GOE
- Seru Construction Plc
Iteya - Robe - Seru; Lot 2 : Robe Tekleberhan Ambaye
2018 68.28 993,181,495 GOE
- Seru Construction Plc
Jigjiga - Gelelsh - Degahamedo
- Segeg, Contract 4:
2019 52 768,698,951 Markan Trading Plc GOE
Degehamedo - Segeg (Km
165+220-217+420)
Jihur – Deneba – Lemi
Megenteya – Guguftu – Wereilu Sunshine Construction
2018 74 1,394,828,055 GoE
– Degolo, Contract 2: Guguftu – PLC
Wereilu – Degolo
Kelela - Akesta 2019 40 568,348,055 Diriba Defersha GC GOE
Korem Sekota Abi Adi Contract
2019 72 2,121,050,000 Sur Construction Plc GoE
1: Korem Lalibela
Korem Sekota Abi Adi Contract
2019 83 1,866,861,129 Defence Construction GOE
2: Lalibela Abergele
Korem Sekota Abi Adi
2019 75 1,021,950,000 Sur Construction Plc GOE
Contract3: Abergele Agbe
Ethiopian Somalia
regional state
police construction,
Kubi River Bridge 2018 0 71,990,290 GOE
procurement and
special service
Enterprice
Kunzila – Junction-Horticulture
2018 21.8 554,487,294 Markan Trading plc GOE
Farm- Zege Town
Xijiang Bayoung
Lare - Newjikawo - Ninchang 2019 35 1,420,584,398 GoE
Engineering Co . Ltd.
Melkasa – Sodere – Nurera – Yencomad
2017 94 1,203,129,756 GoE
Metahara (94 km) Construction Plc
| 137
Mesle/Musle – Kora/Kori – Teru China State
, Contract 2: Km 84+200 – Teru 2019 72.4 1,501,030,193 Construction GOE
(Km 156+589) (72.389 Km). Engineering Co. Ltd
Mesle/Musle – Kora/Kori – Teru China State
, Contract I: Mesle/Musle (Km 2019 84 1,536,235,564 Construction GOE
0+000) – Km 84+200 (84.2 Km) Engineering Co. Ltd
Metema-Abrajira 2017 117 1,548,000,000 Sur Construction Plc GOE
Beijing Urban
Morka - Gircha - Chencha 2019 73 1,967,496,760 Construction Group GOE
Co. Ltd.
Mota - Mekane Iyesus-Gassay , Zhongmei – JTEGC
2017 63.04 1,618,179,826 GOE
Contract 1: Mota-Jara Gedo Consortium
Muketuri-Alem Ketema , Lot 1: Chaina Railway No.3
2015 58 768,622,711 GOE
Muketuri – Kokebmesk (58km) Engineering Group
Nekempt - Soge Kamash
Koncho Contract 3: Km 160 – 2018 86 1,327,447,854 AKIR Construction PLC GOE
Koncho
Aykel – Zufan – Angereb
, Contract II: Km 69+000 - 2017 71.15 1,955,438,532 China Wu Yi. Co., Ltd. GOE
Angereb/Ashere (71.15km)
Omorate - Omo bridge
2019 74 965,890,930 NKH Construction plc GoE
Gangatom Kangakn
Phase I Jimma Chida Sodo China Railway 7th
2018 74.5 1,054,003,610 GOE
Sawla Lot2 Sodo – Dinke Road Group Co. Ltd.
ATF/RAMA (AFRO-
Robe – Gassera- Ginir ; Contract TSION CONSTRUCTION
2015 60 769,860,000 GOE
I: Robe – Gassera to Km 60+000 PLC JV RAMA
Construction Plc.)
ASER Construction
Sansusi – Tatek Kela 2015 13.6 736,910,324 AfDB
PLC
China Railway 21st
Shishinda - Tepi 2018 76 1,556,573,045 GOE
Bureau Group co.ltd
Beijing Urban
Sodo – Sawla Roads , Lot 3:
2018 36 1,020,177,271 Construction Group GOE
Dinke– Sawla
Co., Ltd.,
Tenta - Gashena Contract 1:
Tenta junction - Wegeltena Hebei Construction
2019 79 1,873,489,477 GoE
- Kurba junction - Kurba km Group CO.ltd.
(33+15 - 115+820 )

China Gezhouba Group
Tepi - Mizan 2018 47.8 1,246,200,728 AfDB
Co., Ltd
MACRO Genaral
Warder-Kebridehar 2019 139 1,814,123,578 Contractor and GOE
Trading Plc.
Wukro-Abreha weatsbha
Neblet-Filafel: Lot 1 Nebelet 2018 51.1 1,004,289,005 Sur Construction plc GoE
Filafel and Mykenetel Spur
Wukro-Abreha weatsbha
Neblet-Filafel; Lot 2 Wukro- 2018 74 1,250,636,416 Sur Construction plc GOE
Nebelet
Ethiopian
Construction works
Yabello Town Bypass 2019 7 286,549,972 corporation, Transport GoE
Infrastructure
construction sector
Yaso Gelesa Dibate Lot 1 Yaso - Grampion Building
2019 100 2,666,067,304 GoE
KM 100+000 Group
FDRE defence
Adishihu Dela - Samre 2019 77 2,114,048,068 construction GOE
Enterprise
Tarmaber – Meleyaya -
FDRE defence
Sefedmeda Spur - 1 Meleyaya –
2019 119 1,906,200,297 construction GOE
Molale Spur - 2 Molale - Wegere
Enterprise
(118.87 km)
Wukro Atsbi-Konoba 2019 63 1,745,722,494 Sur Construction Plc GOE
Gedo-Fincha-Lemlembereha
Synohydro Corporation
Contract 1: Gedo-Menabegna 2019 80.5 942,471,548 GOE
Ltd.
Road Project
Ethiopian Somali
Regional State
Police Construction,
Shebelle-Imi 2019 36 128,407,580 GOE
Procurement and
Special Services
Enterprise
Dabat - Ajire - Ketema Nigus Power con Plc in JV
, contract 2: Ajire - Keraker - 2018 50 1,158,659,797 with Tesfaye Legesse GOE
Ketema Nigus (km50) (Re-bid) construction
Dabat -Keraker Cont1:-Dabat PowerCon Private
2016 43.2 931,304,150 GOE
Ejire Limted
| 139
Dalol/Musli-Bada 2017 41 1,251,625,264 Defence Construction GoE

Dansha-Abferafi-Maikadra 2017 104 1,607,687,056 Sur Construction GOE
Dawnt-Lalibella 2006 119 63,635,701 BERTA Construction GOE
Dear Bure Bridge Under Dungo Construction
2003 0 21,024,375 GOE
Combolcha 3 Pvt.ltd
Debark-Buahit-Dilyibza , Lot Satcon Construction
2016 58 947,920,000 GOE
II:Buahit-Dilibza Plc
Debark-Buahit-Dilyibza , lot I
2015 65 669,465,650 Akir Construction Plc GOE
:Debark-Buahit
Deboseray River Bridge and
2019 NA 43,114,759 ECWC GOE
Approach Roads Project
Debre markos Town 2010 5 212,157,389 Diriba Defersha G.C GOE
Debre Markos-Merawi 2012 220 327,070,830 CHINA WON. GOE
Degehabur - Kebridehar Cont.1 2011 107 281,562,322 Own Force GOE
Degehabur-Kebridehar Cont.2 2011 113 291,159,356 Own Force IDA
SATCON Construction
Dejen - Felegebirhan Road 2014 77 528,000,000 GOE
PLC
Dejen - Lumame 2017 29 1,666,011,250 Kajima GOE
Delbena - Jinka 2013 118 434,567,292 SATCON GOE
Delbo-Blate 2000 37 10,605,680 Lalibela Construction Japan
Midroc Foundation
Dembi -Bedele 2010 62 234,864,491 GOE
Specialist plc.
Denen - Gode 2010 75 234,854,954 Own Force GOE
Dera - Magna 2011 119 269,002,449 Ircon BADEA
China
Bairdar Abay River Bridge, Lot 1:
Communications
Abay River Bridge and Adjacent 2019 NA 1,437,000,000 GOE
Construction
Concrete structures
Company Ltd. (CCCC)
China Tiesiju Civil
Mekele Industrial Park 2018 18.5 913,224,109 Engineering Group IDA
Co. Ltd
China Civil Engineering
Melka Jebdu – Dire Dawa
2018 7.5 498,943,715 Construction GOE
Industrial Park
Corporation

Beijing Urban
Debark-Zarema(Lemalemo by
2018 68.6 2,142,000,000 Construction Group GoE
pass 0+000 - km 68.6)
Co., Ltd.,
Hawassa-Hawassa Airport-
China
Bishan Guracha (Tikur Wuha) ;
Communications
Section 1: Km 0+000-Km 21+048 2018 33 592,084,400 GoE
Construction
and Section 2: Km 0+000-Km
Company Ltd.
12+464
Tercha–Weldehane–Omonada
Junction , Contract I: Tercha– 2019 90 2,450,000,000 GoE
Group
Weldehane–Werebo
Tercha–Weldehane–Omonada
Junction , Contract-II: Werebo – 2019 67 1,450,000,000 GoE
Group
Gona – Omonada Junction
Modjo – Hawassa Highway
SBI International
Project, Lot 3: Batu (zeway) – 2018 36 936,655,441 GOE
Holding A.G.
Arsi Negele Section (57.1 Km)
Zeleul Yohannes
General Contractor
Woldia Town Section 2018 5.3 304,850,794 JV With BoKra GOE
Construction and
Trading Plc
China First Highway
Dessie - Kutaber - Tenta World
2017 67.5 1,057,564,688 Engineering Co. Ltd.
Junction Bank
(CFHEC)
China
Comebelcha Industrial Park Communications
2019 3 478,975,000 GoE
acceses road Construction
Company Ltd. (CCCC)
KFAED/
Dicheto-Galafi 2017 81 2,663,664,022 Defense Construcion
GOE
Didigsala Yalo 2008 63 132,496,185 Terra const GOE
BADEA,
SFD,
Diko-Chifra 2002 19 14,275,575 Sunshine Const.
Soudi
Fund
CGC Overseas
Dima - Raad Bridge 2014 60 536,055,505 Construction Group GOE
Ltd
Dire Dawa-Duri Structures 1998 0 3,044,098 Own Force GOE
| 141
Dire Dawa-Melka Jebdu 2013 7.14 470,000,000 Melcon Construction GOE

CGC Overseas
Dodola-Junction-Goba 2012 130 371,615,788 IDA
Construction Lltd.
Dubti-Assaita 2007 49 105,584,730 SATCON GOE
Dukem River Biridge 1999 0 7,154,568 Own Force IDA
BATU Construction/
Durame - Durgi 2005 72 26,296,806 GOE
Yaro
Durbete - Sahura 2008 107 128,049,228 Kajjo International GOE
Duri-Dewele Road Drainage
2001 0 13,880,805 MACRO GC. GOE
Structures (Contract 2)
Duri-Dewele Road Drainage
2001 0 12,841,158 Own Force GOE
Structures (Contract I)
Efeson(Ataye)-Mehalmeda 2017 60 1,352,642,536 Yencomad IDA
Elidar - Bure(Cont. 2) 2008 100 125,637,210 Sogea IDA
Elmigten River Bridge and
2019 NA 47,363,027 ECWC GOE
Approach
Endasselassie Dejena Dansha
2014 71 510,670,201 SATCON IDA
Cont.1 Endasselassie Dedebit
Endasselassie Dejena Dansha Hunan Hunda & bridge
2016 108 926,292,277 GOE
cont.3 Adiremet Dejena Dansha Corporation
Endesilasie-Shiraro-Humera
2008 128 154,271,535 SUR Construction GOE
(Contract III)
Endesselassie- Degena -
Dansha, Contract 2:Dedebit 2015 76 801,212,553 SUR Construction GOE
- Adiremet
Endeto-Gassera 2012 60 390,343,767 Yencomad Inc. Plc. GOE
F2 junction -F3 Junction 2013 54.7 459,460,272 Sinohydro Corporation GOE
F2-F1-Hana 2015 37 651,111,224 Enyi Construction GOE
China Comuniction
F6 junction - F4 junction 2017 60.6 1,466,787,322 Construction GOE
Company
Felege Selam - Ameya - Chida 2015 57.34 834,554,047 Zhongmei Engineering GOE
Felegebrhan- Bahirdar
Cont2;-Zema River Bridge- 2017 82 1,130,938,772 GOE
Group
Felegebrihan

Feylweha-Abadi Cont2:-Tekeze
2017 53 2,146,303,500 Sur Construction Plc GOE
River-Abiadi
Macro General
Fik-Hamero-Imi , Lot 1: Km
2015 81 819,123,517 Contractor and GOE
0+000-Km 81+000
Trading PLC
Fik-Imi 2006 217 65,658,435 Satcon GOE
Fincha-Lemlem Bereha 2007 51 74,335,672 Sunshine Const. GOE
Shandong Highway
Fisiha Genet – Kele – Segen –
Engineering
Gebelbano, Lot 1: Fisiha Genet 2017 92.5 1,589,317,000 GOE
Construction Group
– Kele – Nedele (92.5Km)
Co., LTD
Jiangxi Water
Fiyel Weha-Abi Adi , Contract 1:
2017 39 1,166,300,000 and Hydropower GOE
Fiyel Weha-Tekeze River
Construction
CRCC21BGC-JWHC JV
(China Railway 21st
Gambela-Abobo-Gog-Dima; Bureau Group Co.,
Contract I: Gambela-Abobo- 2017 103.09 1,310,919,269 Ltd in Joint-Venture GOE
Pugnido with Jiangxi Water
and Hydropower
Construction Co., Ltd)
ORCHID Buisness
Gambella - Ilya 2017 78 1,029,229,136 GOE
Group Plc.
Gambella - Itang - Jikawo 2013 130 446,554,800 Own Force GOE
Gashena - Lalibela - Sekota China Rail way No3
2017 81 1,442,916,048 GOE
Cont 1: Gashena - Bilbala Engineering Group
Gashena-Woldiya Cont.3
2012 108 370,781,066 CRBC GOE
Woreta-Woldiya
Gedeo - Nekempt Cont 2 Bako China Highway Group
2012 66 391,047,638 GOE
- Nekempt Ltd
Gedeo - Nekempt Cont1 Gedeo China Highway Group
2012 66 354,350,910 IDA
Bako Ltd
Gedo Fincha Lemlem Berha
Contract 2 Menebegna - 2015 64 637,283,362 SUR Construction IDA
Lemlem Berha
Gedo -MenaBegna 2017 80.5 1,142,567,661 Hawak International IDA
Gelemso-Micheta 2016 46.00 972,757,589 Al Asab GOE
| 143
BADEA/
Gergera River Bridge 2001 0 13,539,487 Adigrat DRMC SFD/
ABUDABI
Gewane River Bridge and BADEA,
2019 NA 45,894,429 ECWC
Approach Roads SFD
Gewane-Mille 2011 146 248,989,341 LTA GOE
Blue Nile Construction
Gibe River Bridge 2004 0 24,193,649 GOE
Enterprise
Alemayehu Ketema
Gilgeblbes - Debate 2007 58 83,719,311 IDA
G.C.
Gimbo-Masha 2006 153 52,510,000 GOE
Enterprise
Ginchi – Kachise – Chulutie , Lot
Gemshu Beyene
II: Shikute – Chulitie (59+000 – 2019 63 1,267,054,519 GOE
Construction Plc.
122+206 km)
Ginir - Imi - Gode Cont 4 Lab
2014 90 570,615,299 SATCON GOE
Gode
Ginnir - Imi - Gode cont 1 Ginir -
2014 90 541,718,515 Yencomad Inc. Plc. GOE
Baredemtu
Ginnir - Imi - Gode .cont 2
2013 82 497,108,025 Akir construction GOE
Baredemtu-Imi
Ginnir - Imi - Gode .cont 3 Imi
2014 89 571,034,070 SATCON GOE
- Lab
Gint-Wohni 2005 39 33,573,415 SUR Construction GOE
Gob Gob - Gashena 2010 86 227,037,455 CWE GOE
Gode-Hargele 2007 211 75,480,000 WWCE GOE
Gog-Akobo 2006 180 45,547,030 BARO Construction IDA
Action
Gogecha River Bridge 2001 36 11,263,856 Engineering&Genral GOE
trading plc
Gondar By pass 2006 10 60,854,797 Own force GOE
Gondar - Debark 2015 100 690,779,965 Sinohydro Corp. GOE
Gonder-Humera Contract 1 2013 131 441,063,329 Sur construction GOE
Gonder-Humera Contract 2 2012 117 341,179,224 Hunan Hunda IDA
China Common
Gore- Gambella 2015 144 750,900,145 Construction. Co. Ltd. GOE
(CCC)

Ethiopian Road
Gub - Begondi - Wenbera
2012 42 400,602,189 construction GOE
Contract 2:Begondi - Wenbera
Corporation
Ethiopian Road
Guba - Begondi - Wenbera BADEA/
2012 74 367,075,041 construction
Contract 1:Guba-Begondi OFID
Corporation
Guba -Begondi -Wenbera Cont1
2014 75.3 602,600,000 Yemane Girmay G.C
Guba- Begondi/Aysid-Kong/
Harar – Kombolcha – Ejersa
Goro – Fugnanbira – Bombas 2019 97 1,771,548,688 CGCOC Group Co. Ltd.
and Ejersa Goro – Ahmed Imam
Harar by Pass 2012 20 360,003,517 Gemshu Beyene G.C
Hunan Hunda & bridge
Harar-Jijiga 2012 106 350,000,000
Corporation
Enyi General
Hargele - Dolobay Dolodo
2013 60 428,714,511 Business,Enyi GOE
Contract 1: Hargele km 60
Construction
MACRO General
Hargele - Dolobay Dolodo
2013 86 405,726,000 Contractor and GOE
Contract 2: Hargele km 60
Trading Plc.
Hawassa - Ageremariam Hawk International
section, Lot2: Chuko - 2015 60 786,745,807 Finance & GOE
Yirgachefe Construction
Hawassa - Ageremariam
section, Lot3:Yirgachefe- 2016 72 994,787,103 The Arab Contractor GOE
Ageremariam
Hawassa - Ageremariam M/s SEW
2016 66 958,985,721 GOE
section, Lot1:Hawassa - Chuko Infrastructure limted
Hida - Yallo 2008 71 118,843,932 Terra const GOE
Hida-Yalo 2007 3.8 105,586,556 Fal General Contractor GOE
Hirna-Kulubi 2009 91 188,084,975 Keangnam GOE
Holeta-Muger 2010 56 217,859,964 SUR Construction AfDB
Hossana - Sodo 2010 100 212,863,898 Keangnam AfDB
Humbo-Arbaminch 2015 31.5 700,567,448 DMC Construction AfDB
Humera - Lugdi 2006 50 57,663,337 Berhe Hagos GOE
Ilya - Adura 2009 88 179,151,600 SATCON GOE
| 145
Indasilassie-Shiraro-Humera
2005 50 30,976,031 SUR Construction IDA
(Contract I)
Indasilassie-Shiraro-Humera
2006 72 41,146,137 SUR Construction GOE
(Contract II)
China Communication
Injibara - Chagni - Pawi Junction 2017 100 2,283,309,549 Construction ADB
Company Limited
Jaragedo-Zagora-
2017 90 1,256,390,355 Yencomad GOE
JibasrsMariam-Debretabor
Jarre - Mille 2002 0 15,074,377 Africawit B C GOE
Jijiga – Tuli - Lowwanja - China Civil Engineering
Dul’ad – Samekab - Harmukale 2019 123 1,551,507,345 Construction GOE
Junction Corporation
Jijiga Togochale 2012 64 353,226,107 Akir Construction GOE
Jimma - Agaro - Dhidhessa China Railway 21st
2019 79 1,306,509,306 GOE
River Bureau Group co.ltd
Jimma Mizan Cont.1 Jimma
2015 107 686,102,036 Keangnam GOE
Bonga
Jimma Mizan cont.2 Bonga
2015 113 742,938,244 Keangnam GOE
Mizan
Ethiopian Road
Jimma Town Connectivity 2006 2.5 70,625,729 Construction GOE
Corporation
Jinka-Mender LotI:-Jinka-
2017 51 1,214,208,381 ERCC GOE
Mender
Kamashi - Yaso 2008 72 149,926,080 Sunshine Const. GOE
Kebridehar - Denen 2012 90 313,545,908 Own Force GOE
Kebridehar - Shilabo 2014 105 530,998,654 SATCON ADB
Kersa River Bridge & Appproach 2005 0 29,079,049 Yencomad ADB
SMS construction
Keyafer-Turmi 2008 80 114,693,207 GOE
limited
Kibremengist- Shakiso 2008 19 119,673,514 Flintsone Engineering GOE
Ethiopian
Kibremengist-Shakiso 2008 19.059 149,525,403 Construction Work GOE
Corporation
Koka- Adulala-Debrezeit 2014 52.22 613,165,000 Aser Construction GOE

Kombolcha-Gundewoin CGC Overseas
2015 173 694,149,063 GOE
Contract 1 Construction Lltd.
Kombolcha-Gundewoin CGC Overseas
2016 136 904,244,639 GOE
Contract 2 Construction Lltd.
Kombolcha-Woldiya 2014 151 510,639,364 Own Force GOE
China Tiesiju Civel
Konso- Yabelo 2017 107 1,192,527,441 GOE
Engineering Group Ltd
Kulubi-Dengego-Harar 2008 80 162,178,583 CRBC GOE
Lalibella-Sekota 2007 140 85,110,497 SUR Construction GOE
SATCON Construction
Laska - Salaysh 2015 65 689,885,000 GOE
PLC
Logia-Semera(Cont.1) 2007 41 74,643,384 Sogea GOE
Lugdi - Behaker Junction -
2006 46 57,663,337 Berhe Hagos GOE
Maicadra - Humera Junction
lumame - Debre Markos 2017 39.9 2,025,499,535 Kajima GOE
CGC Overseas
Magna-Mechara 2013 120 468,170,084 IDA
Construction Lltd.
Tekleberhan Ambaye
Maichew - Mehoni 2012 17.4 378,614,038 GOE
Construction Plc.
Maytsebry-Dima-
FiyelWeha-AbiAdi -Hawzen- Gemshu Beyene
2015 87 777,078,942 GOE
Fereweyni,Cont2:Dima(Km75.6)- Construction Plc
FiyelWeha(Km162.2)
Maytsebry-Dima-
FiyelWeha-AbiAdi -Hawzen- China Railway No3
Fereweyni,Cont4:Abi 2016 101 874,321,917 Ingineering Group IDA
Adi(Km262.0) _ Co ltd
Fireweyni(Km362.9)
Mazoria - Durgi Lot
NASEW Constraction
1: Cont1:Mazoria- 2011 38 285,915,621 GOE
PLC
Hadero(Km0+000toKm37+500)
Mazoria - Durgi Lot 1:
Aster Mengistu
Cont2:Hadero-Durgi(Km37+500- 2012 34 368,311,076 Japan
GeneralC
Km71+200
Mazoria-Durame 2006 73 54,585,963 BATU Construction IDA
| 147
Mazoria-Durame-Durgi-
OmoRiver LotII:Durgi(km71+200)
- Gibe River (km130+400) 2012 26.5 376,996,880 Kiflom Gebrehiwot GOE
Cont1:Durgi (km71+200)-
Km97+70
Mazoria-
Durgi(Km0+000-71+200)Cont1:-
2011 37.5 288,252,845 ERCC GOE
Mazoria-Hadero(Km0+000-
Km37+500)
Mehalmeda - Alemketama Lot
2016 47 915,292,776 Gemshu Beyene GOE
II: 72 km - Alemketeema
MehalMeda-Alemketema Sunshine Construction
2015 72 802,248,893 GOE
Contract 1: Mehal Meda-Km 72 Plc
Mehoni-Hiwane 2004 68 25,799,702 SUR Construction GOE
China
Mekaneyesus/Este – Simada-
Communications
Saint, Contract I: Mekaneyesus/ 2019 53 1,925,451,764 GOE
Construction
Este-Simada
Company Ltd
Ministry of National
Mekele - Abi Adi - Adwa ,Lot I :
2013 71 482,679,384 Defence, Construction GOE
Mekele - Seret Village
Enterprise
Mekele - Abi Adi - Adwa ,Lot II :
2013 65 460,257,521 SUR Construction PLC GOE
Seret Village -Werei Bridge
Mekele- Abiadi -Adewa Lot3
Alemayehu Ketema
WereiRidge - Adwa Km120+00- 2013 60 479,139,198 GOE
G.C
182+700
Mekele-Dangolat-Samre-
2017 94.5 1,594,387,610 Defence Construction GOE
Finarwa
Mekenajo - Dembidolo Contract
2015 53 633,534,841 Chinal Hyway GOE
1 Mekenajo - Ayra
Mekenajo - Dengoro - Billa
2008 61 138,601,822 China Sichuan Int. GOE
-Hena - Nejo
Mekenajo-Dembi dollo China Int. Water &
2015 65 669,143,994 GOE
Contract: 2 Ayra - Chinka Electric Corp.
Mekenajo-Dembi dollo
2015 63 648,548,842 Chinal Hyway GOE
Contract: 3 Chinka - Dembidolo
Mendi - Assosa 2008 92 156,883,974 Yencomad Inc. Plc. GOE
Sinohydro Corporation
Mendir-Hana 2017 89 1,664,681,178 GOE
limited

Menebegna–Fincha–Shambu–
Bako, Contract 1: Menebegna– 2016 65.5 999,352,015 CGCOC Group Co., Ltd IDA
Fincha–Shambu
Merawi-Gondar 2012 214 398,369,138 ENERGO OFID
Merawi-Gondar 2012 208 395,575,959 CRBC IDA
China Tiesiju Civil
Merewa- Somodo-Seka and
2019 94 2,268,391,160 Engineering Group IDA
Somodo-Limu Junction Spur
Co., Ltd
Rocket Construction
Mersa Wuha River Bridge 2003 20 18,302,078 GOE
& General Trading
Ethiopian
Merti Hortifarm Access 2005 11 29,748,140 Construction Works GOE
Coorporation
Metu - Gore 2007 26 113,818,004 CJCIETC GOE
Mille - Chifra cont. 1 2012 85 373,611,734 CRBC IDA
Mille - Chifra cont. 2 2013 80 498,289,808 Sur Gitto IDA
Mille River Bridge 2006 0 64,970,864 Homa Construction GOE
Mintamir – Metehabila – Zhongmei Engineering
2017 82 1,096,639,115 GOE
Metehara Group Limited
Ethiopian Road
Mizan-Dima-Boma Cont2:-
2016 60 926,796,267 Construction GOE
Dima-Raad Bridge
Corporation
Mizan – Dima - Boma Contract China MCC17 Group
2017 91.6 1,133,472,329 OFID
1: Contract 1: Mizan – Dima Co. Ltd
Mobasa - Nairobi - Addis Abeba
2017 109 1,146,905,006 JMC Project(India) Ltd GOE
Lot III:Mega- Moyale
Modjo - Edjere - Arerti -
Gobsena, Sembo - Sholagebeya
YENCOMAD
- Gorfo - Gobsena and 2015 33 755,409,675 GOE
Construction
Metehara, Contract 3 - Lot - 2,
Gindeber - Gobsena
Modjo-Hawassa Phase-I China Railway Seventh
2017 56 3,669,604,000 GOE
Modjo- Zeway,LotI:- Modjo-Meki Group
Modjo-Hawassa Phase-I
Daewoo Enginering&
Modjo- Zeway,LotII:- Meki- 2017 37 1,747,500,612 GOE
Construction
ZewaySection
Modjo Junction Drainage 2005 0 27,383,293 ERCC GOE
| 149
Action Eng.& General World
Modjo River Bridge 2007 96 82,115,450
Trading Plc Bank
China Communication
Modjo River Bridge &its
2008 0.09 125,141,644 Construction AfDB
Approach
Company
Modjo-Awash Arba 2011 160 257,579,429 Keangnam GOE
China
Modjo-Hawassa Highway; Lot IV: Communications
2017 52 4,857,360,800 GOE
Arsi Negele- Hawassa Construction
Company Ltd. (CCCC)
Mojo Ejere Arerti 2013 65 407,320,609 Yencomad Inc. Plc. ADB
Mojo Ejere Arerti, Arerti
Gobsena, Sembo Sholagebeya- Korea
2013 36 444,696,050 Yencomad Inc. Plc.
Gorfo-Gobsena-&Metehibila Exim
Metahara
Moricho-Dimtu-Bitana-Sodo
2016 60.8 995,018,921 Sunshine Construction GOE
Cont1:-Moricho - Bitena
Moricho-Dimtu-Bitana-Sodo
Cont2:-Bitena -Mayo Kote -Zala Hunn Hunda Road &
2016 48.3 949,946,191 GOE
Iyesus- Sodo&Maykote-Delbo Bridge Corpoation
Junction to Alaba Sodo
China State
Muketuri-Alem ketema Lot2:
2019 50 1,695,797,019 Construction GOE
Kokeb Mesk -Alem Ketema
Engineering Co. Ltd
Mytsebri Dima Fiyelwuha Abiadi Gemeshu Beyene
2011 76 258,721,412 IDA
Hawzen Cont 1. Mytsebri Dima Const. Plc.
China
Nada Kello Br. 1999 0 3,894,539 Own Force Exim
Bank
Nazareth Assela Dodola &
Shashemene Goba Cont. 2 2012 116 398,988,518 Sinohydro Corp. GOE
Assela Dodola Junc.
Nazreth - Assela 2009 79 177,338,108 Sinohydro Corp. GOE
MACRO General
Nehile -Abala 2011 77 272,704,621 Contractor and GOE
Trading Plc.
Nejo - Mendi 2008 74 147,769,823 CRBC GOE
Nejo - Jarso - Begi 2009 147 204,626,158 Sunshine Const. GOE

Nekempt - Mekenajo 2011 127 300,723,746 Sinohydro Corp. GOE
CGC Overseas
Nekempt _ Bedele 2017 96 1,065,899,521 GOE
construction
Nekempt Town Road 2008 3.5 138,714,220 ERCC IDA
IL&FS
Nekemte-Bure Lot1:-Nekemte-
2016 86.1 1,815,988,667 TransportLimited IDA
Anger gutin-Andhode
Elsamex S.A
Nekemte-Bure Lot2:-Andhode- JMC Projects(India)
2016 87.65 1,765,186,783 GOE
Agemsa Section LTD
IL&FS
Nekemte-Bure Lot3:-Agemsa-
2016 84.56 2,043,995,432 TransportLimited OFID
Bure Section
Elsamex S.A
China Comuniction
Omo - F6 junction (including
2017 41.7 1,108,125,885 Construction GOE
omo bridge)
Company
Pan-Africa
Construction
Omo River Bridge 2006 210 59,645,188 IDA
Engineers plc in JV
with VSL,Heavy Lifting
Badia
Omo River Bridge & its approach
2008 0 166,316,531 Akir Construction Plc OfiD-
road under Sawla - Maji
Kuwait
Midroc Foundation
Omo River Bridge PH 2 2006 0 54,343,154 GOE
Specialist Plc.
Yencomad
Omo-Maji ContII:-Sai-Maji 2015 29 772,077,818 GOE
Construction
Yencomad Costruction
Omo-Maji ; Contract II: Sai – Maji 2015 29 772,077,818 IDA
P.L.C
CGC Overseas
Pawi Junction - Fendika-Ayma 2017 75 1,337,718,926 Construction Group IDA
Ltd
Pawi Junction-Renaissance
China Railway No.3
Dam (Guba)
2016 69 887,759,651 Engineering Group IDA
Contract 1: Pawi Junction–Km
Co., LTD
69
Pase III Project :-Hawassa-
Road
Ageremariam; Lot 1: Hawassa 2016 66 965,247,146 Sinohydro Corpration
Fund
- Chuko
Pile Foundation of Omo River
2006 0 58,104,854 BAOUR Midroc GOE
Bridge
| 151
Afro-Tsion
Quha-Maymekedane 2014 24 552,000,000 GOE
Construction Plc
Rama – Chila – Adi Daro - MELCON Construction
2019 91 1,479,881,513 GOE
Semema (91.13KM) Plc.
Realignment of Beseka Ethiopian Road
Crossing( Metehara Railway 2008 7 128,015,754 construction GOE
Crossing- Awash Junction) Corporation
Ethiopian Road
Remaining Works Gogecha River
1999 0.036 9,483,793 construction GOE
Bridge
Corporation
Replacement of Awash Bridge
2010 0 227,668,180 Sato Kogyo Co., Ltd GOE
on A1 Trunk Road Project
Robe - Gassera - Ginir, contract Afrotsion
2018 61 841,602,019 GOE
2, Km 60 - km121(Ginir) Constructionplc.
Ethiopian Road
Sanja - Keraker 2007 31 80,176,358 construction GOE
Corporation
China Rail way No3
Sanja - Kirakir 2015 47 786,796,548 GOE
Engineering Group
Sanja - Kerakir 2014 51 546,965,161 Tibeb Const. AfDB
Sawla - Kako Cont 2: Km
Orchid Busincess
70+400_122+768 Lot1: 2008 23 163,067,816 GOE
Group
Km70+400_Km93+00(22.6Km)
Sawla - Kako Cont2:
2010 30 212,656,683 Genet ConstructionPlc GOE
Lot2:Km93+00-Km122+768
Satcon Consrucrion
Sawla- Maji Cont1: Sawla- laska 2015 287 697,725,209 GOE
plc
Sawla- Maji ContIII:Salayesh
2015 85 684,401,277 Akir Construction Plc GOE
- Omo
Sawla-Bulki-Maji 2007 82 93,400,000 National Engineers GOE
Sawla-kako cont 1 2009 70 179,941,327 Akir Construction Japan
Sawla-kako cont 2 2008 52 161,109,309 GOE
Enterprise
Ethio General
Segen River Bridge 2002 0 15,250,036 GoE
Contractor
Semera Didigsala Yalo Alamata
2012 106 328,257,357 SATCON GOE
cont.2 Semera Didigsala
Semera-Elidar 2009 150 207,067,034 Own Force GOE

Jiangxi Zhongmei
Semra - Dubti 2015 11 773,359,132 GOE
Engineering
Serdo Afdera Afrarhaik Cont.2 2015 96 624,470,145 CRBC GOE
Serdo-Afder Hayk-Didigsala 2007 187 91,844,196 BERTA Construction GOE
Serdo-Afdera-Afar- haik,
2012 90 387,861,697 CRBC GOE
Contract 1
Seru-ShenenWonz-Shehussien Samson Chernet
2008 20 159,464,587 GOE
Lot1:Seru-Km20- General C
Seru-ShenenWonz-Shehussien Yoseph Teketel
2007 27 100,291,415 GOE
Lot2:Km20-Shekhussien Building C
Shahura - Gelego 2012 172 341,479,873 GOE
Shambu-Bako 2016 60.2 993,280,400 CGCOC Group Co..Ltd GOE
Shashemene-Dodola Junction Alemayehu Ketema
2008 34 149,498,893 GOE
Lot 2 km. 39 - Dod. Junc. G.C.
Shashemene-Dodola Lot 1
2007 35 106,660,179 Berhe Hagos GOE
Shash.-km. 35
Shashmene - Wondogenet - GOE &
2009 38 168,243,498 DMC Const
Gemeto ADB
Dano Construction
Sheble - Imi 2009 35.9 203,331,034 Industry & GOE
Commercial Plc
Shekhussen-Micheta (Contract
2008 55 133,650,050 SATCON GOE
I)
Shekhussen-Micheta (Contract
2008 112 124,728,863 SATCON GOE
II)
Shigube - Berhile - Dalol Acess 2009 97 185,002,641 &Engineering GOE
Enterprise
Shire - Shiraro - Humera Lugdi
2014 156 616,441,995 CGGC GOE
lot.1
Shire-Shiraro Humera Lugdi
2015 161 627,709,146 HUNAN HUNDA GOE
Lot.2
Sile river bridge 2006 58.6 45,635,472 ERCC GOE
Sodo- Tercha Lot 1;-Sodo -Omo Hunn Hunda Road &
2017 75.5 1,328,412,050 BADEA
river Bridge Corpoation
Sodo -Tercha Lot2;-Omo River China Railway Seventh
2017 83.4 1,674,383,032 GOE
-Tercha Group
| 153
Soroka-Ergoye-Abrhajira/Tele
2017 92 1,432,205,652 Sur Construction GOE
tower
Taba River Bridge 1999 0 7,931,836 Own Force GOE
Tarmber -Kombolcha 2011 187 289,836,038 DRAGADOS GOE
Three Bridges (Laiman, Amshert, Blue Nile Construction
2002 0 14,238,773 GOE
Beshlo Bridges) Enterprise
Tongo Begi Mugi Road pr.cont 1
2008 70 136,120,676 Berhe Hagos GOE
Tongo Gidami
Tongo Begi Mugi Road pr.cont 2
2012 90 372,402,037 Berhe Hagos GOE
Gidami Mugi
Tsegede Junction - Ketema Rama Construction
2014 23 516,442,159 GOE
Nigus Plc
Hunan Huanda Road &
Tulu Bolo - Kela 2017 80 1,309,798,352 GOE
Bridge Corporation
china Int. Water &
Wacha - Maji 2015 175 775,921,616 GOE
Electric Corp.
Wegeltena-Dawnt 2004 34 22,245,574 BERTA Construction GOE
Wekshit-Mille 2005 42 35,039,000 SUR Construction GOE
Wenbera-Guba 2005 140 30,300,205 AGECO GOE
Werabe-Bojeber 2013 38.5 458,445,650 Yemane Girmay G.C GOE
Werabelle River Br. 2006 0 48,887,374 Pan African Plc.
Wereta - Gob - Gob Lot-1 2009 49 208,940,606 SUR Construction
Wereta - Gob - Gob Lot-2 2011 50 253,856,067 SATCON
Ethiopian
Widening of Mekaneselam Town 2006 0 49,845,805 Construction Works GOE
Coorporation
Wohni-Metema (Contract 1) 2003 25 17,942,206 SUR Construction EU
Wohni-Metema (Contract 2) 2004 26 24,429,669 SUR Construction GOE
Wohni-Metema (Contract 3) 2004 24 25,285,823 SUR Construction GOE
Woito-Turmi -Omorate
CGC Overseas
-Namraputh Cont3:Km120-
2015 91 794,855,086 Construction Group GOE
211Km(Turmi-Omorate/
Ltd
Namraputh)

Amhara Road
Woldia Flakit Heavy
2019 135 1,241,867,440 Construction GOE
Maintenance
Enterprise
Woldiya-Alamata 2008 78 150,329,634 CHINA WON. GOE
Wolkite-Hossana , contract 1, China Gezhouba Group
2015 60 717,440,576 ADB
Wolkite-Arekit Company Ltd. (CGGC)
HAWK International
Wolkite-Hossana , contract 2,
2014 66 618,998,415 Finance and GOE
Arekit-Hossana
Construction Co. Ltd
Wukro - Zalambessa 2014 100 530,187,942 China Railway No 3 GOE
Yabelo_Metagefersa_Shakiso
Shed General
Cont:Yabelo-Metagefersa -Oblo 2008 30 133,025,918 GOE
Contractor PLC
Lot3:Km75_oblo
Cont1:Yabelo-Metagefersa 2009 36 176,008,555 GIGA Constraction GOE
-Oblo Lot1:Yabelo-Km36
Awash Welday buildng
Cont1:Yabelo-Metagefersa 2009 39 207,011,573 GOE
contractor
-Oblo Lot2:Km36_Km75
Yalo - Abala Cont1:Yalo - Nehile,
2011 22.7 254,741,863 Zeluel Yohannes IDA
Lot2: Km45 +000 to Km67+687
Yalo - Abala Cont1:Yalo
- Nehile,Lot1:Km 0+00 - 2010 45 233,086,874 Bridge construction IDA
km45+000
Yalo Hulaga Bisober Weyrawuha
2009 75 179,075,000 Terra const GOE
(Chercher) Mehoni
Zagora (kechinmeda)-Gassay 2013 44 485,177,003 GOE
Group
Zarema - Adiarakey - Shire Cont
2016 70 912,631,313 Own Force GOE
1 Zarema - Maytsebri
Zarema - Adiarakey - Shire Cont
2015 69 747,432,285 Own Force GOE
2 Maytsebri - Shire
Ziway - Butajira - Gubre cont.2
2015 82 637,497,172 Sunshine const. GOE
Butajira - Gubre
Ziway-Butajira 2009 51 210,943,657 Sunshine Const. GOE
Jijiga -Gelelesh -Deghamedo -
Beaeka General
Segege Contract II: Km 55+400- 2020 109.82 1,828,264,182.76 IDA
Business PLC
km165+220
| 155
Adaitu- mille Segment ( Geraru,
2020 0 236,061,778.25 KIDCON Engineering IDA
ledi and weranso 1 & 2 Bridges)
Zewot River Bridge
2020 0 42,192,653.85 ECWC IDA
Replacement Project
Giorare River Bridge Kuwait
2020 0 35,122,559.55 ECWC
Replecement Project Fund
Derek Wonz River Bridge
2020 0 29,131,585.19 ECWC GOE
Replecement Project
Duber Guba River Bridge
2020 1 27,514,540.25 ECWC GOE
Replecement Project
Duber Guba River
Bridge Replecement 2020 1 31,335,191.06 ECWC GOE
ProjectDirectorate
Legegur River Bridge
2020 1 44,452,715.01 ECWC GOE
Replecement Project
Gishen Junction -14km 2020 18.76 1,316,700,000.00 ECWC GOE
Amhara Road
Gonji- kolela (Korie -Adisalem) 2020 10.74 333,027,799.74 Construction GOE
Enterprise
Chaina Railway
Gode -kelafo- ferfer project,
2020 96.3 1,530,000.00 Seventh Group Co.Ltd GOE
Contract 1; Gode- kelafo
(CRSG)
Debrebirhan- Deneba-Lemi Sunshine Construction
2020 108 3,613,766,908.69 GOE
Junction and Jihur - Deneba plc
Zalambesa - Alitena -Merewa -
Edagahamus ; lot 1; Zalambesa 2020 32 935,000,000.00 SUR Construction plc GOE
-Alitena
Tenta-Gashena road Project,
contract2: Kurba Junction Yotek Construction
2020 46.69 1,434,519,841.46 GOE
(Chegoma) - Gashena 9Km PLC.
86+100-130+786
Bridge Replesment Projects I ( Amhara Road Works
2020 47,392,763.50 GOE
Gimbo ber and Berbisa bridges) Enterprise
F.D.R.E Ministry of
Korem -Sekota - abi adi ,
Defence; Defence
Contract 2: Lalibela Junction - 2020 83.2 1,568,831,426.39 GOE
Construction
Abergele
enterprise

Segeg - Gerbo - Danan (Fik-
Segeg- Gerbo- Danan, Lot3: Cross - Land
2020 82.844 1,119,417,453.44 GOE
Yoale - Danana (Km 91+000 to Construction
km 273+844))
Cross - Land
Humbo (Tebela) - Abaya 2020 26.29 699,000,000.00 GOE
Construction
Hawela - Tula - Weteraresa - Yotek construction
2020 85.45 1,829,883,516.96 GOE
Yayu -werachie PlC
Omo - Maji , LotI: Omo - Sai and Yotek construction
2020 68 1,882,967,504.80 GOE
Left canal Bridge PlC
Jiga - Quarit - Arbgebeya -
DMC Construction
Sekela - Tilili Lot 2: Arbgebeya 2020 62 1,673,300,137.71 GOE
PLc.
- Sekela - Tilili
Gambella - Abobo - Goge-Dima
LotII Pungido - Gog- Gilo River 2020 72 1,342,000,000.00 GOE
Group Co., Ltd (CRSG)
-Km 72
Fesehagenet - Qele -Soyama
China Railway 14th
- Segenet - Gebelbano Lot 2 ; 2020 87.9 1,800,000,000.00 GOE
Bureau Group Co..Ltd
Chuluse -Soyama - Km 79+500
China Railway 7th
Adale - Girawa 2020 53 1,436,300,000.00 Bureau Group Co.. GOE
Ltd(CRSG)
Koshe-Mito-Werabe and Yencomad
2020 72.91 1,850,695,155.03 GOE
Kutere-Billalo Construction PLC
Daye - Girja- Kibremengist / China Tiesiju Civil
Melkadesta/ and Meleya - Mejo 2020 63.5 1,555,708,167.88 Engineering Group GOE
Spur Road Co. Ltd
Pawi Junction - Hidasse Dam Lot
2020 70.7 1,253,508,768.76 DMC Construction PLC GOE
2: Km 69 - Hidasse Dam
Yaso - Gelaso - Dibate Lot 1 :
2020 100 3,283,694,543.90 China Wu Yi Co., Ltd GOE
Yaso - Km 100
Diredawa - Shenele & Diredawa
Bypass
Dembidolo - Mugi - Gambela;
Lot 1: Dembidolo - Mughi - Dola 2020 50 1,600,000,000 GOE
Group Co,. Ltd.
(Re-tender)
Shashemene - Alaba 2020 67.3 2,900,000,000.00 GOE
Group Co,. Ltd.
Oromiya Road Works
Metu Bypass 2020 8.7 661,753,585 GOE
Enterprise
| 157
Limu Junction - Kose - Seka -
Atnago - Alga - Seyo - Shenen
2020 90.9 3,640,009,480.12 ECWC GOE
- Guder Lot 2 ; Seka - Atnago -
Shenen - Guder
Walabu Construction
Dermi-Kenticha-Shakiso 2020 66.49 1,720,437,945.39 GOE
S.Co
FDRE Ministry of
Guliso – Cheliya - Begi Lot 1; Defence, Defence
2020 66 2,249,729,760 GOE
Guliso - Km 66 Construction
Enterprise
Nejo – Jarso – Begi - Yayo; Lot Walabu Construction
2020 65 1,824,745,684 GOE
-1; Nejo – Km 65 S.Co
Samson Chernet
Kimir Dingay/Debretabor-Guna 2020 11 416,000,000.00 GOE
General Contractor
Jiangxi The Second
Gimba-Tenta 2020 80.21 2,185,228,256.12 GOE
Construction Co.,Ltd.
Yaso - Gelaso - Dibate - Chagni
2020 117.4 2,732,402,166.58 China Wu Yi Co., Ltd GOE
Lot 2 : Km 100 - Dibate - Chagni
Kibish Construction
Bulbula - Alage /Horticulture/ 2020 36 686,000,000.00 GOE
P.L.C.
Asseb Corridor ( Melledoni Shandong Luqiao
2020 70.67 2,085,985,162.61 GOE
Junction - Manda - Bure ) Group Co., Ltd
Alaba - Angacha - Wato 2020 65.1 1,980,958,256.31 ECWC GOE
Powercon Plc.
Haik - Bistima - Chifra 2020 74.2 2,138,481,835.73 in Jv with Aser GOE
construction Plc.
Gode - Hargele, Lot 1 : Gode - FAL General
2020 100 1,893,759,386.74 GOE
Km 100 Contractor
Debre Markos - Debre Eliyas -
Temcha - Kuch - Ayehu - Zigem 2020 69.8 2,099,080,192.19 Yotek Construction GOE
- Chagni Lot 2 : Temcha - Kuch
Dembecha-Feres Bet-Adet,
Contract I: Dembecha – Sekela Amhara Road Works
2020 85 1,790,005,720.67 GOE
and Link Road to Bibugen Enterprise
Wereda
Mankusa - Birsheleko(Defense Tiks Construction in
Camp) - 145 Kebele Road 2020 32 972,716,279.92 Joint Venture with FAL GOE
Project General Contractor

Mehal Meda - Gisherabiel -
Mekoy - Milamile Lot 1 : Mehal Zhongmei Engineering
2020 59.7 1,781,238,954.95 GOE
Meda - Gisherabiel - Km 70 ( Km Group Limited
0+000 - Km 59 + 700)
Gelego - Tewdros Town - Guba
2020 68.82 1,770,605,838.13 Yotek Construction GOE
Lot 1: Gelego - Km 60
Ningxia
Hamusit - Este 2020 77 1,395,881,640.48 Communications GOE
Construction Co., Ltd.
Chongqing
Nekempt - Bure Lot 1: International
2020 86.1 1,948,446,483.18 GOE
Nekemte-Anger Gutin-Andhode Construction
Corporation (CICO)
Nekempt - Bure Lot 3: Agamsa-
2020 85 2,042,155,977.70 GOE
Bure
Guba - Begndi - Wonbera:
Contract I: Aysid - Kong Road 2020 61.72 201,230,932.85 ECWC GOE
Project
Sawula- Maji ; Contract 3:
2020 37 508,349,626.36 ECWC GOE
Salaish - Omo Road Project
ERA (Nekempt
Kelly-Tulu Kapi Road Project 2020 31 503,155,507.73 GOE
District)
Mankusa - Birsheleko(Defense Tiks Construction In
Camp) - 145 Kebele Road 2021 32 972,716,279.92 Joint Ventury with FAL GOE
Project (Re-tender) General Contractor
Gelego - Tewdros Town - Guba Yotek Construction
2021 68.82 1,770,605,838.13 GOE
Lot 1: Gelego - Km 60 PLC
Debre Markos - Debre Eliyas -
Yotek Construction
Temcha - Kuch - Ayehu - Zigem 2021 78.2 2,151,052,236.06 GOE
PLC
- Chagni Lot 3 : Kuch - Ambla
Weyito - Turmi 2021 135 2,843,185,710.00 Rama Construction GOE
ENYI General Business
Dangla - Jawi 2021 73 2,247,404,541.84 PLC/ENYI Construction GOE
PLC
MCG Construction PLC
Negele Borena - Doloado
in JV with Alemayehu
- Melkasuftu Lot 1 : Negele 2021 64.5 1,371,325,369.08 GOE
Ketema General
Borena - Km 64
Contractor
Nekemte-Soge-Kamashe- Gemshu Beyene
2021 105 2,351,647,933.06 GOE
Koncho Lot 1: Nekemte - Km 105 Construction PLC
| 159
Nekemte-Soge-Kamashe- Gemshu Beyene
2021 55.2 1,923,629,581.78 GOE
Koncho Lot 2: Km 105-km 160 Construction PLC
Agaro - Gera - Medabo 2021 100.5 3,170,122,200.00 Rama Construction GOE
Oromiya Construction
Chanka - Gidami 2021 97 3,206,772,589.87 GOE
Coorporation
Guder Town - Ambo Town Road Oromiya Construction
2021 18.527 1,038,722,506.06 Foreign
Project Coorporation
ENYI General Business
Homosha – Hidassie Dam; Lot-1:
2021 70 2,081,401,426.09 PLC/ENYI Construction GOE
Homosha – Km 70
PLC
Dembecha - Feres Bet - Adet,
Contract II Seqela - Adet
Gimbi – Guye – Alga - Metu; Lot Diriba Defersha
2021 70 1,835,358,164.34 GOE
- 1: Gimbi – Km 70 General Contractor
Yirgalem Construction
Jigjiga Bypass 2021 7 672,098,730.28 GOE
PLC
Yirgalem Construction
Banavo/Bonosha - Achamo 2021 22 682,155,064.23 GOE
PLC
Yonab Construction
Combolcha Bypass 2021 7.11 806,164,023.72 GOE
PLC
Zhejiang
Shekhussen - Jara (Dolosebro- Communications
2021 78 1,592,270,000.00 GOE
Jara-Shekhussen) Construction Group
Co. Ltd
Dogusan Insaat TIC .
Gode-Kelafo - Ferfer Lot 2:
2021 139 2,497,881,730.00 A.S in JV with Rabah GOE
Kelafo - Ferfer
and Son's PLC
Zhejiang
Durbete - Kunzila - Gelago
Communications
- Metema Lot 3 : Km 170 - 2021 124.95 2,719,264,301.40 GOE
Construction Group
Metema
Co. Ltd
Lalibela – Kulmesk - Muja Lot 1;
2021 45 1,888,292,297.10 Construction GOE
Lalibela - Km 45
Corporation
Fik - Segeg - Gerbo - Denan Lot Diriba Defersha
2021 90 1,422,968,463.05 GOE
I;Km 0+000 - Km 90+000 General Contractor
Fik - Segeg - Gerbo - Denan Lot Macro General
II; Segeg - Gerbo - Yoale (Km 2021 101 1,232,011,537.11 Contractor and GOE
90+000 - Km 191+000) Trading PLC

Yotek Construction
Sekela - Tilili ; Contract 1; Jiga 2021 59 2,171,066,618.10 GOE
PLC
- Quarit - Arbgebeya
Dubti - Arrisa - Adigala - Macro General
Biyokebob Lot II; KM 72+000 2021 78 1,482,000,000.00 Contractor and GOE
- KM150+000 Trading PLC
Gog - Jore - Akobo Contract 1
Lot I; Km 0+000 - 36+000 ( Goge 2021 36 1,497,465,276.22 NKH Construction GOE
- Jore - Angella)
China Tiesijue Civil
Chebera Churchura - Gudumu 2021 114 3,259,157,394.04 Engineering Group GOE
Co., Ltd
Gambela - Abobo - Gogo -
Dima/Raad Lot III; Km 72 +000 -
2021 81 1,574,746,965.24 NKH Construction GOE
Akuila - Achaagna - Dima/Raad
Junction Road (Re - bid)
Arsi Robe - Agarfa - Ali Lot 2 : China Civil Engineering
Arsi Robe - Wabe River Bridge 2021 97 4,158,806,181.89 Construction GOE
(Re - bid) Corporation
Kessa-Gimja Bet-Azena -
2021 59.54 2,200,961,348.65 Construction GOE
Ambela
Corporation
Midroc Construction
Bure - Gomer 2021 41.5 1,365,798,491.89 GOE
Ethiopia PLC
CrossLand
Abay River Bridge and Approach Construction in
2021 5 825,659,857.57 GOE
Road JV with HAFCON
Construction
Ethiopia – Djibouti Transport JMC Projects India
Corridor Project Phase I: Adama 2021 60 LTD in JV with Longjian GOE
6,688,456,565.74
– Km 60 Expressway Project Road & Bridge Co. Ltd
Jimma - Chida 2021 80 2,422,629,267.27 Engineering Group GOE
Co., Ltd
Shandong Luqiao
Shambu - Agamsa 2021 95 2,080,273,817.86 GOE
Group Co.LTD
Somali Roads
Shebele - Imi 2021 34 249,613,616.06 GOE
Enterprise
Gode - Hargele Lot 2: km 100
2021 116.83 2,253,021,228.24 A.S in JV with Rabah GOE
-Hargele
and Son's PLC
| 161
Endeselase - Rama - Gerahu
ASER Construction
Senay Lot 1: Endeselase - km 80 2021 89.58 GOE
2,768,400,492.34 PLC
(Rama - Gerah Senay)
Replacement Projects under
2021 33,793,866.72 ECWC GOE
Jimma Package V [Shankila]
Sekela - Tilili Road Project; Yotek Construction
2021 59 2,171,066,618.10 GOE
Contract 1; Jiga - Quarit - PLC
Arbgebeya
Dubti - Arrisa - Adigala - Macro General
Biyokebob DB Project Lot II; KM 2021 78 1,482,000,000.00 Contractor and GOE
72+000 - KM150+000 Trading PLC
Gog - Jore - Akobo Contract 1
Lot I; Km 0+000 - 36+000 ( Goge 2021 36 1,497,465,276.22 NKH Construction GOE
- Jore - Angella) (Re-tender)
Chebera Churchura - Gudumu 2021 114 3,259,157,394.04 Engineering Group GOE
Co., Ltd
Gambela - Abobo - Gogo -
Dima/Raad Lot III; Km 72 +000 -
2021 81 1,574,746,965.24 NKH Construction GOE
Akuila - Achaagna - Dima/Raad
Junction Road (Re - bid)
Arsi Robe - Agarfa - Ali Lot 2 : China Civil Engineering
Arsi Robe - Wabe River Bridge 2021 97 4,158,806,181.89 Construction GOE
(Re - bid) Corporation
Kessa-Gimja Bet-Azena -
2021 59.54 2,200,961,348.65 Construction GOE
Ambela
Corporation
Midroc Construction
Bure - Gomer 2021 41.5 1,365,798,491.89 GOE
Ethiopia PLC
CrossLand
Abay River Bridge and Approach
Construction in
Road Design & Build Project 2021 5 825,659,857.57 GOE
JV with HAFCON
(Re-tender)
Construction
Ethiopia – Djibouti Transport
JMC Projects India
Corridor Project Phase I: Design
2021 60 LTD in JV with Longjian AfDB
& Build of Adama – Km 60 6,688,456,565.74
Road & Bridge Co. Ltd
Expressway Project
JICA &
Jimma - Chida 2021 80 2,422,629,267.27 Engineering Group
AfDB
Co., Ltd

Shandong Luqiao BADEA &
Shambu - Agamsa 2021 95 2,080,273,817.86
Group Co.LTD OFID
Somali Roads
Shebele - Imi 2021 34 249,613,616.06 GOE
Enterprise
Gode - Hargele Lot 2: km 100
2021 116.83 2,253,021,228.24 A.S in JV with Rabah GOE
-Hargele
and Son's PLC
Endeselase - Rama - Gerahu
ASER Construction
Senay Lot 1: Endeselase - km 80 2021 89.58 GOE
2,768,400,492.34 PLC
(Rama - Gerah Senay)
Design and Build of Bridge
Replacement Projects under
2021 33,793,866.72 ECWC GOE
Jimma Package V [Shankila]
(Re-tendered)
| 163
7.2. List of RSDP and SDG Indicators
RSDP Indicators
Indicator 1: Road density
Indicator 2: Traffic Flow
Indicator 3: Roughness and Road Condition
Indicator 4: Vehicle Operating Costs
Indicator 5: Freight rate and Passenger fare
Indicator 6: Fatalities and Accidents per Operational Vehicle
Indicator 7: Maintenance Budget and Expenditure
Indicator 8: Km Maintained
Indicator 9: Maintenance Costs/Costs of Maintaining Network Ratio
Indicator 10: Time for Payments to Consultants and Contractors
Indicator 11: Time for Contract Administration
Indicator 12: Private / Total Construction Ratio
Indicator 13: Labour-based/Total Construction Ratio
Indicator 14: Actual Axle Load/Legal Limit Ratio
Indicator 15: Construction, Rehabilitation and Maintenance Cost
Indicator 16: Journey Time
Indicator 17: Employment Opportunity for Local Labor
Indicator 18: Income Generation for Local Labor
Indicator 19: Improvement in Skill Levels
SDG Transport Indicators
Indicator 1: Proportion of rural population within 2 kilometer of all season mode of
transport
Indicator 2: Percentage Increase in Road and Rail Density
Indicator 3: Percentage Reduction of Travel and Vehicle Turn Around Time
Indicator 4: Percentage of Increased Agricultural Productivity and Economic Activities
Indicator 5: Percentage Increase in Employment Opportunities and Income Generation
from Transport Related Activities

Indicator 6: Percentage Reduction in Passenger Fares (Passenger Kilometer)
Indicator 7: Percentage Reduction in Unit Goods Transport Cost
Indicator 8: Level of Affordability of Transport Cost as percent of Income by the Urban
and Rural Poor
Indicator9: Percentage Increase in the Use of Intermediate Means of Transport (IMTS)
Indicator 10: Existence of Sustainable financing Mechanisms such as Road Funds
Indicator 11: Percentage Increase in the Proportion of Modes of Transportation in Good
and Fair Condition
Indicator 12: Percentage of Schools, which have Reliable Access
Indicator 13: Transport Constraint on Education
Indicator 14: Proportion of Women with Access to Appropriate Means of Transport
Indicator 15: Percentage Distribution of Households having Access to Health Centers,
Clinics.... etc. with reliable access
Indicator 16: Percentage of Households Reporting Constraints on Access of Health
Services
Indicator 18: Access to Health Care Services for Expectant or Post natal Mothers
Indicator 19: Children Under 5 Years
Indicator 20: Percentage of Child Birth at Home or on the Way to Health Facility
Indicator 25: Percent of Households (in the various urban living environment), which
Report Transport Cost, and Time as Major Obstacle to Employment
Indicator 26: Percentage of Households which Report Access a Major Obstacle for
Essential Services
Indicator 27: Environmental Impact Identified by Audits of Transportation Programs
Undertaken
Indicator 28: Implementation and Enforcement of International Conventions in Air and
Maritime Transport
Indicator 29: Status of banning sale of leaded Petrol
Indicator 30: Rate of Fatality (Per 100,000 Vehicle km)
Indicator 31: Adoption of Road Safety Strategies
Indicator 32: Percentage Reduction of Missing links of the Trans – African Highway
Network and Transit Corridors
Indicator 33: Percentage Reduction in Transport Cost for Land locked Countries
| 165
Indicator 35: Percentage Increase in Direct Private Investment
Indicator 36: Implementation and Enforcement of International Conventions in Air and
Marine Transport
Indicator 37: Proportion of check points along the main Transit Corridors to a maximum
of 3 (between port and border of land – locked country)
Indicator 39: Percentage of Time to Cross border Compared to OECD / Industrialized
countries Average
Indicator 40: Percentage Increase in the Number of one stop border posts
Indicator 41: Proportion of Time to Port Clearing Compared to OECD / Industrialized
Countries
Indicator 42: Percentage Increase in Corridor Management Committees
Indicator 43: Implementation of Axle Load Limits and Design Standards for Transport
Infrastructure
Indicator 44: Number of New Air and Maritime Connections between Ethiopia and
African Countries
Indicator 45: Number of Products and Volume of Traffic of Products Transport by Air
and Sea
Indicator 47: Number of Ratification, Implementation and Enforcement of International
Conventions in the Transport Sector

ምርጥ መንገዶች ለኢትዮጵያ ብልጽግና
BEST ROADS FOR PROSPEROUS ETHIOPIA

RSDP 24 Years Assesment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RSDP 24 Years Assesment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RSDP 24 Years Assesment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

Eng. Habtamu Tegegne,

Further acknowledgement is extended to all staff of Plan and Program Management

ERA Document Approval Form

Document Title 24 YEARS RSDP ASSESSMENT REPORT

1. W/o. Sadia Beshir Date

Ato. Yetimgeta Asrat Date:

Eng. Habtamu Tegegne Date:

4. RSDP AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT 53

VIII | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

1.2. Physical and Financial Performance of RSDP

2 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Physical Plan Vs. Accomplishment, Financial Plan Vs. Disbursement, in

Figure 1: Physical plan Vs Accomplishment

Physical performance of RSDP by implementers shows that accomplishment against

4 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Figure 3: Share of Expenditure by Implementers

Table 3: Share of Expenditure by Implementers (1997-2021)

Expenditure Category Share of Expenditure (%)

1.3. Impact of RSDP

Road Density KM Average Distance to

Table 4: Change in Selected Indicators

Indicators 1997 (RSDP Start) 2021 (End of RSDP VI)

1.4. Capacity of Local Contractors and Consultants

8 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Participation of local consultants has been particularly encouraging. In terms of

Figure 6: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Contractors (1997-2021)

Figure 7: Number of Projects Awarded to Local and Foreign Consultants (1997-2021)

1.5. Financing Pattern of RSDP

10 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

12 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

To protect and rehabilitate existing infrastructure, to improve financial self-sufficiency

2.2. Objectives of RSDP

The objectives of RSDP are to:

14 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Economic Development Potential: Ethiopia is endowed with natural resources in

It was during the feasibility stage that

Basic principles adopted for selection of criteria are:

18 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

proportion of their population to the maximum population of road crossing Woredas. A

20 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

22 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Meki - Ziway Road Project

24 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

During RSDP I, a total of 8709 km of roads were rehabilitated, upgraded, constructed

By the end of RSDP I, in 2002 achievements were registered in improving rural

Urban Roads Maintenance 87 > 100

Grand Total 8908 8709 98 9812.9 7284.5 74

26 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Length in km, Budget & Disbursement in million ETB

28 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

3.1.3. Performance of RSDP III

Construction 11212 9814 87.5 13341.8 10765.5 81

Maintenance 1049.9 1433 136

3.1.5. Performance of RSDP V

32 | ETHIOPIAN ROADS ADMINISTRATION

Dire dawa - Dewali

3.1.6. Performance of RSDP VI