India’s cities are drowning in a crisis of governance, not rains

The devastating floods that recently paralysed Kolkata, Mumbai, Varanasi, Prayagraj, the Delhi National Capital Region and many other Indian cities are often described as Nature’s fury.

But evidence shows they are symptoms of a collision between climate change and governance failure. What appears as a meteorological misfortune is a collapse of planning and accountability. There are projections of a 43 per cent rise in extreme rainfall intensity by 2030, overwhelming cities whose natural defences have been systematically dismantled.

When rainfall patterns shift faster than design standards, events once deemed decadal now occur every other year, overwhelming drainage systems calibrated for a different climate.

Anatomy of governance failure

But climate change is only one part of the story. What appears as an extreme meteorological event is, in fact, a collapse of planning, accountability and the logic of public investment in India’s cities. Institutional fragmentation has made resilience impossible.

Also read: Climate crisis pushing eastern India’s world heritage parks to the brink

Drainage, land use and river management sit in separate agencies spanning municipal corporations, development authorities and water boards — each operating with different priorities.

The World Bank has repeatedly noted that Indian urban governance is structured around “projects rather than systems,” where resilience is an afterthought after design rather than embedded within it.

The primary accelerator of this crisis remains unchecked urban expansion. The urban population in India is projected to reach 951 million by 2050. This development translates into a significant land-use and land-cover change.

As concrete and pavement replace natural ground and vegetation, stormwater runoff increases dramatically, overwhelming systems designed for a different climate and population profile.

India has no unified hydrological authority capable of aligning urban infrastructure with basin-scale dynamics. The World Bank has repeatedly noted that India's urban governance is structured around “projects rather than systems“, where resilience is an afterthought after design rather than embedded within it.

Multiple agencies often invest in overlapping infrastructure without shared hydrological baselines, according to the National Institute of Urban Affairs.

Also read: Floods, landslides hit over 30 Darjeeling tea gardens; Rs 50 cr loss feared

Losing capacity to absorb water

Cities are losing their innate ability to absorb water. The destruction of natural infrastructure — wetlands, floodplains and water bodies — that would naturally slow and store floodwaters has rendered traditional drainage inadequate.

Large sums under the Smart Cities Mission or AMRUT programmes are flowing into capital-intensive works like roads, plazas and underground ducts, but little goes into maintenance or ecological restoration.

Mumbai’s drainage system, for instance, has a functional capacity of only 45 mm per hour, a limit that proves insufficient when the city endures deluges reaching 550 mm in three days. Similarly, the drainage network in New Delhi, designed in 1976, is constrained to 50 mm, making it ill-equipped for the current climate reality.

For cities along the Ganga basin, such as Varanasi and Prayagraj, flooding results not only from riverine overflow but from local rain overwhelming drains, an issue worsened by master plans that fail to incorporate future rainfall projections.

Also read: Hyderabad floods: Old City, IT hubs inundated as Musi River overflows

The World Bank estimates an investment need of over USD 2.4 trillion by 2050 to ensure a low-carbon, resilient infrastructure. Yet, current annual spending remains low, hovering at an estimated 0.7 per cent of GDP. Large sums under the Smart Cities Mission or AMRUT (Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation) programmes are flowing into capital-intensive works like roads, plazas and underground ducts, but little goes into maintenance or ecological restoration.

Funding is hindered

The funding that is allocated is also hampered by a paradox of governance. The 10 largest urban local bodies have shown an inability to absorb capital, spending only two-thirds of their total allocated capital budget over a recent three-year period.

This failure is structural, rooted in limited capacity, slow regulatory clearances, and deficient auditing practices within many municipalities. The political economy of flooding is such that immense capital needs are met with limited execution capacity.

Also read: What caused Kolkata floods? A near-cloudburst, outdated drainage, ecological apathy

On top of it, political incentives reward visibility. Governments prefer photographable assets to the continuity of upkeep. Drainage systems are built, then left to silt. Encroachments on floodplains proceed under the banner of development, often with official sanction.

The loss of natural storage multiplies flood peaks. The burden of displacement falls on informal settlements rather than on institutional actors who permit or profit from encroachment. It is the poor and vulnerable who suffer the most.

Political economy of misallocation

India’s urban flooding is not just inadequate spending but also misdirected spending. Schemes prioritise new construction over maintenance. Budget logic favours capital expenditure. Once a drain is built, expenditure is complete.

Yet, drainage is a living system. Without ring-fenced allocations for operations, capacity declines each season.

Municipal finances cover only capital works. Recurrent budgets are squeezed, and systems decay. Resilience remains a marginal add-on in urban policy rather than its organising principle.

Also read: Mamata Banerjee on Kolkata rains: 'Never seen such rainfall'

The solution is not more money but smart governance. Resilience begins with institutional reordering. Every urban project should require basin-scale hydrological clearance, tested against future rainfall scenarios. This single reform would align local interventions with regional water dynamics.

Equally critical is to embed maintenance into financing. Each capital grant should include fixed annual provision for upkeep, audited before new funds are released.

The “Sponge City” concept offers a sustainable framework. This model emphasises on green and blue infrastructure, which means restoring wetlands, using permeable surfaces and creating rain gardens that boost a city’s ability to absorb, store and filter water. Cities like Chennai have already demonstrated the success of this approach with the restoration of 32 water bodies.

Towards a governance reboot

Urban performance metrics must shift from inputs to outcomes. Grant disbursements should depend on verifiable indicators like reduction in inundation duration or area affected. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has recommended performance-based audits, but these need statutory backing.

Also read: Why govt compensation continues to elude Gujarat's poor salt workers hit hard by floods

Nature-based solutions should become the default practice. Technology must serve transparency rather than spectacle. The Smart Cities Mission can play a transformative role if digital infrastructure is reoriented toward open hydrological data. The mission has already initiated 603 projects to improve stormwater drainage across 97 cities. The integration of advanced technologies can move management from reactive to predictive.

What appears as an extreme meteorological event is, in fact, a collapse of planning, accountability and the logic of public investment in India’s cities. Institutional fragmentation has made resilience impossible.

Technology, however, is not a substitute for governance. It is a tool for transparency and better planning. Resilience requires policy reform. There has to be strict enforcement of laws against construction in natural drainage channels, the integration of future climate risk into all urban planning, and, most critically, the building of financial and technical capacity within cities to spend, manage and execute projects responsibly.

Until the structures of urban governance match the sophistication of the technologies being deployed, India’s cities will continue to sink.

Beyond floods and photo-ops

India’s urban floods are not natural disasters but institutional ones. Climate change amplifies rainfall extremes, but damage arises from how cities are governed and capital allocated. The annual cycle of relief and reconstruction is a fiscal feedback loop rewarding failure. Breaking it requires laws protecting floodplains, audits measuring performance, and budgets privileging maintenance over monuments.

Also read: Punjab floods: How Ravi’s fury, embankment collapse brought calamity to farmers

With the country’s urban population projected to nearly double to 951 million by 2050, more than 144 million new homes will be needed by 2070. The floods across India’s cities warn that the future has arrived.

To live with that reality, urban India must learn to absorb water, not just repel it. A resilient city is not one that stays dry, but one that knows how to get wet without drowning.

(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not reflect the views of The Federal.)