Learning Through South-South Cooperation: Comparative Study Helps Reframe Construction Practices
With 11,000 bridges built and counting, Nepal is unquestionably a global leader in trail bridge design and construction. Its blueprint for success has been utilized in many other countries, including in Ethiopia and Rwanda.
But the application of the Nepali blueprint has varied: Ethiopia adopted Nepal’s designs as-is, whereas in Rwanda they were adapted to the local context. A comparative study in the International Journal of Bridge Engineering looks at the best practices in bridge construction in each country — and where there’s room for improvement.
Hunde Tamene, a co-author of the study and an Ethiopian civil engineer, shares insights on these learnings below
Why were Ethiopia and Rwanda selected as the two countries for comparing best practices in trail bridge construction?
Both countries have adopted trail bridge technologies inspired by Nepalese practices. While Ethiopia has formally adopted the Nepali design manual as its national standard, Rwanda (despite lacking an officially endorsed national manual) utilizes a version adapted by Bridges to Prosperity. Ethiopia and Rwanda share broadly similar topographical features, making their comparison geographically relevant, despite Rwanda’s smaller land area. The socioeconomic contexts in both countries also present comparable rural mobility challenges.
This research was also undertaken within the framework of an active collaboration between Helvetas, Bridges to Prosperity and the government of Ethiopia to implement the Transformative Rural Access for Improved Livelihoods (TRAIL) project. The project is a multi-year initiative to develop the national policies, practices, technical expertise, supply chains and buy-in to end rural isolation in Ethiopia.
What were the key findings from the study?
The analysis focused on four criteria: ease of construction and maintenance, use of local materials, construction time efficiency and cost-effectiveness.
In Rwanda, suspension bridges feature simplified steel towers and optimized foundation connections. These design efficiencies contribute to faster construction timelines and lower overall costs compared to Ethiopia.
In contrast, Ethiopia’s suspension bridges are recognized for their maintenance-friendly design, with towers and suspenders that are both adjustable and easily replaceable. The use of locally fabricated steel tower components in Ethiopia also helps reduce dependency on imports while supporting local supply chains.
Another significant focus of the study was the approach to design manuals. In Rwanda, Bridges to Prosperity has effectively adapted Nepalese design standards to suit local conditions, fostering design flexibility and innovation. The study participants from both countries highlighted the importance of incorporating user feedback into design manuals to enhance usability and contextual relevance.
Ethiopia’s higher construction costs suggest the need for process optimization and design simplification, potentially drawing on Rwanda’s more streamlined practices.
Were there any findings that surprised you?
I was particularly struck by the disparity in steel prices: In Ethiopia and Rwanda, steel costs are at least three times higher than in Nepal, significantly impacting total construction cost.
Using the original Nepali designs, steel accounts for approximately 60–70% of the total material used in Ethiopia’s trail bridge construction.
In Rwanda, Bridges to Prosperity strategically adjusted the configuration of the suspension bridge, type and quantity of construction materials to better align with local construction practices and material costs.
How have these findings shaped Helvetas’ ongoing work to construct trail bridges across Ethiopia?
This study helped open the TRAIL Ethiopia team’s eyes to the need for more structural optimization — in particular, creating designs that were more cost-effective and reduced the use of expensive steel. Insights gained from Nepal and Rwanda enabled the team to adopt alternative construction techniques and modify various components of the designs, leading to implementation efficiency and lowered costs.
The research also fostered a more flexible and innovative mindset among the team, encouraging our participation in Helvetas’ annual Innovation Challenge — which we won. This is an internal competition to amplify an idea that is strategic to Helvetas’ mission, scalable and that has transformative potential.
What value do you see in South-South cooperation?
This research is a product of South–South cooperation, grounded in collaborative efforts across Rwanda, Nepal and Ethiopia through data collection and expert dialogue.
In past bridge-building initiatives, Ethiopian teams largely replicated Nepali approaches without critical adaptation. Today, that dynamic has evolved. Nepali advisors are currently embedded in regions across the country, providing ongoing technical support to the Ethiopian team. Through ongoing debate and consultation with these advisors, we are making context-specific improvements and fostering an environment open to innovation.
This relationship has also matured into a mutual exchange. We are no longer just recipients of knowledge — we are contributors. By sharing ideas, experiences and perspectives within the South-South cooperation framework, we are adding value to the broader community of practice.
Our progress reflects this shift. After learning from Nepal’s expertise in trail bridge design and construction, we are now confident in sharing our growing experience in short-span trail bridges (up to 120-meter span) with our peers across African countries. Between 2003 and 2022, only 106 trail bridges were constructed in Ethiopia. In contrast, over the past three years alone, we have built more than 110 bridges — with the number projected to reach 150 by September 2025.
Outside of this research, have you had personal experience with South-South cooperation?
My journey with trail bridges began three years ago when Helvetas entrusted me with the opportunity to lead the TRAIL project in Ethiopia’s Oromia region. Prior to that, my professional experience had been centered on road construction, buildings, water supply systems and teaching at university, with no direct exposure to trail bridge infrastructure.
A few months into my new role, a turning point for me was participating in a Training of Trainers course on trail bridge design and construction facilitated by Dr. N.L. Joshi, a Nepali trail bridge expert. This course, along with subsequent exchanges with other Nepali colleagues, fundamentally changed my perspective. Those discussions encouraged me to critically reflect on established practices and ultimately inspired the concept that formed the basis of this research and other innovations.
I am deeply grateful to Nepali mentors like Padam Gurung, who continues to support me and my team on the ground, and Gyanendra Rajbhandari, who provides valuable remote guidance. Their contributions have been instrumental in accelerating our technical capacity.
Because of this mentorship and practical experience, I now feel equipped to coach consultants, contractors and fabricators in their trail bridge projects. This transformation reflects both my personal growth and the strength of collaborative learning — and is a reminder of the lasting value and potential of South–South Cooperation.
