future proofing indian cities report

Atkins in partnership with

INDIAN CITIESMarch 2015

Key findings from applying a future proofing approach in Bangalore and Madurai

NoticeWS Atkins International Ltd assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents.

This document is an output from a project funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Directorate-General for International Cooperation (DGIS) for the benefit of developing countries. However, the views expressed and information contained in it are not necessarily those of or endorsed by DFID, DGIS or the entities managing the delivery of the Climate and Development Knowledge Network*, which can accept no responsibility or liability for such views, completeness or accuracy of the information or for any reliance placed on them.

© 2014, All rights reserved

* The Climate and Development Knowledge Network (“CDKN”) is a project funded by the UK Department for International Development and the Netherlands Directorate-General for International Cooperation (DGIS) and is led and administered by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Management of the delivery of CDKN is undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, and an alliance of organisations including Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano, INTRAC, LEAD International, the Overseas Development Institute, and South South North.

Acknowledgements We would like to thank the teams within Madurai Municipal Corporation for their immense support and assistance without which this report would not be possible. We would particularly like to thank Dr. Kathiravan Chinnathambi (IAS), Mr Mathuram (MMC) and the participants in the workshops held in Chennai and Madurai for their feedback and support during the development of this report. We would also like to thank the Mr Phanindra Reddy (IAS) and participants at the State level round tables held in Chennai August 2013 and November 2014.

This project was financed by the Climate Development Knowledge Network. The authors wish to thank CDKN and other stakeholders who were consulted in the preparation of this report for their comments, suggestion and insights. In Bangalore we would like to thank H.M. Ravindra Deputy Chief Engineer and S.M. Ramakrishna Additional Chief Engineer (Revenue) Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) as well as participants who agreed to be interviewed and take part in the roundtable workshop meetings.

INDIAN CITIESMarch 2015

Key findings from applying a future proofing approach in Bangalore and Madurai

ii | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


About the project partners

AtkinsAtkins is one of the world’s leading infrastructure and design companies, with the depth and breadth of technical expertise to respond to the world’s most complex infrastructure and environmental challenges. These include responding to the increasing rate of urbanisation and the urgent transition to a low carbon economy. Atkins works with municipal authorities, national and regional government, development agencies, private sector companies, and other stakeholders to develop and implement strategic plans and investment projects to shape and manage the future growth of cities. With over 17,000 employees worldwide, Atkins is able to bring together its technical knowledge across a wide range of disciplines such as transport, water, energy, design, architecture, climate science, ecology, planning, and economics to help cities and those investing in them to act upon the long term opportunities and challenges of resource use and a changing climate. Our international work spans Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East and North America. Through our ‘Carbon Critical’ initiative Atkins has developed a range of bespoke tools to reduce the carbon emissions associated with major urban infrastructure programmes including a low carbon masterplanning tool to reduce city carbon footprints.

University College London (UCL): Development Planning UnitUCL is one of only three UK universities in the top 20 in the 2011 Shanghai Jiao Tong world rankings, and in the latest research assessment exercise UCL was rated third overall in the UK after Oxford and Cambridge. The Bartlett Development Planning Unit (DPU) is internationally recognised for its academic and professional contributions in relation to city development in the developing world in active collaboration with partner institutions and researchers in the Global South. It is concerned with promoting sustainable forms of development, understanding rapid urbanisation and encouraging innovation in the policy, planning and management responses to the economic, social and environmental development of urban areas, giving emphasis to social justice, participatory local governance and poverty reduction. The key distinctive features of the DPU are its commitment to action research and its focus on rapidly urbanising areas in the developing world. The DPU maintains a wide network of partner organisations in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa and South and Southeast Asia working on sustainable cities.

The Indian Institute for Human Settlements (IIHS)The IIHS based in Bangalore, is a national education institution committed to the equitable, sustainable and efficient transformation of Indian settlements. IIHS aims to establish an independently funded and managed National University for Research and Innovation focused on the challenges and opportunities of India’s urban transition. IIHS has also been designated a National Resource Centre (NRC) by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation.

DHAN Foundation The Development of Humane Action (DHAN) Foundation is a professional development organisation founded in 1997. It brings highly motivated, educated young women and men to the development sector, to focus on the mission of Building people and institutions for development innovations and scaling up to enable the poor communities for poverty reduction and self-reliance. The work of DHAN is rooted in values, such as Grassroots action, Collaboration, Enabling, Innovation, Excellence, and Self-Regulation. DHAN’s purpose includes the promotion of new ideas on development themes such as microfinance, small scale irrigation, dry land agriculture, and working with Panchayats; ensuring that quality benefits reach a large number of poor; and providing the opportunity for young professionals in the development sector to practice and develop relevant knowledge, attitudes and skills needed for long term work.

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | i


CONTENTS

00 Glossary and abbreviations iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vii

Introduction ix

What did the approach involve? x

What are the entry points for applying ans scaling the approach xiv

01 INTRODUCING FUTURE PROOFING Introduction 03

Future proofing cities 05

Report overview 07

Why these cities? 08

Introduction to Madurai 10

Introduction to Bangalore 13

02 KEY LESSONS: FUTURE PROOFING PROCESS Lessons from applying a future proofing approach 19

Process for adapting future proofing to a city context 20

03 KEY LESSONS: IMPROVING INTEGRATION USING BLUE-GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE The opportunity: Madurai 30

The opportunity: Bangalore 31

How did the approach work in each city? 36

04 MOVING FROM PLAN TO IMPLEMENTATION 39

05 LESSONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR SCALING THE APPROACH Summary of lessons and implications for scaling the approach 51

Future proofing as a means for shaping smart cities in India 55

What are the entry points for applying and scaling the approach? 57

Hanoi, Vietnam

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | iii


Glossary and abbreviationsGlossary of Terms

Adaptation to climate change: Adjustment in natural or human systems (e.g. cities) in response to actual or expected climate hazards or their effects. It moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities of climate change. Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory, autonomous and planned adaptation.

Agglomeration economies: Relates to the benefits firms obtain when locating near each other or ‘agglomerating’. This concept is related to economies of scale and network effects. As more firms cluster together they usually take advantage of declining production costs, more suppliers and more customers. Cities and specifically urbanisation promote economies of agglomeration.

Blue-green infrastructure services: represent the sum of natural and manmade infrastructure covering the hydrological cycle (blue infrastructure), natural habitat, ecosystems and urban greenspace (green infrastructure). The approach to blue-green infrastructure adopts a systems view in order to identify the links and interconnections between issues in order to avoid disbenefits and help to maximise win-wins. By taking this approach wider range of socioeconomic and quality of life benefits can be delivered.

Capacity to act: There is a wide range of definitions according to the specific context. We define this as a city’s capacity and willingness to respond positively to environmental risks. This is shaped by the economic and institutional attributes of a city and its actors, which determine the degree of its capability to respond to risks.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS): Technology that attempts to capture carbon dioxide originating from fossil fuel use (power generation and other industries) and then pump underground into secure storage in rock formations.

Catalytic Financing: The process whereby official financing from an agency (often the government) encourages further financing (often from the private sector).

Climate hazards: Refers to the risks posed by natural climatic processes and are often exacerbated by climate change. For example: flooding, cyclones and landslides.

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): A flexible mechanism that provides for emissions reduction projects which generate Certified Emission Reduction units.

Climate change: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines climate change as ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods’.

Compact city: A high density urban settlement with mixed land uses and access to an efficient public transports system. The efficient urban layout encourages walking and cycling, low energy consumption and reduced pollution.

Driving force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR): This is a conceptual framework for considering the interactions between society and the environment that is used to highlight gaps in knowledge, processes and linkages between human and environmental systems.

Ecosystem services: The benefits people receive from ecosystems including products like clean drinking water and processes such as the decomposition of wastes.

Externalities: An economic term describing a cost or benefit that is not transmitted through the price of an action and is incurred by a party who was not involved as either a buyer or a seller of the action causing the cost or benefit. An example would a non-car user suffering from the pollution caused by car users.

Geospatial: A term describing the analysis of data using a geographical base.

Greenhouse gas emissions: Emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and the manufacture of cement and include carbon dioxide produced during the consumption of solid, liquid, and gas fuels and fas flaring.

Green infrastructure: Refers to an interconnected network of natural and green man-made features, such as forests, extensive grasslands, wetlands, but in cities also parks, gardens, cemeteries, trees at streets, green walls and roofs.

Gini co-efficient: the extent to which the distribution of income or assets (such as land) among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution.

Groundwater table: The level of the water located beneath the earth’s surface. Often depleted by wells, irrigation and poor water management.

iv | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


Informal settlements: Term often used to describe a slum or shanty town. Often areas where groups of housing units have been constructed on land that the occupants have no legal claim to or occupy illegally. They are often unplanned where the housing is not in a compliance with current planning and building regulations.

Lock-in: As escalating commitment to an ineffective course of action that is extremely difficult or impossible to deviate from.

Low carbon urban trajectory: An alternative development pathway that reduces carbon emissions versus a business-as-usual trajectory.

Mitigation (to climate change): An anthropogenic intervention to reduce the anthropogenic forcing of the climate system. It includes strategies to reduce greenhouse gas sources and emissions and enhancing greenhouse gas sinks.

Multi-dimensional poverty (MDP): Measure that aggregates a range of indicators (e.g. health, education, income) of human wellbeing to capture the complexity of poverty.

Natural resources: Naturally occurring resources used by humans. Natural resources can include, amongst others, air, water, wood, and fossil fuels.

Peri-urban: Land that is immediately adjoining an urban area.

Resilience: The ability of a social or ecological system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-organisation and the capacity to adapt to stress and change.

Risk: There are a wide range of definitions of risk depending on the context reflecting the very different approaches to risk management taken in different approaches to risk management taken in different fields. In the context of this report, we refer to risk broadly as the potential that the ‘activities’ of cities which drive carbon emission and pressure on natural resources and ‘events’ in the form of climate hazards and external pressures on the resources used by cities will have an undesirable impact.

The Global South: A generic term generally used to describe countries with a medium or low Human Development Index score, which is a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education, standards of living, and quality of life for countries worldwide.

‘Triple-Win’ solutions: In the context of this report, policies and programmes that deliver multiple environmental benefits by (1) reducing carbon emissions and energy use; (2) responding to climate hazards; and (3) reducing pressures on regional support systems such as water and food systems and natural habitat.

Urban: Used as a collective term to fit with the different country specific definitions of cities and towns.

Urban catchment: Area surrounding a city that supplies water, food, and other ecosystems services.

Urban densification: Is a term used to describe the number of people living within an urbanised area. Often measured in the number of people in a given area. Concept closely linked to urban sustainability in theories such as New Urbanism, Transit-oriented development and smart growth.

Urbanisation: Is the physical growth of urban areas as a result of rural migration and even suburban concentration into cities. Often linked with modernisation, development and industrialisation.

Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect: The increased temperature of the urban air compared to its rural surroundings. The difference is particularly stark at night.

Urban sprawl: The outwards spreading of a city through the expansion of low-density development that increases car usage.

Vulnerability: A variety of definitions exist according to the specific context. In the context of this report we define vulnerability as the degree to which a city and its inhabitants are susceptible to and are likely to be detrimentally impacted by the stresses and shocks associated with climate change, resource scarcities, and damage to vital ecosystems. The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction defines vulnerability as the characteristics and circumstances of a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change defines vulnerability to climate change as the degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes.

‘Win-win’ solutions: In the context of this report, policies and programmes they deliver multiple environmental benefits by contribution to two of the three out of the following objectives: (1) reducing carbon emissions and energy use; (2) responding to climate hazards; and (3) reducing pressures on regional support systems such as water and food systems and natural habitat.

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | v


Abbreviations used

BAU Business As Usual

BEE Bureau of Energy Efficiency

BRT Bus Rapid Transport

BWSESMP Bangalore Water Supply and Environmental Services Master Plan

BWSSB Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board

CAC Command and Control

CDM Clean Development Mechanism

CDP City Development Plan

CER Certified Emission Reduction

CGC City Coordination Group

CMA Chennai Management Authority

CMA Commissionerate of Municipal Administration

CMCs City Municipal Corporations

CNG Compressed Natural Gas

CO2e CO2 Equivalent (Impact of greenhouse gases expressed interns of CO2)

CSR Corporate Social Responsibility

CVTC City Volunteers Technical Corps

CTAG City Technical Advisory Group

DPR Detailed Project Report

DTCP Directorate of Town and Country Planning

ECBC Energy Conservation Building Code

EE Energy Efficiency

ESCO Energy Service Company

FAR Floor Area Ratio

FSI Floorspace Index

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GEF Global Environment Facility

GHG Greenhouse Gases

GRIHA Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment

Ha Hectares

HPEC High Powered Expert Committee

ICF International Climate Funds

IDFC Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation

IGBC Indian Green Building Council

IHSDP Integrated Housing and Slum Development Programme

INCCA Indian Network for Climate Change Assessment

INR/Rs Indian Rupees

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IT Information Technology

ITS Intelligent Transport System

JNNSM Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission

JNNURM Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewable Mission

kWh KiloWatt hour

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

LPA Local Planning Authority

LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas

MLD Million Litres per Day

MLPA Madurai Local Planning Authority

MoEF The Ministry of Environment and Forests

MMC Madurai Municipal Corporation

MNRE Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

Mw Mega Watts

NAPCC National Action Plan on Climate Change

NMT Non Motorised Transport

NRW Non-Revenue Water

NTAG National Technical Advisory Group

PV Photo Voltaics (Solar panels)

PWD Public Works Department

SEZs Special Economic Zones

SPV Special Purpose Vehicle

TCE Thiyagarajarrajar College of Engineering

TERI The Energy and Resources Institute

TMC Thousand Million Cubic Feet

TNDE Tamil Nadu Department of Environment

TNEB Tamil Nadu Electricity Board

TNHB Tamil Nadu Housing Board

TNSCB Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board

TNSTA Tamil Nadu State Transport Authority

TNUDF Tamil Nadu Urban Development Fund

TNUIFSL Tamil Nadu Urban Infrastructure Financial Services Limited

TNWSB Tamil Nadu Water and Sanitation Board

UFW Unaccounted for Water

UIDSSMT Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns

UIDSST Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme in Satellite Towns

ULB Urban Local Body

vi | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | vii


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

viii | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | ix


Why these cities?

Bangalore and Madurai face significant environmental risks to their future prosperity, there was strong potential to build on existing momentum for action, and the consortium partners have strong existing relationships1.The two proposed Indian cities span different urban types in the Atkins-UCL Future Proofing report based on the most significant environmental risks they face. The cities also differ in their capacity to respond to risks based on the strength of their urban economies, governance, planning and delivery capabilities, providing opportunities to better understand how varying capacity shapes policy responses to future proofing.

Introduction

Introduction

A new approach to future proofing planning has been piloted in two very different cities leading to different results in each. What explains the differences? And what can we learn for other cities?

The project has helped both cities to develop an action plan to help them respond to climate hazards and promote a transition to a low carbon economy while reducing poverty and catalysing economic development.

� A process of future proofing cities was used to engage stakeholders to review current and future risks and challenges facing cities and to develop solutions which chart a clear way forward. The project has placed a special emphasis is placed on supporting and enhancing locally owned policy processes. The results of the project and future proofing approach to enabling integration is directly relevant to the 100 Smart Cities programme in India and possible opportunities and entry points for other cities considering integrated approaches to planning for development.

1 Other potential options include Surat, Mysore, and Bhubaneswar which are cities which face a wide range of environmental risks with strong potential to build on existing work to initiate a process of future proofing urban development plans.

x | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


Key lesssons

The report draws together 13 key lessons drawn from how the process worked in practice in these two pilots examining differences between the cities and what this could mean for future practice in terms of how the process could be further developed and refined.

Process of applying future proofing

1. Using multi-stakeholder dialogues to explore the urban diagnostic and develop action plans is an effective way of supporting partners to define shared priorities and goals

2. A flexible approach is needed to adjust the process and focus of the project to maximise the impact of engagement

3. Using local actors and language is important to help create an active dialogue

4. Combining different perspectives helps to improve understanding of the problem and develop new solutions

Improving integration using blue-green infrastructure planning

5. Future proofing concepts can bring a new frame of reference to inform planning

6. Evidence used in the right way can convince and mobilise change

7. Focussing at the city scale is important to gain support for climate change action

The project focused on three components: First, preparing a city diagnostic analysing the climate and energy risks and the implications of these risks now and in the future considering people and patterns of vulnerability, infrastructure provision which could help address the risks and governance capacity of city institutions and stakeholders. Second, based on the priorities identified an Action plan was developed addressing key priorities. Finally the lessons of piloting the approach were identified which are summarised in this report.

The project was undertaken as a partnership between institutions in each city and the project team in an ongoing dialogue. Project partners from both cities were involved to enable the process of ongoing engagement.

What did the approach involve?

Moving from plan to implementation

8. Blue-green infrastructure is a useful focus to prioritise critical system links and identify issues should be addressed

9. Establishing partnerships and processes for co-ordination is a useful way to bridge between strategy and implementation

10. Using plans to make the case for funding and mobilising local resources represents a key measure of success for cities

11. Support is needed from state and national government support to develop and adopt policy and regulatory frameworks to help enable effective action

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | xi


Key conclusions

Role and value of future proofed planning

� The project found that the future proofing approach has value to both cities by bringing a new frame of reference to planning. The benefit of adopting a long term planning horizon and recognising problems and challenges as complex and interconnected contrasts with a traditional planning processes which result in sector focused plans which do not effectively tackle the issues because of the narrow focus.

� Improved solutions by considering the interconnections between issues and focusing on climate risks and vulnerability. Recognising trends relating to urbanisation and climate and resource risks in the context of patterns of vulnerability to these risks helped to identify the pathways through risks were transmitted (using the concept of blue-green infrastructure). This brought a focus on networks and pressure points in those networks where actions should be prioritised. This was seen as new and there was a shared view that this type of perspective was necessary.

� A practical focus was needed for the value of future proofing to be recognised. This required a focus on short and medium term actions which can deliver the results in parallel with developing actions to tackle long term issues. The capacity of government institutions at local level is limited in terms of the number of people able to

help drive forward programmes and the range of appropriately skilled staff among the second run of technical cadres able to undertake technical work and facilitate co-ordination across sectors and develop solutions.

� Additional support is likely to be required to institutionalise the approach more widely. As a new initiative, it is unlikely that an approach to future proofing would take place in cities without such capacity unless support is provided to help enable such an approach. Technical expertise along with support to activate and institutionalise the process is necessary to support plan making and plan delivery on a sustainable basis. Formalised systems and approaches would be required for approach to be scaled widely. Bringing external technical and academic experts from outside of the city had the benefit of being able to challenge existing thinking and help to identify and activate a stakeholder engagement process able to support the development of integrated plans.

Data gathering and framing the problems

� In a context of limited data the future proofing was successful in building a sufficient picture to enable strategy development at a city wide scale, including identifying key priorities and the opportunities to tackle these issues in a combined way. The action plans highlighted the data gaps where additional work

would be needed to inform specific projects. Case studies were used to explore in more depth the implications of the diagnostic findings at local level. Differences between the approach used to data gathering in both cities highlighted that fully engaging knowledge partners through the data gathering process by discussing emerging findings and triangulating between data sources can be a more effective strategy than viewing the exercise as a technical exercise. The importance of presenting findings visually (through photos and maps/aerial photographs) was effective in reaching non-technical audiences.

� The lack of locally available climate data was not a barrier to strategy development but would be required to inform the approach to future planning in the city and potential options for major capital projects under consideration. In the context of uncertainty many of the actions identified in both plans were focused on building resilience and addressing service gaps.

� The perspective of blue-green infrastructure was helpful in relating issues of local, city wide and wider significance to one another and help stakeholders appreciate their position, and sense of ownership of the problem and the potential stake in developing effective solutions. The level of buy in each city developed during the process was critical in defining how the boundaries to the action plan could be defined. The focus of the project in Bangalore

xii | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


on the water supply and sewage board highlighted that the outputs could be used to inform not only planning but also possible service delivery and operational improvements within the context of competing private water supply and sanitation services providers.

Using multi-stakeholder dialogues in the process of action planning

The project explored the extent to whether an integrated planning approach can work in an environment where institutional structures and mandates to enable such an approach are not fully aligned.

� Integrated planning processes are likely to have the greatest impact where a regulatory framework, effective governance and institutional structures, capacity, working practices and platforms are in place promote such an approach. These conditions were not in fully in place and the project explored how a process of future proofing could be used to help create the conditions to enable such an approach.

� Taking a patient approach is needed to maximise the impact of engagement. Without a fully established and institutionalised approach, leadership is a critical resource to align and mobilise stakeholders and help steer the process.Changes in the political environment and senior technical/administrative leaders meant that there were variations in the level of

support over the course of the project leading to lack of traction or loss of momentum. Strategies to engage and re-engage key stakeholders were necessary. Madurai benefitted from support for the project from State level officials at the initiation and completion of the project which was a critical factor in gaining endorsement for the plan.

� A range of potential strategies were identified to help enable an integrated approach where full leadership and buy in across stakeholders is not in place including preliminary activities to create the conditions for integrated planning, interlinking sector related plans, using data as a focus for mobilising technical stakeholders and concentrating on building or scaling community based activities.

� The diagnostic process of gathering and combining data was helpful in bringing together partners and stakeholders to identify shared priorities. This action planning process was directed towards overcoming silo’s among government stakeholders and to help create an environment for ongoing multi-stakeholder action (although support will be required to assist this process). In Bangalore, impact of the approach was more limited as the conditions were not in place for this project to forge a partnership across a wide range of stakeholders at State and metropolitan level. In addition the methods used to explore community scale actions were different in both cities.

The involvement of a local and actively engaged civil society partner able to mobilise and engage non-governmental stakeholders in Madurai was critical in building and mobilising platforms for multi stakeholder dialogue. The use of social media and community events such as the Madurai symposium and water walks helped to build and maintain momentum for action. Using local languages to undertake dialogues was helpful in creating an active dialogue among local stakeholders.

Strategy to action

� Targeting support to develop medium and long term actions in parallel with normal annual and short term 3-5 year planning and budget cycles and the assorted short term project focus would be necessary to enable a move towards a more integrated and long term approach. The integrated strategies developed for both cities were multifaceted taking programmatic view of the actions necessary to build up over time (taking a 15-17 year time horizon). The range of actions within each action plan incorporated components including technical feasibility, capacity building and strengthening social capital actions along with actions relating to planning and governance including regulations. Some of the actions are new and non-routine and require capacities to be developed as part of the project. In addition, the scope of the plans requires multi-agency engagement to effectively tackle the

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | xiii


issues (and overcome institutional silos). Considering the existing organisational cultures and highly sector focused approach in place at present, in both cities a need was identified to build capacity for co-ordination and establish an effective governance framework.

� The process used for this project does not require changes to regulations in order for the plans to be effective as the strategy can be linked to existing statutory processes of plan making. The preparation of a Green City Plan linked to the process of the Madurai Masterplan review and CDP was seen as the process to extend the range of “future proofing” urban development, environmental and infrastructure policies adopted as part of the plan. BWSSB has responsibilities to effectively deliver many of the projects identified but engagement with other metropolitan and State level bodies will be needed to plans to gain support proposals and resourcing will need to be mobilised.

� A programmatic approach requires that national, state and international donors view the needs and proposals of cities in new ways. For example, it is unusual for city, state and national authorities to view the investment needs of cities taking a long term perspective. Without breaking programmes down into much smaller components a programmatic approach may be incompatible with the scale of resources which can be drawn down. In contrast a key issue which

international donors have reported is that small to medium sized cities often approach them with projects which are too small to be funded by traditional funding mechanisms. The transaction cost is too high in comparison with the value of projects and the scale of finance sought is not suitable for a range of typical financial products. Gaining commitment to a long term but flexible programme can help to overcome the problem of continually justifying projects and accessing funding rather than focussing on roll out and delivery.

� To deliver major capital projects there is a need to source external finance to support investment. The level and value of revenue which could be mobilised from local taxes and user charges in support of loans for capital investment is limited. As a result, grants or loans from state or national government and/or supporting co-finance from the private sector or multilateral and bi-lateral international financial institutions donors is required. The capacity and authority to broker and guarantee rests at State and National government and requires appropriate political support at these levels in addition to agreement at urban local body level.

� The process for accessing funding by engaging possible donors, applying for funding and potentially taking a project to financial close is a long process and requires sustained commitment and resources. The need for a funding strategy and support to at least access initial project preparation

and challenge fund facilities is a key need for those cities which do not have a track record in gaining the support of donors. Enabling State level bodies to act as sponsors and work with cities could provide an effective mechanism to enable take up of the support which is available.

xiv | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


What can cities and State level governments do?

Cities can start to implement a future proofing approach by considering their existing position in connection with policy and plan making, people and partnerships, finance and key events. State and national government agencies also have an important role to play in guiding and shaping action.

Policy and plan making

� Use State Level Climate Change Action Plans as a starting point for considering the issues facing the city and building support.

� Review/undertake state urbanisation reviews and strategies to understand existing patterns of development.

� Use the preparation or review of the City Development Plan (CDP) as to build in climate change considerations into planning. Future proofing can identify the components and policies required.

� The preparation of a Detailed Project Report (DPR) can provide a catalyst for considering opportunities for addressing climate risks and reducing impacts on vulnerable communities in advance of a more comprehensive strategic planning exercise.

� Within established legal and regulatory frameworks room should be made for innovation of processes and allow for new solutions to be piloted.

People and Partnerships

� City leaders – political and administrative should create opportunities for dialogue to breakdown silos within and between organisations. This could take the form of knowledge sharing sessions and group challenges to promote collaborative behaviours.

� Awareness raising – this should be integral to the process and engage the whole community providing opportunities for people to play an active part. Use of social media, community sensitisation through city walks to key problem areas as well as traditional communication methods should be used. Local community based initiatives can be used to build momentum and support for longer term projects.

� State and Urban local bodies should understand civil society and non-governmental projects and programmes which are active in their jurisdiction. Scaling the impact of existing community programmes and projects could represent an early win opportunity to scale or broaden quickly and embed city partnerships.

� The national law for larger firms to contribute 1% of their revenue to CSR activities represents an opportunity to engage the private sector and local Chamber of Indian Industry (CII) chapters.

� Knowledge and learning partnerships engaging relevant faculties within local universities and joining city peer to peer networks provide opportunities for exchanging information and ideas on what works.

What are the entry points for applying and scaling the approach?

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | xv


Using events and circumstances to shift gear

� India is subjected to climate related extreme weather events each year including flooding. While unfortunate, these events can often provide a branching point or catalyst for mobilising action to develop longer term actions beyond disaster risk reduction. Having a focus on particular vulnerable or problem locations within cities can also be helpful in developing early win projects.

� The opportunity for major new development taking place as part of a new township or rehabilitation of an existing community can provide a platform for taking an integrated approach to tackling issues at a comprehensive level.

� Political change can provide a basis for shaping plans and projects.

Finance

� Budgeting – the annual budgeting process provides an opportunity to consider how expenditure can be directed to achieve multiple goals as well as consider opportunities for revenue generation to finance plans. Participatory budgeting processes and tools could be used as a way of opening up a discussion of how to improve the effectiveness of spending.

� Grant funds and challenge funds – Many international organisations and philanthropic organisations have grant or challenge fund programmes. The prospect of funding could provide the impetus to take forward pilot projects and small scale planning and community led initiatives.

� Climate Finance. The Green Climate Fund and other international climate funds are directed towards supporting loan and grant instruments which are targeted towards addressing climate mitigation and or adaptation actions. By framing infrastructure programmes to incorporate climate risks at the same time as addressing existing gaps and future needs can enable access to this source of funding to establish more effective and “future proofed” projects.

� National governmental programmes – A future proofing action plan can help to make the case for attracting support from national programmes and funds such as those associated with the National Urban Renewal Mission and National Sustainable Habitat Mission for example.

xvi | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report


Actions for National and State Governments

A guiding hand

� National and State level governments should provide leadership and support for building effective cross sector co-operation between State and Urban local bodies for taking action. Sometimes there could be a need to help unblock issues and challenges which may emerge. Higher level agencies can help to align incentives and align stakeholders to recognise the shared value which may be developed through a collaborative approach to projects and actions.

� Establishing the field of play through establishing frameworks, regulations and standards for embedding processes and procedures can help to institutionalise best practice. Knowledge products and other manuals and toolkits can help support this process and enable programmes to be scaled effectively.

� National and state level institutions will be responsible for defining and administering programmes at city level. In developing the metrics, criteria and performance standards for projects they can incentivise and channel funding to help achieve smart city and future proofing goals as well as monitor and evaluate performance.

� Institutional structures and mechanisms which may be required to enable implementation are likely to require the support of national and state level bodies who are also likely to be responsible for formulating and adopting regulations and their approval.

� Land reform is likely to be needed to fully achieve a planned and sustainable blue green infrastructure network in order that goals for safeguarding at risk areas and a more comprehensive basis for planning and infrastructure delivery can take place allowing for appropriate land assembly and compensation to take place. This issue has received significant attention at national level.

� State level bodies can support cities in their thrust towards cross sector working. They can change the terms of the debate and ensure that all relevant players are brought to the table including the inclusion of non-governmental partners. Through application of policy at national level they can ensure that city programmes and projects are framed to deliver climate change mitigation and adaptation goals and alleviate poverty in their design.

There is a role to play for a wide range of other partners to enable cities to take action to address the challenges faced by meeting development needs in combination with addressing climate and resource challenges. Not only does this include a wide range of actors at city level including academia and civil society but also multilateral and bi-lateral development agencies, and international philanthropic and non-governmental organisations.

We hope that this project summary and sharing our experiences of this project has been helpful in exploring how integrated planning approaches can be used to address climate change at city level. We would be interested to hear of your experiences and issues faced and the opportunities you see for promoting integrated planning approaches.

The CDKN website provides an opportunity to explore the project further and share your knowledge in how other cities are tackling the issues.

http://cdkn.org/project/future-proofing-indian-cities/

Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report | 01


INTRODUCINGFUTURE PROOFING

01

02 | Future Proofing Indian Cities – Final Report




The project was delivered in three stages. Stages 1 & 2 were delivered at city level and align with the future proofing approach developed by Atkins and UCL. Stage 3 focused on disseminating the lessons learned (see Figure 1.1). This approach was adapted and streamlined to respond to the resources and timeframes available for piloting the approach. The pilots represent the first time the approach had been applied at the city level in India.

Why these cities?

Bangalore and Madurai face significant environmental risks to their future prosperity, there was strong potential to build on existing momentum for action, and the consortium partners have strong existing relationships.2 The two Indian cities span different urban types in the Atkins-UCL Future Proofing report based on the most significant environmental risks they face. The cities also differ in their capacity to respond to risks based on the strength of their urban economies, governance, planning and delivery capabilities, providing opportunities to better understand how varying capacity shapes policy responses to future proofing.

Introduction

Project Rationale

A new approach to future proofing planning has been piloted in two very different cities leading to different results in each. What explains the differences? And what can we learn for other cities?

The project has helped both cities to develop an action plan to help them respond to climate hazards and promote a transition to a low carbon economy while reducing poverty and catalysing economic development.

A process of future proofing cities was used to engage stakeholders to review current and future risks and challenges facing cities and to develop solutions which chart a clear way forward. The project has placed a special emphasis is placed on supporting and enhancing locally owned policy processes.

In March 2013, Atkins, supported by the Development Planning Unit of University College London and the Indian Institute of Human Settlements (IIHS) embarked on a process of action planning with the city authorities of Bangalore and Madurai. The process, focussed on developing future proofed urban strategies in both cities.

In Madurai we worked closely with Madurai Municipal Corporation who has been the client for the project as well as Dhan Foundation who were local delivery partners for the project. In Bangalore the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board have been the client and shaped the direction of the project with IIHS.

2. Other potential options include Surat, Mysore, and Bhubaneswar which are cities which face a wide range of environmental risks with strong potential to build on existing work to initiate a process of future proofing urban development plans.



Figure 1.1 Overall approach to this project

4. IMPACT & COST EFFECTIVENESS

IDENTIFICATION & APPRAISAL OF POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS

URBAN DIAGNOSTIC

FUTURE PROOFING METHODOLOGY STAGEPROJECT STAGE

STAGE 1

URBAN DIAGNOSTIC

DISSEMINATION OF KEY FINDINGS

CAPACITY TO ACT

� Economy � Governance� Planning

� Finance and delivery

VULNERABILITY

� Level of poverty and inequality

� Strength of basic infrastructure and services

� Urban form

RISK: URBAN TYPE

1. RISKS ADDRESSED

3. CAPACITY REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT SOLUTIONS

2. ABILITY TO TARGET VULNERABILITIES AND CATALYSE ECONOMIC

GROWTH� Urban poor

� Basic service delivery

� Jobs, capital stock, growth, competitiveness

� Carbon emissions and energy use

� Climate change hazard risks

� Resource use and ecosystems (water, food, land

use/agriculture, materials, natural habitat)

� Affordability (up-front and lifecycle costs)

� Strength and legitimacy of governance

required

� Planning capacity required

� Deliverability

5. ASSEMBLE POLICY PORTFOLIO � Policy complementarity and conflicts

� Balance of transformational, transition, and resilience measures

� Sequencing

STAGE 2CITY ACTION PLANS ON

SPECIFIC TOPIC AREA



The future proofing approach considers the growth dynamics of the city in parallel with the range of potential risks which may impact its future development. A future proofing approach involves considering looking at three groups of interrelated issues:

� climate risks e.g. flooding, extreme heat events

� resource and ecosystem risks within the city and its wider catchment e.g. water scarcity, food security, and damage to vital ecosystems due to urban growth

� energy use and carbon emissions e.g. from transport, domestic and commercial consumption, industry and waste.

Future proofing cities

What is different about the future proofing approach?

Future proofing has been developed as an approach to address the issues and challenges faced by cities in an integrated manner to respond to the challenges of urbanisation and climate change. It considers the risks facing cities now and in the future alongside current and future patterns of vulnerability and the capacity and potential for stakeholders to act to address these issues. Figure 1.1 shows the components of a future proofing approach.

This improved understanding can be used to develop strategies and plans which are more effective by ensuring that issues are addressed together and considering future changes rather than focusing on individual sector focused interventions or institutional development and capacity building initiatives in isolation.

For example, water supply issues are generally approached solely from the perspective of identifying water engineering solutions, with the potential impacts on vulnerable groups, patterns of development, food security and flooding poorly understood. When urban problems are approached in this narrow way, solutions can sometimes be ineffective, opportunities for generating wider benefits are missed, or significant unintended negative consequences can occur.

CARB

ON EMISSIONS AND ENERGY USE

CLIM

ATE R

ISKS RESOURCE AND

ECOSYSTEM

RISKS

Source: Atkins

Figure 1.2 Future proofing approach: Integrated Assessment Framework

Rather than considering climate adaptation, mitigation and resource and ecosystems as separate issues. Looking at the issues together to the beginning can help to open up the potential for new solutions to emerge which tackle multiple issues together (refer to Figure 1.2).

The solutions developed through adopting a Future proofing approach can maximise the potential of action by responding to the risks associated with issues such as climate change, resource scarcities, and damage to vital ecosystems but in a way which catalyses broader economic development, improves access to basic services, and tackles urban poverty.



The role of blue green infrastructure

In this project the concept of the blue-green infrastructure emerged as a way of relating environmental and infrastructure challenges to patterns of vulnerability at a tangible level. The approach to blue-green infrastructure adopts a systems view in order to identify the links and interconnections between issues in order to avoid dis-benefits and help to maximise win-wins. By taking this approach wider range of socioeconomic and quality of life benefits can be delivered. Blue-green infrastructure services represent the sum of natural and manmade infrastructure covering the hydrological cycle (blue infrastructure), natural habitat, ecosystems and urban greenspace (green infrastructure).

Benefits of a future proofing approach

Building a profile – or urban diagnostic - of these key risks, in conjunction with assessing the vulnerability and capacity of local institutions and stakeholders to respond to them can help to identify implementable solutions which can deliver multiple economic, social, and environmental benefits. This differs from most current approaches to urban development which tend to focus on targeting one or a few narrowly defined objectives (e.g. city competitiveness, green cities) rather than looking at packages of complementary policies which can meet multiple objectives. The benefits for Madurai of developing this approach include:

� A healthy city with functioning public infrastructures to eliminate incidence of water and vector borne diseases.

� Blue -green networks and ecosystems restored – balance achieved between natural systems and communities re-establishing and strengthening the strong historical relationship the city has had with water bodies and networks.

� Needs of community addressed and mechanisms in place to support sustainable growth and expansion of the city.

� Better able to respond to the risks which may be presented by climate change by extending strong partnerships at city scale and local level partnerships aligned with the issues so they can be more effectively managed.

Developing a shared vision

In both cities a series of meetings and workshops were used to develop a shared vision informed by the needs and aspirations expressed by government stakeholders and communities.

� An explicit focus on how the city can respond to four long run challenges - resource security (e.g. water), resilience to climate impacts, the move to a low carbon economy, and protection of ecosystems;

� The identification of packages of complementary policies in these areas which can generate multiple environmental, social, and economic benefits, crucial in the context of limited financial resources;

� A focus on measures which respond to the needs of the urban poor; and

� The identification of measures which can be implemented and driven forward by stakeholders within the city given current capacities.

� looking beyond immediate solutions to current problems by linking short, medium and long term actions.



This report draws together the key findings from applying the future proofing approach in two cities and highlights the implications for policy makers. It will be of interest to city leaders in India at national, state and local level including technical teams, elected representatives and civil society. The report will also be of interest to international donors, city leaders and others beyond India who wish to understand the issues and challenges in tackling climate change at city level and lessons for implementing integrated planning approaches.

Section 1: The remainder of this section describes in more detail the Future Proofing approach and provides an

overview to Bangalore and Madurai including a comparison of the context and issues faced. A summary is provided of how the process was applied in each city and the result.

Section 2: Highlights the action planning processes which has been used to develop future proofing plans for both cities. The process highlighted the opportunity in both cities and helped to establish priority areas to be the focus for future proofing action.

Section 3: Focuses on the future proofing process and lessons and key findings which were drawn including the conditions necessary for a future

Report overview

proofing process to be effective and the importance of multi-stakeholder engagement and governance.

Section 4: Highlights how the integration was approached in each city and how the concept of the Blue-Green infrastructure framework was used for identifying and communicating the interrelated links between issues to gain traction on vulnerability and climate change risks in parallel.

Section 5: Focuses on how implementing the plan was addressed as part of the strategy process. The key lessons of combing and sequencing actions to maximise benefits, making the case for resources and forming effective partnerships are highlighted. The enabling role which national and State level governments should play is also highlighted including policy and regulatory changes.

Section 6: The final section draws together the lessons and implications for scaling the future proofing approach and using integrated approaches to tackling climate change in cities.

A separate note has been prepared which identifies the linkages between this project and addressing India’s wider urbanisation challenge including the Government of India programme for 100 Smart cities. Key recommendations and entry points for applying the approach are given. This note can be accessed via the CDKN and Atkins website.



Why these cities?

Bangalore and Madurai face significant environmental risks to their future prosperity, there was strong potential to build on existing momentum for action, and the consortium partners have strong existing relationships.3 The two proposed Indian cities span different urban types in the Atkins-UCL Future Proofing report based on the most significant environmental risks they face. The cities also differ in their capacity to respond to risks based on the strength of their urban economies, governance, planning and delivery capabilities, providing opportunities to better understand how varying capacity shapes policy responses to future proofing.

Criteria Madurai Bangalore

Total population

� More than 1m population 2010

� Projected population 2.2m x 2030

� More than 5m population 2010

� Projected population 14.7m x 2030

Urban slum population

24.9% (2011) 8.5% (2011)

Institutional and governance

A smaller number of State and Urban Local Bodies.

Complex – large number of State and Urban Local Bodies.

Entry point Madurai City Corporation was the beneficiary and government actor shaping the action plan

Bangalore Water Sewage and Sanitation Board was the leading government actor shaping the action plan

Key priorities shared

Future proofing blue-green Infrastructure to address climate risks and build resilience

Encompassing:

� Water resources management (surface and ground water)

� Water supply

� Water quality

� Sanitation

� Solid waste management

� Fluvial and pluvial flooding

� Preservation of natural ecosystems and provision of greenspace.

Lack of effective access to water is seen as the highest priority in Bangalore and an issue the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) wishes to tackle.

� Water availability

� Water distribution to reduce transmission and distribution losses

� Water quality and pollution

� Surface water management and water bodies

� Long term water security

� Pluvial flooding

For BWSSB Wastewater management, leakage reduction and proper accounting for non-domestic uses.

Table 1.1 Context for future proofing: Madurai and Bangalore compared

Source: Census 2011, GO1;World urbanisation prospects 2014

3. Other potential options include Surat, Mysore, and Bhubaneswar which are cities which face a wide range of environmental risks with strong potential to build on existing work to initiate a process of future proofing urban development plans.



Criteria Madurai Bangalore

Governance Capacity and resources within Madurai Corporation have not increased to match the level of need and rate of growth of the city.

Limited locally sourced financial resources available.

Gaps in coordination between State and Local Bodies programmes and funding has led to gaps in adequate provision.

Fragmentation between responsibilities between Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage, Madurai Corporation Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department and Public Works Departments for management of water supply and distribution, groundwater and surface water drainage, and waste water and sanitation.

Links between the government sector and civil society, higher education and private sector actors in the city not fully coordinated to consolidate action.

Gaps in the formulation and coordination of plan making across sectors as well as follow up and enforcement.

Capacity and resources within city institutions have not increased to match the level of need and rate of growth of the city independent land owner decisions drive the agenda.

Dependency on external financial resources for capital projects.

Mandate for planning and governance is fractured

No single agency for governance and planning

Responsibility for climate change is not part of the official mandate of Urban Local Bodies.

Conflict between various institutional bodies hampers effective planning and a coordinated approach.

Lack of effective community participation in planning.

Gaps in the formulation and coordination of plan making across sectors as well as follow up and enforcement.



Madurai

Madurai is the second largest city in Tamil Nadu. One of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world, Madurai developed on the fertile plain of the River Vaigai and has been a major religious centre and settlement for two millennia. Today it is an important educational, industrial and tourism hub, but retains many remnants of its historic origins.

The urban diagnostic which was prepared highlighted that Madurai is faces a wide range of risks that will hinder future economic growth and quality of life unless action is taken soon to futureproof Madurai’s development.

Future Stresses on the city

The city is growing rapidly, and is expected to rise to over two million people by 2031. This is already leading to significant to pressures on infrastructure, housing, and basic services. Currently it is on track to locking itself into an energy intensive, high carbon, and sprawled development path.

The city is likely to be particularly impacted by climate change. Madurai lies in a warm-humid climatic zone, which is hot and dry with intermittent and irregular rainfall. Madurai sits within the Vaigai Basin which already experiences severe water stress. The expected increase in average temperatures and rainfall variability will lead to wide ranging effects on many sectors, including food and water systems, human health, buildings, transport, energy and ecosystems.

Potential Impact

The issue of water scarcity affects the whole city. Increasing demand for water resources the city combined with poor

Introduction to Madurai

pressing challenge the city needs to tackle safeguard its long term future.

The natural and man-made blue green systems need to be viewed together to develop a sustainable long term solution. This is necessary because of the interconnectedness of the network of natural systems comprising rivers, channel, canals, tanks, wetlands and groundwater overlaid with water supply, distribution and collection systems (which are only partially developed).

Madurai Corporation has been committed to delivering a universal water supply, underground sewage system, improving public health and ensuring the city becomes slum free. However, the response has previously focused on sector specific actions which have been implemented partially and not been effective in tackling the problem. The different systems are planned separately and are not well adapted to respond to long term water scarcity exacerbated by population growth and climate change stresses.

In order to address these issues and build the long term resilience of the city, taking a blue-green infrastructure

water distribution infrastructure gives rise to lack of access, intermittent supply and falling groundwater reserves. The lack of adequate sanitation means that existing supplies are contaminated. Unless there is investment to enable more efficient water use and provision of infrastructure to enable access to clean water and sanitation this issue could constrain the capability of Madurai to grow and prosper in the future.

Climate impacts will have a disproportionate impact on those living in multi-dimensional poverty with a significant proportion of the population of Madurai living in slum areas. These slum areas include some which lying close to the Vaigai River channel which will be increasingly prone to flooding, and the lack of effective sanitation in all slums is likely to lead to the spread of communicable diseases.

Why it makes sense to focus on blue green infrastructure

Analysis and consultations with a wide range of state and city level stakeholders highlighted that gaps in Madurai’s blue-green infrastructure is perhaps the most

This map is illustrative only and not intended to be used for reference purposes and is not an authority on issues of recognition, sovereignty or jurisdiction



approach by integrating the issues of water resources management with the management of urban growth (including expansion and improving slum areas). This meant looking at ground and surface water management, water supply and distribution, sanitation, drainage and storm water management as well as links to natural habitat, urban development and energy use - all in the context of a changing climate.

The stakeholders

The capacity of Madurai to respond to the environmental risks to its growth and prosperity is shaped by the strength of its governance and planning structures, and its ability to access, mobilise, and structure financing to respond to identified risks.

The Madurai Municipal Corporation (MMC) is the key organisation that manages and/or coordinates most of the city level services. MMC were the focal point for the project who played a role in requesting the technical support which the project could offer.

The Corporation boundary has recently been expanded to include a further 28 Wards around the edge of the city and the Corporation now has responsibility for meeting the deficit in infrastructure and services to this area. Unlike many other larger cities in India, all of the service provision organisations are managed by the Corporation. This means that Madurai Municipal Corporation need to be at the centre of bringing about action working with other key stakeholders. However, the capacity and resources of the city need to be strengthened to respond to the scale of the challenge.

Whilst the governance structures within Madurai are not as fractured as some of India’s larger cities, there are still a large number of other agencies involved in the planning, regulation, management, funding and delivery of infrastructure and urban development and a relative lack of coordination between them on complex technical issues.

A key part of the project was comprehensive consultation with a range of other stakeholders including the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, the Local Planning Authority, State level decision makers as well as a range of local experts, academics, land owners and other community organisations. This engagement was used to significantly strengthen the diagnostic analysis and shape the development of the action plan.

Absolutely critical was the inclusion of a local partner, the Dhan Foundation as part of the project team. As well as contributing technical knowledge, they were able to bring together key public sector stakeholders and connect them with local community groups.

The result

Endorsement by a wide range of stakeholders and formation of a city partnership to support implementation.

The outcome in Madurai was an action plan which was embraced by a diverse range of city stakeholders. The plan is now endorsed by both Madurai Municipal Corporation and at State level.

The Commissioner and Chief engineer met with the Principal Secretary for Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department (Tamil Nadu). The plan was discussed and a commitment was made to review progress of the plan every three months and to use the plan in conjunction with accessing state and national funding channels. The plan has also been discussed and endorsed by local Corporator’s within the Municipality to embed the plan locally.

“The Corporation, working together with other partners in the city, will form a new city partnership and will use the plan to enhance upcoming projects, inform future plans for the city and use it as a tool to attract additional resources to address the needs of Madurai”.

Dr Kathiravan Chinnathambi I.A.S Commissioner Madurai City Corporation

Commissioner launches the Action Plan with Stakeholders



A local partnership is evolving to take forward the further shaping and implementation of proposals. The initial focus will be on the formalisation of the partnership and the identification of initial actions to take forward the proposals which Dhan Foundation and Madurai Corporation are exploring together.

The project has led to an improved understanding of climate change issues in the city not only among government stakeholders but also civil society and the wider public. This was brought about by coverage of the project in the local media, social media campaigns and the use of “water walks” to highlight the issues on the ground. The focus on slum areas for the detailed case studies directly engaged residents both raising awareness and galvanizing action through the formation of local groups. This helped to build momentum to address the challenges facing the city.

Policy development and new ways of working

The action plan and diagnostic report has also been discussed in conjunction with the review of the City Development Plan which the Corporation and Local Planning Authority (LPA) will take forward over the coming year.

Bringing together of different types of information relating to climate change and infrastructure issues and to explore this through multi-stakeholder workshops has helped to strengthen links between partners and helped to initiate new ways of working in the city. The Corporation and other government bodies increasingly recognise the technical knowledge and capacity which the local university and civil society groups can bring. The need to

build capacity and introduce new systems within the Corporation is also recognised as part of the solution. This would help to fully embed the approach so that the issues can be considered at a greater level of detail across the whole city and to provide a basis to formalise the results into more detailed feasibility work and project design.

Budgeting and finance

A commitment has been made to consider the Action plan in conjunction with budgeting processes for the short, medium and long term. The current focus on short term budgeting means that the initial focus is on what could be achieved in the next 1-3 years through normal Corporation budgeting process. The agreement and support of State level bodies are critical factor in enabling Madurai to access funding and support to take forward plans.

Madurai Corporation does not receive the revenues from local taxes and charges to take forward large scale capital projects. This is partly due to the level of rates levied and the effectiveness of collection from local businesses and residents. The ability of the Corporation to charge for local water supply at effective rates is constrained by the existing poor level of service and the ability and willingness of residents to pay. If this issue is tackled the Corporation could improve its self-sufficiency and enable access to finance.

Engagement with donors who could support larger scale action has also been initiated. Opportunities for funding have been considered within the plan. The plan has also been shared with a number of potential funders including Tamil Nadu Urban Infrastructure Services Finance

Limited (a national government and World Bank supported delivery vehicle) as well as City Development Initiative Asia (CDIA), Asian Development Bank and GIZ with a view to mobilising support for projects identified in the plan. A resolution has also been made for the city to apply to participate in the 100 resilient Cities Programme supported by Rockefeller Foundation and to explore other opportunities to access support through philanthropic organisations.



Introduction to Bangalore

Future stresses

As with Madurai, the most severe and immediate risks to Bangalore’s future growth relate to water supply, sanitation and flooding. The public health, environmental health and economic implications of these are already becoming evident and will become increasingly severe as the Indian subcontinent moves into more unpredictable rainfall regimes associated with climate change.

The potential impact of climate change on Bangalore could result in: (i) an increase in average temperatures and increase in the number of extreme ‘hot days’ (with increased risk of drought); (ii) an increase in the unpredictability of the summer monsoon with potential for rainfall variability, and (iii) an increase in the frequency of heavy rainfall events (with increased risk of flooding).

These projected climate hazards are likely to have wide ranging impacts on a range of sectors in Bangalore – including food and water systems, health, buildings, transport, and natural ecosystems and biodiversity. The impact of these changes put the future growth and prosperity of the city at risk and limit improvements on the quality of life of residents.

Introduction to Bangalore

Bangalore is the capital of Karnataka. It has emerged as a global centre for ‘new’ service sector economies such as information technology and biotechnology. Bangalore has the highest district income in the state, contributing approximately 34% to Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) (Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2011). Economic expansion has been underpinned by investment in large scale infrastructure projects including elevated roads, a new metro, a new airport, and new special economic zones.

This rapid prosperity, and the opportunities afforded by the new knowledge economy for which Bangalore is renowned, have led to a doubling of the city’s physical footprint in the last decade (Census of India, 2011; Indian Institute for Human Settlements (IIHS), 2009; Ramachandra and Kumar, 2009). However, this rapid and unplanned urbanisation has been at the cost of the city’s resources and liveability In particular, the growth on the city’s peripheries is placing pressure on Bangalore’s natural and economic resources and infrastructure. This poses environmental and health risks for the entire city, especially for low-income and other vulnerable populations such as women, children, and the elderly. In addition, economic and population growth have led to rising energy intensity and carbon emissions. The buildings sector and construction sector have seen the fastest growth.

Potential impact

Many of Bangalore’s lakes and surface water bodies have been seriously degraded or even built upon reducing the capability of the city to deal with heavy rainfall events and to store water. The combination of increasing demand for water resources, poor water distribution infrastructure, and contamination of existing supplies could constrain the ability of Bangalore to grow and prosper in the future as demand in the city and wider region continues to grow. A significant proportion of the city’s population lives in slum areas. The city is also growing rapidly, creating challenges in ensuring the provision of adequate infrastructure, housing, and basic services to meet the growing demands of its residents.

The issues associated with rising energy use and increasing congestion include limiting the economic potential of the city (congestion harming economic productivity) and extended travel times and air pollution eroding the quality of life of city. The city could also face rising energy costs interruption of supplies if the energy needs of the city are not addressed. The dependency of the city on fossil fuels and the impact on global climate change also remains significant.

Bangalore

This map is illustrative only and not intended to be used for reference purposes and is not an authority on issues of recognition, sovereignty or jurisdiction



Project focus

The severe water stress which Bangalore and the wider region are already experiencing, the interconnectedness of Bangalore’s ‘blue infrastructure’ to other challenges such as managing the impacts of climate change and spread of communicable diseases, along with concerns about the quality of water made addressing water security the most urgent system wide priority for Bangalore for the Action plan to address by this project.

The interest shown by Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board in exploring the links between the services they are responsible for and other influences on the water supply system informed the focus of the Action Plan on this range of issues.

BWSSB’s ambitions included increasing the reuse of wastewater in Bangalore, reducing leakages, and water loss, and improving revenue generation. BWSSB officers expressed interest in participating in the future proofing and the action planning process, and were keen to see examples and a case study of how water supply and sanitation is currently working, as well as ways in which their existing goals and plans could be informed by the action plan.

Consultations with key stakeholders from government agencies, NGOs, academic and research institutions were a core element of the action planning approach in Bangalore in order to reflect their views and to help make the link between sectors. The project included consultation with Bruhat Bengaluru Mahangara Palike (BBMP) Municipal Corporation, the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), the Bangalore Metropolitan Regional

Development Authority (BMRDA), the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM), Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL) and the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB). The goal was to work with the stakeholders, especially those in government agencies, to produce a realistic plan that would help Bangalore grow sustainably.

Rising energy use and the transport issues of the city are also recognised. However, while interest was shown by BESCOM to consider potential actions in relation to energy infrastructure and opportunities for renewable energy. However, other initiatives such as the Climate Resilient Green Growth Plan for Karnataka were already beginning to tackle these issues in a parallel project.

The stakeholders

Using a focus on water to consider the implications and links to other sectors. This more limited ambition for the project Action Plan to focus on BWSSB as a basis to explore linkages to climate change and development challenges in other sectors (engaging other government bodies in the process) was partly a reflection of the institutional challenges in Bangalore and the resources and time available for the project.

The opportunity for the project to focus at the city scale across all relevant sectors is more of a challenge for larger cities.

In the case of Bangalore there is no single agency at the city level that controls future urban planning and development. In fact, this power is dispersed widely among

several municipal and state-run agencies, often leading to contentious decision-making as jurisdictions and functions of the various agencies tend to overlap. The fragmented governance arrangements mean that the ability of the municipal government to tackle local challenges in a comprehensive fashion and to direct development in a sustainable direction has been limited.

The opportunity to explore the potential of a future proofing approach in conjunction with metropolitan scale planning processes was explored as part of the project with a view to bringing together stakeholders from across all sectors (similar to Madurai).

The potential benefit of a future proofing approach was recognised, the various planning agencies with responsibilities for planning in Bangalore including the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), the Bangalore Metropolitan Regional Development Agency (BMRDA), and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) (Municipal Corporation). However, there was a range of views on how the project could benefit each organisation and a lack of alignment on how the project could address the scale and complexity of the challenges for a large city like Bangalore within the available timelines and resources available for the project.

The electoral cycle and change of administration at State level during the diagnostic stage also represented a barrier to taking this route to apply the future proofing approach.

The number and range of institutional and non-governmental stakeholders also



represented a challenge to piloting Future proofing at Metropolitan scale. One of the biggest challenges was developing an understanding of an integrated approach to dealing with environmental risks, particularly because most city-level agencies do not see this as part of their mandate. The second challenge was inter agency working. It is a major challenge to bring officers from different city and state level agencies together to discuss challenges within the water and sanitation sector, since the governance of this sector in Bangalore is fragmented. With several agencies responsible for similar issues tensions can emerge if ownership is claimed by multiple organisations. There are also issues which no organisations wish to take responsibility or ownership of. The third challenge was the challenge of bringing government officers and other non-governmental stakeholders together in order to build a shared understanding of issues, and inform the development of the action plan. This challenge was similar in Madurai, however the difference in Bangalore are the range and number of stakeholders in the city and the politicised nature of social relations within and between governmental and civil society actors. In this environment a multi-stakeholder approach at the city level would require considerable leadership to create the conditions to mobilise stakeholders which was not available at the time the project.

The outcome of the consultation process during the diagnostic stage of the project was that government stakeholders had a strong preference for engaging around a project focused within a particular sector that could bring in fresh thinking to tackle wider challenges on sustainable development and poverty reduction. Given the urgent challenge around water

supply and sanitation issues, it was agreed that BWSSB should take the lead for the project.

The result

After exploring the issues widely at diagnostic stage the result in Bangalore was that the preparation of an Action Plan taking an integrated approach to planning across all sectors was not achieved by this project. There were a number of reasons for this:

� The institutional and stakeholder landscape in large megacities is complex. As a result, there is a need for leadership to be in place to resolve tensions and conflicts between institutions which need to be overcome to gain support for an integrated approach. In Bangalore the overlapping and blurred mandates mean that gaining traction on how and who should take a leading role proved difficult. The high level technical and political actors who could have been a source of leadership did not fully engage due to the timing of the project around the time of elections (and associated organisational changes). In this environment officials need to choose which issues and projects they wish to champion. A one year project without an established route to implement proposals was not seen as sufficient value to invest time in.

� Achieving an integrated approach for a large city may require a different approach. To overcome this problem, either resources need to be increased for the project in order to address multiple sectors to be tackled in parallel and then brought together to create an integrated approach

aligning with existing planning processes and structures. Alternatively, the formation of a wider partnership with agencies able to provide downstream support (such as national Ministries and International donors) could be established at the outset to incentivise engagement and activate leadership to mobilise partners. The formation and agreement of such partnerships requires a significant commitment and investment in time and may take a year or more to formalise.

The result which was achieved in Bangalore is set out below: The multi-stakeholder engagement workshop and discussion around the urban diagnostic increased awareness and dialogue among stakeholders on the importance of considering climate change issues and understanding the potential impact on vulnerable communities and infrastructure. However, integrated action across different agencies through planning or strengthening co-ordination has not taken root.

The workshop and meetings held opened a dialogue between government agencies and civil society and the academic sector enabled discussion of the key issues to take place to build a shared understanding of the water infrastructure systems in Bangalore and how these are likely to be affected by future urbanisation and climate and resource challenges in the future. The key institutional gaps and tensions were highlighted and are perceived as the major impediment which needs to be overcome to enable an integrated approach.



The case studies undertaken on the ground highlighted the challenges and responses taken at present at local level where these are gaps in infrastructure provision and variability in the level of service provision and helped to frame a systems view of the interconnected actions needed by different institutions. The Action Plan developed with BWSSB used this information to develop a plan which linked together actions which BWSSB but with support and linkages to other agencies and how the capital investment plans of BWSSB could be enhanced to take account of climate variability risks.

Engagement took place with relevant city and parastatal government bodies around the diagnostic. Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) with IIHS led the development of an action plan.

The opportunities for improved planning, infrastructure and design were identified and explored. The action plan provided a costed plan for combining a range of solutions embracing water resources, water supply distribution management, wastewater and sludge collection treatment, improved services delivery and water demand management which enable a more effective approach to addressing climate risks.

The first of the projects to move forward directly linking with this project has been the indirect potable re-use of water through storm water harvesting. BWSSB are also planning to use the plan to engage to help mobilise resources.

A new chairman has recently been appointed at BWSSB. The team is reviewing the proposals of the plan and results of the project with a view

to deciding the next steps. The project counterpart at BWSSB sees one of the next steps as sharing and engaging State level bodies around the plan including the Water Resources Department, Public Works Department and Urban Development Department. Support from these stakeholders is required to enable a joined up approach and for systems and working arrangements to be put in place to enable co-ordination.

Initial engagement has taken place with a range of agencies including the World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB) and GIZ with a view to mobilising support for projects identified in the plan. ADB are reviewing the Action Plan in conjunction with their Bangalore City Cluster Development Investment Project which is looking at an integrated approach to addressing infrastructure needs and economic opportunities for the metropolitan area which is being taken forward with BBMP. BWSSB had not been engaged regarding this important initiative for the city. The results of this project are providing a basis for BWSSB to engage with this programme enable discussion of climate change risks to form part of the discussion in identifying and shaping projects.

The lack of access to water and available infrastructure has been identified by ADB as a potential brake on growth and one of the reasons hampering the productivity of the city. The diagnostic and action plan can play a role in identifying how to tackle governance and the institutional landscape in Bangalore in to take forward an integrated approach effectively at a practical level. The ADB-BBMP program will provide physical and non-physical investment in selected clusters within the BBMP area to: (i) improve regional and

metropolitan planning, (ii) upgrade key economic and social infrastructure, and (iii) enhance urban governance (including service delivery) to create a better business and investment climate. The Program proposes to achieve the above objectives by: (i) ensuring that multi-stakeholder demand-based (cluster) infrastructure development is preceded by metropolitan economic and sector planning, (ii) promoting sectoral coordination and convergence, and (iii) establishing a strong partnership between public and private sectors.

The Program will seek to use a number of innovative financing, capacity development, and reform instruments. There is potential for BWSSB to link with BBMP to align action and explore how the projects identified by BWSSB with stakeholders in the Action Plan can be taken forward. The project also allows the capacity development to be supported in conjunction with infrastructure provision. The multi-finance facility will also enable Bangalore Metropolitan Region to implement a structured roadmap on a programmatic basis which takes into consideration the economic, social, and environmental needs together.



ACTION PLANNING IN MADURAI

02

FUTURE PROOFING PROCESS

02

05

Using local actors and language is important to help create an active dialogue

04

09

A flexible approach is needed to adjust the process and focus of the project to maximise the impact of engagement

02

Future proofing concepts can bring a new frame of reference to inform planning

03

Support is needed from state and national government support to develop and adopt policy and regulatory frameworks to help enable effective action

11

Evidence used in the right way can convince and mobilise change

06

Establishing partnerships and processes for co-ordination is a useful way to bridge between strategy and implementation

Using plans to make the case for funding and mobilising local resources represents a key measure of success for cities

10

Focussing at the city scale is important to gain support for climate change action

07

Blue-green infrastructure is a useful focus to prioritise critical system links and identify issues should be addressed

08

Using multi-stakeholder dialogues to explore the urban diagnostic and develop action plans is an effective way of supporting partners to define shared priorities and goals.

01

Combining different perspectives helps to improve understanding of the problem and develop new solutions

The difference a future proofing process has made:11 Key lessons

Figure 2.1



05

Using local actors and language is important to help create an active dialogue

04

09

A flexible approach is needed to adjust the process and focus of the project to maximise the impact of engagement

02

Future proofing concepts can bring a new frame of reference to inform planning

03

Support is needed from state and national government support to develop and adopt policy and regulatory frameworks to help enable effective action

11

Evidence used in the right way can convince and mobilise change

06

Establishing partnerships and processes for co-ordination is a useful way to bridge between strategy and implementation

Using plans to make the case for funding and mobilising local resources represents a key measure of success for cities

10

Focussing at the city scale is important to gain support for climate change action

07

Blue-green infrastructure is a useful focus to prioritise critical system links and identify issues should be addressed

08

Using multi-stakeholder dialogues to explore the urban diagnostic and develop action plans is an effective way of supporting partners to define shared priorities and goals.

01

Combining different perspectives helps to improve understanding of the problem and develop new solutions

This part of the report analyses the key findings and learning from piloting a future proofing planning process in the two cities. It draws together learnings from how the process worked in practice examining differences between the cities and what this could mean for future practice in terms of how the process could be further developed and refined.

The key lessons are highlighted opposite and then explored through the subsequent 3 sections exploring the process, how integration was achieved and how plans were taken from strategy towards implementation.

Key lessons from applying a future proofing approach



Process for adapting future proofing to a city context

This Section highlights the process used for adapting a process of future proofing to a city context and how this worked out in practice. It contrasts the different experiences in both cities and highlights findings which should be recognised in applying integrated planning approaches in other cities.

Key Finding 1: Using multi-stakeholder dialogues to explore the urban diagnostic and develop action plans is an effective way of supporting partners to define shared priorities and goals.

Future proofing was pivotal in identifying needs and exploring what the future could be like. Discussing the issues with stakeholders individually and then bringing different stakeholders together through meetings and workshops was key to testing, shaping and strengthening the diagnostic which was prepared from a technical perspective. Discussions helped to identify areas of shared concern and to identify areas of alignment among stakeholders.

In Madurai, city partners working together developed a series of shared priorities and a basis for joined up action by establishing a forum which provides a space for stakeholders to engage outside of their normal silos. It is expected that formalised mechanisms will now be established to institutionalise this way of working. However ongoing support and resources will be required in order that Madurai Corporation can take action with other stakeholders.

In Bangalore stakeholders came together to review the urban diagnostic. However, the conditions were not in place for this project to forge a partnership

across a wide range of stakeholders at Metropolitan and State level. Key issues were the timing of the State elections and subsequent change in technical decision makers. The issue of the blurred responsibilities and subsequent tensions between different governmental bodies in the city was another barrier. A committee has been established in the city to develop proposals for reform.

In both cities at the outset of the process the various stakeholders were working independently towards their various agendas with limited coordinated action. The future proofing approach helped stakeholder see where they had shared issues and objectives and where action could be aligned. The impetus created by the project and creating the conditions whereby dialogue could take place. This included using initial meetings to understand perspectives, creating a diagnostic to explore the issues and then workshops to bring together different perspectives and encourage debate.

Using stakeholder mapping techniques with stakeholders helped to define who could potentially be involved in the process and helped to extend discussions beyond the usual suspects. Making the process as inclusive as possible was seen as the best way to help activate lasting partnerships and processes and help to overcome the barriers and silo’s between different departments and institutions.

An integral part of the process of developing the diagnostic and action plans was to help establish conditions for implementation of the resulting proposals. This was not viewed as a one off activity but part of an ongoing process.

In Madurai, the involvement of Dhan Foundation grounded in the locality who

had established networks and contacts was a critical factor in mobilising and raising awareness to a wider audience using mechanisms such as the city symposium and through regular communication via social media platforms. In Bangalore, IIHS a respected academic institution used its convening power to draw together different stakeholders to explore the issues.

The approach

The process of action planning was used to develop, deepen and share understanding between different stakeholders, as well as exploring and initiating discussion of what the opportunities could be for each city to address its existing vulnerabilities and adapt to climate risks which are expected to impact both cities.

The process to support engagement included the following turning points and milestones:

� building platforms for engagement

� reviewing the current position and through the creation of the urban diagnostic

� using the action planning process to clarify and examine the implications of the existing situation for vulnerable communities

� bringing together stakeholders to engage together and consider the priority issues

� exploring and selecting the range of different actions which can be mobilised to reduce vulnerability and adapt to climate risks.

� socialising the plan and discussing the initial stages of implementation.



of continuity and bridge between changes in Commission/senior decision makers are local level. Hosting a multi stakeholder workshop at the British High Commission was helpful to align State level representatives who are not easy to mobilise due to their time pressures and commitments. This was not possible in Bangalore to elections and long delays in senior representatives being appointed.

There was continuity in the day to day contacts at deputy technical officer level in both Madurai Municipal Corporation and BWSSB which ensured the viability of the project. However, communications and progress on the project was not continuous because of partners needing to deputise and take on additional responsibilities which reduced the bandwidth to engage. This is a reflection of the limited capacities which exist within urban local bodies among the second ladder of officials and was particularly an issue in Madurai as a smaller city compared with Bangalore.

Bangalore with a population of over 8.42 million3 people has a complex institutional landscape with agencies being responsible for different spatial jurisdictions and with State and Urban Local Bodies having overlapping responsibilities for sectors and competing agendas.

The diagnostic and project was explored with a range of agencies including Great Bangalore Municipal Corporation known as Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) and Bangalore Water Supply and Sanitation Board (BWSSB) and BESCOM (electricity). The level of institutional engagement with multi-stakeholder workshops to share the findings of the diagnostic was mixed.

Key Finding 2: A flexible approach is needed to adjust the process and focus of the project to maximise the impact of engagement.

Although framed as a linear process established over a fixed period of 12 months, the path of the project in reality took a less neat iterative process which flexed and adapted to include new actors, changes of governmental administrators and political administrations and associated changes in the level of engagement as well as new information and opportunities which emerged over the course of the action planning process. There are significant time implications for involving and maintaining the network of actors involved in the project.

To avoid changes in key personnel derailing the project, the changes in dynamics were handled by the local teams in each city (IIHS and Dhan Foundation) together with the Atkins team in India tracking changes in local circumstances on the ground. For each change there was a need to introduce the project to the new stakeholder and understand their needs and agendas at each stage (and to adapt in response). The changes did lead to variations in the level of appetite and engagement during the project reflecting the views of stakeholders. However, the main implication was delay of multi-stakeholder engagement activities during periods where we were awaiting new decision makers to be appointed and bedded in order for them to be in a position to engage in the project (which is not seen as an urgent and important activity).

Involving State level representatives at an early stage (which was possible in Tamil Nadu) helped to provide a degree

Rather than develop an action plan through the BBMP or BDA the BWSSB emerged as the agency which wished to explore how a future proofing action plan could help to coordinate action around water issues and how tailored strategies could be developed to respond to differing needs in different parts of the city.

BWSSB used the urban diagnostic and case studies of to explore how their plans should be shaped in an environment where multiple supply chains for water supply and competing systems have evolved to address the needs of consumers. Private players and individual households have stepped in to compete with BWSSB but also to bridge the gap where infrastructure gaps exist. The Action plan considered how to regulate and manage such a situation. Making a case to justify the provision of infrastructure to areas which are partially is a particular challenge which proposals respond to. This contrasted with past proposals which focused only on BWSSB’s role as a supplier with less recognition and consideration of how households may interact with other providers.

For future projects one consideration would be to consider making further resources available in order to base a technical member of the team within the governmental partner office’s at least for key parts of the project. Even though, Atkins and IIHS had presence in Bangalore project meetings were not sufficient to fully penetrate the client organisation.

The mode of partnership working with non-governmental representatives in India is something which is unfamiliar in the culture of governmental bodies in India. While existing relationships and trust had been developed in both cities



Category ofWater Sources

SuppliersMode of Supply/

Sources Consumers

SurfaceWater

GroundWater

BWSSB water supply

Private players

Self-supply

Piped water supply network

Water tankers

Neighbourhood tube wells both with

electrified and non-electrified

pump

Artisan wells and tube wells

Directly from surface - lakes, ponds, and canals

Domestic residual

Commercial establishments

Non-revenue water consumer

Industrial establishments

Economically weaker sections

(Non-Revenue)

Unaccounted for water

consumer

over a number of years before the start of the project there were uncertainties among some officials of what could really be achieved by the project and how to engage as an organisation particularly in between meetings and workshops. This perception was apparent for both consultant, academic and NGO partners

among the project team. Leadership from client contacts within the partner organisations and maintaining consistent messages provided the support needed for the project.

Figure 2.2 Conceptual diagram illustrating multiple supply chains in the city

Case study: Unregulated supply chains affects how water resources can be tackled

Tankers supply water to households and establishments

Given that BWSSB is not able to able to cater entire water demand for city, both households and establishments depend on other multiple sources, as indicated earlier. There little information on each of supply chains- whether there are tankers, or bottled water. Existence of these multiple chains means that there is a higher possibility of contamination of potable water.

Source: IIHS Primary Study, 2014

3 BBMP area, 2011 Census.



Key Finding 3: Using local actors and language was important to create an active dialogue

A process of action planning involving civil society and governmental actors facilitated by international academic and technical consultants was used to shape the development of the action plans. Local actors and facilitators were pivotal in establishing a platform which could be used to activate dialogues linked to future proofing. The processes was framed and situated in the local debate in a way using language and images which resonated with other local stakeholders. The benefit of this was to increase engagement with a wider number of people than would have otherwise been possible and stimulate a wider of debate of what the future of the city could be like.

For example in Madurai the dialogue drew upon the associations the city has as an important temple city and religious centre. The pride and identity which citizens have for the city and the historic traditions associated linked to the use of water at the temple were used to highlight the issue of how the natural and human-made infrastructure systems providing water to the city had fallen out of balance. Traction was gained on how the link between the natural lake/tank system and drainage channels could be restored to enhance the image and identity of the city.

Dhan Foundation were helpful in relating the potential opportunities presented by future proofing the city to the wider local narratives about the past, present and future of the city using examples of past events and situations. Situating the diagnostic and action planning with local actors helped to inspire a community

Raising awareness and mobilising the local community as part of the action planning process in Madurai

The project team interacted with many people across a range of social groups and institutional settings during the action planning process. More than 100 people in 25 locations across the city were interviewed as part of Focus Group Discussions and Multi Stakeholder workshops. This included the informal settlement communities living alongside the river as well as major landowners, people working in establishments alongside the river corridor and middle class residential colonies. This process not only worked as an awareness campaign and to mobilise the local community, but also allowed the research team a deep access into the lived experience of people on the history of the river corridor, its transformation over the years and witness directly the systemic causes (for example the sewerage and water supply infrastructure, and solid waste management system) and problems faced by the community on their everyday life. More than 20 recorded voice files and other media products like videos, photographs and maps generated from this process were used in the focus group meetings and multi stake holder workshops.

A ‘Water Walk’, was held which helped the participants to conceptualise blue-green infrastructure as a fundamental part of the ecological heritage of Madurai. More than 50 participants were taken on a transect tour along the 15 Kilometres of Kiruthumal river corridor starting at the origins of the river at Thuvariman tank to the Samanatham tank end, stopping along specific locations where there is evidence of:

� Wastewater being used for vegetable cultivation

� Areas experiencing severe pollution from multiple sources (including households, factories, corporation sewage pumping stations, manholes, garages, cattle rearing, public institutions etc.)

� Encroachment from development

� Links and associations with other tanks and water channels; and

� How the river supports informal settlements

This process has had a significant impact on the participants. Many participants directly witnessed the importance of the blue-green infrastructure in Madurai for the first time.

“I have never seen these parts of the city before this experience has made me see Madurai in a new light and the connections along the Kiruthumal between Thideer Nagar and other areas”. Local resident.

The participants learned how the river corridor changes its form along diverse locations in the city – from its origins, its various interconnections with other water channels and water tanks, the layers of land uses and old village settlements alongside, the impact of the bed concreting, the forms of pollution (including the role of the Corporation’s pumping stations and private septic tank cleaning contractors in polluting the river), the impact of waste water agriculture and the multiple vulnerabilities that the people living alongside are exposed to.



based approach to tackling the issues identified using ‘bottom up solutions’. This was not confined to existing initiatives but also helped to mobilise those not already engaged and new project ideas.

Facilitating community meetings/surveys in Bangalore and Madurai in local Kannada/Tamil where appropriate with the process led by locally based team members helped to maximise understanding and engagement among stakeholders. In Madurai the multi-stakeholder workshops were also held predominantly in Tamil rather than English.

While there was an active dialogue about the project particularly in Madurai (including a community symposium and social media campaign), with additional time and resources preparing additional tailored knowledge management products in local languages could have helped to further embed and raise awareness about the project among the community.

Key Finding 4 - Combining different perspectives helps to improve understanding of the problem and develop new solutions

A key ingredient to helping to frame the issues and challenges of both cities was to inspire a discussion and debate about what the future of the city could be like.

A key part of this was to highlight how the issues were interconnected and linked at each scale from the local, city as well as greater than city scales for trends and drivers relating to climate change. This was enabled and enriched by mobilising and combining ideas drawn from different types of knowledge. This included:

� local tacit knowledge from residents and citizens including knowledge from local expert advisors

� local technical/academic expertise

� engineering and technical expertise from urban local bodies involved in planning and managing infrastructure networks on a day to day basis

� local private sector perspectives

� international perspectives from Indian and outside academics and technical experts in planning, social development, climate and environment and infrastructure experts. These experts brought the lens of climate change and helped to conceptualise and develop a shared understanding which synthesised the contributions made by all actors.

The involvement of external academic and technical experts working with Governmental and civil society actors helped to reframe the debate and provide external challenge and present a branching point which provided the space and opportunity for local actors to shape an alternative path to business as usual approach. The involvement of technical and academic experts helped to introduce the concept to blue-green infrastructure and use this as a basis for integrating proposals.

The concept of blue-green infrastructure highlighted how natural and human-made systems were networked and impacted on one another helped to highlight how more coordinated action would be needed. The concept also helped to provide a vision for restoring and remaking the natural ‘life support’ systems of the city. The diagnostic was used to provide reference points to situate local debates and discussions and provide information which could be used to help define priorities and where action could be taken.

In Madurai to show how blue-green networks interact on the ground the example of one river corridor (selected using the diagnostic) was used to explore in more detail the implications of how risks and challenges were interlinked and to engage stakeholders in identifying the range of actions which could be deployed to solve the range of interconnected issues (refer to box 4).

In Bangalore a contrasting approach was used using the knowledge of IIHS and the findings of the diagnostic case studies were selected in consultation with BWSSB which represent the range of challenges faced in the city in terms of water infrastructure. Two very different

areas were chosen the first an older area close to the centre of Bangalore and a second in a rapidly expanding area. Both areas experienced gaps in infrastructure provision and level of service and were vulnerable to climate risks. However, how these patterns manifested themselves and the responses and implications for how BWSSB and other stakeholders should respond are very different (refer to box 5).

Drawing firm conclusions by comparing the methods and process used in both cities is not straight forward given that the lead client, context and level and type of engagement is different. However, the process followed in Madurai was more open with a wider range of stakeholders involved. It was possible to bring different types of stakeholder together sooner – the involvement of Dhan who used their networks to raise awareness of the project had the effect of increasing the profile of the project and placed pressure on public bodies which was partly responsible for increasing engagement and accountability as the project progressed.

In Bangalore, the reluctance of BWSSB to engage as closely with other stakeholders (taking a more hands off role) it would have been counter-productive to pursue a similar strategy for engagement. However the case studies were helpful in bringing additional insight to BWSSB in terms of how to adapt their approach to addressing gaps in service delivery to respond to the needs of users and what range of interventions could be effective.



How using a case study approach assisted action planning in Madurai

Madurai region is dotted with hundreds of small and large water tanks that are networked with its main river Vaigai and minor river Kiruthumal with the help of many distributor channels. Currently this blue-green infrastructure is severely disrupted due to the fragmented pattern of decision-making and practices of urbanisation. Identification of this network resulted in the proposition that any path that promotes sustainable urbanisation of Madurai should move beyond a geography bounded by administrative areas to one which addresses risk and vulnerabilities caused by the actual impact of development on the water systems. As a result, it was agreed that the study team should focus on a case study of a river corridor in the city to understand how the complex relationships between water supply, sanitation, development and poverty interact. This case study focused on the Kiruthumal river corridor, which is a tributary of the River Vaigai.

The research process involved detailed documentation (mapping, photo and video) of 15 kilometres of the corridor, interviews with a wide range of people who live alongside the river, and three focus group meetings (two meetings with communities living along its edges and one with experts, government officials, major land owners along the edges, etc). This primary fieldwork and action research process lasted for about four weeks in November 2013.

The way the river corridor transforms from its natural spring origins to various locations across the city was documented in detail to understand the socio-spatial-

ecological interactions and governance issues. This process revealed the complex risks and vulnerabilities that many people in Madurai are exposed to as a result of the state of blue-green infrastructure, as well as the challenges that lie ahead for Madurai’s sustainable growth. This documentation produced a range of analytical materials that was used later for the focus group discussions and multi stakeholder workshop. The study examined the following in detail to understand the risk, vulnerabilities and the capacities to act:

� origin and the way Kiruthumal corridor integrates with the network

� heritage importance - cultural and ecological

� relationship with pattern of land use;

� impacts of the institutional goverance setup

� impacts of existing projects and programs

� imagining the possible futures and key reflections on methods and process of restoration.

In Madurai, the network view of infrastructure and systemic opportunities for transformation was explored by stakeholders by examining the issues and challenges and opportunities by taking a transect view along a particular corridor (the Kiruthumal River) from close to its source through the city.

A series of water walks were made to highlight existing practices in the city showing where the corridor is impacted from lack of solid waste management, pollution and discharges from leaks and gaps in the waste water networks, water extraction and contamination of water

supplies used for drinking and food production. It illustrated that localised action in isolation at a Ward level would be ineffective in providing a sustainable solution and that to achieve a more transformational solution a platform for coordinating action would be required.

Since the initial walks Dhan Foundation extended this approach to explore other corridors throughout the city. The walks have been well supported and have helped to supplement the understanding and diagnosis of issues in the city and help to raise awareness of how the networks of blue and green infrastructure in the city are connected and the implications which pollution has for communities in other parts of the city.

Box 4



The field study and its contribution to action planning in Bangalore

The action planning process in Bangalore included a validation exercise conducted by IIHS in two locations. These site case studies provided a grounded illustration of water supply and sanitation opportunities to address the issues experienced by communities and establishments in the context of local realities of land use and planning. The case studies helped in the framing of what the potential ‘solutions’ could be and what they might look like at the local level to enable BWSSB take forward actions within its own planning, budgeting regulatory frame (and reach out to other stakeholders whose support is needed to make action effective). The aim of the field study was threefold: first, to validate the issues that were raised in the urban diagnostic study including issues related to disparities in access to water and sanitation services in Bangalore; the lack of good quality water, groundwater contamination, and the impact of this on vulnerable, especially poor, populations in the city; second, to understand issues at household and neighbourhood level; and finally, to validate action plan components at the local scale. The first site is located close to the centre of Bangalore, in the older colonial Cantonment area. The site has a range of land uses including residential, institutional and smaller commercial establishments. The second site is located on the south eastern periphery of Bangalore, and is representative of newer forms of development in the city including large gated communities, information technology parks, and large commercial establishments such as malls.

The case of a vulnerable household in Lingarajapuram

M, a middle aged woman, lives with her one son and four daughters in a single room house in Lingarajapuram, close to the Banaswadi railway line. They have been living in this house for the last 12 years. M lost her husband eight years ago and does not work, her son being the primary earning member of the family – he works as an unskilled construction worker for approximately eight months in a year, and in other work for rest of the year. As a construction worker, his earns about Rs. 10,000 monthly. His eldest sister also brings home about Rs.3,500 monthly working as a domestic worker. Both have been educated only up to high school. The other two sisters are still enrolled in school. The family has minimal assets – only a TV, and is heavily dependent on the PDS system both for food and cooking fuel. They have access to BWSSB water through a tap located immediately outside their house. This water is used for both potable and non-potable users, and is stored in pots at home. The water is not treated in any way before being used for drinking. At the time of interview, they claimed that they had not received water from the tap for the last 10 days. Such disruptions are fairly common. In such instances, the family procures water from the nearby Sulabh public toilet complex by paying Rs.1 per pot. The family does not have a toilet, and relies on the public toilet complex, which charges Rs.2 per use. The house is built over a drain, and is susceptible to flooding. The case of M and her family highlight a range of concerns which were used to inform the action plan:

� There is a need for greater focus on the poor and vulnerable households because of lower level of service delivery to them. Households source water from multiple sources rather than rely on one provider to cope with intermittent supply which can increase lead to health risks.

� BWSSB could use emergency tankers to provide clean water during outage periods. In addition increasing efforts to conserve resources (e.g. through rainwater harvesting) and tackling maintenance of distribution networks to reduce leakages could help to improve the resiliency of supply.

� The lack of comprehensive records on the infrastructure assets which BWSSB owns and the condition of networks, and lack of adequate systems for combining information from users makes prioritising and targeting action a significant challenge and leads to a reactive approach to tackle the issues which arise.

Box 5



ACTION PLANNING IN MADURAI

02

IMPROVING INTEGRATIONUSING BLUE-GREEN INFRASTRUCTUREPLANNING

03



Introduction

This section highlights how the technical approach to explore integration of different issues was adapted in the context of both cities. It highlights how a longer term perspective to planning incorporating consideration of climate change and reducing vulnerability was achieved at different stages. Issues regarding the information available to plan and how a coherent strategy was developed which reflected the level of ownership available in each city.

Key Finding 5: Future proofing concepts can bring a new frame of reference to inform planning.

The normal processes of preparing city development plans and sector plans (for example for water supply, mobility, poverty reduction etc.) do not provide a process for systematically considering issues facing the city together or to consider the choices which may need to be made of where to focus.

The planning cycle for City Development plans takes a 5 year view and are limited to budget cycles. With constrained capacity and resources there is no requirement or incentive for urban local bodies to take a long term planning approach. The exception is land use planning whereby a 15 year planning horizon is typically considered. However, the issue is that sectors which are required to make land use masterplans successful may not be considered (for example by linking development with the provision of infrastructure or avoiding development on land which is subject to environmental risks).

The future proofing process brought information together regarding long term development and environmental trends and related these to current problems. It encouraged discussion of the kind of approach which may be needed to establish a development path which addresses today’s immediate concerns in parallel with providing a sustainable basis for meeting long terms needs and challenges.

Improving integration using blue-green infrastructure planning



� There is an opportunity for local communities to become more engaged in the protection and channels and tanks and to benefit from them for local supply, amenity and tourism.

� Flooding can be addressed, particularly in the most vulnerable areas, through the separation of sewers and storm drains, construction of adequate surface drainage, flood storage and green infrastructure improvements.

� There is potential to improve the effectiveness of the water supply system through the re-use of waste water, improvements to the capacity and efficiency of local water treatment facilities, as well as upgrades to mains water infrastructure.

The action planning process identified a range of opportunities to improve blue-green infrastructure in Madurai.

� There is a major opportunity to improve the sewer network, ensuring it collects all wastewater and is delivered to the treatment works without contamination of the environment. This also needs to take into account future changes from population growth and the implications of increased rainfall from climate change.

� Whilst sanitation programmes are having positive impacts in the city, there is still much work to be done. There is an opportunity to ensure the whole population of Madurai understand the benefits of sanitation and makes use of toilets (both private and community).

� The collection and disposal of solid waste can be improved in the city, in particular to ensure the city’s waterways are not used as dumping grounds. This needs effort both to improve waste collection systems and infrastructure, as well as education to ensure the dangers of waste disposal in rivers are well understood.

� Channels and tanks should be restored to their previous intended function, enabling better storage of drinking water and acting as balance ponds to prevent flooding.

� Legislation and management of channels and tanks should be improved to prevent future encroachment, manage abstraction and establish operational rules.

� Structures to improve the coordination of stakeholders and the planning for blue-green infrastructure should be considered.

� A “Green City masterplan” should be developed to provide policies to enable the effective management of development to protect communities and maintain and enhance blue-green infrastructure and the associated benefits to the community. The plan would be institutionalised and formalised through the update of the statutory City Development plan and land use masterplan (further details are provided in Project 13 within the Action Plan).

The opportunity: Madurai



or permanent, poses a risk for the entire city in two ways: a. long term depletion and unavailability; and b. temporary disruptions arising out of climate, environmental, socioeconomic, and other reasons.

� Unregulated supply chains can be addressed. Since BWSSB does not cater to entire water needs of the city, the households and industry are dependent on a range of other options. There is no information, and monitoring of these multiple chains resulting in the hazards of a. poor quality of water and b. unregulated withdrawal from ground sources.

� Preventing the depletion of lakes and other water bodies. Lakes are steadily depleting due to blockages in natural drainage channels, and also dumping of sewage, solid waste, and industrial wastes.

� Preventing the disruption of natural drainage channels and their contamination. Natural drainage channels are getting blocked due to unplanned development and untreated sewerage and industrial wastes are released into them.

The processes explored to institutionalise the plan in Bangalore were different. BWSSB is linking the Action plans with its own programmes and initiatives as they come forward and using the plan to promote co-ordinated action with BBMP, BDA and State level bodies in Karnataka.

The action planning process identified a range of opportunities to improve blue-green infrastructure in Bangalore.

� Addressing contamination of potable water. Due to uncontrolled faecal contamination and multiplicity of household water supply sources, all households are potentially exposed to this hazard, especially poor who may not have access to BWSSB supply or effective water treatment at home.

� Improving consistency of water supply, as waste is only supplied for four-five hours every alternate day or once in three days depending on the location. In some locations, public supply also tends to unreliable at times. Other supply via ground or tanker may not be in the household’s control.

� Improving the affordability and valuation of water. The absence of tariff revisions has perhaps conveyed to households that water is cheap, even though BWSSB tariffs are among the highest in India. Rich and middle income households are hence not valuing and sustainably using water whereas poor households are paying higher prices for water.

� Potential to improve sanitation. Some households, especially on the periphery are dependent on unimproved options like pit latrines. A small proportion of households depends on open defecation. This poses health hazards.

� Addressing the issue of high dependence on a single source. The biggest hazard that the water supply system the city faces is near total dependence on Cauvery River. Any disruption in this source, temporary

The opportunity: Bangalore



Across both cities the process used to identify and develop the actions blended together perspectives from international technical and academic experts and bottom up views from on the ground discussions and meetings.

The international experts considered the range of future proofing options which could be used to address the issues identified in the diagnostic this drew upon consideration of the range of existing practices and opportunities which represent best practice including options which may not typically be used in an Indian context (e.g sustainable urban drainage). This was developed as a long list of possible options.

In parallel a process for gathering options and ideas from local actors was initiated in case study areas were elicited facilitated by Dhan foundation and UCL in the case of Madurai and IIHS in the case of Bangalore this took the form of small meetings in Madurai and household interviews and street surveys. The initial materials were reviewed to identify interconnections and broad themes which technical issues. This process was used to highlight discussion topics and themes to explore in a workshop environment. Care was taken to avoid narrow sector oriented categories which aligned with institutional silos to open up debate between actors.

Partners in both cities highlighted that they would have liked the project to focus on all of the significant risks identified in each city during the diagnostic phase. In Bangalore BESCOM the local electricity supply company were willing to engage around energy intensity and low carbon issues. In Madurai there was appetite to widen the project to include a focus on low carbon planning, waste management and transport and air quality issues. The

timeframes and resources available for the project meant that the action plan focused on the highest priority issues for the purposes of the pilot. The approach to implementing the plan in Madurai (through establishing a local partnership) enables other issues to be added to expand the focus). In Bangalore other programmes at a metropolitan level are also helping to enable action.



Key Finding 6 - Evidence used in the right way can convince and mobilise change

Using the diagnostic to build an evidence base to develop strategy in a data poor environment.

The range of available data in each both cities was fragmented and patchy. Information tended to be held in institutional silos and are not often published online or available. Those documents which exist are published according to statutory and regulatory requirements and often appear to go through the motions of strategy ingredients without going into detail (possibly in response to lack of data on relevant issues).

Institutions in both cities hold incomplete information about the water distribution, sewerage and drainage infrastructure (as well as other information necessary to develop and plans and strategies in detail). The information which exists is not necessarily up to date so the understanding of what infrastructure exists, where and its condition is often uncertain and can present a barrier to setting priorities leading to a fire fighting approach responding to service outrages and blockages/incidents.

In order to manage uncertainties and gaps in data there is a need for hypothesis, professional judgement and a process of triangulation/validation using multiple data sources to build a picture which is “good enough” to shape strategies and action plans. However, this is not a substitute for more detailed data collection and pre-feasibility required to support key decisions and concept and detailed design.

The urban diagnostic assembled in each city by the technical experts was used as a basis to bring together and engage stakeholders. The process of developing and reviewing the diagnostic was helpful in synthesising a shared understanding of the range of issues and to explore interconnections between existing pattern of vulnerability in the city (reflected by incidence of vector borne diseases and lack of piped water and wastewater network coverage and the areas most affected by existing climate events such as floods and storm events).

In Madurai, data was not held in centrally and was more limited. In Bangalore, gaining access to data was easier and was relatively more extensive and better organised. IIHS through undertaking previous projects in the city were also able to use their knowledge and information. However, what was less effective in Bangalore was the lesser engagement with individual “issue and data holders” during the initial consultation process. In Madurai this process was used as a way of getting support and buy in for the project as well as yielding insights and qualitative information and recruiting “supporters” for the project.

For example in the case of slum mapping in Bangalore academic sources and surveys were used to collect information drawing upon previous profiling work undertaken by IIHS to assess vulnerability taking a top down perspective. In Madurai data, both official slum profiling surveys were available from the Basic Services for the Urban Poor Programme team and community based mapping and surveys undertaken by Dhan which in both cases had the benefit of recent engagement of the community on the ground.

The information gained from these vulnerability assessments was sufficient to provide a high level profile and help to inform the major issues the strategy should address including spatial priorities at a broad level and the opportunities to tackle the issues identified. However, the level of data collected from this approach did not provide the type of survey information required to select and design interventions (at a concept or detailed design level). The benefit of the diagnostic has been to support pre-feasibility including to identify what action may be required where, where the priority areas and pressures lie within each city to enable further investigation.

For both cities the Action plan identified what additional data and feasibility studies might be needed to inform plans for individual projects in order that this can be developed into a more detailed specification. The Action Plan provides a document which can be used to engage a range of government and international funding organisations who have programmes which can provide the support needed.

Partners in both cities would have liked a project such as this one to be more ambitious not only identify data gaps but also to support work to address these gaps. This was not possible within the time and resources available.



Benefits of taking a network view - understanding water as a blue-green infrastructure system helped to identify vulnerability in both cities

The issues highlighted in the urban diagnostic in both cities were identified as being complex and systemic in nature. The problems and vulnerabilities experienced within communities were often traceable and linked with natural river and drainage system networks as well as physical infrastructure.

This way of seeing was powerful to stakeholders in the discussions and interactions because it help to link local challenges with the systems and risks operating at city and regional scale.

Water is a system – it flows through cities, it is used for drinking, cooking, washing, fishing, agriculture and industry and then discharged. Seeing cities through this lens has been key to re-framing the issues and solutions which could be adopted. The water flowing into the system of natural lakes in Madurai and Bangalore also impacts on the natural habitat and biodiversity of the city (particularly in wetland areas) Considering the systemic nature of water and blue-green systems, it is vital to have holistic solutions. This was emphasised in the workshops and discussions.

For example:

� Rehabilitation of tanks and channels provides multiple benefits: cleaner water, enhanced capacity to deal with flood risk, biodiversity and amenity, with secondary benefits in terms of incomes and health

� Dealing with the sewerage system and having appropriate sanitation ensures channels are not polluted, and provides a resource via re-use; with secondary benefits in terms of health, resource re-use.

� Solutions would only be effective if they involve the communities who live alongside channels, as well as the institutions who are charged with managing different parts of the system.

Integrated solutions taking blue-green infrastructure together will underpin poverty reduction through avoiding illness (and medical costs) and lost working time, reducing the risk of extreme events (e.g. flood, drought) as well as indirectly boosting the attractiveness and quality of life in each city. The solutions would help to build capacity in infrastructure, governance and the resilience of communities to respond to changes in climate and resource scarcity and possible price increases relating to food and energy.



Blue-green infrastructure: a way of seeing, a way of integrating

Understanding water as a system has helped to identify Madurai’s vulnerability

The historical sustainable relationship with water has become stressed. Madurai has historically had a sustainable relationship with water, but this has become stressed due to over-abstraction, sand mining of the Vaigai River, and pollution.

Patterns of vulnerability including areas of uncontrolled development were viewed in relation to the pattern of existing water bodies to identify the link between encroachment, fly-tipping and pollution of water sources. Discussions with residents and local farmers identified a link between the water bodies, food production and health as polluted water is used for irrigating crops.

The problem is a reflection that the peri-urban areas are particularly vulnerable areas. The infrastructure of the city has either not been extended or developed in an effective way to serve these areas. Problems have intensified as the population moving to the city has increased.

Figure 4.1 Impact of development of Madurai’s water bodies

Existing development

Water body without water

Water body with water

LPA boundaryCorporation boundary



The concept of blue-green infrastructure was appreciated and understood by actors in both cities.

In Madurai, how the role and condition of tanks and drainage channels interacted with malfunctioning of sewerage and sanitation infrastructure emerged as a key concern. This was explored through a case study of communities along the Kiruthumal River and how these two issues were intrinsically intertwined and linked to a third issue of water resources. Pollution of the river and groundwater means that communities in many areas cannot access clean water, causing a range of health issues. Among stakeholders, the potential health benefits were highly valued. Promotion of these benefits could be used to build support for other linked initiatives where the benefits may be less visible (or accrue to communities in other parts of the city).

In Bangalore, BWSSB were reluctant to use the “green” element as this implied and linked with responsibilities held by BBMP and the Karnataka Forest Department. This is despite the issue and linkage to natural drainage and lake systems was equally important in both cities. While the concept was seen as a powerful as a way of understanding the city. It did not have the same resonance in mobilising action among stakeholders in Bangalore. This was partly due to a reluctance of BWSSB to fully champion the “whole problem” for fear of extending beyond their organisational remit. In addition, it was not possible for the project in Bangalore to engage civil society actors in the same way as Madurai.

What are the challenges of taking network action?

Taking a network view is an effective way of exploring and framing problems at a city scale. The diagnostics can be used at identifying the critical issues at city level and identify the broad actions required linking across sectors.

The focus is helpful in identifying possible “network pressure points” where the interaction of multiple issues can be linked with patterns of vulnerability can be used to scope out where action should be focused. However, it should be noted that geographical location of issues may not directly be correlated – e.g. contamination of water supplies may occur upstream.

A challenge is that there are likely to be a large number of areas identified which require action. Further prioritisation is likely to be required to decide where to start. This could be informed by the number of people affected, their vulnerability or potential scale of impact.

While key actions at a city level can be identified there is a need for significant resources and support to identify and develop programmes of specific action and to mobilise the capacity and support needed to deliver them.

What potential is there for using the blue-green infrastructure more widely?

The approach of using blue-green infrastructure as a lens is likely to have widespread replicability as a holistic “systems view” is likely to be relevant to all cities especially those which are subject to significant climate impacts, are subject to short term or long term risks to their water resources where the level of needs exceeds resources. However, the balance and significance of particular issues will be specific to each city and so the relevance and type of opportunities and solutions will also be different.

Where is the approach likely to be most effective?

The greatest impact is likely to be in cities where the conditions for multi-stakeholder dialogue are on place or can easily be activated. Contrasting the experiences of Madurai and Bangalore the implication is that future projects attempting an integrated approach to climate change issues should be centred on organisations who have the official mandate or convening power to mobilise institutions and stakeholders across a broad spectrum so that the approach can be promoted from the outset.

How did the approach work in each city?



A range of alternative strategies could be used in other cities.

In the common situation where the ideal conditions do not exist for development of a fully integrated strategy to be developed from the outset a number of other options could be considered.

Interlinking sector strategies. This approach would develop a comprehensive urban diagnostic to identify the issues and then individual sectoral strategies for different institutions to bring about effective action. This approach could be effective if it is accompanied by a process for socialising and linking the strategies (to identify potential synergies and linked actions).

There would need to be sufficient dialogue and cross sector learning at key stages in the process. The approach could lead to greater early stage ownership by institutions. However, it is likely to cost more in terms of the financial resources required and is likely to be more wasteful in terms of duplicated efforts (and might avoid resolving possible tensions and conflicts which could be a barrier to the benefits of integrated action being fully delivered). This approach would also be unlikely to lead to the kind of dynamic that a multi-stakeholder dialogue can bring in terms of increased levels trust, inter-agency collaboration and mutual learning.

Creating the environment for multi-stakeholder dialogue. This focus would help create the conditions where multi-stakeholder working can become effective (and removing barriers which prevent such an approach). Targeting leaders, potential leaders and change agents who can play

a pivotal role in mobilising cross sector action could be used as a preparatory stage to establishing a multi-stakeholder dialogue process. However, this initial catalyst needs to be seen as part of a wider process of organisational/cultural change for the impact to be sustained long term.

Use a focus on data gaps as a catalyst. A further alternative entry point could be to focus initially on data gaps where there was common agreement in both cities that this should be a priority for action. Co-operation could be built at a technical level if “permission to engage” can be secured from senior technical/political stakeholders. Establishing collaboration platforms centred on data has the potential to foster collaboration and promote greater data sharing (combining an emphasis on social/organisational discussion forums as well as technological systems in parallel). Knowledge partnerships can be established which combine and value information from across government, the academic sector and civil society. Such platforms could also be used to engage the public through open data portals and social media strategies.

Focus instead on building community based action. Where strategies to engender engagement at city wide level are likely to be ineffective. Efforts could focus on scaling community based approaches until conditions exist for wider engagement. Where the circumstances for city scale action are limited (where the support of city/sub-national government is likely to be needed as a driving force) greater emphasis could be placed on scaling localised community based action where there is a base to build from. This could focus on developing further community led partnerships and pilot projects. However, it is uncertain whether this would be effective in bringing about the transformational change needed to address the complex nature of the issues. There could also be challenges of having adequate structures of accountability to direct resources effectively.



Key Finding 7 - Focussing at the city scale is important to gain support for climate change action

While the issue is recognised the issue of climate change is not form part of the responsibility or mandate of urban local bodies. This means that plans would not normally consider this issue and the implications for strategy development.

The importance of focusing at the city scale is widely referenced in the literature. The rationale is that it is only when dropping down to the local level do problems become tangible and linked to individual people and institutions who have the real incentive to act as they will be directly impacted. At higher State and national scales have a role to play in establishing the governance and policy framework and mobilising resources.

Approach to evidence on climate risks

Using the urban diagnostic to explore the future of the city and fast moving urbanisation trends affecting vulnerability together with climate change trends impacts which evolve over longer timeframes was helpful in relating current day to day priorities to future risks.

While no detailed modelling of climate change risks and impacts had been previously undertaken at the city level in either city (e.g. through downscaling of global or national climate models). Mobilising and utilising data from existing sources including national/State level assessments and relating information to the local situation helped stakeholders envisage how slower onset issues would impact on vulnerable areas and how solutions could be built into interventions and projects already being considered.

It also helped to look at medium and longer term time horizons (beyond 3-5 year planning cycles) to help stakeholders look beyond current challenges and immediate concerns and how future climate variability could impact the city. Issues such as how slow onset climate change could impact water scarcity and influence the way peri-urban areas were planned and managed was a discussion which took place as a result in relation to Madurai. The opportunity to develop these areas following a new plan led model rather than zoning/developing property first and waiting for infrastructure to follow later was championed by the Chamber of commerce and Corporation in relation to the Avaniapuram area which had been added to the city.

Similar discussions took place in relation to the Bellandur-Sarajapur Road area in Bangalore where new development areas are developed off-grid from water supply and sanitation networks (with private operators delivering water and collecting septage by road).

Recognising the importance of taking action in cities needs to be coupled with developing local capacity.

In this project the importance of the city scale of intervention was voiced by the Department of Environment Tamil Nadu at the State level roundtable. She saw how the Action Plan prepared by stakeholders at city level could play in important role in delivering the objectives of the State level Climate change action plan. A key opportunity highlighted has been for the project to mainstream the issue of climate change into the planning processes for infrastructure programmes and urban development. It was not possible to hold a similar event in Karnataka due to the State elections.

The expert roundtables held with city stakeholders in Chennai and Bangalore also concluded that the city scale is the right scale to gain traction on the issues relating to climate change. However, there was a feeling at both workshops that the lack of institutional capacity and mechanisms for developing and coordinating plans could present a challenge in taking the action necessary. An example given was the lack of enforcement over the sinking of borewells to source groundwater.

Workshops in both cities highlighted that it was a shared responsibility of citizens, civil society and the private sector and not only government to address the issues (for example monitoring and reporting problems) but that initiatives to raise awareness and change behaviours would be needed.

Developing a sense of trusteeship and ownership of the problems through developing local partnerships was something which was emphasised many times. However the project in Bangalore made less progress in moving towards this goal in the context of this project.



MOVING FROM PLAN TO IMPLEMENATION

04



This section highlights how the project identified potential pathways for implementing the proposals identified in the action plan contrasting the experiences of both cities. It highlights the tensions in balancing short term and long term requirements and the opportunities presented by partnership working to assist co-ordination and bridge implementation gaps. In addition, the challenges of funding an integrated plan are considered along with the support required from national and State governments to provide an effective policy and regulatory frame work to improve the effectiveness of action at local level.

Key finding 8 - Blue-green infrastructure is a useful focus to prioritise critical system links and identify how issues should be addressed

A key lesson from the project in both cities was to identify the implementation pathways and trajectory of actions needed to deliver a sustainable approach. In developing the approach there is a need to balance and make trade-off’s between ease of implementation, complexity, vulnerability and impact which required a pragmatic approach to be taken. In Bangalore some more complex projects were included earlier where institutional capacity, resources and political appetite were already mobilising where these feature lower down the list of priorities in Madurai.

The pathway in Madurai best reflects the position of many small to medium sized cities where there is a need to build up momentum over time in stages to achieve and effective long term approach (and to move away from a fire fighting approach focusing on the most pressing issue).

In Madurai the plan covered a 17 year period to 2031. The first 5 years of the action plan focussed on strengthening adaptive capacity focusing on critical linkages and hotspots which could deliver the most significant immediate benefits. Community based organisations play a role in complementing government driven initiatives. While capital improvements take time to be fully delivered, strengthening social capital was seen as a way of initiating action and making an immediate impact to vulnerable

communities. In addition, the preparatory work to enable future infrastructure is taken forward by completing feasibility work and mobilising funding. It should be recognised that during this period the Corporation would also follow through on existing committed projects while building up its internal capacity.

Governance and future proof planning is something was also identified as an area which needed to be strengthened immediately and was seen as a necessary enabling factor to unlock and strengthen infrastructure delivery. The actions included:

� Governance mechanisms and partnerships for infrastructure coordination and delivery;

� A green city plan linking to the CDP/masterplan update which can ensure that policies and safeguarding of land is in place to reduce exposure to risk.

� A series of other policy, legal and regulatory mechanisms and systems which are needed to help sustain change and align incentives between different interests. Measures ranged from enforcement of development permits through to fines and penalties relating to dumping of waste.

From 2020 onwards the plan has a greater emphasis on delivery and roll out including a broader range of projects to enable the city to future proof city expansion and to address longer term risks such as climate impacts within the water basin catchment of the city as well as flood risk.



Sequencing infrastructure actions in Madurai following a phased approach.

� Step 1 - Improving sanitation, including sewer system rehabilitation within the existing urban area, was the key issue which needs to be tackled most urgently because sustainable change on the other issues cannot be delivered without it.

� Step 2 - Action to address solid waste management so that channels and sewerage infrastructure does not become blocked is to be can be addressed in parallel.

� Step 3 - As these two actions take effect for different branches of the network it will be possible to make sustained progress in rehabilitating channels and tanks. Without separation of sewage, any action will have a limited impact.

� Step 4 - As the channels and tank system is restored, it will strengthen drainage systems which will lead to protection from localised flooding during the monsoon, as well as less frequent floods. Action can then shift towards physical interventions to address flood risk along the Vaigai.

� Step 5 - Actions to directly address the water resources supply-demand balance in the Vaigai feature lower down the list of priorities. This is because action to address sanitation and sewer system rehabilitation and restoration of green infrastructure corridors will have the effect of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of water supply and enable the city to improve its resilience by becoming more self sufficient for its water resources needs over time.

To accomplish the Action plans for both cities a need for external support and capacity was identified. Without this there is unlikely to be relevant expertise and bandwidth to start to take forward planning and governance actions while still achieving short term goals.

In both cities there serious capacity constraints within the institutions were identified including a lack of availability of trained and competent personnel and a lack of procedures and systems for projects to be implemented to high standards.

To ensure sustained changes, it was identified that support is provided in order that changes are institutionalised, instead of a focus on merely implementing projects (with a risk of a hit and miss approach). Both action plans identified a need for support to initiate and sustain institutional learning and conversion of project achievements into standard operating procedures.

Involvement of state institutions is critical for mobilising external support



Key Finding 9 - Establishing partnerships and processes for co-ordination is a useful way to bridge between strategy and implementation

During the workshops the integrated ‘systemic’ view of issues and challenges resonated and was appreciated and championed by the range of stakeholders in both cities. The need for interlinked and transformational projects was also seen as a high priority. However, there was a gap between a holistic strategy approach and what it was felt could be achieved in practice based upon governance arrangements.

The solution which emerged in Madurai to help overcome this issue was to establish partnership structures. An outline structure has included in the action plan and is being explored by Madurai Corporation and the C-TAG group to enhance and build upon existing structures.

In Madurai the proposals to establish a forum to co-ordinate and galvanise stakeholders was a proposal which was widely supported. The Action Plan defined a possible structure for the partnership and outline terms of reference. The partnership has several strands:

Coordination

� City Administrative Forum - working across Departments within the Madurai Corporation and other local delivery bodies (including representatives of the local cells of nine State Level bodies).

� Tamil Nadu State Forum - a wider consultative group embracing seven further State Level bodies.

� Community forum - would play an advisory and monitoring role and would include stakeholders such as City Technical Advisory Group, City Volunteer Technical Corps, research and academic institutions, civil society organisations and private sector representatives.

A core governmental working group led by Madurai Corporation would be used to co-ordinate programme/project management delivery and action which is likely to meet weekly/fortnightly. State forum members would be co-opted as relevant to the agenda.

Access would be widened to Community forums on a monthly/bi-monthly basis to provide additional oversight and to link in the actions and programmes being led by other non-governmental actors.

Project teams

Drawing from members of the City Administrative Forum, State Forum and Community Forum a number of project/task oriented sub groups would be established to develop and report back on particular action plan Projects.

A knowledge management and project preparation partnership was proposed as a mechanism to define technical assistance and capacity building activities, a funding and resourcing strategies and social capital building programmes in the city.

The civil society sector through Dhan Foundation and the Thiyagarajar College of Engineering represented significant resources for the city in terms of knowledge and expertise. Considerable social capital is vested in these institutions based within the community and who

work at ground level in developing and implementing solutions. The formation of an enhanced partnership which draws upon the strengths and capabilities of urban local bodies and other institutions emerged as a key actionable outcome of the project.

In order to activate and mobilise the forums some additional support is likely to be required. One role identified was for a programme co-ordinator to be appointed within the Municipal Corporation to play an interface role between the different actors and a champion for initiatives. The idea of participating in the 100 Resilient Cities Programme which could help to enable the appointment of a “Chief Resilience Officer” could perform this type of role.

In Bangalore other than the multi-stakeholder workshop it was not proposed to establish new partnerships or coordination bodies but to enhance the support for existing parastatal bodies such as Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to enhance their effectiveness.

In both cities it was felt that once co-ordination had taken place, implementation responsibilities for individual projects should not be spread too widely to ensure accountability. Where there were joint or overlapping responsibilities for particular projects agencies should work together but with a lead agency clearly identified to manage the project.



Key Finding 10 - Using plans to make the case for funding and mobilising local resources represents a key measure of success for cities.

There was demand from stakeholders at city level and State level (in Tamil Nadu) to use the diagnostic and action plans to mobilise additional support from national government programmes and donors.

Developing a city scale programme for action Developing a strategy and defining projects as part of the action plan was seen as a helpful in establishing what is feasible tackle climate risks in parallel with development needs (without the two being seen as separate). The plans were helpful in providing a strategy and phasing approach and moving towards investor ready projects. In both Madurai and Bangalore the primary project partner has taken the initial steps to using the plans to engage potential project partners who can provide support for feasibility and project preparation capacity development and finance.

Achieving this goal as part of the project was seen as a key benefit and helped to maintain momentum and an incentive for stakeholders to engage. This contrasted with previous attempts at engagement which had focused on discussing problems without a more practical focus. Mobilising the local and international technical experts enabled a programme to be framed using technical language and terms so it could be used by the Corporation and other stakeholders to make the case for securing additional resources for implementation avoiding the danger of creating a long “wish list” of actions without a basis to enable implementation.

Involvement of technical experts with knowledge of project and technical feasibility, funding parameters and the features of projects which would make them attractive to potential funders was helpful in this regard. This helped to distinguish the approach of future proofing from a business as usual approach to stakeholder engagement and action planning.

Involvement of state institutions is critical for mobilising external support.



Both cities already had a series of project priorities and programmes which they were seeking support for. Some of these project have been framed as single sector civil engineering works but without necessarily articulating how interventions would help to build resilience to reduce the vulnerability of communities to climate risks.

In other cases projects had the potential to deliver significant co-benefits such as health benefits (e.g. reduction of vector borne diseases through improved sanitation) but these benefits had not previously been recognised as public health officials had not been directly engaged to input to the plan. In other cases, the supporting soft infrastructure investments in community awareness and capacity building programmes were identified as key requirements to enable the effectiveness of projects.

Re-framing projects to adopt a more integrated and comprehensive approach to tackling the issues can help to unblock stalled projects and maximise the potential benefits which can be delivered through enhanced project design to maximise the positive impact.

A programmatic approach to developing a series of sequenced, interlinked projects highlighted the potential for Madurai to make a transformational leap forward which could not otherwise be achieved through incremental and disjointed action. In Bangalore the plan provided an important building block to show how other institutions can work with BWSSB to help enable a more integrated approach.

A programmatic approach requires that national, state and international donors view the needs and proposals of cities in

new ways. For example, it is unusual for city, state and national authorities to view the investment needs of cities taking a long term perspective. Without breaking programmes down into much smaller components this may be incompatible with the scale of resources which can be drawn down. In contrast a key issue which international donors have reported is that small to medium sized cities often approach with projects which are too small to be funded by traditional funding mechanisms. The transaction cost is too high in comparison with the value of projects and the scale of finance sought is not suitable for a range of typical financial products. Gaining commitment to a long term but flexible programme can help to overcome the problem of continually justifying projects and accessing funding rather than focussing on roll out and delivery.

Mobilising funding

To deliver major capital projects there is a need to source external finance to support investment. The level and value of revenue which could be mobilised from local taxes and user charges which could be used to support loans for capital investment is limited. As a result, grants or loans from state or national government and or supporting co-finance from the private sector or multilateral and bi-lateral international financial institutions donors are required. The capacity and authority to broker and guarantee rests at State and National government and requires appropriate political support at these levels in addition to agreement at urban local body level.

Although the Action Plans identify a range of sources of funding which could be mobilised. The process for accessing funding by engaging possible donors,

applying for funding and potentially taking a project to financial close is a long process and requires sustained commitment and resources. The need for a funding strategy and support to at least access initial project preparation and challenge fund facilities is a key need for those cities which do not have a track record in gaining the support of donors. Enabling State level bodies to act as sponsors and work with cities could provide an effective mechanism to enable take up of the support which is available.

In the future Madurai Corporation and BWSSB would have liked a project such as this to have a wider remit in order that feasibility and project preparation work could be undertaken and support provided to work alongside their teams in developing Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) for each project in order that these can be directly used to source national funding. This type of support and the level resources available to enable this activity do not align with the current CDKN programme focus.



Key Finding 11 - Support is needed from state and national government support to develop and adopt policy and regulatory frameworks to help enable effective action

While the city scale was highlighted as the right scale for mobilising action urban local bodies and other locally based institutions require the support and buy in from State and national level agencies

Theme/Issue Proposed mechanism: Bangalore Proposed mechanism: Madurai Comments

Proposed mechanisms for formally adopting making the plan proposals effective.

BWSSB has the responsibility for implementing many of the specific proposals identified and can integrate proposals within its working practices. Additional capacity and support is likely to be required to institutionalise the proposals.

However, the support of other city level bodies (BBMP, BDA) and State level Departments need to formalise into their own plans. These include:

� BDA Masterplan

� A regional Comprehensive water resource management plan for the BMRDA area.

� City Sanitation Plan for BBMP including Ward and neighbourhood components.

� A new metropolitan water policy for managing water resources by increasing self sufficiency through demand management measures.

A new green city plan would be prepared linking to the City Development Plan and masterplan (which would provide the basis for adoption). The specific components which would be included which vary from the prescribed approach include:

� Policies on channel and tank protection

� Identification of zoned areas/overlays for flood protection areas and supporting policies.

� Identification and planning of urban green space with design and management standards

� Planning policies and design standards for new communities/ Eco neighbourhoods

Land consolidation and management measures to enable - Town Planning schemes.

In addition compensation and incentive structures to enable effective protection of safeguarded land and appropriate management and stewardship would also be required.

All of these measures require support of State level Department of Town and Country Planning. In addition in addition to the Corporation, the State level Public Works Department and Water and Drainage Board would also need to feed in.

The Bangalore approach is for BWSSB to take forward those proposals which it has responsibility for and to contribute to wider metropolitan and State processes to help facilitate integration.

This approach could have limited impact without further resources to support a process of enhanced inter agency and multi-stakeholder working.

The Madurai proposals have the opportunity to directly link into the revision of the City Development Plan and 2031 masterplan.

However, support may be required to enable special attention to be paid to the topics identified.

Some actions require a lead and additional actions to be taken at State level by the Department of Town and Country Planning. This is because proposals differ from the standard approach (the proposals are more prescriptive) and may require adoption as a supplement the State Planning regulations or through local byelaw.

to make the change. The introduction of the 74th constitutional amendment in 1992 devolved planning regulation and development authority to Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). However, resources and much of the power over development in terms of finance and approval rests with State and national government.

Strengthened local byelaws and institutional structures could provide a starting point for some early wins in both

cities. However, State level support is required for major regulatory and policy changes identified within the action plans to be introduced.

Table 4.1 below highlights some common themes featured in each of the action plans and contrasts the pathways identified for taking forward the proposed measures.

Table 4.1 Comparison of proposed policy and regulation mechanisms




Co-ordination mechanisms

BWSSB will be consulted on plans and can feed in to Bangalore wide co-ordination forums which have been established to inform the review of the City Development Plan.

No new mechanisms identified to engage non-governmental actors.

City partnership with nested forums and working arrangements to be to be used as the primary basis for co-ordinating action at city level (refer to further details on p 43).

Common infrastructure standards and co-ordination procedures were identified to align the actions of public bodies (e.g. phasing action in relation to new development).

Madurai did not have existing mechanisms in place for bringing together government and non-governmental stakeholders to co-ordinate action (a situation which is common for many mid size cities). State level bodies play an important role in decision making.

Helping to activate such a mechanism can help to create a greater focus for action at city level.

Bangalore does have established mechanisms but the urban diagnostic highlighted that these arrangements are not wholly effective due to the responsibilities and resources of key institutions and political factors.

Improved governance of the lake/tank system.

Establishing clear ownership and custodianship of lakes within BBMP.

A system for controlling tanks was identified as the approach is fragmented. Key needs:

� Establishment and refinement of operational rules

� Abstraction management and enforcement

� Discharge regulation and management

� Encroachment management.

A common priority likely to be a common problem in other cities/states.

Requires the co-ordination of 5 local and State bodies in both cities.

Effective partnership working is required to establish a shared approach and resolving local issues.




Improving network performance and service delivery.

A range of actions were identified which BWSSB wish to phase in over time. This includes use of tariff and pricing mechanisms to enable water conservation.

Incentives are required to enable BWSSB to achieve national service level benchmarks.

Initially, the focus on Madurai was on taking action to improve the effectiveness of water supply and sanitation measures through taking remedial action to improve infrastructure. This would enable the Corporation to move towards increased cost recovery.

The two cities are not directly comparable in drawing comparisons

Effective regulation of private sector suppliers

State level support is required for byelaw to licence tankers and control rights of way.

Similar measures identified in Madurai.

Uncontrolled groundwater abstraction is also an issue in Madurai. However the issue has not reached the extreme situation which Bangalore experiences.

Similar measures required in both cities requiring the support of State level bodies.

Enforcement of existing regulations

A key issue – the view of BWSSB was that additional resources would enable this to be tackled.

The need to establish operating procedures for enforcing the Karnataka Ground Water Act was highlighted as a key issue.

In addition to resources for enforcement.

It was felt that this would only be effective where alternative options are made possible.

Engagement with affected stakeholders and developing partnerships was seen as a way to establish acceptable solutions.

The political dimension of enforcing unpopular regulations or increasing penalties was seen as unjust unless a feasible alternative was established/made available.

This chapter has summarised and contrasted the approach and learnings from both cities in terms of the governance mechanisms and support required to move from plan to implementation. The next section considers how the lessons from the project can be translated to other cities and how the approach can be scaled.



LESSONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR SCALING THE APPROACH

05



Summary of lessons and implications for scaling the approach

Key conclusions

This project has piloted the approach at local level in two cities over a year and a half. The project has shown how the approach of combining an integrated urban diagnostics with an action planning process to develop a plan can be useful for cities to tackle their climate change issues and vulnerability together. This section provides a summary of the conclusions to the project. It also considers the wider relevance of the project for other cities. In India the approach is directly relevant to the 100 Smart Cities programme and National Urban Renewal Mission which seek to tackle issues in a holistic manner and to establish a model for urban development to tackle the interlinked issues facing India’s cities.

Role and value of future proofed planning

� The project found that the future proofing approach has value to both cities by bringing a new frame of reference to planning. The benefit of adopting a long term planning horizon, and recognising problems and challenges as complex and interconnected contrasts with a traditional planning processes resulting in sector focused plans which do not effectively tackle the issues because of the narrow focus.

� Improved solutions by considering the interconnections between issues and focusing on climate risks and vulnerability. Recognising trends relating to urbanisation and climate and resource risks in the context of patterns of vulnerability to these risks in Madurai and Bangalore helped to identify the pathways through risks were transmitted (using the concept of blue-green infrastructure). This brought a focus on networks and pressure points in those networks where actions should be prioritised. This was seen as new and there was a shared view that this type of perspective was necessary.

� A practical focus including developing necessary capacities to deliver. A practical focus was needed for the value of future proofing to be recognised. This required a focus on short and medium term actions which can deliver the results in parallel with developing actions to tackle long term issues. The capacity of government institutions at local level is limited in terms of the number of people able to help drive forward programmes and the range of appropriately skilled staff among the second run of technical cadres able to undertake technical

work and facilitate co-ordination across sectors and develop solutions.

� Additional support is likely to be required to institutionalise the approach more widely. As a new initiative, it is unlikely that an approach to future proofing would take place in cities without such capacity unless support is provided to help enable such an approach. Technical expertise along with support to activate and institutionalise the process is necessary to support plan making and plan delivery on a sustainable basis. Formalised systems and approaches would be required for approach to be scaled widely. Bringing external technical and academic experts from outside of the city had the benefit of being able to challenge existing thinking and help to identify and activate a stakeholder engagement process able to support the development of integrated plans.

Data gathering and framing the problems

� In a context of limited data the future proofing was successful in building a sufficient picture to enable strategy development at a city wide scale, including identifying key priorities and the opportunities to tackle these issues in a combined way. The action plans highlighted the data gaps where additional work would be needed to inform specific projects. Case studies were used to explore in more depth the implications of the diagnostic findings at local level. Differences between the approach used to data gathering in both cities highlighted that fully engaging knowledge partners through the data gathering process by discussing



emerging findings and triangulating between data sources can be a more effective strategy than viewing the exercise as a technical exercise. The importance of presenting findings visually (through photos and maps/aerial photographs) was effective in reaching non-technical audiences. It is important to focus resources on relevant topics and avoid collecting too much information which does not directly relate to key issues and is unrelated or purely contextual in nature. Making sure there is a focus on the future as well as existing needs is paramount. Not using evidence to inform planning is likely to lead to ineffective projects and a waste of financial resources.

� The lack of locally available climate data was not a barrier to strategy development but would be required to inform the approach to future planning in the city and potential options for major capital projects under consideration. In the context of uncertainty many of the actions identified in both plans were focused on building resilience and addressing service gaps.

� The perspective of blue-green infrastructure was helpful in relating issues of local, city wide and wider significance to one another and help stakeholders appreciate their position, and sense of ownership of the problem and the potential stake in developing effective solutions. The level of buy in each city developed during the process was critical in defining how the boundaries to the action plan could be defined. The focus of the project in Bangalore on the water supply and sewage board highlighted that the outputs could be used to inform

not only planning but also possible service delivery and operational improvements within the context of competing private water supply and sanitation services providers.

Using multi-stakeholder dialogues in the process of action planning

The project explored the extent to whether an integrated planning approach can work in an environment where institutional structures and mandates to enable such an approach are not fully aligned.

� Integrated planning processes are likely to have the greatest impact whether there a regulatory framework, effective governance and institutional structures, capacity, working practices and platforms are in place to promote such an approach. These conditions were not in fully in place in Bangalore and Madurai and the project explored how a process of future proofing could be used to help create the conditions to enable such an approach.

� Taking a patient approach is needed to maximise the impact of engagement. Without a fully established and institutionalised approach leadership is a critical resource to align and mobilise stakeholders and help steer the process.

Changes in the political environment and senior technical/administrative leaders mean that there were variations in the level of support over the course of the project leading to lack of traction or loss of momentum. Strategies to engage and re-engage key stakeholders were necessary. Madurai benefitted from support for the



for action. Using local languages to undertake dialogues was helpful in creating an active dialogue among local stakeholders.

It could be more time consuming and challenging to develop an integrated and inclusive process to support plan making. The cost of such plans is also likely to be greater than at present given the broader scope of issues addressed and time required to engage stakeholders in a meaningful way. Up front investment to actively engage stakeholders in developing proposals will be helpful in eliciting areas of alignment as well as sensitive topics early in the process so that issues can be addressed. The benefit should be reduced delays later in the process and in gaining support for approvals.

Strategy to action

� Targeting support to develop medium and long term actions in parallel with one normal annual and short term project focus would be necessary to enable a move towards a more integrated and long term approach. The integrated strategies developed for both cities were multifaceted taking programmatic view of the actions necessary to build up over time (taking a 15-17 year time horizon). The range of actions within each action plan incorporated components including technical feasibility, capacity building and strengthening social capital actions along with actions relating to planning and governance including regulations. Some of the actions are new and non-routine and require capacities to be developed as part of the project. In addition, the scope of the plans requires multi-agency engagement to effectively

project from State level officials at the initiation and completion of the project which was a critical factor in gaining endorsement for the plan.

� A range of potential strategies were identified to help enable an integrated approach where full leadership and buy in across stakeholders is not in place including preliminary activities to create the conditions for integrated planning, interlinking sector related plans, using data as a focus for mobilising technical stakeholders and concentrating on building or scaling community based activities.

� The diagnostic process of gathering and combining data was helpful in bringing together partners and stakeholders to identify shared priorities. This action planning process was directed towards overcoming silo’s among government stakeholders and to help create an environment for ongoing multi-stakeholder action (although support will be required to assist this process).

In Bangalore, impact of the approach was more limited as the conditions were not in place for this project to forge a partnership across a wide range of stakeholders at State and metropolitan level. In addition the methods used to explore community scale actions were different in both cities.

The involvement of a local and actively engaged civil society partner able to mobilise and engage non-governmental stakeholders in Madurai was critical in building and mobilising platforms for multi stakeholder dialogue. The use of social media and community events such as the Madurai symposium and water walks helped to build and maintain momentum



multilateral and bi-lateral international financial institutions donors is required. The capacity and authority to broker and guarantee rests at State and National government and requires appropriate political support at these levels in addition to agreement at urban local body level.

� The process for accessing funding by engaging possible donors, applying for funding and potentially taking a project to financial close is a long process and requires sustained commitment and resources. The need for a funding strategy and support to at least access initial project preparation and challenge fund facilities is a key need for those cities which do not have a track record in gaining the support of donors. Enabling State level bodies to act as sponsors and work with cities could provide an effective mechanism to enable take up of the support which is available.

� The challenge posed by a future proofing approach is to gear the level of ambition for the approach to what can be achieved while at the same time using the process to develop plans which have the potential to deliver transformational change. In situations where there is not support to embark on such a process incremental changes focused on individual sectors can still deliver benefits. However, in India and internationally the direction of travel is for plan making to become more integrated as evidenced by reviews such as the reviews of the JNNURM programme and the Global Report on Human Settlements 20094 future proofing provides a practical way to take on this challenge incorporating a response to climate and resource risks.

tackle the issues (and overcome institutional silos). Considering the existing organisational cultures and highly sector focused approach in place at present, in both cities a need was identified to build capacity for co-ordination and establish an effective governance framework.

� The approach of linking relating water focused actions to other sectors through a wider metropolitan and state-wide process was seen as the best way forward in Bangalore to enable an integrated approach with other agencies. In Madurai, the plan was endorsed at State level during the project with support among stakeholders for a city –partnership to be formalised anchored by Madurai Corporation but linking with State and non-governmental civil society stakeholders.

� The process used for this project does not require changes to regulations in order for the plans to be effective as the strategy can be linked to existing statutory processes of plan making. The preparation of a Green City Plan linked to the process of the Madurai Masterplan review and CDP was seen as the process to extend the range of “future proofing” urban development, environmental and infrastructure policies adopted as part of the plan. BWSSB has responsibilities to effectively deliver many of the projects identified but engagement with other metropolitan and State level bodies will be needed to plans to gain support proposals and resourcing will need to be mobilised.

� A programmatic approach to developing a series of sequenced, interlinked projects highlighted the potential for Madurai to make a

transformational leap forward which could not otherwise be achieved through incremental and disjointed action. In Bangalore the plan provided an important building block to show how other institutions can work with BWSSB to help enable a more integrated approach.

� A programmatic approach requires that national, state and international donors view the needs and proposals of cities in new ways. For example, it is unusual for city, state and national authorities to view the investment needs of cities taking a long term perspective. Without breaking programmes down into much smaller components a programmatic approach may be incompatible with the scale of resources which can be drawn down. In contrast a key issue which international donors including ADB have reported is that small to medium sized cities often approach them with projects which are too small to be funded by traditional mechanisms. The transaction cost is too high in comparison with the value of projects and the scale of finance sought is not suitable for a range of typical financial products. Gaining commitment to a long term but flexible programme can help to overcome the problem of continually justifying projects and accessing funding rather than focussing on roll out and delivery.

� To deliver major capital projects there is a need to source external finance to support investment. The level and value of revenue which could be mobilised from local taxes and user charges in support of loans for capital investment is limited. As a result, grants or loans from state or national government and/or supporting co-finance from the private sector or

4. Grant Thornton (2011) Appraisal of Jawaharal Nehru National Urban renewal Mission. Grant Thornton, Delhi. http://jnnurm.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Appraisal-of-JnNURM-Final-Report-Volume-I-.pdf

UN Habitat (2009) Planning Sustainable Cities: Global Report on Human Settlements 2009. UN Habitat, Nairobi.



The integrated approach followed by future proofing is directly relevant to the 100 Smart Cities programme in India. While the concept and definition of the programme is being developed the concept note published in October 2014 provides an indication of the direction of travel.5 The importance of governance and institutional infrastructure is highlighted as a critical factor in identifying and framing the type of instruments required to support cities and determining how appropriate solutions can be developed and implemented along with finance and a means to strengthen capacities.

The focus of the smart cities framework is on addressing infrastructure gaps in order to meet service delivery benchmarks for a range of “smart cities” indicators across transport, spatial planning, water supply, sewerage and sanitation, solid waste management, storm water drainage, electricity, telephone connections, wi-fi connectivity, healthcare facilities, education, fire-fighting and others (including green buildings and renewables). The focus is on the quantity and level of service/access criteria rather than the quality of provision.

The role which a future proofing cities approach can play

The future proofing approach is relevant to achieving progress to delivering smart cities as it provides a framework for working through and setting priorities for achieving the level of service goals identified. A summary of how the future proofing approach can be applied to support decision making is provided below.

Firstly, the added value Future Proofing can bring is that the issues of climate risk and resource availability are considered in the context of setting and meeting goals. This enables cities to better manage their long term growth and urbanisation in the context of environmental change in addition to addressing immediate short term needs.

The second benefit from future proofing is integration. It provides a basis for considering issues and opportunities together so that action can be coordinated on a cross sector basis. This can be used to link interventions and projects to achieve multiple goals and maximise the ability of actions to catalyse growth.

The third benefit is that the future proofing approach considers the capacity required to implement solutions. The costs of particular solutions are considered in the context of what is required to support effective delivery considering governance, planning and deliverability.

Future proofing as a means for shaping smart cities in India

5. Ministry of Urban Development (2014) draft Concept Note on Smart City Scheme. http://indiansmartcities.in/downloads/CONCEPT_NOTE_-3.12.2014__REVISED_AND_LATEST_.pdf



Smart and future proofed

The experience of applying the future proofing approach with stakeholders in two of India’s cities has highlighted some key components which could support the development of the Indian Smart Cities programme.

� Not only about supply side of infrastructure. The future proofing approach highlighted that for existing challenges in both cities to be tackled effectively, a combination of infrastructure enabling actions as well as policy reforms and social capital building activities were required. Tacking this approach can tackle both existing infrastructure shortfalls as well as provide a sustainable basis for city growth and expansion.

� Infrastructure for development - The future proofing process highlighted how a programmatic approach to defining projects to address multiple interlinked issues can be effective in delivering wider co-benefits at the same time. For example, some of these benefits such as the health benefits from reducing water borne diseases were seen as among the most important issues for vulnerable households. Alleviating flood risk through establishing a green space network can enable space for water on a temporary basis whilst addressing deficiencies in urban green space.

� Undertaking diagnostic assessments covering energy and low carbon assessments for climate change mitigation; climate change adaptation; resources; and vulnerability at the same time as considering future development and infrastructure needs enables effective

policy integration and increases the likely effectiveness of the plan.

� Addressing climate change risks while tackling vulnerabilities should be viewed as an ongoing process rather than a one off activity.

� Dynamic data needs - in order to manage uncertainty there is a need for hypothesis, professional judgement and a process of triangulation/validation using multiple data sources to build a picture which is “good enough” to shape strategies and action plans. However, this is not a substitute for more detailed data collection and pre-feasibility required to support key decisions and concept and detailed design.

� Stakeholder engagement - The process of developing an integrated plan needs to actively involve and engage the community, private sector and other knowledge partners as active participants in the process beginning at an early stage.

� No one size fits all - While the process can be the same in every city, the process for planning and engagement needs to be created around the dynamics in the city in terms of institutions and stakeholders. The process for future proofing took time to establish and embed. A continuous process of engagement and alignment are needed to keep the process on track.

� Regulations and standards are required to make implementation effective - New instruments for governance are likely to be needed including platforms for coordination, as well as policies, standards and regulation.

� Forming city level partnerships can be a critical factor in making integration a reality - Establishing knowledge and learning partnerships with educational institutions, civil society partners and technical expertise at an early stage can bring different kinds of knowledge to build a picture of the issues. Until the net is cast wide there is a risk important issues may be overlooked.

� Plans should be transformational but implementable - responding to the scale and pace of change cities face. This recognises that plans should take a long term perspective but combining the need for flexibility to be built in to enable revisions to be built in in response to economic cycles and enhanced information on climate risks for example. The approach to implementation should be considered from the outset. Early win projects can help build support for the plan.



Cities can start to implement a future proofing approach by considering their existing position in connection with policy and plan making, people and partnerships, finance and key events. State and national government agencies also have an important role to play in guiding and shaping action.

Policy and plan making

� Use State Level Climate Change Action Plans as a starting point for considering the issues facing the city and building support.

� Review/undertake state urbanisation reviews and strategies to understand existing patterns of development.

� Use the preparation or review of the City Development Plan (CDP) as to build in climate change considerations into planning. Future proofing can identify the components and policies required.

� The preparation of a Detailed Project Report (DPR) can provide a catalyst for considering opportunities for addressing climate risks and reducing impacts on vulnerable communities in advance of a more comprehensive strategic planning exercise.

� Within established legal and regulatory frameworks room should be made for innovation of processes and allow for new solutions to be piloted.

People and Partnerships

� City leaders – political and administrative should create opportunities for dialogue to breakdown silos within and between organisations. This could take the form of knowledge sharing sessions and group challenges to promote collaborative behaviours.

� Awareness raising – this should be integral to the process and engage the whole community providing opportunities for people to play an active part. Use of social media, community sensitisation through city walks to key problem areas as well as traditional communication methods should be used. Local community based initiatives can be used to build momentum and support for longer term projects.

� State and Urban local bodies should understand civil society and non-governmental projects and programmes which are active in their jurisdiction. Scaling the impact of existing community programmes and projects could represent an early win opportunity to scale or broaden quickly and embed city partnerships.

� The national law for larger firms to contribute 1% of their revenue to CSR activities represents an opportunity to engage the private sector and local Chamber of Indian Industry (CII) chapters.

� Knowledge and learning partnerships engaging relevant faculties within local universities and joining city peer to peer networks provide opportunities for exchanging information and ideas on what works.

Finance

� Budgeting – the annual budgeting process provides an opportunity to consider how expenditure can be directed to achieve multiple goals as well as consider opportunities for revenue generation to finance plans. Participatory budgeting processes and tools could be used as a way of opening up a discussion of how to improve the effectiveness of spending.

� Grant funds and challenge funds – Many international organisations and philanthropic organisations have grant or challenge fund programmes. The prospect of funding could provide the impetus to take forward pilot projects and small scale planning and community led initiatives.

� Climate Finance. The Green Climate Fund and other international climate funds are directed towards supporting loan and grant instruments which are targeted towards addressing climate mitigation and or adaptation actions. By framing infrastructure programmes to incorporate climate risks at the same time as addressing existing gaps and future needs can enable access to this source of funding to establish more effective and “future proofed” projects.

� National governmental programmes – A future proofing action plan can help to make the case for attracting support from national programmes and funds such as those associated with the National Urban Renewal Mission and National Sustainable Habitat Mission for example.

What are the entry points for applying and scaling the approach?What can cities and State level governments do?



Using events and circumstances to shift gear

� India is subjected to climate related extreme weather events each year including flooding. While unfortunate, these events can often provide a branching point or catalyst for mobilising action to develop longer term actions beyond disaster risk reduction. Having a focus on particular vulnerable or problem locations within cities can also be helpful in developing early win projects.

� The opportunity for major new development taking place as part of a new township or rehabilitation of an existing community can provide a platform for taking an integrated approach to tackling issues at a comprehensive level.

� Political change can provide a basis for shaping plans and projects.

Actions for National and State Governments

A guiding hand

� National and State level governments should provide leadership and support for building effective cross sector co-operation between State and Urban local bodies for taking action. Sometimes there could be a need to help unblock issues and challenges which may emerge. Higher level agencies can help to align incentives and align stakeholders to recognise the shared value which may be developed through a collaborative approach to projects and actions.

� Establishing the field of play through establishing frameworks, regulations and standards for embedding

processes and procedures can help to institutionalise best practice. Knowledge products and other manuals and toolkits can help support this process and enable programmes to be scaled effectively.

� National and state level institutions will be responsible for defining and administering programmes at city level. In developing the metrics, criteria and performance standards for projects they can incentivise and channel funding to help achieve smart city and future proofing goals as well as monitor and evaluate performance.

� Institutional structures and mechanisms which may be required to enable implementation are likely to require the support of national and state level bodies who are also likely to be responsible for formulating and adopting regulations and their approval.

� Land reform is likely to be needed to fully achieve a planned and sustainable blue green infrastructure network in order that goals for safeguarding at risk areas and a more comprehensive basis for planning and infrastructure delivery can take place allowing for appropriate land assembly and compensation to take place. This issue has received significant attention at national level.

� State level bodies can support cities in their thrust towards cross sector working. They can change the terms of the debate and ensure that all relevant players are brought to the table including the inclusion of non-governmental partners. Through application of policy at national level they can ensure that city programmes and projects are framed to deliver

climate change mitigation and adaptation goals and alleviate poverty in their design.

There is a role to play for a wide range of other partners to enable cities to take action to address the challenges faced by meeting development needs in combination with addressing climate and resource challenges. Not only does this include a wide range of actors at city level including academia and civil society but also multilateral and bi-lateral development agencies, and international philanthropic and non-governmental organisations.

We hope that this project summary and sharing our experiences of this project has been helpful in exploring how integrated planning approaches can be used to address climate change at city level. We would be interested to hear of your experiences and issues faced and the opportunities you see for promoting integrated planning approaches.

The CDKN website provides an opportunity to explore the project further and share your knowledge in how other cities are tackling the issues.

http://cdkn.org/project/future-proofing-indian-cities/

The Atkins logo, ‘Carbon Critical Design’ and the strapline ‘Plan Design Enable’ are trademarks of Atkins Ltd.© Atkins Ltd except where stated otherwise.

www.atkinsglobal.com

For more information please contact: Roger SavageTel: +44 (0) 207 121 2980

Email: [email protected]

Registered office: Atkins, Woodcote Grove, Ashley Road, Epsom Surrey KT18 5BW United Kingdom

Enquiries: Tel: +44 (0)1372 72 6140

Fax: +44 (0)1372 74 0055

Email: [email protected]

www.atkinsglobal.com

future proofing indian cities report

Documents