The Bangladesh Flood Management and Community Resilience Program
Overview
In Bangladesh — a country highly vulnerable to riverine and coastal flooding — numerous community-based adaptation programs have been implemented. One widely referenced success is the Flood Management and Community Resilience Program (FMCRP), implemented jointly by local NGOs, community groups, and international partners such as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC).
The goal of FMCRP was to strengthen resilience to recurrent flooding through combined structural and non-structural measures at the community level.
How the Plan Was Designed and Implemented
Community Engagement and Participatory Assessment
Local committees were formed, including women’s groups, youth, and local leaders.
Vulnerability mapping was conducted with community participation to identify high-risk areas, key assets (homes, crops), and seasonal flood patterns.
Integrated Structural Measures
Elevated shelters and flood-resilient homesteads were constructed using local labor and materials.
Raised pathways and embankments were improved to reduce isolation during floods.
Non-structural and Capacity-Building Activities
Community-based early warning systems were developed using simple, locally understood flood signals.
Farmers were trained in flood-tolerant cropping systems and post-flood livelihood recovery strategies.
Partnership and Resource Sharing
Local government supported with technical advice and small grants.
NGOs coordinated material resources and facilitated training.
Reflection on Key Criteria
Represents Community Values
Yes. The program began with participatory vulnerability assessments that ensured local priorities (e.g., protecting homes, securing food crops, and preserving school access) were central. Women’s groups and elders helped shape adaptation actions, reflecting community values around family safety and shared risk.
Addresses Challenges
The plan directly targeted the core challenges of flooding — loss of homes, disrupted livelihoods, and risk to personal safety. Structural actions (elevated shelters) and non-structural activities (early warnings, flood-resilient crops) worked together to mitigate these challenges.
Adequately Assessed Vulnerability
Yes. The vulnerability mapping process was detailed and community-led, identifying not just physical exposures but social vulnerabilities (such as households headed by women, elderly persons, or landless farmers). This ensured that adaptation measures prioritized the most at-risk groups.
Demonstrates Conflict Resolution
During planning, disputes arose over resource allocation (e.g., where to build raised platforms first). These were resolved through community meetings and agreed criteria — prioritizing the lowest-lying hamlets and female-headed households. A simple rota and appeal mechanism were established so community members could voice concerns.
Meets the Community’s Expectations and Needs
Surveys and post-implementation feedback indicated that communities felt safer, better prepared, and more confident in flood events. School attendance during flood seasons increased slightly because access routes were improved, addressing a community priority.
Contributes to the Community’s Adaptive Capacity
The program strengthened adaptive capacity in multiple ways:
Improved physical infrastructure reduced immediate flood impacts.
Skills training in flood-resilient agriculture diversified livelihoods.
Early warning knowledge increased preparedness.
Local committees continued to meet annually to review flood plans.
This combination of assets, knowledge, and organization enhanced the ability of the community to adapt over time.
Key Takeaways for Your Post
This example shows a holistic adaptation plan with both physical interventions and social learning.
The success largely came from community ownership, participatory planning, and local leadership.
It illustrates how adaptation can be both technically sound and socially inclusive.