My work with the environment and rivers often takes me to remote areas across different regions of the country. I’ve seen up close how climate change is making life unbearable for people in these areas. That’s what made me realise why these places need greater government attention. While studying the allocation of government resources in areas affected by climate change, I came to learn about the term "climate vulnerability".
I learned from a government circular issued by the local government ministry that to ensure appropriate development allocations for climate-affected areas, the government has introduced an initiative called the Climate Vulnerability Index. This initiative has been strategically supported and advanced by the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) and the UNDP’s Local Government Initiative on Climate Change (LoGIC) project.
There had been no such initiative before. This programme marks the beginning of such efforts. The government’s circular also mentioned that the project was launched under this initiative. It is a commendable and praiseworthy step. However, after searching online and speaking with a few individuals working on disaster relief allocations, I found that this initiative has not received much publicity.
The LoGIC project, implemented under the Local Government Division of the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives (LGRD), is a joint initiative of the Government of Bangladesh, Sweden, Denmark, UNCDF, and UNDP.
Shortly after the interim government took office, it launched a very positive initiative for areas affected by climate change. On 26 September last year, a directive was issued by amending the Union Parishad Development Assistance Utilisation Guidelines 2021.
The amendment stated that to enhance the adaptive capacity of highly climate-vulnerable areas in response to the adverse impacts of climate change, and in determining the general allocation for local government institutions, climate vulnerability will be considered a key indicator alongside area, population, and underdevelopment.
In our country, there is no special allocation for people in crisis due to natural causes. The minimal general allocations that exist often fail to reach the most affected areas because of power dynamics, influence and a flawed allocation system
It outlines that specific percentages of funds should be allocated based on climate vulnerability at the city corporation, municipality, upazila, and union levels.
This initiative should have been taken much earlier. Since it wasn’t, the current government’s amendment of the guidelines is a welcome move. However, such need-based and people-focused considerations should not be limited to local government allocations alone. It is essential that they guide all resource allocations across the board.
According to a government circular, in the 2021 guidelines, 75 per cent of the allocation for Union Parishads was distributed based on area and population. In a revision made in September 2024, that distribution was changed. Now, of the 75 per cent share, 40 per cent is based on area, 30 per cent on population, and 30 per cent on the Climate Vulnerability Index of the Union Parishad. The percentages vary across different tiers of the Local Government Division’s institutions. Close attention must also be paid to how effectively this revised policy is being implemented at the Union Parishad level.
In Bangladesh, development needs are not the same across city corporations, pourashavas (municipalities), upazilas or unions. Climate change and its impacts further diversify these needs. From division to district to individual union, the disparities in needs are significant. Many unions are partially or entirely riverine while others lie along the seacoast.
Some areas are hilly.
In the Rajshahi region, many places face water shortage during the dry season. In many coastal areas, access to safe drinking water is scarce. The challenges in hilly areas are different. Some places are ravaged by drought, others by floods.
Certain regions of the country experience flooding multiple times a year while others are never affected. When upstream India releases water into the rivers, people along some riverbanks face sudden suffering. There are also areas heavily affected by river erosion. Every year, thousands of homes are swallowed by rivers in the same locations. Hundreds of thousands are displaced annually and migrate to different parts of the country. The government does nothing for those who lose their homes to river erosion.
Cities through which rivers flow also face severe pollution. In short, the needs to cope with climate impacts vary widely across the country. Drought is worsening in some areas, while others are experiencing colder winters. Rivers are being destroyed continuously, and as a result, the environment is becoming increasingly endangered.
In our country, there is no special allocation for people in crisis due to natural causes. The minimal general allocations that exist often fail to reach the most affected areas because of power dynamics, influence and a flawed allocation system. If funds were disbursed based on the nature and severity of the problems, the most vulnerable people would benefit significantly. Even the small emergency allocations provided during extreme crises tend to be inadequate.
The city corporations, municipalities, upazilas and unions have been grouped into different categories, but the basis for this classification is unclear to me. Some districts that do not experience floods or do not need urgent climate adaptation still receive allocations, while other genuinely vulnerable areas receive less support.
Back in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I asked the state minister for disaster management and relief, Enamur Rahman, on a television talk show what criteria had been used to classify the districts. He was unable to provide a clear answer. I also asked him why there was such extreme disparity in rice allocations for the poor during the pandemic. Again, there was no satisfactory explanation.
In some districts, the number of poor people is around 60,000. In others, it's over two million. Similarly, the number of individuals able to cope with climate impacts varies greatly from district to district. These disparities must be taken into account in allocation decisions. But during the pandemic, rice allocations were made without considering poverty levels.
As a result, it was found that poor people in Munshiganj and Narsingdi received nearly three maunds (about 120 kg) of rice per person, while in Kurigram and Dinajpur, they received only four to five kilograms. This happened because districts were classified solely based on population and area. The lack of disaster-related statistics meant the government treated all districts the same, leading to such inequities in allocation.
Many ministries are involved in addressing climate vulnerability, such as the ministry of water resources and the ministry of environment, forest and climate change. Policies like this need to be introduced for their work in this regard. In several districts of Rangpur division, there are no measures in place to prevent erosion along the Teesta River.
As a result, hundreds of thousands of people living on both banks of the river are becoming homeless. Due to the absence of a comparative policy based on urgency, the government has allocated funds for work on the Ghaghot River, which is relatively less damaging, rather than on the Teesta. Yet, had that money been spent on the Teesta, it would have benefited many more people.
In all government departments, directorates, and ministries involved with the Climate Vulnerability Index, fund allocations must be made in consideration of that index. Otherwise, some areas will see a flurry of work thanks to influence, while others will be neglected. With a flawed policy, allocations will fail to reach the right places. This principle should not be limited to the Climate Vulnerability Index alone, but apply across all government development initiatives.
*Tuhin Wadud is Professor, Department of Bangla, Begum Rokeya University and Director, Riverine People.
wadudtuhin@gmail.com