The concept of social vulnerability to climate change (abbreviated herein to “social vulnerability”) is underpinned by the theoretical arguments of political ecology. It provides important insights into how unequal power relations and social stratifications shape climate vulnerability in a given context, including in climate-vulnerable regions in the Global South. In other words, it helps us to understand who is vulnerable and under what conditions. As a useful analytical tool, social vulnerability can claim a diverse intellectual lineage, including scholarship on livelihoods (Scoones Reference Scoones1998), hazard theory (Burton, Kates, and White Reference Burton, Kates and White1993), global environmental change (Turner II et al. Reference Turner, Matson, McCarthy, Corell, Christensen, Eckley and Hovelsrud-Broda2003), and resilience (Holling Reference Holling2001). The common thread shared by these approaches is that the natural event (i.e., disaster) does not alone define the magnitude or distribution of impacts across the population. Rather, social, economic, and cultural processes and characteristics, which create unequal power relations and social stratification, interact with natural events to determine the level of vulnerability associated with the event.
“Power,” as a key determinant of social vulnerability, engages with the political, demographic, economic, and social processes that create and/or contribute to asymmetric power and power relations among different population groups (Leach and Rivera Reference Leach and Rivera2021). The important question is: How do unequal power relations determine varying levels of social vulnerability? Scholars have argued that factors including race, class, ethnicity, gender, and income generate differential vulnerabilities within a similar biophysical environment (Cutter, Boruff, and Shirley Reference Cutter, Boruff and Shirley2003; Vasquez-Leon, West, and Finan Reference Vasquez-Leon, West and Finan2003). In this process, power dynamics operate within formal and informal social institutions to influence vulnerability outcomes (Williams Reference Williams2011). The types of power relations in question are those defined by socioeconomic and cultural differences, such as gender (Carr, Fleming, and Kalala Reference Carr, Fleming and Kalala2016; Tschakert et al. Reference Tschakert, Sagoe, Ofori-Darko and Codjoe2010), ethnicity (Roncoli et al. Reference Roncoli, Jost, Kirshen, Sanon, Ingram, Woodin and Somé2009), religion (Orlove et al. Reference Orlove, Roncoli, Kabugo and Majugu2010), and economic conditions (Tschakert et al. Reference Tschakert, Sagoe, Ofori-Darko and Codjoe2010). Unequal power relations in society act as potential contributors to differential and adaptive capacities in the sense that those with more influence have greater access to limited resources and opportunities. The opposite is true for those who live at the bottom of local power hierarchies, who mostly are poor and marginalized, and find themselves at the mercy of local power elites.
“Power,” as a key determinant of social vulnerability, engages with the political, demographic, economic, and social processes that create and/or contribute to asymmetric power and power relations among different population groups.
Such unequal power relations characterize rural agrarian societies in many parts of the climate-vulnerable Global South, including coastal Bangladesh, which is at the frontline of global environmental change. The daily rhythm of life in coastal Bangladesh is conditioned by sea-level rise, coastal flooding and erosion, tropical cyclones, rainfall variability, and saltwater intrusion (Ahmed, Eklund, and Kiester Reference Ahmed, Eklund and Kiester2022).
Although substantial research has been conducted on the impacts of climate change in Bangladesh (Ahmed and Kiester Reference Ahmed and Kiester2021; Momtaz and Shameem Reference Momtaz and Shameem2016) and social vulnerability in general (Alston and Akhter Reference Alston and Akhter2016; Cutter, Boruff, and Shirley Reference Cutter, Boruff and Shirley2003), there is a need to unpack the role of power asymmetries in the discussion of social vulnerability and adaptive capacities. Using empirical research conducted in coastal Bangladesh, this study suggests that local power relations are manipulated and negotiated, resulting in social vulnerability and unequal access to adaptive resources.
POWER RELATIONS IN RURAL AGRARIAN SOCIETY
In Bangladesh, almost 66% of the country’s population lives in rural areas (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics 2015). Farming and fishing are the major livelihood options for the majority of this population (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics 2017; Rapsomanikis Reference Rapsomanikis2005). However, the local agrarian society is not homogeneous (Hossain and Lewis Reference Hossain and Lewis2008; Rahman 1986/Reference Rahman2001). The social structure of rural Bangladesh is exceedingly complex (Gankovsky Reference Gankovsky1974); to understand this complexity, it is important to unpack the dynamic nature of the local society and power structure (Khan Reference Khan2015).
Unequal power relations are reflected in the fact that some people have greater access to social, economic, and political power, as well as opportunities in their locality because of their privileged status in society. In this context, a deeper understanding of unequal power relations in rural agrarian society provides important insights into how people interact with their biophysical environment and the conditions that influence climate-adaptation outcomes.
Unequal power relations are reflected in the fact that some people have greater access to social, economic, and political power, as well as opportunities in their locality because of their privileged status in society.
Land-ownership status plays a central role because the distribution of power is closely associated with the distribution and control of lands (Barkat, Raihan, and uz Zaman Reference Barkat, Raihan and uz Zaman2001; Rahman Reference Rahman2001). Rural Bangladesh is predominantly patriarchal and class-based (Rahman 1986/Reference Rahman2001). Because land is a scarce resource in the country, it has a central role in shaping local power relations and the power structure. Ultimately, whoever holds ownership of the land in the country controls local power (Ahmed and Eklund Reference Ahmed and Eklund2024; Rahman Reference Rahman1981).
Local people often are divided into power elites versus the marginalized with limited power; large landowners versus landless farmers; rich money lenders versus indebted poor peasants; and other socioeconomic and cultural divisions. Among the local Muslim and Hindu peoples, this stratification traditionally is grounded in the country’s long history with the zamindar system. It traces back to the precolonial and colonial periods, when large landowners controlled large swaths of local lands, labor, and capital. In most cases, zamindars’ lands were cultivated by poor peasants who did not own the lands (Barkat, Raihan, and uz Zaman Reference Barkat, Raihan and uz Zaman2001). Zamindars and other hereditary landlords exercised their feudal powers and received social and political protections by contributing revenues to the British colonial government. Although the zamindar system is now outlawed in Bangladesh, its legacy of land concentration continues. Most lands are controlled by a small number of social, economic, and political elites, many of whom live in cities.
Among the Hindus, the traditional caste system governs the social stratification and lingers as the remaining unequal power structure (Tiwari Reference Tiwari2010). The upper-caste “Brahmins” control the majority of communal resources, and the low-caste groups work as laborers—sometimes bonded to the land or to an elite. The caste system also involves landlords and “landless” peasantry, which shape the unequal power relations in agrarian societies in many parts of South Asia.
In addition to religion, ethnicity may be a deciding factor of unequal power relations. In Bangladesh, approximately 98% of the population is Bengali; ethnic minorities comprise the remainder (Miah Reference Miah2018). Almost 20,000 Rakhine ethnic minorities live in coastal Bangladesh in addition to mainstream Bengali people. The Rakhine people are of Indo-Chinese descent and have lived in the region since the early-eighteenth century.
In the patriarchal society of rural Bangladesh, gendered expectations and divisions of labor comprise another aspect that determines unequal power relations (Rocheleau and Edmunds Reference Rocheleau and Edmunds1997). Research suggests that women are not only inherently more vulnerable to the effects of climate change; they also may face barriers that reduce their adaptive capacity (Ahmed and Kiester Reference Ahmed and Kiester2021; Mersha and van Laerhoven Reference Mersha and Van Laerhoven2016). In Bangladesh, women typically have less education and less access to financial capital, own less than 10% of the land, and receive only 5% of all agricultural-assistance services (Alston and Akhter Reference Alston and Akhter2016). They also have less power and influence over decisions that are made by male household members (Denton Reference Denton2002). Moreover, women are limited by sociocultural norms that make it difficult for them to travel alone or to enter the busy local market (i.e., bazaar) and public spaces unaccompanied. On rare occasions, households headed by women have broken with gendered norms and obtained increased economic autonomy (Djoudi and Brockhaus Reference Djoudi and Brockhaus2011). Gendered barriers to climate adaptation also are evident in other parts of the Global South, such as Uganda (Orlove et al. Reference Orlove, Roncoli, Kabugo and Majugu2010), Ghana (Freduah, Fidelman, and Smith Reference Freduah, Fidelman and Smith2019), and Ethiopia (Deressa et al. Reference Deressa, Hassan, Ringler, Alemu and Yesuf2009).
Unequal power relations in agrarian society are fluid and dynamic (Habib and Mizan Reference Habib and Mizan2016), and they are continuously influenced by various social, economic, cultural, and political factors. The power relations in agrarian society potentially influence livelihood opportunities and capacities to cope with various social and environmental stresses (Atteridge and Remling Reference Atteridge and Remling2018). In Bangladesh, unequal power relations and uneven power structures are deeply rooted. With its institutions of discrimination, the system therefore often is predictable. Rahman (Reference Rahman1981) found that control over land (i.e., land ownership), ties to administration (i.e., access to public goods), and income opportunities (i.e., both farm and nonfarm income) are the three important variables in rural Bangladesh that explain existing unequal power structures.
STUDY AREA
Coastal Bangladesh has a long history of severe floods, heavy monsoons, cyclones, tidal surges, and river and coastal erosion (McGranahan, Balk, and Anderson Reference McGranahan, Balk and Anderson2007; Roy, Hanlon, and Hulme Reference Roy, Hanlon and Hulme2016). The region is approximately 47,201 square kilometers, which is 32% of the country’s total landmass. This study focuses on Kalapara Upazila (i.e., a subdistrict, which is a local administrative unit) in the central coastal zone under the Patuakhali district, one of the most southern local administrative units in the country. Encompassing 492 square kilometers, Kalapara has a population of 238,000 (Upazila Disaster Management Committee Reference Committee2014). Like most areas in rural Bangladesh, communities in Kalapara typically are hierarchical. In most cases, they are strongly patriarchal and highly unequal in terms of access to resources and livelihood opportunities. People in Kalapara engage in diverse livelihoods such as farming, fishing, and forest-dependent activities. However, small-scale farming is the most common form of local livelihood (Ahmed and Eklund Reference Ahmed and Eklund2024).
Because of its geographical location, Kalapara is one of the most vulnerable and disaster-prone areas in the country. People there are no strangers to the devastating impacts of tropical cyclones, which bring destruction and displacement and leave communities grappling with irrecoverable losses, damages, and grief (Miah Reference Miah2018; Upazila Disaster Management Committee Reference Committee2014).
RESEARCH METHODS
Kalapara was chosen as the study site because of its (1) vulnerable geographical location and exposure to various weather- and climate-related stresses; (2) local dependency on climate-sensitive sectors, such as farming and fishing; and (3) perennial loss of agriculture lands and farm productivity due to natural hazards. The empirical research was conducted between September 2017 and January 2018. The farmers were selected as respondents because of their dependency on farming; locational exposure; and farm-level impacts of tropical cyclones, coastal flooding, and rainfall variability.
These farmers were selected by purposive sampling so that their representation reflects the desired criteria described previously. They were distributed spatially throughout 28 villages (locally known as moujas) in Kalapara. However, the number of respondent farmers was not distributed evenly across villages. This was largely due to their availability but also because of the spatial concentration of ethnic (i.e., Rakhine) and religious minority (i.e., Hindu) farmers. In contrast, the Muslim farmers, who comprise the local majority, were distributed more evenly across villages in the region.
In Kalapara, a total of 1,049 households reported farming as their main livelihood option (Hoque Reference Hoque2014). Of these, 250 farmers were interviewed using semi-structured questionnaires. Of those 250 interviews, 20 farmers were selected for in-depth case studies: half of whom were male and half of whom were female heads of the household. Some respondents were chosen purposively because they were particularly successful and innovative farmers (i.e., high adaptive capacity). The socioeconomic situations of the other interviewed farmers were particularly precarious. They were selected after the initial interviews were conducted. Once they were selected, further time was requested, depending on their availability, for more in-depth discussions. In all of the cases, respondents were in charge of making decisions for the farm-related activities of their households.
All of these data were collected in various forms, both closed-ended quantitative and open-ended qualitative information. Quantitative and qualitative information was analyzed, respectively, using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences and NVivo, a qualitative data analysis software package, which revealed richer insights from the collected data. Narrative analysis also generated themes and insights from the in-depth interviews.
RESULTS
Access to critical weather- and climate-related information is a key resource that local people need to cope with increasing environmental stresses. In most cases, those who are more socially vulnerable have inadequate or lack access to that critical resource. Access to this information often is mediated by the local power structure and social stratification. The findings of this study highlight the root causes of unequal access to early-warning and critical weather-related information.
In August–October 2017, farmers in Kalapara experienced a major rainfall event; many of them lost more than 50% of their crops. Although the government issued early warnings, 70% of respondents reported that they did not receive any information, and there were major variations among the people who did receive the warnings. However, although only 30% of the farmers received early-warning and rainfall information, their access to information was not homogeneous.
Among those interviewed, only 26% of ethnic farmers received the early warning—the lowest rate compared among all groups of respondents (Table 1). Collected data show that the ethnic Rakhine farmers also sought information more than the local mainstream Bengali (Figure 1).
Access to 2017 Rainfall Information (%)
Information-Seeking Behavior (%)
However, the scenario was reversed regarding receiving the information; that is, the Bengali people received more information but spent less time seeking it. To understand this unequal access to early-warning and climate-related information, the social landscape of disseminating and receiving that information must be described. In the region, most of the farmers shop at the local bazaar, where they interact with agriculture extension agents. The bazaar is a place for social interaction, information exchange, and innovation. Those who go to the bazaar on a regular basis most likely will interact with other farmers and the agriculture extension agents, and they will learn how to access other public and private resources. Rakhine farmers typically are hesitant to go to the bazaar due mostly to their sense of exclusion. Differences in culture, ethnicity, and language play the major role in creating these social barriers.
The situation is even more difficult for Rakhine female household members. Because of gender and ethnicity differences, they feel a sense of insecurity and are hesitant to enter a traditionally masculine and Muslim-dominant space at the bazaar. The local power structure is defined primarily by ethnicity, gender, and religion and is reflected in the profile of the bazaar as a social space as well as who is comfortable engaging in its activities. Rakhine farmers often stay on the sidelines, and this limited public engagement places them on a lower rung of the social structure. The situation is compounded for Rakhine women. The absence of agriculture extension agents from their ethnic background also complicates communication.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Because people are exposed to increasing climate crises in most of the world, various governments, development agencies, and communities spend billions of dollars every year to reduce vulnerability and improve adaptive capacity and resilience. Despite these efforts, millions of people—particularly those who are poor and marginalized—experience disproportionate climate impacts due to their limited adaptive capacity. Therefore, it is critically important to understand the root causes of social vulnerability and barriers to adaptation and resilience.
In this context, and using empirical evidence, this article provides important social and cultural insights, and it advances knowledge on the implications of unequal power relations and dynamics in the discussion of social vulnerability, adaptation, and resilience. As a complex problem, overall social dimensions of climate change demand a more nuanced understanding of how society interacts with the environment during crises. The unequal power structure helps us to understand who is vulnerable, under which contexts, and what is necessary to improve their adaptive capacity. The concepts of power relations and therefore social stratification demand increasing priority in the discussion of climate adaptation and resilience.
CONCLUSION
Unequal power structures exist in almost all societies in the world. Moreover, these religious, ethnicity, gender, and income differences stem from existing social institutions and the cultural cleavages that they create. The social, cultural, and economic differences shape the level of resources that people may have or the resources that they can access when necessary. Unequal access to various adaptive resources (e.g., land and farm and nonfarm incomes) is the outcome of the deeply rooted uneven power structures that exist. Therefore, the climatic impacts in Bangladesh are mediated by gender, income, ethnicity, and religious differences. This article explains that social vulnerability is the outcome of the lack of access to resources as well as restricted social and political power, which ultimately determines who owns what and on what level—in other words, differential adaptive capacities. Although this research was conducted in coastal Bangladesh, the findings provide critical insights into vulnerability and adaptation for other parts of the world that experience similar social, cultural, and environmental challenges.
This article explains that social vulnerability is the outcome of the lack of access to resources as well as restricted social and political power, which ultimately determines who owns what and on what level—in other words, differential adaptive capacities.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author acknowledges Professor Timothy J. Finan of the University of Arizona for his critical comments and constructive suggestions during the initial development of this article.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Research documentation and data that support the findings of this study are openly available at the PS: Political Science & Politics Harvard Dataverse at https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PGUNAP.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The author declares that there are no ethical issues or conflicts of interest in this research.
Open access
