Author: Dipin Subedi
It is a fact that countries in the world with the least contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions are the most susceptible to climate crises (1). To make matters worse, they rely heavily on agriculture for their livelihoods, have a flailing economy, are politically unstable, and their living standards are well beneath the global average. They are usually helpless and handicapped in terms of climate change mitigation, adaptation, and resilience.
Photo by: Dipin Subedi
A notable example of a nation unfortunately and unwittingly dragged into this maelstrom is Bangladesh. In return for emitting only 0.3 percent of the world’s total emissions, Bangladesh finds itself lodged in the list of countries immensely vulnerable to climate impacts, such as extreme weather, rising seas, waterlogging, floods, and intense cyclones. Over the next 25 years, it is projected that Bangladesh will lose approximately 17 percent of its territory, including a third of its fertile agricultural land.
On my recent visit to three cities in Bangladesh, namely Dhaka, Gazipur, and Manikganj, I came across various practical community-driven approaches for climate change adaptation and mitigation. I will here, first, list out these approaches that I encountered during my trip to the CCDB Climate Centre in Gazipur and to one of the community-based organizations in Manikganj. Then, I will meditate upon what it really takes to successfully achieve comparable results in Nepal to strengthen climate resilience.
Exposure
My observations began at the CCDB Climate Centre located in Gazipur. This unique initiative serves as a knowledge hub promoting climate-resilient, sustainable development in Bangladesh. Extending over 22 hectares of land, the Centre mimics five distinct ecological zones of Bangladesh. In their respective domains, these zones house technological innovations tailored to meet the needs of the victims of climate disasters, such as farmers and economically challenged marginalized communities.
In the process, I was exposed to almost 100 practical community-driven approaches to climate challenges, thirty-seven of which were developed for adaptation and forty-four for mitigation. In the coastal region where excessive flooding and subsequent waterlogging create complications, technologies such as Floating Solar, Cyclo-aqua, Integrated Floating Solar, Salt Water Lamp, Hydraulic Ram Pump, and Wave Electricity were on display. A person carrying a portable Cyclo-aqua would be able to purify hundreds of liters of water in a short time for numerous households in a community during floods.
Technologies widely used across South Asia to mitigate climate crises, such as the Biomass Briquette Machine, Biomass to Electricity, and Solar Water Heater were also on display. A particularly recognizable exhibit featured a Solar Parabolic Reflective Cooker that traps solar heat for household cooking. In fact, I was told that this apparatus was originally a Nepali innovation.
Mitigation technologies not used on a large scale in Nepal, or not used at all, such as Solar Mosquito Light Trap, Biodegradable Plastic, Lightning Protection System, Green Bricks, and Plastic to Petrol were also put on display.
Next, I observed the technologies featured at the Centre for Climate Change Adaptation. Resilient homesteads, crops with salt and drought tolerance, floating vegetable gardens, and solar desalination panels formed part of the exhibition. Techniques such as mulching and the production of vermicompost were introduced among farmers for agricultural adaptation to climate change. Similarly, bottle drip irrigation and rainwater harvesting systems strengthened drought resilience among farmers. Flood-affected farmers were taught to produce seedlings in cocodust, and a model zero-energy cool chamber was demonstrated as a strategy to curb food loss.
On a few occasions, I inquired about the cost of certain technologies. Upon learning how dear they might prove to the poor farmers and climate victims in general, I became highly doubtful of their affordability and scalability.
In any case, continuous research and design at the Climate Centre, frequent and direct engagement with the stakeholders, victims, and communities to build climate resilience, have partly assured me that greater affordability could be realized over time.
Community-Based Organizations
I reflect here upon another novelty. I visited one of the hundreds of community-based organizations in the Manikganj district, a mere 50 km from Dhaka, where community members were actively using the climate change adaptation and mitigation technologies. The organization was women-led, comprised entirely of women who claimed responsibility for improving their entire community.
Evidently, the technologies that I saw at the CCDB Climate Centre had significantly improved their livelihoods. Soil fertility increased, agricultural costs declined, and multi-seasonal agricultural patterns generated diverse produce. Although natural compost use led to low yields, farmers grew nutritionally enriched organic crops, and the link to markets for selling them was ensured.
Every child in the community went to school. Supported by their own microfinance institution, adult members reaped financial dividends in proportion to the amount they saved. Women who are financially free and stable have started to own homes legally. Social safety net programs by the government, convinced of the positive outcomes of the organization, intervened to lend them support during times of crisis.
Besides, emboldened by credit support, lower interest rates on loans, and a full rebate for early loan repayment, the number of risk-takers in the form of entrepreneurial traders was growing in the community.
These community-based organizations, above all, were so designed as to progressively meet certain criteria and ultimately function autonomously in terms of economic support.
The abundance of community-based income-generating activities, collective action of a whole community against climate-induced disasters, all the while grounded upon the value of self-reliance, was nothing short of astonishing and, as far as I was concerned, truly didactic.
A Model for Comparison
Save for coastal disasters and Himalayan catastrophes, Nepal and Bangladesh share significant similarities in terms of climate-induced calamities. To begin with, we, like them, have an infinitely small amount of contribution to global warming and yet suffer disproportionately. Our socio-economic conditions that shape our climate resilience, notably those of rural areas, closely resemble theirs.
If so, why have efforts concerning climate change adaptation and mitigation in Bangladesh improved by leaps and bounds when Nepal struggles to attain comparable results to support initiatives and innovations to strengthen climate resilience? Also, what ensures the longevity of the achievements in Bangladesh and pushes the trajectory of success ever upwards?
Planning, in this regard, appears to constitute the initial step. Even more so than money or an even flow of funds. Initiatives like the Climate Centre at Gazipur were the manifestation of a painstakingly long process of research and planning. Nepal has also broken ground in the realm of technologies, knowledge-sharing platforms, research, and design. I have already mentioned that our solar cooking method was imitated at the Climate Centre. Yet we repeatedly fall short when approaching livelihood transformation.
It is necessary, therefore, in the ensuing step, not to rely solely on technologies but on human-centered engagement. We ought not to misunderstand the vulnerabilities of the affected communities as incompetence. Things worked rapidly and durably, from my observation of the women-led group, when they experienced increased self-respect, self-reliance, and autonomy.
It occurred to me in Manikganj that achieving ‘real’ climate resilience in Nepal would be possible only where whole communities are engaged. A whole community against climate change is only possible when their lives are connected throughout multiple dimensions. When a whole community’s income-generating activities are intertwined, when the financial habits of each individual decide the financial strength of a community, and when wiser folks reinforce the value of education, such benevolent entanglements could effortlessly ward off the pressures of climate change and facilitate adaptation in Nepal.
Author Introduction
Mr. Dipin Subedi is a research/program associate at CSC, bringing a multidisciplinary approach to academic research and policy analysis. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in Applied Economics and a Master’s degree in Political Science and Government. With extensive experience in research and think tanks, he specializes in evidence-based analysis of trade, migration, climate change, governance, and foreign policy. Committed to an ecological perspective on societal issues, he emphasizes data-driven insights to inform policy and decision-making.