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…








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.