Adapting infrastructure to changing climatic conditions: the case of transport infrastructure in Mongolia

This policy paper analyses the mainstreaming of climate resilience into Mongolia's transport infrastructure before the bulk of the country's planned network is built. Produced under the climate resilience pillar of the Sustainable Infrastructure Programme in Asia (SIPA) — supported by Germany's International Climate Initiative — and prepared in close cooperation with Mongolia's Ministry of Road and Transport, it draws on a series of multi-stakeholder policy dialogues to assess how a country warming three times faster than the global average (over +2°C between 1940 and 2015, potentially exceeding +5°C by 2100 under a high-emission scenario) can avoid locking in long-term vulnerabilities. It situates the challenge against Mongolia's Vision 2050 ambitions to add 8,831 km of new roads and 4,838 km of new railways, backed by a 2024 parliamentary earmark of USD 900 million (12% of the state budget), in a sparse network where roughly 90% of roads remain unpaved and vast rural areas still lack year-round access. It maps six key climate hazards — dzuds, heavy precipitation, flash floods, droughts and dust storms, freeze–thaw cycles, and permafrost thaw — and reviews three priority entry points: climate risk assessments, technical standards and regulations, and climate-resilient investment frameworks.

The paper finds that climate resilience is not yet embedded in Mongolia's transport policies, design standards, or investment practices, even as climate-related disasters have risen 68% over the past 15 years and are projected to grow a further 23–60% by 2050. Average annual transport losses from natural hazards already exceeded USD 0.9 million in 2023 and could reach USD 13.4 million per year — roughly three times the Asia-Pacific average as a share of GDP, with roads and railways absorbing 77% and 21% of damages respectively — while more than 1,000 km of roads built between 2011 and 2018 have already been severely damaged by flooding and permafrost degradation. The critical gaps are institutional rather than technical: standards still rely on historical rather than forward-looking climate data, no legal requirement mandates climate risk screening in project preparation, and domestically financed projects apply far weaker appraisal processes than multilateral-funded ones, with public investment screening assigning only 6–9% weight to alignment with national strategies. With much of the network still unbuilt, the paper argues the window to act cost-effectively is now — strengthening climate risk information, mandating asset-level risk assessments for major projects, updating standards and procurement systems, and aligning investment screening with adaptation goals — given World Bank estimates that resilient infrastructure yields USD 4.2 trillion in net benefits across low- and middle-income countries.