Let India’s road-quality overhaul become the template for all infrastructure projects

In July, road transport minister Nitin Gadkari linked poor Detailed Project Reports (DPRs)—prepared by consultants selected through a Request for Proposal process—to the increasing number of road accidents.

The Gambhira Bridge collapse, which killed 22 people, exposed a crisis of road neglect and cost-cutting. Similar issues led to the Morbi bridge collapse, the NH-44 closure in Jammu and Kashmir, and cave-ins on national highway 66 in Kerala.

Government procurement is sometimes constrained by the selection of the lowest bidder (L1), which can compromise quality. Even the weighted average qualification criterion of Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) has its limitations.

But change is arriving, and for India’s infrastructure, it’s set to be a game-changer. This year, the ministry of road transport and highways eliminated financial bids altogether for the hiring of consultants, leading to a new approach that aims for quality while meeting procurement norms.

This reform is not a routine highway-sector update. It is a template that other ministries must adopt for ports, railways and airports if India is to meet the ambitions of its National Infrastructure Pipeline and National Logistics Policy.

Consultants are the architects of a road project’s blueprint. Their DPRs decide the alignment, geometric and pavement design, safety features, utility relocation plans and cost structures that shape the entire life-cycle of a highway. When they lack technical rigour, we see design flaws, structural failures, economic losses and even safety hazards.

In September, the highways ministry announced that consultancy-service deals will now be awarded solely based on technical merit, removing the financial bid component.

Under the previous QCBS method, consultants were ranked on the basis of a technical score combined with a financial score. Firms often quoted aggressively low prices to improve their financial score, which led to poor quality DPRs. Past performance of the consultant, evaluated bi-annually by the National Highways Authority of India, is also a criterion, warranting the need to maintain a reliable track record.

The new scoring structure for consultants complements the revamped bidding norms for Hybrid Annuity Model contracts introduced in July. For years, L1 contracts had encouraged developers—which construct roads based on DPRs—to underbid by 10–15%. The rule changes prescribe higher financial and technical thresholds, thus curtailing aggressive underbidding and incentivizing developers that demonstrate strong technical know-how.

Previous norms also allowed inexperienced bidders to win contracts by quoting unrealistically low prices for future operating and maintenance costs. To prevent this, the ministry has set a fixed cost for maintenance, so no one can under-quote just to win a bid. On top of that, winning contractors must furnish extra security money now, which promises end-product quality. It acts as a deterrent; contractors would not be tempted to cut corners.

The benefits are clear. A quality-first selection process should deliver roads that last longer, cut fuel burn, lower vehicle damage and reduce unpredictability across supply chains. Cleaner model concession agreements (MCA) and tighter financial filters also reduce the odds of stalled projects and mid-construction stress.

But there are short-term trade-offs. Mid-tier consultants and developers with inconsistent track records or thin balance sheets may get temporarily sidelined. Bidder participation will dip and bid prices could rise moderately.

These are manageable transition costs. The alternative—fragile roads requiring constant repair—is far more expensive. With 124 highway projects worth ₹3.5 trillion planned in 2025–26, India cannot afford to keep building infrastructure that deteriorates quickly.

The ministry’s reform agenda rests on three core pillars. First, a shift to quality-first selection of consultants and bidders. Second, bankable and realistic contracts through upgraded MCAs. And lastly, accountability enforced via scorecards, audits and QR-coded monitoring.

This governance model must not stay confined to highways. Similar problems of poor DPRs, underbidding, uneven enforcement and weak life-cycle planning plague ports, airports, railways and other forms of urban infrastructure. As India pushes forth with economic corridors, multimodal logistics parks, port-led development and last-mile connectivity, durable infrastructure is not optional; it is foundational to cut logistics costs and stay globally competitive.

The reforms indicate that India is finally willing to prioritize durability over upfront savings. The opportunity and challenge are to replicate this philosophy across all sectors, so that every kilometre of road, rail track or port berth built delivers value for decades. India already has the world’s second-largest road network. Our next goal should be to build one of the best.

The authors are, respectively, India managing director and senior analyst at BowerGroupAsia.