Asset Management Manual A Guide For Practitioners

ASSET MANAGEMENT MANUAL
A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS

1.MANAGEMENT
Asset Management
Implementation
Introduction
Getting started
References
Case studies
Case study 1
Case study 2
Case study 3
Case study 4
Organization
Introduction
Adapting organization
Leadership and Culture
Self assessment
Asset management champions
Asset management roles
Competency requirements
Online resources
References
Case Studies
Strategy
Introduction
Asset Management Strategy
Maturity assessment
References
Case studies
Case study 1
Case study 2
Performance
Management
What is PM?
Why PM is needed?
Maturity level
Setting PM framework
Strategic objectives and LoS
Performance measures
Targets
Performance gaps
References
Case studies
Case study 1
Case study 2
Document written by the "Asset Management" Technical Committee of PIARC
Version 3 - 03/10/2017
©World Road Association (PIARC) / Association mondiale de la Route (AIPCR) - 03/10/2017 2/95
1 MANAGEMENT
This first section of the manual deals with some of the core components and enablers of asset
management an organization should take into account when considering the adoption of a formal asset
management approach. The section is made up of four chapters: Implementation, Organization, Strategy
and Performance Management.
The initial chapter sets the context for the application of asset management, and describes the
recommended procedure for its implementation. This procedure comprises the following steps: a) Establish
the organization goals and objectives; b) Undertake a self-assessment and gap analysis; and c) Identify
improvement actions. Linked to self-assessment, the chapter mentions some of the maturity models that
can be used as a reference to evaluate the road organization competencies.
A successful implementation of asset management requires the road organization to have a proper
structure and capacity to allow for the required work and information flows. The above is discussed in
chapter 1.2, which includes various topics related to adapting the organizational structure to support asset
management, namely leadership and culture, a further description of self-assessment, asset management
champions, asset management roles and competency requirements.
Asset Management is a long-term, strategic process of managing road assets effectively during their life-
cycle. Therefore, the development of an asset management strategy is one of the key activities involved in
adopting the asset management framework. Chapter 1.3 explains what an asset management strategy is,
the range of aspects it should cover, how it can be prepared, and who should be responsible for this
activity within the road organization.
Finally, chapter 1.4 describes another core component of asset management: the performance
management framework. This component is needed to determine if the road organization is in the path to
achieving the objectives set out in the asset management strategy. As described in this chapter,
development of a performance management framework involves translating the organization objectives
into the required levels of service, and linking the above with performance measures and targets for
monitoring progress in reaching the desired outcome.
1.1 IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSET MANAGEMENT
The management of the road infrastructure assets is a big challenge for many road organizations. The
implementation of asset management and asset management tools will help them to fulfill the current and
future requirements in a repeatable and sustainable way.
There are different questions to be answered in the different management processes, like “What is the
current state of assets, the level of service and performance? What are the best maintenance strategies?
What are the necessary funding strategies to achieve the goals? ”. The benefit of having a holistic asset
management approach is manifold, including different aspects like financing and investment, planning,
environmental impacts, assessment of maintenance needs, etc.
For a successful implementation different steps are suggested. This includes the establishment of goals
and objectives in line with the vision and the expectations of the different stakeholders, the self-
assessment and gap analysis, and, of course, necessary steps for an improvement of the current situation.
1.1.1 INTRODUCTION
Road organizations are facing many of the same challenges and could benefit from the adoption of asset
management principles. These challenges include increased demand from stakeholders, reduced budgets
and greater challenges to deliver value for money and transparent and auditable processes for
investment. However, many organizations lack the resources and/or experience to initiate and grow an
asset management program. Therefore, PIARC has developed this manual to support road organizations in
their implementation of asset management
There are many factors influencing the way road organizations make decisions about managing their road
assets. The traditional way of doing business, which postpones repair activities until major deterioration
occurs, is no longer sustainable. It is too expensive and it erodes the value of these important assets. As
the costs of operating and repairing roads continue to increase and available funding decreases, it has
become more difficult for governments to meet the demands of an aging infrastructure while dealing with
public expectations to provide the same level of service for less money. The public also demands
transparency and accountability from road organizations, requiring justification for decisions and
responsibility taken for results. The typical way of doing business, which frequently relied on repairing the
worst roads first after extensive deterioration has occurred, does not work. It is an expensive and
ineffective way of maintaining road assets. It allows road to depreciate, resulting in a loss of asset value as
well as asset conditions far below those expected by the traveling public. Therefore, in today’s economic
environment, organizations need to approach the management of road assets differently than in the past.
There can be substantial consequences associated with continuing to manage assets ineffectively,
including not providing safe and efficient movement of people and goods, all of which will ultimately cost
the public more.
No matter the size of the road organization, the size of the road network, or the maturity of the road
organization with regard to data, analysis and tools available, an asset management framework will
support a road organization in effectively managing its assets. Asset management is sometimes confused
with pavement management and bridge management computer systems. It needs to be stressed that
asset management is not a computer program, nor is it a rigid protocol. It is a set of business processes for
decision making that encourages continuous improvement in infrastructure management. Asset
management provides to road organization a framework to communicate its approach to its workforce, to
external stakeholders including politicians, to the media, to its external partners and to the public. Asset
management is a framework leading to improved management of infrastructure assets and improved
decision making based upon quality information and decision making.
This manual will focus on various levels of a road organizations maturity in undertaking the activities that
comprise the asset management framework. The levels of maturity focus on the following:
● Organizational goals and objectives

● Inventory of pavements, bridges and other major infrastructure assets
● Knowledge of the age, condition and deterioration of the assets
● Availability of information to undertake lifecycle cost analysis for all major asset types and asset classes
● Information to undertake risk management analysis at the enterprise and program level
● Information to develop the organization’s financial plan to support investment
● Development of investment strategies to manage the road network for its whole life
● For organizations with little or no data concerning their assets and little or no experience in undertaking
analysis as well as agencies with a wealth of information, there are five key questions, as listed in Table
1.1.1, that are the goal to be able to answer.
1.1.2 GETTING STARTED
No matter the size of the road organization, its inventory, or the information and data it has concerning its
assets, asset condition and network, the road organization should get started with the information it has.
Step 1: Establish the asset management goals and objectives that align with the agency’s mission,
desired outcomes and business strategy. If the road organization does not have a written mission that
identifies desired outcomes and a business strategy, this should be developed and shared with
stakeholders. It is important to set goals and objectives outside of individual asset classes in order to
obtain the broader perspective from stakeholders, including elected officials and the public. (For example,
the goal for pavement condition involves those responsible for pavements, but the goals of the condition
are developed or supported by politicians and the public.) Getting started, questions to ask may include
the following:
● What assets does road organization own and what condition are they in?
● Does the road organization have an inventory?
● Is the inventory and condition information of the road organization assets in a paper file or in a computer
file, or does the road organization have a computerized management system?
● Does the road organization know how much has been invested in the subject assets in the past?
● What are the top priorities for the road organization?
● What is the goal for the condition of pavements and bridges?
● Is this goal realistic, or is it aspirational?
● What is expected concerning asset condition by the public and politicians? Are the expectations and
goals aligned?
● Are these goals openly shared?
● What strategies should be applied to reach these goals?
Step 2: Undertake a self-assessment and gap analysis to determine the road organization current position
across a range of asset management practices and then prioritize areas that need to be addressed to meet
the desired position. The most basic self-assessment can be based on the five core questions above; more
complex questions pertaining to data, analysis and the use and availability of this information can also be
addressed. This information can be used to prioritize weak areas that need to be addressed.
Step 3: Scope the specific improvement actions. It is important to take a holistic view of how asset
management relates to the organization’s mission and strategy. Key issues to be addressed include
identifying the scope of assets to be included, the framework for decision making, internal business
processes, capabilities, data needs and benefits and costs. Road organizations need to look at the way
they do business and undertake a self-assessment and gap analysis to assess where they are and what
they need to do to better manage their network. This may be a need for additional data, or better sharing
of the data, or enhancing processes within the organization. Questions to ask are the following:
● Is asset management a way of doing business in the road organization?

● What strategies should be applied to reach asset management goals?
● Should additional assets be included in the road organization approach to asset management?
● Does the road organization adequately undertake a risk analysis to manage risk?
● Does the road organization manage its assets for the long term?
● Is the road organization able to communicate system condition, performance and needs?
● Is a detailed gap analysis study needed?
Maturity models
The measurements of the degree to which organizations have implemented asset management principles
can support organizations in identifying their strengths and weaknesses in relation to their intended goals.
Maturity models can be viewed as a set of structured guidelines that describe how different domains or
expert fields of an organization are able to contribute to a set of predetermined organizational outcomes
(Volker et al., 2011).
A clear and repeatable definition of the maturity levels is essential for the whole assessment procedure. It
is strongly recommended to use a unified scale or categorization within the whole road organization
because this enables the managers to benchmark the different asset management sectors and their
processes. Of course, the number of categories and the scales should be in coincidence with already
existing successful assessment procedures. The referenced literature (e.g. AASHTO, ISO 55000) introduces
a 5- to 6-level scale/classification, which requires detailed information about the different processes. Not
all road organizations will be able to collect and assess the necessary information. Thus, and as a starting
point a minimum of 3 maturity levels should be used.
This Manual introduces a matrix to measure the maturity level of an asset management organization,
which offers 3 maturity levels for the following asset management dimensions: management (organization,
strategies and performance), data and modelling (inventory, monitoring, risk and lifecycle planning),
planning (management and financial plan, asset evaluation and programming) and application
(management tools and communication). The maturity levels are described briefly in the following table
1.1.2 while the following section includes a more detailed description of each dimension.
The 3 maturity levels of this manual can be extended easily subject to the availability of necessary input
information.
1.1.3 REFERENCES
- The Self-Assessment Methodology Plus, IAM Institute of Asset Management, June 2015,
https://theiam.org/knowledge/Knowledge-Base/sam/
- AASHTO Transportation Asset Management Guide—A Focus on Implementation, American Association

and Transportation Official, June 2013, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/pubs/hif13047.pdf
- Volker, L.; Van Der Lei, T. E. & Ligtvoet, A. Developing a maturity model for infrastructural asset
management systems. In: Beckers, T. & Von Hirschhausen, C., eds. 10th Conference on Applied
Infrastructure Research - Infraday 2011, 7-8 October 2011 Berlin. TU Berlin.
http://www.infraday.tu-berlin.de/fileadmin/fg280/veranstaltungen/infraday/conference_2011/papers_presen
tations/paper---volker_vanderlei_ligtvoet.pdf
- Scott, R., Plano, C., Nesbitt, M. (2016). Transportation Performance Management Capability Maturity
Model. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Office of Transportation
Performance Management, Washington, DC. https://www.tpmtools.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/tpm-
cmm.pdf
1.1.4 CASE STUDIES
The following case studies are presented in this chapter:
CASE STUDY 1: Successful implementation of a Road Assets Management tool for the roads of Madrid
Region
CASE STUDY 2: Learnings from implementation of Road Asset Management System in Assam, India
CASE STUDY 3: Asset management gap analysis and self-assessment effort of the US Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
CASE STUDY 4: Self-assessment using the IAM toolkit
SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF A ROAD ASSETS MANAGEMENT TOOL
FOR THE ROADS OF MADRID REGION
MIGUEL NÚÑEZ, Consejería de Transportes e Infraestructuras de la Comunidad de Madrid, Spain
INTRODUCTION
Reliable data and sound analyses are necessary to manage a road network in a cost-effective manner.
Nowadays, appropriate systems and equipment are available for gathering data and analysis. Based on
sound analyses, properly financed road improvement plans can be estimated. It is possible to outline
different improvement scenarios on the basis of given priorities, e.g. reduction of fatal accidents, and
financial constraints. The process should blend managerial and technical perspectives, as is shown with an
empirical illustration from the road network of the Madrid Region in Spain.
OBJECTIVES
For a civil engineer the key motivation, in regards to his expertise, is undoubtedly to put it at the service of
companies and public organisations, but the main goal is ultimately the service provided to the citizen.
This would, no doubt, be envisioned in the case of road network maintenance. Clearly, our work must be
done with care and perseverance in order to achieve the best possible results.
BENEFITS
What it is set out below reveals the integrated vision that the Department of Communications and
Transport of the Region of Madrid has followed in developing different type of contracts in order to obtain
the best results, both technically and economically.
So, the real case of the Madrid Region will be described to exemplify how the technical and
economic/administrative perspectives can be arranged in order to achieve the best viable result in view of
the specific challenge that is road assets management. There has been a significant reduction in the
budget for new infrastructures in recent years, with investments allocated to the conservation of the
existing ones. We have a highly developed infrastructure network thanks to the heavy investments in
previous years.
The new construction activities focus on obtaining improvements in road safety, through remodelling of
intersections, construction of roundabouts, elimination of sections of accident black spots, improvements
of links, improvements of routes, construction of bus stops, improvements in pedestrian crossings, etc.
SOLUTION
The road network of the country of Spain and the Region of Madrid is divided as follows:
Table 1.1.4.1: Description of Spain and Madrid networks
The Roads Maintenance Strategy in Madrid region has allocated more than 160 million euros during the
2018-2021 period, divided into five main items:
PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS
With regard to improving the pavements, two contracts are being implemented. One entails the visual
inspection of the entire network and a second contract includes the survey of the pavements using high-
performance equipment.
The entire road network of Madrid region managed by the Department is classified into:
● Main network: 662 km (25%);

● Secondary network: 634 km (25%);
● Local network: 1,227 km (50%).
By means of the first contract, the visual inspection of the entire network, metre by metre, is being carried
out and its level of cracking defined in terms of:
● Transverse cracking;
● Longitudinal cracking;
● Block cracking;
● Alligator cracking;
● Rutting;
● Potholes;
● Loss of material.
The surface state of the network is classified by analysing these aspects, taking five cracking levels into
consideration. Thus, the Madrid Region's network has been classified as follows:
● Deterioration level 5: 9%;

● Deterioration level 1: 11%.
These are:
● Deflections less than a maximum that is related to the category of heavy traffic that the road bears:
Table 1.1.4.2: Limit values for deflection based on the category of heavy traffic (in mm/100)
● Friction (CTF) greater than 40.
The information obtained in the condition survey contract, as well as the information resulting from the
visual inspection contract being carried out parallel to the condition survey contract, will be recorded in
the management system used by the Department since 2006 for managing the information on its road
network. This system, called ICARO, is an effective and easy-to-use tool that allows both the technicians
and Department managers to efficiently manage the available resources, with the main objective of
carrying out preventive conservation of the Madrid Region’s road network.
To achieve this objective, it is absolutely necessary that the information to be analysed is accurate. For
this reason, before loading the survey data into the management system, the company RAUROS is
carrying out the coherence analysis described previously. This way, by disallowing the invalid survey data,
the information ultimately used by the Department's technicians and managers to take decisions is
completely reliable.
These activities are:
● Micro agglomerate;
● Mill and inlay;
● Overlay;
● Crack sealing;
● Recycling with emulsion;
● Repair of depressions;
● Repainting of road markings.
Thus, the work carried out or planned to be carried out in the 2018 to 2020 period is reflected in Figure
1.1.4.3.
This work is awarded by tender in contracts for the rehabilitation services contracts by batches, awarding a
maximum of two batches to the same rehabilitation company.
These batches correspond to the eight zones into which the Region of Madrid is divided in terms of road
maintenance. Table 1.1.4.3 describes the length at which action must be taken and the budget allocated
for each of the batches.
Table 1.1.4.3: Pavement improvement contracts
STRUCTURES MAINTENANCE
With regard to the maintenance of the structures, the department is currently implementing the “Contract
for the inspection and oversight of bridges and structures in the Madrid Region road network (2016 -
2019)".
The department is currently responsible for maintaining 1,122 structures spread throughout the region.
This analyses the trends of different indices that indicate their condition:
● Structural index: IE
❍ Deterioration that reduces the robust performance of a structure;
● Containment index: ICSC
❍ The configuration of the containment system;
❍ The condition or level of damage or deterioration presented by these systems;
❍ The containment deficit presented by the system;
● Road safety index: ISV
❍ Deterioration affecting the functionality of a structure;
❍ Problems in circulation: joints, potholes, etc.
❍ Risk of accident caused by falling fragments;
❍ …
● Durability index: ID
❍ Deterioration affecting the durability of a structure;
● Minor deterioration index: IM
Thus, priority has been given to the necessary actions by dividing them into three contract award batches:
North, East and West (dark blue, pink and light blue in Figure 1.1.4.6).
The investment planned to be made in the 2018-2021 conservation period is shown in Table 1.1.4.4.
Table 1.1.4.4: Budget for bridge maintenance
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
With regard to operation and maintenance, management thereof has also been divided into nine batches,
seven of them awarded to different contractors (a maximum of two batches per contractor), and the
remaining two managed with Region of Madrid resources, as indicated in Table 1.1.4.5 and Figure 1.1.4.7.
Table 1.1.4.5: Operation and maintenance costs
Payment of these contracts is based on service contracts for the operation and maintenance of the roads
under their responsibility based on three types of activities:
● Group I: Activities and operations regulated by service indicators (KPI's);

● Group II. Planned operations paid for by measurements of project units;
● Group III. Extraordinary operations arising from emergency or urgent situations.
STREET LIGHTING AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS
The maintenance of these aspects of the network is done in two separate maintenance contracts during
three years.
Table 1.1.4.6: Lighting and traffic light installation maintenance contracts
MARGINS AND LANDSCAPES
To carry out the maintenance of margins, crossings and islands, there is a contract that includes:
● Refurbishment and conservation of margins, roundabouts, crossings, rest areas and areas adjacent to
the road;
● Treatment of embankments;
● Conservation of the Tajuña Greenway and of the 61.2-kilometre Carabaña-Estremer route;
● Mechanical clearing of margins and cleaning litter in the own resources areas;
● Tree pruning.
SHADOW TOLLS
In addition to the contracts mentioned above, there are five shadow tolls for roads which are subsidised for
road users. This subsidy is returned to the concession-holder.
The payment to the concession-holder is done with an annual subsidy corresponding to the traffic during
the yearly period that has just ended, multiplied by the rate for the yearly period updated with the IPC. The
amount is calculated each yearly period and the monthly subsidy to the concession-holder is one-twelfth
thereof. Payment to the concession-holder has an annual limit that cannot be exceeded, regardless of the
increase in vehicles travelling on the road. This is the risk of the concession.
Table 1.1.4.7: Details on the concessions currently being implemented in the Madrid Region
CONCLUSIONS
As described, the maintenance and conservation model of the Madrid Region's road network is a model
based on the different needs of the assets and the different possibilities for maintenance and conservation,
and selects the most appropriate, both technically and economically.
The Department of Transport and Infrastructure works constantly to achieve the highest quality standards
in its road network and thereby provide users with the tools to attain a level of development in the area.
LEARNINGS FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF ROAD ASSET MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM IN ASSAM, INDIA
RAJESH KEMPRAI, Commissioner and Special Secretary to Government of Assam, Public Works Roads
Department, India
DIGANTA GOSWAMI, Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Roads Department, Government of Assam,
India
INTRODUCTION
Public Works Roads Department (PWRD) is the agency responsible for managing the secondary, urban and
rural road network in Assam. To boost infrastructure development, it had initiated several projects in the
state and Assam State Roads Project (ASRP) being one of them. The State Government of Assam (GoA)
through the Government of India (GOI) has received a loan from the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (IBRD) for implementation of Assam State Roads Project. Development and
implementation of a computerized road asset management system (RAMS) for the maintenance and
management of the state road network is one of the key mandates of ASRP. Consequently, such a system
was developed and implemented during 2015-18 to meet the needs of PWRD and is called Assam Road
Asset Management System (ARAMS). The ARAMS application is envisioned to assist the PWRD to
rationalize and aid the decision-making for planning / programming of road maintenance and rehabilitation
activities and to estimate the long-term funding requirement for preserving the road assets at an
acceptable service level, thereby safeguarding their asset value. It is intended to reflect the state-of-the-
art technology and best international practices, in a way that suits the local needs and conditions. To
achieve this, PWRD retained LEA Associates South Asia Pvt. Ltd. (LASA), India in joint venture with LEA
International Limited (LEA), Canada in association with Geo Info Space Private Limited (GIPL), India. This
report offers insights to the project tasks and major findings / learnings for PWRD from the Project.
OBJECTIVES
The principal objective of the project was to establish and implement a road asset management system
(RAMS) for PWRD. The project envisaged following tasks under its scope of work:
● Develop a web-GIS based software applications incorporating layers of engineering and economic
criteria, database of road network and structures inventory, condition, and traffic data; tools to input,
store and analyse the data based on agreed system and functional requirements of the department’s
user;
● Prepare a Data Collection Manual and collect road, bridge and traffic data from the field on SH (State
Highways) and MDR (Major District Roads) for nearly 7500 km using established methods and modern
data acquisition equipment. Data collection of another 36,500 km of rural road network and updating the
data to the same database was further added as variation to this project;
● Process field data and upload in ARAMS database to diagnose the pavement performance;
● Develop asset management policies, strategies and implementation plan for PWRD to effectively manage
their assets;
● Set-up and implement the system in the data centre of PWRD, and impart training on data collection and
system use to PWRD staff for sustainability;
● Develop multi-year rolling plans for capital works including road improvement, rehabilitation and
pavement strengthening, road safety improvements, bridge replacements and repairs, and various
improvement works (spot improvements) to bring the roads to the desired level of service;
● Develop annual maintenance plans for periodic, routine, special, and emergency repairs;
● Optimize funding to maintain the network in a defined level of service;
● Prioritize sections for a fixed budget and / or allocate funds from various funding sources to the road
sections prioritized using customized rational criteria;
● Prepare network level reports on asset value, road condition, road capacity, safety ratings, safety
hazards, traffic levels, historical trends etc.
BENEFITS
The major benefits expected from the project to PWRD are manifold. A few of them are listed below:
● Provide improved internal and external communication regarding asset information for more effective
management within and outside the department;
● Improved data quality, consistency, and credibility because of adoption of standardized data collection,
analytical, evaluation methods;
● Help PWRD to choose cost-effective, optimal, sound design, maintenance and rehabilitation policies, by
comparing alternative maintenance/rehabilitation strategies;
● Evaluate and prioritize widening, rehabilitation, and maintenance works based on engineering, traffic,
economic and social parameters;
● Review asset conditions as an outcome of resources/budgets committed/spent in the past few years for
performance monitoring;
● Predict asset conditions for different funding/maintenance scenarios;
● Review impact of funding levels, or forced decisions on the overall health of the asset to decide desirable
funding;
● It can be used as a rational basis for allocating funds for maximum public benefits/returns.
SOLUTION
Assam is the largest state among the North Eastern states of India and acts as gateway for the entire
North Eastern (NE) states i.e. Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and
West Bengal and two countries viz. Bangladesh and Bhutan. Its fiscal and economic situation has been
improving since last decade, efforts of the government has helped the state to accelerate its Gross State
Domestic Product (GSDP).
Its geographical location demands huge thrust on the development of road infrastructure in the region for
enhancing the region’s economy. As road infrastructure assets are the key factors of economic
development, mobility and social equity for any region or nation. They are not only costly to build but also
expensive to maintain in order to adequately meet the public expectations. The key issue is how to
manage existing assets in an optimum way and deliver maximum benefit to public, taking into account
limited financial resources. The solution is Road Asset Management System (RAMS) which offers a
comprehensive and structured approach to deliver benefits to the community benefits through
management of road network. It is defined as a systematic process of maintaining, upgrading, and
operating road assets cost-effectively. PWRD, under the assistance of the World Bank has developed a web
based Road Asset Management System (ARAMS). It is a comprehensive system developed for the road
network under PWRD jurisdiction mapped on a GIS platform. It is intended to improve the technical
capacities, skills and management capabilities of the PWRD and other road agencies associated with road
management and maintenance, thus improving the ability of the Government of Assam (GoA) and its
subordinate agencies to manage efficiently and cost-effectively road maintenance and improvement
activities.
ROAD NETWORK
The capital Assets of road agencies in Assam comprised of the road network and assets created thereon
such as pavements, bridges, culverts etc. The current road assets in the state are represented in the table.
While the National Highways (3,197 km) is managed by a number of agencies (NHAI, PWD-NH & Buildings,
BRO, Railways), the Public Works Road Department (PWRD) in Government of Assam manages secondary
and tertiary state road network of 44,862 km. The secondary network is classified into State Highways, SH,
3,134 km; and Major District Roads, MDR, 4,413 km, Urban Road 1,409 km and Rural Roads, 36,544 km.
The length of rural roads is expected to be around 47,000 km as per RAMS consultant’s estimate, thereby
making the total road network under PWRD to about 56,400 km to be managed by the RAMS. About 604
km of SH and 34 km of MDR are taken-up as NH post 2012-13, thereby making total NH as 3835 km.
This case study mainly focuses on the secondary road network i.e. SH and MDR under PWRD which
comprises of about 15% of the entire road network of Assam. Of the 7500km of SH and MDR network,
about 87% paved road network comprise of bituminous, cement concrete and paver blocks and the
remaining 13% is unpaved which also included about 6% (411 km) inaccessible network due to dense
forest cover, breached river sections, etc. as represented in the table below:
Table 1.1.4.8: Road network included in case study
About 84% of road network has carriageway width less than 7m i.e. either single or intermediate lane.
Only 10% of the road network is of double lane standard and the remaining 6% is inaccessible as
represented below:
Table 1.1.4.9: Road width included in case study
There are 1835 bridges and 10798 culverts on SH & MDRs in Assam which also include 101 wooden, 22
semi-permanent steel bridges and 96 bridges are under construction as represented in the table below:
Table 1.1.4.10: Bridges included in case study
DATA COLLECTION
Data collection constitutes the most time consuming and resource requiring component for asset
management system. It is also subject to budgetary scrutiny and at risk due to financial constraints. In the
context of Assam, the data collected was most appropriate to the objectives, resources and modus
operandi of the department, and meets the criteria of relevance, reliability, affordability, appropriateness
and accessibility. Most of the data was collected through automated means using electronic and
mechanical equipment. The consultant procured ARRB’s Hawkeye to collect center-line alignment,
inventory, geometry, roughness and condition of the pavement travelling at highway speeds. The data
collection methodology implemented for Assam road network is represented below:
Table 1.1.4.11: Data collection methodology
ROAD NETWORK CONDITION (FINDINGS)
Due to years of inadequate investment towards robust design on capital asset creation and lack of
maintenance thereon has the road network in poor condition. Road maintenance is a lower priority as
compared to new construction. The advent of flagship schemes such as NHDP (National Highway
Development Program), PMGSY (Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yajona – Rural Roads Program), etc. by the
Government of India (GoI) has led to negligence towards maintenance of SH and MDR network. Some of
the key observations from the surveys carried out by the RAMS consultant are as follows:
● Nearly 80% of roads have narrow road width i.e. less than 7m and 13% of the road network is still
unpaved or kuccha roads, of which around 6% i.e. 411 km are inaccessible;
● The standard pavement thickness is very less i.e. about 10 inches or 290mm, which is barely adequate to
hold the heavy traffic;
● Most of the roads are carrying heavy axle-loads with no regulations, thereby damaging the pavement life
at a faster rate. In high commercial traffic roads, a high vehicle damage factor (VDF) of 11.16 is observed
which is very uncommon;
● Poor quality mixes such as Semi-Dense Bituminous Macadam (SDBC) or Premix carpet (PC) are used as
surface coat which are porous in nature. Due to high precipitation and heavy axle-loads, these surfaces
barely last for only two years only. Poor drainage facility adds up to the current misery;
● More than 90% of the roads do not have any drainage and more than 60% of the road length has built-up
sections where permanent drains are necessary;
● Assam being flood prone, most of the road sections are overtopped, thereby leading to early removal of
low graded top coat or wearing course;
● Only 17% of the road network are smooth or of good riding quality (IRI < 4m/km) and about 35% of roads
are failed or in non-motorable state;
● More than 90% of the roads have very less (< 2 year) remaining life and are not maintainable at any
cost. They have to be reconstructed only;
● Nearly 123 bridges are semi-permanent which has to be constructed and about 57 bridges are in either
poor or very poor condition which needs immediate attention.
ARAMS APPLICATION
ARAMS is a web-based GIS application developed to add, edit, update, view, analyze, monitor and delete
the data on roads and bridges under PWRD. It is integrated with PWRD’s online e-portal and hosted in the
department’s server located in the Office of the Chief Engineer, PWD (Roads), Chandmari, Guwahati. It
primarily consists of 7 core modules:
● Network Manager (NM), embedded with ESRI’s ArcGIS, creates road network comprising of details of road
such as road name, jurisdiction, category, road length, direction, etc.
● Road Information System (RIS), stores information about inventory, composition, roughness, pavement
condition, structural strength, history of works carried out, etc. of PWRD roads;
● Bridge Information System (BIS), stores information about inventory and condition of the bridges along
with high resolution digital images for viewing and store overall rating of bridges with costs;
● Traffic Information System (TIS), stores 7 day 24-hour traffic volume count data for 200 locations
collected in three years including storage of seasonal correction factors, PCU (Passenger Car Unit), VDF
(Vehicle Damage Factor), etc. It facilitates user to assign traffic over road network using GIS map
interface and also calculates msa (million standard axles) for the pavements;
● Right-of-Way Feature Information System (RWFIS), stores location and offset distance of the -of-way
features and represents on a strip map;
● Road Safety Information System (RSIS), stores accident information and calculates accident spots based
on the rules configured within RAMS. It also stores information about potential hazardous locations along
with remedial measures;
● HDM-4 based Pavement Management System (PMS), allows user to define homogenous sections,
generate input files for import to HDM-IV for Programme / Strategy analysis and stores results obtained
from HDM-IV for reporting;
● Annual Maintenance Tool (AMT), which uses simplified matrix to determine annual maintenance plan for
PWRD. It can be configured based on user-requirements.
In addition to the above, two (2) modules; Web-GIS and Reports were developed to assist PWRD in viewing
the information on a GIS map platform and retrieve pre-defined standard reports for administrative use. A
schematic representation of the ARAMS system architecture is given below:
The application suite is developed using Oracle 11g R2 Enterprise Edition and ArcGIS Server 10.4. The
client side script uses HTML and JavaScript, and server side script as Java technology. It supports a cross
browser, cross platform technology, and runs on all popular web browsers including Microsoft Internet
Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome. The system and functional requirements of ARAMS was
established after carrying out a detailed needs analysis study and reviewing the software licenses,
hardware and networking options available with PWRD for hosting. Some of the interfaces with key
features are represented below:
NETWORK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
The vast road network with a current asset value of only INR 12,260 crore (USD 1751 million) will further
lose its value with time if it is not sufficiently maintained and improved to tackle the distress and traffic
demand. Treatments for maintenance and improvements should be suggested for building durable or long-
life pavements. To maintain the roads at the desired level of service, adequate and timely provision of
budget is also a requisite and should be planned and estimated in advance. A robust network management
strategy considering the remaining life of the pavements with emphasis laid on long-lasting pavement (40
year design), use of superior mixes, adequate provision of drainage and raise in embankments to mitigate
submergence was developed as listed below:
● Reconstruction (with or without widening) of weak/failed pavements with less remaining life (< 2 year)
must be taken up on priority with a long-lasting approach:
❍ Base and sub-base should be designed for 40 years;
❍ Bituminous course should be designed for 20 years;
● Intermediate lane sections to be reconstructed for 2 lane facility in anticipation of heavy traffic;
● Maintenance to be undertaken on pavements having more than 10 year life for greater value of money
and long-time serviceability. Interim rehabilitation to be done on poor condition roads to make it rideable
for couple of years;
● Owing to high precipitation in Assam and observed Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF), minimum 30 Asphaltic
Concrete with Polymer Modified Bitumen (PMB) should be preferred over thin 20 mm Premix Carpeting or
25 mm Semi Dense Bituminous Concrete;
● Structurally damaged bridges to be rehabilitated / reconstructed immediately;
● Selection of maintenance, rehabilitation strategies based on rationalized criteria:
❍ Pavement Condition Index (PCI) / Roughness (IRI);
❍ Traffic Loading.
OUTCOMES
Using the proposed network management strategy and ARAMS application tools, a three-year ‘Action’, a
seven-year ‘Strategy’ and a fifteen-year ‘Vision’ plan up to the fiscal year 2031-32 were recommended to
rehabilitate the road network and maintain in the desired level of service complying with the planning
guidelines of NITI Aayog. The future treatments and costs were based on the current and the anticipated
condition of pavements and the expected traffic up to 2031-32. The total requirement for re-construction
of SH & MDR by 2031-32 was estimated to INR 41,915 crore (USD 5988 million) and about INR 30,000
crore (USD 4,286 million) in the next 7 years to bring the road network at an acceptable level of service as
represented in the graph.
A detailed report on ‘Memorandum to Government of India 15th Finance Commission on Requirement of

Funds with Explanatory Notes for Maintenance of Road and Bridge Capital Assets’ was submitted to
Finance Commission for their consideration.
As a part of implementation strategy, the state government has also announced the ‘Assam-Mala’
programme. The objectives of this program is to improve the SH & MDR network in the next 15 years for
fueling economic growth and bringing the state road infrastructure at par with comparable economies of
Southeast Asian countries; to provide quality inter-linkage roads between the National Highways and the
rural roads network as well as facilitate seamless multi-modal transportation; and to interconnect
economic growth centers with quality transportation corridors and improve inter-state connectivity. The
program is expected to have a number of projects under its umbrella. As a major initiative, Government of
Assam (GoA) has earmarked INR 5,000 crore (USD 714 million) in the next 3 financial years for improving
about 1000 km of road network. It is also planning to rope in additional resources through external funding
agencies such as Asian Development Bank, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, World Bank, etc. for
improvement of another 2000 km road network.
As an interim measure, GoA had also allotted a sum of INR 300 crore (USD 43 million) for maintenance of
SH & MDR and PWRD allotted these funds for providing surface renewals / overlay. RAMS application was
extensively used to identify the road sections and estimate the maintenance costs for each road sections.
The pavement composition, pavement distresses, roughness and deflection, traffic (AADT & CVD), etc.
collected on SH & MDR road network in 2017-18 year were reviewed to finalize the road sections.
CONCLUSION
PWRD has come a long-way in developing a GIS based Road Asset Management System using state-of-the-
art equipment for data collection, latest technologies for system development, feel-good user interfaces,
and best hardware and network for seamless connectivity and hosting services. Any system developed, if
not sustained, will fail one day. To evade such scenario, PWRD has taken up following initiatives towards
RAMS sustainability which will be a benchmark / point of reference for other road agencies:
● Outsourced data collection and support for preparation of asset management plans for 3 years under
Assam-Mala Programme;
● Set-up a Road Asset Management Cell (RAMC) with dedicated staffing and well-defined mandate to give
necessary thrust to the road network planning and budgeting;
● Ownership from the department’s top officials and decision makers and use of ARAMS outputs for
identifying various road network improvement programme;
● Training and refresher courses planned in association with Assam Road Research & Training Institute
(ARR&TI) to make PWRD engineers thoroughly competent in ARAMS.
REFERENCES
AASHTO, AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 1993 American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., U.S.A., 1993
Asphalt Institute, Asphalt Overlays for Highway and Street Rehabilitation, MS-17, Asphalt Institute,
Lexington, Kentucky, U.S.A.,
Asphalt Institute, Thickness Design Asphalt Pavements for Highways and Streets, MS-1, Asphalt Institute,
Lexington, Kentucky, U.S.A., 1991
Federal Highway Administration, Highway Statistics 2014, FHWA, Washington, D.C., U.S.A., Dec. 2015
Indian Roads Congress, Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements for Low Volume Rural Roads (First
Revision), IRC:72-2015, Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi, India, 2015
Indian Road Congress, Tentative Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements, IRC:37-2017, Indian
Roads congress, New Delhi, India, 2012
ASSET MANAGEMENT GAP ANALYSIS AND SELF-ASSESSMENT EFFORT OF
THE US FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA)
The FHWA is assisting state departments of transportation (DOTs) in conducting and reviewing the results
of an organizational gap analysis, which includes a self-assessment. The self-assessment considers, at a
minimum, the adequacy of organizational strategic goals and policies with respect to asset management,
whether asset management is taken into account in the agency’s planning and programming of resources,
as well as whether the agency is implementing adequate data collection and analysis policies, undertaking
whole-life lifecycle cost analysis and undertaking programmatic risk assessments to support an effective
asset management program.
Based on the results of the self-assessment, a gap analysis is undertaken to determine which areas of the
agency’s asset management process require improvement. The self-assessment questions are available at
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/gap/selfassessment.pdf
The FHWA works with state DOTs in undertaking the asset management gap analysis, which includes the
following:
● Review of asset management materials

● Undertake and analyze the results of the asset management self-assessment
● Interview key personnel from various offices
● Conduct in-person, real-time asset management self-assessment (clarify and discuss responses in a
group setting)
● Interview state DOT senior agency leaders
● Develop draft implementation plan
● Coordinate workshop with DOT to review the draft improvement plan
● Final implementation plan
SELF-ASSESSMENT USING THE IAM TOOLKIT
The Highways Agency in the UK (now named Highways England) made it a contract requirement for its
asset support contracts for the contractor to undertake a competency assessment against the
requirements of PAS 55 (a Publicly Available Specification published by the British Standards Institution
(BSI)) in order to assess asset management capability. In the first year, the contractor is required to
achieve maturity level 1 and after two years maturity level 2. The approach uses the Institute of Asset
Management (IAM) self-assessment methodology and toolkit.
The level 2 assessment takes the following form:
● A gap assessment of the current competencies through interviews with key staff and a review of relevant
documentation
● A report with recommended actions against each of the requirements in PAS 55 using the IAM
assessment tool
● A final review of the actions undertaken through furthered structured interviews and a final report
assessing the maturity level
● The outcomes of this approach will be a set of asset management competencies and an action plan to
achieve level 3 maturity.
1.2 ORGANIZATION
Many road organizations around the world still operate using a silo-like structure, in which the various
physical and operational issues such as road capacity and road safety are managed separately, i.e. with no
consideration of common strategic objectives. Consequently, organizations tend to focus on the short-
term, project-level management of road assets, which, in a context marked by resource shortage and
competing stakeholder demands, make it difficult to attain performance goals at the network level.
This chapter discusses several topics related to adapting the structure of a road organization to unleash
the potential of asset management, and support the organization in achieving its objectives. These topics
comprise leadership and culture, self-assessment of current asset management practice, asset
management champions and their crucial role in promoting the required changes, and the organizational
structure suitable to implementing asset management. Also, it covers the personnel competencies that
should be developed to meet the requirements of asset management, which fall under a number of
knowledge areas thus showing the multidisciplinary nature of asset management.
1.2.1 INTRODUCTION
For asset management to be successful, a road organization must have in place a corporate structure that
facilitates the implementation and delivery of asset management by appropriately empowered and
competent staff (UKRLG and HMEP 2013). This organizational structure must be fully supported by the
leadership.
The assessment of current asset management practices may reveal the need for an important corporate
change to attain the potential of asset management. Depending on the differences between actual and
recommended practice, the implementation of a comprehensive change strategy may be required, which
should be driven by the organization trying to reach the level of maturity.
The change strategy has to identify what needs to be done and how the organization’s executives will
involve and motivate staff in achieving the benefits pursued. Typical processes of this corporate change
include integrating asset management into business processes and organizational culture, establishing
asset management roles, and setting performance management standards (FHWA Transportation Asset
Management Expert Task Group 2013). These standards, in particular, may be supported by agency
agreements with the government.
Many road organizations around the world still function based on a silo-like organizational structure, in
which the areas responsible for managing the various asset types (pavements, bridges, slopes, and so on)
operate almost in isolation, without an integrated vision to achieve the corporate objectives. Asset
management aims at aligning and linking processes so that all business units within an agency operate in
a coordinated fashion rather than independently (FHWA 2012), based on a unified view of asset
management policy and strategy taken at the leadership level (UKRLG and HMEP 2013).
Frequently, adopting the structure for asset management will present greater challenges than putting to
work new technical or analytical procedures (FHWA 2012). This might be particularly the case with
developing countries, where the resources and staff necessary for the institutional change may not be
available, thus inhibiting the implementation of asset management. In such circumstances, greater effort
is usually required from the supporters of change to make the case for asset management.
1.2.2 ADAPTING THE ORGANIZATIONAL
STRUCTURE TO SUPPORT ASSET MANAGEMENT
The changes required to adopt the asset management framework usually involve a deep transformation of
the road organization, which should be supported by strong leadership and commitment. Such leadership
must be in place from the moment the need to implement asset management is first recognized so that
the organization conducts, as a first step, a self-assessment exercise for identifying the required changes.
Very often, the initial steps towards a corporate transformation are actively promoted by asset
management champions.
Results from the self-assessment exercise typically include new or modified business processes, workflows,
activities, or tools that should be put into practice. In general, organizational structures existing prior to
the adoption of asset management are inappropriate to accommodate those innovations smoothly, and,
therefore, the shape of the road organization must be rethought to establish the roles and information
flows that will better serve the chosen approach to asset management. Moreover, the new roles will likely
require new staff competencies that extend far beyond the traditional areas of road engineering.
The following sections provide greater detail concerning leadership and culture, self-assessment,
champions, asset management roles, and competency requirements.
1.2.2.1 LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE
Leadership has a strong influence on the culture and behavior of all organizations. Clear direction and
priorities will ensure that both significant and apparently minor decisions made across the organization
support a consistent approach to achieve the business objectives. Such decisions include appropriate
investment decisions to reflect the asset management strategy (UKRLG and HMEP 2013).
Below is a list of some of relevant aspects of leadership and organizational culture as applied to asset
management:
● Senior management must demonstrate leadership by creating a culture and environment reflecting an
agency-wide commitment to asset management.
● Strong leadership should run throughout the organization to influence the many functions of road
infrastructure management, and link them all so that they support the wider asset management
approach.
● An asset management culture promotes a coordinated approach across the organization to the long-term
management of the network by aligning the activities of individuals and teams to common objectives
rather than to individual priorities.
● An asset management culture should avoid conflicting priorities and messages, lack of understanding, or
lack of a collaborative approach.
● Achieving good leadership requires a certain amount of knowledge on the part of leaders. The key issues
and benefits of asset management should be articulated by the asset management staff in ways that are
non-technical and meaningful.
1.2.2.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT
The self-assessment’s aim is to benchmark the current asset management practices of the organization
and identify specific opportunities for improvement (Cambridge Systematics et al. 2002). The main
objectives of self-assessment include the following:
● Develop a consensus among managers within the organization about the status of asset management.
● Assist the organization in identifying asset management strengths, weaknesses, constraints, and
opportunities for improvement.
● Develop priorities and recognize critical areas that need immediate attention.
● Provide a foundation for implementing the organization’s improvement strategy for asset management.
One of the most important steps in implementing asset management is to identify the organizational
policies and goals to be achieved, which will define the agency’s most important priorities. Asset
management is a customer-focused, goal-driven management and decision-making process.
Organizational goals, policies, and budgets establish a consistent evaluative philosophy. Goals and
performance measures are the levers that drive the decision framework, establishing investment scenarios
that reflect levels of service and making resource commitments consistent with the perceived needs of
stakeholders. Analysis procedures regarding alternative options are used within this framework (FHWA
2012).
1.2.2.3 ASSET MANAGEMENT CHAMPIONS
It seems to be universal that, at least in the early stages of implementing an asset management
framework, there will be a need for a champion, who can be anyone with sufficient interest and influence
to promote organizational changes. A champion may be designated by someone in top-level management
or he may simply emerge from among the members of the involved groups. In any case, a champion is
one who does not rest until the mission is accomplished. Candidate champions include the following:
● The leader of the organization

● Functional or geographic managers
● First-line supervisors
● Key technical or policy-level staff
The champion for implementing an asset management framework will face the challenge of prevailing in
any deliberations and debates about why such a differentiated approach is needed at all.
Arguments about the unique significance of the road system, the benefits (and complexity) of a risk-based
approach, the need for mitigation strategies and contingency plans, and the interests of stakeholders are
likely to be relevant to the champion (Cambridge Systematics et al. 2009).
1.2.2.4 ASSET MANAGEMENT ROLES
In designing the most suitable organizational structure to support asset management, road organizations
may choose either a centralized or a decentralized approach. While the former facilitates consistency of
processes and work methods, it also entails the risk of making asset management appear remote for the
areas responsible of service delivery, which may not fully understand the policies defined centrally. On the
other hand, in some circumstances a decentralized structure may result in a fragmented asset
management approach and culture.
Regardless of the organization type chosen, the roles and relationships driving asset management should
clearly establish the strategic, tactical, and operational levels within an organization, as shown in Table
1.2.2.4 (UKRLG and HMEP 2013).
The asset management functions included in Error: Reference source not found are discussed throughout
this manual.
Key roles for developing and delivering asset management include the following (UKRLG and HMEP 2013):
● Senior decision makers support and endorse the asset management policy, strategy, and performance
requirements. Their leadership and financial commitment is crucial in building the organizational culture
and structure to make asset management successful. In addition, senior decision makers should
undertake a periodic review of the approach adopted for asset management.
● Asset managers and practitioners are responsible for developing and delivering the approach to asset
management that has been agreed upon by senior decision makers and documented in the strategy and
performance requirements. Collection and management of appropriate data and development of lifecycle
plans, multi-year programs, and annual works programs will be required to support the approach and
meet the asset management requirements.
The actual positions and relationships among these roles that should be defined within each organization
largely depend on the results of the self-assessment exercise.
At the basic maturity level, asset management may rely on just one person or a small group with multi-
disciplinary training and experience. As the organization moves to the proficient level, asset management
will involve the coordinated effort of various workgroups and multiple individuals.
Defining new roles and managing the transition from a small group to a formal, mature asset management
team is an important leadership task (FHWA Transportation Asset Management Expert Task Group &
AASHTO 2013). It requires a consideration of individual, team, and organizational expectations as well as a
vision for how the process will change as the formal asset management team is established and
developed. Figure 1.2.2.4.1 shows an example of how a transitional asset management team might be
composed.
As with any major project in a road organization, the re-engineering of the corporate structure needs a
project manager or project leader, who will be devoting most of his/her time to the project. A feasible
candidate to play this role might be the chief executive officer of the organization or a properly
empowered senior manager. The most important skill of the project manager would probably be his/her
ability to build teams. The attribute list for this person should also include motivation and persistence in
overcoming the inevitable barriers that appear whenever an organizational change is attempted. The
project manager may come from an engineering, economics, or planning background or, preferably, from a
combination of more than one of these disciplines.
A steering committee of senior managers, overseeing the work of the asset management leader, is also
essential to ensure that all parts of the asset management process function together as a unit. Sufficient
resources are vital to the effective implementation of asset management, including adequate training for
agency staff to ensure availability of the necessary skills and understanding to implement asset
management successfully.
Clear role descriptions for those carrying out asset management tasks and requirements should then be
developed. There is likely to be new competency requirements within the organization and training
programs in asset management to support the proposed changes.
As stated earlier, there is no single way of defining roles for asset management. However, an
organizational structure suitable to delivering asset management typically includes the roles depicted in
Figure 1.2.2.4.2 (UKRLG and HMEP 2013).
1.2.2.5 COMPETENCY REQUIREMENTS
Senior management should identify the competencies necessary to meet the requirements for adopting
asset management. Where these competencies are not available in the organization, training of staff may
be required. Recruitment, mentoring, or collaboration with other authorities may also be considered
(UKRLG and HMEP 2013).
If competencies or resources are not available, external support can be an effective way of addressing
gaps, particularly when there is a need to build capability within the organization. It is important that
ownership is retained within the agency and that asset management staff have enough knowledge to be
smart purchasers.
Competencies may fall under a number of categories, including the following:
● Leadership and governance

● Communications and relationship management
● Strategic thinking and decision making
● Risk management
● Business management, finance, resources, tools, and information management
● Planning development and review
● Asset understanding
● Lifecycle management
● Technical skills, including choice of treatments and materials
● Procurement and contract management
● Delivery
1.2.3 ONLINE RESOURCES
There are a number of international training resources for asset management, some of which can be
accessed at no cost. These include the following:
● Austroads, Australia and New Zealand https://austroads.com.au/assets/asset-management

● Guide to asset management
● Specifications and test methods
● Asset management research reports
● Weigh in motion resources
● FHWA and AASHTO, US http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/ https://www.tam-portal.com/
● Publications and documents
● Training
● Current projects
● Events
● Tools
● Resources (including recorded webinars)
● HMEP, UK http://www.highwaysefficiency.org.uk/efficiency-resources/asset-management.html
● Resources
● Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Guidance
● Guidance on the Management of Highways Drainage Assets
● Lifecycle Planning Toolkit
● The Potholes Review
● The Asset Management E-Learning Toolkit
● Connect & share
● News
● Events
● NAMS, New Zealand Asset Management Support http://www.nams.org.nz/
● Seminar series
● In-house training
● PIARC, International http://www.piarc.org/en/knowledge-base/road-assets-management/
● Technical reports
● Articles published in the Routes/Roads magazine
● Proceedings of PIARC international seminars
● HDM-4 software
1.2.4 REFERENCES
Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Applied Research Associates, Inc., Arora and Associates, KLS Engineering, PB
Consult, Inc., and Louis Lambert. 2009. NCHRP Report 632: An Asset-Management Framework for the
Interstate Highway System. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. Washington, DC.
Last accessed July 24, 2015 at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_632.pdf.
Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc., Ray Jorgenson Associates, Inc.,
and Paul D. Thompson. 2002. Transportation Asset Management Guide. American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials. Washingtom, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2012. Executive Brief: Advancing a Transportation Asset
Management Approach. Federal Highway Administration Office of Asset Management. Washington, DC.
Last accessed July 29, 2015. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/pubs/if12034.pdf.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Transportation Asset Management Expert Task Group. 2013.
AASHTO Asset Management Guide—A Focus on Implementation. Executive Summary. American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Washington, DC. Last accessed July 29, 2015.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/pubs/hif13047.pdf.
United Kingdom Roads Liaison Group (UKRLG) and Highways Maintenance Efficiency Programme (HMEP).
2013. Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Guidance Document. Department for Transport, London.
Last accessed July 24, 2015.
www.ukroadsliaisongroup.org/download.cfm/docid/5C49F48E-1CE0-477F-933ACBFA169AF8CB
1.2.5 CASE STUDIES
These practices have been tested in several instances and case studies are being prepared. They will be
presented here when available. If you want to share a case study, please contact
assetmanagementmanual@piarc.org.
1.3 ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
The asset management strategy should be a clear and concise high level document setting out how road
infrastructure asset management is delivered for the road organization, to meet its long-term corporate
goals and objectives.
The following chapter focuses on the explaining what is an asset management strategy, the reasons for a
road organization having one; which objectives this strategy should comply, and what aspects should be
covered. It also provides information regarding the maturity levels applied for an organization
demonstrating asset management strategy principles.
1.3.1 INTRODUCTION
The asset management strategy should be a clear and concise high level document setting out how road
infrastructure asset management is delivered for the road organization to meet its long-term corporate
goals and objectives.
The development of an asset management strategy is one of the key components in the asset
management framework. The key objective of the asset management strategy is to provide direction to
the management and maintenance (PIARC 2013) of the road assets by providing a line of sight between
the organizational goals and its asset management activities and ensuring that the required results are
achieved.
1.3.2 ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
The asset management strategy (PIARC 2014) sets out what the long-term objectives of the organization
are for managing its road infrastructure assets. It should also describe how they are met. The
organization’s long-term objectives should include meeting its legal obligations, managing the
requirements of road users, meeting the demands from central government and the organization itself, as
well as summarizing the overall requirements for the performance of road infrastructure within the context
of any constraints, such as funding.
The asset management strategy sets a clear direction for the implementation of asset management and
provides a link with other relevant transportation and funding strategies (PIARC 2016), including those of
donor agencies. It provides the basis for the organization to adopt asset management principles to achieve
greater efficiency and value for money as well as improve the organization’s overall performance. It can
also describe the economic benefits of investing in the maintenance of roads. The strategy also sets out
how asset management activities are implemented, measured, and continuously improved.
In preparing its asset management strategy, the organization should undertake a thorough review of its
key documents and plans and identify key statements and objectives such as transport goals and
improvement of road condition. The organization’s review of its asset management framework, including
delivery of the asset management strategy itself, performance requirements and work programmes, may
also lead to the strategy including actions that improve current asset management practices.
The strategy should cover a number of aspects regarding the planning, delivery, and management of road
infrastructure assets and how these are delivered over the short, medium, and long term. Typically, these
aspects may include the following (PIARC 2016, PIARC 2017):
● Relevant strategic plans and transport objectives;

● Performance management, including levels of service;
● Road use needs and how these are managed;
● Future demands for the management of the asset and how these contribute to meeting; stakeholder
expectations and needs;
● Meeting legal obligations, including maintaining a safe network;
● Long-term financial needs, including investment requirements;
● The process for making investment decisions and the priorities for funding;
● Identification of any critical assets and management of risk associated with those and all other assets;
● Findings from the implementation of performance monitoring;
● Initiatives undertaken to improve any asset management activities, such as adopting the self-
assessment described in this guide;
● The strategy should be described in a concise document that those who are not engaged with the
management of roads should be able to understand. It may be helpful to test and review this document
with senior leaders in the organization;
The strategy should be prepared by the staff responsible for asset management. It must be supported by
the senior leaders in the organization in a clear way and be endorsed by senior decision makers. Ideally, it
should be a short standalone document that is concise and available to all those who have an interest in
asset management. If the organization has a website, the strategy may be posted on it. The asset
management strategy is a high-level document that takes a long-term view and will only need to be
updated when there is a change in policy or approach or to reflect improvement actions undertaken
following the maturity self-assessment.
1.3.3 MATURITY ASSESSMENT
The maturity levels for an organization demonstrating asset management principles are shown in Table
1.3.3. Organizations may assess their maturity against this scale.
Source: Based in Highways Maintenance Capital Funding: Self-assessment questionnaire for

incentive fund
1.3.4 REFERENCES
AASHTO, Transportation Asset Management Guide—A Focus on Implementation. January 2011. Last
accessed May 2017, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/AASHTO_TAMGFI-1.pdf.
AASHTO, The AASHTO TAM Portal, Last accessed May 2017, http://www.tam-portal.com/.
Department for Transport (DfT), Highways Maintenance Capital Funding, Self-assessment questionnaire for
incentive fund, United Kingdom, http://www.trb.org/NCHRP750/ForesightReport750Series.aspx,
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/487481/guidance-and-self-a
ssessment-questionnaire.pdf.
Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia (IPWEA) The International Infrastructure Management
Manual (IIMM), 5th edition, January 2015
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ISO 55000:2014 Asset management -- Overview,
principles and terminology.
Transport Research Board (TRB), NCHRP Report 750: Strategic Issues Facing Transportation, Volume 6: The
Effects of Socio-Demographics on Future Travel Demand, Last accessed May 2017.
PIARC 2013. Maintenance methods and strategies, D.2 Road Pavements, PIARC Paris France, ISBN : 978-2-
84060-323-8, (https://www.piarc.org/ressources/publications/7/19456,2013R08-EN.pdf).
PIARC 2014. The importance of road maintenance, ISBN : 978-2-84060-349-8,

(https://www.piarc.org/ressources/publications/1/22262,2014R02EN.pdf).
PIARC 2016. Assessment of budgetary needs and optimisation of maintenance strategies for multiple
assets of road network, Technical Committee 4.1 Management of Road Infrastructure Assets, ISBN : 978-2-
84060-378-8, (https://www.piarc.org/ressources/publications/8/24533,2016R04EN.pdf).
PIARC 2017. Management of road assets: Balancing of environmental and engineering aspects in
management of road networks, Technical Committee 4.1 Management of Road Infrastructure Assets, ISBN
: 978-2-84060-455-6, (https://www.piarc.org/ressources/publications/9/27317,2017R05EN.pdf)
Last accessed December 28, 2016,
http://www.ukroadsliaisongroup.org/en/utilities/document-summary.cfm?docid=5C49F48E-1CE0-477F-933
ACBFA169AF8CB.
1.3.5 CASE STUDIES
CASE STUDY 1: Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA), Cleveland, Ohio, USA
CASE STUDY 2: Asset Management strategy ANAS S.p.A. Italy
NORTHEAST OHIO AREAWIDE COORDINATING AGENCY (NOACA),
CLEVELAND, OHIO, USA
JASON J. BITTNER & DAVID K. HEIN, Applied Research Associates, Inc., USA & Canada
INTRODUCTION
In order to ensure that the condition of the roadway is adequate to maintain the usability, comfort, and
safety of the travelling public, concession agreements usually include a set of conditions outlining the type
and frequency of monitoring and the minimum acceptable levels of pavement performance. The ability to
meet these criteria is an important part of the project and is outlined in the operations, maintenance, and
rehabilitation plan.
The performance of pavements and their compliance to the project requirements can be measured in a
variety of ways. Typical concession agreements focus on the components that most impact the safety and
ride comfort level of pavement. The most common conditions identified in the concession agreements for
highway projects include:
● International Roughness Index (IRI);

● Pavement Surface Distress;
● Rut Depth;
● Friction.
IRI has become the element of choice to reflect the ride comfort level of a pavement. IRI reflects the
serviceability of the pavement, the ride comfort (Patterson), and even the amount of vehicle fuel
consumption (Taylor). Typically, a maximum value of IRI is specified for a given section length (i.e. average
IRI of 2.5 m/km for each 50 m length of a lane). In addition to a maximum IRI value, it is also becoming
common for the concession agreements to also specify a given distribution of IRI values to ensure that the
entire network is not maintained at only the minimum level of acceptability. A typical IRI profile cumulative
distribution used in can be seen below (NBDOT).
Figure 1.3.5.1: IRI profile cumulative distribution
A highway concession may have thousands of 50 m sections. The percent of 50 m sections in each “bin” of
IRI range from 0.5 to 2.5 m/km. For example, the figure shows that 50 percent of the sections must have
an IRI of less than 1.25 m/km. The curve in the figure shows that about 60 percent of the sections have an
IRI of less than 1.25 m/km which is compliant, but the curve moves into the red (non-compliant zone) for
number of sections requiring an IRI of less than 0.9 m/km.
OBJECTIVES
A unique component of some of the concession agreements is the use of key performance indicator
distributions such as those shown in figure above. These distributions add a new level of complexity to the
prediction and budgeting of rehabilitation activities.
Typical PMS software applications allow for a large variety of goals during the forecasting analysis.
However, they are not designed to meet the dynamic needs of the distribution analysis. This has proven to
be one of the more difficult aspects of performing long term forecasting (ie. 5 years). The most optimal
plan for a concessionaire is to plan rehabilitation activities such that in conjunction with the deterioration
of non-rehabilitated sections just meets the distribution of IRI in the following year. Traditional pavement
performance models for IRI would be developed through an age versus IRI graph. The following figure
shows the age versus IRI graph for a typical highway conditions with more than 5,000 pavement
management sections each 50 m in length.
Figure 1.3.5.2: Age vs. IRI
Clearly, it is not possible to fit a traditional performance curve thought this IRI data. Ideally, the overall
roadway condition should be hovering just over the distribution line. In order to change the distribution, it
is important to understand that improving the condition of an individual section will alter the shape of the
distribution of all section with better performance. This means that many minor preventative maintenance
activities on the network, although the most cost-effective treatment for the pavement, will not
significantly change the distribution. By locating the poor performing sections on the distributions and
simulating the results of the repair, an estimate of distribution can be created to assess any other areas of
the curve that many need to be adjusted. For areas that affect the performance at around the 50 percent
mark of the distribution, localized cost-effective rehabilitation and maintenance alternatives can be used
to change the shape and ensure overall compliance.
CHALLENGE
The nature of the requirements for IRI, is such that pavement sections exhibiting an IRI of greater than 2.5
mm/m are scheduled for rehabilitation each year. The rehabilitation action taken may be very localized to
address a bump or settlement and as long as the IRI for the 50 m section is reduced to below 2.5 m/km,
the section is in compliance with the project requirements. Predicting when an individual section may
exceed the 2.5 mm/m limit is very difficult as “rough” pavement sections may appear very quickly.
SOLUTION
In order to develop an indication of the impact of the pavement maintenance and rehabilitation program
on the distribution of IRI as compared to the concession IRI requirements, an analysis of the rate of change
of IRI was completed. The average rate of change of IRI of 1.6 percent through the past 5 years was
selected to represent the typical reduction in smoothness for sections that were not improved by
maintenance or rehabilitation action. This average reduction in IRI was then applied to the all of the
measured IRI for all 50 m sections that were not improved to determine the expected IRI for each section.
For sections that were improved, the IRI values were “reset” and assigned to bins as shown in the
following table. The bins are necessary because the result of maintenance to improve IRI will not result in
the same IRI for all sections.
Table 1.3.5.1: IRI distribution
The percent of “improved” sections in each bin represents the expected improvement due to the
rehabilitation action taken for pavement sections that exceeded an IRI value of 2.5 mm/m, i.e. 25 percent
of sections were improved from an IRI of greater than 2.5 mm/m to less than 0.8 mm/m of roughness. The
number of “improved” sections in each bin were then added back to the “deteriorated” IRI dataset based
on the average deterioration of 1.6 percent per year to determine the new IRI cumulative distribution
curve. The curve for 2018 is shown below.
A similar exercise was then completed for the next 5 years of the concession based on the maintenance
and rehabilitation activities planned in the current 5-year plan and average annual rate of deterioration
expected.
CONCLUSION
The cumulative distribution performance modeling described above permits the concessionaire to actively
determine the impact of the current 5-year maintenance and rehabilitation plan on the cumulative
distribution of IRI and to optimize their annual investments.
REFERENCES
Paterson, W.D.O. International Roughness Index: Relationship to Other Measures of Roughness and Riding
Quality. In Transportation Research Record 1084, National Research Councel, Washington, D.C., 1987.
Taylor, G.W., and J.D. Patton. Effects of Pavement Structure on Vehicle Fuel Consumption – Phase III Report
CSTT-HVC-TR-068. National Research Council of Canada, 2006.
New Brunswick Department of Transportation (NBDOT). OMR – Asset Management Requirements Trans
Canada Highway Project Attachment 61. Fredericton, New Brunswick, 1998.
ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ANAS S.P.A ITALY
UGO DIBENNARDO, ANAS S.p.A, Italy.
INTRODUCTION
ANAS S.p.A., the main Italian road agency, manages more than 32.000 km of national roads, including
hundreds of bridges and tunnels. With the pursuit to optimize technical and economical efforts and build a
renovated planning strategy, a Pavement Management System (PMS) has been implemented “in-house”. It
is part of a wider project aimed at the proposal of a Road Asset Management (RAM), which suggests a
proper allocation of funds based on required maintenance needs. Specifically, the RAM is able to propose
optimum technical and financial long-term strategies for planning maintenance activities of all the assets
involved in a road network (e.g. pavements, bridges, tunnels).
In the last decade, many PMS have been developed worldwide. However, each system must deal with
peculiarities of the involved road network and address specific issues related to local conditions.
Consequently, ANAS has decided to develop its own software, a user-friendly system centered on a
performance-based approach. Incorporating the control parameters imposed by Italian Ministry of
Infrastructure and Transport to monitor pavement conditions, ANAS PMS proposes simple decision-making
tools for planning road maintenance, efficiently leading to identification and prioritization of sites needing
repairs.
OBJECTIVES
The final objective of the proposed system is to create a simple supporting tool in the decision-making
process to properly allocate funds and optimize technical activities. The system will assist technicians and
road managers in building up an effective infrastructure network, which must guarantee safety and good
service conditions for users, as well as sustainability/benefits in terms of financial resources and technical
efforts for the road agency.
BENEFITS
Based on the outputs of the proposed system, ANAS sought to identify maintenance and rehabilitation
priorities due over time, proposing cost and technical-effective repairing solutions able to comply with
budget and performance requirements (i.e. minimizing maintenance activities in terms of frequency and
costs and maximizing pavement performance). The system implementation and the consequent planning
strategy will guarantee high quality standard infrastructures together with relevant money savings due to
direct and indirect benefits for road users and road managers.
SOLUTION
Each year ANAS, through its experimental research center, monitors its road network to detect the main
parameters for verifying pavement condition ((e.g. CAT, IRI, HS) asked by Italian Ministry of Infrastructure
and Transport. This extensive monitoring campaign makes available a huge amount of data that can be
exploited for the development of a reliable PMS without needing additional efforts in terms of equipment
and/or complex features (i.e. no need of additional costs).
In this sense, the first step of the PMS construction process (still in progress) has been the development of
an elaboration method that includes the above-mentioned pavement performance parameters regularly
detected by ANAS for the determination of pavement rating. Specifically, a simple methodology was
proposed to elaborate all the historical data recorded through in site investigation equipment and visual
inspections. The analysis provides two main performance indicators, which describe functional and
structural pavement conditions:
● Functional Index (IF): related to friction (i.e. skid resistance) and roughness data – parameter prescribed
by Italian regulations to verify pavement conditions (i.e. IPAV, N). The Coefficient of Transversal Friction
(CAT) and the International Roughness Index (IRI) quantify pavement skid resistance and pavement
roughness, respectively;
● Structural Index (IS): related to pavement surface distress level. Road conditions are determined through
visual inspections conducted by ANAS technical staff already responsible for supervising each road
section. A specific distresses catalogue and a standardized elaboration procedure support road
inspections.
Based upon IF and IS rating combination (Figure 1.3.5.3), the current road pavement condition level is
identified as summarized by the parameter IRD (Index of Distress Relevance).
Below, expressions and relationships between the above-described parameters are shown:
Table 1.3.5.2: CAT and IRI category
Figure 1.3.5.3: Pavement condition rating
With the aim of verifying the capability of the proposed road data elaboration method to provide a feasible
and reliable picture of the actual maintenance need of the road network, a case study of its applicability is
presented in the next paragraph.
Two 5 km sections of double carriageway roads with same traffic and structure category (i.e. road category
B – subjected to heavy traffic – Figure 1.3.5.3) were analyzed in terms of IRD. The sections were selected
taking into account maintenance needs previously identified based on the empirical experience of road
agency technicians. One section was selected among those identified in “poor conditions” (i.e. requiring
repairs – Figure 1.3.5.4). The other one, recently rebuilt, was chosen among those in “good conditions”
which do not require priority in rehabilitation (Figure 1.3.5.5). For each section, CAT and IRI data were
analyzed as previously described and visual inspections reports were elaborated to determine IF, IS and
IRD as summarized below. For the first section, data recorded in two different periods were considered
with the aim of verifying the ability of the system to identify the distress evolution over time.
Figure 1.3.5.4: Road Pavement Structure
Figure 1.3.5.5: a) RA 11 (2017); b) RA 08 (2015); c) RA 11 (2017)
Table 1.3.5.3: IRI and CAT data elaboration
Table 1.3.5.4: Pavement condition rating
Results shown in Table 1.3.5.3 and 1.3.5.4 validate the reliability of the performance-based elaboration
method proposed by ANAS to identify pavement condition. IRD properly ranks roads based on the distress
level: a better IRD rate characterizes the road section recently restored (RA 11). At the same time, the
road section requiring maintenance (RA 08) shows ICAT and IIRI values that worsen over time with an
overall reduction in the IRD rate, as expected due to the higher deterioration recorded with the most
recent road inspection. Based on these findings, in order to restore acceptable pavement conditions, ANAS
planned specific maintenance activities on the RA 08 road (conducted in 2017 and 2018).
Thus, with few efforts in terms of data acquisition and mathematical calculations, the IRD parameter is
able to easily provide a comprehensive picture of the current pavement condition of the whole road
network and demonstrates the sensibility to adjust according to distress evolution.
The next step for ANAS PMS development is the implementation of provisional evolution models based on
climate and traffic conditions as well as time aging effects. By applying evolution laws to the IRD
parameter, the IDF (Index of Future Deterioration) will be identified, so capturing in advanced maintenance
needs and priorities of the road network and their evolution. In this sense, for the construction of reliable
evolution laws, the wide historical database recorded over time by ANAS research center constitutes an
irreplaceable resource. The combination of IDF information with visual inspection data, that provide useful
hints about deterioration causes, assists technicians in the identification of the most feasible and effective
technical solutions. To this regard, depending on distress type and extension as well as IFD values, a
catalogue of standardized maintenance activities will support technical decisions. Finally, based on
technical needs and budget availability, ANAS can plan a careful long-term action strategy, which allows
significant cost savings and technical efficiency.
CONCLUSION
ANAS PMS demonstrates optimum capability in identifying gaps and priority maintenance needs, allowing
for better allocation of resources as well as technical efficiency. With very limited efforts in terms of data
finding and calculation, the proposed system can easily provide a reliable picture of the current pavement
condition of the road network, demonstrating the sensibility to adjust according to distress evolution.
REFERENCES
ASPHALTICA World Seminar. 2018. “Pavement Management System - Il progetto di ANAS”, presented by
Ugo Dibennardo and Tullio Caraffa. Rome, Italy. 26 October 2018.
1.4 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
The asset management strategy, introduced in chapter 1.3, links organizational goals and objectives with
actions needed to manage its highway infrastructure assets. Performance measures and levels of service
(target values negotiated with stakeholders) should be established to make the strategy operational.
Therefore, the organization shall establish, implement and maintain process(es) and/or procedure(s) to
monitor and measure the performance and/or condition of assets.
This chapter sets out the process(es) and/or procedure(s) for:
● Providing a systematic approach to measure progress in the implementation of asset management

(setting a framework for performance management);
● Setting levels of service and performance targets to enable auditing and monitoring the strategic
objectives.
The process(es) and/or procedure(s) for monitoring the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the asset
management system are dealt with in section 2.2.
1.4.1 WHAT IS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT?
Performance management refers to a systematic process for evaluating the ability of road assets to
provide the required level of service. This process should be applied to a road network rather than to
individual assets.
Goals and objectives, essential for managing the highway infrastructure asset, are defined in terms of
levels of service. In order to evaluate these levels of service target values of performance indicators, also
called performance measures, have to be used.
Therefore, road organizations establish, implement and maintain process(es) and/or procedure(s) to
measure the performance of the assets they are responsible for, and to monitor progress toward a result
or goal (see figure 1.4.1, PIARC 2012, PAS55 and ISO 55000).
1.4.2 WHY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IS
NEEDED?
Performance management is functional to the achievement of the following objectives:
● Provide a systematic approach to measure progress in the implementation of asset management;

● Enable auditing and monitoring of the delivery of the asset management strategy;
● Demonstrate how funding is being used effectively to meet stakeholder needs;
● Provide the link between corporate vision, asset management strategy and maintenance operations;
● Facilitate effective communications with stakeholders by demonstrating performance against their
requirements;
● Demonstrate any shortfalls in funding.
1.4.3 MATURITY LEVELS
The maturity levels for authorities/agencies with regards to performance management can be defined as
shown in table 1.4.3.
1.4.4 SETTING A PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
FRAMEWORK
Setting a framework for performance management involves expressing the long term corporate goals and
objectives of the road organization in terms of the desired levels of service, and linking these with
performance measures and targets that allow the organization to monitor progress in achieving the
intended results (PIARC 2004). Therefore, the main components of a performance management framework
are: levels of service, performance measures and performance targets (see figure 1.4.4).
As shown in Figure 1.4.4, a number of measures can be chosen to describe the overall performance
associated with each level of service.
In developing a performance framework, it is important to understand who is affected by highway asset

performances; within this broad group of people, three broad categories may be identified:
● External Stakeholders Tend to have a greater interest in what happens on the network than the average
customer does, they can also differ from customers in that their interest in the transportation system is
institutional rather than merely personal;
● Customers Anyone who uses any part of the transportation network, who is affected by the activities
associated with providing the service, or who has a legitimate interest in it;
● Partners A type of stakeholder which shares strategic objectives with the transportation agency. Partners
may assist in the delivery or funding of projects.
The data collection and processing activities, dealt with in section 2.1, must be guided by a coherent
strategic vision that specifies what goals and objectives are to be served and what measures will quantify
the objectives, as defined by the performance management framework.
The methodology used to collect data, calculate performance measures and establish targets, and define
the associated levels of service should be fully documented for future reference. Furthermore,
authorities/agencies may develop an approach for communicating levels of service and measures to
external and internal stakeholders.
1.4.4.1 STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND LEVELS OF
SERVICE
The asset management strategy sets out what the authority intends to do in order to manage its highway
infrastructure assets; in developing the strategy, authorities/agencies should establish the mission and
goals (asset management objectives). Management objectives usually identify the quality of service to be
offered to stakeholders, which reflect the authority’s aspiration/availability and the expectations of
stakeholder. Any asset service affecting any stakeholders in their roles as users, taxpayers, partners,
elected officials, community residents, etc., may be included.
The quality of services likely to be placed in the future on the highway network should be incorporated in
defining the levels of service. Therefore, levels of service are broad statements that describe the
performance required for highway infrastructure assets, which are the balance between stakeholder
expectations, corporate vision and available funding (see figure 1.4.4.1.1).
At the proficient maturity level of asset management, levels of service can be split into two distinct
categories: customers/stakeholders and technical.
Customer levels of service relate to how the customers and stakeholders receive the service in terms of
tangible and intangible measures or criteria. They are expressed in terms that customers and stakeholders
can understand and comprehend. Tangibles include the appearance of facilities, frequency of service
disruptions, availability of service, frequency of crashes, etc. Examples of intangibles include speed of
service, staff attitude and ease of dealing with the agency.
Definition of customer level of service
Levels of service are broad statements that describe the performance of highway infrastructure
assets in terms that stakeholders can understand. They should relate to outcomes and cover key
aspects of asset performance such as safety, serviceability and sustainability. They should consider
the performance of the whole network rather than that of individual assets
Technical levels of service support both the customer’s and the agency’s strategic objectives; they are
usually expressed in technical terms used by agency personnel or contractors. At the early stages of asset
management (basic maturity level), some agencies use their performance measures as level of service
statements.
Definition of technical level of service
Levels of service are statements or values of a key performance indicators that describe the
performance of highway infrastructure assets in technical terms and are suitable for inclusion in
maintenance delivery contracts or internal service agreements. They should relate to outcomes and
cover key aspects of asset performance such as safety, serviceability and sustainability. They should
consider the performance of the whole network rather than that of individual assets
Each road organization needs to determine the number and nature of its own levels of service, but in any
case, levels of service should be developed based on themes that demonstrate the relationship between
higher level corporate objectives and any stakeholder requirements for delivery of the service, the most
common aspects/themes being (see e.g. law P.L. 112-141 in USA (AASHTO, 2013)): safety, serviceability
(congestion reduction, system reliability, etc.), sustainability (environmental, aesthetics), accessibility (e.g.
reduced project delivery delays) , financial performance, etc.
Levels of service can be developed through workshops, focus groups, public opinion surveys, collaborative
working and market survey research
It should be noted that levels of service need to be developed in a hierarchy that reflects the increasing
level of detail of planning activities (see figure 1.4.4.1.2).
Strategic - To provide a snapshot of overall performance, generally for stakeholder consumption;
Tactical - To inform decision making, particularly in terms of investment;
Operational - To provide information on operational aspects of the service, such as the speed of repairs or
performance of service providers undertaking maintenance activities.
1.4.4.2 PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Each level of service should be supported by a set of performance measures (see figure 2), which will
enable to measure both individual aspects of performance as well as the overall level of service.
Two type of measures are of interest:
● Measures of physical condition of the highway asset;

● Measures of the organizational performance.
It is relevant to distinguish between the condition and performance of an asset:
● Asset’s performance is directly related to its ability to provide the required level of service;
● Asset condition is related to its physical state, which may or may not affect its performance.
Usually, for each level of service, a number of performance measures are chosen, and the process to
evaluate them generally involves the aggregation of raw data (objective and subjective, quantitative and
qualitative), as shown in table 1.4.4.2.1.
Definition of Performance MeasureVarious performance measures are usually required to represent a

single level of service, but they might be aggregated in a key performance indicator (KPI) to describe the
level of service. It may be appropriate to use different weighting factors for each of the performance
measures that contribute to a level of service or KPI (e.g. condition of footways may have a greater
weighting than condition of white lines).
Performance measures are used to monitor whether authorities/agencies are meeting the levels of
service and to report the actual performance. They are usually numbers or scores that have meaning
to relevant staff, and are calculated transforming raw data. They may be technical and non-technical
Typically, performance measures may include both engineering and non-engineering considerations (for
example based on results from public opinion surveys). There are four type of performance measures:
● Input – Demonstrates the amount of resources needed to complete activities and includes staff, labor
and material costs and other relevant financial information. This type of measure does not necessarily
demonstrate the performance of the service or whether the overall strategy is met;
● Output – Typically measures completed activities, such as the area of surface dressing per year. This
type of measure provides information on the activities completed against a program of works, but does
not provide information on whether the level of activity met the overall strategy, whether it met any of
the performance requirements, or if it delivered value for money;
● Outcome – Describes the results of activities provided and may include measures such as public
satisfaction and the condition of various assets. These measures can be used to demonstrate the link
between the asset management strategy and service delivery most effectively;
● Efficiency – Reflects the input cost per activity or for the total service. It could be used to support
investment decisions.
The steps for identifying performance measures generally include:
● Identifying existing performance measures and how they are being used;
● Defining gaps to be addressed based on coverage of critical outcome areas for authorities/agencies and
support for the asset management best practices;
● Establishing criteria for selecting new measures.
The logical starting point for the development of performance measures is to identify what aspect of
performance is being measured.
Indicators suitable to be used as performance measures should be:
● Meaningful,
● Relevant to demonstrate the delivery of strategy,
● Based on reliable data already available,
● Simple to understand,
● Stable (can be compared over time),
● Useful for benchmarking (for comparison with other authorities/agencies),
● Already known or used (or something similar already being measured by others),
● Sustainable in terms of cost.
One of the basic considerations in developing performance measures is to maximize the use of existing
data and minimize the need for collection of additional data.
The SMART approach may be used in selecting actual performance measures. This approach evaluates the
following attributes for candidate measures:
● Specific - the measure is specific, clear and unambiguous, explaining clearly what is expected;
● Measurable - there is a simple method for measuring it;
● Attainable - the measure is realistic and there is a clear action plan of how it can be achieved;
● Relevant - it is important in achieving the asset management objective; and
● Time-bound it is measured in a timeframe.
Once performance measures are selected, it is advisable that:
● data are tested in order to verify if they are practical to measure and compute;
● validity of results is checked in order to verify that they genuinely reflect current performance (precision
and accuracy of the performance measures is a critical issue when performance measures are
established and target values set).
Typical sources of data and other information used to define performance measures may include: public
opinion surveys (letters, e-mails, calls and blogs), business reporting, operational reporting, existing
inventory data, performance data (including condition) and financial reporting.
In relation to KPIs, Working Group 2 (Management Indicators) of a past PIARC Technical Committee on
Asset Management (cycle 2008-2011), put some effort into identifying the existing management indicators
as well as the lack of indicators when necessary (PIARC 2012). Table 1.4.4.2.2 shows some examples of
the work carried out by this committee.
Random Auditing: Audits can include customer satisfaction surveys, sample condition surveys and ad hoc
inspections. Random audits are frequently used to independently audit the performance of Highway
Authorities/Agencies who are working under quality management systems. Their purpose therefore is to
provide an independent crosscheck on performance.As far as the frequency of measures is concerned,
consideration should be given to the balance between the cost of collecting the monitoring data and
information and the risks of not having the information available. This is particularly important when
considering compliance with statutory obligations and demonstrating value for money. The most
commonly used ways of carrying out performance measurement are:
● System Audits: Where asset management software systems have been implemented the system, if
properly used, will provide a source of performance management data. For example, customer query
systems will be able to provide response times to queries and also be able to identify areas of exception,
i.e. particular types of complaint or query or particular geographical areas generating a high number of
queries
● Monthly: Where established management systems are in place it is possible to obtain monthly
performance statistics. In general, these may focus on activities and the time taken to complete them.
Progress against an established program may also provide a useful management tool.
● Annual: Some indicators will be based upon information supplied by others annually. This limits the use
of such indicators to annual reviews.
1.4.4.3 TARGETS
Progress in achieving asset management goals and objectives, as described by levels of service, is
quantified by target values of the selected performance measures. Therefore, each performance measure
should have a performance target associated with it over a period of time, typically up to five years.
The targets should be easily recognizable and understood by senior decision makers and/or the asset
manager depending on whether they are strategic, tactical or operational.
The process of defining performance targets needs to be iterative, determining the best combination of
targets against what is affordable. In this process, consideration should be given to:
● past and current performance and what is achievable;

● cost in the short, medium and long term.
Definition of targets
Performance targets define quantitatively the performance that needs to be achieved in order to
reach the required levels of service. They should be set by staff responsible for asset management,
agreed with senior decision makers and be achievable and affordable.
The process of setting performance targets may include steps such as the following (NCHRP, 2006):
● Define contexts and time horizons;

● Link targets to long – term goals;
● Assess funding availability;
● Analyze resource allocation scenarios and trade-offs;
● Consider policy and public input;
● Establish the targets and track progress.
Examples of performance targets as defined by various US state DOTs are presented in Table 1.4.4.3.1
Table 1.4.4.3.2 shows examples of targets used in Romania. Both sets of examples refer to pavement
preservation.
NOTES:
NP1 – very good performance;
NP2 – good performance;
NP3 – medium performance
NP4 - NP5 - poor performance
Traffic expressed in millions of standard axles (msa)
1.4.5 PERFORMANCE GAPS
Once performance targets have been developed, they can be used to compare current against desired
performance (levels of service). Any gap between the two informs about the works programs necessary to
meet the asset management strategy.
An initial evaluation of performance gaps can be undertaken by simply identifying those performance
measures where the target measure has not been met. It should be noted however that a performance
gap could exist for a number of reasons as follows (see figure 5):
Gap 1: Customer Expectations – Management Perception: The customer’s expectations of the service
provided do not match the service provider’s management perception of what is to be provided.
Gap 2: Management Perception – Actual Performance: The management perception of the service quality
does not match the actual quality of service being provided
Gap 3: Actual Performance – Specified Performance: The service is not being delivered to the quality
specified in the relevant standards and/or contracts.
Gap 4: Actual Performance – Communication to Customers: There has been inadequate communication
with the customers resulting in them having a skewed perception of the service delivered.
In works planning and programming, performance measures are used to structure the comparison of
different options at the network and project levels.
The use of performance measures rarely makes decisions easier or automatic, but it can inform the
decision – making process and communicate more effectively the consequences of investment choices.
Finally, attention should be paid to verifying that, after implementation of programs, the desired levels of
service are achieved, capturing the lessons learnt from any lack of performance and including these in any
revision of performance measures, targets and programs of actions/works. This is part of the approach to
performance monitoring described in section 2.2.
1.4.6 REFERENCES
AASHTO, 2013. Transportation Asset Management Assessment , Department of Transportation - Federal
highway Administration, AASHTO Transportation Asset Management Guide: A focus on implementation —
Executive Summary , Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and AASHTO, June 2013
(http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/pubs/hif13047.pdf).
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Transportation Asset Management Expert Task Group. 2013.
AASHTO Asset Management Guide—A Focus on Implementation. Executive Summary. American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Washington, DC. Last accessed July 29, 2015
(http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/pubs/hif13047.pdf}.CSS/TAG, 2004. Preparation of a Model Framework for
Asset Management (Plans) for a Highway Network in the UK: Stage One Report: Review of International
and Cross- Sector Experience, May 2004.
HMEP, 2013. Highway Infrastructure Asset Management, Department for Transport UK, may 2013
(
http://www.ukroadsliaisongroup.org/en/utilities/document-summary.cfm?docid=5C49F48E-1CE0-477F-933A
CBFA169AF8CB).
Last accessed July 24, 2015
(
http://www.ukroadsliaisongroup.org/en/utilities/document-summary.cfm?docid=5C49F48E-1CE0-477F-933A
CBFA169AF8CB).
ISO 55000, 2014. Asset management -- Overview, principles and terminology. ISO standard.
NCHRP 551, 2006. Performance Measures and Targets for Transportation Asset Management, National
Cooperative Highway Research Program - Report 551, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
2006 (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_551.pdf).
PAS 55, 2008. PAS 55: Asset Management – Parts 1 and 2. British Standards Institution's (BSI).
PIARC 2004. The framework for performance indicators, Comité technique 6 Gestion des Routes /
Technical Committee 6 Road Management The Framework for Performance Indicators, PIARC Paris France
2004, ISBN 2-84060-165-6 (https://www.piarc.org/en/order-library/13485-en-
The%20Framework%20for%20Performance%20Indicators.htm).
PIARC 2012. High level management indicators, Comité technique AIPCR D.1 - Gestion du patrimoine
routier/PIARC Technical Committee D.1 - Management of road infrastructure assets, PIARC Paris France
2012, ISBN 978-2-84060-288-1
(
http://www.piarc.org/en/order-library/17058-en-High%20level%20management%20indicators.htm?catalog&
catalog-topic=33).
1.4.7 CASE STUDIES
CASE STUDY 1: GEPUR guide a single shared methodology for managing an inter-urban or an urban
network
CASE STUDY 2: Footway evaluation developed by BRRC
GEPUR GUIDE A SINGLE SHARED METHODOLOGY FOR MANAGING AN
INTER-URBAN OR AN URBAN NETWORK
HUGUES ODEON, CEREMA, France
INTRODUCTION
In France, the IQRN method has been used to manage the national road network for about 25 years. But
this method is not fit for local road networks, and there is no other simplified method available. The main
purpose of the GEPUR project was to provide a single and shared methodology for managing local road
networks of Eastern France (ten departments). This methodology was written by officers who are in charge
of the daily management of inter-urban and urban road network; the group was led by a representative of
the Cerema. The final guide is composed of two parts, the first one for inter-urban networks, and the
second one for urban roads. The frame of these two parts of the guide is similar, but the urban roads have
specificities that influence their behavior and lifecycle, making it necessary to take them into account.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the GEPUR project was on one hand to provide a guide available for road network managers
and their contracting authorities, and on the other hand to create a group of road network managers who
will be able to share their know-how.
BENEFITS
The GEPUR project allowed road network managers to build their own methodology together, taking
advantage of the experience of each of them.
SOLUTION
The GEPUR guide provides an open methodology. Its implementation to a specify network can be different
according to the contracting authorities policy, the length of the network and the financial capabilities of
the department or the city.
Regarding the asset management plan, the road network manager can opt for different strategies. Usually,
the network is divided in three or four classes, and the chosen strategy varies according to the classes.
First, he has to choose between different priorities:
1. To repair only the most destroyed pavements;

2. To adopt routine maintenance to slow distress progress on a huge part of the network;
3. To repair pavements along a route, to avoid dissemination of works;
4. To maintain pavements on a high level for the primary network, and on a lesser level for the secondary
network;
5. The length of the maintained roads each year must be in accordance with the total length of the
network and the durability of used technics.
Then, he has to define different technics for maintenance. Each of them has benefits and limits which must
be taken into account. For example, the routine maintenance can only maintain the quality level of the
road for a few years, a surface dressing can restore the surface characteristics of the pavement
(impermeability, skid resistance) and an asphalt concrete can moreover contribute to strengthen the
structure.
It is then possible to define which technics will be used on each class of the network, what the
maintenance frequency is for each of them, and what average percentage of surface will be treated with
each technic. For example (Table 1.4.7.1), on the class 1 network, it could be possible to adopt 15% of
very thin asphalt concrete, 15% of thin asphalt concrete, 20% of asphalt concrete, and 50% of surface
dressing. On the class 3, these percentages can respectively be 0%, 25%, 0% and 60%, with 15% of
specific asphalt concrete for flexible pavement. The durability of each technic also depends on the traffic
of the road, and consequently of the class (Table 1.4.7.2).
Table 1.4.7.1: Average percentage of each technics per class (%)
Table 1.4.7.2: Average durability of the different maintenance technics (years)
Finally, the road network manager defines an asset management plan for each class of the network (Figure
1.4.7.1), describing the type of maintenance to be applied and its average durability for a long cycle life
(30 years for example). It is then possible to evaluate the global cost of this asset management plan over
30 years, and to adjust it to the financial capabilities of the department.
Figure 1.4.7.1: Asset management plan depending on the type of structure (flexible, bituminous, rigid) and
traffic
CONCLUSION
The GEPUR guide provides a tool to the road network managers and their contracting authorities, which
allows them to define their own asset management plan, according to their quality policy and the financial
capabilities. This guide is in two parts, the first one for inter-urban road network, and the second one for
the urban road network.
REFERENCES
Group. 2016. GEPUR Part 1 : inter-urban network. IDRRIM. Paris (Fr), June 2016.
https://www.idrrim.com/publications/4484.htm
Group. 2018. GEPUR Part 2 : urban network. IDRRIM. Paris (Fr), to be published.
Odéon H., Jung V., Schang J.P. (2015) : GEPUR, une méthode de gestion d’un réseau routier par et pour les
collectivités locales, AIPCR 2015, Séoul (Corée du Sud), nov.
Odéon H., Schang J.-P., Jung V. (2017) : GEPUR : a method for managing a road network by and for local
authorities, JTTE, USA, Marc-Apr, pp. 104-115.
FOOTWAY EVALUATION DEVELOPED BY BRRC
TIM MASSART, BRRC, Belgium
INTRODUCTION
Walking and cycling are green transport modes which should be given more attention in future. The quality
of footways is not always very good. Maintenance planning and budgeting are mostly based on ad hoc
repairs.
The problem is the lack of a complete evaluation method. We have developed an evaluation method for
footways.
Our approach is based on a network analysis with a wheelchair, which is the most “sensitive” type of
footway user. This wheelchair is equipped with sensors and a skid resistance measuring device. Three
parameters (comfort/longitudinal unevenness in the direction of travel, gradient in the direction of travel,
and crossfall) can be measured in one run, and a skid resistance measurement is made in each section of
the network.
We would like to present this measuring equipment with results maintained untill now. Furthermore we
would like to promote this approach and show the good relation between the objective measuring device
and the subjective rating of the testpanel.
OBJECTIVES
Efficient inventorying and inspection of footways.
The objective of this tool is to measure in 1 pass the comfort, crossfall and longitudinal slope of a footway
in an objective way.
BENEFITS
By measuring the 3 characteristics, mentioned above, in an objective way, we eliminate subjective

complaints from citizens.
SOLUTION
At the national and international level, there is currently no objective tool to determine this quality of
pedestrian pavements continuously, quickly and cost-effectively. The concept is all too often approached
subjectively, on the basis of the feeling that we get as a traffic participant in a public space. That is why
the Belgian Road Research Center decided in 2015 to develop a measuring instrument to assess
pavements on three criteria that are fundamental for pedestrians: flatness (comfort), skid resistance
(resistance to slipping) and slope (transverse and longitudinal).
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Relevant technical parameters to be collected for footway evaluation are the following:
● footway width;
● longitudinal unevenness / comfort;
● crossfall / gradient;
● skid resistance / coefficient of friction;
Footway width
Different users need different footway widths. In this concept we use a wheelchair. We assume that people
with impaired mobility are the most “sensitive” users of a footway. If people with a wheelchair, baby car or
other vehicle can travel in an acceptable way, the criterion is met.
Longitudinal unevenness / comfort
The feeling of comfort on a footway varies widely with the type of user. In the concept proposed in this
article, we will measure comfort with a wheelchair equipped with an accelerometer. This evaluation is
objective and stringent, because a wheelchair user suffers the most from lack of comfort on a footway.
Crossfall / gradient
Crossfall should normally be lower than 2 %. This parameter will be measured continuously in the concept
proposed below.
CONCEPT
Basic concept (V0)
After analysing the available tools and the way inspections are made in other countries, we found that no
existing device can measure all the relevant characteristics at an affordable price. That is why we are
suggesting the concept described below. (This measurement method remains to be refined and the
measuring equipment still needs to be developed.)
The basic component of the method is a wheelchair. We propose to convert it into a measuring vehicle.
The chassis of the wheelchair as well as the wheels and the load (weight in the wheelchair) will be
determined experimentally, as a first step. It seems interesting to choose the chassis and wheels so as to
minimize suspension and damping, with a view to obtaining a highly sensitive measuring device.
Figure 1.4.7.2: Basic concept (Source: BRRC)
A smartphone is fixed onto the chassis and the following parameters can be measured:
● time;
● GPS;
● orientation with respect to the north (compass);
● speed;
● crossfall / gradient;
● longitudinal unevenness / comfort (with accelerometer).
In 2016, a first prototype (V0) was developed by the CRR. This was materialized by a wheelchair on which
smartphones containing a GPS and an accelerometer had been fixed (equipment integrated by default in
all smartphones). This equipment provided figures concerning the comfort of the coating (rating out of 10).
This comfort is evaluated via the accelerometer which will measure the vertical accelerations generated by
the surface of the coating on the wheelchair and therefore in fine on the user. In order to measure also the
adhesion of the coating, a complementary tool available to the BRRC has been used: the Portable Friction
Tester (PFT - more information available on www.brrc.be/fr/article/f1301_06 and
www.vti.se/en/Publications/Publication/road-marking-friction_669533).
At the end of 2016, surveys were carried out with this prototype and the PFT tool on eleven "test" sites
located in the city center of Brussels, each with a different coating: two asphalt, two concrete and seven
natural stone .
In April 2017 and in collaboration with Brussels Mobility, the adherence and flatness of these eleven sites
were then evaluated by different users during a morning organized by the CRR. The objective of this
approach was to verify if the results obtained by the measuring equipment, reflected the feeling of
pedestrians. In total, twenty-eight participants took part in this field exercise: eighteen valid pedestrians
and ten people with reduced mobility (people in wheelchairs, people walking with difficulty, people with
visual impairments). A test sheet was completed by each participant and for each site.
Figure 1.4.7.3: Evaluation of the footway by user (Source: BRRC)
At the end of the analysis and as illustrated in the graph of Figure 1.4.7.4, a classification of the sites
according to the comfort of the coating perceived by the users was carried out. The classification obtained
from the subjective data collected by the twenty-eight users (light blue on the graph), compared to that
obtained with the encrypted data collected by the prototype (dark blue), shows that a correlation exists on
this notion of comfort.
Figure 1.4.7.4: Comfort ranking (Source: BRRC)
Encouraged by this encouraging observation, the BRRC decided during the summer of 2017 to develop a
second prototype (V1) with several objectives:
● also measure the transverse and longitudinal slopes of the pedestrian zones;
● measuring the speed of movement to eliminate the disturbances generated by different survey speeds;
● remove as much as possible the possible disturbances related to the quality of the accelerometer used
(variable depending on the smartphone);
● develop a single system with which all the components communicate;
● Automatically centralize all the data collected in a single database.
RESULTS AND PERSPECTIVES
Presented in preview on the stand of the BRRC at the Belgian Road Congress in Brussels at the beginning
of October 2017, this equipment allows to measure continuously and in a "geolocated" way the comfort
and the longitudinal and transversal slopes of the sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces. The
measurement of adhesion can currently not be performed by this equipment and always requires the use
of additional equipment (PFT tool for continuous measurement (tests in progress), SRT pendulum (Skid
Resistance Tester for point measurement). This second prototype and the sensors that compose it are
shown in Figure 1.4.7.5.
Figure 1.4.7.5: Second prototype (Source: BRRC)
In summer 2018 we have surveyed a complete city center in Belgium with the measurement equipment. In
the map beneath, you can find the results on the comfort of the footways for the complete city center.
Figure 1.4.7.6: Comfort assessment for a whole network (Source: BRRC)
This functional equipment is now integrated in the family of roadside inspection equipment available at the
BRRC. It can be used to respond to external technical assistance specifically oriented to the quality of use
of pedestrian coatings.
The road administrator will be able to categorize different pedestrian coatings based on comfort (wheelcair
equipment) and adhesion measurements (PFT). The following figure shows a decision grid that can be used
to trigger an intervention. In the green area (VG Very Good) we have a pedestrian coating with very good
scores on comfort and adhesion. In the red zones we have at least one problem (adhesion or comfort).
Based on this we can choose a substantiated measure.
Figure 1.4.7.7: Evaluation grid for footway coatings (Source: BRRC)
WHAT STILL REMAINS TO BE DONE
The concept presented above has been tested in actual practice. We will explore different strategies to get
this equipment on the market.
● the wheelchair community has shown interest and we will explore posssibilities how to encourage them
to measure their network;
● Explore possibilities to use applications (app) on smartphone / tablet and correlate wheelchair users with
the prototype;
● Establish a measurement methodolgy to explain how we obtain repeatable and reproducable
measurements.
CONCLUSION
Walking and cycling are green transport modes which will get more attention in future. The quality of
footways is not always very good. In most cities, road managers have difficulties in estimating the quality
level of their footway network. Maintenance planning and budgeting are mostly based on ad hoc repairs.
With this complete evaluation method administrators will be able to manage this asset in a more efficient
way and with a well determined approach.
After this inspection, the administrator will have a good overview of the quality of his footway network. He
will easily find those footways who need a maintenance. On the other hand, experience will be gained for
different types of pavements for footways. With this experience, the administrator will be able to decide
wich type of pavement is suitable for which footway.
REFERENCE
Tim Massart, 2018. The Belgian Road Research Center strives to develop a Tool that measures the
usability of pedestrian surfacing/ Routes/Roads n°377 – 2nd quarter 2018. Location.

Asset Management Manual A Guide For Practitioners

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Asset Management Manual A Guide For Practitioners

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASSET MANAGEMENT MANUAL

A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS

Document written by the "Asset Management" Technical Committee of PIARC

● Organizational goals and objectives

● Is asset management a way of doing business in the road organization?

- AASHTO Transportation Asset Management Guide—A Focus on Implementation, American Association

Table 1.1.4.1: Description of Spain and Madrid networks

● Main network: 662 km (25%);

● Deterioration level 5: 9%;

● Friction (CTF) greater than 40.

Table 1.1.4.3: Pavement improvement contracts

Table 1.1.4.4: Budget for bridge maintenance

Table 1.1.4.5: Operation and maintenance costs

● Group I: Activities and operations regulated by service indicators (KPI's);

Table 1.1.4.6: Lighting and traffic light installation maintenance contracts

MARGINS AND LANDSCAPES

Table 1.1.4.8: Road network included in case study

Table 1.1.4.9: Road width included in case study

Table 1.1.4.10: Bridges included in case study

A detailed report on ‘Memorandum to Government of India 15th Finance Commission on Requirement of

● Review of asset management materials

The level 2 assessment takes the following form:

● The leader of the organization

Competencies may fall under a number of categories, including the following:

● Leadership and governance

● Austroads, Australia and New Zealand https://austroads.com.au/assets/asset-management

● Relevant strategic plans and transport objectives;

Source: Based in Highways Maintenance Capital Funding: Self-assessment questionnaire for

PIARC 2014. The importance of road maintenance, ISBN : 978-2-84060-349-8,

● International Roughness Index (IRI);

Figure 1.3.5.1: IRI profile cumulative distribution

Figure 1.3.5.2: Age vs. IRI

Table 1.3.5.1: IRI distribution

Table 1.3.5.2: CAT and IRI category

Figure 1.3.5.4: Road Pavement Structure

Table 1.3.5.3: IRI and CAT data elaboration

Table 1.3.5.4: Pavement condition rating

This chapter sets out the process(es) and/or procedure(s) for:

● Providing a systematic approach to measure progress in the implementation of asset management

● Provide a systematic approach to measure progress in the implementation of asset management;

In developing a performance framework, it is important to understand who is affected by highway asset

Definition of technical level of service

Strategic - To provide a snapshot of overall performance, generally for stakeholder consumption;

Tactical - To inform decision making, particularly in terms of investment;

Two type of measures are of interest:

● Measures of physical condition of the highway asset;

It is relevant to distinguish between the condition and performance of an asset:

Definition of Performance MeasureVarious performance measures are usually required to represent a

The steps for identifying performance measures generally include:

Indicators suitable to be used as performance measures should be:

Once performance measures are selected, it is advisable that:

● past and current performance and what is achievable;

● Define contexts and time horizons;

NP1 – very good performance;

NP2 – good performance;

NP3 – medium performance

NP4 - NP5 - poor performance

Traffic expressed in millions of standard axles (msa)

First, he has to choose between different priorities:

1. To repair only the most destroyed pavements;

Table 1.4.7.1: Average percentage of each technics per class (%)

Table 1.4.7.2: Average durability of the different maintenance technics (years)

Efficient inventorying and inspection of footways.