Implications of Development Cooperation and State Bureaucracy on Climate Change Adaptation Policy in Bangladesh

Abstract

Policy action is visible in national and international climate governance. However, policy-making and its implementation often fail to generate the desired outcomes that aim to adapt to the adverse impact of climate change in a developing nation, such as Bangladesh—a country highly vulnerable to the impact of climate change. Against this backdrop, the study aims to analyze the implication of development cooperation and bureaucratic politics on the policy-making and implementation of climate change adaptation policy in Bangladesh. In doing so, the research uses national and international climate adaptation funds and the existing state administrative framework of the climate adaptation regime. Methodologically, it follows a mixed qualitative–quantitative research approach. The study discusses the following key findings: (1) the general cross-sectoral nature and thrusts of domestic and external climate adaptation funding; (2) how Bangladesh technical departments, such as that for water management, have reacted successfully to ensure the utilization of the funds is for implementing adaptation policy; (3) simultaneously, how Bangladesh bureaucracy, made of the elite, together with politics, have maintained their traditional values, practices, and structures in responding to the administrative requirements of climate adaptation funders, especially bilateral and multilateral development agencies, and (4) what changes should be brought to the bureaucratic cadre and added to the administrative setup in Bangladesh to provide a better overall impact of the adaptation policy and funding.

Analysing policy changes for achieving sustainable development goals: Insights from forest, environment and climate change action plan in Bangladesh

“…The above analysis indicates that development actors are either indifferent or incapable of designing innovative policy goals and instruments for implementing the aforementioned policy substances. Also, scholars argue that the hierarchical and routine administrative framework does not supportive enough to perform the technical nature of works (see Biesbroek et al, 2018; Huque, 2010; Rahman et al, 2020). The decision actors may seek to accomplish traditional development works based on pre‐set implementation means, which are less risky but visible to the general public.…”

Gobernabilidad y elecciones: una revisión sistemática

“…Asimismo, se hace hincapié en que los actores de la gobernanza tienden a operar en lo concerniente a la política subyacente y el modo de funcionamiento que pretende dar en la aplicación de políticas (Rahman et al, 2020). Por ejemplo, en la región se plantea que la gobernabilidad se interrelaciona con diversas áreas sociales.…”

“…Entre otros aspectos, se tiene que un marco analítico y conceptual que se centra en la gobernanza y en los estudios acerca de las relaciones subyacentes de los actores investidos de poder, intereses y valores, según refieren Mondal et al (2021), es imperativo dado que es necesario consignar cómo se conciben dichos elementos. Asimismo, es menester que, siguiendo esa ruta, cabe precisar que en los países en desarrollo se busca un marco burocrático y una gobernanza de calidad, puesto que dependen de los recursos financieros nacionales (Rahman et al, 2020).…”

Grassroots involvement on Global South policy narratives and deliberative action on climate change loss and damage

“…What is mainstreamed in the existing climate financing and response facilities is more of a structural-institutional approach, which widely concerns governmental and bureaucratic-oriented policymaking, mitigation, and response processes at both international and local scales (Griffith-Jones et al , 2020; Peterson and Skovgaard, 2019; Rahman et al , 2020). Meanwhile, the debates surrounding climate change loss and damage are ongoing, anchoring discourses toward response and recovery financing facilities.…”