Stakeholder Power–Influence Analysis: Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP)
Most influence vs. most benefit
Most influence: National government agencies (Ministry of Environment, Forest Department) and international donors hold the highest influence due to control over policy, funding, approvals, and project design.
Most benefit: Local communities benefit the most in the long term through improved livelihoods, reduced disaster risk, and ecosystem protection, although their formal influence is comparatively low.
Stakeholder roles, benefits, and influence
National government agencies: Policy formulation, regulatory clearance, coordination, infrastructure development; high influence, moderate direct benefit.
Local government bodies: Implementation support, community mobilization; medium influence, medium benefit.
International donors: Funding, technical guidance, monitoring frameworks; high influence, indirect benefit (development and climate goals).
NGOs and civil society organizations: Community engagement, livelihood programs, capacity building; medium influence, high social impact benefit.
Local communities (fishers, farmers, women’s groups): On-ground implementation, traditional knowledge, stewardship of mangroves; low influence, highest livelihood and safety benefits.
Researchers and academic institutions: Climate modeling, ecosystem monitoring, policy advice; low to medium influence, knowledge-generation benefit.
Contribution and dependency
Government and donors drive structure and resources.
NGOs act as bridges between policy and communities.
Communities depend on SRP for resilience but also contribute essential local knowledge.
Researchers support evidence-based adaptation.
Power imbalances and overlooked voices
Marginalized groups (women, landless laborers, indigenous forest users) often have limited decision-making power.
Over-reliance on top-down planning may undervalue traditional ecological knowledge.
Determining power and influence
Assessed through control over funding, decision-making authority, policy leverage, implementation capacity, and dependency on project outcomes.
Influence increases with resource control and governance authority; vulnerability and reliance indicate benefit rather than power.