Our paved road infrastructure constitutes a massive investment. Preservation of the asset value is achieved by timely and cost-effective maintenance. This paper first considers the close relationship between infrastructure assets and economic growth, and identifies the role of maintenance in privatization of road infrastructure. It then describes the four basic alternative approaches to carrying out infrastructure maintenance: (a) in-house, (b) force account, (c) end result based contract, and (d) long term performance based contract. In determining which approach is best for an agency, a number of influencing factors are discussed, including type of asset(s) and condition, size and resources of the road authority, past history and experience, political environment and degree of risk. As well, agency policies and objectives which can impact on the approach chosen are discussed, as are the key features, advantages and limitations of each approach. Finally, an example of a long term performance based contract for maintenance management system from Australia is provided in the paper.