Urban planning needs to be climate sensitive
The recent extreme heat in North India and the cyclonic event in the Bay of Bengal underscore India’s particular vulnerability to the climate crisis. India’s cities bear the brunt of this, with their large concentration of people, infrastructure, and economic activities heightening their vulnerability. While developing countries continue to struggle to recognise the climate crisis as an issue to integrate into their spatial plans and policies, a few developed nations have made it obligatory.
Cities are also significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. Addressing this crisis requires aligning India’s urban planning with climate-sensitive approaches to build resilient cities. Kochi, Mumbai, Delhi, and Port Blair have incorporated climate crisis concerns into their spatial planning. While Gujarat created a climate cell at the state level, Ahmedabad did this at the city level to implement its Climate Action Plan and prepared its first heat action plan in 2013. On the other hand, many Indian cities continue to lack safeguards in their local policies. Cities like Panjim, Visakhapatnam, and Coimbatore, for instance, are extremely vulnerable geographies but are not conducting vulnerability assessments.
In India, spatial planning policies are under the purview of Union, state, and local governments. The 74th Constitutional Amendment mandates state and local governments to create development plans based on policies laid down by, and with funding from, the Union government. However, planning has been relegated to the sole purview of state governments and their agencies, despite the 74th Amendment mentioning local municipal governments. This is largely due to limited capabilities and understanding. These development plans include long-term (20-25 years) focus on socio-economic aspects and spatial distribution of land uses, and short-term (5-7 years) city development plans focusing on urban infrastructure, service delivery, and community participation. These plans are supported by the Urban and Regional Development Plans Formulation and Implementation (URDPFI) guidelines. However, worsening climate crisis impacts necessitate updating these policies to integrate climate-sensitive elements effectively. Action is required at all levels — Union and state for policy development, determining technical and structural standards, and ensuring implementation by relevant agencies specified under the 74th Amendment.
Planning for climate resilience changes continuously and needs review. Improving the skills of city-level stakeholders is necessary to incorporate climate data into planning procedures. This entails making climate data accessible and developing the ability to use it. Given the scale of planning, master plans by themselves cannot address environmental challenges. For effective change, local area planning, and citizen involvement must be integrated. Further, a one-size-fits-all strategy won’t work. To illustrate, Mumbai prioritises managing housing density, Chennai focuses on flood mitigation measures, and inland cities like Delhi, on heritage preservation, green cover or urban expansion and urban heat island management.
The significance of public consultation processes cannot be overstated in climate-sensitive planning. While horizontal coordination between governments and stakeholders is frequently mentioned, the voices of communities for resilience are occasionally disregarded. The preparation of master plans include public engagement procedures. However, they usually take place after the plan is created. Community input must be considered from the beginning. Establishing crosssectoral arrangements is essential. The implementation of climate-resilient projects can be facilitated by paving the way for more integrated and effective governance structures by breaking down silos and promoting cross-sectoral collaboration.
The language of the planning laws needs to be changed fundamentally as physical infrastructure is the focus. Other factors related to industry, such as transportation, street patterns, and mobility, should also be taken into consideration. Addressing capacity gaps in climate-sensitive planning initiatives and the need for institutional frameworks remains crucial for climate-proofing cities.