The decentralization of authority, capability and finance is widely considered to be best practice in urban risk governance. Drawing on the concept of misframing from critical justice theory, we analyse injustices arising from the de jure decentralization of risk governance in Nepal, scrutinizing multi-scalar urban risk governance and its impact on resilient and equitable urban planning. Informed by qualitative research conducted from 2019 to 2024, we ask: How does the (mis)framing of risk governance affect local actors’ capacities to manage risks? And to what extent can inclusive, risk-informed urban planning and policy facilitate just decentralization? We identify a disconnect between risk-management responsibilities assigned to local government and its capacity to meet these expectations. Proposing a typology of misframing, we provide recommendations for the design and deployment of more equitable and contextually appropriate financial, technological and administrative decentralization as a pathway to justice that can overcome rigid scalar jurisdictions.
Poudel et al. (Tue,) studied this question.