International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering and Management
Year: 2026, Volume: 13, Issue: 3
First page : ( 138) Last page : ( 144)
Online ISSN : 2350-0557
Sarita Admune
DOI: 10.55524/ijirem.2026.13.3.16 |
DOI URL: https://doi.org/10.55524/ijirem.2026.13.3.16
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
Article Tools: Print the Abstract | Indexing metadata | How to cite item | Email this article | Post a Comment
Sarita Admune
India’s infrastructure finance debate has largely concentrated on mobilizing capital for asset creation through public expenditure, bank lending, public–private partnerships, municipal bonds, green bonds and multilateral finance. This paper advances a balancing argument: infrastructure finance in a climate stressed economy must also finance risk reduction before disasters occur. Urban floods, cyclones, heatwaves, water stress and critical service disruptions impose direct repair costs, fiscal pressure, business interruption, livelihood loss and social distress. However, most public finance continues to operate after the shock through relief, compensation and reconstruction. This paper examines resilience bonds and parametric disaster risk finance as nonconventional instruments for Indian urban infrastructure during 2017–2026. Using a descriptive and policy analytical design based on secondary literature, disaster risk finance documents, regulatory material and international experience, the paper develops a Protect–Price–Pay framework. The framework links three functions: protection through risk reducing infrastructure, pricing through avoided loss estimation, and payment through prearranged insurance, catastrophe risk transfer or resilience linked savings. The paper does not claim that India already has a mature resilience bond market; rather, it argues that Indian cities can initiate with structured pilots in urban flooding, cyclone exposed infrastructure, heat resilience and critical public services. The proposed approach is technically feasible only if India develops reliable city level risk accounts, transparent parametric triggers, actuarial modelling capacity, regulatory clarity on insurance linked securities and legally preapproved social payout plans. Resilience finance cannot replace public investment, municipal finance reform or climate adaptation planning. Its value lies in making avoided losses visible, measurable and partially financeable.
Assistant Professor, HSS, VJTI, Mumbai, India
No. of Downloads: 1 | No. of Views: 7
Shivangi Srivastava.
October 2025 - Vol 12, Issue 5
