PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BRIDGE STOCK

I. Introduction

Our country, the Philippines, is home to a vast number of bridges along both local and national
road systems. The responsibility for national bridges lies with the national government through
the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). This centralized oversight ensures a
coordinated and strategic approach to planning, constructing, maintaining, and developing
bridges at the national level. Having the DPWH manage national bridges reflects a dedication to
preserving and enhancing essential transportation infrastructure, which is vital for economic
growth, accessibility, and overall mobility.

Bridges are crucial in driving economic growth by acting as key links in the road network. Their
importance lies in enabling smooth traffic flow and connecting various regions, which enhances
the country's overall accessibility and connectivity.

Maintaining in a regular manner is essential for maintaining the strength of bridges and their
parts. This strategy helps prevent further deterioration, ensuring the safety and efficiency of the
structures. It also aids in preserving or even improving their condition over time, allowing them
to fulfill their intended role effectively. Classifying bridges as either permanent or temporary
structures reflects the diverse nature of the infrastructure. Permanent bridges, often constructed
from concrete and steel, are built for long-term use and are expected to last for several decades.
Temporary bridges, like bailey and timber structures, are utilized when a more flexible or short-
term solution is required.

Every bridge type serves a distinct purpose based on factors like location, expected traffic load,
and duration of use. The use of concrete and steel in permanent bridges emphasizes the focus
on durable and sturdy infrastructure, while the use of bailey and timber in temporary bridges
shows adaptability in meeting varying needs.

The typical service life of a permanent bridge can extend up to fifty years, but this doesn't
necessarily mean it must be replaced after that period. Well-designed modern bridges often last
longer than their initial design life, thanks to advancements in engineering, materials, and
construction techniques.

While the overall condition of a bridge is crucial in determining its lifespan, other factors may
also drive the decision to replace a bridge. Changes in road design, updated standards, and
increased traffic volume are all key factors that can influence the replacement decision.

The DPWH has established programs to enhance the quality of the national road network,
acknowledging its vital role in sustaining economic development and linking urban and rural
areas. These initiatives, which focus on asset preservation and network expansion, demonstrate
a commitment to maintaining and improving infrastructure for the benefit of the nation, as
outlined in the following Bridge Program:

1. Asset Preservation

 Retrofitting/Strengthening of Permanent Bridges: It is the modification of

existing bridge structures to make more resistant to seismic activity, ground
motion, or soil failure due to earthquakes.
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 2 of 8

 Rehabilitation/Major Repair of Permanent Bridges: This involves major work

required to restore the structural integrity of a bridge, as well as work
necessary to correct major safety defects.

2. Network Development

 Replacement (Temporary to Permanent): A bridge with a short life span and

with limited loading capacity and restrictions on speed.

 Replacement of Permanent Weak Bridges: A bridge that has an overall

condition of bad and shall have major defects, no longer structurally sound
and are considered to be beyond repair.

 Widening of Permanent Bridges: This involves enhancing the capacity and

capabilities of existing bridges to accommodate increased traffic volumes or
changing infrastructure requirements. Bridge construction can be widening of
the existing or constructing a parallel bridge.

 Constructing of New Permanent Bridges: The construction of permanent

concrete bridge structures along river crossings/fording and upgrading of box
culverts and spillways into standard bridge structure.

II. Bridge Management System (BMS)

In the year 2003, DPWH has established the BMS under the Road Information and Management
Support System (RIMSS-CO7) Project in order to effectively manage the national bridge stock.
It was eventually institutionalized in 2004 thru Department Order (DO) No. 47. BMS bridge data
are annually collected based on the bridge inventory and condition survey being conducted by
the accredited Bridge Inspectors (BIs) from the DPWH District Engineering Offices (DEOs) and
the BMS Regional Coordinators from the DPWH Regional Offices (ROs) who are tasked to
supervise the bridge inventory and condition survey and also manage the quality assurance on
the bridge data.

The collected bridge data from the surveys are encoded in the Bridge Inventory Condition (BIC)
stand-alone program and uploaded in the RBIA, which is the repository of all national road and
bridge data. The BMS team in the Central Office (CO) manages the uploading and quality
assurance of the BMS data, as well as the conduct of the BMS analysis to determine the Bridge
Needs Ratio (BNR) for each bridge to enable the bridges to be ranked and prioritized according
to bridge program.

The funding for the bridge program can come from various sources. It may be included in the
DPWH annual budget under the General Appropriations Act (GAA) or in foreign-assisted
programs. The GAA is the government's annual budget law that specifies the allocation of funds
for different government agencies, while foreign-assisted programs are initiatives supported by
international organizations.

The period from 2005 to 2008 marked a phase of improvement in the conduct of bridge condition
surveys by the DPWH in the Philippines. Several changes were introduced during this timeframe
to enhance efficiency and simplify the inspection process.
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 3 of 8

In 2005, the DPWH issued DO No. 43, which aimed at streamlining and improving the bridge
condition survey process. One of the key changes introduced was the reduction of inspection
types from seven (7) to five (5). This reduction was likely implemented to eliminate overlapping
activities and simplify the required actions during inspections.

In 2009, a new set of Bridge Condition Rating Criteria and Rating Card was introduced. This
likely included updated guidelines and assessment criteria for evaluating the condition of bridges.

The introduction of new condition criteria had been accompanied by training for BIs to ensure
consistent and accurate assessments. Additionally, the surveys were administered by the BMS
Regional Coordinators. This indicates a collaborative and coordinated effort with regional
coordinators overseeing and supporting the survey process.

Following the changes in inspection types and the introduction of new criteria, there was a
significant improvement in the uploading of bridge condition data from the calendar year (CY)
2010 up to present. This suggests that the modifications made to the survey process positively
impacted the efficiency and accuracy of data collection and management.

The BMS was instituted to manage the maintenance/rehabilitation, retrofitting/strengthening,

upgrading and replacement of bridges required to address the deterioration of bridges and to
maintain the bridges to an acceptable standard. It does not directly consider the capacity of a
bridge in traffic or structural terms. It is important to recognize that bridge upgrading and
replacement may occur for other reasons including upgrading of a road link to a higher standard,
increasing traffic density on a bridge, increased traffic loadings (vehicle weight); and changes in
bridge design standards.

Bridges may also be upgraded as part of major upgrading of the roads on which they are located.
Further, upgrading a two-lane road to a divided four lane motorway requires the bridges to be
similarly upgraded though the existing bridges may still be sound and suitable for the current
traffic levels.

Currently, the annual condition survey starts every second quarter of the year, the first three (3)
months is intended for inventory and condition inspection survey and the remaining three (3)
months will be accomplishing the bridge data and uploading, allowing them to complete the task
for a period of six (6) months. These tasks include, among others, inspecting the condition of
bridges, updating the bridge inventory, encoding data, and preparing and uploading the BIC
stand-alone program into the CONFIRM1 for updating the BMS including photographs using the
prescribed format, such as: site visit, mandatory, inventory and defects photos that are file-
named accordingly.

1
CONFIRM is an asset management solution specifically designed to empower public bodies with the insight to make informed
decision on repair, maintenance and investment for critical public infrastructure assets.
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 4 of 8

III. Data Analysis

A. Bridge Inventory

Based on the generated BMS output for CY 2024, the total number of bridges nationwide
is 9,007, with an aggregate length of 414,897.99 linear meters; of which, 8,996 (99.88%)
are classified as permanent bridges having an aggregate length of 414,521.02 linear
meters and only 11 (0.12%), with an aggregate length of 376.97 linear meters, are
considered as temporary bridges.

Table 1 shows the summary of existing national bridges indicating the types of
permanent and temporary bridges with the corresponding number and length by region.
On the other hand, Table 2 shows the breakdown of the existing national bridges by
district and per regional basis.

Majority of the national bridges are concrete type structures, as shown in Table 1, with
a total of 7,590 bridges (326,120.64 linear meters), Steel type structures are 1,406
bridges (88,400.37 linear meters), while Bailey type structures are 11 bridges (913 linear
meters) and no Timber type structures.

The summary by region and by engineering district in Table 2 shows that in terms of
the total number of bridges, Region VIII has registered the highest with 928 bridges,
followed by Region III with 758 bridges and the last two (2) lowest are Region XI and
BARMM with 306 and 184 bridges respectively.

B. Bridge Condition

The overall condition of a bridge is based on the condition of its attributes component.
Table 3 shows the distribution of the bridge condition (good, fair, poor and
bad). Based on the CY 2024 bridge condition survey, the figures indicate that 44.33%
(3,993 bridges) of the total numbers of bridges are in good condition, 48.61% (4,378
bridges) in fair condition, 6.25% (563 bridges) in poor condition, 0.81% (73 bridges) in
bad condition and there are no bridges for further assessment, as illustrated in FIGURE
A below. These figures show that majority of the bridges are in a good to fair state that
requires routine or major maintenance, while poor to bad condition state requires major
maintenance, upgrading or replacement.

Percentage Distribution Per Bridge Condition CY 2024

48.61%
50.00% 44.33%

40.00%
Percentage

30.00%

20.00%
6.25%
10.00%
0.81% 0.00%
0.00%
Good Fair Poor Bad Further
Assessment
Bridge Condition

FIGURE A
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 5 of 8

In general, structures described as “good” are free of defects, those described in “fair”
condition have defects which affect durability, those described as “poor” in condition
have defects which affect the performance and structural integrity of the structure and
those structures described as “bad” are deemed to have major defects and are
considered to be beyond repair.

Structures in good or fair condition that have adequate traffic capacity and adequate load
rating are preserved more easily than they could be rebuilt or replaced. But necessary
action at structures in poor and most especially bad condition may seem to be more
urgent. Bridges in good condition are candidates for routine maintenance actions, those
in fair conditions may receive major repair, poor condition bridges are eligible for
upgrading and bad are for replacement work. The key is that there are separate funds
for each level of work, so that cost effective investments to maintain bridges in good
condition are still made.

The matrix below are the recommended countermeasures:

Bridge
Recommended Countermeasure
Condition
Good Routine Maintenance
Fair Major Maintenance (Repair, Strengthening, Protective Works)
Poor Major Maintenance or Upgrading
Bad Upgrading or Replacement

The list of district engineering offices, with the length and corresponding condition rating,
is found in Table 4.

C. Comparative Report on Bridge Data (2009-2024)

The comparison of the increase or decrease in the number of permanent and temporary
bridges from 2009 as the base year to 2024 is presented in Table 5. This comparative
analysis covers bridges along national roads but it does not include fording, spillways and
overflow structures.

The increase in the aggregate length was due to the replacement of temporary to
permanent bridges which entailed the construction of longer spans and also the
construction of new bridges across river crossings, spillways and newly converted roads.

In general, the annual increase in the total number of bridges and aggregate length is
the result of significant number of bridges that were replaced from temporary to
permanent bridge structures, including those bridges leading to tourist service centers
that were converted into national roads and those converted from local roads to national
roads, respectively. Most of these bridges are locally-funded projects and foreign-assisted
bridge projects as well.

Furthermore, the annual increase/decrease in number of bridges from 2009 to 2024 was
due to the following: a) additional bridges from the newly converted national roads
through Department Orders and legislations, b) newly constructed parallel bridges, c)
newly constructed bridge structures across river crossings including box culverts, d)
replacement of spillways and overflow structures with either permanent or temporary
bridges and e) implementation of the foreign-assisted bridge programs.
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 6 of 8

Regional Summary of Bridge Type According to

Length CY 2007
30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

-
CAR NCR I II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII XIII

Concrete Steel Bailey Timber

FIGURE B

Figure B, based on the succeeding matrix below, shows the length of bridges in linear
meter by region for the year 2007. Concrete type is notably the predominant bridge
structure nationwide, with Region III having the longest aggregate length of 29,622
linear meters while BARMM has the shortest length at 4,943 linear meters.

Concrete is seconded by steel in terms of length. It spans a total of 91,084 linear meters,
wherein the longest length falls in Region I, with a total length of 11,147 linear meters,
and the shortest is at 1,285 linear meters in BARMM.

In terms of temporary bridges, Region IV-B has the longest bailey bridge structure of
363 linear meters; whereas, Region IV-B has also the longest timber bridge structure of
35 linear meters. Conversely, Region VII has the shortest aggregate bailey bridge
structure at 16 linear meters; while, NCR, Region I, V, III, IV-A, V, VII, IX, X and XIII do
not have any Bailey bridge. Notably, Region IV-B is the only region that has timber bridge.

NCR, Region I, III, IV-A, V, VII, IX, X, and XIII are the regions with 100 percent
permanent bridges, while, Region IV-B has the longest total length of 398 linear meters
of temporary bridges.
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 7 of 8

For 2024, as shown in Figure C, based on Table 1. Region III has the longest aggregate
concrete bridge length at 31,669.14 linear meters. While BARMM has the shortest length
at 5,452.55 linear meters. In terms of steel structures, the longest is 11,298.79 linear
meters in Region I and the shortest is at 1,424.68 linear meters in BARMM.

Chart Title
35,000.00
30,000.00
25,000.00
20,000.00
15,000.00
10,000.00
5,000.00
-

VI

XIII
I
II
III

IX
X
XI
XII
BARMM

V
NIR
CAR
NCR

IV-A
IV-B

VIII
VII
Concrete Steel Bailey Timber

FIGURE C

SUMMARY OF EXISTING NATIONAL BRIDGES (LENGTH AND NUMBER) by TYPE - PER REGION
Table 1
RBIA Generated Report as of October 16, 2024 Unit of Measure: Linear Meter (lm)
Permanent Bridges Temporary Bridges
Grand Total
Region Concrete Steel Total Bailey Timber Total
Number Length Number Length Number Length Number Length Number Length Number Length Number Length
BARMM 155 5,452.55 29 1,424.68 184 6,877.23 0 - 0 - 0 - 184 6,877.23
CAR 255 8,300.87 96 6,358.55 351 14,659.42 2 62.22 0 - 2 62.22 353 14,721.64
NCR 288 28,389.70 19 2,542.35 307 30,932.05 0 - 0 - 0 - 307 30,932.05
NIR 353 12,637.80 79 3,933.44 432 16,571.24 0 - 0 - 0 - 432 16,571.24
I 496 24,928.03 90 11,298.79 586 36,226.82 0 - 0 - 0 - 586 36,226.82
II 452 23,498.80 69 6,659.72 521 30,158.52 0 - 0 - 0 - 521 30,158.52
III 664 31,669.14 93 7,326.14 757 38,995.28 1 14.50 0 - 1 14.50 758 39,009.78
IV-A 614 17,739.09 68 2,784.38 682 20,523.47 0 - 0 - 0 - 682 20,523.47
IV-B 583 21,244.30 72 2,984.45 655 24,228.75 0 - 0 - 0 - 655 24,228.75
V 638 20,756.91 96 4,091.17 734 24,848.08 1 36.80 0 - 1 36.80 735 24,884.88
VI 430 19,300.29 83 5,711.22 513 25,011.51 1 20.50 0 - 1 20.50 514 25,032.01
VII 352 16,192.61 82 4,519.53 434 20,712.14 0 - 0 - 0 - 434 20,712.14
VIII 764 28,341.87 164 9,140.17 928 37,482.04 0 - 0 - 0 - 928 37,482.04
IX 289 12,915.66 79 3,527.47 368 16,443.13 0 - 0 - 0 - 368 16,443.13
X 364 15,299.56 89 4,417.31 453 19,716.87 3 98.25 0 - 3 98.25 456 19,815.12
XI 259 13,338.65 46 2,861.57 305 16,200.22 1 91.65 0 - 1 91.65 306 16,291.87
XII 282 11,710.98 42 1,466.91 324 13,177.89 2 53.05 0 - 2 53.05 326 13,230.94
XIII 352 14,403.84 110 7,352.52 462 21,756.36 0 - 0 - 0 - 462 21,756.36
Grand Total 7,590 326,120.65 1,406 88,400.37 8,996 414,521.02 11 376.97 0 - 11 376.97 9,007 414,897.99

It is apparent that in a period of fifteen (15) years, there has been a significant number
of upgrades that have been implemented which accounts for the decrease in the length
of temporary bridges nationwide from 16,047 linear meters in 2007 down to 376 linear
meters in 2024. On the other hand, there has been a relative increase in the stretch of
permanent bridges in 2024 at 414,521 linear meters from 298,406 linear meters back in
2007.

Also, it is evident that a certain number of regions in the country no longer have
temporary bridges. Among all the regions, Regions III, V, VI, X, XI are the only regions
that has temporary bridges
 2024 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Atlas
Page 8 of 8

Thus, we can simply say that improvements in the national bridge network have truly
come a long way. It doesn’t stop here. The Department still has projects lined up to
continue to enhance the country’s bridge system in accordance to its mandate of
improving the lives of every Filipino, as well as achieving total connectivity, through
quality infrastructure.

D. Target Outcome for National Bridges

DPWH has set three major outcomes that shall be its contribution in achieving the goal
of sustainable development that will improve the life of every Filipino. These include
reduced travel time, improved road quality and safety as well as lives and properties
protected from natural disasters.

To reduce travel time, the agency aims to construct new roads and bridges for a seamless
transport system through the construction of expressways, through Private-Public
Partnership (PPP), new roads to close gaps and missing gaps in the national road
network, by-passes, flyovers and four long-span bridges (inter-island linkage projects).

As a country frequented by various natural disasters, the possibility of another major

disaster in the Philippines is not a matter of where, but when. The Philippines ranked
third among all of the countries with the highest risks worldwide wherein 60% of the
country’s total land area is exposed to multiple hazards, and 74% of the population is
susceptible to their impact. This is largely due to the risk involving coastal hazards such
as typhoons, storm surges and volcanic eruption. Unfortunately, there are no short-term
solutions to the array of challenges the Philippine government faces in terms of coping
with climate change-affected disasters. With this in mind, DPWH aims to build disaster-
resilient structures in calamity-prone area and rehabilitate/strengthen five hundred nine
(509) bridges along the primary roads identified vulnerable area.