Download Study

General

Study Overview

Title:

Completing the Road Network: Evidence from New Vehicular Bridges in Nepal

Study is 3ie funded:

No

Study ID:

RIDIE-STUDY-ID-60b5b54ecf76a

Initial Registration Date:

05/31/2021

Last Update Date:

05/27/2021

Study Status:

In Development

Location(s):

Nepal

Abstract:

This impact evaluation targets new bridge construction in Nepal, approximately 260 bridges. Bridges are constructed based on a scoring system developed and centralized in the government the bridge management system (BMS). This scoring system allows the Department of Roads (DOR) to rank bridges by perceived need. We will randomize bridges within each score, thus remaining consistent with DOR priorities while still providing an opportunity to identify the impact of bridge construction. Each link is therefore characterized by its highest-need bridge, which determines its place in the build order. Our theory of change relies on two pillars. First, we expect individuals to benefit directly from increased connection to their local market. In fact, isolation constraints multiple decisions made by households, by limiting access to markets to sell goods, labor markets, and health and education facilities. Decreasing isolation with new transport infrastructure thus has the potential to generate changes in household welfare through a variety of interconnected channels. Second, we are expecting individuals to potentially benefit from equilibrium effects as the project not only connects households to their local market, it also connects them to the entire Nepali Strategic Road Network (SRN). Thus, this connection may have additional benefits (and potentially costs) not captured in the connection to their local market.

Registration Citation:

Bougna, Theophile., Wyatt, Brooks; Kevin, Donovan. Completing the Road Network: Evidence from New Vehicular Bridges in Nepal

Categories:

Agriculture and Rural Development
Transportation

Additional Keywords:

Bridge, Connectivity, NEPAL, Rural Development, Markets, Prices

Secondary ID Number(s):

Principal Investigator(s)

Name of First PI:

Theophile Bougna

Affiliation:

The World Bank Group

Name of Second PI:

Kevin Donovan

Affiliation:

Yale School of Management

Study Sponsor

Name:

The world Bank and the FCDO

Study Sponsor Location:

United States

Research Partner

Name of Partner Institution:

Yale University School of Management and W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University

Type of Organization:

Research institute/University

Location:

United States

Intervention

Intervention Overview

Intervention:

The BIMP-II Program will support the new construction, rehabilitation, or replacement of approximately 80 new 2lane bridges (about 4,000 m). Specifically, the Program will support the construction of approximately 35 4lane bridges (about 2,000 m). The expected beneficiaries from reduced transportation costs are the following: agricultural producers, motorized road users, pedestrians, cyclists, and local communities. Bridges to be constructed will be selected exclusively from the Bridge Management System (BMS)-generated priority list. In addition, backlog bridges with contracts signed before BIMPII’s date of appraisal will not be eligible for disbursement. Finally, this program is a continuation of the BIMP-I program implemented in 2015/16. While BIMP-II includes both bridge upgrading, maintenance, and new bridges, this impact evaluation will focus solely on new construction.

Theory of Change:

Our theory of change rests on two pillars:

1. Individuals benefit directly from increased connection to their local market: Isolation constrains multiple decisions made by households, by limiting access to markets to sell goods, labor markets, and health and education facilities. Decreasing isolation with new transport infrastructure thus has the potential to generate changes in household welfare through a variety of interconnected channels.
2. Individuals potentially benefit from equilibrium effects: BIMP-2 not only connects households to their local market, it connects them to the entire Nepali SRN. Thus, this connection may have additional benefits (and potentially costs) not captured in the connection to their local market. Examples of such channels include the possible availability of new and cheaper goods or changes in land prices within the newly-connected community.

Direct impact of connection: Households previously unconnected to local markets may lack access to jobs based in these centers. Typically, these jobs pay higher wages and thus connection has the potential to directly increase (expected) income. However, as is common in the developing world, households are engaged in a variety of activities – farming, microenterprise management, and wage labor. Therefore, the ability to access a new labor market may indirectly affect farming outcomes by unlocking resources to purchase farm inputs that were previously unavailable (due to, for example, credit constraints or excess riskiness of investment). Thus, access to the labor market has both a direct and indirect effect on household income. At the same time, however, connection may make it easier to get crops to market. This would decrease the cost of getting crops to market (either via direct transport costs or time costs), thus incentivizing production.

Multiple Treatment Arms Evaluated?

No

Implementing Agency

Name of Organization:

Nepal Ministry of Physical Infrastructure, Department of Roads, Bridge Branch

Type of Organization:

Public Sector, e.g. Government Agency or Ministry

Program Funder

Name of Organization:

Government of Nepal and the World Bank

Type of Organization:

Public Sector, e.g. Government Agency or Ministry

Intervention Timing

Intervention or Program Started at time of Registration?

Yes

Start Date:

01/04/2021

End Date:

06/30/2024

Evaluation Method

Evaluation Method Overview

Primary (or First) Evaluation Method:

Randomized control trial

Other (not Listed) Method:

Additional Evaluation Method (If Any):

Matching

Other (not Listed) Method:

Method Details

Details of Evaluation Approach:

Introducing Randomization into Build Schedule

We will focus exclusively on new construction. The rationale here is that the upgrading of existing bridges is unlikely to generate any substantial impact in the short to medium term (1-5 years), as it primarily an issue of widening, upgrading, and re-enforcing existing bridges. Moreover, new construction is primarily designed to link more rural communities to the Strategic Road Network (SRN), thus providing a well-defined “less connected” node of the network in the baseline. Bridge upgrading along the SRN does not provide such an obvious community.

With that in mind, we turn to our identification strategy. A pure randomized roll-out of bridge construction was deemed infeasible, and inconsistent with DOR goals. Instead, our goal is to utilize the preponderance of ties within the BMS scoring system, thus providing a role for randomization.

Given the number of indicators and number of bridge sites, each of the 226 new bridges could in principle take on a unique score. In practice, however, there are only 26 unique scores. Scores vary by 0.05 increments. Fifty-five bridges score 2.30, with 90 bridges (40 percent of total) are between 2.25 and 2.45. The next most common scores after 2.30 are 2.15 (28 bridges) and 3.4 (26 bridges), which is the maximum recorded score.

We will randomize bridges within each score, thus remaining consistent with Department of Road (DOR) priorities while still providing an opportunity to identify the impact of bridge construction. Each link is therefore characterized by its highest-need bridge, which determines its place in the build order.

Outcomes (Endpoints):

Change in income

Change in agricultural production and productivity

Change in agricultural profit

Change in household welfare

Change in commodities market prices

Unit of Analysis:

Household

Hypotheses:

Our theory of change highlights the connection between bridge construction and increased traffic flows. This can improve economic opportunities for those living close to the road through (i) better market access, and (i) better service provision, and (iii) greater mobility and connectivity to opportunities located elsewhere.

Hypothesis: Bridge construction and improvements will, on average, result in better access to market and increased household welfare.

The research questions attached to this hypothesis are the following:

1. What is the impact of new bridge construction on household welfare (measured trough change in food consumption and revenue) in Nepal?
2. What is the impact of new bridge construction on access to basic socio-economic infrastructure (schools, health centers, markets, etc.)?

Unit of Intervention or Assignment:

Bridge

Number of Clusters in Sample:

100

Number of Individuals in Sample:

3000

Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:

Our sample is constituted by settlements/villages (primary sample units) and the 3,000 households located in the vicinity of both sides of bridges

Supplementary Files

Analysis Plan:

Other Documents:

Data

Outcomes Data

Description:

Household surveys (Baseline and Endline) conducted in treatment and control villages. Market price data. We will also exploit four sources of administrative data: The Nepal Annual Household Survey which contains information on household consumption, jobs, wages. The Census of Manufacturing Establishments carry out every 5 years. We will also implement a market price survey for agricultural products across Nepal.

Data Already Collected?

No

Data Previously Used?

Data Access:

Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?

Data Approval Process:

Approval Status:

Treatment Assignment Data

Participation or Assignment Information:

Yes

Description:

Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?

Data Previously Used?

Data Access:

Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?

Data Approval Process:

Approval Status:

Data Analysis

Data Analysis Status:

Study Materials

Upload Study Materials:

Registration Category

Registration Category:

Prospective, Category 1: Data for measuring impacts have not been collected

Completion

Completion Overview

Intervention Completion Date:

Data Collection Completion Date:

Unit of Analysis:

Clusters in Final Sample:

Total Observations in Final Sample:

Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:

Findings

Preliminary Report:

Preliminary Report URL:

Summary of Findings:

Paper:

Paper Summary:

Paper Citation:

Data Availability

Data Availability (Primary Data):

Date of Data Availability:

Data URL or Contact:

Access procedure:

Other Materials

Survey:

Survey Instrument Links or Contact:

Program Files:

Program Files Links or Contact:

External Link:

External Link Description:

Description of Changes:

Study Stopped

Date:

Reason: