Explore
Flagship studies, sector briefs, and recurring reports, by topic.
Long-form data narratives that walk through an argument.
Recurring advisor series, from weekly reads to annual reviews.
The daily policy prescription, generated each morning.
Seven sector deep-dives: banking, trade, energy, agriculture, and more.
Ask the corpus: answers grounded in published work, with citations.
Grounding verified
~10K households displaced annually per CEGIS
River erosion is a slow-onset climate hazard that dismantles livelihoods one bank-line at a time. The curated evidence is stark: roughly 10,000 households are displaced annually, per CEGIS. Unlike a cyclone, erosion gives months of warning, yet the state response is still reactive. It mobilizes after the land is already in the river, in the form of emergency embankment patching and ad hoc relief. The lead responsible body, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), owns the climate-adaptation mandate, but erosion sits at a seam between meteorology, disaster management, and environmental administration, which is precisely why no single agency currently treats the displaced household as the unit of accountability.
The problem matters now because displacement of this scale is recurring and predictable. Households that lose homestead land enter a cycle of distress migration, informal settlement, and lost schooling. The current_state indicator for this hazard is not yet collected (the registry flags it as needing a collector), which is itself a finding: the state cannot manage at the household level what it does not measure at the household level.
Begin with the register (action 2): without a household-level count, every later action lacks a denominator and an audit trail. In parallel, issue the inter-agency circular that activates the forecast pipeline (action 1), because the monsoon does not wait for institutional readiness. Once the register and the advisory exist, the pre-positioned compensation mechanism (action 3) has both a list of who and a trigger of when. Planned bank protection (action 4) and annual reporting (action 5) build on that foundation. The register is the keystone: it unlocks targeting, compensation, and accountability.
The binding constraint is fiscal and jurisdictional, not technical. CEGIS can already predict erosion, so the gap is institutional will to fund relocation before loss, which is politically harder than visible post-disaster relief. The seam across MoEFCC, the Bangladesh Meteorological Department, the Department of Environment, and the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief invites coordination failure unless one body is named accountable for the displaced-household number. A registry also carries the risk of capture and exclusion if eligibility is not transparent.
River erosion displaces roughly 10,000 households a year (per CEGIS), and the response is still reactive because no agency owns the displaced household as a measured unit. The fix is to make MoEFCC accountable for a forecast-driven register that turns a predictable hazard into pre-positioned relocation and compensation.
Where this hazard bites hardest, ranked by population in the 100-year floodplain, population-weighted with WorldPop 2020. Source: multi-hazard exposure atlas (GloFAS, FABDEM, MODIS, ACAG).
| District | Division | population in the 100-year floodplain |
|---|---|---|
| Jhalokati | Barisal | 98.3% |
| Pirojpur | Barisal | 97.5% |
| Lakshmipur | Chittagong | 96.9% |
| Gopalganj | Dhaka | 96.4% |
| Barguna | Barisal | 96.1% |
| Barisal | Barisal | 96% |
| Madaripur | Dhaka | 94.8% |
| Shariatpur | Dhaka | 94.1% |
The figures and responsible bodies cited in this prescription are drawn from the platform's own data and the GovTwin registry listed below.
Drafted by an Opus writer grounded in the facts above. Where the prescription cites a figure, it is drawn from those facts. The diagnosis derives from the BDPolicyLab crisis taxonomy; the responsible body and budget from the GovTwin registry. Recommended actions are the think tank's policy judgment.