Kundan Pandey | 11 Feb 2025 | India | Climate Connections
As cities across India develop their own climate action plans, discrepancies in methodologies and priorities have emerged. A recent government discussion paper calls for a national framework that standardizes the core components of these plans while allowing local flexibility. Experts argue that empowering Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and integrating climate action into broader urban planning are essential for effective mitigation and adaptation.
Insights from Recent Reviews
A review of thirteen city climate action plans reveals notable inconsistencies. For example, Gorakhpur’s early 2010 plan lacked proposals for mitigation measures, greenhouse gas reduction targets, or identification of vulnerable areas. Similarly, Pune’s 2022 plan did not pinpoint vulnerable zones, whereas Coimbatore’s plan did include these critical assessments. The review, part of a discussion paper titled Pathways for Mainstreaming Urban Climate Actions by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) in collaboration with GIZ, evaluated each plan against twenty criteria—including methodology, risk identification, and institutional mechanisms. A key finding was that only eight cities have robust institutional structures in place to implement and monitor their plans.
The Case for a National Framework
The paper recommends establishing a national framework that mandates essential elements such as governance, financing, and institutional accountability across all City Climate Action Plans (CCAPs). Vibhor Sood, a technical advisor at GIZ and co-author of the report, explains that while each city faces unique challenges, a set of foundational components should be universally adopted. This common framework would not replace local methodologies but would ensure consistency and enhance coordination and accountability, ultimately strengthening India’s overall climate strategy.
Challenges at the State Level
The discussion paper also critiques State Action Plans for Climate Change (SAPCCs), noting that while these plans focus on sectors like agriculture, forests, and industry, they largely overlook urban priorities. An evaluation of eight SAPCCs from states such as Gujarat, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu found that urban issues are frequently sidelined. The report recommends that SAPCCs include a dedicated section on urban climate actions and that state-level climate cells offer tailored guidance to ULBs. Daniel Robinson, a climate and urban expert, underscores the challenge of states lacking dedicated climate change departments—departments that have traditionally managed forest issues now face the added responsibility of addressing urban climate concerns.
Decentralizing Climate Action
Cities are increasingly recognized as pivotal in combating climate change, as nearly 70% of greenhouse gas emissions originate from urban areas. Chetan Vaidya, an independent urban advisor and co-author of the MoHUA paper, emphasizes that effective climate action requires local-level interventions. Historically, urban planning in India has centered on basic services like water supply and waste management, with little focus on climate resilience. Now, as extreme weather events become more common, cities must integrate climate considerations into their master plans. However, many current CCAPs lack the necessary legal backing, human resources, and financing to translate plans into effective action.
The report also points to the incomplete devolution of powers to ULBs, a shortfall stemming from the 74th Constitutional Amendment. Without a full transfer of functions, finances, and responsibilities, local governments remain ill-equipped to tackle climate challenges. Vibhor Sood highlights that only a few states have devolved over 50% of necessary functions to ULBs, stressing the need for greater local empowerment. He cites the National Clean Air Programme as an example of how city-level initiatives can drive meaningful change when adequately supported.
A Path Forward
The momentum for city-based climate action has grown since the launch of the National Mission on Sustainable Habitat (NMSH 2.0) for 2021–2030, which targets low-carbon urban growth and enhanced climate resilience. As of December 2024, around 41 cities have either implemented or are in the process of developing their CCAPs. Recent calls for urban governance reforms, highlighted in Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s budget speech, further underscore the need for systemic changes that facilitate better coordination between national, state, and local levels.
In conclusion, while city-level climate plans mark significant progress, bridging the gaps in institutional frameworks, financing, and capacity requires a coordinated national approach. A standardized framework, tailored to accommodate local variations, could provide the necessary structure to ensure that all cities—big or small—are equipped to meet the challenges of a changing climate.
Comments