As climate change, migration, and uneven development continue to reshape cities across the world, the need for inclusive, community-rooted planning has never been more urgent. 

In Kathmandu, Nepal, more than 70,000 people live in informal settlements along the Bagmati River corridor, one of the city’s most contested and ecologically degraded landscapes. There are more than 20 informal settlements on the banks of the Bagmati River and its tributaries. In recent years, these communities have faced increasing pressure from municipal authorities calling for the clearance of settlements within a 20- to 40-meter offset from the riverbank in the name of environmental restoration and flood control. While ecological revitalisation is a necessary goal, the approach thus far has been blunt: eviction without viable alternatives or meaningful inclusion of the people most impacted.

What if planning didn’t begin with removal, but with relationship? What if those who stand to lose the most from top-down planning decisions were brought in at the start, not only to share their concerns but to shape solutions? When community engagement is iterative, intentional, and participatory, it can move urban planning beyond displacement towards dignity, creating design strategies that are both more equitable and more implementable. Meaningful engagement is not an optional or symbolic gesture; it is a vital tool for transforming conflict into collaboration, and for aligning social justice with ecological resilience in urban development.

Reframing the Challenge

Kathmandu’s plan to restore the Bagmati River corridor by creating green space, mitigating floods, and improving water quality is environmentally forward-thinking in concept. However, the proposed interventions threaten to displace thousands of low-income families living in informal settlements within the river corridor. ‘Armoured’ or impervious retaining walls along the banks are also exacerbating the issues of flood mitigation and river health. Ecological analysis drawn from satellite data, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) data—a measure of vegetation health calculated through satellite imagery—and on-the-ground observation finds that the current riparian buffer treatments are not just socially disruptive, they are also counterproductive. Vertical retaining walls and impervious surfaces accelerate water velocity, increase erosion, and worsen water quality. 

Most of Kathmandu’s informal settlements were established decades ago by rural-urban migrants seeking livelihood opportunities, stability, and safety. These communities are not monolithic; they are heterogeneous, organised, and increasingly equipped with their own planning visions. Yet the city government’s policies frame them as encroachments on public land and polluters of the riverbanks, rather than as potential collaborators in the revitalisation of urban ecosystems.

Designing an Iterative, Inclusive Engagement Process

To critically and constructively engage with the top-down nature of urban development along the Bagmati River corridor, and building on an ongoing collaborative and solidaric mode of engagement dating back to over half a decade, the authors partnered with the Nepal Basobas Basti Samrakchan Samaj (SPOSH–Nepal, Society for the Preservation of Shelters and Habitation Nepal) to design and facilitate grassroots-based community-led deliberative sessions, with the Jagriti Nagar informal settlement community along the Bagmati River, south of Teel Ganga, within the Kathmandu Municipality. SPOSH is a federated network of informal settlements spread across 44 districts and seven provinces in Nepal, active for more than four decades and has been relentlessly championing the right of the urban poor to shelter and land. Underlined by the spirit of ‘deep democracy’, community members led a series of dialogic workshops, representing the wider settlement in conversations about their priorities, challenges, and visions for the future.

The engagement process was structured around an iterative framework that allowed the team to adapt in real time based on community feedback. By clarifying shared goals and refining the language used to express community priorities, the process helped generate more credible, actionable narratives—ones that could resonate across a wide spectrum of stakeholders, from urban planners and architects to ecologists, conservationists, and government officials. The engagement series was also designed to be non-extractive. It was not a one-off consultation, but a step in an ongoing relationship focused more on co-creation and community process rather than a singular final product. 

Shared Challenges, Shared Goals

Throughout the dialogic workshop engagements, Jagriti Nagar community members voiced a consistent set of concerns: destructive monsoon flooding, the need for secure tenure to guard against sudden eviction, access to land, and the continuity of their livelihoods. These priorities reflected not only material vulnerabilities and aspirations for dignity and inclusion in urban life, but also values deeply rooted in the rural backgrounds of many community members.

At first, the concerns voiced by Jagriti Nagar residents seemed disconnected from the goals of the stakeholder groups we talked to. However, the engagement process unfolded and key alignments began to emerge: agencies like the Bagmati River Conservation Trust and the Kathmandu Municipal Government emphasised flood control and sanitation, while academics from Kathmandu and Tribhuvan Universities expressed commitments to equitable development and climate resilience. As ‘outsiders’ unencumbered by local political dynamics, we were able to surface common ground that might otherwise have remained obscured by institutional mistrust or social tension.

These intersections suggest the possibility of partnership development around shared outcomes. Rather than forced eviction, alternative futures such as land-sharing models or riverfront redesigns that integrate ecological infrastructure with low-cost housing upgrades could meet multiple goals at once. Communities would gain stability and visibility; governments would gain flood mitigation and cleaner waterways; NGOs would gain pathways to demonstrate inclusive planning in action.

This alignment is more than a narrative shift; it is a potential policy design lever. By reframing community needs as opportunities for collaborative solutions, iterative engagement can transform adversarial dynamics into shared strategy. In contexts where displacement is often justified through claims of public interest, these moments of overlap point to a different model—one in which public interest is co-authored by all who inhabit the city.

Building Tools for Advocacy and Action

One of the most important outcomes of this approach was not just the ideas generated through engagement but the tools produced along the way. These tools were crafted to be legible, adaptable, and compelling for community members and volunteers leading future organising efforts. Visuals played a central role and 3D-printed models helped distil complex challenges and communicate community priorities across linguistic, educational, cultural, and professional divides. 

These materials were not just for reflection or internal use. They were designed as tools for advocacy. They enabled the community to speak across power imbalances, grounding their visions in clearly articulated priorities and spatial evidence. During interviews with stakeholders, similar participatory methods were used to identify overlaps in resources, challenges, and goals.

Because the threats faced by Jagriti Nagar are not unique, these tools are designed for lateral scaling across other settlements along the Bagmati River corridor. While each context will differ, the approach can be adapted: revising visual content, co-producing new materials, and training local leaders to facilitate workshops. In this way, the process becomes an infrastructure for participatory methods that produce not just insights, but artefacts that sustain organising, deepen alliances, and shift the terrain of negotiation.

Why This Work Matters Beyond Kathmandu

While this project was rooted in the particular conditions of Jagriti Nagar, the dynamics it navigated are far from unique. Across the Global South, urban development is frequently framed in terms of infrastructure, investment, and growth—yet too often, these visions exclude or erase the people living at their most vulnerable edges. The term ‘development’ itself is contested and evolving, used to justify projects that range from truly transformative to deeply extractive. What this pilot demonstrates is that when urban design begins with community knowledge and centres the people most at risk, entirely different futures become possible.

In a city like Kathmandu, where governance is often fragmented and planning can be highly politicised, just urban futures require more than good ideas. They demand institutional champions. SPOSH happened to be one in this context—to carry the work forward, sustain trust, and challenge conventional processes from within. 

Reclaiming Dignity Through Design

In cities where the urban poor are too often treated as disposable, participatory design offers a method of justice, not just a method of planning. It challenges the assumption that expertise flows in one direction and reframes design as a shared, iterative process grounded in relationships, context, and care.

For professionals, officials, and academics, the lessons are clear: equity requires collaboration, not consultation. Ecological resilience depends on community stewardship, not displacement. And urban futures must be co-designed with those most impacted, actively shaping the decisions that define their lives.

For international audiences, the call is twofold: support and amplify. Support local organisations, such as SPOSH, doing the slow, essential work of building power from the ground up. And amplify models of practice that centre people—not as obstacles to planning, but as its rightful co-authors.

As climate change, migration, and uneven development continue to reshape cities across the world, the need for inclusive, community-rooted planning has never been more urgent. Projects like this one, led by grassroots organisers and supported through reciprocal partnerships, offer a template for how just transitions can begin.

Design alone cannot restore justice. But it can help reclaim space, voice, and possibility, and in doing so, help reclaim dignity for those too often left out of the urban future.