Socioeconomic impacts of road development in Ethiopia : case studies of Gendewuha - Gelago, Mile - Weldiya and Ginchi - Kachisi roads

Like many other economic and social activities that are infrastructure-intensive, the transport sector is an important component of the economy impacting on national, regional and local development as well as the welfare of citizens. An efficient transport infrastructure provides a multitude of socioeconomic opportunities and benefits with positive multiplier effects such as better accessibility to markets, employment, education and health. If it is well managed, transport infrastructure transforms the quality of life of residents through dynamic externalities it generates. But when infrastructure is deficient in terms of capacity, efficiency or reliability, it can have unwarranted economic costs due to reduced or missed opportunities. Despite its central role in rural development, little is known about the extent and impact of the various benefits that arise from the development of roads, particularly in developing countries. A large body of literature exists documenting the spatial patterns of socioeconomic development which can be induced by road infrastructure development processes and are in most cases dynamic and temporal. The impacts of a given road infrastructure development can also be analysed at the local, regional or national perspectives. The local impact is expected to be limited to the immediate neighbourhoods of the highway including tukuls, towns and villages to be found on both sides of the road within a distance of 5kms defining the influence zone. Based on this, the main objective of this research is to assess socioeconomic impacts of road infrastructure development of three newly developed highways on their respective surrounding communities 5-10 years after the interventions. Two of the highways are gravel surfaced and one is paved type. The respective study names are: Gendewuha – Gelago road (Corridor 1), Mile – Weldiya road (Corridor 2) and Ginchi – Kachisi road (Corridor 3). Their respective lengths are 165; 125; and 105 kilometres, while the study refers 10 kilometres on both sides of the roads. The study had focused on primary data on selected variables that describe socioeconomic conditions both before and after the intervention by using mixed methods of data collection considering quasi experimental design (QED). The main methods of analysis employed are descriptive and inferential statistics. Models such as: Random model approach and double-difference regression were used. The research had utilized two types of impact analyses (temporal and spatial) for comparison and also tested by using paired sample t tests: First: for each of the three corridors, comparisons between current conditions and the situation before the road intervention and, second: comparing conditions in the zone of influence (ZOI) situated within 5kms with control zone (COZ) situated beyond 5kms which are considered not to benefit much from road improvements during the period covered by the study. The research is based on data collected from 392 household heads, 77 key informants, 69 FGD participants from seven different localities, traffic counts from seven points, physical observations, outputs of GIS analysis utilizing satellite imageries and vast secondary data. The findings show that there are more positive and less negative temporal and spatial socioeconomic impacts generated by the three corridors notwithstanding disparities among the different locations. Accordingly, the paved highway is found to have more powerful positive impacts than the gravel roads, which are of low standards and functioning poorly. The status of truck and bus terminals which should have been integrated in the highway development projects are still underdeveloped with obvious effects on the sustainability of their socioeconomic impacts in the study areas. Furthermore, certain natural and more importantly manmade factors are found to have pre-empted the realization of certain positive socioeconomic impacts to be obtained from road interventions. In a nutshell, the dissertation had proofed the importance of conducting impact evaluation in the study areas by answering the questions of ‘what works and what doesn’t? and what is the extent of the impact?; measuring the impacts and relating the changes in the dependent variables to developmental policies; investigating the positive and negative effects of road development interventions and their sustainability; producing information that is relevant from transparency and accountability perspective; and finally contributing to individual and organizational level learning that can be inspired by conducting impact evaluations from the perspectives of change theory, programme theory and central place theory. These also offer possibilities of informing decision makers as to whether to expand, or improve road development related interventions by way of programmes, projects and policies. Therefore, from the perspective of Transport Geography, it is the primary interest of the researcher to contribute towards filling the aforementioned gaps in the existing body of the knowledge in Ethiopia and elsewhere.GeographyD. Litt. et Phil. (Geography