India : MFF - North Eastern State Roads Investment Program (Facility Concept)
The investment program will (i) improve about 430 kilometers (km) of priority road sections in six states (Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Sikkim, and Tripura) in the northeastern region (NER) of India, and (ii) provide capacity building support to the executing agencies: the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (MDONER) and the state public works departments (PWDs) or its equivalent in the six project states. The investment program will target the secondary road network and aim to enhance the performance of state roads sector in NER through investment project implementation and dedicated capacity building measures. The improved secondary road network will provide important linkage between the primary and tertiary road networks in the region, for which there are ongoing national programs for improvement.
South Asia Department
Request for information
|Project Name||MFF - North Eastern State Roads Investment Program (Facility Concept)|
|Country / Economy||India
|Project Type / Modality of Assistance||Loan
|Source of Funding / Amount||
|Strategic Agendas||Inclusive economic growth
|Drivers of Change||Gender Equity and Mainstreaming
Governance and capacity development
|Sector / Subsector|
|Gender||Some gender elements|
|Description||The investment program will (i) improve about 430 kilometers (km) of priority road sections in six states (Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Sikkim, and Tripura) in the northeastern region (NER) of India, and (ii) provide capacity building support to the executing agencies: the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (MDONER) and the state public works departments (PWDs) or its equivalent in the six project states. The investment program will target the secondary road network and aim to enhance the performance of state roads sector in NER through investment project implementation and dedicated capacity building measures. The improved secondary road network will provide important linkage between the primary and tertiary road networks in the region, for which there are ongoing national programs for improvement.|
|Project Rationale and Linkage to Country/Regional Strategy||
NER forms a distinct geographical unit, representing about 8% of the country's geographic area. It has a population of about 39 million (about 4% of the country's population). Approximately 98% of NER's borders are with other countries, Bangladesh, Bhutan, the People's Republic of China, Myanmar, and Nepal. Its connection with the rest of the country is only through a narrow land corridor. Except in Assam, NER has predominantly hilly to mountainous terrain and very high rainfall (among the highest in the world), which frequently results in landslides and floods.
Many factors have hampered the process of economic development in NER. Prior to independence, the only major economic activity was tea growing in some parts of present-day Assam. NER's transport connectivity to the rest of India has been limited to the narrow land corridor. Some states joined the planned development process later than other states of the country. Recognizing the need for accelerated development, the Government of India places special focus on the development of NER in its five-year plans, mainly through central funding of development activities in the region. Over the last two decades the government has required 10% of the budgets of central ministries and departments to be allocated for NER, and the creation of a non-lapsable central pool of resources for collecting the unspent allocated central funds for further assistance to the region. However, the recent growth performance of these states has not been encouraging, although some of the human development indicators (HDIs), such as the literacy rate, show remarkable progress. The government's Eleventh Five Year Plan, 2007-2012 states that while development efforts over the years have made some impact (as reflected in some of the HDIs which are comparable with the rest of the country), the region is deficit in physical infrastructure which has a multiplier effect on economic development."
In 2001, the government created a dedicated ministry, MDONER, to coordinate and give impetus to the various central development efforts. MDONER responsibilities include dealing with matters relating to the planning, execution, and monitoring of development schemes and projects in the region including those for roads and administering the non-lapsable central pool of resources.
To further these development efforts and with renewed recognition that poor roads and bridges supporting the region's single most dominant transport mode of road transport are the major constraints on such effort, the government started a national investment program to improve road connectivity to remote places in the region. The Special Accelerated Road Development Program in the North Eastern Region (SARDP-NE) is to improve higher class roads including national highways and state roads in the region, and provide connectivity to the state capitals and district headquarters in NER by developing two-lane national highways and improving state roads.
The present investment program was developed in parallel with SARDP-NE and is complementary to it. While SARDP-NE focuses on improving higher class roads including national highways and other roads with strategic importance, the investment program is developed to improve intrastate connectivity, mainly to district headquarters and other places of administrative and economic importance in the individual states, and to enhance capacity of state PWDs to manage their road assets.
Improved surface transport connectivity in NER.
|Description of Outcome||
Improved mobility and accessibility in the project areas.
|Progress Toward Outcome|
|Description of Project Outputs||
1. Reconstructed and rehabilitated state roads
2. Improved business process and staff skills of PWDs
|Status of Implementation Progress (Outputs, Activities, and Issues)||
For NESRIP Project 1
- Civil Works contracts in Assam, Sikkim and Meghalaya were awarded in 10 Dec 12, 17 Nov 12 and 12 Sep 13 respectively.
Overall physical progress for Assam is 31.44%, for Sikkim 25%.
- CSC in Assam, Sikkim and Meghalaya were awarded on 8 Nov 12, 28 Feb 12 and 12 Jul 12 respectively.
- PMC contract was awarded on 3 Aug 12.
For NESRIP Project 2
-Manipur, Mizoram and Tripura subprojects: Civil work contractors have been procured.
-Assam subprojects: Under tendering process of contractors.
|Summary of Environmental and Social Aspects|
NESRIP Project 1:
Project 1 is classified as environmental category B. Initial environmental examinations (IEEs) were prepared to address the impacts. Although the project roads pass through reserve forest, vegetation density along the project roads is moderate and not endangered. Therefore, the IEEs indicate no major adverse environmental impacts. However, the IEEs will be updated based on detailed design and prior to commencement of civil works; the environmental management plans will be included in the civil works contract. The investment program involves improvement and reconstruction of existing state highways and district roads on existing alignments and within available rights-of-way, with minor land acquisition.
The IEEs find that environmental impacts associated with the upgrading and improvement of the project roads will occur mainly during construction. However, since most of the roads are located in hilly areas, landslides could occur during construction and operation. The other important issue related to construction is the disposal of spoil materials from earth work. Contractors will need to be monitored to ensure that spoil materials are not disposed of in forested areas, nearby water bodies, agriculture land, and on the down-slope side of roads without adequate protection. These impacts are manageable and can be mitigated by implementing the mitigation measures recommended in the IEEs. The IEE confirms that none of the project roads are located in environmentally and ecologically sensitive areas. An environmental assessment and review framework was prepared for the investment program and subsequent tranches.
NESRIP Project 2:
The project will not have any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, it is categorized as 'B in accordance with ADB's Safeguard Policy Statement (2009) and in line with the environmental assessment review framework of the MFF. IEE reports for each state have been prepared and updated based on the latest detailed design and in accordance with the environmental assessment review framework. They are disclosed as required by ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (2009). Environmental impacts associated with upgrading and improvement of the project roads will occur mainly during construction. Negative impacts are mainly related to construction waste; air, noise, and water pollution; occupational health and safety; tree removal; and erosion. These impacts are manageable and can be mitigated by implementing the measures recommended in the EMP which have been included in the bidding documents for civil work contracts. No critical habitat and physical cultural resources will be adversely affected. During preparations of IEE reports, meaningful consultations have been carried out with the relevant public and stakeholders. Concerns raised during the consultations have been incorporated in the reports.
NESRIP Project 1:
The investment program was developed with a view to minimize the need for land acquisition and involuntary resettlement. Where possible, construction activities will take place within the existing rights-of-way. Resettlement plans were prepared for the four roads in Project 1 to address land acquisition and resettlement impacts. A total of 1,453 households will be affected, out of which 275 will have a partial impact on their commercial structures, 802 will lose a portion of their residential structure, and 119 will have a partial impact on their residential-commercial structures; the rest would either lose a strip of agricultural land or open land. The displaced households will be entitled to compensation for the loss of land and structures at replacement cost, shifting cost, and other income restoration assistance. Resettlement for Project 1 is estimated to cost $4,475,937. In accordance with a resettlement framework prepared for the investment program, each state will prepare a resettlement plan for each subproject in subsequent tranches and submit it to ADB for approval.
NESRIP Project 2:
The project is categorized as A for resettlement impacts. A resettlement framework was prepared for the investment program. Six combined resettlement and indigenous peoples plans were prepared covering all subprojects financed under Project 2.
The project was developed with a view to avoiding or minimizing land acquisition and involuntary resettlement by adopting the most feasible technical design. The proposed widening of roads will occur within the existing right-of-way. A full census based on the detailed designs for the subprojects was conducted. Resettlement plans were prepared for the subprojects In accordance with the government s Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (amended in 1984), National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy (2007), the resettlement policies of the states and ADB s Safeguard Policy Statement (2009).
The project will have significant land acquisition and resettlement impacts resulting in both physical and economic displacement. A total of 27.36 hectares of private land will be acquired and approximately 1,470 households comprising of 6,285 persons will be displaced. The total resettlement budget for the project roads is approximately $3.7 million. Compensation rates for the loss of land and structures, shifting assistance, income restoration assistance, and additional support for vulnerable groups and indigenous groups are provided in the entitlement matrix. The compensation entitlements have been endorsed by the executing agency and adequate budget will be allocated. Meaningful consultation and information disclosure were undertaken with (i) project-displaced persons, (ii) indigenous peoples households in the project influence area and their leaders, and (iii) the general public through the ADB website. If any changes or additional land requirements or involuntary resettlement impacts are identified, an updated resettlement plan will be prepared. ADB s approval will be obtained before further implementation of the relevant section of the project roads. The PIU Project Director will be responsible for overall implementation of the combined resettlement and indigenous peoples plans. The Resettlement Officer of the PIU will be the focal person to coordinate and oversee proper implementation. The internal monitoring will be conducted by the implementing agencies and qualified and experienced external experts will undertake the overall monitoring of the safeguards and relevant social issues and submit semiannual monitoring reports to the national level executing agency for submission to ADB.
NESRIP Project 1:
In NER, the scheduled tribe population constitutes 26.93% of the total population. Of the six project states, Meghalaya and Mizoram have scheduled tribe populations making up more than 85% of their respective population. In Assam and Sikkim, scheduled tribe populations make up less than 20%. More than 100 tribal groups reside in NER. In Meghalaya and Mizoram, the majority of the population is tribal, while in the remaining states the tribal population is not distinctive in the sense that they are inherently integrated with the modern and dominant population of the state. Tribal groups in the subproject areas freely interact and share their sources of water, folklore, food, infrastructure, and other belongings with the outside community. Moreover, these groups have nuclear families and are open to new ideas like family planning and formal education. Social impact assessments confirm that the socioeconomic impacts due to the subprojects will not be comparatively different for these people when compared with the remainder of the population. In addition, meaningful consultations, held in an atmosphere free of coercion, were conducted to ensure a comprehensive perspective on the proposed road improvement and its impacts; and to ascertain community members' response, their needs and demands, an estimate of losses that they would suffer, and steps to mitigate those losses. Primary and secondary stakeholders consulted include directly affected people, executing agencies, implementing agencies, local administration officers, men, women, farmers, business communities, and disadvantaged groups residing along the corridor of influence. Combined indigenous peoples plans and resettlement plans were prepared for the road improvement under Project 1. Adequate compensation provisions are made to mitigate adverse impacts on indigenous peoples. An indigenous peoples planning framework was prepared for the investment program and for subsequent tranches. In accordance with the framework, if any significant impacts on indigenous people are identified in the subprojects in subsequent tranches, the relevant state will prepare an indigenous peoples plan and submit it to ADB for approval.
NESRIP Project 2:
The project is category B in accordance with the ADB s Safeguard Policy Statement (2009) since the project will likely have limited impacts on indigenous peoples. An indigenous peoples planning framework was prepared for the investment program and six combined resettlement and indigenous peoples plans have been prepared for the subprojects funded under Project 2. In some project areas, the tribal population is dominant, whereas in others, they are scattered and not concentrated in any particular subproject area and interact freely with the outside community. The assessment of social impact did not show any difference in impact between indigenous and non-indigenous groups in the project locations. The project will not adversely impact on the identity, culture and customary livelihoods of the indigenous peoples. Meaningful consultations with the concerned indigenous groups and their leaders were conducted in an atmosphere free of coercion and in a culturally sensitive manner. This was to ensure a comprehensive perspective on the project and its impacts, and to ascertain community response to the project, their needs and demands from the project, an estimate of losses that they would suffer, and steps to mitigate those losses.
|Stakeholder Communication, Participation, and Consultation|
|During Project Design||As part of the project preparation, consultations were held at the level of primary and secondary stakeholders including directly affected people, executing agency, implementing agency, other local administration and departments etc. Issues related to the proposed project development and various activities involved in the planning and implementation was discussed. About 62 individual interviews were conducted with government officials and focus group discussions were carried out with village Panchayats, village administrative officers, men, women, farmers, business communities, concerned government departments and disadvantaged groups to ensure a comprehensive perspective on the Project and its impacts. The main objective of these discussions was to ascertain community response to the project, their needs and demands from the projects, an estimate of losses that they would suffer, and steps to mitigate those losses. The directly affected populations were consulted to understand their concerns regarding the road construction and gather suggestions on the types of mitigation measures that should be considered to address the envisaged impacts.|
|During Project Implementation|
|Consulting Services||For recruitment of consultants, MDONER and the state governments will be required to submit for ADB's prior approval draft documents and reports related to consultant recruitment, as required by the relevant ADB guidelines.|
|Procurement||Civil works are packaged into large contracts to attract qualified contractors and will be procured using international competitive bidding procedures. Construction supervision consultants will help the project implementation units with contract administration. The project management consultant will help MDONER with overall project management. For procurement of civil works, MDONER and the state governments will be required to submit for ADB's prior approval draft documents and reports related to civil works procurement, as required by the relevant ADB guidelines.|
|Responsible ADB Officer||Jagir Kumar|
|Responsible ADB Department||South Asia Department|
|Responsible ADB Division||India Resident Mission|
|Concept Clearance||23 Nov 2005|
|Fact Finding||07 Jul 2006 to 19 Jul 2006|
|MRM||12 Mar 2007|
|Approval||21 Jul 2011|
|Last Review Mission||-|
|PDS Creation Date||24 Feb 2006|
|Last PDS Update||07 Oct 2014|
MFF Facility Concept 0058-IND
|Financing Plan||Loan Utilization|
|Total (Amount in US$ million)||Date||ADB||Others||Net Percentage|
|Project Cost||298.20||Cumulative Contract Awards|
|Approval||Signing Date||Effectivity Date||Closing|
|21 Jul 2011||25 May 2012||25 May 2012||30 Jun 2014||31 Dec 2014||31 May 2015|
|Financing Plan/TA Utilization||Cumulative Disbursements|
|0.00||1,200,000.00||0.00||0.00||0.00||0.00||1,200,000.00||24 Mar 2023||1,025,219.30|
Project Data Sheets (PDS) contain summary information on the project or program. Because the PDS is a work in progress, some information may not be included in its initial version but will be added as it becomes available. Information about proposed projects is tentative and indicative.
The Access to Information Policy (AIP) recognizes that transparency and accountability are essential to development effectiveness. It establishes the disclosure requirements for documents and information ADB produces or requires to be produced.
The Accountability Mechanism provides a forum where people adversely affected by ADB-assisted projects can voice and seek solutions to their problems and report alleged noncompliance of ADB's operational policies and procedures.
In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of, or reference to, a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
Safeguard Documents See also: Safeguards
Safeguard documents provided at the time of project/facility approval may also be found in the list of linked documents provided with the Report and Recommendation of the President.
Evaluation Documents See also: Independent Evaluation
None currently available.
None currently available.
The Access to Information Policy (AIP) establishes the disclosure requirements for documents and information ADB produces or requires to be produced in its operations to facilitate stakeholder participation in ADB's decision-making. For more information, refer to the Safeguard Policy Statement, Operations Manual F1, and Operations Manual L3.
Requests for information may also be directed to the InfoUnit.
|Title||Document Type||Document Date|
|North Eastern State Roads Investment Program - Project 2||Procurement Plans||Feb 2012|