India’s heatwave hotspots are no longer confined to a few isolated pockets. A study based on 52 years of India Meteorological Department data, covering 1971 to 2022, finds that the area exposed to extreme heat has expanded sharply across central and north-western India, with the affected zones becoming larger and more connected over time. The finding changes the planning question for cities: the challenge is not only how hot a place becomes, but how widely heat-related risks are spreading across urban systems.
The study, conducted by scientists from the India Meteorological Department and the National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting, examined seven indicators of weather extremes. These included daytime heat, humid heat, heatwave severity and drought-like conditions. The analysis produced a composite India Climate Extremes Index intended to show how multiple hazards are changing together rather than treating temperature as the only measure of climate stress. The findings were reported as having been published in the peer-reviewed International Journal of Climatology in September 2026.
Its central conclusion is that north-western India has become the country’s leading extreme-heat hotspot. The region recorded the fastest increases in daytime temperatures, humid heat and heatwave severity. Areas that appeared as separate heat pockets in the 1980s had developed into broader and more continuous zones by the 2010s. Central India has also seen an expansion of areas under heat stress.
That geographical shift has an important urban consequence. A city’s exposure to heat is shaped not only by its own temperature readings but also by the wider region that supplies its water, food, electricity and labour. As heat expands across connected areas, the pressure on these systems can rise at the same time. The supplied study does not quantify the impact on individual cities, but it identifies the urban services most likely to face growing pressure: public health systems, drinking-water supply, agriculture, electricity demand and water availability.
This is why the distinction between a hot day and a widening heat zone matters. A short-lived temperature spike can be addressed through alerts and immediate response. A persistent expansion of heat-affected areas requires changes in preparedness, monitoring and resource planning. The study’s findings indicate that the geography of risk is becoming more extensive, while the response must become more localised.
The evidence also shows that India’s climate risk is not uniform. The north-west is emerging as the strongest heat-risk zone, but other regions are experiencing different combinations of hazards. In southern India, drought pressure is increasing. The study identifies longer-duration drought conditions in parts of the eastern coastal belt covering Odisha, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. In the north-east, the pattern is more unstable: periods of very heavy rainfall are occurring alongside episodes of drought.
These regional differences make a single national response inadequate. A heat action plan designed for a north-western city cannot automatically serve a drought-prone southern district or a north-eastern urban area facing intense rainfall and flood risk. The research therefore points towards regional preparation rather than a uniform climate-response template. It recommends stronger heat-protection plans in the north-west, better water and drought management in the south, and improved preparedness for floods and extreme rainfall in the north-east.
The institutional implication is significant. Climate preparedness is often discussed through individual hazards, with heat handled by one set of agencies, water by another and disaster response by a third. The composite index used in the study instead brings several extremes into one assessment. That approach can help public authorities identify where hazards overlap and where administrative responsibilities may need to be coordinated.
At district level, the researchers recommend stronger weather monitoring. This is particularly relevant for urban administration because municipal decisions are frequently made at scales smaller than a state or a broad meteorological region. A district-level system can provide more precise information for warnings, water planning, hospital preparedness and decisions affecting outdoor work. The supplied report does not provide details of the proposed monitoring architecture, its funding or the agencies that would implement it. Those institutional questions remain important for turning the recommendation into an operating system.
The study also places humid heat at the centre of the changing risk. Heat becomes more difficult to manage when high temperatures combine with humidity, because the combined conditions can intensify stress on the human body. The report says that the dangerous combination of heat and humidity is moving beyond coastal areas into the interior. That matters for cities that may not traditionally have treated humid heat as a primary planning concern.
For urban infrastructure, this means climate risk cannot be assessed only through annual temperature averages. The indicators highlighted in the study include heatwave severity, humid heat and drought, all of which can affect a city differently. Heat can raise demand for electricity and water, while drought can reduce the reliability of water sources. At the same time, extreme conditions can affect agriculture and food supply in the surrounding region. The study does not offer a city-by-city assessment, but its framework suggests that urban planning needs to consider these connected pressures together.
The north-western hotspot finding also raises a question about the scale of heat-protection planning. The report calls for stronger heat-preparedness measures in the region, including adequate water, protection for vulnerable people and timely warnings. These measures are most effective when they reach residents before extreme conditions peak. They also require coordination between weather agencies, municipal bodies, health departments, water utilities and electricity providers. The source material identifies the need for such preparation but does not establish how consistently these systems currently operate across affected cities.
The same principle applies to drought management in the south. Where dry conditions persist for longer periods, water supply planning cannot be limited to emergency tanker operations or short-term restrictions. The study specifically links the changing climate pattern to water availability and agriculture. That connection is important for cities because urban water systems depend on sources and catchments that extend beyond municipal boundaries. Yet the supplied report does not provide data on reservoir levels, groundwater trends or the performance of specific water programmes, so the scale of local shortages cannot be inferred from the study alone.
In the north-east, the coexistence of intense rainfall and drought points to a different planning problem. Heavy rainfall over a short period does not necessarily guarantee reliable water availability across the year. The reported pattern suggests greater variability in the monsoon, with implications for flood protection, drainage, water storage and emergency response. Again, the study’s regional finding is clear, while its city-level consequences require further investigation.
The data period covered by the research, from 1971 to 2022, is long enough to show a change across multiple decades rather than a single unusual season. The comparison between the 1980s and the 2010s is particularly important: heat areas that were once fragmented became larger and more continuous. The report also states that affected areas in central and north-western India grew by 20 to 40 percent per decade. These figures describe the expansion of areas exposed to extreme conditions, not a uniform increase in temperature across every location, and they should not be interpreted as a city-level forecast.
What the evidence confirms is a broadening and regional differentiation of climate risk. What it does not establish is how every municipality, neighbourhood or infrastructure network will perform under those conditions. The study provides a national and regional pattern, while implementation will require more granular information on heat exposure, water systems, public health capacity, electricity demand and vulnerable populations.
The larger urban question is whether Indian cities will continue to treat extreme heat, drought and intense rainfall as separate seasonal emergencies or begin planning for them as connected risks. The study’s findings support the second approach. North-western cities need stronger heat protection; drought-prone regions need more robust water planning; and areas facing intense rainfall need flood preparedness that accounts for increasingly unstable patterns. The next test will be whether district-level monitoring and region-specific preparation become routine administrative functions rather than responses activated only after an extreme event.
