As delegates huddle in closed negotiation rooms in Belém for the annual climate summit (COP30) to deliver results, the search for viable climate transition models has taken on fresh urgency. With the US withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and Europe grappling with energy crises and political fatigue, attention has shifted to major developing economies.
China’s centralised, state-led approach has delivered impressive scale in renewable energy deployment, but its reliance on state-owned industries and top-down enforcement makes it a difficult model to replicate across the Global South.
India’s alternative, a federal model that pairs national frameworks with state-level implementation, may offer a more adaptable template for nations facing similar governance complexities and development pressures.
India’s climate governance operates through a distinctive structure. Its National Action Plan on Climate Change has established eight national missions, covering renewable energy, energy efficiency, sustainable agriculture, and forest restoration. But rather than directing implementation from New Delhi, the responsibility has been delegated to India’s 28 states and eight union territories.
Each region develops its own state action plan, adapting national goals to local conditions, economic profiles, and ecological realities. This bottom-up approach reflects India’s diversity and creates space for experimentation, though it also produces uneven results.
State success stories
The federal structure has enabled notable successes in several states. Gujarat has emerged as India’s solar powerhouse, registering a 50% surge in solar generation over the past year and claiming pole position in total installed renewable energy capacity at 35.16 GW. The state’s growth stems from large-scale solar parks combined with aggressive rooftop adoption and supportive policies that build on central government initiatives.
Tamil Nadu has pursued coastal resilience through mangrove restoration projects that engage local fishing communities while protecting against storm surges. The state has achieved 50% of its installed electricity capacity from renewable sources and has secured the second position in wind energy capacity for the second consecutive year.
Odisha has invested heavily in disaster preparedness, developing early warning systems and evacuation protocols that have substantially reduced cyclone-related fatalities in recent years.
How the model works
These achievements illustrate how India’s model functions in practice. The central government provides financing mechanisms, technical standards, and broad direction. States then layer additional incentives and programmes tailored to regional needs.
The Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Electric Vehicles scheme exemplifies this approach. The central programme offered subsidies to manufacturers and consumers from 2015 through 2024, making electric vehicles more affordable nationwide. Individual states responded by waiving road taxes and registration fees for electric vehicles, allocating funds for charging infrastructure in underserved areas, and offering additional purchase subsidies.
“By empowering states and cities to design context-specific climate action plans, India has enabled more than 30 states and union territories to mainstream adaptation and disaster risk reduction within their development planning,” said Abinash Mohanty, Global Sector Head for Climate Change and Sustainability at IPE Global, a consultancy. This devolution creates ownership at the implementation level and allows regions to address their most pressing risks.
“These systems create laboratories of experimentation, where subnational units experiment and learn from each other, which ideally improves implementation efficiency over time,” pointed out Aditya Valiatan Pillai, a visiting fellow at the Sustainable Futures Collaborative, a research organisation, and a researcher at King’s College London.
Maharashtra’s agricultural solar programme demonstrates the model’s potential for community-level impact. The state secured $1.1 billion from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank for its Climate Resilient Distributed Renewable Energy Access Programme. The initiative solarises agricultural power feeders by installing grid-connected solar projects near local substations, guaranteeing farmers daytime electricity for irrigation during erratic monsoon cycles.
The state aims to solarise 30% of agricultural feeders by 2025, mobilising about 7,000 MW of distributed capacity. A complementary programme provides off-grid solar pumps to individual farmers in remote areas, reducing reliance on diesel and increasing energy independence.
Significant challenges remain
However, India’s federal approach also reveals significant challenges that resonate across the Global South. State capacity varies dramatically. Some regions lack trained personnel, adequate budgets, or institutional mechanisms to translate plans into action.
Madhya Pradesh conducted extensive stakeholder consultations across 11 agro-climatic zones and developed detailed vulnerability assessments for key crops, producing a grounded action plan. Other states relied on secondary literature and generic frameworks disconnected from local realities. Tamil Nadu developed district-level climate projections to guide planning, while some states had no state-specific climate data at all.
Financing remains a critical barrier. “Less than 10% of global climate finance currently reaches the local level, leaving successful pilots underfunded,” Mohanty said. Many successful community-based adaptation initiatives struggle to scale beyond demonstration projects.
Local governments manage dozens of development schemes with limited staff, and climate initiatives compete for attention with immediate needs like healthcare, education, and water supply. Without political salience or clear financial incentives, adaptation programmes often receive insufficient priority.
Coordination presents another challenge. “What we have now is a system of activity on the ground, but the country is yet to find a lever that ensures consistent, high-quality implementation across the country,” Pillai explained. Heat action plans illustrate this tension. Dozens of cities have developed their own versions since Ahmedabad’s pioneering effort, but questions remain about minimum standards and quality control.
The diversity of climate risks compounds implementation complexity. “One of the key challenges for the central government is to map and identify the diversity,” said Vishwas Chitale, who leads the Climate Resilience Team at the Council on Energy, Environment and Water, a think tank.
Coastal communities need protection from cyclones and sea-level rise. Agricultural regions face shifting rainfall patterns and drought. Mining areas confront heat stress for workers, while urban centres struggle with flooding and air quality. “We not only experience diverse extreme weather conditions, including floods, heatwaves, cyclones, and droughts, but also these are spread across different kinds of geographies with multiple kinds of socioeconomic sensitivities,” Chitale said.
Enabling conditions for success
For India’s model to serve as a template for other developing countries, several enabling conditions are essential. Direct climate finance flowing to subnational government bodies remains crucial. National governments can establish dedicated financing windows that channel resources to states and cities with clear accountability mechanisms but flexible implementation.
“Climate risk must be integrated into sectoral funding flows at every level,” Chitale emphasised. Rather than treating climate as a standalone budget category, countries can embed climate considerations into agriculture, infrastructure, health, and education spending, he said.
Capacity building also requires sustained investment. Technical assistance programmes can help local governments conduct vulnerability assessments, develop monitoring systems, and design effective interventions. Regional learning platforms can allow states to share successful approaches and avoid duplicating failures.
Strong data systems can enable both local planning and national oversight. Political engagement matters too. Climate action gains traction when communities understand local risks and demand responsive policies. Civil society organisations and research institutions can provide technical expertise that government departments often lack.
A path forward
India’s experience suggests that federal and decentralised governance structures, common across the Global South, need not hinder climate action. The federal model accommodates diversity, fosters innovation, and creates multiple points of entry for solutions. It aligns with how many developing countries already function, rather than requiring wholesale governance restructuring.
At COP30, even as delegates consider pathways for increased climate action, India’s federal approach offers pragmatic lessons. Climate governance in large, diverse developing economies will be complex, uneven, and adaptive. Progress will only come through combining national vision with subnational empowerment, creating systems that provide direction without stifling local initiatives.
India’s model is neither perfect nor universally replicable. It demands political will, institutional investment, and continuous refinement. But for federal democracies and countries with decentralised governance across Africa, Asia, and Latin America, India’s experience demonstrates that meaningful climate progress is possible alongside development goals.
The challenge and opportunity lie in adapting the federal framework to different contexts, learning from both successes and limitations, and building the enabling conditions that allow subnational actors to lead.
