Stakeholder Influence and Power in the Sundarbans Project
Stakeholder Influence and Power:
Most influence: International donors and national government agencies – they control funding, policy, and project design.
Most benefiting: Local communities – gain direct protection from cyclones/erosion, diversified livelihoods, and improved safety/disaster infrastructure. The ecosystem itself (mangroves) also benefits through restoration, indirectly protecting communities
2. Role, Potential Benefits, and Influence of Each Stakeholder
a) Government agencies:
Role: Regulation, infrastructure planning, coordination
Benefit: National coastal security, political credit
Influence:High
b) International Donors:
Role: Funding, technical guidance, monitoring
Benefit: Global climate adaptation goals achieved
Influence: High
c) Local Communities:
Role: Implementation, local knowledge
Benefits: safer lives, alternative incomes, resilience
Influence: Medium
d) NGOs/CSOs :
Role: Training, livelihood support
Benefits: Stronger programs, funding opportunities
Influence: Medium
e) Researchers:
Role: data collection, impact assessment
Benefit: Knowledge generation, publications
Influence: Low–Medium
3. Contribution and Dependency by Group
a) Government agencies: Contribute policy/framework and permit and depend on project success for national adaptation targets.
b) NGOs: Contribute to implementation and community trust and depend on funding from donors.
c) Local communities: Contribute labor, traditional knowledge, and compliancea and highly depend on project outcomes for survival and livelihoods.
Researchers: Contribute scientific evidence and depend on access to field sites and data.
4. Power Imbalances or Overlooked Voices
There is power imbalance. High power with donors/government vs. limited formal power for local communities (especially marginalized groups – women, fishers).
Marginalized groups within communities (e.g., women, indigenous groups) may have low representation in decision-making, risking uneven benefit distribution
5. Determination of Power and Influence
Power and influence were assessed based on:
Control over resources (funding, land, policy) which is donors and government = high.
Ability to affect project direction/objectives = decision-makers.
Dependency on the forest/ecosystem and direct exposure to risks = communities = high interest but medium influence via participation.
Role in implementation and knowledge provision = NGOs and researchers = supportive influence.
Though the local community is viewed to be in the category of keep informed stakeholders in the Sundarban Resilience Project with high interest and lowe power. In an advanced mapping analysis using Mendelow matrix and critical analysis of the social license being hold by the local community in the implementation and the overall success of the project, the community seems to have a high social power that to enhance the success of the project especially the women within the community. This can make my final opinion on stakeholder mapping to view the local community as a high influence and high power stakeholders as they key to the general success of the Sundarban Resilience Project.