Who Will Fix the Roof? India Fragmented Climate Governance
At around eight in the morning, when A young office commuter stepped out of Sector 62
metro station, it was raining. He had already expected some inconvenience due to rain, like
a wet road, a delay in the auto, perhaps A few traffic jams. Instead, he found himself
standing at the edge of something like A small pond. The road ahead had disappeared
beneath the water.
Cars are moving slowly, and bikes are being pushed rather than ridden. Pedestrians are
lifting their trousers and searching for a path through the water. Now, crossing the road
became an exercise of judgement, where is the pavement, where is the drainage, and
where does the road suddenly become deep? This is not the scene from any village or river
basin. It was Noida, India’s one of the most planned and rapidly urbanising cities.
Primarily, it did not seem to be an issue of climate policy. Now, the question is. Who was
responsible for the waterlogging? Was it a drainage system? The municipal authority? The
district administration? Was the problem an inadequate drainage system capacity, rapid
construction, loss of natural drainage channels, poor maintenance or simply an intense
rainfall?
The answer is perhaps all of them. And precisely where India’s climate governance problem
begins.
India does not lack a Climate policy. It has ambitious climate commitments and mission
programmes. But responsibility for dealing with climate risk is distributed across ministries,
Change (MoEFCC), is the nodal agency for climate actions, it only acts as a coordinating
body, rather than an implementing authority.
The flooded road in Noida, therefore, tells a larger story. A climate policy may be formulated
in Delhi. Urban plan approved at the state level, but the Drainage system is managed by
urban local governance, which has its own autonomy. So, it is like we have built a house that
has many rooms, but when the roof leaks, it is not clear who is responsible for repairing it.
Climate Action Tracker(CAT) overall assessment of India’s climate action efforts is highly
insufficient. CAT mentions it is due to the abundance of policies and the lack of
implementation and coordination across sectors and ministries.
It’s not just a policy flaw, it showcases the complex nature of the climate governance
framework that exists in our country. It is more evident when different ministries and
institutions coordinate. For example, the Ministry of Coal continue to focus on increasing its
domestic coal production with an annual growth of around ten per cent (FY 2025-26), while
reducing coal use is the most important thing in achieving net zero by 2070. So, the work
done by these ministries individually does not contribute to a combined national climate
strategy.
Federal structure: another layer of fragmentation
India follows a cooperative federal model in which the centre formulates policy, coordinates
among ministries and institutions and seeks to achieve the national climate goal while states
implement it through the State Action Plan on Climate Change (SAPCC). Due to variations in
finance, political structures and state priorities, the quality of actions, resources and
implementation across states varies.
It is a well established fact that the local community is the most vulnerable section to
climate change. Agricultural farmers directly experience that climate change is affecting
their harvests, but local governance lacks funds, policies, or awareness to address it. The
only major role they can play is to implement the central climate policy.
Fragmented architecture still works to some extent
Although it is true that India adheres to a decentralised architecture, we cannot say it’s a
complete policy failure. India’s Long-Term Low Emission Development(LT-LEDS) is based on
the principles of Equity and Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective
Capabilities (CBDR-RC). It presents an excellent example of how different institutions can
still work together without a single authority. Its seven strategic sectors provide a common
idea on which ministries and sectors can work together.
Even, the legal framework in India also helps in maintaining coordination in the fragmented
governance architecture. For example, the Mangrove Initiative for Shoreline Habitats &
Tangible Incomes (MISHTI) scheme is an excellent example of how a scheme with a clear
focus, adequate funding and strong legal support can achieve good results despite
expanding to around nine coastal states and four union territories. This represents that
centralisation is important but not always essential. Effective coordination can be achieved
through shared funding, legal mechanisms, defined roles and responsibilities.
The Deeper Tension: Ambition Without Enforcement Architecture
The major issue is structural, having a wide vertical and horizontal coordinating mechanism
but lacking regulatory institutions. Indian climate governance is best at policymaking,
launching missions, and international commitments. To reach this goal, the integration of
different departments, institutions, and ministries is essential.
In the Global South, the problem of lacking strong regulatory authority is very common, not
because these countries face lesser climate impact, but because of a major focus on
developmental issues and belief in climate equity.
Even, in the Global North, some countries have strong mechanisms, i.e., the UK, and
Germany have a strong climate change framework, with binding provisions and empowered
by a legal framework. Although developed nations have Common but Differentiated
Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), many still lack a centralised and
legal mechanism to address climate change.
The UK is one of the first countries to establish a strong, legally binding framework in the
form of the Climate Change Act 2008, which creates the Committee on Climate Change
(CCC), an independent statutory body that advises the UK government on emission targets,
carbon budget, and assesses progress and publishes independent reports on adaptation and
emission cuts. Citizens’ assemblies in the UK are an important institution work in achieving
national targets.
Germany’s Federal Climate Action Act (KSG) establishes legally binding climate targets and
emissions limits. Climate action is based on cooperation between stakeholders, individual
oversight, and an independent Council of experts on climate change.
Panacea; Strong governance mechanism
Firstly, India can learn from the UK and Germany and create a dedicated climate authority to
implement international commitments, help achieve national climate goals, assign
responsibility, and facilitate strong horizontal and vertical coordination, effective monitoring
and timely completion of climate projects.
Second, India does not need a super ministry to deal with the climate issue. Instead, a
statutory/executive body with legal authority, including experts from diverse backgrounds,
will present short-term (1-year) climate goals at the beginning of every year and will present
its report to the parliament at the end of every year.
Third, the creation of a climate assembly at the district level. This assembly will comprise 50
climate experts from that district. This assembly will be headed by the district collector, who
will discuss how local practices and techniques could be better integrated with climate
issues and national commitment. The report of this meeting will be forwarded to the nodal
agency of climate change at the centre level.
Fourth, at every ministry level, at both the centre and state levels, a separate department of
climate action, which will create awareness and coordinate with the central authority as
needed.
Climate change cannot be effectively governed solely at the national level because
implementation ultimately depends on different levels of government, including
provincial/regional and local authorities. At the same time, local governments cannot solve
climate change independently because they depend on higher-level policies, resources and
institutional frameworks. So, to achieve climate goals and development sustainability, the
integration of different stakeholders and an efficient enforcement mechanism is necessary.
The author is Ph.D. Scholar at G B PANT Social Science Institute, Prayagraj, and working on environmental governance, climate change and public policy.