WISE Quotient 2026 · heat brief

Mumbai’s heat is a commons problem.

Citizens know it. Almost no one names it. Half the city has lost the shared infrastructure that would help. And in one belt, Govandi–Mankhurd, heat has stopped being a discomfort and become the texture of despair. Every chart below is interactive: hover, tap, explore.

1.97heat liveability, the lowest of all 17 indicators
68.5%say their locality is not liveable in summer
49.0%live in a heat belt (half their neighbours agree)
<1%name heat as their issue when asked openly
Three claims, not one number

Universal. Unequal. Silent.

CLAIM 01

Universally felt

Only 0.8% answered “don’t know” on heat, the lowest of any indicator. No awareness campaign needed; citizens know.

0.8%
CLAIM 02

Unequally felt

Long-tenured Govandi residents: 87% say summer is strongly unliveable. Newcomers elsewhere: 26%. A 3.3× gap.

3.3×
CLAIM 03

Silently felt

In heat-trap localities, fewer than 1 in 100 residents name heat when asked what is wrong. The vocabulary gap comes before the action gap.

<1%
Lens 01 · universally felt

The most visible problem is also the worst-scored.

Heat has the smallest “don’t know” rate and the lowest score of all 17 indicators. Hover any bar.

All 17 indicators: score (bars) and don’t-know rate (toggle)

Lens 02 · unequally felt

The longer you have lived here, the harsher your verdict.

Strong-disagreement on heat climbs steadily with years of residence. Long memory is a record of decline, not nostalgia.

“My locality is strongly unliveable in summer” by years of residence

Sharpest cut: residents of 20+ years in M/East sit at 87% strong disagreement. In informal-named localities (nagar, wadi, chawl, the Dharavi–Govandi belt) it is 56%, against 34% everywhere else.
Lens 03 · silently felt

The heat silence.

Asked openly what is wrong with their area, heat-trap residents name garbage, roads, water. Heat itself: 10 mentions among 1,366 residents.

What heat-trap residents name as civic issues (n = 1,366)

Why it matters

Cleanliness has a vocabulary: BMC, dustbins, swachh. Heat has none. There is no civic phrase yet for a shaded corridor or a public cooling room. Naming heat is itself the first intervention, and it is measurable: re-survey and watch the naming rate move.

“If I had a superpower, first and foremost I would try to reduce the intensity of the sunrays so that I and the others won’t sweat much.”
Citizen, 18–24 · Goregaon West (one of the few who named it; nearly all were under 30)
Lens 04 · a commons failure

Heat travels with shared infrastructure, not private resources.

Heat correlates strongly with everything collective (water, waste, climate, green cover, mental-health support) and barely at all with private or community-internal strengths (belonging, enterprise, hope). That is the statistical signature of a commons failure: you cannot fix it with a fan.

Correlation of heat liveability with every other indicator

Co-failure: share of citizens for whom heat AND the other system are both broken

Lens 05 · refuge collapse

Fifteen localities with nowhere to escape.

A locality is in refuge collapse when summer is unliveable AND its outdoor escapes (green cover, public space) are broken too. Hover a locality for all three scores.

Refuge-collapse localities: heat, green cover, and public-space scores (all ≤ 2 of 4)

The contrast that makes it actionable: Chembur Camp is also a heat trap (1.22) but scores 3.65 on green and 3.73 on public space; its citizens at least have an outside. The fifteen above have neither an inside nor an outside. They are the priority list for shaded corridors, tree cover and public refuges.
Lens 06 · where hope breaks

In most heat traps, hope holds. In Govandi, it has collapsed.

Every dot is a heat-trap locality, sized by responses. Drag to zoom; hover for scores. All seven localities below the hope line are in one belt.

Heat liveability × hope, heat-trap localities only

The one-line read

Where heat, commons failure, refuge collapse and voicelessness coincide, hope goes. It is geographically bounded and it has a name: the Govandi–Mankhurd belt. Citywide heat policy that does not treat this belt separately will fail it.

Context · in brief

Where this sits, and what to do.

Cross-validation: satellite and citizen voice agree

The OpenCity / Citizen Matters Heat Data Jam (Maharashtra Climate Cell, Climate Group, C40, WRI India, St. Xavier’s) modelled M/East with satellite data: bastis suffer most, and built-volume-to-vegetation explains 85% of within-ward temperature variance. This survey reaches the same diagnosis from the street: a publishable cross-validation.

The ecosystem this joins

Mumbai: MCAP/BMC (cool roofs, Marol urban forest, climate-resilient streets) · HeatWatch India (worker-focused organising) · cBalance (passive cooling for informal housing) · IIT-B CSRE (surface-temperature research). India: Ahmedabad HAP (the template, ~2,300 lives) · Mahila Housing Trust (20,000+ cool roofs, women-led) · Telangana Cool Roof Policy · CEEW (warm nights rising faster than hot days) · WRI Cool Cities Lab.

Six moves for WISE

1. Publish this refuge-collapse list as a named civic artefact. 2. Run heat-naming workshops in those 15 localities and measure the naming rate. 3. Treat Govandi as a separate flagship, co-designed with local CBOs. 4. Add occupational heat, night heat, and refuge access to the next Quotient. 5. Take the demand-side case to WRI’s Keep Cool challenge. 6. Bring the citizen data to the Heat Data Jam coalition rather than build a new one.

Method: heat-trap = locality (n≥15) where 75%+ disagree summer is liveable. Naming detection uses word-boundary matching, corrected 12 June 2026; earlier versions of this page said 6%, the corrected figure is 0.7%. All figures recomputed from the full 5 July 2026 CSV.

WISE heat brief · data from the WISE Quotient 2026 · rebuilt on the 5 July 2026 dataset