Stakeholder Power–Benefit Reflection: Sundarbans Resilience Project
In my stakeholder mapping of the Sundarbans Resilience Project, I found that national and state governments and international donors hold the most influence because they control policy decisions, funding, and implementation authority, while local communities especially farmers, fishers, women, and marginalized groups benefit the most since the project directly affects their livelihoods and resilience to climate risks. Government agencies provide governance and scale, NGOs and researchers contribute technical expertise, facilitation, and evidence-based planning, and local communities contribute local knowledge and on-the-ground action but remain highly dependent on external actors. Compared to a peer’s mapping that placed NGOs and researchers in the high-influence category, I viewed them as medium-influence actors because, although they shape design and engagement, they lack final decision-making power. This difference highlights how influence can be understood either through formal authority and resource control or through knowledge, trust, and community access. Overall, the mapping reveals a clear power imbalance, with those most affected having the least influence, which could undermine project success if community voices are not meaningfully included in decision-making processes.
I also observed that governments and international donors do have the greatest influence because they have the funds and influence decisions and policies and true local communities benefit. However, the voices of local communities are always underlooked since they have limited influence and do not take decisions even when they are the most affected.