Lifecycle costing rather than lowest-bid procurement is key to sustainable infrastructure. Discuss with reference to modified bitumen technologies.

Lifecycle costing judges a road by what it costs to build, maintain and re-lay over its whole life, not by its price on day one. The Finance Ministry's 2021 reforms backed this idea. They allowed Quality-cum-Cost Based Selection (QCBS) as an alternative to the traditional L1 (lowest-bid) system [1]. Modified bitumen shows why the change matters.

Why lowest-bid procurement fails roads

• Modified bitumen costs more upfront than plain bitumen. Its two main types, Crumb Rubber Modified Bitumen (CRMB) and Polymer Modified Bitumen, are covered by IRC:SP:53 [2].
• Under L1, contractors quote plain bitumen to win the tender. The money saved comes back as potholes, rutting and frequent resurfacing, paid from maintenance budgets.

The case for lifecycle costing

• Durability: bitumen modified with crumb rubber performs better than normal bitumen. CRMB is used in the wearing coat of flexible pavements [2].
• Waste-to-resource: the government accepts that disposing of old tyres is a problem, and CRMB turns scrap tyres into a road material [2]. Waste tyres can be imported to make crumb rubber and CRMB but not pyrolysis oil [3].
• Circular economy: under EPR for Waste Tyres (July 2022), producers are responsible for tyres at the end of their life [4]. Tenders based on lifecycle cost would give crumb rubber a steady market.

Constraints and caveats

• Weak supply pull: pyrolysis is the main way tyres are recycled, and NITI Aayog wants an auditable EPR certificate system [5]. At present, sending tyres to CRMB earns no more credit than cheaper routes.
• Data gaps: lifecycle models need reliable records of how pavements perform and what maintenance costs. Many state PWDs do not keep these records.
• Limited scope: QCBS is allowed only for selected quality-oriented works [1].
• Discretion risk: quality scoring can become subjective unless the criteria are clear and published.

Modified bitumen shows that the cheapest bid often builds the costliest road. MoRTH and state PWDs should specify CRMB for wearing coats on chosen stretches, build databases on pavement performance and keep QCBS scoring transparent. MoEF&CC should tighten EPR as NITI Aayog recommends [5]. This kind of procurement supports SDG 9 (resilient infrastructure) and SDG 12 (responsible consumption), giving India roads that are both durable and circular.