Introduction

Port cities have long served as engines of trade, cultural exchange, and urban transformation.^[1] Strategically positioned at the intersections of land and sea trade, they drive national and regional growth through logistics, industrial clustering, and employment. For example, India’s Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority (JNPA), built in 1989 to decongest the Mumbai Port, has become the country’s leading container port, handling nearly 50 percent of containerised cargo at major ports.^[2] Its development marked a pivotal shift in India’s maritime infrastructure, spurring industrial growth and economic activity in the neighbouring Raigad district, particularly in Navi Mumbai.^[3] These efforts are bolstered by Maharashtra’s investment in transformative infrastructure such as the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link, which aims to improve regional connectivity. Similarly, South Africa’s port of Durban, central to the city’s development since the 19^th century,^[4] now accounts for approximately 60 percent of the country’s trade revenue.^[5]

Integrated development models are reshaping the dynamics of port cities. Paradip’s Smart Industrial Port City in Odisha demonstrates the Port and Industry-led City (PILC) approach, which generates coastal jobs, cuts logistics costs, and advances India’s Sagarmala programme for port-led growth.^[6] As part of this strategy, India’s 13 major ports (see Figure 1) form the backbone of national maritime connectivity, collectively driving industrial clustering, trade facilitation, and regional development. Likewise, Abu Dhabi’s Khalifa Port and adjacent industrial zone combine advanced infrastructure, regulatory efficiency, and multimodal connectivity to promote innovation and economic diversification.^[7]

Figure 1: India’s 13 Major Ports

Source: Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways^[8]

Beyond trade, port cities influence urban infrastructure, housing, and services, stimulating broader economic corridors. Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) play a crucial role in aligning port development with city planning and integrating circular economy principles, including waste management, energy efficiency, and resource recovery. However, the effectiveness of this integration often depends on the quality of urban governance. Weak institutional coordination, limited regulatory capacity, and inadequate long-term planning can undermine sustainable and inclusive outcomes.

In the Global South, port cities connect local aspirations with global economic flows, but rapid growth can also lead to environmental degradation, infrastructure strain, and social inequality. The PILC model, with its emphasis on coordinated planning and sectoral integration, offers a pathway to inclusive and resilient development. Historically, planning processes have often excluded Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs), overlooking their land rights, traditional knowledge, and cultural heritage and thereby reinforcing their marginalisation.^[9] Inclusive governance frameworks that centre IPLC voices are essential for equitable and sustainable outcomes.

This paper explores how port cities can harness the blue economy—defined by the World Bank as the “sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods, and ecosystem health”—^[10] to foster inclusive development. It draws on case studies from various countries and policy analyses across three themes: governance, climate resilience, and inclusion. It also studies relevant global cases and experiences to understand the challenges faced by Indian port cities and their success in linking maritime growth with social and environmental goals.

Leveraging the Urban Blue

Once focused primarily on cargo and shipping, these coastal hubs now support a wide range of activities, including fisheries, tourism, manufacturing, and knowledge-based services. Their future prosperity hinges on strategic investments in logistics, human capital, finance, and innovation ecosystems.

Emerging maritime cities, such as Mumbai in India, Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Laem Chabang in Thailand, Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, and Cape Town in South Africa, can draw lessons from global leaders like Singapore, Rotterdam (the Netherlands), and Oslo (Norway). Rotterdam has integrated sustainability and digital technologies to become a smart, green port city.^[11] Oslo, meanwhile, has revitalised its maritime sector through renewable energy and blue economy initiatives, creating opportunities in sustainable shipping and marine tourism.^[12] Likewise, Singapore has strengthened its position as a global maritime hub by advancing decarbonisation, digitalisation, and maritime innovation through initiatives such as the Maritime Singapore Decarbonisation Blueprint and Living Lab.

Indeed, ports are increasingly becoming digital, innovation-driven clusters for sustainable blue growth, spanning sectors such as marine transport and tourism, biotechnology, blue foods, and renewable energy. In the Global South, blue economy sectors are closely tied to community livelihoods and cultural identities.^[13] However, rapid urbanisation, industrial expansion, and infrastructure-led growth often marginalise IPLCs.^[14] These communities—who are longstanding stewards of marine biodiversity—suffer displacement, cultural erosion, and exclusion from governance.^[15] Recognising their rights and traditional knowledge is essential not only for justice but also for building ecological resilience and promoting the legitimacy of development goals.

Sustainable port development requires integrated governance that balances economic growth with environmental protection and social equity. International frameworks, such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 9, 11, 13, and 14),^[16] the Paris Agreement,^[17] and the World Ports Sustainability Program,^[18] offer broad guidance; however, context-sensitive, local action is critical. Many port authorities also align with the UN’s Sustainable Ocean Principles^[19] to promote ethical, transparent, climate-resilient, and inclusive operations. In this context, scholarly literature defines ‘port sustainability’ as “business strategies and activities that address the current and future needs of ports and their stakeholders, while protecting human well-being and maintaining environmental health.”^[20] This reinforces that inclusivity is not just a social imperative but a cornerstone of long-term resilience and competitiveness.

The World Shipping Council’s 2023 rankings of top container ports highlight the growing prominence of emerging port cities in the Global South (see Table 1).^[21] Notably, 28 percent of the ranked ports are from the Global South (excluding China), while China alone accounts for 37 percent of the list,^[22] underscoring its dominance in global trade. Ports in the Global North account for 35 percent. These figures suggest that the traditional Global North-Global South divide is less relevant in the ports sector today, with southern economies proving equally competitive in the global logistics landscape.

According to the rankings, ports such as Jebel Ali (the UAE), Port Klang (Malaysia), Colombo (Sri Lanka), Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam), Mumbai (India), and Manila (Philippines) each handle millions of twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs)^[23] annually,^[24] underscoring their growing role in global trade.^[25] Meanwhile, ports like Hai Phong (Vietnam), Tanger Med (Morocco), and Mundra (India) are emerging as strategic gateways for international commerce.

China, though part of the Global South, is excluded from this analysis due to its well-established maritime dominance through mega ports like Shanghai and Shenzhen.^[26] Its influence, however, extends widely through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has financed port infrastructure across several coastal nations, including Sri Lanka’s Hambantota Port and facilities in Africa.^[27] China’s growing maritime footprint has triggered concerns over debt dependency and sovereignty risks for host countries. While these investments have expanded connectivity, they have also raised concerns about debt sustainability, local economic dependency, and governance challenges in host countries. This further highlights the need to consider social impacts such as land use changes, community displacement, and equitable benefit-sharing in port development.^[28]

In contrast, other Global South port cities, such as those discussed later in this paper, are showcasing their competitive potential by integrating sustainability, innovation, and inclusive blue economy principles into their development strategies. These emerging maritime hubs are not only leveraging their strategic locations but also drawing on local knowledge and adaptive governance to reshape port-led development, paving the way for more equitable and sustainable futures.

Thriving port cities contribute to global trade through efficient, high-performing ports, reflected in high TEU volumes and top-20 Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) rankings, while fostering vibrant, liveable urban environments that drive economic growth, innovation, and inclusion.^[29] They actively integrate sustainability, education, local employment, gender equity, and climate resilience into their blue economy strategies, setting global benchmarks for socially inclusive and environmentally responsible coastal development.

Table 1: 2023 Global Container Port Rankings, TEU Volumes, and Urban Integration Status

Rank	Port Name	Country	2023 Volume (Million TEU)	Thriving Port City?	Urban Integration
11	Jebel Ali, Dubai	UAE	14.47	Yes	Dubai’s main container port, integrated into the city’s global logistics hub
12	Port Klang	Malaysia	14.06	Yes	Malaysia’s busiest port, largely industrial, with partial direct city integration
19	Tanjung Pelepas	Malaysia	10.48	Partial Urban Activity	Efficient transhipment hub; partial urban integration, mainly industrial surroundings
20	Laem Chabang	Thailand	8.87	Partial Urban Activity	Thailand’s main deep-sea port; arterial city development secondary to the port/industrial zone.
23	Tanjung Priok, Jakarta	Indonesia	4.1	Yes	Located in Jakarta, a bustling and densely populated city.
25	Colombo	Sri Lanka	6.94	Yes: Capital City	Located in the capital and largest city, tightly linked to the urban economy.
26	Ho Chi Minh	Vietnam	7.4	Yes	Vietnam’s largest city and trade centre.
31	Manila	Philippines	5.21	Yes: Capital City	Central port in the capital, dense urban integration.
33	Hai Phong	Vietnam	5.57	Yes	Vietnam’s second-largest port city, has strong urban growth tied to the port.
35	Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority, Mumbai	India	6.35	Yes	In Mumbai’s metropolitan region, India’s financial hub.
37	Tanger Med	Morocco	8.61	Partial Urban Activity	Rapid development around the port, not yet a major urban centre.
39	Mundra	India	7.4	Partial Urban Activity	Major private port; with rapid urban development catching up around it.
44	Jeddah	Saudi Arabia	5.59	Yes	Major Red Sea port with a large urban population.
45	Colón	Panama	4.87	Partial Urban Activity	Strategically important and located near the Panama Canal, with a port-driven economy with partial urban scale.
46	Santos	Brazil	4.78	Yes	Brazil’s largest port, integrated into the São Paulo metro area.
47	Salalah	Oman	3.79	Partial Urban Activity	Strong port hub, Salalah city is modestly sized.
50	Cai Mep	Vietnam	5.48	Partial Urban Activity	Major port complex and industrial hub; partial urban development.

Legend:

• Yes: Clear, thriving urban port city.

• Partial urban activity: Strong port operations, but not a major urban or commercial hub.

Source: Author’s own, based on the World Shipping Council 2023 rankings and various other sources.  

A Global South Perspective

Port cities across the Global South are increasingly embracing socially inclusive blue economy models that integrate economic growth with equity, education, and environmental stewardship. The examples listed in Table 2 illustrate how different cities are operationalising these principles in practice. 

Table 2: Socially Inclusive and Sustainable Blue Economy Initiatives in Global South Port Cities

Country	Port	Inclusive / Sustainability Initiatives
India	JNPA	Operates a Multi-Skill Development Centre to enhance local employment.[30]
India	Mumbai Port	Invests INR 4,000 crore (US$479 million) in sustainable infrastructure, showcasing green and inclusive urban development.[31]
India	Mundra	Runs ‘Kal Ki Kaksha’ (Tomorrow’s Class), combining digital literacy with environmental education for youth.[32]
Malaysia	Port of Tanjung Pelepas	Promotes gender inclusion in maritime professions; supports sustainability education in schools.[33]
The UAE	Jebel Ali	Implements the ‘Our World, Our Future’ strategy, aligning with SDGs, emphasising workforce diversity and community engagement.[34]
Oman	Salalah	Prioritises environmental and operational improvements.[35]
Sri Lanka	Colombo	Enhances efficiency via public-private partnerships; integrates community participation in port planning.[36]
Brazil	Port of Santos	Commits to an SDG-aligned sustainability pact for inclusive development.[37]
Peru	Callao	Advances in marine conservation, clean energy, and social equity alongside competitiveness.[38]
South Africa	Cape Town	Integrates marine conservation, clean energy, and social inclusion with port-led economic growth.[39]
Morocco	Tanger Med	Introduced the Paperless Passage Initiative, streamlining trade and improving digital access for small/marginalised enterprises.[40]
Indonesia	Jakarta	Pilots environmental dashboards to ensure green logistics and monitor urban pollution in real time.[41]
Thailand	Laem Chabang	Focuses on environmental and operational improvements, with scope to deepen social inclusion.[42]

Source: Author’s own 

While commendable, these efforts highlight the need to more comprehensively integrate social inclusion through community engagement and equitable job creation into their sustainability agendas. Reimagining port cities as inclusive, innovation-driven urban systems rather than mere trade gateways can transform them into engines of equitable growth.

Advancing Sustainable, Inclusive, and Resilient Port Cities

This section explores how port cities can integrate governance, climate resilience, and inclusion (see Table 3) to embed local context, community needs, and cultural heritage into urban maritime planning.

Table 3: Key Dimensions of Sustainable Port City Development

Dimension	Key Focus Areas
I. Governance	Participatory planning, institutional coordination, targeted investments, transparent decision-making, and knowledge transfer
II. Climate Resilience	Nature-based solutions, adaptive infrastructure, disaster risk reduction, and blue diplomacy
III. Inclusion	Integration of IPLCs, cultural and maritime heritage, and equitable access to services and opportunities

Source: Author’s own 

I. Governance

Effective and integrated governance is crucial for sustainable port-city development, especially in the Global South, where complex challenges also create opportunities to strengthen institutions, enhance coordination, prevent duplication, and advance innovative urban planning. Aligning port authorities, local governments, and national agencies through coordinated governance and multi-stakeholder platforms, including those involving government, industry, academia, and civil society, can prevent institutional fragmentation and ensure that economic growth is balanced with social and environmental priorities. Effective governance must also navigate geopolitical rivalries and risks of elite capture while addressing the social costs of land dispossession, labour precarity, and environmental burdens that often fall on marginalised groups.^[43] These dynamics underscore the importance of participatory and transparent frameworks.

• Integrated Governance and Institutional Coordination

Establishing dedicated Blue Economy Coordination Units at the local level can help align maritime infrastructure, environmental regulation, and urban planning. Singapore’s Maritime and Port Authority, which integrates regulatory, operational, and sustainability functions, offers a strong model of institutional coherence.^[44] This approach supports SDGs 11 and 16,^[45] and reflects the New Urban Agenda’s emphasis on integrated urban-coastal governance.^[46]

The OECD’s (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) Principles on Urban Policy underscore the importance of multi-level, place-based governance for infrastructure that promotes social inclusion and environmental sustainability.^[47] In contrast, the Port of Mombasa’s expansion in Kenya faced criticism for poor consultation and environmental oversight, leading to community displacement and biodiversity loss,^[48] highlighting the need for anticipatory and integrated planning. Positive examples like Rotterdam show how coherent governance frameworks can advance climate-resilient and inclusive development.^[49] This aligns with the Sendai Framework, SDG 17 on partnerships, and the UNDP’s Integrated Coastal Zone Management guidelines.^[50] Empowering local governments, particularly in coastal areas, is essential to ensure that development reflects local realities. While resource and capacity constraints persist, targeted support, clear mandates, and institutional strengthening can enable more effective and inclusive governance.^[51]

• Financial Instruments and Public-Private Partnerships

Stronger linkages between port authorities and climate finance institutions can unlock vital funding and technical support, ensuring that investments align with both national priorities and local needs. Innovative financial mechanisms, such as blue bonds, impact investment funds, and specialised maritime financing, are opening new avenues for sustainable coastal development.^[52] For example, DP World’s issuance of the Middle East’s first blue bond demonstrates the potential of such tools to fund port infrastructure and marine ecosystem restoration.^[53]

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) have also been instrumental. In Mombasa, Kenya, port expansion was complemented by PPP-led waterfront redevelopment and SME (Small and Medium Enterprises) support, boosting jobs and economic resilience.^[54] In Piraeus, Greece, joint investments in cruise terminal upgrades and cultural integration have revitalised port activity and positioned the city as a key Mediterranean tourism hub.^[55] However, unsuccessful cases also highlight the importance of accountability and community engagement. Myanmar’s Dawei Deep Sea Port, for example, was stalled due to funding gaps, governance failures, and the local opposition’s attempts to force evictions and environmental harm.^[56] Similarly, Trinidad and Tobago’s desalination project was delayed and went over budget because of mismanagement and weak oversight.^[57]

• International Collaboration and Knowledge Transfer

Collaborations between ‘sister’ ports serve as valuable platforms for capacity building and knowledge exchange between established and emerging maritime hubs. For instance, the Port of Rotterdam has signed Memoranda of Understanding with Maharashtra and Kerala,^[58] offering consultancy and logistics optimisation, and supported maritime education in Gujarat through partnerships with Erasmus University and the Dutch Shipping & Transport College.^[59] Similarly, Subic Bay in the Philippines has explored trade partnerships with Mumbai,^[60] while Japan’s Yokohama Partnership Port Program and the Yokohama Blue Carbon Project^[61] support Southeast Asian ports such as Da Nang (Vietnam) and Cebu (Philippines) with technical cooperation, digitalisation, and sustainability initiatives.^[62] The European Union’s Ports Observatory promotes cooperation among Mediterranean ports (MEDNET) to support green transition and data-driven governance.^[63]

These transnational networks facilitate knowledge sharing in maritime logistics, environmental management, human capital, and innovation. However, not all collaborations deliver results; at the Port of Durban, international partnerships like the twinning agreement with Guangzhou have remained largely inactive, reflecting how weak engagement and misaligned priorities can limit their effectiveness.^[64]

II. Climate Resilience

Climate-related hazards increasingly threaten coastal urban centres, demanding policy responses that combine infrastructure adaptation, disaster preparedness, and community engagement. Strong regulatory frameworks are vital for curbing environmental degradation and protecting coastal ecosystems, with the growing recognition of nature-based solutions as essential to resilient and inclusive infrastructure. In this context, the Blue Ports Initiative, which promotes sustainability standards, innovation, and ecosystem-based approaches for ports, offers a useful framework for embedding climate resilience into port development strategies.^[65]

• Climate-Responsive Coastal Urbanisation

In Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), rapid port expansion has underscored the need for environmental safeguards and better urban planning to protect vital coastal wetlands, prompting dialogue on embedding ecological preservation into port development.^[66] Similarly, Lagos (Nigeria), has made progress in upgrading its port infrastructure despite ongoing issues with congestion and pollution, creating a foundation for further improvements through integrated urban mobility and environmental management.^[67]

To maximise impact, national and local governments should embed environmental performance indicators and sustainability-linked investment criteria into port planning. Establishing dedicated blue economy coordination units within local governments, alongside regional policy alignment, can help bridge capacity gaps and ensure that infrastructure investments are both future-ready and locally responsive. These integrated efforts not only advance SDGs 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and 14 (Life below Water), but also support the SAMOA Pathway’s call for resilient, inclusive coastal development in Small Island Developing States and coastal nations alike.^[68],[69]

• Nature-Based Solutions for Climate-Resilient Ports

Globally, ports are integrating nature-based solutions with climate-resilient infrastructure to address rising environmental risks. Durban (South Africa) combines mangrove restoration, adaptive infrastructure, and early warning systems to manage sea-level rise.^[70] Manila’s Climate Change Commission has developed a port-adjacent risk assessment tool to guide emergency planning and investment.^[71] In Valencia, Spain, seagrass and dune restoration near ports boosts biodiversity and storm protection.^[72] DP World’s Jebel Ali Port in Dubai leads a large-scale mangrove project along the UAE coast, demonstrating how industrial activity can be aligned with environmental sustainability.^[73] Similar restoration efforts are underway in Brazil, the Philippines, and India.^[74] DP World has also conducted climate risk assessments in Dakar (Senegal) and Maputo (Mozambique) to inform resilient infrastructure planning.^[75] Conversely, Chittagong in Bangladesh, faces repeated flooding and cyclone damage due to limited investment in adaptation, highlighting gaps in resilience planning for fast-growing coastal cities.^[76] Moreover, integrating blue carbon offset markets such as those based on seagrass ecosystems could also provide both climate mitigation and financing opportunities.^[77]

Blending natural buffers, including mangroves and wetlands, with engineered solutions such as elevated structures, renewable energy, and green logistics is key. Examples from Cape Town (South Africa) and Callao (Peru) show how sustainable port design can enhance both efficiency and climate readiness,^[78] in line with SDG 13, the UN-Habitat Climate Action Framework, and Article 7 of the Paris Agreement.^{[79],[80],[81]}

• Blue Diplomacy for Resilience

Building resilience at the local level also requires strong regional cooperation. Platforms such as the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), and the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative facilitate collaboration on connectivity, disaster risk reduction, and sustainable maritime development. Initiatives like the Lamu Port-South Sudan-Ethiopia Transport (LAPSSET) Corridor in East Africa and the Chabahar Port partnership between Iran, India, and Afghanistan highlight the strategic value of cross-border port development for both economic integration and shared resilience.^[82]

Cases include the India-Mauritius maritime cooperation, which has enhanced coastal surveillance and capacity-building, and the Australia-Pacific Islands partnership, which supports climate resilience in small island developing states.^[83] In contrast, the China-Myanmar Kyaukpyu Port project has raised concerns about debt sustainability and environmental risks,^[84] and the South China Sea disputes, where competing maritime claims hinder cooperative mechanisms and erode trust.^[85] Effective blue diplomacy must therefore balance strategic interests with inclusive development goals, environmental safeguards, and regional trust-building for genuine resilience and maritime stability.^[86]

III. Inclusion

A sustainable blue economy must be people-centred, recognising coastal communities as key stakeholders rather than peripheral beneficiaries. Their active participation is essential, as their traditional ecological knowledge offers valuable insights for sustainable development. When development efforts prioritise the engagement and empowerment of these communities, they encourage collaborative, locally grounded approaches that benefit both people and the environment. Moreover, for IPLCs, oceans are not just resources but vital socio-ecological commons that sustain cultural and spiritual practices, while offering place-based solutions.

• Safeguarding Cultural Heritage and Indigenous Knowledge

Cities like Kochi in India and Valparaíso in Chile exemplify how integrating traditional knowledge into urban planning enhances resilience.^[87] In Kochi, vernacular architecture supports climate adaptation, while in Valparaíso, indigenous knowledge informs the stabilisation of hillsides to preserve heritage neighbourhoods. In Mumbai, Koli fishing communities’ understanding of tidal cycles and sustainable harvesting has guided mangrove restoration and coastal zone management, demonstrating the role of indigenous perspectives in both conservation and economic development.^[88] By centring local knowledge and lived experience, these interventions foster community ownership, build trust in planning processes, and ensure that urban development responds to the real needs and values of local populations. Zanzibar in Tanzania and Beira in Mozambique further illustrate how heritage conservation can coexist with modern port infrastructure.^[89] In Zanzibar, ancestral knowledge supports mangrove restoration efforts; and in Beira, traditional water-channelling techniques help manage seasonal floods. These examples show that including IPLCs in governance not only protects cultural heritage but also creates more equitable, resilient urban futures.

In contrast, the expansion of the Port of Tema in Ghana faced criticism for prioritising rapid industrial growth over local community needs, resulting in inadequate social safeguards and limited job creation for nearby residents.^[90] Port cities are custodians of unique socio-cultural identities that, if protected and promoted, can enhance urban resilience, community pride, and local economies through heritage tourism and cultural industries. Such practices reflect the principles of UNESCO’s Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) Recommendation^[91] and contribute to SDG 11.4 on safeguarding cultural and natural heritage.^[92]

• Investing in Human Capital for the Blue Economy

Equally essential is investing in human capital to build the workforce for a resilient and innovative blue economy. Skills in maritime logistics, ocean science, aquaculture, and coastal planning are critical. Coastal countries can strengthen this capacity by developing regional maritime skill development institutes in partnership with universities, port authorities, and private sector actors. Drawing from models such as Korea Maritime and Ocean University, training programmes must be aligned with global standards and tailored to local interests.^[93] Yet, many coastal states face challenges in this sphere, including limited domestic human capacity, reliance on external or foreign labour, and the persistent underrepresentation of women in maritime and ocean-related sectors, all of which constrain inclusive and sustainable workforce development.^[94]

Accessible, high-quality training opportunities can help retain talent, empower youth, and build a skilled workforce that drives inclusive and locally-owned blue economy growth. For example, Ecuador’s Operators of the Future programme at DP World’s Posorja Terminal trains women in crane and forklift operations, breaking gender barriers in port logistics.^[95] Such initiatives also support SDG 4^[96] and the ILO’s Global Framework for Green Jobs,^[97] while advancing the goals of the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development.^[98]

• Integrating Social Equity

Urban governance must also proactively support job creation and inclusive economic participation. For instance, the success of the coastal eco-tourism cooperatives in Zanzibar, which employ and train local youth and women, demonstrates how livelihood generation can be directly linked to conservation.^[99] In contrast, large-scale port expansions often bypass local labour, relying instead on external contractors while missing critical opportunities for inclusive job creation. For example, in many BRI projects, Chinese contractors often rely on their own labour, especially in high-skill roles, with contracts often mandating Chinese workers, limiting local employment and skills transfer.^[100]

A sustainable blue economy must be inclusive, socially equitable, and grounded in the cultural and human capital of coastal communities, particularly across the Global South. Ensuring meaningful participation in port and coastal planning requires mandatory social and gender impact assessments, transparent decision-making, and targeted investments in historically marginalised communities. The Port of Dar es Salaam has shown how creating micro-enterprise zones and engaging local communities can deliver more equitable growth.^[101] Such strategies also align with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations’ Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines,^[102] SDGs 5 and 10,^[103] and the 2030 Agenda’s commitment to “leaving no one behind.” ^[104]

Pathways for India

With a coastline of 11,098 km , 72 coastal districts, and a network of 13 major and 213 non-major ports,^[a],[105] India’s vast maritime geography underscores the strategic imperative of developing resilient and future-ready port cities. Moreover, with 95 percent of India’s trade by volume transported via sea routes, strengthening maritime infrastructure is vital to the country’s ambition of becoming the world’s third-largest economy by 2027.^[106] India’s port cities stand to gain from global best practices, while also contributing valuable lessons from the Global South on  how port-led development can be aligned with sustainability, inclusivity, and resilience.

Initiatives such as the Smart Cities Mission^[107] and urban programmes like Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT)^[108] can offer valuable frameworks for integrating digital infrastructure, climate resilience, and citizen-centric planning into port city development. Furthermore, national initiatives such as the Sagarmala Programme, Maritime Amrit Kaal Mission 2047^[109] and India’s SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region) vision^[110] underline the critical role of port cities in driving economic growth, regional connectivity, and maritime security, making sustainable and inclusive development of these urban centres not just desirable but essential.

This section outlines practical pathways for India in governance, climate resilience, and inclusion (Table 3). The priorities are framed within four thematic pillars, each linked to its distinct implementation challenges.

Sustainability Imperatives

India’s initiatives, such as the Harit Sagar guidelines,^[111] inland waterway development, and the new National Centre of Excellence in Green Port and Shipping website,^[112] reflect a growing commitment to low-carbon, environmentally responsible port infrastructure. Mormugao Port’s recognition under the Environmental and Social Impact (ESI) framework signals early progress,^[113] but translating these policies into scalable outcomes requires more systematic implementation.

Global ports, such as Cape Town and Callao, demonstrate how renewable energy and carbon-neutral strategies can be embedded into daily operations. Domestically, Mundra Port offers a leading example, harnessing renewable energy to power sustainable logistics.^[114]

To build on this momentum, India should operationalise sustainability indicators across all ports and deploy digital environmental monitoring systems to ensure real-time accountability. Local community participation through initiatives like citizen-led air and water quality monitoring or engagement in green infrastructure can further localise and democratise environmental governance.

India’s Coastal Regulation Zone notifications and the Draft National Fisheries Policy are important steps toward safeguarding coastal areas and recognising small-scale fishers. However, stronger integration mechanisms and safeguards for IPLCs are needed.^[115] In Kochi, traditional fishers’ weather knowledge informs urban planning through partnerships, while unions like Matsyafed integrate Indigenous practices, as seen in the Marine Stewardship Council-certified Ashtamudi fishery.^[116] Tools like integrated coastal zone management^[117] and marine spatial planning can also help balance development with conservation and inclusion. Marine protected areas^[118] can be most effective when IPLCs are actively involved, supporting both ecological and cultural goals; however, such participation often requires clear legislative frameworks to safeguard rights, ensure accountability, and institutionalise co-management practices.

Moreover, some persistent challenges remain for India:

• Institutional overlaps and fragmented governance across maritime and urban authorities could continue to slow coordinated implementation.
• Capacity constraints, especially in smaller and state-run ports, can make it difficult to adopt advanced digital and environmental technologies at scale.
• Limited access to long-term and sustainable financing may continue to be a barrier to investing in modern, green infrastructure solutions.

Aligning national efforts with global commitments, such as the SDGs and decarbonisation targets, will require cross-sectoral coordination and international partnerships. Notably, the Port of Rotterdam Authority is collaborating with Indian ports through the Green and Digital Corridor initiative, aimed at facilitating the export of green hydrogen and other clean energy sources to Europe.^[119] Such partnerships not only enable innovation transfer and institutional strengthening but also demonstrate how global climate goals can be advanced through context-sensitive, inclusive port development models.

Equitable and Inclusive Development

India’s blue economy hinges on cultivating a skilled, future-ready workforce. Moreover, port-led development must prioritise inclusive growth to ensure that economic benefits reach marginalised and vulnerable coastal populations. Models like the Port of Dar es Salaam demonstrate how targeted support to small enterprises and artisans can embed local participation into port economies.^[120] In India, the Kandla Port’s investments in health, education, and livelihoods for neighbouring communities affirm the value of community-oriented planning.^[121]

Industry-linked institutes at major ports and coastal universities should offer training in maritime logistics, ocean technology, aquaculture, and coastal governance. The Sagarmala Programme links coastal and fisheries infrastructure with skill development and livelihood generation.^[122] Initiatives, such as the JNPA’s Multi Skill Development Centre in Mumbai, which has trained over 2,300 youth,^[123]  and the Vadhavan Port’s maritime catering courses in partnership with the Directorate General of Shipping,^[124] highlight how ports can drive local empowerment and workforce growth.

Integrating IPLCs, mainly traditional coastal communities, into early planning is vital. Moreover, marine literacy can foster inclusive governance by helping communities engage with ocean-climate issues.^[125] For instance, in Odisha’s Chilika Lake, fisher-led eco-tourism supports both livelihoods and wetland protection, while in Tamil Nadu’s Tranquebar, post-tsunami heritage tourism involves fishing communities in cultural storytelling and economic renewal.^[126]

For meaningful inclusion, Indian ports must embed social safeguards into planning and expansion. This requires institutionalising social impact assessments to evaluate community impacts, adopting Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) protocols^[127] to ensure that coastal and indigenous voices shape decision-making, and directing targeted investments in healthcare, education, skills training, and alternative livelihoods so that port-led growth translates into tangible benefits for surrounding regions and communities.

ULBs should formalise the role of IPLCs in planning, while establishing clear pathways for community representation and benefit-sharing. Importantly, these initiatives must avoid a one-size-fits-all approach. However, concerns may persist:

• Informality and underemployment remain deeply entrenched in India’s workforce—nearly 90 percent of workers, including fishers, farm labourers, and tourism staff, work in the informal sector without job security or social protection.^[128] For instance, in the coastal state of Odisha, over 48 percent of salaried workers in coastal and related sectors have no written contracts or paid leave, showing widespread job insecurity.^[129]
• The absence of disaggregated data on gender, caste, and occupational vulnerabilities can weaken the design of targeted interventions.
• Exclusionary planning frameworks, often top-down, could fail to capture the socio-cultural diversity of coastal India, resulting in poor representation of IPLCs in decision-making.

To address these gaps, inclusion must be tailored, not imposed, through place-sensitive, gender-responsive, and equity-driven planning that acknowledges regional disparities and socio-economic hierarchies.

Heritage Preservation with Contemporary Developments

International port cities, such as Valparaíso, Zanzibar, and Barcelona, demonstrate how cultural heritage can be effectively integrated into urban renewal and port infrastructure planning. These models show that heritage, when treated as a living, community-driven asset, can coexist with economic growth and modernisation.^[130]

In Chennai, India, efforts to preserve coastal heritage, such as temples and maritime festivals, are being linked with port development.^[131] There is also growing emphasis on safeguarding intangible cultural heritage, such as artisanal fishing practices, oral histories, and traditional boatbuilding, which are essential to the identity of coastal communities.

The National Maritime Heritage Complex in Lothal, Gujarat, and initiatives like the stitched ship project underscore India’s maritime legacy and indigenous innovation.^[132],[133] Globally, the German Maritime Museum and the Maritime Museum of Rotterdam combine exhibitions with community engagement and education. The German Maritime Museum brings together interactive exhibits with research on maritime archaeology and climate change, while the Rotterdam Museum offers ship restoration projects and storytelling programmes that connect visitors to the city’s working port and heritage.^[134] These are relevant lessons for Indian port cities.

Promoting cultural tourism through festivals, maritime museums, and creative industries can enhance both economic and social value, as demonstrated by Kochi, where the city’s multicultural port heritage has been successfully integrated into its tourism economy.^[135] Preserving the ways of life of traditional coastal communities, such as the Koli fishing communities in Mumbai or the boatbuilding artisans in Beypore, Kerala,^[136] not only strengthens social cohesion but also ensures that heritage preservation remains rooted in local knowledge and lived experience. For instance, festivals like Narali Purnima,^[137] during which Koli fishers offer coconuts to the sea to mark the beginning of the new fishing season, reflect deep ecological reverence and community rituals tied to the rhythms of the ocean. Importantly, these efforts must not be tokenistic or limited to tourism objectives; they must meaningfully incorporate community sensitivities, aspirations, and agency.^[138]

However, fragmented responsibilities among heritage, tourism, and port authorities often result in policy misalignment. There is also a risk of cultural commodification, where heritage is reduced to a tourism asset, stripping it of its social depth. Additionally, gentrification and infrastructure expansion can marginalise local communities and sever their ties to heritage sites.^[139] Addressing these concerns requires embedding heritage-sensitive planning into port development through participatory cultural mapping, community-led design, and formal recognition of coastal communities as heritage custodians.

People-centred Regional Integration and Maritime Connectivity

Regional initiatives such as the LAPSSET Corridor in East Africa^[140] and India’s own engagement in platforms like the BIMSTEC^[141] and IORA^[142] illustrate the potential of maritime cooperation to enhance connectivity, economic integration, and shared resilience. Further, the Chabahar Port, developed through India’s trilateral partnership with Iran and Afghanistan, offers a strategic template for bypassing geopolitical constraints and expanding access to Central Asia and the Middle East.^[143] More recently, emerging frameworks like the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) also signal a growing ambition to embed Indian connectivity within broader transregional networks.^[144]

India’s leadership in South-South cooperation uniquely positions it to champion inclusive, regionally grounded maritime partnerships across the Global South. However, regional integration efforts in India could face several uncertainties:^[145]

• Geopolitical volatility and shifting alliances that often disrupt continuity in cross-border infrastructure and connectivity projects.
• Inadequate subnational capacity can limit the ability of coastal states and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) to participate meaningfully in regional diplomacy and maritime governance.
• Marginalisation of coastal communities from integration strategies could risk deepening existing socio-economic disparities.

To overcome these, India must embed a people-centric lens in its connectivity strategy, where maritime corridors support not only trade and naval mobility but also the flow of knowledge, services, and humanitarian aid. For example, cooperation on early warning systems and transboundary disaster preparedness can better protect coastal populations.^[146]

The meaningful inclusion of fisherfolk, port workers, and informal coastal settlers is vital. Initiatives such as India-Sri Lanka fisher dialogues demonstrate the value of community-level diplomacy in reducing conflict over shared marine resources.^[147] Integrating small-scale fishers into regional value chains through cold chain logistics, fair market access, and cooperative platforms can reinforce livelihoods and India’s soft power.

To strengthen regional engagement, Indian states could institutionalise international affairs units and invest in training local officials in maritime law, climate diplomacy, and trade governance. Participation in forums like the Global Maritime Forum, Sagarmanthan: The Great Oceans Dialogue, and Singapore Maritime Week can further facilitate multi-level knowledge exchange and problem-solving.^[148]

Ultimately, maritime integration must be rooted in community agency, equitable participation, and regionally coordinated solutions, especially for the marginalised groups in coastal economies, ensuring that India’s connectivity is strategic, inclusive, and future-ready.

Conclusion

Coastal cities lie at the frontlines of intersecting global pressures such as climate change, urbanisation, and economic transition. They are, however, also laboratories of innovation, where the future of sustainable growth, climate resilience, and inclusive development can be tested and defined.

This paper has examined four thematic pathways for India—i.e., sustainability imperatives, inclusive development, heritage preservation, and regional connectivity—within the cross-cutting dimensions of governance, climate resilience, and inclusion. Taken together, they offer a blueprint for Indian port cities to move beyond reform towards transformative, future-ready development, while also championing Global South perspectives in shaping a more inclusive maritime future.

By considering these recommendations, India’s port cities could realise the ‘true blue’ opportunity: engines of prosperity that balance growth with equity and ecological stewardship. Ports would function not only as global trade hubs but as climate-resilient ecosystems, powered by renewables, equipped with green infrastructure, and aligned with global decarbonisation goals. Urban waterfronts could protect cultural heritage while enabling marginalised groups to thrive in the blue economy. Integrated governance across maritime, urban, and environmental authorities will be able to further unlock sustainable finance and innovation at scale, positioning Indian port cities as global examples of resilient and inclusive coastal futures.

Global South port cities already demonstrate that aligning national growth with cultural, ecological, and social priorities is possible. Building on these lessons, Indian port cities can position themselves as leaders in subnational diplomacy, shaping regional norms on maritime sustainability, while anchoring India’s broader maritime ambitions.

---

Anusha Kesarkar Gavankar is Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation.

---

All views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author, and do not represent the Observer Research Foundation, either in its entirety or its officials and personnel.

Endnotes

• Developing and Emerging Economies
• Maritime Security
• India
• blue economy
• global south countries
• indian maritime policy
• indian port cities
• major ports in india
• port and Industry led cities
• port based economy
• port economy
• port led industrialization
• sagarmala programme india
• sagarmala project

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.