Six-Point Integrated Intervention Strategy for a Climate-Vulnerable Informal Settlement in a Rapidly Growing Indian City

Introduction

The problems of an informal settlement experiencing irregular water supply, inadequate sewerage, poor solid-waste collection, inadequate public transport, recurrent waterlogging and increasing exposure to extreme rainfall should not be addressed through isolated infrastructure projects. These deficiencies are interconnected. Poor solid-waste management can block drains; inadequate drainage increases waterlogging; waterlogging can contaminate water-supply networks and sanitation systems; weak transport connectivity reduces access to employment and essential services; and extreme rainfall magnifies all these vulnerabilities.

An appropriate planning response should therefore follow an integrated, inclusive, climate-resilient and service-oriented approach consistent with the principles of SDG 11—Sustainable Cities and Communities, particularly Targets 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.5, 11.6 and 11.b. The intervention should also support SDG 6 on clean water and sanitation and SDG 13 on climate action.

The fundamental planning principle should be in-situ upgrading wherever technically feasible, rather than displacement of the community. Infrastructure improvements should simultaneously address basic services, environmental conditions, mobility, climate resilience and social inclusion.

The following six-point intervention strategy is proposed.

---

1. Universal, Safe and Reliable Water-Supply System

Existing problem

Irregular water supply creates multiple problems in informal settlements. Residents may depend on public standposts, tankers, private vendors or groundwater. Intermittent supply also increases the possibility of contamination because negative pressure in pipelines can allow polluted groundwater or sewage to enter damaged water lines.

Water inequality is therefore not merely an engineering problem; it is an issue of urban inclusion and environmental justice.

Proposed interventions

The first intervention should provide universal and equitable access to safe water.

A detailed household and infrastructure survey should identify existing connections, standposts, pipelines, sources, supply hours, pressure levels and households without formal access. The existing network should then be extended or rehabilitated.

The following measures are recommended:

• provide individual household water connections wherever feasible;
• establish community standposts as an interim solution in areas where individual connections cannot immediately be provided;
• replace damaged and leaking pipelines;
• introduce bulk metering and progressively household-level metering;
• create District Metered Areas (DMAs) for leakage monitoring;
• undertake regular water-quality testing;
• maintain minimum pressure to prevent contamination;
• provide adequate household/community storage during the transition towards continuous supply;
• introduce rainwater-harvesting systems in community buildings and suitable residential structures; and
• develop groundwater-recharge structures where hydrogeological conditions permit.

A Water Safety Plan should be prepared covering the entire chain from source to household. Particular attention should be paid to places where water pipelines cross drains or sewer lines.

Planning objective

The long-term goal should be:

Universal access → safe water → adequate quantity → reliable supply → affordable service → reduced water losses.

Low-income households should receive lifeline tariffs or targeted subsidies so that formalisation of water services does not make water unaffordable.

Expected outcome

The intervention would reduce dependence on tankers and informal vendors, improve public health, reduce household expenditure on water and contribute directly to SDG 11.1 and SDG 6.1.

---

2. Decentralised Sewerage, Sanitation and Faecal-Sludge Management

Existing problem

Inadequate sewerage in dense informal settlements can result in wastewater flowing through open drains, overflowing septic tanks and direct discharge into nearby water bodies. During extreme rainfall, sewage and stormwater can mix, producing serious health and environmental risks.

A conventional underground sewerage system may not always be immediately feasible because informal settlements frequently have narrow streets, irregular plots, high densities and uncertain land tenure.

Proposed interventions

The sanitation strategy should therefore be based on a context-specific combination of centralised and decentralised systems.

Where connection to the municipal sewerage network is technically and financially feasible, households should be connected to the existing network. In inaccessible areas, decentralised wastewater-treatment systems can be considered.

The strategy should include:

• household toilets for all families;
• community toilets only where household facilities are temporarily impossible;
• simplified or small-bore sewer systems in high-density areas where appropriate;
• scheduled desludging of septic tanks;
• safe collection and transportation of faecal sludge;
• faecal-sludge and septage treatment;
• decentralised wastewater-treatment systems where network connection is impractical;
• prevention of sewage discharge into stormwater drains;
• regular inspection of sewer lines; and
• reuse of safely treated wastewater for appropriate non-potable purposes.

The key principle should be to maintain a separation between:

Sewage system ≠ Stormwater drainage system.

This separation becomes particularly important under extreme-rainfall conditions.

Climate-resilient sanitation

Sanitation infrastructure should be designed above expected flood levels wherever possible. Electrical and mechanical components of pumping facilities should be protected against inundation, while manholes should be designed to reduce stormwater inflow.

Expected outcome

The intervention would reduce open sewage, groundwater contamination and waterborne diseases while improving environmental quality. It would contribute to SDG 11.1, SDG 11.6 and SDG 6.2–6.3.

---

3. Integrated Solid-Waste Management and Drain Protection

Existing problem

Poor solid-waste collection and waterlogging are closely connected. When waste is dumped into streets, vacant plots and open drains, plastic bags and other materials obstruct drainage channels. During intense rainfall, blocked drains significantly increase local flooding.

Therefore, waste management should form part of the settlement’s flood-resilience strategy, rather than being treated solely as a municipal cleanliness service.

Proposed interventions

A door-to-door collection system should be introduced for every household. Waste should be segregated at source into wet, dry and domestic hazardous fractions in accordance with applicable municipal requirements.

The intervention should include:

• 100% door-to-door collection;
• source segregation;
• fixed and publicly communicated collection schedules;
• covered collection vehicles appropriate for narrow streets;
• decentralised composting of biodegradable waste where feasible;
• material-recovery facilities for recyclable waste;
• formal integration of waste pickers and informal recyclers;
• prohibition of dumping into drains and water bodies;
• regular drain-cleaning programmes;
• pre-monsoon removal of accumulated silt and waste; and
• community reporting of missed collection and illegal dumping.

Waste collection points should not be located in natural drainage paths or flood-prone low points.

Community participation

Resident groups, women’s groups, youth organisations and waste workers can participate in neighbourhood cleanliness monitoring. Behaviour-change campaigns should explain the direct connection:

Uncollected waste → blocked drains → reduced drainage capacity → waterlogging → disease and property damage.

Expected outcome

Improved waste management would simultaneously increase neighbourhood cleanliness, reduce drainage blockage, improve recycling and lower public-health risks. It would directly support SDG 11.6 and indirectly strengthen climate resilience under SDG 11.b.

---

4. Climate-Resilient Stormwater Drainage and Waterlogging Management

Existing problem

This should be treated as a high-priority intervention because the settlement already experiences waterlogging and is becoming increasingly exposed to extreme rainfall.

Traditional drainage design based only on historical rainfall may be inadequate under changing climate conditions. Urbanisation also increases impermeable surfaces, causing rainfall to become surface runoff more rapidly.

Risk-based planning approach

Before constructing new drains, the planning authority should undertake a GIS-based flood and drainage assessment.

The assessment should map:

• settlement topography;
• natural drainage channels;
• existing drains and culverts;
• historical waterlogging locations;
• low-lying areas;
• impervious surfaces;
• waste-dumping hotspots;
• critical infrastructure;
• vulnerable households;
• rainfall intensity; and
• potential evacuation routes.

The analysis should identify micro-flood-risk zones within the settlement.

Proposed grey infrastructure

Existing drains should first be cleaned, repaired and hydraulically assessed. Missing links should be constructed and undersized sections upgraded.

Interventions should include:

• rehabilitation and desilting of drains;
• additional stormwater drains in underserved areas;
• enlargement of critical culverts;
• removal of physical drainage obstructions;
• installation of backflow-prevention devices where appropriate;
• pumping arrangements at unavoidable low points; and
• protection of major outfalls.

Blue-green infrastructure

Engineering measures should be supplemented with nature-based solutions such as:

Rain gardens + bioswales + permeable paving + recharge trenches + detention areas + urban vegetation + restored ponds/wetlands.

Rather than moving all stormwater downstream as quickly as possible, these measures help cities follow the principle:

Capture → Store → Infiltrate → Delay → Safely Drain.

Open spaces that are not intensively used can potentially function as temporary detention spaces during exceptional rainfall, provided public safety is ensured.

Early-warning and emergency response

Rainfall forecasts and municipal alerts should be linked to a settlement-level warning mechanism using mobile messaging, public-address systems and community volunteers.

Particularly vulnerable households—such as older persons, children and persons with disabilities—should be mapped for priority assistance during emergencies.

Expected outcome

The intervention would reduce flood depth and duration, minimise infrastructure damage and improve resilience to climate extremes, directly contributing to SDG 11.5 and 11.b.

---

5. Affordable Public Transport, Walking and Last-Mile Connectivity

Existing problem

Infrastructure deprivation is not limited to water and sanitation. Poor public transport can create transport poverty, particularly where low-income residents live far from employment centres, schools, hospitals and public services.

Informal-settlement residents frequently depend heavily on walking, cycling, buses and shared transport. Therefore, expensive road widening or car-oriented infrastructure would not necessarily address their mobility needs.

Proposed interventions

The strategy should prioritise people rather than private vehicles.

First, a mobility and accessibility survey should identify:

• major employment destinations;
• schools and health facilities;
• nearest bus/metro/rail stops;
• existing walking routes;
• travel costs;
• public-transport frequency;
• unsafe locations; and
• first/last-mile gaps.

Public transport routes should then be modified or extended where demand justifies it. Feeder services, e-rickshaws or appropriately regulated shared mobility can connect the settlement with major public-transport corridors.

Walking infrastructure

Since walking is likely to be a major access mode, priority should be given to:

• continuous pedestrian pathways;
• safe crossings;
• street lighting;
• universal-access features;
• shaded pedestrian routes where feasible;
• drainage along walking routes;
• safe access to bus stops; and
• removal of physical barriers.

Bus stops should be designed with shelter, lighting, route information and safe pedestrian access.

Affordability and inclusion

Transport planning should consider not merely physical distance but also travel time, cost, reliability, safety and accessibility. Affordable fare structures are particularly important for low-income households.

The planning objective should be:

Home → safe walk/feeder → public transport → employment/education/healthcare.

Expected outcome

Improved connectivity would expand access to employment and essential services, reduce transport exclusion and contribute directly to SDG 11.2.

---

6. In-Situ Upgrading, Participatory Governance and Integrated Climate-Resilience Planning

The final intervention integrates the previous five into a single settlement-upgrading programme.

In-situ upgrading as the preferred approach

Where the site is reasonably safe and can be made resilient, in-situ upgrading should be preferred to wholesale relocation. Relocation can disrupt employment networks, social relationships, education and access to services.

However, households occupying locations with unmanageable life-safety risks, such as an active drainage channel or an area where flood risk cannot reasonably be mitigated, may require carefully planned nearby relocation with adequate compensation, tenure protection and community participation.

Participatory planning

Residents should participate in decisions concerning:

• water points and network extensions;
• toilet and sewerage arrangements;
• waste-collection locations;
• drainage improvements;
• public-space design;
• transport stops;
• flood evacuation routes; and
• implementation priorities.

A Settlement Infrastructure and Resilience Committee can be established with representatives of residents, women’s groups, youth, vulnerable populations, the ULB, utility agencies and local civil-society organisations.

GIS-based integrated settlement plan

All infrastructure should be brought together in a single spatial database:

Households + water + sewerage + drains + waste hotspots + roads + public transport + open spaces + flood risk + vulnerable population.

This prevents the common problem of one infrastructure agency undertaking works that interfere with another—for example, constructing a road and subsequently excavating it for a sewer line.

Land tenure and basic-service security

Infrastructure provision should not necessarily be delayed until every tenure issue is completely resolved. Appropriate legal and administrative mechanisms should allow residents to access essential services while longer-term tenure questions are addressed.

Monitoring through measurable indicators

A neighbourhood dashboard should monitor outcomes such as:

Indicator| Proposed Direction/Target
Households with safe water access| Towards 100%
Reliability of water supply| Continuous improvement
Households with safe sanitation| Towards 100%
Door-to-door waste collection| 100%
Source segregation| Progressive universal coverage
Untreated sewage entering drains| Towards zero
Waterlogging duration after major rainfall| Substantial annual reduction
Population within convenient reach of public transport| Progressive increase
Safe pedestrian access| Universal coverage of major routes
Households exposed to high flood risk| Progressive reduction
Resident grievances resolved| Time-bound resolution

Community-based monitoring should complement municipal data.

---

Integrated Implementation Framework

The six interventions should not be implemented independently. Their interrelationship can be expressed as:

1. Safe Water Supply
   ↓
2. Sewerage and Sanitation
   ↓
3. Solid-Waste Management
   ↓
4. Stormwater and Climate Resilience
   ↓
5. Public Transport and Accessibility
   ↓
6. In-Situ Upgrading + Participatory Governance

In practice, implementation should be coordinated rather than strictly sequential.

Suggested Phasing

Phase I: Immediate Actions — 0–12 Months

Priority should be given to measures capable of reducing immediate health and disaster risks:

• settlement and household survey;
• GIS infrastructure mapping;
• emergency repair of water pipelines;
• drinking-water-quality testing;
• regular waste collection;
• cleaning and desilting drains;
• identification of waterlogging hotspots;
• temporary sanitation improvements;
• pre-monsoon preparedness; and
• establishment of community coordination mechanisms.

Phase II: Infrastructure Upgrading — 1–3 Years

The second phase should include:

• water-network extension;
• sewerage/decentralised sanitation infrastructure;
• stormwater-network rehabilitation;
• household waste segregation;
• pedestrian improvements;
• public-transport/feeder connectivity;
• rainwater harvesting; and
• blue-green infrastructure.

Phase III: Resilience and Service Consolidation — 3–5+ Years

The final phase should focus on:

• reliable/continuous water supply;
• smart metering and monitoring;
• treated wastewater reuse;
• comprehensive flood-resilience measures;
• climate-sensitive land-use controls;
• long-term infrastructure maintenance;
• service-performance monitoring; and
• institutionalisation of community participation.

Relationship with SDG 11

The proposed interventions collectively address several SDG 11 targets:

Settlement Problem| Intervention| SDG 11 Link
Irregular water and inadequate basic services| Universal water supply| 11.1
Inadequate sewerage| Sanitation and wastewater management| 11.1, 11.6
Poor solid-waste collection| Integrated waste management| 11.6
Inadequate public transport| Public transport and last-mile connectivity| 11.2
Waterlogging| Stormwater and blue-green infrastructure| 11.5
Extreme rainfall| Climate-resilient infrastructure| 11.5, 11.b
Informality and exclusion| Participatory in-situ upgrading| 11.1, 11.3

Conclusion

The informal settlement should be viewed not as an isolated “slum-improvement” problem but as part of the wider urban infrastructure and climate-resilience system. The most appropriate approach is therefore integrated in-situ upgrading, combining universal basic services with environmental management, sustainable mobility, disaster-risk reduction and participatory governance.

The six-point strategy can be summarised as:

1. Safe and reliable water supply →
2. Sewerage and sanitation →
3. Integrated solid-waste management →
4. Climate-resilient drainage and flood management →
5. Affordable public transport and last-mile accessibility →
6. Participatory in-situ upgrading and climate-resilient governance.

The key planning principle is that infrastructure, social inclusion and climate resilience must be addressed together. Improving only drains without managing waste, or providing water without sewerage, will merely transfer problems from one urban system to another. An integrated strategy, by contrast, can transform the settlement into a safer, healthier, better-connected and more climate-resilient neighbourhood while advancing SDG 11.