By Lubaina Rangwala
[...]
First, the ICAP fails to integrate future climate trends in its projection of heat risk under different geographic conditions. Cooling requirements in dry and arid regions as opposed to humid coastal regions will vary drastically; so will the technology and planning. Integrating climate projections in city and regional plans can emphasize the need for climate sensitive urban environments and potentially reduce ambient temperatures. In addition to land use plans, cities can use remote sensing data to produce vulnerability maps that corelate urban heat islands with depleted tree covers, under different temperature scenarios. This can help cities identify highly exposed areas and target interventions such as increasing tree cover and mandating building regulations towards climate sensitive urban development. Heat vulnerability maps under different climate scenarios can be used to inform decision makers of the costs of inaction by corelating data on health impacts, economic productivity loss and risks of emigration.
Second, increase awareness on heat stress to influence long-term adaptation action. Heat is an invisible and slow-moving climate hazard that is yet to be recognized as a ‘natural calamity’ by the National Disaster Management Act, 2005. Currently, most disaster preparedness action focuses on flood risk and other natural disasters (sudden shocks). Even citizens perceive heat as an inconvenience or health risk at best. They retrofit their homes, buildings and neighbourhoods in response to flood risk, but rarely come together to plant trees and plan for long-term heat resilience. In response to increasing threats, the ICAP misses a crucial opportunity to 1) mandate retrofitting guidelines for existing buildings, infrastructure and services to potentially reduce urban heat island effects; 2) create awareness and encourage informed participation to plan for collective heat resilience rather than focusing on a greater reliance on personal cooling solutions; and 3) ensure early warning alerts include heat warnings and personal resilience strategies that are responsive to dry and humid heat conditions, factoring temperature and humidity as two simultaneous risk factors.
Third, focus on the needs of vulnerable people living and working in highly exposed places. A recent study conducted in poor and vulnerable communities in Surat showed that residents living in poor communities lack the information, awareness, and understanding of the severity of heat risk on their bodies and their lives. For example, respondents said they lose an average of 7-8 workdays during extreme summers due to illnesses and exhaustion. Some daily-wage workers reported job loss and the inability to find new jobs once they had recovered. Unfortunately, people still perceive heat as an inconvenience and respond to it by adopting personal comfort habits rather than organize or demand for long-term solutions.
[...]