Prevalence and predictors of vulnerability among Sundarbans mangrove forest resourcedependent communities (SMFRDCs) in southwestern coastal Bang

Abstract

Vulnerability assessment is necessary to reduce the likelihood of a community being affected by natural disasters. This study was aiming at assessing the prevalence of vulnerability of forest resource-dependent communities (FRDCs) of the Sundarbans mangrove forest (SMF) and identify the associated risk factors. Thus, this cross-sectional survey was conducted on the Sundarbans mangrove forest resource-dependent communities (SMFRDCs) of three southwestern coastal districts of Bangladesh, i.e., Satkhira, Khulna, and Bagerhat. Administering a semi-structured interview schedule (SSIS), data were collected from 782 SMFRDCs following a multistage stratified random sampling approach, and data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics v27 for Windows. Findings indicate the prevalence of vulnerability among three Upazila (sub-district) of Satkhira, Khulna, and Bagerhat districts was 46.2% (95% CI: 40.4% - 51.9%) in Shyamnagar, 50.0% (95% CI: 43.5% - 56.5%) in Koyra, and 53.4% (95% CI: 47.4% - 59.3%) in Mongla, respectively. Findings further indicate that individuals who were engaged in more than two occupations were 0.501 times (95% CI: 0.272 – 0.924) less likely to be vulnerable to natural disasters, whereas individuals with an experience of 31 years and above were 0.501times (95% CI: 0.278 – 0.904) less likely to be vulnerable. Among household resources and socioeconomic status, it is apparent that individuals with higher household materials and facilities were 0.308 times (95% CI: 0.183 – 0.518) less likely to be vulnerable. On the contrary, individuals with medium and high domestic assets were 3.146 times (95% CI: 1.870 – 5.294) and 2.083 times (95% CI: 1.256 – 3.455) more likely to experience vulnerability. In contrast, individuals with high transport and livestock assets were 0.446 times (95% CI: 0.250 – 0.0.797) and 0.480 times (95% CI: 0.261 – 0.882) less likely to experience vulnerability in their respective households, respectively. Likewise, individuals with land property and having loans were 0.412 times (95% 2 CI: 0.201 – 0.847) and 0.595 times (95% CI: 0.370 – 0.957) less likely to experience vulnerability in their households, respectively. Among livelihood capitals, it is apparent that individuals with medium natural capital were 0.437 times (95% CI: 0.271 – 0.703) less likely to be affected by vulnerability. Individuals with medium and high physical capital were also 0.288 times (95% CI: 0.184 – 0.452) and 0.162 times (95% CI: 0.080 – 0.331) less likely to experience vulnerability. It is also evident that individuals with medium political capital were 0.330 times (95% CI: 0.204 – 0.535) less likely to experience vulnerability. Additionally, the findings show that the vulnerability among the SMFRDCs varies depending on geospatial location. Moreover, different sociodemographics, household resources, and livelihood capitals were critical predictors of the vulnerabilities of the SMFRDCs. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that government and nongovernment organizations, together with their national and international development partners, devise comprehensive and holistic plans to reduce the vulnerabilities of the SMFRDCs by addressing individual and community levels factors.