Stakeholder Analysis and Justification
1. Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most?
In the Indus Delta mangrove restoration context, government agencies (Provincial Forest Department, Climate Change Ministry, District Administration) hold the highest influence because they control land tenure, policy approval, funding access, and enforcement. However, local coastal communities (fisherfolk, women’s groups) are the primary beneficiaries, as restored mangroves directly protect their homes, livelihoods, and food security. NGOs act as influential intermediaries, while researchers provide technical guidance but have limited decision-making power.
2. Stakeholder roles, benefits, and level of influence
Government Agencies (High Power – High Influence)Their role includes policy formulation, land allocation, large-scale plantation programs, and coordination with donors. They benefit through improved climate resilience indicators, international recognition, and progress toward national climate commitments. Their influence is high due to regulatory authority and funding control.
NGOs and Civil Society Organizations (Medium–High Power – High Influence)Organizations such as WWF-Pakistan and IUCN provide technical expertise, community mobilization, and monitoring. They benefit by achieving conservation goals, donor compliance, and institutional credibility. Their influence is strong at the implementation level, though they rely on government approval.
Local Communities (Low Power – High Dependence)Fisherfolk, women’s cooperatives, and youth groups are responsible for plantation, protection, and local stewardship. They benefit most through reduced disaster risk, improved fisheries, and alternative livelihoods. Despite high dependence on outcomes, their formal influence in planning and policy decisions remains limited.
Researchers and Universities (Low Power – Medium Influence)They contribute scientific knowledge, species selection, and impact assessments. Their benefits include research outputs and policy relevance. Influence is advisory rather than decision-making.
Donors and International Agencies (High Power – Indirect Influence)They provide funding, frameworks, and reporting requirements. Benefits include climate finance accountability and development outcomes. Their influence is indirect but strong through conditional funding.
3. Contribution and dependence of stakeholder groups
Government agencies enable scale and legal legitimacy. NGOs translate policy into action and build community capacity. Local communities depend most on project success for survival and livelihoods, while also ensuring sustainability through day-to-day protection. Researchers support effectiveness, and donors depend on measurable results for continued investment. The project succeeds only when these roles are complementary.
4. Power imbalances and overlooked voices
A key imbalance exists between decision-makers and local communities, particularly women and small-scale fisherfolk. While women often participate in nursery work and livelihoods, they are underrepresented in formal planning forums. Indigenous knowledge and local coping strategies are sometimes undervalued compared to technical or donor-driven approaches. These gaps can weaken long-term ownership and sustainability if not addressed.
5. Determining power and influence
Power and influence were assessed using:
Control over resources (funding, land, policy authority)
Decision-making authority (planning, approvals, enforcement)
Dependency on outcomes (livelihoods, safety, food security)
Ability to shape implementation (technical expertise, community trust)
This aligns with standard stakeholder power–interest and influence–impact frameworks used in climate adaptation planning.