In this project, government agencies (e.g., Forest Department, local administration) hold the highest influence, as they control policy approval, land use permissions, and funding channels. However, local communities—especially fishers and small farmers—benefit the most, as the project directly improves livelihood security, disaster protection, and ecosystem services.
Government agencies: High influence; roles include policy support, coordination, and infrastructure. Benefits include improved resilience outcomes and policy success.
NGOs: Medium–high influence; responsible for implementation, community mobilization, and capacity building. They benefit through project outcomes and institutional credibility.
Local communities: Low–medium influence but high dependence; they provide local knowledge, labor, and long-term stewardship.
Researchers/academia: Medium influence; contribute technical guidance and monitoring, benefiting through data and applied research.
A key power imbalance exists where community voices—especially women and landless groups—may be underrepresented in decision-making, risking misaligned interventions. Power and influence were assessed based on decision-making authority, control over resources, and dependency on project outcomes.
Great submission