Top 10 countries by road quality
Top 10 Countries by Road Quality (Latest Comparable Global Metric)
This expert overview ranks the world’s leaders in road surface and network quality using the latest globally comparable indicator available across 140+ economies: the “Quality of Roads” score (1–7 scale) from the World Economic Forum (WEF) Global Competitiveness Report 2019. While newer logistics datasets exist, no post-2019 worldwide update of the exact “road quality” question has been released at the same coverage.
How the ranking is measured
- Indicator: WEF GCI “Quality of Roads,” scale 1 (low) to 7 (high), country-level perceptions from a large executive survey.
- Coverage: 141 economies (latest global wave: 2019). Ensures cross-country comparability.
- Why use it: It remains the only single, globally harmonized “road quality” score for so many countries.
- Limitations: Perception-based; does not directly measure pavement IRI, lane-km, or maintenance backlog.
- Update cadence: The specific road-quality item has not been re-released post-2019 in a globally comparable form.
For post-2019 developments, treat LPI 2023 Infrastructure as directional context rather than a substitute for the road-quality score.
Top 10 Countries by Road Quality (WEF “Quality of Roads”, 1–7)
| Rank | Country | Score (1–7) | Notes |
|---|
What sets the leaders apart — concise country insights
1) Singapore (6.5/7)
Compact geography, high traffic density, and disciplined asset management enable consistent pavement quality. Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) and strict vehicle policies dampen peak congestion, reducing rutting and surface distress. Design standards emphasize drainage and life-cycle cost optimization.
Transferable idea: Treat right-of-way as a premium resource; price scarcity and reinvest in state-of-good-repair.
2) Netherlands (6.4/7)
Dense motorway grid with top-tier maintenance cycles, rut-resistant mixes adapted to heavy trucking, and meticulous winter operations on critical corridors. Strong data governance (pavement condition monitoring) informs timely resurfacing.
Transferable idea: Make condition data the core of funding allocation to prevent deferred-maintenance spirals.
3) Switzerland (6.3/7)
Challenging alpine terrain met with premium engineering: long tunnels, avalanche and slope protections, and conservative design lives. Funding stability and tight construction QA/QC keep surfaces smooth despite freeze-thaw cycles.
Transferable idea: Fund resilience features (drainage, geotechnics) as first-order pavement-life drivers, not “extras.”
4) Hong Kong SAR (6.1/7)
High-spec urban expressways and tunnels with rigorous asset inspections. Land scarcity pushes vertical solutions (flyovers, undersea tunnels) with robust ventilation, waterproofing, and surface standards.
Transferable idea: Urban motorways require capital-intensive structures; budget for long-term O&M from day one.
5) Japan (6.1/7)
Expressway concessions (e.g., NEXCOs) tie user revenues to asset performance. Pavement design accounts for seismic events and frequent precipitation; rapid post-event rehabilitation practices minimize roughness spikes.
Transferable idea: Performance-linked operators + emergency rehab playbooks = smoother networks over time.
6) Austria (6.0/7)
Toll-funded ASFINAG operates motorways with long-tunnel portfolios and alpine designs. Consistent resurfacing schedules maintain skid resistance and IRI targets despite winter stressors.
Transferable idea: Dedicated road-funding streams stabilize multi-year preservation programs.
7) Portugal (6.0/7)
Large 2000s–2010s PPP and EU-funded upgrades built modern corridors across varied terrain. While volumes are lower than core EU freight hubs, the main axes retain high surface standards.
Transferable idea: Use PPPs selectively where demand and maintenance incentives align with public goals.
8) United Arab Emirates (6.0/7)
Rapid greenfield build-out of multi-lane arterials and inter-emirate corridors with generous cross-sections and high-quality materials; designs handle extreme heat and sand abrasion.
Transferable idea: Calibrate binder grades and surface textures for desert climates to curb oxidation and polish.
9) South Korea (5.9/7)
National expressways integrate intelligent transport systems (ITS) and heavy-vehicle controls; freight corridors get frequent resurfacing to preserve evenness and noise limits.
Transferable idea: Targeted heavy-freight management protects pavements and safety outcomes.
10) Oman (5.7/7)
Newer high-spec corridors connect coastal and interior hubs; engineering addresses steep grades and flash-flood drainage. Low freeze-thaw stress helps surfaces maintain condition once built to spec.
Transferable idea: On new networks, spend early on proper subgrade/drainage to lock in decades of quality.
Why rankings shift (or don’t)
Road-quality leaders tend to combine: (1) stable funding that avoids deferred maintenance; (2) data-driven preservation (routine condition surveys, IRI/skid tracking); (3) climate-specific materials and drainage; (4) strong governance with accountability for performance; and (5) traffic management (pricing, freight controls) that reduces rutting and structural fatigue.
Sources (clickable)
- World Economic Forum — Global Competitiveness Report 2019 hub (GCI 4.0) and Appendix A: GCI methodology.
- Country road-quality list (WEF indicator replication) — TheGlobalEconomy.com: Roads quality (2019, 1–7).
- World Bank — Logistics Performance Index (LPI) 2023 (infrastructure pillar used for post-2019 context).
Note on recency (as of Sep 25, 2025): the specific WEF “Quality of Roads” indicator has not been republished post-2019 with the same global coverage; newer logistics datasets complement but do not replace the road-quality score.
