Want to create interactive content? It’s easy in Genially!

Get started free

Gujarat Rural Roads (MMGSY)

Mira K

Created on September 19, 2022

The objective is to improve the rural road connectivity (by providing all weather connectivity) to 1,060 villages in all the 33 districts in Gujarat state benefitting about 8 million people.

Start designing with a free template

Discover more than 1500 professional designs like these:

Education Timeline

Images Timeline Mobile

Sport Vibrant Timeline

Decades Infographic

Comparative Timeline

Square Timeline Diagram

Timeline Diagram

Transcript

Gujarat Rural Roads (MMGSY)

India

2017 - 2019
E&S-Category: B
Status: Approved

Timeline

March 13, 2017

CONCEPT REVIEW

May 17, 2017

FINAL REVIEW

July 4, 2017

FINANCING APPROVAL

January 2020

LATEST FIELD VISIT

June 30, 2019

LOAN CLOSURE

US$ 329 mln

AIIB
Total Project Costs

US$ 658 mln

US$ 329 mln

GoG
Safeguard Concerns:
  • Women did not get any new employment opportunities, and the project has not promoted women's livelihoods or asset building.
  • Work sites did not have gender-safe bathrooms or housing facilities for women workers.
  • Neither AIIB nor R&BD and LASA have a gender expert; AIIB does not have a gender policy.
  • Women face sexual harassment.
  • Women are being hired only at the lowest unskilled levels in AIIB-funded projects, and there is no provision for skill upgradation or to create a befitting match between the educational background of the women and the kind/quality of work they are asked to handle
Safeguard Concerns:
  • MMGSY fails to provide equal, safe, decent jobs, and there are no records of any kind to show they have been hired, are working, or are being paid.
  • The project reinforced gender inequalities and violated labour and human rights, especially those of tribal peoples.
  • Field research found that labor conditions at visited work sites esembled forced labor.
Safeguard Concerns:
  • Construction workers, a majority of whom were of tribal origin and lower caste, systematically had their rightsviolated.
  • Project documents fail to explicitly mention social, historical, cultural, and tribally relevant processes which could be utilized to identify and address local barriers to gender inclusivity.
  • Although the training LASA led touched upon tribal and gender issues, they were offered too late to benefit women during project implementation.
Further Information