DN’s representation at the IDDRR 2026 events: Virtual Roundtable on Heat, Health, and Livelihoods, organized by AIDMI.

Key Insights from Speakers

a) Women, Heat, and Local Resilience

Dr. Midhila Mallika, Senior Consultant at the National Disaster Management Authority, highlighted the unequal burden of extreme heat, particularly on women. She described this as the “gender tax of extreme heat.”

For many women, particularly those involved in home-based and informal work, the home can become a thermal trap. They may experience high indoor temperatures while simultaneously managing unpaid care responsibilities, household work, and livelihood activities.

Dr. Mallika identified three important pillars for stronger heat resilience: early warning systems, improvements in the built environment, and economic protection. Affordable cooling, safer housing, financial support, and appropriate risk-transfer mechanisms need to become part of heat resilience.

She also stressed that local organisations and communities can identify vulnerabilities that larger systems may miss. Local leadership must therefore be connected with state and national institutions.

“Empowering local action is the only sustainable path forward.”

b) Rising Heat, Rising Risk in Asia-Pacific

Ms. Mikiko Tanaka, Director and Head of the UNESCAP Subregional Office for South and South-West Asia, placed local heat experiences within the wider Asia-Pacific context.

Drawing from the Asia-Pacific Disaster Report 2025, she highlighted the growing impact of rising temperatures on health, labour productivity, agriculture, food security, energy systems, infrastructure, and ecosystems.

Her presentation showed that extreme heat can no longer be viewed only as a seasonal health concern. It is becoming a broader economic and development risk. Agriculture and construction are especially exposed to productivity losses, while rising cooling demand is putting growing pressure on energy infrastructure.

A key message was that heat resilience should be integrated into existing development finance, infrastructure, public health, and planning systems rather than treated only as a separate programme.

“Heat adaptation does not require exclusive financing, rather strategic integration into other development funding and policy streams.”

She also stressed stronger impact-based forecasting, standardised heat terminology, urban cooling, and regional cooperation for sharing data, innovation, and good practice.

c) Climate Education and Storytelling

Ms. Remya Sasindran, Co-founder of words. rhythms. images. and Communications Manager at ADRRN, shared experiences from Dehradun, where rising temperatures are changing the everyday lives of communities.

The initiative combined climate education and storytelling to help women, children, and families understand heat risks and identify practical household-level measures.

Local women teachers played a central role because they were trusted within their communities. Children carried learning from classrooms into homes and neighbourhoods, encouraging others to drink water, avoid peak heat, and take practical protective measures.

Some households explored low-cost actions such as white roof coatings, curtains, and improved ventilation.

“This heat is not normal.”

The Dehradun experience showed that awareness can lead to action when information is locally understood, trusted, and connected to practical choices. Storytelling also created space for communities, officials, journalists, educators, and civil society to discuss heat risk together.

d) Women’s Leadership and Regional Learning

Ms. Pritha Khanal, GESI Specialist at Duryog Nivaran, shared lessons from the SIDRRA programme and related experiences across South Asia.

She emphasised that disaster and heat risks are not experienced equally. Women, persons with disabilities, socially excluded communities, and low-income households often face greater exposure while having fewer options for protection.

Examples from Nepal and Pakistan demonstrated the value of women acting as trainers, leaders, risk communicators, and decision-makers. Participatory risk mapping also showed that communities possess knowledge that external technical systems may not capture.

A major lesson concerned communication. Forecasting or warning technology does not automatically result in action. People must understand and trust information, and warnings must be accessible and connected with realistic options for response.

“Information that exists but is not understood or acted upon does little to reduce risk.”

She also emphasised that livelihood constraints matter. A worker may understand a heat warning but still have to continue working. Heat action must therefore connect risk communication with livelihood protection.

e) From Local Innovation to Heat Action Planning for All

Mr. Mihir R. Bhatt, Director of AIDMI, brought the four presentations together around the idea that resilience is the continuity of everyday life.

He argued that a disaster is not only what happens outside the home; it is also what happens inside when ordinary life becomes impossible. Can a woman cook safely? Can a child sleep? Can an older person breathe comfortably? Can a home-based worker continue earning under a hot roof? And India has a lot to learn and share to set the agenda (Annex-1).

He highlighted four priorities: resilience should be measured through everyday life; women must help design heat resilience; warnings must be accompanied by the means to act; and local innovation needs institutional support.

AIDMI describes this broader approach as Heat Action Planning for All.

“Resilience starts at home, but protecting that home is everybody’s responsibility.” All homes in all Asia Pacific. And UN ESCAP has the needed leadership to not leave anyone behind (Annex-2).

His remarks called for a shift from measuring completed activities to measuring whether people can remain safe, healthy, and economically secure during extreme heat.