Bangladesh’s National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) Essay

Due to Bangladeshs extreme vulnerability to humor link up impacts, variant is needed for the political and economic survival of the country (Ali, 1999 Sajjaduzzaman et al, 2005). Since exploitation countries have been historically less responsible for the emissions that type humor potpourri, it is the office of developed countries to finance the cost of edition in addition to growing aid commit ments (Article 4.4 UNFCCC, 1992). To this end, the linked Nations ruler on clime tilt (UNFCCC) provides financial backing for variation under a global governance system, and has do discipline interpretation Programs of Action ( napa) a requirement for all Least unquestion suitable Countries (LDCs) in order to provide the space for participatory approaches and confederation-level inputs in version policy-making (Ayers et al, 2009).Here, the rationale is that the impacts of humour revision are experienced topical anaestheticly, so adaptation programs need to be formula ted and imposeed at the local level (Ayers 2011). The Least Developed Countries Expert stem (LEG) affirms that early enfolding of people at the grassroots level entrust be fundamental in ensuring successful execution of pe-tsai initiatives (LEG, 20022).The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), together with the United Nations victimisation Program and the globular Environment Facility, has provided funding for its highest antecedence NAPA understand a $10.8 billion Coastal Afforestation pop out (20102013) which aims to reduce mode heighten hazards through coastal afforestation with biotic company participation in the coastal districts of Barguna and Patuakhali (Western Region), Chittagong (Eastern Region), Bhola, and Noakhali (Central Region) (Figure 1) (Ministry Of Environment and Forestry (MOEF, 200524).Bangladesh is iodine of the first countries to implement a community-based adaptation (CBA) ejection as part of its NAPA, and intends on using this escort as a template for other under attack(predicate) regions in Bangladesh (MOEF, 2008). Before this date is utilise as a template, it is important to analyse its resultant roleiveness. This report will search the role of the UNFCCCs NAPA scheme in software documentationing or hindering a participatory approach to adaptation in Bangladeshs CBA coastal afforestation project. Specifically, the focus question will be whether the coastal afforestation project is effective in facilitating adaptation at the grassroots level.BACKGROUNDThe Bangladesh NAPA identifies coastal communities as world the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, and proposes 15 projects that would toy their urgent and immediate adaptation needs (MOEF, 20054). The vulnerability of coastal communities in Bangladesh is also emphasised in the Third Assessment discipline of the Inter presidential termal Panel on humour Change (IPCC, 2001). Coastal z mavins are the highest priority sector in the NAPA due t o the importance of the economic resources being affected, the urgency, severity and certainty of severe climate change impacts, and because coastal regions incorporate 32% of the countries go through space, with over 35 million people life story just 1m above sea level (Agrawala et al, 2003).Bangladeshs flat deltaic topography with wretched elevation and its geographical location that sits at the intersection of three river basins puts it at risk of flooding and tidal inundation, droughts, tropical cyclones and storm sights (Rawlani and Sovacool, 2011). In addition, Bangladesh is unfastened to impacts from the melting of the Indian and Himalayan glaciers (Rawlani and Sovacool, 2011).These factors combined mean that every area in Bangladesh is prone to four types of floods- flash floods, riverine floods, rain floods, and storm surge floods (Figure 2) (Mirza, 2002). Furthermore, all sectors and regions ofBangladesh are vulnerable the impacts of climate change (Figure 3) (Rawla ni and Sovacool, 2011). The sites for the coastal afforestation project were selected based on their extreme vulnerability to climate change impacts (MOEF 2008). methodologyAdaptation refers to rectifyments in ecological, social and economic systems in response to the impacts of climate change (IPCC, 2007). Whereas adaptive capacity is the ability of a system to chastise to the impacts of climate change- to moderate potential damages, take advantage of opportunities, or get along with the consequences, resilience goes further to include the degree the system is capable of selforganisation, and able to learn and adapt to changes (Folke, 2006 Jerneck and Olsen, 2008 Magis, 2010). For this reason, a resilience modeling with the following criteria will be used to analyse the effectiveness of the coastal afforestation projectsalmagundi in adaptation approaches involving a mix of technological, ecosystem based, governance and behavioural adaptation approaches.Effective governance and institutions that are seen as legitimate are little for delivering sustainable adaptation outcomes (Bahadur et al, 2013). This is because they can facilitate learning and experiment in safe ways, monitor results, update assessments, and modify policy as untestedknowledge is gained (Carpenter et al, 2001778).Preparedness and planning requires relevant and timely information, and integration with be institutional processes (Bahadur et al, 2013).An acceptance of uncertainty and change at all scales- individual, organisational and general- to alter adaptation actions to changing serving so that co-benefits can be acquire and perverse outcomes avoided (Bahadur et al, 2013).The level of community battle and ownership is essential as to ensuring projects reach the most vulnerable (Bahadur et al, 2013). This is a key factor in cut down vulnerability to climate change under CBA (Pouliotte et al, 2009).Mainstreaming climate change into evolution planning to achieve climate hot deve lopment is necessary for reducing vulnerability to climate change (Bahadur et al, 201355).COMPARISONThe NAPA project demonstrates systems thinking by a willingness to learn from past policy mistakes. The Forestry surgical incision has adopted a more participatory approach to forest centering due to criticisms that past projects resulted in overharvesting and overgrazing due to a lack of community ownership over coastal mangroves (Rawlani and Sovacool, 2011). Since the1980s, rising mendicancy and population reaping combined with anabsence of land-use policies has resulted in a loss of over 40,000 ha of forests along the eastern and central coasts of Bangladesh due to clearing for agriculture, shrimp farming, season pan and settlements (MOEF, 2008).The project document reviews these past retires and has put in agency measures for livelihood diversification so that natural resources are not use (MOEF, 2008). The project aims to diversify livelihoods through its triple f model of Forest, Fish, and nutrition, which integrates aquaculture and food production within the afforested and reforested plantations so that community income sources are change (Sovacool et al, 2012). The FFF model currently focuses on drought and flood resistance increase and vegetable crops. Through a combination of agriculture, fishing and producing palm embrocate the project has so far provided an income stream for 1,150 families and community training on nursery and plantation counseling to 12,200 coastal people (Rawlani and Sovacool, 2011).However, as one local states, we have developed saline tolerant crop varieties yet the concentration of salinity is going up. We cant keep on producing crops when land is flooded and water salty Adaptation has its limits (Rawlani and Sovacool, 2011 860). Evidently, the FFF model fails to encourage a diversity of livelihood options, and thus equip locals with the adaptive capacity to adjust adaptation actions to changing circumstances. By co ntrast, an NGO in the village of Subarnabad- the demonstrate of Development Education for Advancement of Landless (IDEAL)- has implemented a CBA project that allows the community to choose their own livelihood options (Figure 5), thus giving them full(a) ownership and providing a range of options so that they can adjust their income streams if circumstances change.The climate impacts emphasised by the NAPA project correlate with community responses recorded in an independent household survey in one of the target sites, the Noakhali village (Figure 4) (Ayers, 2011). However, the adaptation options listed by respondents cerebrate on addressing systemic issues like lack of access to disposal services and NGOs, high poverty rates, low social mobilisation, low literacy rates and insecure land incumbency (Ayers, 2011). Coastal afforestation was never raised as a priority adaptation option (Ayers,2011). The project has sponsored 6000ha of community-based mangrove plantations, 500ha of non-mangrove mount plantations, 220ha of dykes, 1000km of em tillments, and building sea provide to prevent salt water intrusion into rivers (Sovacool et al, 2012).These initiatives reveal the projects focus on reducing the physical exposure to climate change impacts (Ayers, 2011). However, respondents in Noakhali framed risk in wrong of addressing development issues that cause vulnerabilities to climate change impacts in the first site (Ayers, 2011). One type is the projects introduction of early warning information and adventure preparedness systems in 20 of the most vulnerable towns (MOEF, 2008). In discussions some the risks of cyclones and storms with fishermen in Noakhali, they revealed that information provision was not the problem- radios had already been provided by a local Red Crescent program, but financial pressure to ante up back the loans meant that fisherman would ignore the bad weather warnings (Ayers, 2011).Therefore the favourite(a) adaptation option here w ould be putting in place a better micro-credit system. This case illustrates the importance of addressing the underlie issues that expose vulnerable groups to climate change impacts. It also shows that a lack of coordination between government and embodying institutions can waste funding and exacerbate vulnerabilities. Therefore, community involvement in identifying vulnerabilities and adaptation responses is essential to building resilience on the ground. discourseA lack of community involvement and ownership over the implementation of the project can be attributed to the NAPA preparation process. The process knotted consultation with local level stakeholders- representatives from local government, local NGOs, farmers and women- through regional consultation workshops (Ayers, 2011). However, power dynamics within communities meant that politically powerful stakeholders dominate the discussions to the exclusion of less powerful stakeholders- basically, the most vulnerable were no t compound in the NAPA preparation process (Ayers, 2011). Furthermore, the participation of local stakeholders focused on prioritising pre-identified adaptation options (Ayers, 2011).This top down approach combined with the border of risks as climatechange impacts rather than vulnerabilities explains why the adaptation options in the NAPA conflict with those prioritised by the targeted communities (Ayers, 2011). This is due to a global mannikin of adaptation that casts adaptation as a response to the additional impacts of climate change rather than the factors that make people vulnerable to these changes (which are lots closely connected to existing development needs and problems) (Ayers, 201163).The LEG (2002) guidelines emphasise the importance of bottom-up, participatory approaches (2) to adaptation and the NAPA project emphasises the participation of men and women at the grassroots- level(MOEF, 200822), so what institutional approach is needed to meet these ends? Ayers et al (2009) suggest reframing the adaptation discourse under the UNFCCC in terms of vulnerability instead of impacts, as this would allow vulnerable communities to identify, prioritise and implement climate resilient development activities and thus operationalize CBA. CBA requires an engagement with local institutional structures-be it public, private or civil societyfrom the beginning of the NAPA development process- to look which institutions or features of institutions are needed for climate resilient development in that particular context (Ayers et al, 2010).In practise, this means more coordination between the government of Bangladesh and local institutions to develop mechanisms for mainstreaming climate resilient development.Opportunities for quislingism already exist in Bangladesh, but need to be harnessed. For example, the NGO IDEAL has successfully implemented CBA in the South-Western village of Subarnabad by providing training and technical support as well as access to loa ns and a savings bank to adopt new livelihoods strategies of their choosing to suit their situation (Pouliotte, 2009) (Figure 5). In turn, this has had a mobilising effect on the community, which can be seen in the strategies being employed without the stand by of the NGO- by learning from neighbours and building networks (Pouliotte, 2009).The effect of this project in reducing vulnerabilities by diversifying livelihood options shows that climate change adaptation activities need to be built into community driven development programs. Another NGO in Bangladesh, The Arsenic Mitigation and Research Foundation (AMRF), has facilitated the establishment of Village Committees made up of women in arsenic-affectedvillages who collect 3 Dhakas from each resident per calendar month and lobby local government for funding to not only fail and maintain the deep tube wells, but also encourage activities in other sectors like education, sanitation, and village infrastructure (Rammelt et al, 2011 ).These committees have the funding, lobbying power, and legitimacy to potentially carry out climate resilience development programs as well. A barrier for LDCs to mainstreaming climate change into development planning is the funding issue of additionality. This is why deepening community involvement through community-based organisations- in collaboration with government- is the institutional approach needed to carry out climate resilient development.CONCLUSIONAlthough the NAPA project in Bangladesh reflects community perceptions on the impacts of climate change, vulnerable communities were given little opportunity to identify and address the underlying development issues that cause vulnerability to such impacts (Ayers, 2011). This exposes the problem with facilitating CBA within the line of impacts-based adaptation policy-making under the UNFCCC. Therefore a new framework is needed that defines adaptation more broadly that addresses the drivers of vulnerability, and recognises tha t development is risk management(Commission on Climate Change and Development, 2009 9).APPENDIXFigure 1extraction MOEF 20084Figure 2Source Mirza et al, 200348Figure 3Source Rawlani and Savacool, 2011863Figure 4Source Ayers, 201174Figure 5Source Pouliotte et al, 200942Reference listAli, A (1999) Climate change impacts and adaptation assessment in Bangladesh, Climate Research, 12 109-116Agrawala, S, Ota, T, Ahmed, A.U, Smith, J, van Aalst, M (2003) Development and climate change in Bangladesh focus on coastal flooding and the Sundarbans, OECD, Paris functional at http//www.oecd.org/env/cc/21055658.pdfAccessed 25 July, 2013Agrawal, A (2008) The role of local institutions in adaptation to climate change, Social Development Department, World Bank, Washington, MarchAvailableathttp//www.icarus.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/agrawal-adaptation-institutions-livelihoods.pdfAccessed 25 July, 2013Ayers, J (2011) Resolving the adaptation paradox exploring the potential for deliberative policy-m aking in Bangladesh, Global Environmental Politics, 11(1) 62-89Ayers, J, Dodman, D (2010) Climate change adaptation and development the state of the debate, Progress in Development Studies, 27 (6)161-168Ayers, J, Huq, S (2009) documentation adaptation through development what role for ODA? Development form _or_ system of government Review, 27 (6) 659-784Bahadur, A.V, Ibrahim, M, Tanner, T (2013) Characterizing resilience unpacking the concept for tackling climate change and development, Climate and Development, 5 (1)55-65Commission on Climate Change and Development (2009) The human holding of climate adaptation the importance of local and institutional issues, April Available at http//www.ccdcommission.org/Filer/report/HUMAN_DIMENSIONS.pdf Accessed 26 July, 2013Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007b, Australia and New Zealand. Climate Change 2007 Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergov ernmental Panel on Climate ChangeAvailable at http//www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/contents.html Accessed15 July, 2013IPCC (2001) The acquirement of Climate Change, Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change,Availableathttp//www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml. Ufpg2T89UNAccessed 26 July, 2013Folke, C (2006) Resilience the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses, Global Environmental Change, 16(3)253-267Jerneck, A, Olsson, L (2008) Adaptation and the poor development, resilience and transition, Climate Policy 8, 170-182Magis, K (2010) Community resilience an indicator of social sustainability, Society and inborn Resources, 23401-416Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) (2005), National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA), BangladeshAvailable at http//unfccc.int/resource/docs/napa/ban01.pdf Accessed 20 July, 2013Ministry of Environment and Forests (2008) Community- based a daptation to climate change through costal afforestation in Bangladesh, BangladeshMirza, N.M.Q, (2002) Global heating and changes in the probability of occurrences of floods in Bangladesh and implications, Global Environment and Change, 12127138Pouliotte, J, Smit, B, Westerhoff, L (2009) Adaptation and developmentlivlihoods and climate change in Subarnabad, Bangladesh, Climate and Development, 131-46Rammelt, C, Masud, Z.MD, Boes, J, Masud, F, Masud, A (2011) Beyond medical treatment, arsenic poisoning in cracker-barrel Bangladesh, Social Medicine, 6(1) 22-30Rawlani, A.K, Savacool, B.K (2011) Building responsiveness to climate change through community based adaptation in Bangladesh, Mitigation and Adaptation strategies for global change, 16845-863Sajjaduzzaman M.M, Koike, N (2005) Mangrove plantation destruction in Noakhali Coastal Forests in Bangladesh a case study on causes, consequences, and model prescription to game deforestation, International Journal of Agriculture and Biol ogy 7 (5)732-734Sovacool, B.K, DAgostino, A.L, Meenawat, H, Rawlani, A (2012) Expert views of climate change adaptation in least developed Asia, Journal of Environmental Management, 9778-88Sovacool, B.K, DAgostino,A.L, Rawlani, A, Meenawat, H (2012) Improving climate change adaptation in least developed Asia, Environmental Science and Policy, 21112-125UNFCCC/LEG (Least Developed Countries Expert Group) (2002) Annotated guidelines for the preparation of National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPA), Bonn, July Available at http//unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/annguid_e.pdfAccessed 25 July, 2013UNFCCC(1992) The United Nations Convention on Climate Change Available at http//unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf Accessed 24 July 2013