Traditionally, road sector financing in developing countries comes from general budget allocations of a national or local government. Budget allocations to the road sector depend strongly on the total available budget for the year concerned, as well as budget needs in other sectors such as health, education, defense, etc. As a result, budget allocations to the road sector tend to vary from one year to the next, with underfunding tending to be the norm. Especially road maintenance is often underfunded, causing maintenance backlogs and leading to accelerated deterioration of the road network and the need for costly rehabilitation or reconstruction. To address the underfunding and its variability, countries around the world have introduced road funds. Generally, these road funds receive funding from hypothecated or earmarked road user charge revenues. Road user charges refer to taxes and fees that are paid specifically by road users, and may include fuel taxes or levies, vehicle import duties or taxes, road tolls, vehicle technical inspection fees, etc. The earmarking of these road user charges to a road fund introduces a “user pays” principle where road users finance the operation and maintenance of the road network that they make use of. Although road funds may also contribute to road construction and improvement costs, generally, the road fund revenues are insufficient to cover such costs. Therefore, road funds tend to limit themselves to financing the maintenance and, to a certain degree, also the rehabilitation of the road network. Although road funds have remained largely the same in the way that they are financed and the activities that they fund, their management and governance have evolved over time. Distinction is often made between first-generation road funds that focused on earmarking road user charges, and second-generation road funds where greater attention is given to the management of the road fund.