In the Sundarbans Resilience Project, national government agencies and international donors have the most influence because they control funding, policies, and major decisions about how the project is designed and implemented. Their approval and financial support are essential for the project to move forward. On the other hand, local communities, especially forest-dependent households and marginalized groups, benefit the most from the project since it directly improves their livelihoods, strengthens disaster protection, and restores the ecosystem they rely on. NGOs help bridge the gap between authorities and communities by supporting awareness, participation, and local implementation, while researchers contribute data and technical knowledge to guide restoration and adaptation efforts. The project clearly shows a power imbalance: those most affected by climate change have less formal authority in decision-making compared to government bodies and donors. I determined the level of power and influence by looking at who controls resources and policies, who shapes decisions, who depends on the project for survival or income, and who directly benefits from its outcomes.
top of page
ACCESS4ALL Group
Public·2352 members
bottom of page
I agree with you on the power play.If by those affected by climate change ryou are referring to the communities benefiting i will like to say that, sometimes they actually call the shots. Without their firm support , accepatnce and their efforts to monitor and keep watch, the projects will struggle. They can be the real deal when it comes to power dynamics. It is not a foxed thing but most of the time the funders and agencies do have the control.