CHAPTER 5: DATA SYNTHESIS AND RESULTS................................................... 26-67
5.3 Primary Data Analysis
The primary data for this study had been collected using the PRA tools – specifically, the Semi- Structured Interviews (SSI) of the residents of the coastal areas (Annex D). The SSI was chosen as the ideal tool because of its flexibility in extracting the information from the field level. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, some of the responses had been collected via online mediums.
The SSI questions were designed to allow flexibility of the questions and answers so the participants can give their insights and observations that might otherwise have been missed in structured interviews with hard and fast questions.
The responses of the SSI were collected from the respondents living in different representative districts of all three coastal areas of Bangladesh following Cresswell (2007). Responses from Khulna and Satkhira represented the Western coastal zone dominated by the mangrove forest the Sundarbans. Responses from Patuakhali, Bhola, and Noakhali represented the Central coastal zone dominated by the broken coastline at the interface of lower Meghna and the Bay of Bengal. In addition, the responses from Chattogram and Cox’s Bazar represented the Eastern coastal zone (Table 5.22). Moreover, the background information of the respondents is given in Table 5.23:
Table 5.22: Location and Number of Responses Representative
Region District Number of
Respondents Sub Total Total
Western Coastal Zone Satkhira 3 9
40
Khulna 6
Central Coastal Zone Patuakhali 8
19
Bhola 5
Noakhali 6
Eastern Coastal Zone Cox’s Bazar Chattogram 8 4 12
62
Table 5.23: Background Information of the Respondents
Background Information Number of
Respondents Percentage (%)
Gender Male 28 70
Female 12 30
Age Group
21-30 16 40
31-40 7 18
41-50 12 30
51-60 5 12
Education Level School level 6 15
Undergraduate level 27 68
Post graduate level 7 17
The respondents of the South Western coastal area were from Satkhira and Khulna, two large districts of Bangladesh. These districts are protected by the large mangrove forest – the Sundarbans. This region is frequently battered by tropical cyclones; the most notable of them in recent years was the severe cyclonic storm Sidr in 2007. Due to the disaster-prone nature of the region and the memories of recent disasters, most people are very much aware of the vulnerability and the threats. They were also found to be highly aware of the protective nature of the Sundarbans and the important role it plays in mitigating cyclonic winds and storm surges.
The respondents from this region universally acknowledged the Sundarbans for bearing the brunt of the Sidr and protecting countless lives and properties. They also mentioned the cooperativeness of the local people in letting the Sundarbans recover from the damage on its ecosystem sustained due to the Sidr. The respondents showed acknowledgment and fondness for the mangrove, and concern about the future of their protective barrier (Table 5.24).
Table 5.24: Key Responses from South Western Coastal Zone
Region Issues Number (Percentage) of
Responses Remarks
Positive Negative
Western Coastal Zone
Existence of Strategic Green
Buffer at Present 9 (100%) 0 (0%)
The respondents acknowledged the strategic position of
the Sundarbans Acknowledgment of the
Protective Effect of Green
Buffer and Bioengineering 9 (100%) 0 (0%)
The respondents are aware of this from their experiences with
severe cyclones Attitude Towards an
Expansion of Green Buffer
and Bioengineering 5 (56%) 4 (44%)
Some respondents feel that instead of expanding, the focus
should be given to monitoring the existing buffers Responsibility of the Public
for Protecting the Green
Buffers 8 (89%) 1 (11%)
Most respondents feel they are responsible
for protecting the Sundarbans Attitude Towards Adopting a
Combination of Structural
and Non-Structural Measures 7 (78%) 2 (22%) Most respondents were in support
63
The respondents from the Central coastal area of Bangladesh also were familiar with natural disasters like cyclones. However, their main concern seemed to be coastal erosion because while the cyclones strike on average once a year, they are afflicted by coastal erosions almost throughout the year. Most of the respondents from this area were in support of large engineering works such as sea walls and large stretches of high embankments. However, they also acknowledged the protective nature of green buffers and bioengineering solutions which have been effective in some places in protecting against erosion and slowing down the rate of loss of land. They shared experiences of plantation by the sides of the river embankments reducing the erosion and helping in stabilizing the river reach at some stretches, especially upstream from the interface of the lower Meghna and the Bay of Bengal. Most of the undergraduate and postgraduate level educated respondents from this region recommended an integrated green barrier system, incorporating the structural measures and non-structural measures (Table 5.25).
Table 5.25: Key Responses from Central Coastal Zone
Region Issues Number (Percentage) of
Responses Remarks
Positive Negative
Central Coastal Zone
Existence of Strategic Green
Buffer at Present 7 (37%) 12 (63%) Respondents were unsure of the effective locations Acknowledgment of the
Protective Effect of Green
Buffer and Bioengineering 11 (58%) 8 (42%)
The opinions of the respondents were divided as some felt the protective effects would not apply to
their area Attitude Towards an
Expansion of Green Buffer
and Bioengineering 10 (53%) 9 (47%)
The respondents were more concerned about protective rigid, high
embankments Responsibility of the Public
for Protecting the Green
Buffers 15 (79%) 4 (21%) Most respondents
supported it
Attitude Towards Adopting a Combination of Structural
and Non-Structural Measures 13 (68%) 6 (32%)
The respondents were susceptive towards a
combination, however, properly
designed and regularly maintained
embankments were their main concern
The respondents from the Eastern coastal area were familiar with the unbroken continuous shoreline of the region. The respondents of this region are familiar with frequent cyclones, and the urban development of this area is also mainly adjacent to the shoreline. This limits the available space to create a functional green barrier thick enough to reduce storm surges and mitigate cyclonic wind speeds. The respondents mentioned their acknowledgment of the effectiveness of green barriers on the southern coast, however, most of them were aware of the space requirements, and expressed their doubt of bioengineering being useful in this particular area. However, some respondents from Cox’s Bazar mentioned the recent drive in plantation programs in that region, especially near the Maheshkhali and Kutubdia region, and the environmental benefits of these programs. However, their opinion was split on the
64
effectiveness of these programs in the mitigation of natural disasters, while focusing on the environmental – especially ecological – benefits, and the benefits against mudslides (Table 5.26).
Table 5.26: Key Responses from South Eastern Coastal Zone
Region Issues Number (Percentage) of
Responses Remarks
Positive Negative
Eastern Coastal Zone
Existence of Strategic Green
Buffer at Present 9 (75%) 3 (25%)
The respondents highlighted the artificial mangroves
in Mirsarai and adjacent area Acknowledgment of the
Protective Effect of Green
Buffer and Bioengineering 10 (83%) 2 (17%) Most respondents acknowledged
positively Attitude Towards an
Expansion of Green Buffer
and Bioengineering 8 (67%) 4 (33%)
Some respondents were concerned about the space stress in the
urban area Responsibility of the Public
for Protecting the Green
Buffers 9 (75%) 3 (25%) Most respondents
acknowledged the responsibility Attitude Towards Adopting a
Combination of Structural
and Non-Structural Measures 7 (58%) 5 (42%)
The respondents expressed their doubt
for adopting a combination mostly
due to the space requirements