In the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), the identification of the stakeholders and their management is central to the success of the project because every group has the potential to support or hinder implementation initiatives. National government agencies, international donors, and project management team are the most powerful stakeholders since they have the powers to make decisions on policies, allocation of funds, and the general orientation of the project. They have power which is reflected on the control of financial resources, power to make regulations and ability to define the project priorities and outcomes.
Despite the fact that these actors have the most influence, the major beneficiaries are the local communities, namely the fishers, farmers, women, indigenous communities among other marginalised communities that rely directly on the Sundarbans as their livelihoods and resistant to the effects of climate-related hazards. These communities gain advantages in terms of better livelihood, better disaster preparedness and ecosystem recovery, but tend to formal power in the decision making process despite being dependent on the project success.
Other stakeholders take the mediating and supportive roles. Community engagement, capacity building, and on-the-ground implementation are made possible by NGOs and community based organisations, whereas data, monitoring and scientific expertise are provided by researchers and other technocrats to guide project activities. However, the groups normally have less influence on final decisions as opposed to the government institutions and donors.
One of the problems that can be identified in the SRP is the unequal power between decision-makers and local communities. Even though the community members are often a great source of indigenous knowledge and experience, they could be underrepresented in the planning and governance processes especially women, the small scale resource users, and the indigenous communities. Unchecked, such an imbalance may compromise the sustainability in the long run and local ownership of the project results.
In general, control of funding, policy power, and decision-making capacity are the determinants of power and influence within the SRP. This is an emphasis on the significance of participatory and inclusive forms of governance, whereby the government agencies, donors, the community leaders and citizens are actively informed, consulted and involved. Enhancing meaningful community engagement has potential to harmonize the goals of the project with the needs of the local community, enhance resilience impacts, and guarantee the success of the project in the long-run of the climate-adaptation efforts like the SRP.