How can climate resilience be ‘inclusive’ at the municipal level?

There are increasing social, economic, and political inequalities in Indian cities which lead to underserved populations getting pushed to city peripheries in environmentally degraded or hazardous areas. Multiple studies have proven that these areas are most vulnerable to climate disasters.

When climate actions are targeted in these locations, various challenges are faced on the ground. Through WRI India's engagement in select vulnerable neighbourhoods in Mumbai, it was realised that several gaps in the existing governance systems in such areas pose a major hurdle to inclusive climate actions.

Two of these locations were in the P/N and M/E wards of Mumbai, where an attempt was made to upgrade open spaces with nature-based solutions for climate adaptation. Both these wards have high-density populations, insecure tenures, and inadequate amenities, and are also most vulnerable to consistent climate disasters caused due to flood and heat risks.

The common necessity that was highlighted was the need for a safe public space for recreational activities including playing, group studying, congregating, and walking amongst others.

The WRI India’s project objective was to increase the green cover of dense residential settlements and integrate nature-based solutions to increase the resilience of these areas, build recreational spaces, and in the process create a road map for inclusive climate adaptation actions. It partnered with Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA) and Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) as local partners active in the ward. Their previous experience of working in the neighbourhoods helped leverage existing friendships with the communities to co-create a plan to address climate issues. Through workshops with community youth groups, society federations, co-operative societies, and women’s organizations, WRI India was able to understand residents’ needs and inadequacies in infrastructure services. The common necessity that was highlighted was the need for a safe public space for recreational activities including playing, group studying, congregating, and walking amongst others.

Urban greening was identified as a strategy which resonated with the youth, through which they could claim the space^[1] for recreational needs. The project involved working on six sites in R&R colonies, informal settlements, and municipal schools to transform underutilised, derelict areas into safe, vibrant, accessible, and shaded public spaces. There were challenges in addressing the existing lack of services such as water, drainage, solid waste management, footpaths, etc. in the process.

Apart from the lack of per capita open space provision in low-income areas which BMC attempts to acquire by implementing the Development Plan (DP) 2014-34, there are various on-ground upgradation initiatives by communities that are instrumental in upgrading smaller plots and interstitial spaces that may not be captured in a DP. Supporting such initiatives can help strengthen community cohesion, create hierarchies of open spaces that are well-knit and ensure long-term climate resilience.

The project involved working on six sites in R&R colonies, informal settlements, and municipal schools to transform underutilised, derelict areas into safe, vibrant, accessible, and shaded public spaces.

Following are some suggestions that municipal entities can play a key role in encouraging community-led open space upgradation projects at the local level, thereby increasing inclusive effort:

1. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) through a community cell: For the development of public open spaces, several departments can get involved at the ward-level such as gardens, stormwater drainage, solid waste management, sewerage operations, roads and traffic. These may also include education, or the health department based on the intent of the project. It would help to have a single window at the ward office and an SOP to guide community representatives in a stepwise manner to help them realise their vision. This community-facing cell, through the SOP, could guide community representatives in validating the plan, help in understanding which departments would be relevant to their project, answer FAQs, collaborate to oversee the progress and include contacts of resource persons.

2. Awareness and feedback drives: A platform to invite inputs from the larger neighbourhood needs to be organised before commencing the pre-conceptualisation stage of the public project. Depending upon the scale of the project, awareness of its initiation can be announced in the relevant catchment zone. For example, for a plot less than 500 square meters, a catchment of 500 mts around the plot can be targeted to spread awareness and invite suggestions. These could be communicated in the form of signages outside the plots, published on official websites and spread through local intel, giving contact details of project leads. This would help in gathering support and seeking opinions about the realistic needs of the neighbourhood.

3. Stakeholder workshops for conflict resolution: In-person stakeholder workshops with community members can be hosted by relevant municipal departments. For example, during the projects at P/N and M/E wards, the Garden department and Tree Authority hosted a couple of stakeholder workshops and consequent smaller meetings with community representatives, NGOs, design and biodiversity experts and other relevant departments to resolve challenges on ground. This helped garner confidence amongst the communities in achieving success.

4. Formally appointing NGOs/CBOs as community mobilisers: NGOs, community mobilisers, and expert negotiators need to be an integral part of carrying out public projects, to make sure that community concerns are raised and opportunities for decision-making are available at every stage of the project. Often, after initial meetings with community members, projects are implemented without further community engagement during the execution stages. This distance, from vision to execution and project realization, creates a sense of doubt and in turn, causes detachment from the project. This can eventually lead to a lack of ownership and consequently affect long-term sustenance.

5. Participatory budget and funding: Ward-level participatory budgeting processes can be formally introduced to reflect on the priorities of community members through needs-based assessments. For example, adequate provision of recreational spaces may take precedence over road widening activities based on local needs and should therefore be reflected in that ward’s budget. Budget heads that are directed towards aiding maintenance and awareness can be appropriately used for low-income areas that need them the most. CSR funds or donations that are received by the municipal corporation can be pooled and channelised in prioritized locations. A dashboard to transparently display these pledges can be created by the corporation, to ensure that the grant recipients are deserving of this support.

6. Inclusive tendering: Government tender documents for the development of large public plots, should be cognizant of local SMEs getting priority if they belong to the neighbourhood. Contractors that employ service staff like gardeners and gatekeepers, local artists and designers, and local labour should be given priority in the tendering process to encourage generating local livelihoods.

7. Representation of diverse individuals: It is important to identify whether the local community organisations are themselves inclusive, in terms of caste, class, religion, language, culture, colour, race, gender, age, and ability. A socially inclusive environment needs to be created right from the composition of the organisation, to creating equitable processes for active participation or feedback from diverse groups, across all phases (conceptual, preparatory, design, execution and continuous monitoring) of the project.

8. Monitoring impact due to inclusive processes: A monitoring and evaluation framework and system needs to be set up, with indicators in the SOP, to check the impact of the implementation of how successfully climate resilience is created through social cohesion and environmental enhancement.

Achieving climate resilience through inclusive measures at the municipal level requires a comprehensive approach that addresses the social, economic and political inequalities prevalent in our cities. Climate adaptation in vulnerable areas underscores the importance of community engagement, local partnerships, and tailored strategies. Enhancing green spaces, integrating nature-based solutions, and addressing infrastructure deficiencies such as water and waste management with inclusive tendering practices and robust monitoring mechanisms are essential to empower underserved populations. It can also aid in fostering climate actions that prioritise the needs of vulnerable communities and building resilient urban environments for all.

Deepti Talpade is a Program Lead for Urban Development and Resilience at WRI India.

Lubaina Rangwala is Program Head, Urban Development and Resilience with the Sustainable Cities and Transport team at WRI India

^[1] Previous attempts to claim space by youth have taken place at M/E ward by Youth for Voluntary Unity and Action. (YUVA, 2018)

• Developing and Emerging Economies
• Climate Change
• India
• Budgeting
• challenges
• Cities
• Climate
• community
• Development
• empowerment
• engagement
• Governance
• greening
• inclusivity
• inequalities
• infrastructure
• Monitoring
• Mumbai
• nature
• Partnerships
• populations
• projects
• resilience
• solutions
• tendering

The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

PREV NEXT