Gewog Connectivity Roads for Enhanced Climate Resilience Report

Assessment of Gewog Connectivity Roads for

Enhanced Climate Resilience Gewog Connectivity Roads for Report Enhanced Climate Resilience Report

Enhancing Sustainability and Climate Resilience of Forest and Agriculture Landscape and Community Livelihoods in Bhutan

UNDP, BHUTAN OCTOBER 2016 OCTOBER 2016

Table of Contents List of Tables ...... 4 MAPS ...... 4 ABBREVIATIONS ...... 5 GLOSSARY ...... 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 8 1. BACKGROUND...... 12

1.1 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON ROADS ...... 12 2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY ...... 15

2.1 SCOPE OF THE ASSIGNMENT ...... 17 3. METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH ...... 18 4. ENHANCING RESILIENCE OF ROADS TO CLIMATE CHANGE...... 22

4.1 DEVELOPMENT OF CLIMATE RESILIENT ROAD ...... 23 4.2 CURRENT STATUS OF CLIMATE RESILIENCE OF GC ROADS IN THE TARGET PROJECT AREA24 4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR ENHANCING THE CLIMATE RESILIENCE OF THE PRIORITIZED GC ROADS...... 26 4.4 MAKING PRIORITIZED GC ROADS CLIMATE RESILIENT...... 29 4.5 ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION FOR INCORPORATION OF CLIMATE RESILIENT MEASURES..... 36 I. Nature of economic benefits: 36 II. Nature of social benefits: 36 III. Nature of environmental benefits 37 IV. Cost-benefit analysis 37 5. GEWOG CONNECTIVITY ROADS ...... 39

5.1 GENERAL INFORMATION ON ROAD NETWORK IN THE COUNTRY ...... 39 5.2 GENERAL INFORMATION OF ALL GC ROADS IN THE COUNTRY ...... 40 5.3 IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITIZATION OF GC ROADS ...... 41 5.4 PRIORITIZED GC ROADS FOR PROJECT SUPPORT ...... 42 5.5 GC ROADS SELECTED FOR CLIMATE PROOFING ...... 51 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 53 7 Annexure ...... 55

7.1 ANNEX – I _ TERMS OF REFERENCE ...... 55 7.2 ANNEX – II _ LIST OF STAKEHOLDER/PERSONS CONSULTED ...... 60 7.3 ANNEX – III _ FIELD ASSESSMENT DATA OF IDENTIFIED GC ROADS ...... 61

7.4 ANNEX - IV _ ITINERARY...... 121 7.5 ANNEX – V _ REFERENCES ...... 123 7.6 ANNEX – VI _ ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY ROAD CONSTRUCTION (EFRC)...... 124 7.7 ANNEX - VII _ LIST OF PARTICIPANTS DURING PRESENTATION ON 20-JULY 2016 ...... 129 7.8 ANNEX - VIII _ PHOTOGRAPHS OF DUNGMITHANG – MESITHANG GC ROAD, ...... 130 TANG, BUMTHANG ...... 130

List of Tables

TABLE 1: IDENTIFICATION OF GC ROADS FOR ASSESSMENT BY NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE ...... 20

TABLE 2: DETAILS OF GEWOG CONNECTIVITY ROADS ASSESSED AND ANALYSED ...... 21

TABLE 3: CLIMATE RISKS ...... 26

TABLE 4: POTENTIAL ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES AGAINST CLIMATE INDUCED HAZARDS26

TABLE 5: GC ROADS PRIORITIZED AND ACTIVITIES RECOMMENDED FOR CLIMATE PROOFING ...... 28

TABLE 6: COSTS FOR CLIMATE PROOFING OF PRIORITIZED GC ROADS ...... 29

TABLE 7: SUMMARY _ CURRENT STATUS OF CLIMATE RESILIENCE OF GC ROADS...... 31

TABLE 8: UNIT COST OF ITEMS FOR COMPLETE CLIMATE PROOFING ...... 40

TABLE 9: DETAILS OF GEWOG CONNECTIVITY ROADS TAKEN OVER BY DOR IN 2014 ...... 41

TABLE 10: RANKING OF THE GC ROAD PROJECTS BASED ON WEIGHTED NET PRESENT VALUE ..... 50

TABLE 11: TOTAL COST OF GC ROAD PROJECT...... 50

TABLE 12: ROADS SELECTED FOR CLIMATE PROOFING ...... 51

TABLE 13: FINAL RANKING OF GC ROADS SELECTED FOR CLIMATE PROOFING ...... 52

List of Boxes Box 1: Definition of Gewog Connectivity Roads….………………………………………………..14 Box 2 : Definition of climate-induced hazards …………………………………………….………..15 Box 3: Climate Resilience Adaptive Measures………………………….…………………………..18

MAPS

MAP 1: PROJECT TARGET AREAS (LANDSCAPE 1, LANDSCAPE 2 AND LANDSCAPE 3)...... 16

MAP 2: ROAD ALIGNMENT OF CHHUDZOM (DOVAN) GC ROAD (48.5 KM) ...... 42

MAP 3: ROAD ALIGNMENT OF NIMSHONG-SHINGKHAR GC ROAD (31.96 KM) ...... 43

ABBREVIATIONS

AE Assistant Engineer AMC Agriculture Machinery Center ASL Above Sea Level BC Biological Corridor BHU Basic Health Unit CMU Central Machinery Unit DoFPS Department of Forest & Park Services DoL Department of Livestock DoR Department of Roads DR Dzongkhag Road ECRP Eastern Central Regional Project EE Executive Engineer EFRC Environmental Friendly Road Construction FC Formation Cutting FR Farm Road FW Formation Width GC Gewog Connectivity GEF Global Environment Facility GNHC Gross National Happiness Commission JE Junior Engineer Km Kilometer LDCF Least Developed Countries Fund LG Local Government m meter MoAF Ministry of Agriculture and Forests MoEA Ministry of Economic Affairs MoWHS Ministry of Works & Human Settlement NLC National Land Commission NRDCL Natural Resources Development Corporation Limited Nu Ngultrum PA Protected Area PE Project Engineer

PPD Policy and Planning Division RGoB Royal Government of Bhutan RLP Rural Livelihood Project RNR Renewal Natural Resources ROW Right of Way RSPN Royal Society for Protection of Nature RSTA Road Safety and Transport Authority RUG Road Users’ Group SNV Netherlands Development Organization ToR Terms of Reference UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund WMM Wet Mix Macadam

GLOSSARY

Dasho : Conferred title equivalent to ‘Sir’ Dzongdag : District Administrator Dzongkhag Tshogdu : District Development Committee Dzongkhag : District Gewog : Administrative Block Gup : Elected head of a gewog Lhakhang : Temple Mangmi : Deputy Head of the Block Administration Ngultrum : National currency Nye : Religious site Thromde : Municipality Tshogpa : Elected link man between the Gup and the public

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Royal Government of Bhutan (RGoB) accords the highest priority for the sustainable conservation of its environment. It is enshrined in the constitution of the kingdom of Bhutan that every Bhutanese is a trustee of the Kingdom’s natural resources and environment for the benefit of the present and future generations and that the government shall protect, conserve and improve the pristine environment and safeguard the biodiversity of the country. Despite such a colossal commitment, Bhutan is still considered highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The vulnerability to the impacts of climate change largely emanates from its rugged mountainous ecosystem, steep geo-physical setting due to its location in the Himalayas with altitudes ranging from 150 to 7,500 meters (m) above sea level (asl), and its weak economic structure as a least developed country. Over 69% of the population dwell in rural areas and are largely dependent on agriculture for their livelihood. It is a landlocked country and surface transport is the most reliable form of connectivity in the country. In the recent years Bhutan has been confronted with varying magnitudes of the impacts of climate change on the sources of rural livelihoods and biodiversity. The country has been struggling to reduce and adapt to these impacts in order to sustainably improve the resilience of the rural communities and conservation of the biodiversity. The future climate change projections for Bhutan indicate that as compared to the 1980-2009 periods the mean annual temperature is projected to increase by 0.8°C to 1.0°C by 2010- 2039 and further by 2.0°C -2.4°Cfor the period 2040-2069. The summer temperatures are projected to increase by 0.8°C in 2010-2039 and further increase by 2.1 °C by 2040-2069. The winter temperature is projected to increase by much higher range of 1.2°C rise for 2010- 2039 time slice and by 2.8°C for the period 2040-2069.With regard to the precipitation, the mean annual precipitation is expected to increase by 10% for the period 2010 to 2039 and, further by 20% for the period 2040-2069.The most prominent and increasing climate change induced hazards relevant to the road and transport sector are landslides, flash floods, different types and magnitude of soil erosion which are most induced by unprecedented monsoon rain. The climate change induced hazards will severely impact the livelihood sources of the rural communities and disrupt key infrastructures like roads that will immensely affect the access to food and other basic necessities. The physical topography dominated by rugged mountainous terrain is by far the most significant factor that predisposes the Bhutanese roads to climate change induced disasters. For the long term sustainability, durability and to reduce the impacts on the environment it is essential to undertake climate proofing of roads to make it climate resilient. The project on “Enhancing sustainability and resilience of forest and agriculture landscape and community livelihoods in Bhutan” aims to reduce the impacts of climate change on the most vulnerable section of the Bhutanese society which are the rural communities. The project has broad objectives to enhance the sustainability of the different sources of livelihoods and biodiversity of the country. To achieve its objectives, the project has adopted an integrated landscape-based approach which has the key strategy for adaptation to the impacts of climate change. The integrated landscape strategy of the project includes the improvement of the institutional capacity at national, sub-national and local levels to sustainably manage the forests and agricultural landscapes for enhanced resilience to climate change; emplacement of a governance system for biological corridors and operationalization of conservation managements system in the pilot corridors; and the development of climate resilient livelihood options for the local communities.

The primary focus of the project is to support the development of climate resilient livelihood options in the country to reduce the vulnerabilities of the communities to the impact of climate change. Among others, one of the potential areas of intervention envisaged by the project is the development of climate resilient Gewog Connectivity (GC) roads. This study is expected to provide relevant inputs for the formulation and design of project. The underlying objectives of this assignment is to examine the existing status of GC roads in the project areas, assess their vulnerability to various climate-induced hazards, identify and prioritize the GC roads that requires to be strengthened for enhancing the resilience of the rural communities, and analyze the costs and benefits for enhancing the climate resilience of these roads. This study on GC roads forms one of the sub-consulting assignments whose findings will provide inputs for the formulation and design of project. The different methodologies adopted for this assignment included the use of primary and secondary information. The secondary information was obtained through the desktop reviews and focused group discussion with the relevant stakeholders. The primary data was obtained through a predesigned structured questionnaire survey of the stakeholders and by undertaking the field visits to assess the status of the target GC roads. The key informants covered by the survey in the eleven Dzongkhags included the local government officials like Gups, Gewog Administrative Officers, Mangmi, Tshogpas and selected representatives of the beneficiaries. Furthermore, additional information was also collected from the engineers from the Department of Roads (DoR) at departmental head office Thimphu and field offices. Site engineers from DoR accompanied during the field visits for all the targeted roads. The engineers provided with an in-depth information on about the road and also enabled during discussions and consultations with the local government officials and other public at the survey sites. The data collected were then analyzed to prepare the final report. During the review of literature on road construction techniques, existing standards and specification for different categories of roads were reviewed. The literature gave a particular emphasis on the Environmental Friendly Road Construction (EFRC) techniques and its utilization in developing climate resilient roads. The most basic information on the GC roads was obtained from which is the national focal agency responsible for all aspects of the road sector in Bhutan. Of the total 31 GC roads considered under project area, 14 GC roads that constitute 48% of GC roads in the project area were sampled for assessment. The key criteria used for selecting the samples for this study were the percentage of landscape falling inside a Gewog, GC roads with a length of over three Kilometers (Km) and identification of at least one GC road from each Dzongkhag. The findings from this study further confirms that because of the country’s fragile and rugged mountainous terrain the impacts of climate change on GC roads will be highly severe and will affect the road and transport sector in different ways. As a result of the increased monsoon discharges from streams and rivers which will increase the frequency and magnitude of land slips, landslide, flash flood and erosion likely to impact on essential infrastructures like roads with severe damages. Some of the damages could be even irreversible. About 73% GC roads assessed in this study are highly vulnerable to climate change induced hazards because of the poor design and sub-standard quality of construction. Out of 14 GC roads assessed, only four seem to have some degrees of climate resilience. Although the use of EFRC techniques was to be followed, it has been apparently ignored or not adopted rigorously making the roads highly vulnerable to the different types of climate change induced hazards. The drains are poorly designed and water from the drains overflows on the road surface damaging the road. It is highly likely that insufficient construction budget resulted in comprising the quality of 9 construction. Two of the 14 sampled GC roads fall in heavy rainfall zone and are highly prone to damage all the year rounds if it is not adequately climate proofed. The shortage of local labour is one of the main constraints that affect the regular and timely maintenance of GC roads especially during the peak monsoon season when the roads are highly exposed to the climate induced hazards. Any small damages during the monsoon season neglected tend to serve as the entry point for major damage of much higher magnitude. Since the construction of climate resilient roads is a fairly new area, the DoR is severely affected by the lack of skilled and technical expertise. The present technical expertise on the construction of climate resilient roads in DoR is highly inadequate. At present, the manuals and guidelines on EFRC designs are absent. Based on the findings and observations from this GC road study a number of recommendations are made for the improvement of the present status of the GC roads for making it climate proof and resilient. Some of the most fundamental recommendations are: Five GC roads namely 48.5 Km Chhokorling (Toribari) – Pankhay (Gewog office) GC Road (Dovan) in Sarpang; 31.96 Km Nimshong-Shingkhar GC road, Shingkhar Gewog, Zhemgang Dzongkhag; 19.5 Km Wangdigang-Zhalingbi GC Road, Korphu Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag; 21.2 Km Yongkola-Banjar GC road, Tsamang Gewog, Mongar Dzongkhag and 16.3 Km Autsho - Gewog Centre (Jarey) GC road in Lhuentse have been prioritized for support by the project.

There is an urgent need to develop and strengthen the technical capacity of engineers of the DoR on the design and construction of climate resilient roads as DoR is the nodal agency responsible for the development of the road sector. This could be accomplished through the provision of short and long term trainings, study visits to relevant institutions in the region and by developing guidelines on EFRC and climate resilient roads.

The use of EFRC techniques such as bioengineering works has to be strengthened and enforced during the construction of the GC roads.

This study has estimated a total budget of Nu.1269.00 million for the development of climate resilient roads under the project. From this total allocation a sum of Nu. 634.50 million should be allocated for the development of climate resilient roads; Nu. 610.00 million towards making the GC roads climate resilient, Nu. 4.50 million for the development of EFRC and climate resilient guidelines, and Nu. 20.00 million should be for strengthening the institutional capacity of DoR.

There is a need to implement a holistic climate resilient package for the entire length of the Chhudzom-Dovan and the Nimshong – Shingkhar GC roads while for the Korphu GC road there is a need to execute the bioengineering works and construction of gabion walls in two critical sections.

This study has identified and prioritized three GC roads namely Chhudzom-Dovan, Nimshong –Shingkhar and Korphu GC road for immediate climate proofing under the project. The lessons learned from these pilot roads should then be used for developing the guidelines and specifications for the preparation of climate resilient standards for construction of climate resilient roads in Bhutan.

Making GC roads climate resilient requires a much higher capacity of drains, blacktopping, and construction of additional cross drains or culverts. This entails additional budget 10 compared to the construction of normal roads. The DoR has estimated a budget of Nu.6.78 million for the construction of one kilometer of climate resilient roads and hence it is essential to use this estimate while preparing the budget estimates for the development of climate resilient roads.

There is little doubt that road is the most effective, inexpensive, sustainable and reliable form of transport in Bhutan. Topography and geo-physical setting of the country is by far the most significant factor that predisposes the Bhutanese roads to climate change induced disasters. It is apparent from this study that the different climate change induced hazards such as the landslides, flash floods and different forms of soil erosions make the roads highly vulnerable to damages especially during the monsoon. The financial resources, technical expertise and institutional capacity with the DoR for the development of climate resilient roads need to be strengthened for the development of climate resilient GC roads in the country. Roads are one of the most important sectors and are also the most potential drivers of change for the socio- economic development of the country. Notwithstanding its role in the socio-economic development of the country the climate proofing of GC roads remains the priority area of investment for the government for adaptation to climate change.

1. BACKGROUND Bhutan is a mountainous landlocked country located on the eastern slope of the Himalayas with a geographical area of 38, 394 square Km. The country is characterized by fragile mountainous ecosystem with elevations ranging from about 100 meters in the foothills to over 7500 meters towards the north. High, rugged mountains, glaciers and moraines, deep valleys and ravines and depressions earmarking watercourses, drainage basins and waterfalls characterize Bhutan’s physical features1. The landscape which is dominated by rugged mountainous terrain and steep slopes makes the country highly vulnerable to the different types of climate induced natural hazards and climate related disasters. Over 69% of the population dwell in rural areas and are largely dependent on subsistence agriculture for their livelihood2. Agriculture sector is highly dependent on monsoon. Being is a landlocked country surface transport is the most reliable form of connectivity in the country. In the recent years Bhutan has been confronted with varying magnitudes of the impacts of climate change on the sources of rural livelihoods and biodiversity. Considering its fragile ecosystem, the country has adopted the conservation of environment as one of the four pillars of Gross National Happiness (GNH) which embodies the main development philosophy of the country. The Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) accords the highest priority for the sustainable conservation of its environment. It is enshrined in the constitution of the kingdom of Bhutan that every Bhutanese is a trustee of the Kingdom’s natural resources and environment for the benefit of the present and future generations and that the government shall protect, conserve and improve the pristine environment and safeguard the biodiversity of the country. Notwithstanding, the colossal commitments towards the conservation of the environment Bhutan is increasingly facing the impacts of climate change and climate induced disasters. In the recent times the frequency and magnitude of climate induces extreme events is increasing causing substantial damages to the source of livelihoods. The climate in Bhutan varies substantially from one Dzongkhag to another due to the sudden changes in the topography, elevation and altitude over short distance and small season variation cause impacts of substantial magnitudes across the different sectors such as agriculture, infrastructures like roads and bridges bringing immense hardships to the communities. A well developed and reliable transport system is a critical infrastructure for the socio- economic development of the country, In Bhutan the river systems and waterways are mostly unfit for transport due to the mountainous terrain that makes the rivers system narrow which meander through steep gorges, and generally do not run very deep3. Air transport is still developing, not very feasible and expensive. Thus surface transport is the most inexpensive, reliable and sustainable transport system for Bhutan. 1.1 Potential Impacts of Climate Change on roads Climate change has the potential to cause significant disruptions and damage to transport systems particularly to the roads. The climate change projections for Bhutan indicate that as compared to the 1980-2009 periods the mean annual temperature is projected to increase by 0.8°C to 1.0°C by 2010-2039 and further by 2.0°C -2.4°Cfor the period 2040-2069. The summer temperatures are projected to increase by 0.8°C in 2010-2039 and further increase

1 Second National Communication to UNFCCC, NEC, 2011 2 RNR Sector 11th Five Year Plan,2013-2018, MoAF 3Second National Communication to UNFCCC, NEC, 2011 12 by 2.1 °C by 2040-2069. The winter temperature is projected to increase by much higher range of 1.2°C rise for 2010-2039 time slice and by 2.8°C for the period 2040-2069.With regard to the precipitation, the mean annual precipitation is expected to increase by 10% for the period 2010 to 2039 and, further by 20% for the period 2040-20694. The National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA), 2006 has identified natural disasters mainly landslides, floods and other forms of physical disruptions as the main cause of concern that could cause irreversible damages to important infrastructures like roads, bridges and hydropower that will impact the delivery of services to the rural communities. According to NAPA (2006) the incidence of natural disaster and its impacts are likely to be heightened by climate change5. The most common climate induced hazards that could directly impact the road and associated infrastructures are landslide, floods, and landslips, deposition of boulders and debris, deformation of topography and destabilization of the delicate steep slopes.

Topography is by far the most significant factor that predisposes the Bhutanese roads to climate change induced disasters. Generally, the topography of all of the project areas is highly mountainous with deeply incised river valleys and road alignments often have to pass through the unavoidable unstable slopes.

Given the above scenario the impacts of climate change on all types of roads are highly likely and that making the roads climate proof and resilient will be very fundamental for its long term sustainability.

4 Second National Communication to UNFCCC, NEC, 2011 5 Bhutan National Adaptation Programme of Action, 2006, National Environment Commission, Thimphu. 13

The timeframe for this study was 35 days including fieldwork as reflected in the Terms of Reference (ToR) in Annexure I.

Box 1: Definition of Gewog Connectivity Roads

Gewog Connectivity (GC) Roads are part of the Dzongkhag Roads (DR) that connects the Gewog Centers. The goals are to increase and improve access to health and educational facilities, markets, financial institutions and other development benefits. The Road Act 2013 has defined “Dzongkhag Road (DR) as all internal Dzongkhag roads, including road that connects a Dzongkhag Centre and an Integrated Gewog Centre or connects two Dzongkhag Centers not otherwise designated as National Highway or connects an Integrated Gewog Centre with an existing road of equal or higher classification.” All GC roads connect Gewog offices from highways. These provide access to Integrated Gewog Centres, schools and Basic Health Unit (BHU). The road alignment normally passes through the Gewog connecting villages and farmlands along the way. Sometimes these roads also touch or pass through important historical and cultural sites/monasteries etc. The construction of all internal DRs started during the 9th Five Year Plan as Farm Road (FR). The FR has the following specifications: carriageway of 3.5 m, Formation width of 5.10m, L-shaped drain of 0.60m and .0.5 m shoulder on either side.

The specifications of DR and FR are given below: Pavement Standards Road Type Right of Way Formation Width Carriageway Drains Shoulder Remarks (ROW) (FW) Shoulder on Farm Road 12.20 m 5.10 m 3.50 m 0.60m 0.50 m both sides of Carriageway 1 m of width Dzongkhag Road or (after drain) 1.00 Gewog 20 m 6.50 m 3.50 m 1.00 m left for m Connectivity debris Road collection The GC roads are part of the DR. These have been named as GC roads* to differentiate from other DR while taking up blacktopping works. The government has prioritized to blacktop all roads connecting to Gewog Centres. * Consultation with DoR officials.

2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the assignment is to examine the existing status of GC roads in the target project areas and their vulnerability to various climate-induced hazards. The assignments also include the identification and prioritization of GC roads that require to be strengthened enhancing its resilience to climate induced disaster by undertaking a detail analysis of climate related risks and costs and benefits analysis of the roads. The target project areas include Landscape 1, Landscape 2 and Landscape 3 which defined below. Landscape I: constitutes the Jigme Khesar Strict Nature Reserve (JKSNR) and Biological Corridor 1 covering 758 square kilometers that is administratively under in Bjee, Sombay, Gakiling and Sama Gewogs of Haa Dzongkhagand Tsento Gewog under Paro Dzongkhag. The total population living inside Landscape I is estimated at 1,500 people.

Landscape II: constitutes the Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park (JSWNP), Biological Corridor 2 and Biological Corridor 8 covering 2,844 square kilometers which cuts across seven different Dzongkhags of Punakha, Sarpang, Thimphu, Trongsa, Tsirang, Wangduephodrang and Zhemgang. It includes a total of 23 Gewogs of which 11 are under Wangduephodrang, four Gewogs under Trongsa, two Gewogs each under Punakha, Sarpang and Tsirang and one Gewog each in Thimphu and Zhemgang Dzongkhags. The total population living inside the protected landscape II is estimated at 10,000 people.

Landscape III: constitutes Phrumsengla National Park (PNP) and Biological Corridor 4 covering 1,406 square kilometers. This area covers 11 Gewogs under Bumthang, Lhuentse, Mongar, Zhemgang, and TrongsaDzongkhags. Of the 11 Gewogs three Gewogs each fall under Bumthang and Lhuentse, two Gewogs each fall under Mongar and Zhemgang Dzongkhags while one Gewog falls under Trongsa Dzongkhag.

Box 2 : Climate-induced hazards

Climate-induced hazards may be defined as processes or phenomena that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic disruption or environmental damage. Climate Change is a result of overall global warming, leading to ice/glacier melting, increased rainfalls, erratic weather conditions/patterns and extreme weather events. This has an overall impact on agriculture, forest/bio-diversity, health, water resources and roads/infrastructures. High intensity and localized rainfall causes an increased saturation of slopes and increases surface runoff with risks of erosion, landslides, flash floods and infrastructure damages. Road assets likely to be affected are pavement and road base, bridges, culverts, slopes (stability) and surface drainage. Road blocks/damages from flash floods on the highways are becoming quite common. The two most notable instances of floods caused by high discharges recorded in Bhutan are the Landslide Dam Outburst Floods (LDOF) at Kurizampa in Kurichu in Mongar that occurred on 10th of July 2004 which was caused by the outburst of “Tshatichu landslide dam” and the Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF) in Punatsangchu that occurred on the 7th of October,1994 which was caused by the outburst of glacial lake “Luggye-Tsho”. Both these floods inflicted severe damages to the existing highways at several places.

MAP 1: Project Target Areas (Landscape 1, Landscape 2 and Landscape 3). Landscape 1: Jigme Khesar SNR + BC 1 Landscape 2: JSW National Park + BC 2 + BC 3

16 Landscape 2: JSW National Park + BC 2 + BC 8

2.1 Scope of the Assignment This study was undertaken under the supervision of Gross National Happiness Commission (GNHC) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). The Project Preparation Grant (PPG) team worked in close collaboration with the consultants. The assignment included the following different tasks.  To undertake a detail review of all GC roads with respect to their length, number of beneficiaries, functional and financing status.  To undertake the physical assessment of the different GC roads under project area to establish the current status of climate proofing and resilience using the nationally acceptable standards for climate-resilient and EFRC especially in relation to drainage and slope stability.  To develop suitable selection criteria based on the socio-economic, climate change and environmental factors for assessing the climate resilience status of the GC roads. These criteria were then used to identify and prioritize the GC roads for project support for enhancing their sustainability and resilience to climate change.  To undertake the cost-benefit analysis considering the economic, social and environmental factors including the benefits of the GC road over short, medium, and long-term for enhancing the climate resilience of the prioritized GC roads for project support.  To identify strategic activities for enhancing the sustainability and climate resilience of the prioritized GC roads, and prepare detailed costing for these activities based on nationally acceptable standards and norms for making the roads climate-resilient or environment friendly.

3. METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH

Different approaches and methodologies were adopted for undertaking this assignment through the use of primary and secondary information. The secondary information was obtained through the desktop reviews and focused group discussion with the relevant stakeholders. The primary data was obtained through a structured questionnaire survey of the stakeholders and by undertaking the field visits to assess the status of the target GC roads. The key informants covered by the survey in the eleven Dzongkhags included the local government officials like Gups, Gewog Administrative Officers, Mangmi and Tshogpas. Furthermore, additional information was also collected from the engineers met at the survey sites. The data collected were then analyzed to prepare the final report. The detail approaches are discussed below. i. Review of Related Literature Review of relevant literature related to road construction techniques, existing standards and specification for various types of roads were reviewed. Particular attention was given to the Environmental Friendly Road Construction (EFRC)6 techniques used in the road construction sector. This is because the road designs and specifications are of paramount importance to address the climate change impacts. A variety of literature on climate resilience of roads was scanned and reviewed7 during the course of this work. It was apparent that the information on climate resilience or climate proofing of roads in the country is very scanty. The proposed Nganglam-Deothang Highway was the first road where some climate resilience initiatives were initiated. The three reports on this road reviewed and relevant for this study were the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report for Nganglam-Deothang Highway8, where some climate resilience adaptive measures are proposed, followed by the Draft Final Environment Report 9 where further studies were carried out to identify vulnerable areas and the recommended climate change adaptive measures.

6 See Annex VII_EFRC 7 See Annexure V_ References/ Literatures reviewed 8 EIA_ Nganglam - Deothang Road, ADB Project No. 39225-06, Bhutan: Road Network Project (RNP) II Additional Financing, DoR May 2012 by Karma Chogyel 9 Environment Report _ ADB TA-7608 Road Network Project (RNP) II Additional Financing, REG: Enabling Climate Change Responses in Asia and the Pacific – Building Resilience to Disaster and Climate Change Impacts (Subproject 2) Nganglam - Deothang Road, DoR January 2013, by KD Chamling

Box 3: Climate Resilience Adaptive Measures Climate Resilience Adaptive Measures or climate change adaptation refers to the measures adopted for reducing the vulnerability to new climate patterns by appropriately altering behaviour and reviewing asset usage and resource allocation that is based on previous climate patterns. Some of the examples of climate resilience adaptive measures are:  Application of safety factors to design assumptions (due to rapid contraction/expansion, bitumen bleeding).  Avoiding the hazardous areas that are prone to landslides and flood.  Reduce slope gradients wherever possible.  Increasing drainage capacity.  Increasing protective works through retaining and breast walls.  Increasing the bridge openings and scouring protection.  River training and river bank protection.  Increased use of bioengineering for slope protection.  Improving the construction quality through higher specifications and stricter compliance.  Provision of sufficient maintenance resources such as the budget, maintenance programmes.  Enforcing truck axle loading.  Introduction of supportive reforestation, agricultural and irrigation management programmes in project road corridors.  Undertaking bioengineering works on slopes to enhance slope stability. .

The most basic information on the GC roads was obtained from the Department of Roads (DOR) which is the nodal agency responsible for the road sector in Bhutan. ii. Field Visits to Target Project Areas During the course of this study a total of 14 GC roads (Table 1) were selected for assessment and during the field visits a structured questionnaire survey prepared by the consultants was used to collect the required information. The key informants covered by the survey in the eleven Dzongkhags included the local government officials like Gups, Gewog Administrative Officers, Mangmi and Tshogpas. Furthermore, additional information was also collected from the engineers from the Department of Roads (DoR) at departmental head office Thimphu and field offices. Engineers from respective sites also accompanied during the field visits of the targeted roads. They provided valuable information on about the road and also enabled during discussions and consultations with the local government officials and other public at the survey sites10.Three selection criteria used for the sampling the GC roads for this study were:  Percentage of landscape study area falling inside a Gewog.  Length of GC road above 3 km and command area covered were considered

10Refer Annexure II_ Lists of Stakeholder/Persons consulted

 Inclusion of at least one GC road per Dzongkhag. This study assessed 48% of GC roads falling in the project area (Table 1 and 2). Table 1: Identification of GC roads for assessment by number and percentage

Number Gewogs GC roads GC road Gewog coverage of GC inside in project selected inside the project Sl. No. Dzongkhag roads Project Gewogs for study study area Remarks study area (Nos.) (Nos) (Nos.) (%) 1 Lhuentse 8 3 2 1 Jarey – 55-60% inside PNP 2 Mongar 15 2 2 1 Tsamang – 55% inside PNP 3 Bumthang 4 3 3 1 Tang – 5% inside PNP 4 Trongsa 3 4 3 1 Korphu – 100% inside JSWNP 5 Zhemgang 6 3 2 1 Shingkhar – 65% 30% inside PNP + 35% inside BC 6 Sarpang 10 2 2 1 Chhudzom/Doban inside JSWNP – 5% 7 Tsirang 12 2 2 1 Phuentenchhu – inside JSWNP 10% 8 Wangdue 15 11 10 4 Athang – 75% - 60% inJSWNP Phodrang +15% inside BC8

- inside BC2 Gasetshowom - 25% - inside BC2 Nahi – 50% - 35% inside JSWNP + 20% Phobji – 50-55% inside BC8 9 Punakha 7 2 1 1 Kabjisa - 5% inside BC2 10 Paro 10 1 1 0 Tsento – inside the BC 15-20% 11 Haa 3 3 3 2 Sombaykha – inside JKSNR 40-45% Total 11 93 36 31 14 48% of GC roads assessed iii. Analysis and Report Writing The final part of the methodology was the analysis of all the information collected through field visits and other consultations meetings. Based on the final analysis the findings from this study has been reported and relevant recommendations made for enhancing the climate proofing and resilience of the GC roads for better adaption to the impacts of climate change.

Table 2: Details of Gewog Connectivity roads assessed and analysed Landscape Dzongkhag Gewog GC roads considered for assessment Length Remarks (km) (% coverage inside the project study area) Landscape 1: Not assessed. Bjee -70-75% inside the landscape Jenkana - Khamina 65.5 JKSNR + BC 1 (Road upgraded to SNH.) Not assessed. Sombaykha -40-45% inside JKSNR Khamina-Sombaykha 14* (Made Field visit only as the Haa road is under construction.) Not assessed. Gakiling Gakiling-Rangtse 7* (Made Field visit only as the road is under construction.) Paro Tsento – 15-20% inside the BC Drugyel – Gewog office 0.6 Not assessed. (Field visit not made). Landscape 2: Punakha Kabjisa - about 5% inside BC2 Jalephu - Kabjisa Gewog office 3.06 Assessed. JSWNP+BC2+ Sarpang Chhudzom/Doban – 5% inside JSWNP Chokorling (Toribari) – Gewog office 48.5 Assessed. BC8 Trongsa Korphu – entirely inside JSWNP Wangdigang-Zhalingbi 20 Assessed. Tsirang Phuentenchhu – 10% inside JSWNP Tsirangtoe Gup office – Gewog office 5.25 Assessed. Athang – 75% (60% inside JSWNP + 15% Assessed. Jarogang zam – Dogayphu (Gewog office) 7 inside BC8) Gaselo Feeder Road (end point) - Wasina Assessed. Wangdue Gasetsho wom -25% inside BC2 5.7 (Gewog Office) Phodrang Nahi – 50% inside BC2 Agoloo – Gup office 3.4 Assessed. Phobji – 50-55% (35% inside JSWNP + 20% Assessed. Tabading -Gup Office (RNR Office) 14 inside BC8) Landscape 3: Bumthang Tang – 5% inside PNP Dungmithang - Mesithang 27 Assessed. PNP + BC4 Lhuentse Jarey – 55-60% inside PNP Autsho-Jarey 16.3 Assessed. Mongar Tsamang – 55% inside PNP Yongkola - Tsamang 21.3 Assessed. Shingkhar – 65% (30% inside PNP + 35% Assessed. Zhemgang Nimshong - Shingkhar 31.96 inside BC) Total 11 16 14 237.21 * Road under construction (Refer Annex – IV _ Itinerary)

4. ENHANCING RESILIENCE OF ROADS TO CLIMATE CHANGE The importance of roads cannot be undermined as it is the country’s most feasible, reliable and inexpensive mode of transport. It is also seen as the single most drivers of change for the rapid socio-economic development of the country. The RGoB has prioritized to provide good road connectivity to all the Gewogs primarily to reduce poverty and promote balanced and equitable rural development. As discussed in section 1.1 above that the topography of the country is the most significant factor that predisposes the Bhutanese roads to climate change induced disasters. The mountainous topography, steep slopes and unavoidable unstable slopes makes the roads highly vulnerable to the different forms of weather induced disasters. The future climate change projections for Bhutan indicate that the temperature and precipitations are likely to increase significantly which will lead to the increasing frequency and magnitudes of extreme climatic events and natural disasters. In a mountainous country like Bhutan no roads are totally safe from frequent blocks be it in summer or winter11. Roads built must be climate resilient to meet the extreme temperature changes and to carry the traffic volume12. One of the formidable challenges faced by the DoR is to keep the roads open for traffic during the monsoon. Furthermore, the geologically fragile mountainous terrain makes the roads highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate changes such as flash floods and landslides caused by heavy rains. Considering this scenario, there is urgency and need to identify suitable technologies for developing a more climate resilient roads in the country to ensure the smooth flow of essential goods and services during the time of natural disaster. There is also a need for suitable adaptation and mitigations measures in the road sector.

Resilience has been defined as “The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards. Climate resilient roads require a set of technological measures rather than a single technology; to resist, absorb, accommodate and recover from the effects of hazards in a timely and efficient manner, including through the reservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions13.” Climate resilience, in the road sector means that our roads should be able to resist, absorb and accommodate any adverse impacts induced by from climate change. Climate proofing, is a term used generally for identifying risks in a project from climate variability and change, and ensuring that those risks are reduced to acceptable levels through long-lasting and environmentally sound, economically viable and socially acceptable changes implemented at one or more of the following stages in the project cycle: planning, design, construction, operation and decommissioning14.

The resilience of the roads to climate change impacts could be enhanced though better climate proofing and building climate resilient roads. From an engineering perspective,

11 National Food Security Paper, Bhutan Climate Summit 2011, MoAF. 12 Climate change Risk Assessment Report, Asian Development Bank, Country Partnership Strategy: Bhutan, 2014-2018 13-14 Paving the Way for Climate - Resilient Infrastructure: Guidance for Practitioners and Planners, UNDP September 2011.

22 climate proofing is the capacity of a system to continue to function well as the climate changes. It is a measure of the range within which the system, such as an ecosystem, a socio-economic system or a technological system continues to function ‘normally’15. The road networks in Bhutan are highly vulnerable to climate change impacts due to poor quality of construction, a high proportion of unpaved roads and limited resources for maintenance and lack of suitable construction technologies. The GC roads in particular are most vulnerable to impacts of climate change due to the poor quality of design and construction. Although the DoR places a high emphasis on the construction of environmentally friendly roads through the use of EFRC technologies, the resilience of the roads to climate change is still inadequate. Surface drainages, culverts and bridges and hillside slopes become vulnerable to increased rainfall intensity resulting in the increased surface runoff, soil erosion and sediment load transport. Scouring and damages to wing walls, aprons and drainage systems are imminent. Therefore, to make our roads climate resilient or climate proof higher drainage capacity of drains, culverts and bridges must be designed. Proper and adequate retaining structures combined with bio-engineering measures must be in place to prevent slope failures. The road surface has to be protected with bituminous sealing to prevent water getting into the base course and damaging the road and thereby reducing the lifespan of the road.

4.1 Development of Climate Resilient Road The measures adopted to make roads climate proof and enhance its resilience to climate change are generally classified in two categories16 : I. Engineering and structural measures- Under these measures the technologies typically includes the following:  The use of slope stabilization structures such as (dry stone wall, gabion wall, Random Rubble Masonry (RRM), and jute bag wall. The choice of the structure is dependent on the gradient of the road, terrain and site conditions and the availability of construction materials.  Paving of roads with durable materials  Development of improved drainage systems to avoid erosion of road materials. The drainage system includes drainage and cross drainage structures such as cascades, small check walls, culverts and causeway, and French drains in marshy areas.  For the construction of new roads construction proper alignment of roads to avoid unstable and fragile areas and improved planning of roads with proper cross section and higher standard dimensions is essential. II. Bio-engineering measures Bio-engineering is the use of vegetation, either alone or in conjunction with civil engineering structures such as wall and drains to manage water and debris thereby reducing instability and erosion on slopes. The plants or plant materials used in bioengineering works are selected local plants that have the properties to root out and establish at sites, thus enhancing slope stabilization process by the plants’ root networks

15 Paving the Way for Climate - Resilient Infrastructure: Guidance for Practitioners and Planners, UNDP September 2011. 16 https://www.ctc-n.org/sites/www.ctc-n.org/files/UNFCCC_docs/ref20x08_35.pdf

system. Bio-engineering measures prevent soil erosion and provide slope stability through soil anchoring, reinforcing, armouring the slopes. Through the use of bioengineering measures exposed areas and dumpsites are covered and exposed less which strengthens the soil stability, reduces environmental impacts and improves the aesthetic value.

Some of the popular bio-engineering methods are:

Grass Planting: Grass seed is spread or alternatively grass seed is hand-planted in lines across the slope. This results in slope stabilization by armouring and reinforcing of slopes.

Shrub and Tree Planting: Shrubs or trees are planted at regular intervals on the slope which later create a dense network of roots in the soil supporting the slope.

Brush Layering, Palisades and Fascines: Woody cuttings are laid in lines across the slope usually following the contour which forms a strong barrier, preventing the development of rill, and trap material moving down the slope. The system catches debris, armours and reinforces the slope.

Composite Systems: A range of composite systems used to include live check dams, vegetated stone pitching and planted geo-textiles later supplemented by the vegetation. The composite systems reinforce the soil thereby stabilizing the slopes.

4.2 Current status of climate resilience of GC roads in the target project area The assessment of 14 GC roads17 revealed that the overall road quality and condition of the GC roads poor considering the lack of drainage system, surface flows and evident landslides and soil erosion. The construction of the GC roads has not received adequate attention, in terms of planning, road alignment surveys and supervision during construction period. The lack of basic maintenance was very obvious in almost all the GC roads. The most challenging part is the lack of or non-existence of essential road structures such as the side drains and cross drainages. Traces of earthen drains are seen in some sections but most of these were non-functional. In many sections the drains are higher than the pavement, due to compaction of the carriage-way over time due to traffic and also due to surface runoffs. Further, it was difficult to ascertain whether any maintenance was ever carried out after the completion of the construction. After the GC roads were taken over by the DoR in 2014, the maintenance has improved as the DoR carries out the maintenance on a routine basis and when immediate attention is needed. The field engineers expressed difficulties in recruiting local labourers. DoR’s regular maintenance crews are busy with their own allocated maintenance sites along the highways. The slopes need protection with the construction of retaining and breast walls, reinforced earth together with geotextiles materials in many areas. The construction of Gabion walls would be adequate and suitable in many cases. Some of the valley side slope failures are

17 See Annex- II_ Field Assessment Data of identified GC Road.

24 due to the poor construction activities such as the tipping of construction spoils slide clearings. EFRC techniques demand safe disposal of spoils in pre-identified disposal sites. Such provisions are often excluded from construction contract package due to budget constraints. No bioengineering measures had been carried out for slope stabilization in most of the GC roads. Many of the barren slopes would have stabilized by now had some bio-engineering works been carried out. Such measures, if carried out properly and timely, would not only enhance slope stability but also improve the aesthetic value of the site. Bioengineering measures serve the same purposes of engineering structures. It is cheaper than engineering structures, easy to implement and over time replaces the engineering structures while providing the same engineering functions to the site. The steep gradient, insufficient road width and lack vehicle passing zones, narrow and blind curves are other issues that need to be rectified and improved. General improvement of road through widening and gradient corrections is required immediately. However, no major realignment of the road is envisaged. During the field visits, it was observed that DoR has already contracted out six GC roads from the 14 GC roads assessed in this study. The scope of the works primarily included blacktopping. Repair and maintenance of drainages, widening and gradient improvements in critical areas and other required permanent structures are marginalized due to insufficient budget allocation. For blacktopping of one kilometers of GC road a total budget of Nu. 2.90 million is allocated which is not sufficient to address climate resilient issues. The present status of the assessed GC roads indicates that they are not climate resilient. Although the ongoing works of blacktopping with some minor repair and maintenance will contribute to the improvement of road conditions to some degrees much remains to be done to make these roads climate resilient. Some of the GC roads assessed were found to be ‘climate resilient to a certain degree and this can be attributed to the ongoing blacktopping, construction of drains and other repairs works. Therefore, upgrading the present GC roads to a complete climate resilient or climate proof GC roads would require a much higher investment both technically and financially. The DoR has estimated an amount of Nu. 6.78 million to complete and climate proof for one kilometer of GC road. Most of the GC roads are like fair weather roads and their status can be generally summarized as:  The quality of construction of the GC roads assessed was very poor in terms of their thickness of blacktopping, drainage and other essential structures.  Out of 14 GC roads (73%) assessed, only four roads have some degree of climate resilience.  Although EFRC techniques seem to have been adopted for the construction of GC roads many important adaptive measures of EFRC have been either ignored or not followed during construction.  Bioengineering measures have not been carried out and this needs to be emphasized and strengthened.  The budget allocated for one kilometer of GC road construction is apparently low and as a result the quality of construction is compromised and other essential structures like drainages and retaining structures on the road are minimized.  Absence of adequate numbers of cross drainages has led to the accumulation rain water which has damaged the road pavement. On the five GC roads namely Tsamang, Korphu, Nimshong-Shingkhar, Chhudzom (Dovan), Zenkana-Khamina only four-wheel

drive vehicles could ply. The most popular vehicle fit for these roads are the Indian made Boleros.  To make our GC roads climate resilient blacktopping, improvements of drains, construction of additional cross drains and culverts, providing retaining structures and the improvement of gradient are very essential.  In general, the formation width is less and narrower than the required length of 6.5 m. Some locations have only 4-5 m of width. This makes passing of two vehicles extremely difficult and one has to reverse till a suitable and safe location is found to give way for the approaching vehicle.

4.3 Recommendations and Estimates for enhancing the climate resilience of the prioritized GC roads Bhutanese roads are highly vulnerable to the different impacts climate change. There are two main climate parameters which will impact and make our roads vulnerable. These two parameters are the increase in the temperature and precipitation. It is expected that there will be an increase in the rainfall intensity, duration and frequency including freak weathers. This will lead to higher discharges that will directly impact and increase the risks from surface runoffs, flooding; landslides and scouring. Higher level of discharges will weaken and even wash away the bridges, culverts, drainages and retaining structures. The high variation in temperature is likely to have impacts on the road pavement through bitumen bleeding, PCC curing and cracking. Some of the risks associated with climate change and its consequences are summarized in Table 3. Some of the potential adaptation and mitigation measures are presented in Table 4.

Table 3: Climate risks No Types of Climate Induced Hazards Potential Impacts on Roads 1 Increased intensity and frequency of Saturation of soil, Landslides, Mudslides, deposition of precipitation debris on the roads, contamination of water sources, High runoff rates, erosion, Flooding, 2 Increased temperature Poor curing of PCC, PCC slab curl and cracking, Flushing/bleeding of Asphalt concrete (bitumen). 3 Windstorms Deposition of debris, erosion and slides

4 Decrease or fluctuation in temperature Change in frequency of Freeze-thaw cycles 5 Snowfall and ice Damage of asphalt concrete

Table 4: Potential adaptation and mitigation measures against climate induced hazards Impacts Possible Solutions for New Roads and Existing Roads Construction of New roads Existing roads Saturation of soil Implement and rigorously follow EFRC Widening drains, construct line drains technology 26

Landslide Retaining walls and combine with Retaining walls supplemented by bioengineering works bioengineering works High runoff rates, Provision 3-4 numbers of cross drains Provision of 3-4 numbers of cross drains for erosion for each kilometer as per DoR each kilometer as per DoR standards standards Increase size and number of cross Design drainage structures of higher drainages. capacity Decrease the interval distance of cross Design culverts of higher discharge drainages to reduce large volume of capacity using 1200 mm diameter discharges at one place Hume pipe Design drainage structures of higher Provide scour protection works capacity Design culverts of higher discharge capacity using 1200 mm diameter Hume pipe. Provide scour protection works Contamination of Avoid discharge of drain water in water Avoid discharge of drain water in water water sources sources sources Flooding Design and build bridge/culvert to Design and build bridge/culvert to accommodate higher discharges. accommodate higher discharges. Increase culverts/bridges openings Increase culverts/bridges openings and and scour protection works. scour protection works. Provide adequate wing walls or aprons Provide adequate wing walls or aprons both both upstream and downstream upstream and downstream Provide scour protection works. Provide scour protection works. (Marshy area) Construct lined catch drain above. Construct lined catch drain above. Construction of French drains to drain French drains + gabion walls with geo-textile. Unstable slope and off water. Use perforated pipes for subsurface slope failure due to Construction of gabion walls (breast drainage excess water wall). Brush layering and live staking Bioengineering -live staking (Sandy soil) Construct masonry/gabion wall. Construct masonry/gabion wall. Slope failure. Construct light crib wall above. Construct light crib wall above. Trim slope if necessary; Trim slope if necessary; Carry out bioengineering works Carry out bioengineering works (Blasting) Follow control blasting techniques. (Widening and improvement works in rocky Damaged slope & areas.) vegetation with stone Drilling pattern has to be designed and debris. amount of explosives calculated to be used

according to rock type. Continue use of Cordex. Use of delay detonators and Acconex (silent blasting) is highly recommended as per site conditions. Weak pavements Design pavements as per existing Design pavements as per existing standards standards to prevent failures from to prevent failures from extreme impacts of extreme impacts of temperatures, temperatures, precipitation and flooding. precipitation and flooding. Potential threat of Provide adequate embankment, Provide adequate embankment, protection undercutting of roads protection walls. walls. by rivers/streams Increase flood protective and river Increase flood protective and river training training works. works. Disruptions of Design and build bridge/culvert to Design and build bridge/culvert to movements due road accommodate higher discharges. accommodate higher discharges. damages by existing Increase culverts/bridges openings Increase culverts/bridges openings and streams/river and scour protection works. scour protection works. crossing 27

During the increased discharge of water caused by high intensity of rainfall, the management of excess flow is the biggest challenge. The existing road and road infrastructures become vulnerable to the high increased discharges. To avoid the damages caused by increased discharge of water, the most vulnerable sites have to be identified and adequate corrections made to ensure that the roads are not subject to irreversible damages. The immediate interventions would be to assess the existing road construction technology, provide adequate resources and strengthen the technical capacity. Once the vulnerabilities are identified there several measures that could be deployed to make the roads more climate resilient. The potential corrective measures that could be deployed are:  Modifications to infrastructure by changing road surfacing materials, increasing the capacity of culverts and bridges, side and cross drainages  Changes in maintenance procedures such as checking drains in vulnerable areas after heavy rainfall and increased monitoring of embankments. To make the prioritized GC roads more climate resilient, all GC roads will have the following parameters in place.  Road gradient corrected and improved.  Drainages, culverts & bridges designed to take higher discharge capacity from the existing standards. Trapezoidal drains with increased discharge capacity used in marshy or high discharge locations.  Higher discharge capacity Hume-pipes (900 – 1200) mm diameter used for Cross drainages (3-4 cross-drains/km or as per site conditions provided).  Improved slope stability through; - Slope batter maintained - Increased with adequate numbers of retaining structures (retaining/breast walls) - Bio-engineering works implemented on slopes, slide areas, dumping sites.  Safe and adequate numbers of vehicle passing zones.  Adequate wing-walls and aprons provided both upstream and downstream including scour protection works.  Regular and timely repairs and maintenance works undertaken.  Milestones, relevant road signs and crash-barriers erected for information and safety of road users. Based on field observations, assessment and data analysis, the following GC roads are prioritized and recommended for enhancing climate resilience.

Table 5: GC roads prioritized and activities recommended for climate proofing Sl. No Recommendations Name of the Prioritized GC Road 1 Carry out a complete climate proofing a) Chokorling-Pangkhey (48.5 km) GC road, (blacktopping, culverts & drains, walls, Chhudzom (Dovan) Gewog, Sarpang bioengineering works) for entire length of the Dzongkhag road b) Nimshong-Shingkhar (31.96 km) GC road, Shingkhar Gewog, Zhemgang Dzongkhag

2 Bioengineering and slope protection measures Wangdigang - Zhilangbi (19.5 km) GC road, Korphu at chainages 0.200–0.300 km Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag

a) Bioengineering works - 85m x 25m b) Gabion wall constructions - 85m x 5 m (Length x Height) c) L-drains constructions - 85 m 3 Construction of drains and additional a) Yongkola-Banjar (21.2 km) GC road, Tsamang permanent works for entire length Gewog, Mongar Dzongkhag b) Autsho-Jarey (16.00 km), GC road, Jarey Gewog, Lhuentse Dzongkhag.

Table 6: Costs for climate proofing of prioritized GC roads Sl. No Activities Costs 1 Carry out a complete climate proofing for entire lengths:

a) Chokorling - Pangkhey (48.5 km) GC road, (48.5 x 6.78) = Nu: 328.83 million Sarpang Dzongkhag b) Nimshong - Shingkhar (31.96 km) GC (31.96 x 6.78) = Nu: 216.69 million road, Zhemgang Dzongkhag Sub-total = Nu: 545.52 million------(1) 2 Bioengineering and slope protection measures at chainages 0.200–0.300 km of Wangdigang

- Zhilangbi (19.5 km) GC road, Korphu Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag

(2125 m2) x 705 = Nu: 0. 15 million i. Bioengineering works - 85m x 25m ii. Gabion wall constructions - 85m x 5 m (85 x 27437.55) = Nu: 2. 332,200 mill (Length x Height) (85x1100) = Nu: 0.093,500 mill iii. L-drains constructions - 85 m Subtotal = Nu: 2.576 million ------(2) 3 Construction of drains and additional permanent works only for entire lengths for:

a) Tsamang (21.2 km) GC road 21.20 km x 1100.00 = Nu: 23.32 million i. L-drains (25%) of (Nu: 23.32 million) = Nu: 11.13 million ii. Permanent works (25%) b) Jarey (16.00 km) GC road Sub-total = Nu: 34.45 million------(3) i. L-drains 16.00 km x 1100.00 = Nu: 17.60 million ii. Permanent works (25%) (25%) of (Nu: 17.60 million) = Nu: 4.40 million Sub-total = Nu: 22.00 million------(4)

Grand Total {(1) +(2) +(3) +(4)} = Nu: 604.546 million or say Nu: 605.00 million 4.4 Making Prioritized GC Roads Climate Resilient. The existing GC roads were constructed to provide access to Gewogs. The EFRC concepts and technologies were to be part of the construction methods. Despite the efforts to stringently follow the EFRC techniques the roads did not meet the required standards. Five GC roads namely Chhokorling-Pangkhey, Nimshong-Shingkhar, Wangdigang-Zhilangbi, Yongkola-Banjar and Autsho-Jarey are in poor conditions and hence require additional inputs and interventions to make it climate resilient. The DoR has already started blacktopping of many existing GC roads including minor repairs and maintenance with the limited budget of 29

Nu: 2.9 million/km. These interventions will no doubt improve the road conditions but will not be adequate enough to make it fully climate resilient. These roads will thus require construction of more cross-drainages, increased side drains, slope stability and the overall formation width. The current GC roads were construction with Farm Road specifications and need to be upgraded with increased specifications as GC or Dzongkhag road to take increased discharges in the event of high precipitation. These roads were prioritized based on general observations, field assessment and cost–benefit analysis. The roads identified under this category are already given under

Table 7: Summary _ Current status of Climate Resilience of GC Roads Vulnerability to various climate hazards Climate resilience Sl. Year measures Name of the GC Road Changes to environment Current Status of Prone to slides / Remarks No. Built due to road construction climate resilience / geological instabilities EFRC standards No impacts on land, Side/cross drains, No sign of slope Road is climate Need to increase the drain water & forest culverts adequate for instabilities. resilient to a size (extra wide drains) after resources. increased rainfall certain degree. 15 yrs. Tabading - Phobji resulting from climate 1 2004 Slight increase of dry No additional (5.6 km) change waste input required Slope stabilization is immediately. not required No impacts on land, Side/cross drains, 1 slide area (30x15) m. Road is not Additional inputs required water & forest culverts required. climate resilient. for climate resilience like; 1 breast wall (30x3) m resources. Autsho - Jarey required. . - Construction of 3 walls 2 2012 Waste may increase - 14 km of side drains to be (16.3 km) Scree area; requires once blacktopped as per constructed 1.5 -2 m high Gabion Gup. - 3 causeways required wall. - 20 cross-drains needed No impacts on land, Side/cross drains, 1 slide area (20x9) m. Road is not Additional inputs required water & forest resources. culverts required. climate resilient. for climate resilience like; 1 breast wall (20x3) m Yongkola–Tsamang required. - 2 breast wall 3 2005 - 15 km of wider side drains (21.3 km) - 35 nos. of 90 mm dia Hume pipe cross drains - Bioengineering at 3 sites

Vulnerability to various climate hazards Climate resilience Sl. Year measures Name of the GC Road Changes to environment Current Status of Prone to slides / Remarks No. Built due to road construction climate resilience / geological instabilities EFRC standards No impacts on land, Side/cross drains, 1 slide area (15x15) m. Road is climate - One additional breast wall Dungmithang - water & forest culverts adequate resilient. required (Bioengineering 1980 1 breast wall (20x3) m 4 Mesithang (Tang) resources. area). s Slope stability is required. (17 km) required and in contract. No impacts on land, Side/cross drains, 1 slide area (15x10) m. Road is not Additional inputs required water & forest culverts required. 1 breast wall (15x3) m climate resilient. for climate resilience. Korphu resources. Slope stability is required. - 10 km of line drain required and in - 40 cross-drains (Wangdigang - contract. - 1000 m3 Gabion wall 5 Zhalingbi) 2004 - 1 box culvert at (19.5 km) Nagpokhoshar (3Lx4.5Wx1.5h) m - 4 places gradient improvement - 4 nos. cause ways No impacts on land, Side/cross drains, 2 slide areas (15x10) m Road is not Additional inputs of all road water & forest culverts required. and 25x 20 m climate resilient. structures required for resources. climate resilience. Nimshong - Slope stability is Shingkhar 6 2013 Slight increase of required. - 2 nos. breast walls (31.96 km) plastics and beer bottles. - 40 nos. Cross drains - 30 km 0f line drains - Bioengineering at 4 sites

Phuentenchu No impacts on land, L-drains required. 2 No sign of slope Road is climate Not required. water & forest nos. causeways and 14 instabilities. resilient to (Tsirangtoe Gup resources. nos Hume pipe culverts some degree. 8 Office – Phuentenchu 2006 in contracts Gup Office) Slight increase L-drain required Slope stability is not to make it more (5.25 km) required. climate resilient.

Vulnerability to various climate hazards Climate resilience Sl. Year measures Name of the GC Road Changes to environment Current Status of Prone to slides / Remarks No. Built due to road construction climate resilience / geological instabilities EFRC standards No impacts on land, L-drains required on None. Road is not Additional inputs required water & forest entire length. climate resilient. for climate resilience. resources. 4 nos causeways - L-drains required on No change. required entire length. - 4 nos causeways 7 nos Humepipe required Athang culverts reqd. - 7 nos Humepipe culverts (Jarogang zam – 9 2013 1 Box culvert required reqd. Dogayphu G office) over Phangrichu stream - 1 Box culvert reqd over (7 km) Phangrichu stream - 4 nos irrigation channel crossings require proper cross-drainage works. Signs of erosion seen due to irrigation cross channel. No impacts on land, L-drains requiredd. None Road is not Additional inputs required water & forest climate resilient. for climate resilience. Kabjisa 2 additional Humepipe Road widening of 100 resources. 10 (Jalephu – Kabjisa 2010 culverts reqd. m required. - 100 m road widening No change. - 100 m retaining wall reqd. Gewog Office) 100m Retaining walls - L drain reqd. (3 km) (3.1 km) required. - 2 nos. Hume pipe reqd. No impacts on land, L-drains needs repairs No sign of slope Road is climate Not required. water & forest instabilities. resilient to Cross drains not Gasetshowom - resources. certain degree. 11 2001 required. (5.5 km) Slight garbage increase No additional input required immediately.

Vulnerability to various climate hazards Climate resilience Sl. Year measures Name of the GC Road Changes to environment Current Status of Prone to slides / Remarks No. Built due to road construction climate resilience / geological instabilities EFRC standards No impacts on land, L-drains needs repairs. 1 slip (3x3 m) Road is not Additional inputs required water & forest climate resilient. including black topping. 1 breast wall reqd. 12 Nahi -- 3.7 km 2006 resources. - 1 breast wall (3x3) m No garbage - L drains repairs (2.5 km) Road under construction. FC is over and final widening of 4km completed. Work Start date- April All EFRC methods need to contracted to M/s Lhendup Norbu Construction, in April 2015 and the contract period is 2015 be complied with. 18 months. - Supervise and monitor 13 Sombeykha -- 14 km works closely for quality. - Ensure control blasting works. - Carry out bioengineering works. Road under construction. 3 km of FC completed. Construction is carried out Start date- April All EFRC methods need to departmentally by DoR. 2015 be complied with. - Ensure control blasting works. Carry out bioengineering Gakiling-Rangtse – - 14 works. (7 km) - Drains/cross drains must be of higher quality and higher specifications to withstand higher discharges (high rainfall area)

4.5 Economic Justification for Incorporation of Climate Resilient Measures Rural roads tend to generate large amount of benefits to the local economy, social and environment. In this study following parameters are used to identify the benefits of the rural road projects. I. Nature of economic benefits: Economic benefits are easy to quantify through following parameters: a. Improved access to social infrastructure (schools and health centers): Roads help to improve access to social infrastructure and lead to large economic benefits from increased productivity. b. Increased production: Roads provide better access to existing markets for the farmer by reducing transport costs which encourages farmers to produce more. Roads also facilitate the transportation of goods such as construction materials and heavy machines which reduces the cost of development. This results into higher profit for the producers. c. Increased consumer surplus: Consumers have better access to diverse range of commodities and also with reduced cost leading to increase in consumer surplus. d. Enhance agriculture growth: Roads help to improve marketability of perishable goods through timely and cheaper transport, and this provides a direct incentive for more market-oriented agriculture production with more profitable cash crops, and also raise rural income and employment. e. Greater investment: Reduced transportation cost and increased expected rate of returns creates opportunities for greater investment in buildings and other fixed assets. f. Creation of a more competitive local market: Greater resource use efficiency will be generated by promoting competitive market structure through encouraging more local business and more intense competition from outside. g. Greater Savings: Better roads help to improve fuel efficiency of the vehicles and help to cut down consumption of fossil fuels and also expand personal savings through reduced maintenance cost of vehicles. h. Higher value of land: With the improved access created by the road project, the value of the rural land increase making land a highly valuable asset.

II. Nature of social benefits: Social and economic benefits cannot be entirely segregated as they are closely linked and thus many of the social benefits can be indirectly quantified through following economic parameters. a. Increased labour mobility: Incentivize labour movement through higher expected wages and larger employment opportunities; b. Improved access to health: More work days available due to reduced morbidity and sick days per person; c. Better access to schools: Higher percentage of people with basic education and literacy, which has been associated with better productivity and quality of life. d. Women empowerment: Larger numbers of female have opportunity for better education and health services and productive employment. e. Greater personal transport and increased social mobility with transfer of knowledge, more opportunity for new businesses and entrepreneurship. f. Higher productivity and income.

g. Reduced rural urban migration: If the benefit created by the project is large enough, the local areas tend to become more attractive and the rural-urban migration rate tends to decline. Rural roads tend to suppress the push effect.

III. Nature of environmental benefits: The environmental benefits of the rural road projects can be captured through following parameters: a. Reduced carbon emission: with better roads, the fuel efficiency of the vehicles improves and it leads to reduced emission of carbon. b. Reduction in firewood use: with better roads more people will have easier access to alternative source of cooking fuels like use of liquid petroleum gas (LPG) or kerosene. This will reduce the felling of trees for firewood. c. Slope stability and aesthetic value improved: bioengineering works will provide slope stability and the plants once established helps to further support regeneration of plants in the area. The plants help in the absorption of CO2 and release oxygen to the atmosphere. It is usually very difficult to accurately quantify the benefits of the infrastructural projects such as roads. Such quantification requires very expensive inter-temporal surveys. Many a times it is preferred to use relevant studies as benchmark for deriving appropriate parameters for undertaking social cost and benefit analysis. A study ‘Framework for quantifying social and economic benefits from rural road development; some thoughts and practical insights’ by Thampil Pankaj (Retired Principal Transport Specialist, World Bank) provides estimates that such projects can lead to income gain (that includes imputed values of all the economic, social and environment gains) equivalent of 80-100%. In this study we have taken the lower bound of 80%, for estimating total benefits of the projects.

IV. Cost-benefit analysis: The financial analysis was carried out in order to assess consolidated profit from the project and to outline the cash flows that underpin calculation of socio economic benefits and costs. The main objective of financial and economic analysis is to calculate monetary value on cost and benefits. Infrastructural projects tend to generate large amount of positive externalities that far exceed the private benefits. Some of these projects may appear non-profitable from the private perspective but tend to become socially desirable. In such cases social profitability (welfare) should become primary criteria for the project appraisal. In this study, only those social benefits are included which can be monetized. The financial evaluation indicates that the GC road is relatively expensive. Yet, the long term benefit far exceeds cost of GC Road because such infrastructural projects tend to generate far greater benefits than its costs in longer period. Long term return on this investment goes beyond the current rural livelihood than without road connectivity. GC road will have long term benefit for both rural and agricultural development in Bhutan, natural resources management and biodiversity conservation and as well as it would help to reduce rural-urban migration. Given that there are no cases on the use of roads, only the social benefits should be taken into account for the cost and benefit analysis. Major methodological approaches followed for the financial analysis are:

In this study, it is based on simple social cost and benefit analysis. The social cost and benefit analysis is based on Net Present Value (NPV)18 approach. To calculate NPV, 10% rate of discount is applied. The choice of rate of discount is based on average rate of inflation over the last 6 years.

NPV is calculated as 푡 푅푡 푁푃푉 = ∑ { } − 퐶 (1 + 푟푡) 푖=1

Where, Rt= net private benefits in each period of time r = Rate of discount C= Cost of project Given the large size of positive externalities created by infrastructural public sector projects, SCBA is more justified and widely applied. In this analysis, NPV is defined as the sum of future streams of net social benefits from an investment project. This analysis takes into account potential increase in the income for the households after the project comes into operation. For this analysis, Gewog wise data on household income from the BLSS 201219 is used as benchmark information. This income was converted to possible Gewog level household income in 2015 using the average annual growth rate (AAGR) figure of GDP growth rate (2.5%) for three years starting from 2012-2015. AAGR was calculated from the information obtained from national accounts reports, NSB, for the relevant years. For the rest of the information, data generated by this study though field survey is used.

ADB 2010 report on infrastructure in Bhutan states that infrastructural projects cause the non-farm income to increase by 50-72%, while the farm income increases by 21- 29%. This study uses this information for the potential gain in the income of the households after GC roads. Using the proportion of farm and non- farm households as weight, average increase in income can be taken as 31.4%. Based on these calculations, this study assumes that on average household income would rise by 31.4% after making the GC roads climate resilient.

Cost of blacktopping of one km of GC road is taken as Nu. 6.78 million. To arrive at possible gains in income from time saved from travelling because of roads (reflecting an increase in total factor productivity), the income gain from GC road are disaggregated for per hour income. This figure is used for arriving at income gain for every hour of labour saved. This can also be treated as opportunity cost of time saved.

Overall NFB is used to calculate net present value (NPV) of sum of streams of financial flows over thirty years’ time. To calculate NPV, 10% rate of discount is applied. The choice of rate of discount is based on average rate of inflation over the last 6 years.

18 NPV is defined as discounted sum of future streams of income from a project. 19 Bhutan Labour Survey, NSB, 2012 38

5. GEWOG CONNECTIVITY ROADS

5.1 General information on road network in the country Bhutan started the construction first road in 1961 with the construction of the Thimphu- Phuentsholing national highway. Today, most part of the country is connected with a network of roads. There are 11,052.48220 km of various categories of roads, 337 numbers of bridges and 380 pedestrian bridges nationwide. (Refer Annex- VI- Type and Length of Roads by Dzongkhags). The road transportation network is classified as follows: a) Asian Highway (AH) - Phuentsholing–Thimphu Highway, b) Primary National Highway (PNH) - existing East-West & North-South Highway, c) Secondary National Highway (SNH) -existing District roads, d) Dzongkhag Roads (currently Feeder roads) / GC roads e) Thromde roads (currently Urban Roads) f) Farm roads (currently Farm Roads), and g) Access Roads (AR) The DoR is the national focal agency with the overall responsibility for all types of roads in the country. The Thromde Administration is responsible for all roads in the Thromde. Similarly, the Dzongkhags Administration is responsible for the administration and management of all roads constructed or maintained by it, including access roads. For Farm Roads technical specification, guidelines and manuals are provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests. In order to facilitate and improve accessibility in rural areas, a network of roads was constructed to Farm Road standards by Dzongkhags. The Farm Roads that connect to Gewog Centers are categorized as GC roads. These roads are unpaved and lack adequate road assets including the drainage systems. These GC roads need to be upgraded to the new GC road specifications. The blacktopping of these roads have been initiated by the Government projects and expected to complete Blacktopping of 98 GC roads by beginning of 2018.

20 (15 -16 Source: July 2016, DoR, MoWHS, Thimphu) 39

The unit rate for complete climate proofing GC roads is as follows: Table 8: Unit cost of items for complete climate proofing Sl. No Specifications Unit Cost (Nu. Million/Kilometer) 1 Base Course 2.043 2 Bitumen Sealing 1.281 3 Permanent works (drains, walls, 2.10 culverts etc.) 4 Total 5.424 5 25% contingency for making roads 1.356 climate resilient Therefore, the total cost for complete climate proofing of GC road is Nu: 6.780 million/km21. Source: DoR, 2016 The maintenance costs22 for various categories of roads per annum are: Primary National Highway - Nu: 88,000.00/km Secondary National Highway` - Nu: 80,000.00/km Dzongkhag Roads/GC roads - Nu: 44,000.00/km . 5.2 General information of all GC roads in the country To improve accessibility in rural areas, a network of GC roads measuring 1702.89 km covering 68 Gewogs have been constructed since the beginning of 9th Five Year Plan. Initially, the Dzongkhags Administration was responsible for the construction and maintenance of these roads in their respective Dzongkhags. All of these roads are unpaved due to the lack of financial resources. Many of the road assets, like culverts, drains, cross drainage and walls in the GC roads are either absent or inadequate. In 2014 the GC roads were handed over to DoR for their maintenance and management. The government has prioritized and mandated DoR to carryout blacktopping of GC roads. Apart from blacktopping, other activities important activities like slope protection, repair and maintenance of drains, culverts including the improvements of gradient, zigs and curves improvement, and road widening at the critical certain stretches are some of the common issues observed in most of the GC roads which that needs immediate attention. The DoR has contracted out the blacktopping works of many GC roads with some provisions of L-shaped drains, cross-drainages and some retaining structures. The estimated budget of Nu: 2.9 million for blacktopping one kilometer of road appears to be insufficient to provide required

21 Unit rate provided by dor, 2016. 22 Maintenance cost provided by DoR, 2016.

40 permanent structures. The DoR has estimated a budget of Nu.6.780 million to upgrade one Kilometer of existing road to a more climate resilient GC road.

Table 9: Details of Gewog Connectivity Roads taken over by DoR in 2014 Sl. No. Regional Office Number Existing Under construction in (km) 2016 1 S/Jongkhar 22 262.30 12 km 2 Trashigang 19 218.81 - 3 Lingmethang 21 272.13 17 km 4 Trongsa 9 58.28 - 5 Zhemgang 8 117.54 35.58 km 6 Sarpang 24 248.14 - 7 Lobeysa 26 67.14 - 8 Thimphu 15 146.13 48 km 9 Phuentsholing 21 190.85 10 km Total 165 1,581.32 122.58 km Source: DoR_2016 All GC roads are upgraded from Farm Road requiring changes in the dimensions and specifications as the Road Classification. See Fig: 1 below for the road designs and specification.

5.3 Identification and Prioritization of GC Roads Climate change induced disaster can severely affect the road infrastructures causing significant disruption and damage to transport systems. The damages inflicted by such disasters and extreme climate events have a direct bearing on the road users, communication and maintenance budgets. Timely and informed adaptation actions can significantly reduce climate change impacts and associated costs. By making roads more climate resilient the sustainability and life of the roads can be greatly enhanced. All GC roads connect Gewog office to the national highways. These provide access to RNR Centres, Schools, Basic Health Unit (BHU) and markets. The road alignment normally passes through the Gewog centers connecting villages and farmlands along the way. In some cases, these roads also touch or pass through important historical and cultural sites and monasteries. Since these roads provide access to goods and services, their usability is very important and hence should be accessible throughout the year. All GC roads are of paramount importance for a particular Gewog as it is the only means of motorable linkage between the Gewog and other parts of the country. The government has also given a high priority to blacktop all GC roads. Blacktopping is only one aspect of making a road climate resilient. Although, making all GC roads climate resilience would be desirable, the cost involved will be invariably very high. To cope with the limited financial resources, prioritization of GC roads was done using a set of selection criteria. There are a total of 31 GC roads covering 37 Gewogs under 11 Dzongkhags in the project study area. Many of these 41 roads were found to be very short or outside the landscapes and thus not selected. The selection of GC roads for this was done using the following three criteria:  Percentage of landscape study area falling inside a Gewog  Length of the GC road above 3 km and command area covered by road  Minimum of one GC road per Dzongkhag

5.4 Prioritized GC Roads for Project Support From the above exercise 14 GC roads (48%) were identified and selected for further assessment. These 14 GC roads covered 14 Gewogs of 11 Dzongkhags within the project study area. Based on the three selection criteria and detailed cost-benefit analysis (CBA) five GC roads have been prioritized for climate proofing with support from the project. The ranking of all the GC roads assessed and cost benefits analysis is presented in Table 10 and 11 respectively. The five prioritized roads are: 1. Chhokorling (Toribari) – Pankhay (Gewog office) GC Road (Dovan) - 48.5 km The entire road length is considered for upgrading to complete climate resilient road due to:  It scores the highest ranking. (Refer Table 10: Final ranking of GC roads selected for climate proofing).  Oranges and cardamom are the main cash crops and people need good and reliable road for marketing.  Other beneficiaries are two Lower Secondary Schools, 2 BHUs, RNRs.  The road serves/benefits 11 villages including three villages of other Gewog, (Jigmecholing Gewog).  The area is subjected to a very heavy rainfall during monsoon and hence a good climate resilient road is essential. Map 2: Road alignment of Chhudzom (Dovan) GC road (48.5 km)

2. Nimshong-Shingkhar (31.96 km) GC road, Shingkhar Gewog, Zhemgang Dzongkhag The entire road length is considered for upgrading to complete climate resilient road due to:  This road will connect the remotest village.  This road will greatly facilitate the inception work of the upcoming Chamkharchhu Hydropower project.  This road provides connectivity to another important village of Bardo from Therang junction from where the road bifurcates to Shingkhar and Bardo. Bardo has one of the oldest schools established during 1965 and thus makes the place a historic and important village.  Benefits existing institutions like, one Early Child Care Development Centre (ECCD), one RNR centre, one Basic Health Unit and Shingkhar Primary School. It is a boarding school with 140 students, 10 day scholars with seven teachers and two cooks.  The area is subjected to a very heavy rainfall during monsoon and hence a good climate resilient road is essential.  There is a high potential of increased agricultural production especially potato and the proposed road will ensure better accessibility to market.  Development of Eco/cultural Trek from Khandopang (Bumthang) till Shingkhar. Potential revenue increase from tourism in future.  Proposal of connecting Khomsar-Wama under Shilambi Gewog of Mongar Dzongkhag in the 12th Five Year Plan period.  Shingkhar Gewog has five ‘Nyes” or religious sites which people visit. With good road the Gup said that more people will visit the sites.

Map 3: Road alignment of Nimshong-Shingkhar GC road (31.96 km)

3. Wangdigang-Zhalingbi (19.5 km) GC Road, Korphu Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag This road connects three villages of Nimshong with 67 households (H/H), Nabji with 61 H/H and Korphu with 80 H/H which are entirely inside the buffer zone of Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park. The Park Office is at Nabji and at the end of the road. The road is important due to:  A good quality road is essential for safe and reliable mobility for efficient management of the Park.  Eco-tourism has been started since five-six years back and better road will attract more tourists in the area in future.

Photo 1: Eco-Tourism-Resting place at Nabji constructed five years ago.  The Gewog has a historic and important Nabji lhakhang. Annual tshechu is conducted on the 15th day of 11 month of Bhutanese calendar. Many people visit the Lhakhang and attend the tshechu. The tshechu celebration goes on for one week and the highlight being the ‘naked’ mask dance (chham) which attracts large number of visitors. There may be increased number of visitors once the road is improved.

Photo 2: Nabji Lhakhang

 Cardamom is one of the cash crops cultivated more and more by the villagers and there is a need for improve access to market.  Other crops grown and marketed are oranges, ginger, vegetables including “cane shoots” (patsha) and ‘dumroo’ (wild leaves) considered a local delicacy.

 Dairy products like butter and cheese are also marketed to Zhemgang and Tintibi towns, both are about 40 km away. The road was initially constructed as Power Tiller Track (PTT), meant for farm power tillers. This was upgraded to Farm Road later and therefore the road alignment and specifications are not up to the standards. Generally, the road width is narrow, has sharp narrow zigs/blind 44 curves, steep alignment gradient (in many stretches) and lacks proper drainage systems. At three to four places only 4-wheeled drive vehicles can play due to bad road, worsened by water ponding on the road surface. Over all the road needs widening of roads, improving gradient and blind curves and water management structures.

The road is currently taken up for blacktopping with limited inputs on drains/walls. There are still critical slide prone areas that need stabilization. The budget allocated for blacktopping and repairs/maintenance works is insufficient to carry out slope stabilization measures. It requires additional budget to make sections of the road climate resilient. Further, there are two critical sites about chainage 0.200 – 0.300 km from the Take-Off point where slope stabilization works are needed.

Photo 3: Slide areas near Take-Off. Photo 4: Lower road alignment is Korphu GC road.

Need for climate proofing sections of the road: During field survey two critical sites were identified that threatened with potential landslides. These sites must be stabilized and make it safe and trafficable to vehicles round the year through. Therefore, the area has been identified, assessed and recommended to be taken up under the Project Support. Specific interventions with costs have been worked out in the report. The following interventions recommended are;

a) Slope stabilization through;  Carrying out Bio-engineering works.  Construction of gabion walls.  Construction of L-drains in the are

Photo 5: Site for Bio-engineering works. Photo 6: Site for L-Drain construction.

Photo 7: Narrow road width in slide area. Photo 8: Very narrow road width.

b) Capacity building through Bio-engineering training  Bio-engineering training can be conducted to get hands-on experience at the site. The training will benefit the participants while the area also gets bio-engineering works. This will also help in the capacity building of engineers at the local level.  If scheduled properly even the laying and construction of gabion walls would provide hands-on training to the participants.  The training would also enable to understand and implement Occupational Health and Safety measures at work sites.

4. Yongkola-Banjar (21.2 km) GC road, Tsamang Gewog, Mongar Dzongkhag About 55% of Gewog falls within the Phrumshingla National Park. The DoR is currently carrying out blacktopping works. But due to insufficient budget, repairs/maintenance of drains is restricted to some road sections. Therefore, to make the road more climate resilient, drainage system and permanent works will be taken up in the entire length of the road. A good road will provide better access and enable better management of Phrumshingla National Park in future.

Photo 9: Scoured drain. Photo 10: Slope failure & debris covered drain.

Photo 11: Poor drains and damaged slope. Photo 12: Slope erosion on valley side.

Photo 13: Damaged culvert embankment. Photo 14: Water ‘ponding’ on the road.

Photo 15: Conservation awareness message left on the rock by Tsamang School.

5. Autsho- Jarey GC road (16.3 km), Autsho gewog, Lhuentse Dzongkhag.

About 55-60% of Gewog falls within the Phrumshingla National Park. The GC road passes through chir pine area. The road width is narrow, has poor drainage system, with no cross-drains and passes through two scree areas. The DoR is currently carrying out blacktopping works. But due to insufficient budget, repairs/maintenance of drains are restricted to some road sections. Therefore, to make the road more climate resilient, drainage system and permanent works will be taken up in the entire length of the road. A good road will provide better access and enable better management of Phrumshingla National Park in future. It also connects Ganglapong and Khuling villages under Tsamang Gewog.

Photo 16 & 17: Unstable slopes in scree areas.

Photo 18: Scoured drain. Photo 15: Very narrow road width.

Photo 15: Interaction with locals. Photo 15: Consultation (Gup and Engineer)

Table 10: Ranking of the GC Road Projects based on Weighted Net Present Value Dzongkhag Gewog Road WNPV Rank (in Nu. million) Wangdue Phodrang Phobji Tabading-Ngelungdracholing 4,6531.82 1 lhakhang Sarpang Dovan Chokorling-Pankhay 4,145.199 2 Lhuentse Jarey Autsho-Gup Office 3,093.531 3 Trongsa Korphu Wangdigang-Zhalingbi 2,298.265 4 Mongar Tsamang Yongkola-Banjar 1,701.631 5 Tsirang Phuentenchu- Tsirangtoe- Phuentenchu 1,001.218 6 Haa Sombaykha Khamina-Sombaykha 775.0415 7 Punakha Kabjisa Jelephu-Kabjisa 652.1758 8 Zhemgang Shingkhar Nimshong - Shingkhar 607.9944 9 Haa Gakeling Gakiling-Rangtse 498.6683 10 Gaselo Feeder Road (end point)- Wangdue Phodrang Gasetshowom 232.9367 11 Wasina (Gewog office) Wangdue Phodrang Nahi Agoloo-Pengang 201.13 12 Bumthang Tang Dungmithang-Mesithang 127.7856 13 Wangdue Phodrang Athang Zarigang - Athang -0.83766 14

Table 11: Total cost of GC road project Dzongkhag Gewogs Total cost Length Number of Weight of road Beneficiary Households Bumthang Tang 66300000 17 96 5.6 Haa Sombaykha 54600000 14 61 4.4 Haa Gakeling 27300000 7 63 9.0 Lhuentse Autsho 63570000 16.3 145 8.9 Mongar Tsamang 83070000 21.3 128 6.0 Punakha Kabjisa 12090000 3.1 61 19.7 Sarpang Dovan 189150000 48.5 400 8.2 Trongsa Korphu 76050000 19.5 208 10.7 Tsirang Phuntenchu 20280000 5.2 69 13.3 Wangdue Phodrang Athang 27300000 7 3 0.4 Wangdue Phodrang Gasetshowom 21450000 5.5 60 10.9 Wangdue Phodrang Nahi 14430000 3.7 22 5.9 Wangdue Phodrang Phobji 21840000 5.6 229 40.9 Zhemgang Shingkhar 1246440000 31.96 201 6.3

5.5 GC Roads Selected for Climate Proofing From the above two exercises carried out the following GC roads have been selected and prioritized for climate proofing under this project. Table 12: Roads selected for climate proofing (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Dzongkhag Gewog Road WNPV Rank Current Climate Final Ranking (Nu. million) (CBA) Resilience (From Table 7) Tabading-Ngelungdracholing Climate resilient to Wangdue Phodrang Phobji 4,6531.82 1 14 lhakhang certain degree. Sarpang Dovan Chokorling-Pankhay 4,145.199 2 Not climate resilient. 1 Lhuentse Jarey Autsho-Gup Office 3,093.531 3 Not climate resilient. 2 Trongsa Korphu Wangdigang-Zhalingbi 2,298.265 4 Not climate resilient. 3 Mongar Tsamang Yongkola-Banjar 1,701.631 5 Not climate resilient. 4 Climate resilient to Tsirang Phuentenchu- Tsirangtoe- Phuentenchu 1,001.218 6 12 certain degree. Haa Sombaykha Khamina-Sombaykha 775.0415 7 Road under construction. 7 Punakha Kabjisa Jelephu-Kabjisa 652.1758 8 Not climate resilient. 5 Zhemgang Shingkhar Nimshong-Shingkhar 607.9944 9 Not climate resilient. 6 Haa Gakeling Gakiling-Rangtse 498.6683 10 Road under construction. 8 Gaselo Feeder Road (end Climate resilient to Wangdue Phodrang Gasetshowom 232.9367 11 10 point)-Wasina (Gewog office) certain degree. Wangdue Phodrang Nahi Agoloo-Pengang 201.13 12 Not climate resilient. 9 Bumthang Tang Dungmithang-Mesithang 127.7856 13 Climate resilient. 13 Wangdue Phodrang Athang Zarigang -Athang -0.83766 15 Not climate resilient. 11

Computing columns (5) and (6) provides with a new ranking of the road which can be taken as prioritized road for climate proofing. Table 13: Final ranking of GC Roads selected for climate proofing (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Dzongkhag Gewog Road WNPV Rank Current Climate Final (Nu. million) (CBA) Resilience Ranking (From Table 6) Sarpang Chhudzom/Dovan Chokorling-Pankhay 4,145.199 2 Not climate resilient. 1 Lhuentse Jarey Autsho-Gup Office (Jarey) 3,093.531 3 Not climate resilient. 2 Trongsa Korphu Wangdigang-Zhalingbi 2,298.265 4 Not climate resilient. 3 Mongar Tsamang Yongkola-Banjar 1,701.631 5 Not climate resilient. 4 Punakha Kabjisa Jelephu-Kabjisa 652.1758 8 Not climate resilient. 5 Zhemgang Shingkhar Nimshong-Shingkhar 607.9944 9 Not climate resilient. 6 Haa Sombaykha Khamina-Sombaykha 775.0415 7 Road under construction. 7 Haa Gakiling Gakiling-Rangtse 498.6683 10 Road under construction. 8 Wangdue Phodrang Nahi Agoloo-Pengang 201.13 12 Not climate resilient. 9 Gaselo Feeder Road (end point) - Climate resilient to Wangdue Phodrang Gasetshowom 232.9367 11 10 Wasina (Gewog office) certain degree. Wangdue Phodrang Athang Zarigang -Athang -0.83766 14 Not climate resilient. 11 Climate resilient to Tsirang Phuentenchu- Tsirangtoe- Phuentenchu 1,001.218 6 12 certain degree. Bumthang Tang Dungmithang-Mesithang 127.7856 13 Climate resilient. 13

Tabading-Ngelungdracholing Climate resilient to Wangdue Phodrang Phobji 4,6531.82 1 14 lhakhang certain degree.

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the field visit and analysis of the information collected the following recommendations and conclusion is made for the project intervention. Some of the most fundamental recommendations are: 1) Five GC roads namely 48.5 Km Chhokorling (Toribari) – Pankhay (Gewog office) GC Road (Dovan) in Sarpang; 31.96 Km Nimshong-Shingkhar GC road, Shingkhar Gewog, Zhemgang Dzongkhag; 19.5 Km Wangdigang-Zhalingbi GC Road, Korphu Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag; 21.2 Km Yongkola-Banjar GC road, Tsamang Gewog, Mongar Dzongkhag and 16.3 Km Autsho- Gewog Centre (Jarey) GC road in Lhuentse have been prioritized for support by the project.

2) There is an urgent need to develop and strengthen the technical capacity of engineers of the DoR on the design and construction of climate resilient roads as DoR is the nodal agency responsible for the development of the road sector. This could be accomplished through the provision of short and long term trainings, study visits to relevant institutions in the region and by developing guidelines on EFRC and climate resilient roads.

3) The use of EFRC techniques such as bioengineering works has to be strengthened and enforced during the construction of the GC roads.

4) This study has estimated a total budget of Nu.1269.00 million for the development of climate resilient roads under the project. From this total allocation a sum of Nu. 634.50 million should be allocated for the development of climate resilient roads; Nu. 610.00 million towards making the GC roads climate resilient, Nu. 4.50 million for the development of EFRC and climate resilient guidelines, and Nu. 20.00 million should be for strengthening the institutional capacity of DoR.

5) There is a need to implement a holistic climate resilient package for the entire length of the Chhudzom-Dovan and the Nimshong–Shingkhar GC roads while for the Korphu GC road there is a need to execute the bioengineering works and construction of gabion walls in two critical sections.

6) This study has identified and prioritized three GC roads namely Chhudzom-Dovan, Nimshong –Shingkhar and Korphu GC road for immediate climate proofing under the project. The lessons learned from these pilot roads should then be used for developing the guidelines and specifications for the preparation of climate resilient standards for construction of climate resilient roads in Bhutan.

7) Making GC roads climate resilient requires a much higher capacity of drains, blacktopping, and construction of additional cross drains or culverts. This entails additional budget compared to the construction of normal roads. The DoR has estimated a budget of Nu.6.78 million for the construction of one kilometer of climate resilient roads and hence it is essential to use this estimate while preparing the budget estimates for the development of climate resilient roads.

There is little doubt that road remains the most effective, inexpensive, sustainable and reliable form of transport in Bhutan. Topography and geo-physical setting of the country is by far the most significant factor that predisposes the Bhutanese roads to climate change induced disasters, it is apparent from this study that the Climate change induced hazards such as the landslides, flash floods and different forms soil erosions makes the roads highly vulnerable to damages especially during the monsoon. The financial resources, technical expertise and institutional capacity with the DoR for the development of climate resilient roads need to be strengthened for the development of climate resilient GC roads in the country. Based on this study the following key conclusions can be drawn with regard to the climate proofing and the improvement of the GC roads for enhancing the resilience to climate change.  The most prominent and increasing climate change induced hazards relevant to the road and transport sector are landslides, flash floods, different types and magnitude of soil erosion which are most induced by unprecedented monsoon rain. The climate change induced hazards will severely impact the livelihood sources of the rural communities and disrupt key infrastructures like roads that will immensely affect the access to food and other basic necessities.  As a result of the increased monsoon discharges from streams and rivers which will increase the frequency and magnitude of land slips, landslide, flash flood and erosion essential infrastructures like roads will suffer severe damages.  About 73% GC roads assessed in this study are highly vulnerable to the climate change induced hazards because of the poor design and quality of construction. Out of 14 GC roads assessed, only four seem to have some degrees of climate resilience.  The EFRC techniques have been apparently ignored or not adopted rigorously making the roads highly vulnerable to the different types of climate change induced hazards.  The drains are poorly designed and water from the drains overflows on the road surface damaging the road. It is highly likely that insufficient construction budget resulted in comprising the quality of construction.  Two of the 14 sampled GC roads fall in heavy rainfall zone and are highly prone to damage all the year rounds if it is not adequately climate proofed.  The shortage of local labour is one of the main constraints that affect the regular and timely maintenance of GC roads especially during the peak monsoon season when the roads are highly exposed to the climate induced hazards. Any small damages during the monsoon season neglected tend to serve as the entry point for major damage of much higher magnitude.  Since the construction of climate resilient roads is a fairly new area, the DoR is severely affected by the lack of skills and technical expertise. At present, the manuals and guidelines on EFRC designs are absent. The present technical expertise on the construction of climate resilient roads in DoR is highly inadequate.

7 Annexure 7.1 Annex – I: Terms of Reference

TERMS OF REFERENCE

FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANTS/CONTRACTORS

POST TITLE: National Consultant for Assessment of Gewog Connectivity Roads for Enhanced Climate Resilience.

AGENCY/PROJECT NAME: UNDP/GEF/LDCF Project on Enhancing Sustainability and Climate Resilience of Forest and Agricultural Landscapes and Community Livelihoods in Bhutan.

COUNTRY OF ASSIGNMENT: Bhutan

1) GENERAL BACKGROUND In order to reduce climate change vulnerabilities and improve the sustainability of local livelihoods and biodiversity of the country, the Royal Government of Bhutan has requested support from the Global Environment Facility through UNDP for a full-sized project titled “Enhancing Sustainability and Climate Resilience of Forest and Agricultural Landscapes and Community Livelihoods in Bhutan.” The project aims to operationalize an integrated landscape-based approach to climate change adaptation and biodiversity conservation. It seeks to do so through: (a) improvement of institutional capacity at national, sub-national and local levels to manage forest and agricultural landscapes sustainably for enhanced climate resilience; (b) emplacement of governance system for biological corridors and operationalization of conservation management system in the pilot corridors; and (c) development of climate-resilient livelihood options for the local communities.

Based on the project identification form (PIF) document, which articulates the project concept and key components, the GEF has approved project preparation grant (PPG) to 55 develop the Project Document and GEF CEO Endorsement Document. The PPG phase commenced in January 2016 and is scheduled to end in December 2016. In order to aid the project design and formulation of the Project Document, a series of sub-consulting assignments has been anticipated.

2) OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSIGNMENT The objective of the assignment is to examine the existing status of gewog connectivity (GC) roads in the target project areas and their vulnerability to various climate-induced hazards, identify and prioritize the GC roads that require to be strengthened for higher climate- resilience, and analyze the costs and benefits of enhancing the climate resilience of these roads. The findings of this consulting assignment will be vital to the formulation and design of the UNDP/GEF/LDCF project, particularly with regards to the development of climate- resilient livelihood options for the local communities.

3) SCOPE OF WORK AND KEY TASKS Under the supervision of GNHC and UNDP, and in close consultation with the PPG team, the consultant will carry out the following tasks:

(1) Develop and present a detailed methodology and work plan for the assignment;

(2) Carry out desk review of all GC roads with respect to their length, number of beneficiaries, functional and financing status, etc.;

(3) Carry out field work to examine the current status of climate resilience of all the GC roads in the target project areas using nationally acceptable standards for climate-resilient/ environment-friendly roads especially in relation to drainage and slope stability, develop selection criteria, and based on these criteria identify and prioritize GC roads for project support to enhance their sustainability and climate resilience. The criteria will need to constitute a good balance between socio-economic, climate change and environmental factors;

(4) Identify and analyze anticipated costs and benefits of enhancing the prioritized GC roads for project support. The cost-benefit analysis will need to look at economic, social and environmental costs and benefits over short-, medium-, and long-term;

(5) Identify activities for enhancing the sustainability and climate resilience of the prioritized GC roads and prepare detailed costing for these activities based on nationally acceptable standards and norms for climate-resilient/ environment-friendly roads.

4) DURATION OF ASSIGNMENT, DUTY STATION AND EXPECTED PLACES OF TRAVEL

The consultant will be employed for 35 working days spread over the period from 3rd week of March to 30th May, 2016. He/ she will be expected to travel to the field covering gewogs that fall (entirely or partially) inside Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park and Phrumshengla National Park and the biological corridors that link them to other protected areas.

5) FINAL PRODUCTS (1) An inception report detailing the methodology and work plan for the consulting assignment, and outlining the table of contents of the consulting report;

(2) A field mission completion report outlining the process and itineraries;

(3) A detailed report which: (a) provides general information of all GC roads in the country; (b) describing the current status of climate resilience of GC roads in the target project areas; (c) identifying and prioritizing GC roads for project support and their rationale; (d) detailing specific activities and costs to enhance the climate resilience of the prioritized GC roads; and (e) analyzing the anticipated economic, social and environment costs and benefits of enhancing the climate resilience of the prioritized GC roads.

6) PROVISION OF MONITORING AND PROGRESS CONTROLS The consultant will receive technical guidance and support from the PPG team comprising of two international and a national consultant. The PPG team will ensure that the methodology of the assessment is in alignment with the intended objectives of the project, and monitor quality of the final products. UNDP will provide technical advice and liaise with GNHC and project partners to conduct field assessment in the target landscapes.

7) DEGREE OF EXPERTISE AND QUALIFICATIONS

 Master’s degree or higher in road engineering, environmental engineering, climate change adaptation or related field;  At least seven years of relevant progressive work experience;  Knowledge and skills for cost-benefit analysis;  Extensive experience of working on development of rural infrastructure especially rural roads;  High level of proficiency in Dzongkha and local Bhutanese dialects;  Very good analytical and report writing skills in English.

8) CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF THE BEST OFFER

The criteria which shall serve as basis for evaluating offers will be:  Combined Scoring method – where the qualifications and relevant work experience will be weighted a max. of 70%, and combined with the price offer which will be weighted a max of 30%

Criteria Weight Max. Point Technical 70  Academic background 10  Relevant work experience 10  Sound knowledge and skills in cost-benefit analysis 15  Experience of working on development of rural infrastructure especially rural roads as demonstrated 25 through past assignments, publications and reports.

 Appraisal and feedback from past clients on related 10 assignments Sub-total A. (Technical) 70 Financial 30 30 Sub-Total B.(Financial) 30 Total (A+B) 100

9) PAYMENT TERMS The applicant is required to submit a lump-sum financial proposal for the period of 35 working days. The selected consultant will be paid upon payment certification from the hiring manager, in the following manner:  25% upon submission and acceptance of the inception note detailing the methodology and work plan for the assignment;  25% upon completion of the field work and assessment;  50% upon submission and acceptance of the final report by the PPG team, GNHC and UNDP. 10) AWARD OF CONTRACT The consultant who fulfill the requirements will be assessed based on a combined scoring of:  Technical evaluation comprising of 70%, and  Financial evaluation of 30%. 11) FINANCIAL PROPOSAL Please indicate fee structure: 58

i. If Lump-sum (provide breakdown of this lump sum i.e travel, per diem and fee for anticipated number of working days); and

ii. Daily fee (inclusive of fees, including any other relevant expenses related to this assignment).

12) RECOMMENDED PRESENTATION OF OFFER Please submit the below preferred documents with you Presentation of Offer: a) Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability; b) Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references; c) Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a methodology on how they will approach and complete the assignment. The proposal should be submitted in electronic format by Monday 14th March 2016 to [email protected].

7.2 Annex – II: List of Stakeholder/Persons consulted Sl. Name Designation Contact Dzongkhag / Gewog No Number 1. Mr. G. M. Rai Chief, Lobeysa, DoR 17706636 Wangdue, Punakha 2. Mr. Balaram Acharya A. E., Nobding, DoR 17759740 Wangdue Phodrang 3. Mr. Nima Wangchu J. E., Nobding, DoR 17799466 Wangdue / Phobji GC Road 4. Mrs. Ugyen Tshomo J. E., Pinsa, DoR 17993794 Wangdue / Athang, Gasetshowom, Nahi and Kabjisa (Punakha) GC Road 5. Mr. Tsheten Tshering A.E., Pinsa, DoR 17721448 Wangdue 6. Mr. Prem Rai Supervisor, Pinsa, DoR 77412172 Wangdue 7. Mr. Ugyen (ata) Mason, DoR 17604716 Punakha / Zomlingthang, 8. Mr. Tougay Chief, Trongsa, DoR 17607620 Trongsa, Bumthang 9. Mr. Sangay Dorji AE, Jakar, DoR 17699270 Bumthang Sub-division Office 10. Mr. Sonam Dorji AE, Pangjor, DoR 17669903 Korphu GC Road 11. Mr. Jambay Tenzin P. O, Lingmethang, DoR 17685175 Mongar 12. Mr. Wangdi AE, Shengor, DoR 17661789 Sengor Sub-Division Office 13. Ms. Sangay Wangmo JE, Yongkola, DoR 17451700 Yongkola-Tshamang GC Road 14. Mr. Tsheten Dema JE, Autsho, DoR 17368795 Autsho-Jarey GC Road. 15. Mr. Karma Dorji Chief, Tingtibi, DoR 77347499 Zhemgang 16. Mr. H.R. Ghalley EE, Tingtibi, DoR 17512037 Zhemgang 17. Mr. Sangay Dhuba PE,Therang, DoR 17120698 Nimshong Office 18. Mr. Nawang Kinga Supervisor, DoR 17560089 Nimshong-Shingkhar GC Road 19. Mr. C.B. Mongar Chief, Sarpang, DoR 17606832 Sarpang, Tsirang, Dagana 20. Mr. Ugyen Dorji EE, Sarpang, DoR 17695244 Construction 21. Mr. Leki Dorji AE, Sarpang, DoR 17673459 GC roads. 22. Mr. Dakpa P.O., Thimphu, DoR 17524563 Thimphu, Paro, Haa 23. Mr. Sangay Tenzin EE, Haa, DoR 17334752 Haa 24. Mr. Phuntsho Dhendup JE, Khamina, DoR 17120059 Khamina-Sombeykha GC Road 25. Mr. LungtenZamtsho JE, Khamina, DoR 17892881 Khamina-Gakiling GC Road. 26. Mr. Dorji Gyeltshen Chief, Maintenance Division 17708120 DoR, Thimphu 27. Mr. Karma Tenzin EE, Design Section 17609331 DoR Thimphu 28. Mr. Ngawang Choeda Gewog Adm. Officer 17812966 Wangdue / Phobji 29. Mr. Ugyen Dorji Mangmi 77639178 Wangdue/Athang 30. Mr. Sangay Gup 17618563 Wangdue/Gasetshowom 31. Ms. Deki Lhamo Gedung 77374373 Wangdue/Nahi 32. Mr. Karma Gyeltshen Gewog Adm. Officer 17907035 Punakha/Kabjisa 33. Mr. Kinzang Minjur Gup 17727006 Lhuentse/Jarey 34. Mr. Sonam Dhendup Gewog Adm. Officer 17855578 Bumthang/ Tang 35. Mr. Tashi Penjore Gedung 17611459 Trongsa/ Korphu 36. Mr. Phuntsho Range Officer 17747897 Zhilangi Range Office, DoFPS 37. Mr. Nidup Gup 17866591 Zhemgang/Shingkhar 38. Mr. Sherab Jamtsho Range Officer 17559931 Range Office, Nimshong 39. Mr. Shivalal Kararia Gup 17921342 Tsirang / Phuentenchu 40. Mr. Shanti Ram Tshogpa 17317651 Tsirang / Phuentenchu Chamlengai 41. Mr. Chimmi Dorji Range Officer 17788071 Park Office, Lingmethang 42. Mr. Karma Tshethar Chief Engineer Engineering Division, DoA, 43. Lungten Jamtsho Chief Engineer DD, DoR 44. Karma Wangdi Chief Engineer 17162377 Construction, DoR 45. Sonam Desel Dy. Chief Env. Officer 17758958 PPD/MoWHS

7.3 ANNEX – III _ Field Assessment Data of identified GC Roads The following 14 GC Roads were identified and subjected to field assessments. Assessments were carried out for each road and information obtained is being furnished in the Format developed under “Questionnaire” for this specific assignment. A total of 15 GC roads were visited, covering 14 Gewogs under 11 Dzongkhags.

① Phobji Questionnaire Date: 11-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Wangdue Phodrang Gewog: Phobji Name of GC Road: Phobji

From: Tabading - Ngelungdracholing Feeder road To: Ngelungdracholing lhakhang Length: 5.6 Km ch.2.95 km (Gup office/RNR office, Phobji falls on the way)

Year of Construction: 2004 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality of The road condition is very good after Black topping. L-drains /cross drains are in place. Numerous streams also act as natural road: cross drains. The road passes through a very gentle terrain and slope height is also very less, thereby reducing the threats of slope failures/slips etc. Maintenance works (Wet Mix Macadam (WMM), drains etc) were carried out by DOR in 2015., Note: Contract for Blacktopping works (11.5 km, Gangte Gewog – Phobji Gewog) is awarded to M/s Tobden Construction and the work is under progress. Current management of roads: DoR Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required23.

23The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 61

Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labourers are recruited as and when required. Funding? RGoB under Maintenance budget Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO How effective is the current Seems effective as there are no signs of any maintenance required on this road. Also the volume of traffic seems to be less management practice of the roads? on this road. What are the challenges? The JE expressed that labourers are not easily available. Farmers are busy with their works and also the existing daily wage is not attractive to them. Current condition of the GC road The current condition of the road is good and nothing needs to be done. During 2015 the DoR had carried out WMM/drains and critical suggestions to improve repairs/maintenance and this year (2016) blacktopping is being done. the Farm roads to maximize the benefit of the road to the beneficiaries. Beneficiaries Name of village Distance from No. Population Types of Trips per Purpose (uses) Remarks the road of vehicle plying day H/H M F /day During peak season, 2-3 buses Medium & light Transportation of goods (tourists) ply every day. Road passes 20 and services, 5 shopkeepers own vehicles. Khemdro 99 through it. Tippers Offices The JE has observed a slight (contractor) Contract works increase of traffic after road maintenance (road improvement).

Tawa 5 km 130

Name of PAs/BCs Distance from Length Types of vehicle Trips Purpose Remarks the road (km) plying /day per day (uses)

Protected Area: The GC road does not fall inside any PA/BC/FMU.

Biological Corridor:

FMU:

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction: Land degradation - No Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - No Forest resources - No Increase/decrease of wastes and type? - Slight increase of dry wastes. Cleanup days are organized by primary schools on Saturdays. Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Intervention Items Quantity provided Adequacy required Remarks per km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No i) Drainage (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc)

- Side drains Entire length √ √ Concrete L drains are/were repaired/constructed in 2015.

- Cross drains √ √ As a thumb-rule 2-3 nos, per km of cross drains need to be provided. - Culverts/bridges - Not required. ii) Slope stability (Types and dimensions) - Retaining Walls - Not required. - Breast walls - Not required.

- Bio-engineering works - Not required. (Techniques used)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency? Damages Signs of erosion / Size/ Category Location Causes Frequency deposition Remarks area To Type (on & along) Above Is it due to road cut? road. Carriage - - - - - way No sign of slope instability as - No Landslide the slopes are gentle and the (slope height of cut is less than Undercutting by instabilities) Below 3 m in average. rivers, irrigation Road road. - - - - canals, land use, Alignment - No others??

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks

Geological Not seen/observed. instability - -

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)

② Jarey

Questionnaire Date: 13-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 3 Dzongkhag: Lhuentse Gewog: Jarey

Name of GC Road: Autsho - Jarey Length: 16.3 Km From: Autsho To: Gup office/RNR office Year of Construction: 2011 - 2012 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - SDP Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality The road condition is not goods as it passes through chirpine forests with lots of fragmented and rocky stretches. The JE of road: informed that there are rock slides/debris fall during rains at several places. But there is one critical area (at Sangchhenla, around 6-7 km from Autsho) where slips occur very often. The road width is very narrow (averaged 4.5 – 5.5 m) and to give way to the oncoming vehicle is difficult and risky. Either of the vehicle has to go back to find a suitable place before giving way the oncoming vehicle. There are no cross drains and the earthen drain is all covered with debris and non-functional. Both retaining walls and breast walls are required. The entire length of the road needs widening to obtain the formation width (FC) of 6.5 m for GC road. Note: Blacktopping and base course works already awarded and the contractor is just mobilizing machinery and manpower. Current management of roads: DoR

Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required24. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labourers are recruited as and when required. Funding? RGoB under Maintenance budget

24The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 65

Yes/No - NO Are there Road Users’ Group? How effective is the current management practice of the Seems effective as there are no signs of any maintenance required on this road. roads? What are the challenges? The JE expressed that labourers are not easily available. Farmers are busy with their works and also the existing daily wage is not attractive to them. Current condition of the GC The current condition of the road is not good. road and critical suggestions to improve the Farm roads to  About 30% of the road length is very narrow and needs widening. maximize the benefit of the  About 3 km of road length passes through scree area and needs to be provided with breast walls. road to the beneficiaries.  Improvement of gradient required.  Widening of curves/zigs.  Cross drains and line drains required.  A breast wall required at Sanchhenla (30x15 M).

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance from No. Population Types of vehicle Trips Purpose (uses) Remarks the road of plying /day per H/H M F day Jarey Road passes In total there are about 6 nos. of small vehicles through it. Domestic and 3 nos. of two-wheelers plying in the GC 2-3 Medium & light road. Tippers (contractor) Ngangney Road passes Contract works through it. Ladong 3 km There is one BHU and a school in Ladong. Pam 6 km Yumche 9 km Total 145

Distance Trips Name of PAs/BCs Types of vehicle from the Length (km) per Purpose (uses) Remarks plying /day road day

Protected Area: The GC road does not fall inside any PA/BC/FMU. Biological Corridor:

FMU:

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction: Land degradation - No Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - No Forest resources - No

Increase/decrease of wastes and type? - The gup informed that currently not so much of waste generation, but the waste will increase when more vehicles/people use the road after being blacktopped.

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards

Intervention Adequacy Remarks Items Quantity provided required per km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No

(Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc) i) Drainage

- Side drains √ √ Concrete L drains are being constructed under the current contract. - Cross drains √ √ As per site conditions. (As a thumb-rule 2-3 nos, per km of cross drains need to be provided). - Culverts/bridges √ √ Not required. But one existing cause-way needs to be improved. ii) Slope stability (Types and dimensions) - Retaining Walls √ √ Required. - Breast walls √ √ Required. √ √ - Bio-engineering Not implemented. Requires to be implemented for slope stability and works improvement of aesthetic value. (Techniques used)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Size/a Damages Signs of erosion / Category Location Causes Frequency Remarks rea deposition To Type (on & along) Above Is it due to road cut? - road blocks Land slips and Lots of slopes increasingly 30X Carriage road 3-4 times- due to erosion increasing becoming vulnerable. One breast - Yes 15 m- way debris fall. annually. walls of 30x3 m. required at Landslide Songchhenla Undercutting by (slope Valley side slope rivers, irrigation instabilities) getting eroded Below canals, land use, Road - - during slip clearing road others?? Alignment

- None

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks

Around 3 km of road length runs through fragmented rocky area/ “scree” and this area is prone to scree slips if Geological - - disturbed. Potentially scree debris slip threats. Construction of a 1.5-2 m high gabion wall would prevent rock instability slips. Needs further detailed assessment incase interventions are proposed.

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc) - None. ③ Tsamang Questionnaire Date: 14-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 3 Dzongkhag: Mongar Gewog: Tsamang Name of GC Road: Tsamang Length: 21.3 Km From: Yonkola To: Banjar Year of Construction: 2005 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - GOI Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality The road condition is not good as it gets very wet and slippery during rains. Only 4-wheel drive vehicles can make it with great of road: difficulties, even these vehicles cannot make it at 2-3 places when the rains are heavy. About 40% of the road length is narrow. The drains are almost non-functional. Lots of land slips. Cross drains have been provided but not adequate.

Note: DoR has contracted out widening works, including blacktopping with base course. The works are ongoing. Current management of roads: DoR Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required25. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labourers are recruited as and when required. (need based) Funding? RGoB under Maintenance budget

25The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 69

Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO How effective is the current Due to insufficient labors/manpower the road is maintained on need basis.It is not the ideal management practice but perhaps management practice of the the next best alternative solution. roads? What are the challenges? The JE expressed that due to acute shortage of labours, timely maintenance is compromised. Current condition of the GC The road needs improvement of base course immediately and drainage system as driving during / after rains is slippery and road and critical suggestions risky. Due to shortage of labors, proper maintenance of drains has not been carried out and water runs over the carriageway. to improve the Farm roads to Maintenance is reduced to slips clearance only. maximize the benefit of the The DoR has contracted widening works, blacktopping and base course. Due to limited funds the scope of works has been road to the beneficiaries. reduced to carry out limited activities only. L-drains, cross drains proposed are limited in quantity. Cross drains need to be provided as per site conditions but under the present contract this has been limited due to want of fund.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. Population Types Trips per Purpose (uses) Remarks from the of of day road H/H vehicle M F plying /day Medium Used mainly for construction purposes. Carrying & light 2-3 Road Tippers construction passes (contract materials. Drangmaling through it. 8 or) Carrying farm Road produce to passes markets. Tsamang through it. 75

Banjar 3 km 45 There is one BHU and a school in Ladong.

Name of PAs/BCs Distance Types of from the Length Trips per vehicle plying Purpose (uses) Remarks road (km) day /day

Protected Area: The GC road does not fall inside any - - - - - PA/BC/FMU.

Biological Corridor: ------FMU: ------

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction: Land degradation - No Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - No Forest resources - No Increase/decrease of wastes and type? - No

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Quantity Intervention Adequacy provided required Items Remarks per km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc) i) Drainage

- Side drains √ √ Concrete L drains are being constructed under the current contract (quantity/length reduced).

- Cross drains √ √ As per site conditions. (As a thumb-rule 2-3 nos, per km of cross drains need to be provided).

- Causeways (about 10 nos in all) - Culverts/bridges √ √ ii) Slope stability (Types and dimensions) - Retaining Walls √ √ Proposed under the contract. - Breast walls √ √ Proposed under the contract √ √ - Bio-engineering Not implemented. Requires to be implemented for slope stability and improvement of works aesthetic value. (Techniques used) (Generally all the roads constructed by Dzongkhags do not implement bioengineering works including many of the EFRC items, due to very low budget.)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency? Damages Signs of erosion / Size / Category Location Causes Frequency Remarks area To Type deposition (on & along) Above Is it due to road - road During rainy season. road cut? blocks Carriage 20X 9m- seasonal due to Yes. - No way debris Landslide fall. (slope Undercutting by instabilities) rivers, irrigation Below Road canals, land - - - - - road use, others?? Alignment - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks

Geological 15x10 m - seasonal Although well vegetated area, the scouring of toe during rainy season, area tends to become slide prone. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc)- None.

④ Tang Questionnaire Date: 16-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 3 Dzongkhag: Bumthang Gewog: Tang Name of GC Road: Wabthang Length: 17 Km From: Dungmithang To: Mesithang Year of Construction: Early 1980s (about 35 years ago) Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - Sheep/Yak Farming Project, DoL Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality The road is one of the best roads in terms of quality, gradient and road width. The DoR had been maintaining this road for of road: over a decade. Note: DoR has contracted out the blacktopping works to M/S KD Builders Pvt. Ltd. with the following scope of works: - blacktopping - Drains (stone pitched (RRM)drains and L-drain (4 km). The works are ongoing. Current management of roads: DoR (for the past 12-13 years) Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Daily26. Who maintains? DoR through its regular maintenance crews. Labour contribution? DoR, waged Funding? RGoB under Maintenance budget

Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO. Road Users’ Group exists only for farm roads.

26The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 74

How effective is the current Effective since the maintenance is carried out on a daily basis. management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? Maintenance during winter and during snows can be a little challenging. Current condition of the GC The road is in good shape and with the current contract for black topping, drain works, no additional itmes need to be added road and critical suggestions to to further improve the road. Adequate numbers of cross drains exist. improve the Farm roads to But there is one old slide at Zhunshen (at 14-15 km) where a gabion breast wall of 15x3 m needs to be provided. However, maximize the benefit of the this wall must be constructed during non-rainy season to reduce the risk of the slide failure. Construct French drains in road to the beneficiaries. marshy areas of Pangshing and Zhunshen. In all three locations of approx. area of 20x10m each must be taken up.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. Population Types of Trips per Purpose (uses) Remarks from the of vehicle day road H/H M F plying /day

Road Trucks 5 Carrying Benefits 27 villages passes Medium 20 construction through the &light materials.

Babzur village. 22 vehicles Carrying farm Tippers 5 produce to Road (contractor 6 markets. passes 2-wheelers 2 Official duties through the Tractors 6 Tourist buses Kunzangdra village. 20 Tourist bus 3 Study tours Sturdy tour Road passes vehicles

through the Pangshing village. 14

Road passes through the Zhemshong village. 9 Road Misithang 4 passes 75

through the village. Phromang 5 km 19 Dazur 2 km 8

Distance Trips Name of PAs/BCs Length Types of vehicle Purpose from the per Remarks (km) plying /day (uses) road day

Protected Area: - - - - - The GC road does not fall inside PNP.

Biological Corridor: - - - - - GC road falls under BC of PNP.

FMU: - NRDCL plans to extract logs from Rodengla FMU - - - - (end of Feeder Road).

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards

Intervention Quantity Adequacy Items provided per required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc) i) Drainage

- Side drains Throughout. √ √ Stone pitched and L drains are being constructed under the current contract. - Cross drains 3-4 / km √ √ As per site conditions. (As a thumb-rule 2-3 nos, per km of cross drains need to be provided). - Culverts/bridges 4-5 H/pipe √ √ culverts 1 bailey bridge ii) Slope stability (Types and dimensions) - Retaining Walls √ √ Proposed under the contract. - Breast walls √ √ Proposed under the contract √ √ - Bio-engineering Not implemented. Requires to be implemented for slope stability and works improvement of aesthetic value. (Zhungshen slide area). (Techniques used)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Category Location Causes Size/area Frequency deposition Remarks To Type (on & along) Above Is it due to - reduction Water runs over the Drain covered and blocked. road road cut? 15x15 m - Carriage way in road road. - Yes width Undercutting Landslide by rivers, (slope irrigation instabilities) Below canals, land Road - - - - - road use, others?? alignment

- No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc)- None.

⑤ Korphu

Questionnaire Date: 17-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Trongsa Gewog: Korphu Name of GC Road: Wangdigang - Zhalingbi Length: 19.5 Km From: Wangdigang To: Zhalingbi Year of Construction: 2004 RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - Others (many agencies were involved in the construction of this road. UNICEF- Financing source: Food, and Tool & Plants; ECRP, RLP, CMU - machinery and RGoB - Blasting) Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality of Overall the road quality is ok and can qualify as a fair weather road. At 5 locations the road is marshy and even 4-wheel road: drive vehicles have difficulties to drive over in heavy rains. Remnants of drains can be seen in some stretches and nonfunctional in most cases. This has resulted in water running on the road creating water channels and “ponding” effects.

A few cross drains are found near villages only. But for the rest of the road, the natural or depressions serve as cross drains. About 4-5 culverts are required over gullies where some perennial water is found. There are two larger rivers over which bridges need to be constructed. At several places the gradient is very steep and at 4 places this needs to be corrected/improved. About 60% of the road is very narrow and needs to be widened. These are generally in rocky stretches. It appears that maintenance was not carried out at all and the drains are chocked and covered with debris. Perhaps only slip clearance and road blocks clearing activities were prioritized as maintenance activities before DoR took over the road. Note: DoR has contracted out the blacktopping works to Druk Lhayul Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Paro, with the following scope of works: - Widening and improvement of zigs. - GSB, WBM and black topping (25mm thick) works - L drains (0.6 m width) for about 50% of the entire length of the GC road - 40 nos. of Hume pipe Cross drains (90 Hume pipes) already purchased) - Slope stabilities required at 4-5 places- gabion walls (about 1000 m3 of 2-5 m height with varying lengths) required as per site conditions. The works are ongoing.

Current management of roads: DoR Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Daily27. Who maintains? Labour contribution? Funding?

Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO. How effective is the current At present no maintenance works seem to be there. management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? DoR engineer had stated shortage of labour. Current condition of the GC road The road is trafficable during fair weather only. To make it all weather road, improvement works like widening of curves, gradient and critical suggestions to rectification, base course and black topping must be carried out. Side drains, cross drains are other activities that must be put in place improve the GC roads to to ensure water management is properly addressed. There are two rivers (Philigangchu stream) at Nagpokhosar and Jiliganchu maximize the benefit of the road further ahead where culverts or bridges are required. The Philigangchua is relatively small river and can be crossed easily, except to the beneficiaries. that during monsoon the river can get bigger and crossing might be a problem. A box culvert (3L x 4.5W x 1.5H) m should be ok over this river. A bailey bridge (110 ft) is under construction by M/S D.D. Construction over the Jiligangchu stream. It is referred to in the contract as “Construction of Chulekha Nabji Bailey Bridge (110 ft) on Nabji-Korphu GC road”. Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. of Population Types of Trips per Purpose (uses) Remarks from the H/H vehicle plying day road M F /day Road Trucks 10 Carrying construction passes Tippers materials. Nimshong through (contractor Carrying the village. 67 LVs (Boleros) farm produce to markets.

27The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 80

Official duties Nobji -Tourist vehicles during

3 km 61 Tshechu

Khorphu

4.7 km 80 25

Name of PAs/BCs Distance from the Length Types of vehicle Trips per Purpose (uses) Remarks road (km) plying /day day

Protected Area: GC road falls inside the Buffer zone - - - - - area of JSNP.

Biological Corridor: - - - - -

FMU: - - - - -

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction: Land degradation - No Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - No Forest resources - No

Increase/decrease of wastes and type? - None. 81

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards

Intervention Adequacy Remarks Items Quantity provided required per km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No i) Drainage (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc)

- Side drains About 30% remains √ √ Nonfunctional as the drains are choked or covered by debris. in the entire road length. - Cross drains 3-4/km √ √ As per site conditions. (As a thumb-rule 2-3 nos, per km of cross drains need to be provided).

- Culverts/bridges 4-5 H/pipe culverts √ √ 1 bailey bridge ii) Slope stability (Types and dimensions) - Retaining Walls √ √ Proposed under the contract. - Breast walls √ √ Proposed under the contract √ √ - Bio-engineering works Not implemented. Requires to be implemented for slope stability and (Techniques used) improvement of aesthetic value.

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Category Location Causes Size/area Frequency Remarks To Type deposition (on & along)

Above road Is it due to road - reduction Carriage Water runs over cut? 15x10 m - in road Drain covered and blocked. way the road. - Yes width

Landslide Undercutting by (slope rivers, irrigation instabilities) canals, land use, Road Below road others?? - - - - - Alignment

- No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks

Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc)- None.

⑥ Nimshong-Shingkhar

Questionnaire Date: 19-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 3 Dzongkhag: Zhemgang Gewog: Shingkhar

Name of GC Road: Shingkhar

Length: 31.96 Km From: Nimshong To: Shingkhar

Year of Construction: 2013 (additional length of 1.24 km till Gup’s office to be completed by June ’16) Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - GoI Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent The road has no base course as the road is just completed. Side drains/cross drains have not been provided. Due to these the road surface has been damaged by rains and gets slippery and thus making it difficult to drive on it. Observation on overall quality There are two huge landslides at Shebjigang and Gramkhar (chainage 10 km & 14 km from Nimshong). The slides have of road: covered almost half of the road width for about 15-25 m.

A RRC bridge (12.5 L x 4.5 H x 4 W) m is required and proposed over Rejugangchu

DoR Current management of roads: Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? periodic DoR but the road is still considered as under construction due to additional 1.24 km till Gup’s office expected to be completed by Who maintains? June 2016) Labour contribution? Local labours on casual wages. Funding? RGoB Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO.

How effective is the current no maintenance works carried out management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? DoR engineer had stated shortage of labour. Current condition of the GC The road is trafficable during fair weather only. To make it all weather road, drainage system should be in place and maintenance road and critical suggestions to carried out regularly. Breast walls must be constructed on the slide areas. BT works required. Bioengineering works to be carried improve the Farm roads to out. maximize the benefit of the road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. of Population Types of Trips per day Purpose (uses) Remarks from the H/H vehicle road plying M F /day Road Trucks Carrying construction passes Tippers 10 materials. through the (contractor Carrying farm produce Wamling village. 77 LVs to markets. (Boleros) Official duties

Thrisa 5 km 65

Shingkhar Trong 13 Mayembi 16 Changkhar 5 Radhi

Name of PAs/BCs Distance from the Length Types of vehicle plying Trips per day Purpose (uses) Remarks road (km) /day

Protected Area: - - - - - GC road does not fall inside PA, BC or FMU.

Biological Corridor: - - - -

FMU: - - - - -

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction: Land degradation - Yes Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - No Forest resources - No

Increase/decrease of wastes and type? - Slight increase of non-biodegradable plastic wrappers and beer bottles. Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Intervention Quantity Adequacy Items provided per required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc.) i) Drainage

- Side drains √ √ Sl No i) and ii) proposed in the next 2016-17 budget.

- Cross drains √ √ - Culverts/bridges √ √ ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls √ √ - Breast walls √ √ - Bio-engineering √ √ works (Techniques used)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of Remarks erosion / Category Location Causes Size/area Frequency To Type deposition (on & along) Above road Is it due to 15x10 m Drain covered and blocked. road cut? Carriage - reduction in Water runs - 2 locations - way road width over the road. - Yes 25x 20 m Undercutti Landslide ng by (slope rivers, instabilities) irrigation canals, Road Below road - - - - - land use, Alignment others??

- No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc) - None.

⑦ Chhudzom/Dovan

Questionnaire Date: 19-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads

Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Sarpang Gewog: Dovan (Chudzom)

Name of GC Road: Dovan Length: 48.5 Km From: Chokorling (Toribari) To:Pankhay (Gewog office) Year of Construction: 2014 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality Overall quality of the road is good. The road width is sufficient. Side drains and adequate numbers of cross drains provided. of road:

DoR Current management of roads: Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required28.

Who maintains? DoR Labor contribution? Local labours on casual wages.

Funding? RGoB Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - No. How effective is the current Satisfactory management practice of the roads?

28The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 89

What are the challenges? Engineer had stated shortage of labour. Current condition of the GC The road is trafficable during dry weather only. With rains most of the areas get slushy and slippery. Mostly Boleros (or 4-wheel road and critical suggestions to drive vehicles) are able to ply on these roads. Contracts packages have been awarded to carry out black topping works, base improve the Farm roads to course, drains, cross drains and gabion walls. A bailey bridge over Thotne khola (chainage 35 km) has been proposed. Nu:8 maximize the benefit of the million has been approved for the construction of the bridge. Site survey has been completed and design of the bridge is under road to the beneficiaries. progress.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance from No. of Population Types of Trips Purpose (uses) Remarks the road H/H vehicle plying per day M F /day Road passes Tippers 100 Carrying construction Chokorling through the (contractor) materials.

village. Boleros Carrying Hilux farm produce to Road passes markets.

Dalungang through the Official duties village. Visit Gewog office

3Road passes 400 3011 1883 Maogang through the village.

Road passes Gungring through the village. Road passes Phankhey through the village.

Name of PAs/BCs Distance from the road Types of vehicle plying Trips Length (km) Purpose (uses) Remarks /day per day

Protected Area: - - - - - GC Road does not fall inside, PA, BC, or FMU. - - - - Biological Corridor:

FMU: - - - - -

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Quantity Intervention Items Adequacy provided per required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No i) Drainage (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc)

- Side drains 7 km √ √ L drains/earthen drains proposed - Cross drains 50 Nos √ √ Box culverts proposed

1 Bailey bridge required and proposed over Thotne khola at chainage 35 km (120’ L x - Culverts/bridges √ √ 4.5 W x 4 m H) ii) Slope stability 91

- Retaining Walls √ √ - Breast walls √ √ 8 nos. proposed (R/wall and Gabion walls)

- Bio-engineering √ √ works Broadcasting Good (Techniques used) of seeds

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Category Location Causes Size/area Frequency deposition Remarks To Type (on & along)

Above road Is it due to road 50x10m - Water runs over Drain road blocked. 3-4 times cut? 30x15m the road. Road gets muddy and slippery. 30x8m during rainy Carriage -reduction in seasons / way road width - Yes 45x12m - debris depositing on monsoon Landslide road (slope Undercutting by instabilities) rivers, irrigation Road Below road canals, land - - Alignmen - - - use, others?? t - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)- None.

⑧ Phuentenchu

Questionnaire Date: 24 -May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads

Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Tsirang Gewog: Phuentenchu Name of GC Road: Phuentenchu Length: 5.25 Km From: Tsirangtoe Gup office To: Gewog Office, Phuentenchhu Year of Construction: 2006 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall The road quality was good as it is contracted to M/s Wang’s Private Ltd, Wangdue for Blacktopping works. Base course, laying quality of road: of Hume pipes for cross drains are complete. Only earthen drain provided as there is no provision in the contract. The drains will be taken up if additional budget is allocated. Widening of road has been completed and the road width improved/increased to

more than 5.1 m. Gradient has been improved. Side drains/cross drains have not been provided. A total of 15 nos. of passing zones created along the road. Current management of DoR roads:

Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required29. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labours on casual wages. Funding? RGoB Yes/No - NO. Are there Road Users’ Group? no maintenance works carried out How effective is the current management practice of the roads?

29The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 93

What are the challenges? DoR engineer had stated shortage of labour. Current condition of the GC road The current road condition is very good and soon the road will be blacktopped. There are not threats from landslips or and critical suggestions to improve slope failure. Therefore, only L-drains must be provided, as cross drains are already put in place, as water management the Farm roads to maximize the for this road. benefit of the road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries

Name of village Distance No. Population Types of Trips per day Purpose (uses) Remarks from the of M F vehicle road H/H plying /day

Trucks 10 Carrying construction 27 Boleros in Phuentenchu Gewog Tippers materials. only. Road passes Light Vehicle Carrying Upper Norbuthang through the 69 180 150 Bolero farm produce to village. markets. Official duties commuting

Name of Distance Length Types of vehicle PAs/BCs from the Trips per day Purpose (uses) Remarks road (km) plying /day

Protected Area: - - - - - GC road does not fall inside PA, BC or FMU.

Biological - - - - - Corridor:

FMU: - - - - -

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards

Intervention Quantity provided Adequacy Items required Remarks per km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No i) Drainage (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc.)

Earthen drain only, due to low budget provision. L drains must be - Side drains Entire length √ √ provided as the area has high rainfall during monsoon. - Cross drains 2 nos causeway √ √ 14 nos. Hume Pipe - Culverts/bridges √ √ culverts ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls √ - Breast walls √ - Bio-engineering √ works

(Techniques used)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size/a Category Location Causes Frequency deposition Remarks rea To Type (on & along) Above road Is it due to road Carriage - - cut? - - - - way -- No Landslide (slope Undercutting by instabilities) rivers, irrigation Road Below road canals, land use, - - - - - others?? Alignment - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)- None.

⑨ Athang

Questionnaire Date: 25-May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads

Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Wangdue Phodrang Gewog: Athang Name of GC Road: Athang Length: 7 Km From: Zarigang zam To: Gewog Office, Athang 2013 Year of Construction: Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Type of Road: Observation on overall quality The road quality is still trafficable. At four places the road has been dug to take water for irrigation purposes and this makes of road: it a little bumpy ride. Sections of the L drain are still seen, although the drains are higher than the road surface. Land slide had occurred 2 years back due to flash flood effect after the whole area was devastated by fire.

DoR Current management of roads: Type of maintenance:

Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labours on casual wages. Funding? RGoB Yes/No - NO. Are there Road Users’ Group? How effective is the current Not very effective, but somehow road is made trafficable. management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? DoR’s Work Supervisor stated shortage of labour and lack of machineries are hindering proper maintenance works.

Current condition of the GC The current road condition is still ok. L drains must be repaired and rectified. DoR must make adequate provisions to continue road and critical suggestions to providing water for irrigation purposes through Hume pipes embedded below the road. There are no immediate threats from improve the Farm roads to landslips or slope failure. Therefore, L-drains, cross drains and a box-culvert over “phangrichu” stream must be provided to maximize the benefit of the improve the road. A 22 m long with of 3.5m carriage way RC-T Girder bridge exists over the Dickchu river. Road widening in road to the beneficiaries. few places prior to black topping would improve the road quality and also its stability.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. Population Types Trips Purpose (uses) Remarks from the of of per road H/H vehicle day M F plying /day Tippers 2-3 Carrying construction 27 Boleros in Phuentenchu Gewog only. DCM materials. Road passes Dolangpche Light Carrying farm produce to through the 1 1 2 (Hati dunga) Vehicle markets. village. Bolero Official duties Bikes commuting Phangri ‘A’ ------“------1 1 5 Phangri ‘B’ ------“------1 2 4

Name of PAs/BCs Distance Length Types of vehicle Trips from the road Purpose (uses) Remarks (km) plying /day per day Protected Area: - - - - - GC road does not fall inside PA, BC or FMU. Biological Corridor: - - - - FMU: ------

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Intervention Quantity provided per Adequacy Items required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No i) Drainage (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc)

- Side drains L- drains (constructed √ √ L drains must be provided over the entire length. earlier) are found in a few stretches.

- Cross drains 4nos causeway √ √ The existing causeways are damaged and needs to be repaired / reconstructed with bigger dimensions as per site conditions. Cross drainage is proposed to be provided through Humepipe culverts.

7 nos. Hume Pipe culverts proposed by DoR. - Culverts/bridges √ √ One box culvert (4L x 3.5 W x 1.5 H) m Required over Phangri chu stream. ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls √ - Breast walls √ 99

Bio-engineering - works √ Light intervention required on slopes, a per site conditions. (Techniques used)

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size/ Category Location Causes Frequency Remarks area To Type deposition (on & along) Above road Is it due to road Due to erosion of soil above road after cut? Carriage Road heavy forest fire. - Yes - - once - No. It was due way block Landslide to flash flood. (slope Undercutting by Traces of slope erosion seen from irrigation instabilities) rivers, irrigation channel. Road Below road canals, land - - - - use, others?? Alignment - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)- None.

100

⑩ Kabjisa

Questionnaire Date: 26 -May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads

Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Punakha Gewog: Kabjisa Name of GC Road: Kabjisa (Kabesa) Length: 3.1 Km From: Jalephu (Jalekha) - ‘0’ Point To: Gewog Office, Kabjisa Year of Construction: 2009-2010 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent

Observation on overall quality The overall quality of road is good. But in general the road width is very narrow. The narrowest stretch/section is of about of road: 100m at Damtekha and at Kabesa village. At Damtekha section the average FC width is about 4.5 m, the carriage way is 2.5-2.9 m. There is no place to give way to the oncoming vehicle. The side drains and cross drains are provided and sufficient. No threat of slides or slips along the road. DoR Current management of roads:

Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labours on casual wages. Funding? RGoB Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO. How effective is the current Not very effective, but somehow road is made trafficable. management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? DoR’s Work Supervisor stated shortage of labour.

101

Current condition of the GC At Damteckha section the road width must be obtained by constructing a retaining wall. An irrigation channel runs below the road and critical suggestions to road and necessary precautions/measures (or restoration works) must be taken while constructing the wall. One Cross drain improve the Farm roads to must be provided at the Kabjisa GC take-off point to safely drain the water rather than letting all the water on the Highway. maximize the benefit of the Blacktopping of the road would greatly improve the road quality. road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. of Population Types of Trips per Purpose Remarks from the H/H vehicle plying day (uses) road M F /day Carrying Damtekha Road passes Tippers (7) 21 Traffic is heavy during Tsechu, Eusakha construction through the Shaktiman (1) 1 drupchen and also pilgrimage to Chorten materials. village. Light Vehicle - Ningpo Lhakhang (av. 5 vehicles/day) Carrying ------(60) 15 farm produce to 18 58 47 Bolero (7) 10 markets. Bikes (5) 1 Official duties 2 -School bus (2) commuting 2 - Taxi

Eusakha ------“------43 152 145

Distance Types of vehicle Trips Purpose from the Length (km) Remarks Name of PAs/BCs plying /day per day (uses) road Protected Area: - - - - - GC road does not fall inside PA, BCor FMU.

Biological Corridor: ------FMU:

102

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Intervention Quantity provided per Adequacy Items required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No

(Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc) i) Drainage - Side drains L- drains (constructed √ √ L drains nonfunctional at many places. earlier) are found in a few stretches.

- Cross drains 3 nos Hume Pipe √ √ 2 nos. additional required, one at the GC road Take-off point Culverts required - Culverts/bridges -Not provided Not required. ii) Slope stability

- Retaining Walls - √ Not required.

- Breast walls 1 √ √ Additional not required.

- √ - Bio-engineering works Light intervention required on slopes, as per site conditions. (Techniques used)

103

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size/a Category Location Causes Frequency Remarks rea To Type deposition (on & along) Above Is it due to road Carriage road - cut? - - - - way - No - Landslide (slope Undercutting by instabilities) rivers, irrigation - Below Road canals, land - - - - road use, others?? Alignment - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)- None.

104

⑪ Gasetshowom

Questionnaire Date: 26 -May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Wangdue Phodrang Gewog: Gasetshowom Name of GC Road: Gasetshowom Length: 5.7 Km From: Gaselo Feeder road (end point To: Gewog Office, Wasina Year of Construction: 2000-2001 (about 15-16 years back) Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal - Permanent Observation on overall The overall quality of road is good. The DoR had already awarded contracts in two packages to 2 contractors and the scope quality of road: of works included the followings; Blacktopping, drains and WMM. Construction of L-drain was complete in Package 1 (0.00 -2.68 km). Black topping completed in Package 2 (2.68 – 5.5 km). Current management of roads: DoR Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required30. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labours on casual wages. Funding? RGoB Are there Road Users’ Yes/No - NO. Group?

30The site has been handed over to the contractor and now it’s his responsibility to maintain the road till he hands back road to the DoR. 105

How effective is the current Not very effective. management practice of the . roads? What are the challenges? JE stated shortage of labour. Current condition of the GC With current maintenance contracts the road is fine. No critical issues observed that requires attention. road and critical suggestions to improve the Farm roads to maximize the benefit of the road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. Population Types of Trips Purpose (uses) Remarks from the of vehicle plying per day road H/H M F /day Singkhey Road DCM 20 Carrying construction After Gewog office there are two passes Pvt.Vehicle-6 materials. chiwogs that also benefit from the through the Carrying farm produce GC road. 60 110 190 - Taxi village. to markets. Official duties commuting

Distance Name of PAs/BCs Length Types of vehicle Trips from the Purpose (uses) Remarks (km) plying /day per day road

Protected Area: - - - - - GC road does not fall inside PA, BC or FMU. - - - - Biological Corridor: FMU: - - - - -

106

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards

Items Quantity provided per Adequacy Intervention required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc.) i) Drainage - Side drains L- drains √ √ L drains nonfunctional at many places. - Cross drains 4 nos √ √ - Culverts/bridges - 1 culvert Lawalungmachu. ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls - √ Not required. - Breast walls 1 √ √ Additional not required. - Bio-engineering works - Not required. (Techniques used)

107

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size/a Category Location Causes Frequency deposition Remarks rea To Type (on & along) Above road Is it due to road Carriage cut? - - - - No way - - Landslide (slope Undercutting by - instabilities) rivers, irrigation Road Below road canals, land use, - - - - others?? Alignment - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc) - None.

108

⑫ Nahi

Questionnaire Date: 27 -May ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 2 Dzongkhag: Wangdue Phodrang Gewog: Nahi Name of GC Road: Nahi Length: 3.7 Km From: Agoloo (10 km from Highway) To: Gewog Office, Pegang Year of Construction: 2005-06 Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal - Permanent Observation on overall quality The overall quality of road is ok. The road width is narrow (4-5m in average) and is only 3m. Stone masonry L- drain was of road: constructed. Due to lack of maintenance most of sections are damaged and non-functional. There were 4 nos. of cross drains and seemed to be adequate. A small slip has occurred that might become worse if a breast wall is not provided.

Current management of roads: DoR Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? Periodic, as and when required. Who maintains? DoR Labour contribution? Local labours on daily wages. Funding? RGoB Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - NO. How effective is the current management practice of the roads? Not very effective. What are the challenges? JE stated shortage of labour and difficult to access during rainy season.

109

Current condition of the GC The drains need to be rectified/improved. A Gabion breast wall of 3x2m is to be provided to prevent further slope failure. road and critical suggestions to Blacktopping essential to improve the road. improve the Farm roads to maximize the benefit of the road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance No. of Population Types of Trips per Purpose Remarks from the H/H vehicle day (uses) road M F plying /day Hebesa chiwog Road passes Tripper Less Carrying RNR office/residents under construction through the 22 40 60 Tractor than 1 construction beside the Gewog Office. village. Pvt.Vehicle materials.

Distance Name of PAs/BCs Length Types of vehicle Trips per Purpose from the Remarks (km) plying /day day (uses) road

Protected Area: GC road does not fall inside PA, BC or - - - - - FMU. Biological Corridor: - - - - FMU: - - - - -

110

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Intervention Quantity Adequacy Items provided per required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc.) i) Drainage - Side drains L- drains √ √ L drains nonfunctional at many places and needs to be repaired and maintained. - Cross drains 4 nos √ √ - Culverts/bridges - Not required. ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls - √ Not required. - Breast walls - √ √ 1 no. required.

- Bio-engineering -

works Not required. (Techniques used)

111

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size / Category Location Causes Frequency deposition Remarks area To Type (on & along) Above road Is it due to road - Blocked drain. Carriage - Initiation of further - cut? 3x3 m - way erosion. - Yes - Yes Landslide (slope Undercutting by instabilities) rivers, irrigation Road Below road canals, land use, - - - - - others?? Alignment - No

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - None. instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)- None.

112

⑬ Sombeykha

Questionnaire Date: 5-June- ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 1 Dzongkhag: Haa Gewog: Sombaykha Name of GC Road: Khamina -Sombaykha Length: 14 Km From: Khamina To: Gewog Office, Sombaykha Year of Construction: Ongoing (Started – April 2015) Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality The construction of the road has been awarded to M/s Lhendup Norbu Construction. The contract period is for 18 of road: months. The initial formation cutting (FC) is complete and the contractor has started and completed about 4 km of final road widening, base course and drains. This road requires two Bailey bridges at She chu and Shu chu rivers. Current management of roads: Under construction. Type of maintenance: - Annual/periodic/daily? - Who maintains? - Labour contribution? - Funding? - Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No How effective is the current - management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? -

113

Current condition of the GC - road and critical suggestions to improve the Farm roads to maximize the benefit of the road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance from No. Population Types of Trips Purpose (uses) Remarks the road of vehicle per day H/H M F plying /day Tshonglingna Road passes Tripper 20 Carrying Vehicles belonging to the through the 7 43 Tractor construction contractor are plying at site. village. materials.

Gadaykha ------“------13 69 Sombeykha ------“------22 723 Mochu Across Amochu 21 7-8 km

Name of PAs/BCs Distance from Length Types of vehicle Trips the road Purpose (uses) Remarks (km) plying /day per day GC road does not fall inside PA, Protected Area: - - - - - BC or FMU.

Biological Corridor: ------FMU:

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction:

114

Land degradation - Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - Forest resources - Increase/decrease of wastes and type? -

- Side drains L- drains

- Cross drains - - Culverts/bridges - Road under construction. ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls - - Breast walls - -Bio-engineering works (Techniques used) Not carried out. The contractor should carry out bioengineering works immediately as this is the season.

115

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size/ Category Location Causes Frequency Remarks area To Type deposition (on & along) Above Is it due to road There will be a few landslides, the Carriage road - cut? - slopes need to time to stabilize. way - Yes - Yes Landslide (slope Undercutting by instabilities) rivers, irrigation Below Road canals, land - - - - - road use, others?? Alignment - Maybe

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - Not foreseen instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc.)- Can’t say.

116

⑭ Gakiling

Questionnaire Date: 5 – June- ‘16 A: Current Status of GC Roads Landscape: 1 Dzongkhag: Haa Gewog: Gakiling Name of GC Road: Gakiling - Rangtse Length: 7 Km From: Gakiling To: Rangtse Year of Construction: Ongoing (Started – April 2015) Financing source: RGoB/GoI/WB/ADB/Others - RGoB Type of Road: Permanent/Seasonal- Permanent Observation on overall quality The construction of the road is being carried out departmentally. of road: About 3 km of formation cutting (FC) is complete. The work is ongoing.

Current management of roads: Under construction. Type of maintenance: Annual/periodic/daily? - Who maintains? - Labour contribution? - Funding? - Are there Road Users’ Group? Yes/No - No How effective is the current - management practice of the roads? What are the challenges? -

117

Current condition of the GC - road and critical suggestions to improve the Farm roads to maximize the benefit of the road to the beneficiaries.

Beneficiaries Name of village Distance from the No. Populati Types of Trips per Purpose Remarks road of on vehicle day (uses) H/H plying /day M F

Rangtse Road passes through the village. 40

Mochu Across Amochu 21

Distance Length Types of vehicle Trips per Purpose from the Remarks Name of PAs/BCs (km) plying /day day (uses) road Protected Area: GC road does not fall inside PA, BC or - - - - - FMU. Biological Corridor: - - - - FMU: - - - - -

118

B: Vulnerability to various climate hazards

Have there been any changes to the environment as a result of road construction: Land degradation - Water sources (drinking/irrigation) - Forest resources - Increase/decrease of wastes and type? -

Examination of current status of climate resilience/EFRC standards Intervention Quantity Adequacy Items provided per required Remarks km (Nos,) Yes No Yes No i) Drainage (Types of drains, earthen, stones, line etc)

- Side drains L- drains - Cross drains - - Culverts/bridges - Road under construction. ii) Slope stability - Retaining Walls - - Breast walls -

- - Bio-engineering Not carried out. DoR should carry out bioengineering works works immediately as this is the season. (Techniques used)

119

3. Are selected GC road prone to incidences of slides/geological instabilities? Size and frequency?

Damages Signs of erosion / Size/a Category Location Causes Frequency Remarks rea To Type deposition (on & along) Above road - Is it due to There will be a few landslides, the Carriage road cut? - slopes need to time to stabilize. - Yes way - Yes Landslide Undercutting (slope by rivers, instabilities) irrigation Road Below road - - - - - canals, land Alignment use, others?? - Maybe

Category Size/area Frequency Observations / Remarks Geological - - Not foreseen instability

Others - - (Due to quarries, logs/firewood extraction etc)- Can’t say.

120

7.4 ANNEX - IV _ ITINERARY

Day Date Place Activities Gewog 11-May- ‘16 Bumthang - Travel & Halt. Phobji - Met Chief, DoR, Lobeysa Wed - Visit Tabading-Ngelungdraling GC road with JE - Met Gewog Administration Officer Thu 12-May- ‘16 Lingmethang - Met Asst. Engineer DoR, Lingmethang Fri 13-May- ‘16 Lhuentse - Visit Autso _ Jarey road GC Roadwith JE -16.3 Jarey km - Met Gup, Jarey Sat 14-May-‘16 Yongkola - Visit Yongkola -Tsamang GC road with JE -21.3 Tsamang km Sun 15-May- ‘16 Yongkola Rest Mon 16-May- ‘16 Bumthang - Visit Dungmithang - Mesithang GC road with Tang Asst. Engineer - 27 km - Met Gewog Adm. Officer Tue 17-May- ‘16 Zhemgang - Visit Wangdigang- Zhalingbi road - 20 km Korphu (Nobji - Korphu GC Road) - Met Gedung Wed 18-May- ‘16 Zhemgang - Called on Chief, DoR Tingtibito discuss on the Shingkhar field visit. Thu 19-May- ‘16 Nimshong - Visit Buli- Nimshong-Shingkhar GC road with Shingkhar Asst. Engineer - 38.66 km - Met Gup - Range Officer, DoFPS Fri 20-May- ‘16 Tingtibi Travel back to Tingtibi Sat & 21-22 May- ‘16 Gelephu Travel and Halt Sun Mon 23-May- ‘16 Sarang - Visit Doban Road GC Road with EE and JE - Chudzom/Doban 48.5 km - Called on Chief DoR Tue 24-May- ‘16 Tsirang - Visit Tsirangtoe Gup Office- Gewog office Phuentenchuu - 5.25 km (Phuentenchu GC Road with JE) - Met Gup and Tshogpa Wed 25-May- ‘16 Wangdue - Visit Athang GC road with Supervisor, DoR Athang (Jarogang zam - Gewog office road - 7 km) - Met Mangmi

121

Thu 26-May- ‘16 Punakha / - Called on Chief, DoR to finalise the field visits Wangdue - Visit to Kabjisa GC road with Mason, DoR (3.06 Kabisa km)

- Met Gewog Adm. Officer

- End point of Gaselo Feeder Road (DoR) - Wasina Gasetshowom (Gewog Office) with JE - Met Gup Fri 27-May- ‘16 Wangdue - Visit Nahi GC Road (Agoloo – Gup office) with JE Nahi - Met gedung Sat 4-June- ‘16 Haa - Travel to Gakiling and halt (Visit Jenkana - Bjee Khamina road - 65.5 km) Sun 5-June- ‘16 Haa - Visit Khamina– Sombeykha GC road with JE. Bjee - Visit Khamina – Gakiling GC road with JE

122

7.5 ANNEX – V _ REFERENCES

DoR, June 2004: Road Sector Development and Environmental Friendly Roads in Bhutan_ Providing access to rural communities whilst protecting the environment.

DoR, March 2004: Field Hand Book for Construction of Gravel Roads in Bhutan.

DoR, June 2005: “Towards Quality Infrastructure” Reference Manual, Bridges

DoR, August 2010: Guidelines on use of Standard Work Items for Common Road Works

DoR, 2016: Road Pavement Standards, Road classification, Right of Way (ROW)

DoR, January 2013: Environment Report_ ADB TA-7608 REG: Enabling Climate Change Responses in Asia and the Pacific -Building Resilience to Disaster and Climate Change Impacts (Subproject 2)

DoR, May 2012: Environmental Impact Assessment Report, PPTA, ADB Project No. 39225 – 06, Bhutan: Road Network Project (RNP) II Additional Financing, Subproject: Nganglam – Deothang Road

DoR, 2013 Detailed Project Design & Procurement Assessment for SASEC Road Connectivity Project (Nganglam-Dewathang Highway & Pasakha Access Road

NEC, 2011 Second National Communication to UNFCCC.

NEC, 2006 Bhutan National Adaptation Programme of Action, 2006, National Environment Commission, Thimphu

MoAF RNR Sector 11th Five Year Plan, 2013-2018

MoAF National Food Security Paper, Bhutan Climate Summit 2011.

ADB Climate Change Risk Assessment Report, Asian Development Bank, Country Partnership Strategy: Bhutan, 2014-2018

RGoB, July 2010 Bhutan scoping mission report: Local Climate Adaptive (LoCAL) Facility

UNDP, Sept. 2011 Paving the Way for Climate-Resilient Infrastructure: Guidance for Practitioners and Planners, UNDP September 2011

Web sites http://www.resilientmobility.com/taking_action/assessing_risk http://www.resilientmobility.com/taking_action/climate_resilient_roads https://www.ctc-n.org/sites/www.ctc-n.org/files/UNFCCC_docs/ref20x08_35.pdf http://www.adb.org/projects/documents/improvement-road-safety-and-climate- resilience-national-pptar

123

7.6 Annex – VI _ Environmental Friendly Road Construction (EFRC) Background: In May 1990 virtually every senior government official in the country participated in the Workshop on Environment and Sustainable Development to create a nation-wide understanding for and acceptance of the necessity of sustainable development in Bhutan. The workshop discussed problems in working groups covering three main categories: Agriculture, forestry, nature conservation and animal husbandry. Industrial development, urban growth, energy, roads and population. Human resources development, education, health, population, sanitation and clean water supply.

The meeting then adopted the very strong Paro Resolution on Environment and Sustainable Development and a need was felt to have a governmental body to look after the environmental sector of the country. Soon after the National Environment Commission (NEC) was formed and mandated with the responsibility of drawing up a national strategy to ensure that ‘environmental concerns became an integral part of the development agenda’, the ultimate goal being to minimize or mitigate the impacts likely to result from the development process. The National Environment Strategy (NES) for Bhutan named “The Middle Path” was thus formulated and released in 1998 by the NEC.

As all development activities will have some environmental costs, perhaps a higher degree of environmental concerns fall in the road construction sector in the country. The challenges of road construction are many, given the steep terrains and young Himalayan Mountains with very fragile mountain slopes and eco-system. Therefore, to address these challenges the DoR started with the concept of EFRC techniques under the World Bank project, the Rural Access Project (RAP) with TA support from SNV-Bhutan (Netherlands Development Organisation) from May 2000. The first ever Environmental Codes of Practice (ECoP) in Bhutan was developed for the road sector by DoR with technical assistance from SNV Bhutan known as the Environmental Codes of Practice for Highways & Road, September 1999. From 2003 with TA support from SNV, the DoR implemented EFRC-Support Project to further develop and consolidate the EFRC concepts. The project had eight components viz. 1. Rural Access Project Implementation Support, 2. Further development of EFRC concept, 3. Adoption of EFRC for all road works by DoR, 4. Development of EFRC Policy Framework, 5. Introduction of EFRC to other Road Agencies 6. Capacity Development of Dzongkhag and Communities 7. Capacity Building within Private Construction Sector, and 8. Dissemination of EFRC to Technical Training and Educational Institutions. Since 9th Five Year Plan (2002-2007) environmental concerns had received a top priority in the infrastructure development activities. The following paragraphs (in italics) are extracted from the 9 th FYP document. Chapter 18: Roads and Bridges: In a landlocked country like Bhutan, the socio-economic development of the country depends largely on an efficient and reliable road network. Objectives: Improving accessibility to social and economic activities by building more roads; and Enhancing the existing network with a view to reduce travel time, road user costs and transportation cost for goods and services. Adoption of Environment Friendly Road Construction (EFRC) Techniques: Road is one of the largest land users in the country. Inadequate or lack of proper road construction techniques has significant impact on environment and sustainability. Therefore, all road construction activities will be 124 required to adopt environmentally sound techniques and conform to the Environmental Codes of Practice (ECoP) from now on. With such a high commitment from the government all road constructions in the country are now in line with EFRC techniques. As a follow up from RAP-I, the WB supported the RAP-II. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) supported Road Network Project-I (RNP-I) is nearing completion and RNP- II also supported by ADB all have the EFRC techniques inbuilt in the project.

Road Project Cycle Analysis

Planning Road network planning and road selection

Desk Based Study Accurate maps and alternative alignments

Environmental Assessment Best alignment; technical, social and environmental feasible Survey Well mapped road corridor

Design Minimal slope destabilization, EFRC design

Tender Qualified contractor, clear contract and specifications Construction Figure 1: Inclusion of Good quality new road environmental safeguards Maintenance into the road project cycle. Good quality road and durable life-span

Some salient EFRC Features are;  Planning on basis of accessibility plans  Design on small scale maps  Avoiding geological weak areas  Thorough environmental and social assessments  Detailed surveys in the field  Design with balanced cut and fill  Use of dump sites, log and boulder barriers  Use of excavators instead of bull dozers  Proper planned side, cross and French drains  Use of bio-engineering techniques for slope stabilization  Controlled blasting instead of random blasting  Use of crib walls and gabion walls  Environment Management and Quality Assurance Plans compulsory  Use of community based maintenance  Considering the life cycle cost cheaper than traditional methods  Adoption of Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) measures

125

cut volume cut volume up to 400% 100%

Cross Section - Box Cut Cross Section - Full Cut

cut volume cut volume 35% 65% 2 m 1 m

Cross Section - 1 m Shift Cross Section - 2 m Shift Fig 1: Balanced cut and fill. Fig 2: The importance of the location of the road centreline and its consequences with regard to EFRC.

Fig 3: Excavation quantities in relation to the position of the road’s centreline.

Location of Centreline

• Balanced cut and fill - creates little or no slope stability problems - for slope angles of not more than 30º (to avoid retaining walls) • Full fill - for areas with rock joints - when bedding or foliation planes dip out of the slope - in highly erodible soils - in shallow loose scree or similar deposits - in slopes with high water table

• Full cut - for slopes without stability problems - for steep slope angle - for areas where the dipping of surplus material is no problem

Source: Drawings reproduced (Fig 1, 2, 3) from original report of Mr. Urs Schaffner on EFRC. Conclusion on EFRC concept and technology During September-October 2007, a study31 on EFRC was carried out after eight years of implementation. The study confirmed that the higher initial investment was justified and the cost recovery was just after 3 years as initially projected of 8-9 years! The slide reproduced below is self- explicit.

31The RAP/DoR carried out a study “Review of Whole Life Costs and Benefits of Total EFRC for Road Construction within DoR” . The study funded by SNV-Netherlands Development Organisation, Thimphu was carried out by a team comprising of Mr. Urs Schaffner (Road engineer), Mrs. (Dr.) Ruth Schaffner (Bioengineering Expert) and Mr. K. D. Chamling (Environmental Specialist) as local counterpart during Sept- Oct. 2007.

126

Conclusions Initial cost of Total EFRC and cost recovery period

• EFRC not more than 15% costlier than non/partial EFRC roads • Transportation costs in average 10% of the total construction cost • Log and boulder barriers amount to 0.8% of the total cost • bioengineering measures amount to 0.8% of the total cost > Cost recovery after 3 years!

EFRC vs TRC Costs Comparison [X 1,000 Nu.]

12000

10000

8000 Figure 4: Graph on economic feasibility of 6000

EFRC compared to Costs 4000 traditional road construction. 2000 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 Year EFRC Traditional

Graphs showing the EFRC roads have a higher initial investment costs but lower repair and maintenance cost which is just the opposite of Traditional Road Construction (TRC). EFRC roads become economically feasible based on cumulative expenditures and benefits after about 8-9 years. (The above analysis was made during the initial stages of EFRC concept development in 2000.)

127

Fig. 5: Quality level of DoR after 7 years of development

Good engineering practice ~ EFRC concept

DoR 2007

0 10 20 Years

Graph showing the level of capacity and capability of DoR in EFRC technology, at the time of study in 2007.

128

7.7 Annex - VII _ List of Participants during Presentation on 20-July 2016

List of participants during the Presentation on Gewog Connectivity Roads by PPG Sub-Consultant, GEF/LDCF/UNDP on 20th July 2016, Meeting Hall, DoR Thimphu.

Sl. No. Name Designation Organisation 1 Mr. Karma Galay Director DoR 2 Mr. Karma Wangdi Chief Engineer, DoR Construction 3 Mr. M.N. Lamichaney Specialist DoR 4 Mr. Dorji Gyeltshen P Chief Engineer DoR 5 Mr. Dorji Wangmo CPO PPD, MoWHS 6 Mr. Namgay Tshering Engineer DoR 7 Mr. Tshewang Dorji Chief Engineer, BD DoR 8 Mr. Lungten Jamtsho Chief Engineer, DD DoR 9 Ms. Sonam Desel Dy. Chief Environment PPD, MoWHS Officer 10 Mr. K. D. Chamling Consultant, GC Road UNDP

129

7.8 ANNEX - VIII _ Photographs of Dungmithang – Mesithang GC road, Tang, Bumthang

Take-off point. Stone pitched drain.

Blacktopped road with stone pitched drain. Landslide damaged road and drains.

Ongoing black topping works. Line drain under construction.

130