Stakeholder Influence and Benefits in the Sundarbans Resilience Project
Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most? The most influential stakeholders in the Sundarbans Resilience Project are national government agencies, international donors, and the project management team, as they control funding, policies, and implementation decisions. In contrast, local communities—especially fishers, farmers, women, and marginalized groups—benefit the most from the project through improved livelihoods, disaster protection, and ecosystem restoration, despite having limited decision-making power.
Stakeholder roles, benefits, and influence: Government agencies set regulations and oversee coastal protection and forest management. Donors provide financial resources and shape project priorities. NGOs and community-based organizations act as intermediaries, supporting community engagement and implementation. Local communities depend directly on the project for income security, safety from disasters, and access to natural resources. Researchers contribute data, monitoring, and technical knowledge but have limited influence on final decisions.
Contributions and dependencies: Government agencies and donors drive project direction, while NGOs and researchers provide technical and social support. Local communities contribute indigenous knowledge and on-the-ground implementation but are highly dependent on project outcomes for resilience and survival.
Power imbalances and overlooked voices: There is a clear power imbalance between decision-makers and local communities. Women, indigenous groups, and small-scale resource users may be underrepresented in planning, which could affect long-term sustainability if their needs are not fully addressed.
Determining power and influence: Power and influence were determined based on control over funding, policy authority, decision-making capacity, and ability to shape project outcomes.
Peer Response
I agree with my peer’s identification of government agencies and donors as the most influential stakeholders. However, my mapping places greater emphasis on local communities as the primary beneficiaries rather than NGOs. This difference highlights how climate adaptation projects often rely heavily on community participation while still limiting their formal influence, reinforcing the need for more inclusive and participatory governance approaches.