The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored how critical urban crises demand new planning and governance paradigms to create more resilient, accessible, and sustainable cities. Drawing on the special issue theme of “Rethinking Urban Design Paradigms for Resilient Public Spaces,” this paper examines how the pandemic has spurred innovative approaches to urban governance, equity, and spatial design. We analyze scholarly literature on health-driven urban reform and apply it to the Kolkata, India context (population ~15 million), situating it within broader Global South lessons. Kolkata’s dense informal settlements and infrastructure deficits made it highly vulnerable: studies show COVID-19 “hotspots” there closely tracked indices of deprivation (overcrowding, poor sanitation) rather than simple density. We discuss how pre-existing inequalities shaped both risks and responses. The article then explores how post-pandemic planning concepts – such as 15-minute cities, pandemic-resilient public spaces, and participatory governance – can be adapted in Kolkata and similar contexts. We review examples like park upgrades, pedestrianization, and digital command centers, highlighting both successes and limitations (e.g. the “digital divide” hampered inclusive outreach). Throughout, we emphasize the need to design public spaces with equity and health in mind. In particular, we argue for extending green and open space access beyond traditional parks, integrating resilient infrastructure (ventilated, modular, multi-use facilities), and empowering local communities in planning. The pandemic recovery offers a “wake-up call” to planners and policymakers: by addressing embedded vulnerabilities (slums, informality, mobility inequities) and fostering cooperation across government and civil society, cities can transform crisis lessons into lasting innovations for more just, sustainable urban futures. This analysis concludes with actionable policy recommendations tailored to Kolkata and comparable Global South cities, aiming to guide a more inclusive, “chrono-urban” transition that aligns with diverse social needs.

The COVID-19 pandemic was a stark reminder that urban design and governance are public health issues. It revealed that the traditional city, as we built it, was not optimized for emerging crises: public spaces were unevenly distributed, planning often neglected the poor, and governance sometimes prioritized control over inclusiveness. However, crises also spur creativity. Around the globe, planners and communities improvised – from pop-up cycle lanes to mutual aid networks – pointing the way toward new paradigms. Our analysis shows that in Kolkata and similar contexts, tackling these lessons requires a holistic, equity-centered approach. Pandemic vulnerabilities in Kolkata were rooted in deprivation, not destiny. The path forward lies in redressing these structural issues: improving slum conditions, democratizing space, and ensuring no one is digitally or physically excluded. Crucially, the city must not revert to business-as-usual. As Sharifi and Khavarian-Garmsir (2020) suggest, urban planners now face “an excellent opportunity” to reimagine cities with justice and sustainability at the core. In terms of public space specifically, “resilient design” does not mean fortress-like measures, but rather adaptable, inclusive places that serve communities in both normal and emergency times. For instance, a plaza with modular seating can host a festival or accommodate lines for testing. A street expanded for bicycles today can become a site for food stalls tomorrow. This flexibility, coupled with community stewardship, can make public space truly resilient. Equitable governance must underpin these designs. Planners and politicians should regard citizens – including the poorest – as partners rather than passive beneficiaries. The pandemic has exemplified how overlooking any group leaves us all vulnerable. As the Cambridge chapter notes, we are at a moment to “revisit what constitutes public space” and negotiate its production anew. For Kolkata, this could mean formalizing community use of small squares, protecting common corridors in redevelopment, and codifying the right to street vending. Finally, global collaboration and learning are essential. Innovations in one city (e.g. Bogotá’s cycleways, South African township co-design projects) can inspire another, provided they are adapted to local culture and needs. Research must continue to track how public spaces are used post-COVID, so policies remain grounded in evidence. In conclusion, the pandemic has indeed “inspired and informed new approaches” to city-making. The question now is whether those lessons translate into action. By centering accessibility, sustainability, and social needs in urban transitions, cities like Kolkata can honor the spirit of inclusive governance and create healthier, more resilient futures. The goal is a city where diverse populations share safe, vibrant public spaces – in effect, “a healthy city” in the fullest sense of Sennett’s vision.

Das, M., Das, A., Giri, B., Sarkar, R., & Saha, S. (2021). Habitat vulnerability in slum areas of India – What we learnt from COVID-19? International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 65, 102553. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102553. Gutiérrez, F. (2024). “I will stay here”: Public space and social inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Urban Design, 29(3), 263–279. doi:10.1080/13574809.2023.2245336. Kawlra, J., & Sakamoto, H. (2023). Reference from Part 2, excerpt showing historical link between pandemics and urban reform. Kleinschroth, F., Savilaakso, S., Kowarik, I., Martinez, P. J., Chang, Y., Jakstis, K., & Fischer, L. K. (2024). Global disparities in urban green space use during the COVID-19 pandemic from a systematic review. Nature Cities, 1, 136–149. doi:10.1038/s44284-023-00020-6. Rojas-Rueda, D., Norberciak, M., & Morales-Zamora, E. (2024). Advancing health equity through 15-min cities and chrono-urbanism. Journal of Urban Health, 101(3), 483–496. doi:10.1007/s11524-024-00850-2. Sarkar, A., et al. (2021). Living environment matters: Unravelling the spatial clustering of COVID-19 hotspots in Kolkata megacity, India. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102565. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2020.102565. Sharifi, A., & Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Science of the Total Environment, 749, 142391. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142391. Shatkin, G., et al. (2023). Urban public health emergencies and the COVID-19 pandemic. Part 2: Infrastructures, urban governance and civil society. (Special Issue chapter). Sundaresan, J., et al. (2024). Measuring and improving public space resilience to the COVID-19 pandemic: Chongqing-China as a case study. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities. . Van Melik, R., Filion, P., & Doucet, B. (Eds.). (2023). Global reflections on COVID-19 and urban inequalities (Vol. 3: Public Space and Mobility). Bristol University Press. (March & Lehrer chapter on “Public space and COVID-19: New social practices, intensified inequalities”).

© 2025 International Journal of Engineering and Techniques (IJET).

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

IJET assigns a unique DOI to every accepted article via Zenodo for persistent linking and citation. Your article’s DOI: https://doi.org/{{doi}}

Open DOI About Zenodo DOI

Close