Community-Centered Adaptation example: CARE‑supported CBA practices in Bangladesh
A strong example of a community‑centered adaptation plan comes from Bangladesh, where nonprofits such as CARE Bangladesh have supported small‑scale, local adaptation measures over many years. These efforts known as Community‑Based Adaptation (CBA) were introduced around the early 2000s to help vulnerable communities cope with floods, salinity, and other climate stresses. CARE’s first project, Reducing Vulnerability to Climate Change (RVCC), ran from 2002–2005, and later CBA work continued in multiple regions to build local resilience.
Below is how this community‑centered approach meets the forum’s key reflection points:
Represents community values
The adaptation actions were chosen from local experience and traditional practices, not imposed from outside. Communities decided which measures would best protect their livelihoods—reflecting their values of self‑reliance, collective action, and use of local knowledge.
Addresses challenges
The measures directly tackled recurring, real threats such as floods, salinity, and crop losses, rather than abstract or distant problems. By focusing on water, agriculture, and livelihoods, the plan addressed the most urgent local challenges.
Adequately assesses vulnerability
CBA initiatives were rooted in on‑the‑ground vulnerability assessments. Local actors and NGOs studied which communities were most exposed to climate shocks and prioritized practices that could realistically reduce risks to food security, water access, and income.
Demonstrates conflict resolution
Community forums, local leaders, and participatory decision‑making helped manage disagreements over resource use or who benefits from a project. Because the plan was community‑led, conflicts could be addressed through dialogue and local governance rather than top‑down mandates.
Meets the community’s expectations and needs
These interventions were low‑cost, locally compatible, and maintained by community members themselves. That increased acceptance and follow‑through. Communities saw real, tangible benefits less loss of crops or asset damage so expectations were met, and trust in the process grew.
Contributes to the community’s adaptive capacity
Beyond immediate protection, the approach built skills, knowledge, and social networks. Communities learned to plan, monitor, and adapt their practices over time, which strengthened their ability to face future climate shocks. This goes beyond one‑time aid: it increases local capacity to cope long‑term.
Conclusion
This example shows that community‑centered adaptation is most effective when local people lead the design, choose solutions that reflect their values, and are actively involved in implementation and monitoring. It is not only about technical fixes but about empowering the community to manage risks now and into the future.