Mission
Turn heat data into action, ward by ward.
Mumbai gets dangerously hot, and the burden is not shared evenly. Dense, paved, low-green wards feel it most. UCIP exists to say, in public and with sources, which wards are most exposed, why, and what could cool them, along with how sure each answer is.
Not another heat map
Prior tools tend to do one or two things: map where a city is hot, set city-wide targets, or suggest generic fixes. Diagnostic studies stop at the map. Strategy documents set goals without per-ward targeting. Global toolboxes inspire without a specific city's data underneath. UCIP tries to do all four for one city, on the 24-ward BMC boundary map it was built with. BMC has since created new wards, which the methodology explains.
A ranked, cited vulnerability score
Every ward gets a 0 to 100 score from five indicators any city can measure with free, open, global data. The weights come from the data itself: a PCA on Mumbai's own cells, following the method of Reid et al. 2009.
Factor-by-factor explainability
The score is a transparent linear index, so each ward shows exactly what pushes it up or down. No black box, no SHAP needed.
A recommendation engine, not just a map
Each ward gets an intervention with a rationale attached: rain gardens, cool roofs with shaded cooling centres, or pocket parks. A tree-planting rule exists but fires nowhere today, because every hot, bare cell in Mumbai is already built up.
An ecological guardrail
The engine refuses tree planting where it would backfire: native grassland, wetland, mangrove, water and heavily sealed cells. Those get reflective or water-sensitive options instead.
Honesty is a feature
UCIP tries to say how certain each number is. The heat map shows land-surface temperature, which is a real but imperfect stand-in for how hot it feels outside, and only in the daytime. Every ward rank comes with a plausible range, and most ranges span several places. The slum share and the Census 2011 under-7 share used to be scored; they are now shown as context only, because neither can be found for most cities or kept up to date. The cooling coefficients come from studies in other cities and haven't been calibrated for Mumbai specifically, so that caveat sits right next to every estimate instead of buried in a footnote. This is a research prototype, and treating it as more authoritative than that would be dishonest. Residents, planners, and researchers all see the same picture, warts included.