Stakeholder Power and Influence Analysis: Mangrove Restoration Case Study
Based on the stakeholder mapping exercise and comparison with the reference framework, the mangrove restoration project in the Philippines demonstrates a multi-level distribution of power, influence, and benefits among stakeholders.
Who Holds the Most Influence and Who Benefits the Most?
Government agencies and NGOs hold the greatest formal influence due to their control over policies, funding, technical expertise, and regulatory authority. However, local communities, particularly fisherfolk and women’s groups, are the primary beneficiaries of the project’s outcomes. They experience improved protection from storms, restored livelihoods, and enhanced social empowerment.
This distinction highlights an important dynamic: those with the most decision-making power are not always the ones who benefit most directly from the project’s success.
Stakeholder Roles, Benefits, and Levels of Influence
Government AgenciesRole: Policy development, coastal zoning, environmental regulation, and disaster risk reduction planning.Benefits: Reduced disaster recovery costs, improved coastal resilience, and alignment with national climate commitments.Influence: High — due to regulatory authority and policy enforcement.
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)Role: Technical guidance, community mobilization, funding facilitation, and capacity building.Benefits: Program success, donor accountability, and strengthened community partnerships.Influence: High — they act as intermediaries between communities and government or donors.
Local Communities (Fisherfolk, Women’s Groups, Youth)Role: Mangrove planting, nursery management, monitoring, and local stewardship.Benefits: Increased livelihood security, reduced disaster risk, food security, and social empowerment.Influence: Medium — strong operational influence but limited control over funding and policy decisions.
Researchers and Academic InstitutionsRole: Species selection, monitoring ecosystem recovery, and providing scientific evidence.Benefits: Research outputs, data, and policy-relevant insights.Influence: Medium to low — advisory rather than decision-making authority.
Contribution and Dependency Among Stakeholder Groups
Each group plays a complementary role. Government agencies rely on NGOs and researchers for implementation support and evidence-based guidance. NGOs depend on local communities for successful on-the-ground implementation, while communities depend on external stakeholders for resources, technical knowledge, and institutional backing. This interdependence is critical to the project’s sustainability.
Power Imbalances and Overlooked Voices
Despite the participatory approach, power imbalances remain. Local communities, particularly women and marginalized fishers, may still be underrepresented in high-level decision-making. If community knowledge and priorities are not adequately integrated, restoration efforts risk becoming top-down, potentially undermining long-term ownership and success.
Determining Power and Influence
Power and influence were assessed based on:
Control over financial and technical resources
Decision-making authority
Ability to shape policy or project direction
Level of dependency of other stakeholders
Stakeholders with control over funding, policy, and expertise were mapped as high influence, while those directly affected by outcomes but with limited formal authority were mapped as lower influence.
Great analysis! I like how you clearly show the balance between those with decision-making power and those who benefit most. It’s interesting to see how local communities play a key role on the ground even with medium influence. I also agree that including women and marginalized groups more in decision-making is crucial for long-term success.