Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-lzpzj Total loading time: 0.345 Render date: 2021-02-25T09:08:50.651Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

NGOs, elite capture and community-driven development: perspectives in rural Mozambique*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2013

Alex Arnall
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, Agriculture Building, Earley Gate, PO Box 237, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AR, United Kingdom
David S.G. Thomas
Affiliation:
School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
Chasca Twyman
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Sheffield Institute for International Development, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Diana Liverman
Affiliation:
Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona and Environmental Change Institute, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

This article examines the problems of elite capture in community-driven development (CDD). Drawing on two case studies of non-governmental organisation (NGO) intervention in rural Mozambique, the authors consider two important variables – (1) the diverse and complex contributions of local elites to CDD in different locations and (2) the roles that non-elites play in monitoring and controlling leader activities – to argue that donors should be cautious about automatically assuming the prevalence of malevolent patrimonialism and its ill-effects in their projects. This is because the ‘checks and balances’ on elite behaviour that exist within locally defined and historically rooted forms of community-based governance are likely to be more effective than those introduced by the external intervener.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*

This research was funded by an ESRC doctoral studentship. The authors express gratitude to Dr Gavin Hilson at the University of Reading whose comments helped strengthen draft versions of this paper. Special thanks are extended to Nelson Machava in Mozambique for his assistance during the fieldwork stage of the project, as well as the various NGOs and community members who participated in interviews.

References

Adhikari, K.P. & Goldey, P.. 2010. ‘Social capital and its ‘downside’: the impact on sustainability of induced community-based organisations in Nepal’, World Development 38: 184–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, J. 1997. ‘The local state in post-war Mozambique: political practice and ideas about authority’, Africa 67: 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Araujo, M. C., Ferreira, F. H. G., Lanjouw, P. & Ozler, B.. 2008. ‘Local inequality and project choice: theory and evidence from Ecuador’, Journal of Public Economics 92: 1022–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J. 2005. ‘Local government and development planning: towards decentralised planning and budgeting in Mozambique’. Conference paper. Dar-es-Salaam: UNDP.Google Scholar
Bayart, J. F. 1993. The State in Africa: The Politics of the Belly. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bebbington, A. J., Dharmawan, L., Fahmi, E. & Guggenheim, S.. 2004. ‘Village politics, culture and community-driven development: insights from Indonesia’, Progress in Development Studies 4: 187205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, B. J. 1998. ‘Ethnicity, patronage and the African state: the politics of uncivil nationalism’, African Affairs 97: 305–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, T., Collion, M. H., De Janvry, A., Rondot, P. & Sadoulet, E.. 2008. ‘Do village organisations make a difference in African rural development? A study for Senegal and Burkino Faso’, World Development 36: 2188–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, S. 1993. No Condition is Permanent: the social dynamics of agrarian change in sub-Saharan Africa. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Bingen, J., Serrano, A. & Howard, J.. 2003. ‘Linking farmers to markets: different approaches to human capital development’, Food Policy 28: 405–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, M. L. 1989. ‘Peasant agriculture in Mozambique: the case of Chokwé, Gaza Province’, Canadian Journal of African Studies 23: 355–79.Google Scholar
Carbone, G. M. 2005. ‘Continuidade-na-renovação? Ten years of multiparty politics in Mozambique: roots, devolution and stabilisation of the Frelimo-Renamo party system’, Journal of Modern African Studies 43: 417–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CDG. 2005. Reassentamento dos Beneficiários: Fase 2. Maputo: Community Development Group.Google Scholar
Coelho, J. P. B. 1998. ‘State resettlement policies in post-colonial rural Mozambique: the impact of the communal village programme on Tete Province, 1977–1982’, Journal of Southern African Studies 24: 6191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coelho, V. S. P. & Favareto, A.. 2008. ‘Questioning the relationship between participation and development: a case study of the Vale do Ribeira, Brazil’, World Development 36: 2937–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costy, A. 1996. ‘Who governs? NGOs in rural Mozambique’, Southern Africa Report 11.Google Scholar
Craig, D. & Porter, D.. 2006. Development beyond Neoliberalism? Governance, poverty reduction and political economy. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cunguara, B. & Hanlon, J.. 2010. Poverty is not being reduced in Mozambique. Development as state-making. Working Paper no. 74. London: Crisis States Research Centre.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, A. & Beard, V. A.. 2007. ‘Community-driven development, collective action and elite capture in Indonesia’, Development and Change 38: 229–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeGrassi, A. 2008. ‘‘Neopatrimonialism’ and agricultural development in Africa: contributions and limitations of a contested concept’, African Studies Review 51: 107–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denscombe, M. 2003. The good research guide for small-scale social research projects. Buckingham: Buckingham Open University Press.Google Scholar
Dinerman, A. 2001. ‘Peasant and state in Mozambique’, Journal of Peasant Studies 28: 143–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritzen, S. A. 2007. ‘Can the design of community-driven development reduce the risk of elite capture? Evidence from Indonesia’, World Development 35: 1359–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GlobalAid. 2006. Emergencies Impact Review. Johannesburg: GlobalAid Emergencies Unit.Google Scholar
Gow, D. D. & Vansant, J. 1983. ‘Beyond the rhetoric of rural development participation: how can it be done?’, World Development 11: 427–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanlon, J. & Mosse, M.. 2010. Mozambique's elite – finding its way in a globalised world and returning to old development models. Working Paper No. 2010/105. Helsinki: UNU-WIDER.Google Scholar
Harris, L. 1980. ‘Agricultural cooperatives and development policy in Mozambique’, Journal of Peasant Studies 7: 338–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedges, D. & Chilundo, A.. 1993. ‘A Contestação de Situação Colonial, 1945–1961’, in Rocha, A., ed. História de Moçambique, Vol. III, Moçambique no Auge do Colonialismo. Maputo: Universidade Eduardo Mondlane.Google Scholar
Hermele, K. 1992. ‘Land struggles and social differentiation in southern Mozambique: a case study of Chokwé, Limpopo 1950–1987’, International Journal of African Historical Studies 22: 729–31.Google Scholar
Hulme, D. 1994. ‘Social development research and the third sector: NGOs as users and subjects of social enquiry’, in Booth, D., ed. Rethinking Social Development: theory, research and practice. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Iverson, V., Chhetry, B., Francis, P., Gurung, M., Kafle, G., Pain, A. & Seeley, J.. 2005. ‘High value forests, hidden economies and elite capture: evidence from forest user groups in Nepal's Terai’, Ecological Economics 58: 93107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyed, H. M. & Buur, L.. 2006. ‘New sites of citizenship: recognition of traditional authority and group-based citizenship in Mozambique’, Journal of Southern African Studies 32: 563–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lange, A. 2010. ‘Elites in local development in the Philippines’, Development and Change 41: 5376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, A. M. & Ribot, J. C.. 2004. ‘Democratic decentralisation through a natural resource lens: an introduction’, European Journal of Development Research 16: 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, C. 2009. ‘Selected chiefs, elected councillors and hybrid democracies: popular perspectives on the co-existence of democracy and traditional authority’, Journal of Modern African Studies 47: 101–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, N. & Long, A.. 1992. Battlefields of knowledge: the interlocking of theory and practice in social research and development. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maclean, L. 2010. Informal Institutions and Citizenship in Rural Africa: risk and reciprocity in Ghana and Cote d'Ivoire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansuri, G. & Rao, V.. 2004. ‘Community-based and -driven development: a critical review’, World Bank Research Observer 19: 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marriage, Z. 2006. ‘The comfort of denial: external assistance in southern Sudan’, Development and Change 37: 479500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matose, F. 2009. ‘Knowledge, power, livelihoods and commons practices in Dwesa-Cwebe, South Africa’, Development Southern Africa 26: 672–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministério Da Administração Estatal. 1995. Autoridade e Poder Tradicional, Vol. I e II. Maputo: CEGRAF.Google Scholar
Ministério Da Administração Estatal. 2005. Perfil do Distrito do Manhiça, Provincia de Maputo. Xai Xai, Mozambique: Ministério da Administração Estatal, República de Moçambique.Google Scholar
Ministério Da Agricultura. 1982. Contribução para o Programa da Cooperativização do Campo. Maputo: Bulletin of the Ministry of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. 1999. Self-governance and forest resources. Occasional Paper No. 20. Bogor, Indonesia: Centre for International Forestry Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeiffer, J. 2004. ‘Civil society, NGOs and the holy spirit in Mozambique’, Human Organisation 63: 359–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitcher, A., Moran, M. H. & Johnston, M.. 2009. ‘Rethinking patrimonialism and neopatrimonialism in Africa’, African Studies Review 52: 125–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitcher, M. A. 1998. ‘Disruption with transformation: agrarian relations and livelihoods in Nampula Province, Mozambique 1975–1995’, Journal of Southern African Studies 24: 115–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platteau, J. P. & Abraham, A.. 2002. ‘Participatory development in the presence of endogenous community imperfections’, Journal of Development Studies 39: 104–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, V. & Ibanez, A. M. 2005. ‘The social impact of social funds in Jamaica: a ‘participatory econometric’ analysis of targeting, collective action, and participation in community-driven development’, Journal of Development Studies 41: 788838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Republic Popular De Moçambique. 1983. Primeiro Recenseamento Geral da População. Maputo: Conselho Coordenador de Recenseamento.Google Scholar
Ribot, J. C. & Oyono, P. R.. 2005. ‘The politics of decentralisation’, in Wisner, B., Toulmin, C. & Chitiga, R., eds. Towards a New Map of Africa. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. 1985. Weapons of the Weak: everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sumich, J. 2008. ‘Politics after the time of hunger in Mozambique: a critique of neo patrimonial interpretation of African elites’, Journal of Southern African Studies 34: 111–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumich, J. 2010. ‘The party and the state: Frelimo and social stratification in post-socialist Mozambique’, Development and Change 41: 679–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tai, H. S. 2007. ‘Development through conservation: an institutional analysis of indigenous community-based conservation in Taiwan’, World Development 35: 1186–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tendler, J. 1997. Good government in the tropics. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Thorp, R., Stewart, F. & Heyer, A.. 2005. ‘When and how far is group formation a route out of chronic poverty?’, World Development 33: 907–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Berg, J. 1987. ‘A peasant form of production: wage-dependent agriculture in southern Mozambique’, Canadian Journal of African Studies 21: 375–89.Google Scholar
Veron, R., Williams, G., Corbridge, S. & Srivastava, M.. 2006. ‘Decentralised corruption or corrupt decentralisation? Community monitoring of poverty alleviation schemes in Eastern India’, World Development 34: 1922–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardman, A. 1985. ‘The co-operative movement in Chokwe, Mozambique’, Journal of Southern African Studies 11: 295304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, H. G. & Kloeck-Jenson, S.. 1999. ‘Betwixt and between: ‘traditional authority’ and democratic decentralisation in post-war Mozambique’, African Affairs 98: 455–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, H. G. & Myers, G. W.. 1996. ‘A piece of land in a land of peace? State farm divesture in Mozambique’, Journal of Modern Africa Studies 34: 2751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, S. 2010. Elite capture or capture elites? Lessons from the counter-elite and co-opt elite approaches in Bangladesh and Ghana. Working Paper No. 2010/82. Helsinki: UNU-WIDER.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 15
Total number of PDF views: 287 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 25th February 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

NGOs, elite capture and community-driven development: perspectives in rural Mozambique*
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

NGOs, elite capture and community-driven development: perspectives in rural Mozambique*
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

NGOs, elite capture and community-driven development: perspectives in rural Mozambique*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *