THE ECONOMIC CASE FOR REDUCING VULNERABILITY OF TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE TO NATURAL HAZARDS BRAZIL TRANSPORT SECTOR NOTE June 2025 Brazil’s transport assets and the social and economic activities they support are exposed to multiple climate and natural hazards. Climate change is increasing this exposure, impacting critical corridors such as those used for soybean export. Proactive investments and maintenance programs for climate adaptation of critical transport assets will help Brazil avoid costly delays/detours and expensive rebuild of key infrastructure. These initiatives have high return on investment. Additionally, effective emergency response mechanisms in the transport sector are critical to minimize economic losses due to traffic disruptions. Tais Fonseca and Joanna Moody Acknowledgments: This note is one of a series of analytic and advisory outputs of the Brazil Mobility and Logistics for Sustainability and Resilience project (P179908) conducted under the guidance of Bianca Bianchi Alves (Practice Manager, Transport, Latin America and the Caribbean) and Luis Alberto Andres (Program Leader, Infrastructure, Brazil). The team thanks colleagues Jing Xiong (Senior Transport Specialist), Alejandro Hoyos (Senior Transport Specialist), and Frederico Pedroso (Disaster Risk Management Specialist) for their constructive peer review. This note summarizes analytic findings from Guillaume L’Her, Amy Schweikert, Xavier Espinet, Lucas Eduardo Araújo de Melo, and Mark Deinert. (2024). “Transport resilience and adaptation to climate impacts – a case study on agricultural transport in Brazil,” Complex Networks and their Applications XII, (pp.243-250). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53503-1_20 CONTEXT The large and diverse geography of Brazil results in a range of climate and natural hazards that threaten the country’s economic and social development (Figure 1). In 2021, national annual losses from natural hazards were already estimated at US$ 3.9 billion, 1 and climate change is expected to increase the country’s exposure to climate and natural hazards in the coming years.2 Flooding and intense precipitation have been the most damaging disasters in Brazil. Since 1991, these hazards account for more than 70 percent of all material damages amounting to R$ 118 billion.3 Landslides are also significant, accounting for 10 percent of damages. Figure 1. Historic and current natural hazards in Brazil For Brazil’s transport infrastructure, key assets such as roadways, railways, waterways, seaports, airports, and bridges are exposed to climate and natural hazards. Among these hazards, floods, landslides, fire, and drought present the greatest risks to Brazil’s transport infrastructure and the social and economic activities they support.4 An asset-level analysis of exposure to each of these key hazards suggests that the total value of transport infrastructure exposed to at least one of these risks already totals over US$ 358 billion, with some key assets facing multiple risks simultaneously5 (Figure 2). • The value of all assets exposed to flooding6 exceeds US$ 254 billion. • As much as 25 percent of all roads, 23 percent of railway lines, 7 percent of ports, and 10-17 percent of airports (medium and small airports, respectively) are in locations susceptible to a level 2+ landslide—with a total asset value of US$ 264 billion exposed to this risk. 1The World Bank, “Country Climate Risk Profile: Brazil” https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/15915- WB_Brazil%20Country%20Profile-WEB.pdf 2World Bank. 2023. Brazil Country Climate and Development Report. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2023/05/04/brazil- can-be-both-richer-and-greener-world-bank-group-outlines-opportunities-for-climate-action-and-growth 3 Atlas Digital de Desastres no Brasil. URL: https://atlasdigital.mdr.gov.br/ 4 The impact of natural hazards will vary by location, type of hazard, and infrastructure type. For example, droughts are a key risk for waterway transportation, but have less impact on roadways. Landslides and flooding damage networked assets such as roads and railways, while fire may limit operations on all types of assets. 5Asset values are based on average construction (replacement) costs from national data available for highway, primary, and secondary roads, railways, waterways, ports, and small and medium airports. Assets with multiple hazard exposure are only counted once in this total. 6 Exposure includes pluvial and fluvial flooding with estimated depths > 0.25 meters for the 0.01 annual probability event (i.e., “100-year flood”). 1 • Risk of fire, worsened by droughts and extreme heat, currently threatens 9-12 percent of the road network, 6 percent of railway lines, 7-10 percent of airports, and 12 percent of ports. • The operations of 52 percent of ports and 35 percent of waterway kilometers are exposed to drought risk, for a total exposed asset value of over US$ 92 billion. Climate change is likely to exacerbate existing risks, particularly through intense precipitation and extreme heat.7 By 2040 estimates suggest that more than 35 percent of transportation infrastructure are expected to see an increase in intense precipitation events8 and more than 37 percent of seaports, 61 percent of small airports, and 70 percent of waterways will see an increase in extreme heat.9 Figure 2. Transport infrastructure exposure to climate impacts $140,000.00 80% $120,000.00 70% $100,000.00 60% 50% $80,000.00 40% $60,000.00 30% $40,000.00 20% $20,000.00 10% $- 0% Estimated Cost of Assets at Risk, USD ($, million) %over total value The impacts of climate and natural hazards go well beyond material damage. Disruptions to access to basic services, trade flows and business supply-chains provided by transport infrastructure and services have social and economic cascading effects. In Latin America and the Caribbean, businesses are estimated to incur annually approximately 1 percent of GDP in additional costs due to interruption of infrastructure systems including energy, transport and water. 10 In Brazil, the value is slightly higher, with Brazil businesses estimated to lose about 1.3 percent of Brazil GDP annually due to infrastructure disruption, with transport disruption accounting for half of those losses. 7NASA Center for Climate Simulation, “NASA Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled Projections (NEX-GDDP),” https://www.nccs.nasa.gov/services/data-collections/land-based-products/nex-gddp (accessed May 4, 2020). 8Intense precipitation is measured as the maximum annual 5-day sum of precipitation (“wettest five-day period”). The results presented for exposure are the increase in intense precipitation on annual average basis for each decade (2030, 2040), relative to the annual average value for a thirty-year historical baseline (1970-1999). The estimated are calculated using CMIP5 RCP8.5 9 Indicates exposure to an increase in temperatures of 2 degrees Celsius or higher. The estimates are calculated using CMIP5 RCP8.5. 10 Hallegatte et al. 2019. Lifelines - The Resilient Infrastructure Opportunity (English). Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group 2 Economic Impacts on Supply -Chains: Example of Climate Vulnerabilities of Soybean Export Routes The export of soybeans is the largest single-commodity contributor to Brazil’s GDP, accounting for US$ 26.1 billion in 2019.11 In 2020, the country exported nearly 83 million metric tons of soybeans. While as much as 35 percent of Brazilian soy reaches port by rail, the remaining 65 percent is transported by truck. This reliance on road transport for soy movement contributes to a high cost of transport and significant exposure to natural hazards for this value chain that is critical to both the Brazilian economy and global food security. Damage to the road network from landslides, exacerbated by flooding and intense precipitation, can result in costly infrastructure repairs,12 loss of service, and long detours. To assess the potential economic cost of detours, a drop-link analysis was performed for 33 critical soybean export routes (see Figure 3).13 These routes were selected based on exposure to high current and future landslide risk, exacerbated by flooding and intense precipitation.14 The cost of losing each individual critical road segments was calculated as the incremental cost of re-routing required between the origin and destination, using route-specific total annual soybean volume transported and the cost per tonne- kilometer. Over 900 primary road network segments were analyzed for the transportation of soybean exports along the 33 routes. Although the risks from landslides are geographically concentrated—with only 57 of the 900 road segments at high-risk—along only a few corridors, any disruption of these road segments can be very costly (see Table 1). Under current landslide and flooding exposure conditions, damage to a single road segment can result in annual increase in the cost of transporting soybeans of US$ 3 million (Route 15) to US$ 744 million USD (Route 27). Across the 31 routes under current exposure, the median annual increase in cost of transport is US$ 34 million (Route 3). These costs are likely to be exacerbated by climate change. Nearly 80 percent of the segments currently at risk also see increased risk from intense precipitation in future climate change scenarios by 2040. Areas with intense precipitation increases in 2040 may see increased flooding risks and landslides. Figure 3 shows the routes assessed and the critical segments “perturbed” or disrupted in the drop-link analysis. The total cost by State is also calculated by summing every segment within its geographic boundary that required re-routing due to failure from landslide, flooding, and intense precipitation. Pará and São Paulo see the greatest total cost impacts (exceeding $1.9 billion USD if all disrupted routes fail). 11The Observatory of Economic Complexity, “Soybeans in Brazil,” Feb. 2022. https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral- product/soybeans/reporter/bra 12Recent records indicate that single event repairs can range from just over US$ 2,000 to over US$ 3 million. The World Bank, “Improving Climate Resilience of Federal Road Network in Brazil,” May 2019 13A total of 31 export routes, accounting for most soybean export in the country during 2020-2021, were assessed using baseline transportation and export data from D. L. Salin, “Soybean Transportation Guide: Brazil 2020,” United States Department of Agriculture, Aug. 2021. 14 The identification of network segments exposed to disruption was based on geospatial overlay with international hazard datasets: (i) landslide risk from the Global Landslide Hazard Map published by the World Bank (2021) https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/search/dataset/0037584/; (ii) flood risk from the high-resolution global flood hazard model developed by Sampson et al. (2015) “A high-resolution global flood hazard model,” Water Resources Research, 51(9), 7358–7381. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016954; and (iii) projections of future intense precipitation for the 2040 decade, based on CMIP5 RCP8.5 scenario using the “wettest five-day period” metric from NASA’s Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled Projections (NEX-GDDP) https://www.nccs.nasa.gov/services/data-collections/land-based-products/nex-gddp. 3 In Pará high potential detour costs are due to the sparseness of the national road network in the State, leading to very long detours. In São Paulo (and to a lesser extent, Paraná), high costs are due to the State having the greatest number of road segments exposed to high and very high landslide susceptibility, flooding, and intense precipitation and the importance of its ports as destination for several of the soybean export routes assessed. Mato Grosso, with the greatest total export of soybeans of any State, has relatively lower risks from landslide susceptibility, reducing its overall burden. Figure 3. Estimated State-level costs resulting from route disruption. The origin, destination, route traveled, and segments considered in the drop-link analysis are also shown for each of the 33 routes. Table 1. Priority Segments for Resilience Investment Route ID Origin → Destination Annual Volume (kt) Disruption Cost (% of Optimal) Priority Level 27 Sorriso → Itaituba 6,933 152%** High 29 Sorriso → Santarém 5,264 59%** High 28 Sorriso → Porto Velho 7,318 34%* Medium Notes: Full route-level results are provided in Annex Table A1. 4 WAY FORWARD Given the clear economic imperative to address the exposure and vulnerability of transport infrastructure in Brazil to climate and natural hazards, the way forward should focus investments on climate-resilient transport for sustainable services, trade, and logistics. Transitioning from an asset-level to a systems-level approach, considering corridor development would improve resilience planning. Resilient transport investments program should be designed following the life-cycle approach15 targeting the 5 pillars of: (1) system planning and financing, (2) engineering and design, (3) operations and maintenance, (4) contingency planning, and (5) institutional capacity and coordination. The following three recommendations for improving resilient transport investment Brazil cover these five pillars. 1. Develop proactive investment programs to address climate adaptation for key transport assets and along key economic corridors . To build resilience in Brazil’s transport infrastructure as it faces increasing climate risks, it is essential to adopt a forward-looking investment approach targeting vulnerable assets and critical logistics corridors. Applying the first two pillars of the resilience life-cycle approach, proactive interventions—such as landslide prevention and drainage upgrades—can reduce economic impacts across Brazil’s federal road network by 5 to 50 percent.16 Achieving Brazil’s sustainable development goals by 2030 will require an estimated investment of US$ 434 billion in road infrastructure (or 17.8 percent of GDP). This figure includes a reference scenario assuming full coverage of the Rural Access Index, which would require US$ 155 billion in new infrastructure, US$ 70 billion to maintain the existing network, and US$ 108 billion to replace assets that reach their end of life before 2030. These values are calculated based on historic climate conditions. Given the country’s vast territory, natural connectivity through rivers, and environmental constraints, a more targeted approach that does not necessarily achieve 100 percent Rural Access Index by road is likely to be more appropriate. Under this targeted investment scenario, the additional cost of US$ 20 billion needed to ensure the resilience of road investments to 2030 is marginal (with another US$ 34 billion needed to ensure resilience up to 2040). Much of this investment will be focused on landslide prevention and the adaptation of drainage network along roadways to ensure a larger discharge capacity that can respond to increased flooding risks. However, effective prioritization of these investments hinges on the ability to systematically assess asset vulnerability and risk. To that end, resilience should be embedded as a core decision-making criterion in infrastructure planning processes. Road Asset Management Systems (RAMS) can serve as critical tools in this effort, by integrating asset condition data with geospatial climate hazard mapping and vulnerability assessments. This integration enables the identification of high-risk segments and supports the targeting of investments based on both structural condition and projected climate impacts. To operationalize such systems, robust data collection, interagency information sharing, and institutional coordination are essential— 15 Keou, O. et al. (2025). Disaster and Climate-Resilient Transport Guidance Note, DC: World Bank, 16 The World Bank, “Improving Climate Resilience of Federal Road Network in Brazil,” The World Bank, May 2019 5 highlighting the need for strong governance mechanisms and capacity-building across relevant entities (Pillar 5 of the resilience life-cycle approach). Specifically for soybean exports, focusing proactive investments programs in climate adaptation on key economic corridors can have positive economic returns of US$ 2 in benefits for each US$ 1 invested in adaptation. Total adaptation investment needs for the economic corridors total US$ 470 million with potential benefits of US$ 980 million over a 20-year period. Out of the 57 total segments exposed, there is only 1 segment that costs more to proactively reduce landslide impacts than to repair and re-route.17 If factoring in the cost from disruption to the movement of other goods and people on these corridors, the economic returns are likely to be even higher. These results highlight the need for a comprehensive approach to identifying areas of risk and where proactive upgrades are needed, as well as the resulting repair and disruption costs. Planning is essential to prioritize resilient interventions based on risk, asset criticality, and cost-benefit analysis. Continued investment in these areas and other emergency and hazard response capabilities can further reduce the potential hazard impacts under current and future climate change conditions. These findings reinforce the need for a comprehensive, risk-informed planning approach that combines physical asset condition, climate vulnerability, and economic impact analysis. Embedding these criteria into national investment strategies and asset management frameworks will be key to ensuring the resilience and reliability of Brazil’s transport infrastructure under future climate scenarios. 2. Invest in more frequent and more effective routine road maintenance . Good maintenance and asset management is critical for creating resilient roads (Pillar 3 of the resilience life-cycle approach). The increasing frequency and severity of natural hazards due to climate change contributes to a faster degradation of roads. Figure 4 compares the deterioration of road quality over time under two scenarios: with and without climate change. The solid line represents the baseline scenario, while the dotted line illustrates the accelerated deterioration resulting from climate impacts, including heavier rainfall and higher temperatures. Figure 4a shows that road conditions decline more rapidly under the climate change scenario, leading to a significantly shorter service life. More routine maintenance helps reduce and slow down deterioration, as illustrated in Figure 4b, leading to lower costs in the long-term by up to 40 percent compared to current strategies of neglecting roads until they reach a critically dilapidated 17 The upfront costs of proactive investment will vary by route because each route has a unique number of segments exposed to landslide, flooding and/or future intense precipitation risks. To evaluate whether the combined cost of re-routing and repairs for each segment would exceed the costs of proactive mitigation measures and reduced re-routing impacts, two analyses were done. First, the cost of upgrading a route (average cost per spot of $100,450 USD) and the resulting reduction in impact was computed for both a 5 percent and 50 percent reduction in impacts (this was estimated by reducing the re-routing cost by 5 percent and 50 percent). Then, this cost, for each route, was compared to the reactive approach – which was calculated as the cost of fixing a segment once the damage has occurred (average cost of $492,910 USD) and the re-routing cost resulting from perturbation. 6 state.18 The economic case of better maintenance has been widely confirmed with rehabilitation savings raging from US$ 6 to US$ 1019 even without accounting for climate change. Figure 4. Climate change impacts on road deterioration and service life (a) without and (b) with routine maintenance. Better road conservation also enables points of obstruction or segments in need of improvement to be readily identified. Resilient maintenance and operations can be designed under multi-year performance- based contracts (such as CREMA “Contrato de Recuperação e Manutenção”) to mobilize private sector investment to proactively integrate climate-resilient maintenance measures. In Brazil, the implementation of a new generation of CREMA contracts can introduce a basic Climate Risk and Resilience Management Plan as a contractor obligation, thereby supporting long-term sustainability.20 Additionally, RAMS should support effective maintenance and rehabilitation of resilient assets by incorporating data on climate vulnerability and allows for transparency and data shareability among road sector stakeholders. Engaging the private sector through long-term, performance-based maintenance contracts can enhance the efficiency, reliability, and sustainability of service delivery. These contractual models promote lifecycle-based planning, ensure more predictable financing needs, and create incentives for preserving asset condition over time. In parallel, the inclusion of community-based microenterprises for routine and localized maintenance activities—such as debris clearance and minor drainage works—can expand service coverage in remote or underserved areas while generating local employment and fostering social inclusion. 18Jackson, N. Mike, Deepak Dave, Peter E. Sebaaly, and Gail L. Porrit. “Preventive surface treatments versus traditional corrective maintenance measures.” In Transportation Research Circular No. E-C078: Roadway Pavement Preservation 2005: Papers from the First National Conference on Pavement Preservation, Kansas City, Missouri October 31 – November 1, 2005. pg. 120-131. 19Ogita,Satoshi; Palsson,Gylfi; Mills,Leslie Nii Odartey. Assessing Economic Efficiency of Long-Term Road Asset Management Strategies (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. 20 “Diaz Fanas, Guillermo; Xiong, Jing; Gall, Helen. 2025. Transport Resilience Financing, Resources and Opportunities. © World Bank. 7 3. Prepare emergency response plans to minimize the impact of disruptions should they occur. Effective emergency response mechanisms in the transport sector are critical to minimizing economic losses due to traffic disruptions. Our analysis suggests that increasing the response time to address transport disruption in major economic corridors from 1 day to 2 days could have an economic impact of more than US$ 900 million over a 20-year horizon. Emergency response investment may include ensuring the availability of proper equipment to respond to emergencies such as emergency vehicles, heavy machinery and spare materials. Emergency response can be designed using stand-by contracts with revolving clauses for road maintenance, which can be activated using a parametric approach, allowing engaged contractors to amend contracts and respond to disasters through cross-mobilization or subcontracting. Road authorities must establish an emergency response central unit in charge to develop emergency response plans and communication protocols, with strong cooperation and coordination with other emergency and disaster stakeholders (such as Civil Defense and Meteorological and Geological Services) to develop early warning systems and road weather information systems that can be integrated in decision-making protocols for road closures. To accelerate complex interventions, Brazil would benefit from more agile procurement and financial management frameworks. Tools such as pre-approved contracts, contingency budgets, and emergency protocols can significantly reduce response times for events beyond routine debris removal. Private sector participation—via framework or performance-based contracts—can also support timely maintenance and emergency works. And institutional readiness can be strengthened through ex-ante planning tools, such as climate risk maps developed with civil defense and transport agencies, and stand-by contracts with flexible clauses for rapid mobilization and scope adjustment. 8 Table A2. Route-specific information for soybean export and estimated impacts from disruptions. Disruption / detour cost under current Route Information Optimal route (no disruptions) exposure conditions Increase in intense (average of all segment losses) precipitation of ≥20% compared to Total annual Estimated Total annual Total daily Total annual Total daily Percent of the historical Destination baseline along # Origin City volume, 2020-2021 distance cost (2020 US$ cost (2020 cost (2020 cost (2020 optimal Port route? (thousand tonnes) (km) millions) US$ millions) US$ millions) US$ millions) route (%) 1 Cruz Alta, RS Rio Grande 14,509 477 761 2.09 159 0.44 21 No 2 Sorriso, MT Santos 3,852 2,015 621 1.70 51 0.14 8 Yes 3 Sorriso, MT Paranaguá 3,723 2,178 649 1.78 34 0.09 5 Yes 4 Rio Verde, GO Santos 6,163 1,005 495 1.36 83 0.23 17 Yes 5 Rio Verde, GO Paranaguá 5,007 1,261 505 1.38 21 0.06 4 Yes 6 Londrina, PR Paranaguá 4,109 519 234 0.64 31 0.08 13 Yes 7 Mamborê, PR Paranaguá 3,081 569 175 0.48 14 0.04 8 Yes 8 Uberaba, MG Santos 3,852 565 239 0.66 71 0.20 30 Yes 9 Assis Chateaubriand, PR Paranaguá 2,953 632 168 0.46 14 0.04 8 Yes 10 São Desidério. BA Salvador 8,474 1,791 1,366 3.74 92 0.25 7 Yes 11 Primavera do Leste, MT Santos 3,081 1,662 358 0.98 36 0.10 10 Yes 12 Primavera do Leste, MT Paranaguá 2,825 1,918 379 1.04 6 0.02 2 Yes 13 Maracaju, MS Paranaguá 4,494 1,093 393 1.08 17 0.05 4 Yes 14 Maracaju, MS Santos 4,109 1,094 360 0.99 53 0.14 15 Yes 15 Assis Chateaubriand, PR Santos 2,054 969 159 0.44 3 0.01 2 Yes 16 Cristalina, GO Santos 2,439 949 208 0.57 37 0.10 18 Yes 17 Cornélio Procópio, PR Paranaguá 2,311 571 119 0.33 12 0.03 10 Yes 18 Castro, PR Paranaguá 2,568 260 93 0.26 14 0.04 15 Yes 19 Guarapuava, PR Paranaguá 2,953 351 135 0.37 20 0.05 15 Yes 20 São Gabrieldo Oeste, MS Santos 3,081 1,199 259 0.71 35 0.09 13 Yes Disruption / detour cost under current Route Information Optimal route (no disruptions) exposure conditions Increase in intense (average of all segment losses) precipitation of ≥20% compared to Total annual Estimated Total annual Total daily Total annual Total daily Percent of the historical Destination baseline along # Origin City volume, 2020-2021 distance cost (2020 US$ cost (2020 cost (2020 cost (2020 optimal Port route? (thousand tonnes) (km) millions) US$ millions) US$ millions) US$ millions) route (%) 22 Canarana, MT Santos 4,237 1,634 554 1.52 53 0.14 10 Yes 24 Canarana, MT Paranaguá 3,723 1,890 493 1.35 5 0.01 1 Yes 25 Tupanciretã, RS Rio Grande 3,210 457 147 0.40 32 0.09 22 No 26 Chopinzinho, PR Paranaguá 2,183 522 125 0.34 12 0.03 10 Yes 27 Sorriso, MT Itaituba 6,933 884 490 1.34 744 2.04 152 No 28 Sorriso, MT Porto Velho 7,318 1,800 922 2.53 318 0.87 34 Yes 29 Sorriso, MT Santarém 5,264 1,340 494 1.35 293 0.80 59 No Notes: Disruptions calculated using segment impassability for individual segments exposed to flooding and landslides (current exposure) and landslides in regions with intense precipitation increases (2040 decade exposure). A total of 31 routes were considered, but results are only included for locations with damages along the road network. 1 © 2025 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433 Internet: https://www.worldbank.org/transport Standard Disclaimer This work is a product of the staff of The International Bank of Reconstruction and Development/World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 3.0 IGO license (CC BY- NC 3.0 IGO) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/igo/deed.en. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work for noncommercial purposes, under the following conditions: Attribution Please cite the work as follows: Fonseca, Tais, and Joanna Moody. 2025. The Economic Case for Reducing Vulnerability of Transport Infrastructure to Natural Hazards. Brazil Transport Sector Note, Washington DC: World Bank. License: Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial CC BY-NC 3.0 IGO. Translations If you create a translation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This translation was not created by the Transport unit or the World Bank and should not be considered an official World Bank translation. Transport and the World Bank shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation. Adaptations If you create an adaptation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This is an adaptation of an original work by the World Bank. Views and opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by the World Bank. Copyright Statement The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly.