top of page

ACCESS4ALL Group

Public·2286 members

Sundarbans Resilience Project Mapping activity

Based on the Sundarban Resilience Project (SRP) case study, stakeholders were identified according to their power, influence, and benefits from the project. In comparison with the reference framework, government and NGOs hold the greatest influence over major project decisions, while local communities benefit the most from project outcomes, particularly through improved livelihoods and increased resilience.

The government plays a key role in policy formulation, regulation, and control of funding and resources, placing it in a high-power and high-influence position. NGOs and development organizations provide funding, design interventions, and implement project activities, giving them significant operational influence. The local community, although the primary beneficiary, mainly participates in implementation, monitoring, and evaluation and has limited influence over strategic decision-making.


Different stakeholder groups contribute to and depend on the project in various ways for instance;

Government agencies provide the institutional framework, NGOs contribute technical expertise and financial resources, and local communities depend on…


8 Views

Stakeholder Analysis: Sundarbans Resilience Project

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), power is concentrated at the top, with national government agencies and international donors wielding the strongest influence through their control over policy, funding, and strategic priorities. While researchers provide the technical blueprints and NGOs serve as essential intermediaries that bridge the gap between policy and practice, these groups remain secondary to the primary decision-makers who hold formal authority.

This creates a distinct power imbalance for local communities; although they are the primary beneficiaries and possess vital contextual knowledge, they remain largely dependent on project outcomes with minimal formal influence over high-level design. This vulnerability is most acute for marginalized groups, such as women and forest-dependent households, whose voices are often overshadowed.


19 Views

Stakeholder Power, Influence, and Benefits in the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP)

The Sundarbans Resilience Project involves multiple stakeholders with varying levels of power, influence, and benefits. A comparison of these stakeholders shows a clear distinction between those who hold decision-making authority and those who benefit most directly from the project.

Influence and Benefits

The stakeholders with the greatest influence are national government agencies and international donors. Government agencies control policies, regulations, forest management, and disaster infrastructure, while international donors provide essential funding and set strategic and accountability requirements. In contrast, local communities benefit the most from the project’s outcomes. They gain improved livelihood security, reduced exposure to climate-induced disasters, and long-term protection from restored mangrove ecosystems. This reflects a common development pattern where high influence does not necessarily align with high benefit.

Roles, Benefits, and Influence

Government agencies play a central role in project planning and implementation and benefit through improved coastal protection and national climate adaptation outcomes. International donors support the project financially and technically…

9 Views

The stakeholder analysis of the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP) reveals a clear distinction between those who hold decision-making power and those who benefit most directly from the project’s outcomes. National government agencies and international donors emerge as the most influential actors. Government institutions possess regulatory authority over coastal protection, forestry management, and disaster risk reduction, while donors exercise significant influence through financial resources and strategic priorities. Together, these stakeholders shape the project’s objectives, design, and implementation framework.


In contrast, local communities—particularly farmers, fishers, and forest-dependent households—are the primary beneficiaries of the SRP. The project’s focus on mangrove restoration, livelihood diversification, and disaster-resistant infrastructure directly improves their safety, income security, and resilience to climate shocks. However, despite their high level of interest and dependence on the project’s success, these communities have comparatively limited influence over strategic decisions, highlighting a recurring dynamic in climate adaptation initiatives.


Other stakeholders play intermediary and supportive…


21 Views
Ryan Nganga
Ryan Nganga
4 days ago

I largely agree with your stakeholder mapping, particularly your clear distinction between high-influence actors (government agencies and donors) and high-benefit but low-influence actors (local communities). My analysis reached a similar conclusion, reinforcing the idea that climate adaptation projects like the SRP often operate within a top-down governance structure, even when outcomes are community-focused.

One difference in perspective is the emphasis on intermediary actors. While you highlight local governments and NGOs mainly as implementation agents with constrained authority, my mapping placed slightly more weight on their bridging role—not just translating decisions into action, but also shaping community participation and compliance. This suggests that although their formal power is limited, their practical influence over project success may be underestimated.

Overall, the similarities between our analyses underscore a common challenge in adaptation projects: aligning high-level authority with local needs and knowledge. The minor differences highlight how stakeholder roles can be interpreted differently depending on whether influence is viewed as formal authority or on-the-ground impact.


discussion forum

  Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most?

Government agencies usually hold the most influence because they control money,approvals, and policies. On the other hand, Local communities benefit the most from the project’s outcomes but they still have less influence in decision‑making.


Roles, benefits, and influence of each stakeholder

Government agencies:   Role: policy, funding, regulation. Benefit: development goals, political control. Influence: it very high.

NGOs :  Role: spreding social awarness, community support, monitoring. Benefit: social impact, reputation. Influence: medium.

Local communities :  Role:give realistic view , provide feedback, participate. Benefit: improved living standards. Influence: low to medium.


26 Views

You are on right track

discussion de forum


Les projets d’adaptation au changement climatique impliquent une diversité de parties prenantes aux rôles et aux intérêts différenciés. L’identification des acteurs disposant de la plus grande influence, ainsi que des groupes bénéficiant le plus des résultats du projet, constitue une étape essentielle pour garantir l’efficacité, l’équité et la durabilité des interventions. Cet article analyse ces dynamiques dans le contexte du projet de réduction de la vulnérabilité climatique à Protapnagar, dans le district de Satkhira au Bangladesh.


Les parties prenantes détenant la plus grande influence


À Protapnagar, les parties prenantes les plus influentes sont principalement les autorités gouvernementales locales et nationales, les agences de gestion des catastrophes, ainsi que les organisations non gouvernementales internationales et les bailleurs de fonds. Ces acteurs disposent d’un pouvoir décisionnel élevé, lié à leur capacité à définir les priorités stratégiques, à mobiliser les ressources financières et techniques, et à coordonner les actions sur le terrain. Leur…


15 Views

Discussion Forum Response

After identifying and mapping the stakeholders involved in the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP) based on their levels of power and influence, a clear hierarchy of roles and benefits becomes evident when compared to the reference framework.

The stakeholders holding the greatest influence are national government agencies and international donors. They control funding, policy direction, regulations, and overall project priorities, which gives them significant authority over decision-making processes. However, the groups that benefit the most from the project’s outcomes are local communities, particularly fishers, farmers, and women’s groups, whose livelihoods, safety, and resilience directly depend on the success of ecosystem restoration and disaster preparedness efforts.

Each stakeholder plays a distinct role within the project. Government agencies provide policy frameworks, regulatory approval, and coordination across sectors. International donors offer financial resources and technical guidance. NGOs act as intermediaries, translating policies into local action, supporting community engagement, and implementing livelihood and restoration activities. Local communities…

31 Views

When comparing my stakeholder mapping of the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP) with your analysis, there is a strong convergence on the overall power structure of the project, alongside subtle but important differences in perspective. Both mappings identify national government agencies and international donors as the most influential stakeholders, given their control over policy direction, funding, and regulatory authority. Similarly, both analyses agree that local communities—particularly fishers, farmers, and women’s groups—are the primary beneficiaries, as their livelihoods, safety, and resilience are directly shaped by the project’s outcomes.

Where the two perspectives begin to diverge is in how intermediary actors, particularly NGOs and local authorities, are understood in terms of influence. In my mapping, NGOs are positioned as key local influencers with moderate power, reflecting their central role in implementation, community engagement, and translating high-level strategies into locally meaningful action. Your response, while acknowledging NGOs’ importance, places comparatively greater emphasis on their dependence on donor funding and government frameworks, which results in NGOs being perceived as having lower influence. This difference highlights two valid but distinct ways of interpreting power: one grounded in formal authority and resource control, and the other in operational influence, trust, and proximity to communities.

A similar nuance emerges in the treatment of local government authorities. My mapping views them as important bridging actors who mediate between national policies and community-level realities, whereas your framing leans more toward their administrative role within existing hierarchies. This contrast reveals how stakeholder influence in climate adaptation is often relational rather than absolute—actors may wield significant influence in practice even if their formal decision-making authority is limited.

Both analyses also converge on the presence of power imbalances, particularly between decision-makers and those most affected by climate risks. While local communities and women’s groups are essential to implementation and long-term sustainability, their influence over strategic decisions remains constrained. The shared recognition of this imbalance underscores a central challenge in climate adaptation: those with the greatest exposure to climate impacts often have the least voice in shaping responses.

Overall, the differences between my mapping and your reveal that stakeholder relationships in climate adaptation efforts are highly context-dependent and shaped by the lens through which power is assessed. Whether influence is defined primarily by control over resources or by everyday engagement and legitimacy can significantly alter how stakeholders are positioned. This comparison reinforces the importance of adopting a multi-dimensional approach to stakeholder analysis, one that recognizes both formal power and informal influence to support more inclusive and effective climate adaptation outcomes.

In the context of our climate adaptation projects in Ghana, I found that government agencies like NADMO and the EPA hold the highest structural influence due to their role in policy and resource allocation. However, the stakeholders who benefit the most are the local farming and fishing communities, whose livelihoods are directly tied to the project’s success in building resilience against hazards like tidal surges in Keta or droughts in the North. While the government provides the framework and organizations like Rotaract contribute technical expertise and grassroots mobilization, there is a clear dependency where communities rely on these external actors for "adaptive capacity." In my mapping, researchers from institutions like UHAS play a critical role in providing the evidence base (such as cardiotoxic or environmental health data), but their influence is often limited by a lack of direct decision-making power in the final implementation phases.

A significant power imbalance remains evident between…

20 Views

Discussion from the SRP Case Study

From the reading, we discover that Government institutions, donors, and SRP project managers hold the highest form of power and influence over the project. Together, they control the finances, policies, and strategies needed for the project.

On the other hand, the affected community and its inhabitants benefit the most from the project, yet they have no direct influence over the project, but depend wholly on the local NGOs to use their knowledge of the locality to implement the project.

Government agencies have a high level of power and influence over the project and benefit from national climate adaptation capacities/scores. Their job is to provide policy and regulate. International bodies: have low power but a strong influence; they most often have little to no contribution to operations or running of the project. Provide funding for the project.

NGOs: have a strong influence on how the project is carried out, but low power in…

20 Views

I agree with the other points raised in the discussion, but I do see clear power imbalances that cannot be overlooked. Communities, especially women and marginalized groups, often have limited decision‑making power despite being the most vulnerable to climate impacts. If their voices are not properly heard, project interventions risk might increase with local priorities, which can hinder both effectiveness and sustainability. power imbalance not only includes political imbalances but also includes who controls resources, who has authority to approve or redirect activities, and who depends on others for outcomes in social context

Discussion forum stakeholder Analysis of the Sundarbans Resilience Project


After comparing my stakeholder mapping with the reference matrix provided, I found that the categorization of stakeholders according to their levels of power and influence is largely consistent and reflects the actual governance structure of the project.

1. Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most from the project?

Government institutions, main international donors, and the SRP project management hold the highest level of power and influence over the project. They control financial resources, regulatory frameworks, and strategic decision-making processes.

However, local communities in the Sundarbans benefit the most directly from the project outcomes, particularly through improved coastal protection, ecosystem restoration, and diversified livelihood opportunities. Their benefits depend largely on how well their needs and local knowledge are integrated into the project.

2. Roles, potential benefits, and level of influence of each actor

  • Government agencies


14 Views

Dear Richard, I totally agree with your reasoning. The government and international bodies who fund the project hold the highest level of influence over the project.

Based on the stakeholder power–influence analysis and comparison with the reference framework, national government decentralized departments and the project donor hold the most influence in the project. This is because they control key decision-making processes, including policy direction, budget allocation, approvals, and access to resources. Local communities benefit the most from the project outcomes, as they are the primary recipients of improved livelihoods, resilience-building interventions, and enhanced wellbeing, even though they hold comparatively low power and influence.


Each stakeholder plays a distinct role within the project. Government agencies act as the main coordinators and planners, facilitating implementation at local levels while benefiting from capacity building, strengthened institutional coordination, and enhanced legitimacy with communities and donors. The donor provides financial resources and technical guidance and gains reputational benefits, credibility, and influence over development priorities. NGOs support community engagement, implementation, and facilitation, relying on government authority while benefiting from project experience and…


16 Views

Thank you for this well-structured and comprehensive analysis. I strongly agree with your assessment that decentralized government departments and project donors hold the greatest influence due to their control over decision-making, funding, and approvals, while local communities are the primary beneficiaries despite having limited formal power.

I particularly appreciate how you highlighted the interdependence among stakeholders. Your point that government agencies rely on NGOs and researchers for effective field engagement, while those actors depend on government authority to operate, clearly illustrates the collaborative nature of climate adaptation projects. This reinforces the idea that influence does not operate in isolation but through networks of dependency.

I also agree with your observation on power imbalances, especially regarding women and marginalized groups within local communities. Even though communities are the most affected by climate impacts, their limited role in strategic decision-making poses a real risk to project sustainability. This underscores the importance of moving beyond participation as consultation and toward more inclusive, co-decision mechanisms.

Compared to my own stakeholder mapping, your analysis further clarifies how institutional power (control over resources and approvals) often outweighs social influence, even when communities are central to implementation and outcomes. This comparison highlights a recurring challenge in climate adaptation efforts: aligning decision-making authority with lived experience and local priorities.

Overall, your contribution clearly demonstrates how unequal power relations, if not intentionally addressed, can undermine the effectiveness and long-term impact of otherwise well-designed adaptation projects.

Stakeholder power and influence

National government decentralized departments and the project donor holds more power and influence, as the control the core parts of the project in terms of decision-making regarding resources, resource allocation, budgets and other approvals, policy directtion, among others. However, the beneficiary community members are those who benefit most from the project outcomes though the national government and its decentralized departments and the donor also benefit somehow.


The national government decentralized partments are the main coordination and planning unity on behalf of beneficaries, and benefits from several angles including capacity building, strengthened coordination and planning, trust and reputation from both the communities and the donor. They hold high power and high influence over the project, as the can do or undo the project.


The donor provides the financial means for the project to happen besides providing technical guidance and direction in alignment with the project goal and objectives. They intend benefit…


12 Views

Stakeholder Power and Influence in the Sundarbans Resilience Project

1. Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most from the project’s outcomes?

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), national government agencies and international donors hold the highest influence due to their control over policies, funding, and strategic direction. They determine project priorities, approve budgets, and shape implementation frameworks.

In contrast, local communities, particularly forest-dependent households, women, and marginalized groups, benefit the most from the project’s outcomes. Improved livelihoods, reduced disaster risks, and strengthened coastal protection directly affect their daily lives, even though they have limited influence over project decisions.

This distinction highlights a common pattern in climate adaptation projects: those with the greatest influence are not always the primary beneficiaries.

2. Stakeholder roles, potential benefits, and levels of influence

  • Government Agencies (National & Local)

15 Views

Stakeholder Power & Influence Reflection

In this project, government agencies and implementing NGOs hold the most influence because they control funding, policy alignment, technical design, and implementation frameworks. However, local communities—especially women, youth, and livelihood-dependent groups—benefit the most from the project’s outcomes through improved resilience, livelihoods, and environmental protection.

Each stakeholder plays a distinct role:

  • Government agencies provide policy direction, coordination, and legitimacy, with high influence and long-term institutional benefits.

  • NGOs and civil society organizations act as implementers and facilitators, translating policy into community action and ensuring participation, with medium-to-high influence.

  • Local communities are the primary beneficiaries and frontline implementers of adaptation practices, though they often have low formal influence despite high dependency on project success.

  • Researchers and universities contribute evidence, monitoring tools, and best practices, with moderate influence but strong knowledge value.

10 Views
Rafin
Rafin
Jan 30

Well said.

SRP Digestion

Stake holders in the SRP Project include, International donors, National Agencies, Private Organizations, Local Agencies and community folks. The community folks stand to benefit the most from the project outcome. All other entities would derive some level of satisfaction having fulfilled their mandate. Influence and contributions of the stakeholders are as follows;

  1. National Agencies: I believe they hold the most influence since the solicit for and provide funding for the project. Project design depends largely on this agency.

  2. International Organizations: Provide funding and contribute to project design

  3. Organizations: Provide research findings and baseline data for project design. May also contribute funding

  4. Local Agencies: Directly responsible for implementing project with community folks

  5. Community Folks: Assist with implementation and monitoring and evaluation of the project. They are the direct beneficiaries of the interventions

14 Views

Referenced Comparison and Justification of the Stakeholders Mapping for the Sundarbans Resilience Project.

International donors, national government agencies (such as BFD, MoEFCC, and the Disaster Management Bureau), and the SRP Project Management Unit (PMU) emerge as the most influential stakeholders because they shape project priorities, approve budgets, define safeguards, and oversee execution. In contrast, local communities and the Sundarbans ecosystem are the primary beneficiaries.


The roles and contributions of each stakeholder group are summarized in the stakeholder table  attached.  Government agencies provide regulatory authority, coordination capacity, and enforcement mechanisms, making them central to project legitimacy and scale. Donors contribute financial resources, technical standards, and monitoring requirements, which directly influence project design and accountability structures. NGOs and community-based organizations act as intermediaries, facilitating community engagement, promoting behavioral change, and strengthening local accountability. Researchers contribute data, monitoring tools, and adaptation strategies that inform evidence-based decision-making. Meanwhile, the private sector supports sustainable livelihood investments. However this must be regulated to avoid undermining restoration efforts.


Power imbalances…


Sundarbans Resilience Project:  Stakeholder Mapping ((Power–Benefit Matrix)
Sundarbans Resilience Project: Stakeholder Mapping ((Power–Benefit Matrix)


10 Views

I appreciated your stakeholder mapping, especially how you highlighted NGOs as the most influential actors. In my analysis, I ranked government institutions slightly higher due to their regulatory authority and control over national frameworks. This difference reveals how context matters—in some settings NGOs drive implementation, while in others government leadership shapes outcomes. Both perspectives show the importance of strong partnerships to balance power and ensure community voices are meaningfully included in climate adaptation efforts.

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), the identification of the stakeholders and their management is central to the success of the project because every group has the potential to support or hinder implementation initiatives. National government agencies, international donors, and project management team are the most powerful stakeholders since they have the powers to make decisions on policies, allocation of funds, and the general orientation of the project. They have power which is reflected on the control of financial resources, power to make regulations and ability to define the project priorities and outcomes.


Despite the fact that these actors have the most influence, the major beneficiaries are the local communities, namely the fishers, farmers, women, indigenous communities among other marginalised communities that rely directly on the Sundarbans as their livelihoods and resistant to the effects of climate-related hazards. These communities gain advantages in terms of better livelihood, better disaster preparedness…


30 Views

What if a pen could grow into a plant instead of becoming waste? 🌱♻️


Last month, we tested a simple circular-economy idea: seed pens (paper pens that can be planted after use).


This wasn’t just a “craft activity” — it was a behaviour-design experiment: Can climate action become simple enough to fit into everyday life?


In 18 days: ✅ 20 teenagers learned the process and produced seed pens

✅ 120+ seed pens were made by youth

✅ 200+ households joined conversations on plastic waste and climate-friendly habits


140 Views

This post inspired me! 🖊️🌻 I'd love to learn about the product design process! (Sent you a connection invite on LinkedIn)

Stakeholder Power and Influence Analysis: Sundarbans Resilience Project

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), national government agencies hold the highest level of influence due to their authority over policy, regulation, funding allocation, and implementation of coastal protection and ecosystem management measures. International donors also exert high influence by shaping project priorities through financing and accountability requirements. Local communities are the primary beneficiaries of the project, gaining improved protection from climate hazards, livelihood diversification, and ecosystem services, but they have relatively low formal influence over decision-making.

Government agencies act as primary decision-makers, NGOs and civil society organisations function as local influencers by facilitating community engagement and implementation, and researchers provide technical and scientific inputs that inform project design. Local communities contribute contextual knowledge and stewardship of natural resources while remaining largely dependent on project outcomes for resilience and livelihoods.

A key power imbalance exists between decision-makers and community actors, particularly marginalised groups such as women and forest-dependent households, whose voices may be…

12 Views

Interesting analysis. Yes, actors controlling finance, policy, and implementation structures hold the greatest influence, while local communities accrue the greatest benefit. Although, I included the ecosystem in my analysis as a beneficiary.

Power and Participation: Balancing the Sundarbans Resilience Project

In my analysis of the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), I found a significant gap between administrative authority and local impact. The most influence is held by National Agencies and International Donors, who control the project’s funding and regulatory framework, while local communities and marginalized groups benefit the most because their survival depends on the success of mangrove restoration and cyclone shelters (SRP Case Study). Each group plays a specific role: government agencies provide the legal mandate and infrastructure, while NGOs and researchers contribute social advocacy and ecological data, yet they all depend on the project to achieve long-term regional stability. However, a clear power imbalance exists; local villagers have high interest but low formal power, meaning they are often "overlooked voices" whose lack of influence could lead to project failure if their livelihood needs aren't met (World Bank, 2024). I determined these positions by using the Power-Interest Matrix, which ranks stakeholders by…

15 Views

Stakeholder Mapping

As regards the SRP and many other projects, identification of Stakeholders is very crucial to the success of the project. These stakeholders can make or mar the activities leading to the completion of the project. First and foremost, every Government agency that is supposed to be a part of a community project must be duly informed, they must attend meetings and understand what the project is about, community leaders or chiefs must also be informed, community members as well. All stakeholders will be managed according to the influence they have in making the project a success.

12 Views

From waste to income ♻️💸 Hi everyone, I’m Jobayer, a UNICEF Youth Advocacy Champion

We worked with 5 women and reused 6kg textile waste to create products + climate impact.


Would love your feedback — feel free to drop a comment on the LinkedIn post 😊

👉 https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jobayer-bin-hossain_amranotunnetwork-bracyouthplatform-changemakers-activity-7416698024963383296-vr6F?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAECFxr4BkHTjOaMiziguDi6fvt2Xd5bMqac


97 Views

Most influential stakeholder and most beneficial stakeholders with their roles and power imbalance

The most influence is held by the Government of Bangladesh and international donors, as they control funding, policy, and high level implementation. In contrast, the primary intended beneficiaries marginalized coastal communities stand to gain the most from the project's outcomes in terms of livelihood security and disaster protection, but only if the project is designed and executed with their needs at the center.


Government agencies implement and own assets, donors set financial and policy conditions, and contractors build infrastructure, giving them high influence and direct benefits like contracts and political credit. Local communities, who contribute labor and local knowledge, and NGOs, who facilitate and advocate, have medium to low formal influence, despite being essential for on the ground success and sustainability. Their benefits are more indirect and dependent on effective project governance.


Critical power imbalances exist, often overlooking the voices of the landless, ethnic minorities, and women within poor households.…

10 Views

I largely agree with your assessment of government agencies and donors as the most influential actors and coastal communities as the main beneficiaries. Where my mapping differs slightly is in how I position NGOs. I view their role more as intermediary influencers rather than actors with medium influence, as they facilitate participation and implementation but have limited authority over resources or final decisions. I also placed slightly greater emphasis on institutional authority and regulatory control as the primary basis for influence, rather than benefits such as contracts or political credit. Overall, our analyses align, but the difference lies in how influence is weighted between formal authority and implementation-level roles.

Who holds the most influence?

The Government of Bangladesh (Ministry of Environment and coastal authorities) and the international donor agencies hold the greatest influence because they control funding, regulatory approval, and strategic priorities. The local communities benefit most from the project outcomes, gaining improved disaster protection, diversified livelihoods, and long-term environmental security. There is a clear power imbalance between donors/government authorities and local communities. Marginalized groups such as women, small-scale fishers, and informal workers risk being underrepresented in decision-making. If not actively included, this imbalance may reduce community ownership and long-term sustainability.

10 Views

The primary influencer holds the decision power as it

Stakeholder Roles and Influence in Climate Adaptation Projects in the Philippines

 In the project, government agencies hold the most influence because they control policies, funding, and regulations, while NGOs and local communities benefit most directly through improved livelihoods, ecosystem protection, or access to resources. Government agencies provide oversight and funding, NGOs offer technical support and implementation, researchers contribute knowledge and monitoring, and local communities provide local knowledge and participation. Power imbalances exist, as some community voices may be overlooked in decision-making, while NGOs and researchers often hold more technical influence. I assessed stakeholder power and influence by considering control over resources, decision-making authority, and the ability to shape project outcomes.

9 Views

Stakeholder Power and Influence Analysis: Mangrove Restoration Case Study

In the mangrove restoration project, local government agencies hold the most formal influence due to regulatory power and funding access. However, local communities ultimately benefit the most, as the project directly protects their homes, livelihoods, and food security.

  • Government Agencies: High influence; provide permits, funding, and policy support. Benefit from achieved climate targets and reduced disaster risk.

  • Local Communities: Moderate influence (through collective action); provide labour, local knowledge, and long-term stewardship. Benefit from enhanced protection and sustainable resources.

  • NGOs/Researchers: Moderate-high influence; provide technical expertise, training, and bridge communities with funders. Benefit from successful implementation and data.

  • Private Sector (e.g., fishing/tourism): Low-moderate influence; depend on healthy ecosystems. Benefit from sustained economic activities.

Power imbalances exist: community voices can be overshadowed by top-down planning. Success requires ensuring their input shapes project design, not just implementation. I determined influence by assessing control over resources, decision-making authority, and dependency on project outcomes.

5 Views

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…

10 Views

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.

Stakeholder mapping for the Sundarbans Resilience Project showing relative levels of influence and benefit across govern


23 Views

Stakeholder Analysis Principles and the SRP case context.

Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most from the project’s outcomes?

Most Influence:The national government agencies and international donors hold the most influence. Government ministries control policy, regulatory approvals, and integration with national climate strategies, while donors control financial resources, reporting requirements, and strategic priorities. Together, they shape project scope, timelines, and success metrics.

Greatest Beneficiaries:The local communities in the Sundarbans region benefit the most from the project’s outcomes. They gain improved livelihoods, reduced disaster risk, strengthened infrastructure, and long-term environmental protection. The ecosystem itself (mangrove forests) is also a major beneficiary through restoration and protection efforts.

2. Stakeholder roles, potential benefits, and levels of influence

StakeholderRoleBenefitsInfluenceNational GovernmentPolicy, regulation, oversightClimate resilience, national security, compliance with global commitmentsHighInternational DonorsFunding, strategic guidanceImpact outcomes, accountability, climate goalsHighSRP Project Management UnitPlanning, coordinationProject success, institutional credibilityHighLocal GovernmentsLocal implementation, coordinationImproved services, local resilienceMediumNGOs / CSOsCommunity mobilization, livelihoods, advocacySocial impact, mission fulfillmentMediumLocal CommunitiesImplementation, stewardshipIncome security, safety, resilienceLow–MediumResearch InstitutionsMonitoring,…

7 Views

Stakeholder Dynamics in the Sundarbans Resilience Project

Influence and Benefits

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project, the greatest influence lies with national government agencies, the Forest Department, international donors, and the project’s management unit. They control funding, regulations, and strategic direction. The highest benefits, however, flow to local communities, fisherfolk, honey collectors, farmers, women’s groups, and marginalized households, who depend directly on ecological restoration, safer infrastructure, and diversified livelihoods. This creates a familiar adaptation pattern in which those with the least power stand to gain the most from successful implementation.

Roles and Contributions

Government bodies provide policy authority, land-use decisions, and disaster management frameworks. Donor agencies contribute financial resources and technical oversight. NGOs and community-based organizations mobilize local participation, support training, and strengthen social acceptance. Local communities supply labour, indigenous knowledge, and long-term stewardship, while researchers generate data that guides ecological and climate-related decisions. Each group contributes a different form of capital—political, financial, social, or scientific—making the project…

23 Views

Effective strategies/tools for stakeholder identification and mapping

1. I have found stakeholder mapping matrices (power–interest grids) and community consultations most effective. At National Environmental Standard Regulation Enforcement Agency Nigeria (NESREA), this helps me clearly identify who regulates, who implements, who is affected, and who influences environmental compliance—such as ministries, industries, community leaders, and civil society groups.

2. Role of negotiation and communication in managing conflicting interests:

Strong negotiation and communication skills help balance enforcement with cooperation. In NESREA’s work, clear communication of environmental and public health risks, combined with negotiation, allows us to address resistance from industries while still protecting community health, an approach reinforced by my public health training, which emphasises risk communication and evidence-based dialogue.

3. Best practices for inclusive and sustainable collaboration (with example): Key practices include early community involvement, transparent decision-making, and continuous feedback. A good example is NESREA’s engagement with host communities during environmental inspections, where community representatives are included in discussions to ensure compliance…

23 Views

Condensed Comparison of My Submission and the SRP Reference

My analysis of the Sundarbans Resilience Project aligns closely with the reference model, especially in identifying government agencies, the Forest Department, donors, and the project management unit as the most influential actors, while local communities remain the primary beneficiaries. Both perspectives highlight the same pattern: formal power sits with institutions, but the greatest gains go to those with the least authority.

Where my submission adds a distinct angle is in the practical strategies I drew from my regulatory experience. By referencing stakeholder mapping tools, community consultations, and negotiation approaches used in NESREA, I extended the SRP discussion into real-world methods for identifying actors, managing conflict, and building trust. These examples reinforce the SRP’s emphasis on inclusive engagement but also show how structured communication and early community involvement can strengthen adaptation outcomes—whether in Bangladesh, Nigeria

Stakeholder Power and Influence Analysis

After identifying and mapping stakeholders based on their power and influence, I compared my analysis with the provided reference framework. This comparison helped clarify how authority, resources, and decision making capacity shape climate adaptation project outcomes.

Who holds the most influence and who benefits the most

Government agencies hold the highest level of influence in the project. They control policy approval, funding allocation, regulatory frameworks, and long term planning decisions. Their influence is institutional and structural, which allows them to shape project direction from design to implementation.

Local communities are the primary beneficiaries of the project outcomes. While they may have lower formal power, they directly benefit through improved resilience, safer livelihoods, better infrastructure, and reduced climate risks. In some cases, NGOs and researchers also benefit through capacity building, data generation, and project visibility.

Stakeholder roles, benefits, and influence

Government agencies play a leadership and coordination role. They provide policy…

13 Views

I concur with the thinking that government is the biggest influencer though also I would say the largest stumbling block when it comes to supporting communities also.

Stakeholder Power and Benefits in Nigeria Climate Adaptation

In the context of climate adaptation in Nigeria, government agencies hold the greatest influence, while local communities benefit most from project outcomes. Federal and state institutions—including the Federal Ministry of Environment, NEMA, and State Emergency Management Agencies—control policy frameworks, regulatory approvals, and resource allocation. Their decisions shape project design, implementation priorities, and long-term sustainability. Local communities, particularly flood-prone households, small-scale farmers, and coastal residents, are the primary beneficiaries, gaining improved resilience, reduced exposure to climate hazards, and alternative livelihood opportunities.

Stakeholder roles, benefits, and influence can be summarized as follows:

  • Government Agencies: Provide policy direction, approve funding, and oversee implementation. High influence; medium to high benefit through national development gains.

  • NGOs and Civil Society: Facilitate community engagement, mobilize funding, and implement interventions. Moderate influence; medium benefit from project success and donor accountability.

  • Local Communities: Participate in project activities, adopt adaptation measures, and provide local knowledge. Low influence; high benefit from improved resilience.


19 Views

Religious groups also hold sway and influence in rural communities supporting interventions more transparently as well as widely accepted

Stakeholder Mapping

In Malawi, the success of climate change adaptation projects hinges on key stakeholders playing to their strengths. Government agencies are crucial for policy support and creating an enabling environment, ensuring project sustainability. NGOs bring much-needed funding and resources, turning plans into action. Researchers design innovative solutions and provide technical expertise, shaping effective interventions. But the real beneficiaries are the local communities – they're the ones who'll reap the rewards of a resilient environment, improved livelihoods, and sustainable development. Plus, they're the frontline monitors, ensuring projects are on track and adopted long-term.

19 Views

STAKE HOLDER MAPPING

Stakeholder mapping in the Sundarbans Resilience Project categorizes over 100 organizations from Bangladesh and India by influence, interest, and roles to enhance joint conservation and climate resilience. High-influence stakeholders include government ministries (e.g., environment) and security agencies like coast guards; high-interest groups feature local NGOs such as Shushilan and Uttaran, plus international bodies like ActionAid. Iterative methods like interviews and rainbow diagrams classify them into high/medium/low categories, fostering trust-building dialogues with communities, technical agencies, and private sectors for transboundary management and participatory platforms.

20 Views

Stakeholder Mapping (Sundarbans Resilience Project)

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project, the stakeholders with the greatest influence and power are national government agencies such as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, the Bangladesh Forest Department, and key implementing ministries responsible for disaster management and infrastructure. These actors control funding allocation, policy decisions, regulatory permissions, and project prioritization. The groups that benefit most from the project’s outcomes are local communities, particularly fishing households, forest-dependent populations, women’s groups, and marginalized rural families who rely on the Sundarbans ecosystem for livelihoods and protection from climate disasters.


Government ministries act as primary decision-makers, donors (e.g., multilateral banks and UN agencies) provide financial and technical support, while NGOs and CBOs facilitate implementation, training, and social mobilization. Local communities contribute indigenous knowledge and safeguard restored ecosystems, but their formal influence over decision-making is relatively low compared to institutional actors.


Researchers and universities add scientific insights and monitoring capacity.

There are visible power imbalances,…

17 Views

Stakeholder Mapping - Nkata Johnpaul's view

The Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP) involves key stakeholders classified by their power and influence. Primary Decision-Makers, such as the Bangladesh Forest Department (BFD) and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), wield high authority over regulations, funding allocation, and project execution, drawing from their role as forest custodians. International donors like the World Bank, AFD, and GIZ also fall here, shaping objectives through financial and technical support. Local Influencers include NGOs such as IUCN and UNDP, along with community groups, who drive advocacy, engagement, and compliance on the ground.​

Among these, the BFD and MoEFCC hold the most influence due to national policy control, while local communities benefit most through livelihood diversification, disaster protection, and ecosystem preservation. Government agencies lead restoration and infrastructure, benefiting from policy wins; NGOs facilitate training and monitoring, gaining conservation impact; communities contribute labor and knowledge, relying on income alternatives; researchers provide data analysis;…

13 Views

This is highly informative, adds nuance from your first person perspective

The most influential stakeholders are the Government agencies and NGO which hold the most accountable and project Implementation and action without them the local community and researchers cannot implement the project .

The .most benefited from the outcome of the projects is the local community which will bring peace and sustainable development in the community environment when the project is implemented.

When you look at the stakeholders roles each stakeholders have it role and a potential benefit on the project when we says the Government agencies are the one that will bring policy so that the project will be sustainable. The NGO are the one that will bring the fund and all possible tools fir the implementation of the projects to live, the researchers are the one thet are responsible for the design of the projects and solutions of the projects while the locals community there contri…

17 Views

Hello ,


Good morning all,I am very new to this platform. Who can kindly make me understand.

The governement departments holds the most influential roles while the communities stand to benefit. Governemnts provide institutional knowledge, NGOs provide funding and researcheres provide solutions. The communities seem to have a lessor voice

15 Views

Stakeholders Power Dynamics, Influence and Benefits- Sundarban Resilience Project (SRP)

Sundarban Resilience Project is a precise insight on the stakeholder mapping and roles played each stakeholder when it comes to climate change action.

From the project it is evident that the government agencies in this case Department of Environment, Forest conservation holds the most influence in the Sundarban Resilience Project as the take the Manage closely role within the stakeholders mapping matrix characterized by high power and high interest. They make laws and regulations that actively influence the progress of the entire project.

The local communities named shows high interest though they as seen to have minimal or lower power in the project hence they are basically the most benefiting group among the stakeholders hierarchy as they serve to gain an environment with high socio-economic benefits free from climate change hazards such the frequent cyclones,coastal erosions and even salinity intrusion.

The government agency that is Department of Environment,forest affairs operat…

13 Views

That really nice and good thinking

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


12 Views

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.

Discussion Forum: Stakeholder Power, Influence, and Benefits in the Sundarbans Resilience Project

Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most?

Based on the power–benefit stakeholder mapping, government agencies and international donors hold the most influence in the Sundarbans Resilience Project. Institutions such as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, the Bangladesh Forest Department, and international development partners control policy decisions, funding, regulations, and project priorities.

In contrast, local communities—particularly farmers, fishers, women, children, and the elderly—benefit the most from the project’s outcomes. Improved mangrove restoration, disaster-resistant infrastructure, and livelihood diversification directly affect their safety, health, food security, and income stability, even though they have comparatively low formal decision-making power.

Stakeholder roles, benefits, and influence

  • Government agenciesRole: Policy formulation, regulatory enforcement, ecosystem management, disaster preparednessBenefits: Achievement of national climate goals, reduced disaster response costs, international credibilityInfluence: High

24 Views

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.

20 Views

Stakerholder

In my opinion stakeholders power depends on poroject but each project need participartory approach.

23 Views
Praise kafula
Praise kafula
Dec 31, 2025

1: Stakeholder Influence and Power in the Sundarbans Project:

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.

Discussion Forum Response: Stakeholder Power, Influence, and Equity in the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP)

Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most from the project’s outcomes?

Based on the stakeholder mapping and comparison with the reference framework, the Government of Bangladesh (particularly the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and the Forest Department) and international donors hold the most influence. They control funding, regulatory authority, and strategic direction, which gives them high power over project design and implementation.

However, the stakeholders who benefit the most from the project’s outcomes are local coastal communities, especially forest-dependent households, fisherfolk, and women. They experience reduced exposure to cyclones and storm surges, improved livelihood opportunities, and enhanced long-term resilience through ecosystem restoration.

This reflects a common pattern in climate adaptation projects: decision-making power is concentrated at higher institutional levels, while benefits are realized most strongly at the community level.


Stakeholder roles, benefits, and levels of influence

  • Government agenciesRole: Policy formulation, regulation, forest management, disaster preparednessBenefits: Reduced disaster losses, environmental protection,…


14 Views

Discussion Forum Reflection – Vulnerability Mapping Module

For this discussion forum, I have uploaded a PDF of my identified vulnerability list based on the virtual field trip regions, with particular focus on urban slum areas in Dhaka, Bangladesh. The vulnerability assessment highlights key climate hazards such as heavy rainfall, flooding, storms, extreme heat, and water contamination, and examines how these hazards interact with social and infrastructural conditions to shape human vulnerability.


Key insights from the community testimonial videos

The community testimonial videos from Dhaka provided strong, human-centred insights into how climate change is experienced in everyday life. Residents described living in houses made of thin zinc or metal sheets, which become extremely hot during both the dry and rainy seasons. Even with fans, indoor temperatures remain unbearable, forcing people to endure heat stress inside their homes. During storms, rainwater leaks through roofs, and houses often become unlivable for several days.


29 Views

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP), the distribution of power and influence creates a clear distinction between those directing the strategy and those whose lives are most impacted. The Primary Decision-Makers, including National Government Agencies and International Donors, hold the highest level of influence because they control the project’s financial resources, regulatory frameworks, and overarching objectives. Their role is to manage the project "closely," ensuring that disaster-resistant infrastructure like embankments and mangrove restoration targets are met. In contrast, the Local Communities, identified as Rights Holders, hold the most significant interest as they benefit directly from the project’s success through stabilized shorelines and new, sustainable income pathways. While these communities may have lower institutional power, their "informed participation" is vital to prevent a "shallow understanding of the vulnerability context," which can occur when adaptation is simply retrofitted into existing development agendas.


To ensure lasting resilience, the project must navigate existing power imbalances,…

22 Views
Hans Stareck Mbele
Hans Stareck Mbele
Dec 26, 2025

This is a strong and well-articulated analysis that clearly distinguishes between power holders and rights holders within the Sundarbans Resilience Project. I particularly appreciate how the text moves beyond a simple stakeholder listing and instead frames the project through a power interest lens, highlighting the tension between strategic control and lived vulnerability.

The emphasis on informed participation is especially relevant, as it recognizes that community involvement must go beyond consultation to avoid technocratic or top-down adaptation approaches. The role assigned to NGOs and researchers as bridge-builders is also convincing, as it reflects their practical function in translating policy objectives into locally grounded action.

One area that could be further strengthened is an explicit example of how community voices especially women’s groups are institutionalized within decision-making structures (e.g. representation in project committees or monitoring mechanisms).; This would reinforce the argument that power imbalances are not only acknowledged but actively addressed in practice.

Overall, the comment demonstrates a solid understanding of climate adaptation governance, effectively linking authority, accountability, and local knowledge as key pillars for long-term resilience in the Sundarbans.

Power, Influence, & equity in the Sundarbans Resilience Project

After completing the stakeholder mapping exercise, my analysis placed national government agencies and international donors (like the EU) in the Manage Closely quadrant, as they hold the most formal power and influence over resources, regulations, and strategic direction.


The group that may benefit the most from the project’s outcomes are local communities, whose livelihoods, safety, and ecosystems stand to gain directly from mangrove restoration, disaster-resilient infrastructure, and alternative income programs. However, their formal power is lower, placing them in Keep Informed.


I determined influence based on decision-making authority (power) and social/community mobilization capacity (influence). For example:


· Government & Donors: High power via funding and policy.

· Local NGOs & Community Leaders: High influence via grassroots trust and implementation role.

· Researchers & Universities: Moderate power via expertise, but often lower direct influence on daily operations.


10 Views

Stakeholder Power and Influence in Climate Adaptation Projects in Bangladesh

Government agencies hold the highest influence due to their authority over policy formulation, funding allocation, infrastructure development, and regulatory enforcement. In Bangladesh, ministries such as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), local government bodies, and city corporations play decisive roles in project design and implementation.

However, local communities benefit the most from project outcomes. Coastal communities benefit through reduced cyclone risk, mangrove protection, and livelihood security, while Dhaka’s urban poor benefit from improved drainage, heat mitigation, and health resilience. Despite being primary beneficiaries, these groups often have limited decision-making power.

Contribution and Dependency Across Stakeholder Groups

Different stakeholders contribute in complementary ways. Governments depend on researchers for evidence, NGOs depend on government approval and donor funding, and communities depend on all actors for resources and technical support. At the same time, project success depends heavily on community participation, even though their formal power is limited.

Power Imbalances and Overlooked Voices

4 Views

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project, government agencies and international donors hold the most influence through policy and funding control, while local coastal communities benefit the most through improved protection, livelihoods, and resilience; NGOs and researchers support implementation and knowledge, but power imbalances remain as community voices—especially women’s—have limited decision-making influence despite being the most affected.

16 Views
MD. ASHIKUR RAHMAN
MD. ASHIKUR RAHMAN
Dec 24, 2025

I agree with your assessment of the Sundarbans Resilience Project. The concentration of influence among government agencies and international donors is evident, as they control policy direction, funding, and large-scale implementation. At the same time, local coastal communities are the primary beneficiaries, gaining improved protection from cyclones, strengthened livelihoods, and enhanced long-term resilience.

Climate Change Impact in My Local Community: Flooding and Riverbank Erosion in Bangladesh

One major climate change–induced impact affecting my local community in Bangladesh is increased flooding and riverbank erosion, particularly along major rivers such as the Jamuna, Padma, and Meghna. While seasonal flooding has always been part of life here, climate change has intensified the problem through heavier and more erratic rainfall, upstream glacier melt, and rising river discharge.

This issue presents several serious challenges for community members and infrastructure. Frequent floods damage homes, roads, schools, and embankments, disrupting daily life and access to essential services. Riverbank erosion permanently displaces families, forcing them to lose land, houses, and livelihoods, especially those dependent on agriculture. Crop losses due to prolonged inundation threaten food security, while contaminated floodwater increases the risk of waterborne diseases such as diarrhea and cholera. Repeated displacement also creates social stress, poverty traps, and migration to urban slums.

In response, communities and institutions have adopted various adaptation strategies. At the local…

10 Views

While funders of the project have influence regarding the scale and magnitude of the project, the success of the project depends on the local leaders who have the power to let the project proceed. The local residents benefit more from the project.


27 Views

we can even say that government of Bangradesh have the influence as same as funer and donors


Based on the stakeholder mapping exercise and the reference framework provided, a clear pattern emerges regarding power, influence, and benefits within climate adaptation projects in South Punjab (Multan Division). Provincial and district government agencies, particularly disaster management authorities and irrigation departments, hold the highest level of influence because they control policy decisions, funding allocations, infrastructure planning, and emergency responses. However, the groups that benefit the most from successful project outcomes are local communities—especially smallholder farmers, landless laborers, and women-headed households—as their livelihoods, safety, and long-term resilience directly depend on effective adaptation measures.

Each stakeholder plays a distinct role with varying levels of power and benefit. Government agencies act as duty bearers responsible for planning, coordination, and implementation; they have high influence but often derive indirect benefits such as political legitimacy and institutional performance rather than direct livelihood gains. Local communities are primary rights holders with deep contextual knowledge and the highest exposure to climate…

13 Views

Stakeholder power, influence, and benefits in the Sundarbans Resilience Project

In the Sundarbans Resilience Project, government agencies and international donors have the most influence because they control funding, policies, and major decisions. Local coastal communities, especially women and marginalized groups, benefit the most as the project improves livelihoods, safety, infrastructure, and ecosystem protection, but they have limited decision making power. NGOs support the project by working closely with communities, while researchers provide data and technical knowledge. Government bodies and donors provide resources and authority, and communities depend most on the project for their survival. There is a clear power imbalance, as vulnerable groups are often underrepresented. Power and influence were judged based on control over resources, decision-making authority, and dependence on project outcomes.

14 Views

SRP stalkholders grouping

In the SRP, international donors and government agencies hold the greatest influence, directing funding, policy approvals, and overall project strategy. Local communities, however, remain the primary beneficiaries, experiencing reduced climate vulnerability and improved wellbeing.

  • Manage Closely: The Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief, international donors, and the national SRP Project Steering Committee. They provide policy guidance, allocate resources, and coordinate activities. Their decisions are critical to project success.

  • Keep Satisfied: Other national ministries and central regulatory agencies. They oversee budgets and frameworks but are less engaged in daily operations. Proper engagement prevents political delays or resistance.

  • Keep Informed: Local communities, NGOs, civil society organizations, community leaders, and local government authorities. While lacking formal authority, their cooperation is essential for adopting alternative livelihoods, complying with conservation rules, and ensuring mangrove restoration success.

  • Monitor: Academic and research institutions, independent monitoring groups, and media outlets. They contribute research, data, and awareness but do…

12 Views

My name is Munachi, and this is a personalised answer for the community I'm observing.

  1. Who holds the most influence?State & Federal Government agencies (high power + high influence) together dominate, followed closely by NGOs/CSOs and community members who wield high influence through local knowledge and collective action.

2. Who benefits the most?Community members (farmers, traders, residents) receive the tangible outcomes — safer roads, reduced flooding, better electricity access. Politically, the government also gains credibility and votes.

3. overlooked voices?

Typical gaps: women, youth, disabled persons, and informal settlement dwellers. They often have low power and may be under‑represented in planning meetings, yet they feel the impacts most acutely. NGOs sometimes act as their voice, but if NGO presence is weak, these groups stay overlooked.

4. How was power & influence determined?_Power_ = authority (legal, financial, regulatory control)._Influence_ = capacity to shape decisions, mobilize resources, affect implementation speed, or alter project direction.…

15 Views

Stakeholder Analysis for the Sundarbans Resilience Project (SRP)


In the SRP, government agencies and international donors hold the most influence, as they control funding, policy approvals, and overall project direction. Local communities, however, benefit the most directly, gaining protection from climate impacts and improvements to their livelihoods.

The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Bangladesh Forest Department, Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief, international donors, and the national SRP Project Steering Committee fall into the “Manage Closely” category. They play a central role in providing policy guidance, allocating resources, and coordinating activities. Their decisions are critical to project success.

Other national ministries and central regulatory agencies are in the “Keep Satisfied” quadrant. They hold authority over budgets or frameworks but are less involved in day-to-day project activities. Engaging them adequately prevents political delays or resistance.

Local communities, local NGOs and civil society organizations, community leaders, and local government authorities are “Keep Informed” stakeholders. While they lack formal power, their cooperation…

17 Views
Dennis
Dennis
Dec 20, 2025

There are NGO's which also engage in conducting research into how the depletion of Mangrove forests is affecting communities and families. Their output is used, to some extent, in shaping the policy.

Stakeholder Analysis and Power–Influence Comparison: South Moroccan Oases

When I mapped the stakeholders involved in climate adaptation projects in South Moroccan oases and compared them with the Philippine mangrove case, I observed that government agencies and international donors hold the greatest influence because they control funding, policies, and project design. However, local oasis communities—especially small farmers and water users—are the ones who benefit most from successful outcomes, as their livelihoods directly depend on ecosystem health and water availability. NGOs and civil society organizations play an important intermediary role by translating policies into local action and supporting community participation, while researchers contribute scientific knowledge but have limited influence over final decisions. This comparison revealed a clear power imbalance, as traditional water managers, women, and small-scale farmers often have limited voices despite their deep environmental knowledge. I determined stakeholders’ power and influence by considering their control over resources, decision-making authority, and dependency on project outcomes. Comparing my analysis with peers’…

15 Views
Favour Okpiabhele
Dec 19, 2025

I really liked your analysis of the South Moroccan oases. It’s interesting how government agencies and donors hold the most influence, while local communities benefit most, this is similar to the SRP. I also noticed your point about traditional water managers and women having limited voices, which reflects what happens in the Sundarbans too. It shows that formal authority isn’t the only measure of influence; local knowledge and participation are key for making climate adaptation projects succeed.

Government agencies hold the greatest influence in the project due to their control over policy, funding, and implementation, while local communities particularly vulnerable groups benefit the most from improved safety, health, and living conditions. NGOs and researchers play supportive roles by facilitating community engagement, providing data, and informing evidence-based decisions, though their influence is moderate. Despite being central to project outcomes, local communities often have limited decision-making power, creating power imbalances and the risk of overlooked voices. Stakeholder power and influence were determined based on control over resources, decision-making authority, ability to shape outcomes, and level of stake in the project’s success.

16 Views
abdul jabbar
abdul jabbar
Dec 22, 2025

I mostly agree with your stakeholder mapping. In my analysis, government agencies and donors also have the highest influence because they control policies, funding, and major decisions. I also agree that local communities benefit the most but have limited decision making power. One small difference is that I placed slightly more emphasis on NGOs as a bridge between communities and government. This shows that while power is centralized at higher levels, successful climate adaptation depends heavily on inclusive participation and strong coordination with local actors.

Discussion Forum: Stakeholder Power and Influence Analysis

Based on the stakeholder mapping exercise and comparison with the reference, government agencies and funding organizations hold the most influence in the project due to their control over policy approval, funding, and long-term institutional support. However, local communities are the ones who benefit the most from the project’s outcomes, as they directly experience reduced climate risks, improved livelihoods, and greater resilience.

15 Views
Takaruza Tendai
Dec 18, 2025

True to the analysis done by the writer it also corresponds with the analysis I did. Stakeholders have influence within a project and their power needs to be understood to come up with a very effective project

Climate-resilient livelihood options under SRP projects

Climate-resilient livelihood options for SRP projects include diversified agriculture (drought-tolerant crops, agroforestry, integrated farming), aquaculture and fisheries with adaptive practices, renewable energy enterprises (solar, biogas, improved cookstoves), eco-tourism and nature-based services, handicrafts using sustainable materials, and skills training for green jobs. Community-based microenterprises, climate-smart livestock rearing, and circular economy initiatives (waste recycling, composting) also strengthen resilience. These options reduce vulnerability, enhance food security, and create sustainable income streams while protecting ecosystems. Stakeholder mapping should prioritize vulnerable groups—women, youth, displaced populations—ensuring inclusivity, capacity building, and market linkages for long-term adaptation and resilience.

21 Views

Stake holder mapping

Based on my analysis ,Government Agency,holds the most influence due to their regulatory authority, funding control, and decision-making power. However, the group that benefits most appears to be Local Communities/Other Group], as they directly experience improved resilience, livelihoods, and wellbeing from successful adaptation measures.

19 Views

Stakeholder Mapping SRP Project

Most Influence - Primary Decision-Makers – particularly the Government of Bangladesh (Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change) and International Donors


Greatest Benefits - Local Communities


Contributions and Dependencies of Different Groups

Government Agencies:

Contribute through policy enforcement, funding allocation, and institutional support.

Depend on project success for achieving national climate adaptation targets and securing future international funding.


15 Views
Ssenkoomi Joseph
Ssenkoomi Joseph
Dec 17, 2025

Yeah sure thank you so much Emmanuel

Stockholder mapping and interest analysis:sundarbans resilience project

Using the Stakeholder Management and Mapping framework, I analyzed the Sundarbans Resilience Project by identifying key stakeholders, their roles, interests, benefits, and levels of influence.


Primary decision-makers with the highest influence include national government agencies, international donors, and the project management unit. These stakeholders control funding, policies, regulations, and strategic direction, placing them high on the power–interest matrix. Their main role is decision-making, coordination, and resource allocation, and they benefit through policy implementation, international commitments, and project success.


Local communities are the primary rights holders and the main beneficiaries of the project outcomes. They benefit most from ecosystem restoration, reduced disaster risk, improved livelihoods, and increased resilience. However, despite their high dependence on the project, their influence remains relatively low, highlighting an imbalance in stakeholder participation.


NGOs and community-based organizations act as local influencers. They facilitate community engagement, ensure informed participation, and support inclusive implementation, especially for women and marginalized…


13 Views

I feel like the funder dertemines the agenda. NGO's hold the primary decision making and influence in this case. They have the power in practice whilst the government and their ministries includinf the community and its leaders are just participating in principle.

Identified climate vulnerabilities in Dhaka Cox's Bazar and satkhira


24 Views

 National government agencies, international donors, and the project management team, as they control funding, policies, and implementation decisions holds the most influence. However local communities like fishermen, farmers, women, and marginalized groups benefit the most from the project through improved livelihoods, disaster protection, and ecosystem restoration. Despite having limited decision-making power, their enhanced participation can be a great aid in disaster resilience.

25 Views

Stakeholder Influence and Benefits in the Sundarbans Resilience Project

Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most? The most influential stakeholders in the Sundarbans Resilience Project are national government agencies, international donors, and the project management team, as they control funding, policies, and implementation decisions. In contrast, local communities—especially fishers, farmers, women, and marginalized groups—benefit the most from the project through improved livelihoods, disaster protection, and ecosystem restoration, despite having limited decision-making power.

Stakeholder roles, benefits, and influence: Government agencies set regulations and oversee coastal protection and forest management. Donors provide financial resources and shape project priorities. NGOs and community-based organizations act as intermediaries, supporting community engagement and implementation. Local communities depend directly on the project for income security, safety from disasters, and access to natural resources. Researchers contribute data, monitoring, and technical knowledge but have limited influence on final decisions.

Contributions and dependencies: Government agencies and donors drive project direction, while NGOs and researchers provide technical…

17 Views

Stakeholder Power–Benefit Reflection: Sundarbans Resilience Project

In my stakeholder mapping of the Sundarbans Resilience Project, I found that national and state governments and international donors hold the most influence because they control policy decisions, funding, and implementation authority, while local communities especially farmers, fishers, women, and marginalized groups benefit the most since the project directly affects their livelihoods and resilience to climate risks. Government agencies provide governance and scale, NGOs and researchers contribute technical expertise, facilitation, and evidence-based planning, and local communities contribute local knowledge and on-the-ground action but remain highly dependent on external actors. Compared to a peer’s mapping that placed NGOs and researchers in the high-influence category, I viewed them as medium-influence actors because, although they shape design and engagement, they lack final decision-making power. This difference highlights how influence can be understood either through formal authority and resource control or through knowledge, trust, and community access. Overall, the mapping reveals a clear power…

28 Views
princessziadah
Dec 16, 2025

I also observed that governments and international donors do have the greatest influence because they have the funds and influence decisions and policies and true local communities benefit. However, the voices of local communities are always underlooked since they have limited influence and do not take decisions even when they are the most affected.

Stakeholder Analysis and Justification

1. Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most?

In the Indus Delta mangrove restoration context, government agencies (Provincial Forest Department, Climate Change Ministry, District Administration) hold the highest influence because they control land tenure, policy approval, funding access, and enforcement. However, local coastal communities (fisherfolk, women’s groups) are the primary beneficiaries, as restored mangroves directly protect their homes, livelihoods, and food security. NGOs act as influential intermediaries, while researchers provide technical guidance but have limited decision-making power.

2. Stakeholder roles, benefits, and level of influence

Government Agencies (High Power – High Influence)Their role includes policy formulation, land allocation, large-scale plantation programs, and coordination with donors. They benefit through improved climate resilience indicators, international recognition, and progress toward national climate commitments. Their influence is high due to regulatory authority and funding control.

NGOs and Civil Society Organizations (Medium–High Power – High Influence)Organizations such as…

29 Views

Stakeholder Analysis

Analyzing the stakeholders involves their roles, influence, and benefits. It is crucial in understanding the project's success and replicability.

The following table summarizes the key stakeholders identified in the case study:


14 Views

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.

19 Views
ruthyeboahpokuah7
Dec 16, 2025

Great submission

Stakeholder Analysis

1) Who holds the most influence, and who benefits the most?

Most influence

→ Local Government & Funders hold the highest influence.

• They control approvals, funding, regulations, and strategic direction.

Most benefit

Based on interest/affectedness, the groups most directly impacted by changes tend to gain or lose the most.


34 Views

Thats a great insight

Stakeholder Analysis

Analyzing the stakeholders involves their roles, influence, and benefits. It is crucial to understanding the project's success and replicability.



29 Views
Ariful lslam Nahid
Ariful lslam Nahid
Dec 13, 2025

Compared to my peer’s stakeholder mapping, I placed greater emphasis on community dependence rather than influence. While my peer highlighted NGOs as the most powerful actors, I see government institutions as holding formal power, with NGOs acting as intermediaries. This difference reveals how formal authority and operational influence can be perceived differently in climate adaptation projects, underscoring the need for inclusive governance to balance power and ensure sustainability.

Discussion Forum Response: Stakeholder Analysis of the SRP

1. Most Influential and Most Benefited Stakeholders

  • Most Influence:Government agencies such as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Forest Department (FD), and Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB) hold the most influence. They control policies, budgets, and project approvals, making them the primary decision-makers. International donors also exert high influence through funding and technical requirements.

  • Most Benefited:Local communities, particularly forest-dependent households, marginalized groups, and women, benefit the most. They gain from ecosystem restoration, disaster resilience, livelihood diversification, and climate adaptation support.

2. Stakeholder Roles, Benefits, and Influence Levels

Stakeholder GroupRole in ProjectPotential BenefitsLevel of InfluenceGovernment Agencies (MoEFCC, FD, BWDB, DDM)Decision-making, policy, budget allocation, infrastructure planningProject success, environmental sustainability, regulatory achievementHighInternational Donors (World Bank, UNDP, GCF)Funding, technical guidance, accountabilityAchievement of climate adaptation goals, visibility of successHighLocal CommunitiesParticipate in conservation, adopt alternative livelihoodsImproved resilience, safer living conditions, diversified incomeLow–MediumNGOs & CBOsFacilitate community engagement, awareness, trainingSuccessful project implementation, community trust, recognitionMediumResearchers /…

17 Views

Thank you for sharing your stakeholder map. Compared with mine, I noticed that you placed local communities in a higher influence category, while I categorized them as high-interest but low-influence actors. This difference shows how influence in climate adaptation can be interpreted in different ways, formal power versus social or moral influence. Your perspective highlights that community mobilization and local pressure can meaningfully shape project outcomes, even without formal authority. In contrast, my mapping emphasized institutional power held by government agencies and donors. Together, our analyses show that climate adaptation requires both top-down support and bottom-up engagement to succeed.

    James P Grant Brac University Logo
    Hiedelberg University Logo
    Heidelberg Institute of Global Health Logo
    EN Co-funded by the EU_POS.jpg

    Co-funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor EACEA can be held responsible for them.

    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    • LinkedIn
    • Youtube
    bottom of page