The aim of this study ;s to analyze (he im/xICb' of physical rural ilifrastructural expansionrnon the livelihood contexts of rllral people wilh por/ieu/ar reference 10 rural people ofrnMac/Ulkel Woreda, ElIsl Gojjam zone of AmhoT(l regional stale. The study employed bOlhrnql/ll/illltive and quantilalive research approaches. Different loa's of daw col/eelion werernlri(mgu/ated. Results of the sllldy lIrc there/ore: based on in-deplh household and keyrninformant interviews, focus group disclissions. field ohservalions lind household survey.rnSo as 10 broadly analyze lhe issue under study, related literatures have been criticallyrnreviewed and !)lIS[(linable rura/livelihoods approach as an analylicallool has been lIsedrnThe study show~' thai fhe government expansion of physical infrastructures in to ruralrnarea.~ has enabled rural people diversffy their income sources through engagement inrnvariety of livelihood activities. People have created new livelihood activities helped byrnnewly expanded physical infrllstructures. Rural peoples' access to livelihood assets in thernstudy area was found to have been improved (md people acquired several kinds of assetsrnFam the time of physical infrastrucl/lral eXlxmsion onwards.rn711e slUdy also found Ihat physical infrastructural expansion contributed a lot in thernredllclion of poverty in rural areas in a number of ways. I) Rural people are able to widenrnIheir income sources thereby gelling betler income. As people engaged in new incomerngenerating activities, they could eam good incomes which enabled Ihem satisfy Iheir basicrnneeds. save cash money and reserve in kind, pursue further livelihood aclivities. coverrncosls of services (such as hea1lh expemes), and so on. 2) Physical infrastruclllres alsorncontributed 10 the health status of rural people. Pure drink water and rural roads as preÂ·rnrequisites for health posts are essential for healthy and productive rllral man power. 3)rnPhysical infrastructures are also imporlOnt jor raised awareness and good educationalrnprofile ofrllral people in the study area.rnThe study idenlified both negative and positive impacts of physical infrastrllcluralrnexpansion on the social life of the people in the rural area. These impacls were on socialrnnetworks and institutions, on the relationship among rllral people themselves and on thernrelationship between rural people and surrounding urban residents. For instance, thernunbalanced distrib ution of physical inFaslructure across rural localities created inter andrnintra.kebele di~placemenls, that in tlll"/1 affe,:ts peoples 'involvement in the socialrnorganizations of idir, iquib and mahiber. Rural people created and slrengthen their ties,rnthough some others' relationship was disrupted during and after the expansion ofrninfrastructure. The social relationship between rllral people of the study area andrnsUl'I'olllu/ing lIrban dwellers was also found to be facilitated.