Comments from Delegates
Responses by Presenters

Presentation 1: J Rolt: LVRR Standards and Specifications: The International and Regional Perspective

Dick Jonsson (SweRoad)

Queried the implications of re-gravelling of unsealed roads and their sustainability.

Sombath (SIDA)

Whole life costs should include construction and both routine and periodic maintenance.

There should be an optimum design for rural roads; a standard design that allows a standard approach to maintenance.

We agree with these comments and later presentations will make clearer some problems with unsealed gravel roads

 

Costs of both maintenance and construction should be included in a whole life costing approach.

Presentation 2: Saysongkham: The Current LVRR Functional Environment in Lao PDR

Nhinxay (NUOL)

Queried the slide giving field moisture content/lab moisture content ratios – on what numbers of sample was this based?

The slide is based on figures from ADB-10 investigations – it is not a definite conclusion, it merely illustrates a general trend

Presentation 3: Bounta: The Way Forward: A Task-Based LVRR Classification

 

John Weir WFP

The importance of drainage structure should not be forgotten

We agree with the need to look both at road drainage and low cost structures and these issues will be addressed by the project.

Presentation 4: J R Cook: The Practical Application of Appropriate Specifications in LVRR Planning, Design and Construction

Dick Jonsson (SweRoad)

Congratulated TRL-LTEC on the presentation and would welcome closer cooperation with the SC3 project.

TRL-LTEC would welcome close cooperation.

 

 

 

TRL-LTEC are aware of the budget constraints that exist on some projects and although donors should be aware of the sustainability implications of such budgets, it is possible that the “spot improvement” approach is suitable approach for basic access in Lao.

 

TRL-LTEC would welcome any information on the use of local materials and their properties.

The issue of materials for maintenance is important. Local people will tend to use local materials for maintenance and will not want to use materials hauled for some distance. There is a danger of roads deteriorating due to the use of poor materials in maintenance.

 

TRL-LTEC noted these useful points.

 

 

 

A Low Cost Structures Manual is currently being reviewed under SEACAP 19 for use in Cambodia . It is hoped that SEACAP will be able to support its transfer to Lao.

 

TRL-LTEC agree with these points and may need to amend the road option matrix to include a peri-urban (Village) environment for separate consideration.

Presentation 5: Bounta: A Framework to Address Knowledge Gaps and Sustain Current Initiatives

Dick Jonsson (SweRoad)

Considered that the proposed Research Management Unit was confusing and that only one DoR division should have overall responsibility; possibly PTD.

Other divisions also need to be involved, for example ESD (road safety).

 

Dr Maysy (PTD)

Considered that there should be a main role for PTD in the research framework. DoR should identify research issues which could then be out-sourced to other institutions.

TRL-LTEC will seek to clarify these issues in discussion with the SEACAP Coordination Committee.

In general terms the project is recommending a strategy that allows the DoR to identify and mainstream research whilst the actual research procedures may be led by the NUOL.

 

TRL-LTEC agree with these comments.

Presentation 6: Professor Nhinxay: Research Support Capacity by Civil Engineering Department.

Dick Jonsson (SweRoad)

Asked whether the list of suggested research topics was in order of priority

Programme experts should be encouraged to give guest lectures etc

 

Sombath (SIDA)

There was obvious need for coordination and discussions with the ministry on the research programme.

 

Dr Ma y sy (PTD)

MPKT and NUOL will need to discuss research topics

Sengdarith (LRD)

Research proposals will need to be made. Research programmes need to be coordinated with, for example, KfW and JICA.

NUOL students can be used as a research resource.

These were not in any specific order of priority but were put forward for discussion.

TRL-LTEC agree with this and it is part of the project strategy. There have been discussions between TRL-LTEC and NUOL on this and it is planned that these lectures should take place after the start of the new university academic year.

 

 

There were only the NUOL views on research and there was an agreed need for ongoing discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRL-LTEC agree with these comments.

Presentation 7: J R Cook: Training Modules- Framework and General Content

Sombath (SIDA)

There is potential for confusing overlap with training components from other programmes; for example the Basic Access programme and other maintenance programmes.

Who is the Agency for implementing the development of the training Modules for SC3?

SC3 should work within the Master Plan for Road Sector Training.

 

Sengdarith (LRD)

Agreed in principle with Sombath. The SC3 training modules will undertake a supporting role and will not overlap. The training topics should be agreed with PAD.

Focal issues for training should be real issues and care should be taken in targeting trainees.

Need to be wary of training overload; especially at district office level.

TRL-LTEC are very much aware of previous, ongoing and proposed training programmes that have a much bigger scope than the much smaller SC3 training component. TRL-LTEC do not seek to overlap but rather wish to support other programmes.

The SC3 programme is directed through the DoR SEACAP Coordination Committee and we work under their general guidance.

 

 

The SC3 training modules will concentrate on supporting the sustainability of the main SC3 aims.

 

TRL-LTEC note these important points.

General Discussion

Belal Hussain (Basic Access

Found the workshop very useful and informative. It would be helpful if SC3 discussed their findings and proposals with the Basic Access programme prior to issue so that relevant comment could be given.

 

Thongkhan h (KfW)

Identified difficulties in the classification of proposed roads based on traffic where no previous road existed.

LVRRs are difficult to formally justify on economic grounds.

Also queried how to identify whether new LVRR should be built or not; how to identify priorities for candidate roads.

TRL-LTEC would welcome comment on findings and will seek to enhance cooperation.

 

 

 

There is a huge amount of literature about the economic justification for new roads but the work required to collect the data to carry out such prioritisation is far too much for LVRR; it only applies to major new roads. But there is also some literature available on LVRR. Simple methods are required. TRL ORN 22 Deals with including social benefits in the calculations and ORN 5 is all about how to do feasibility studies for new roads.

SEACAP 3 Workshop July 2007

WORKSHOP DISCUSSION NOTES