The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review
Abstract
Community-based and -driven development projects have become an important form of development assistance, with the World Bank's portfolio alone approximating $7 billion. A review of their conceptual foundations and evidence on their effectiveness shows that projects that rely on community participation have not been particularly effective at targeting the poor. There is some evidence that such projects create effective community infrastructure, but not a single study establishes a causal relationship between any outcome and participatory elements of a community-based development project. Most such projects are dominated by elites, and both targeting and project quality tend to be markedly worse in more unequal communities. A distinction between potentially “benevolent” forms of elite domination and more pernicious types of capture is likely to be important for understanding project dynamics and outcomes. Several qualitative studies indicate that the sustainability of community-based initiatives depends crucially on an enabling institutional environment, which requires government commitment, and on accountability of leaders to their community to avoid “supply-driven demand-driven” development. External agents strongly influence project success, but facilitators are often poorly trained, particularly in rapidly scaled-up programs. The naive application of complex contextual concepts like participation, social capital, and empowerment is endemic among project implementers and contributes to poor design and implementation. The evidence suggests that community-based and -driven development projects are best undertaken in a context-specific manner, with a long time horizon and with careful and well-designed monitoring and evaluation systems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bourdieu, P. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621749 · Cited by 17,271
Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology
Portes, A. (1998) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 · Cited by 12,037
Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy
Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000) · The World Bank Research Observer · doi:10.1093/wbro/15.2.225 · Cited by 4,339
Cited by
Agriculture and development: A brief review of the literature
Dethier, J.-J., & Effenberger, A. (2012) · Economic Systems · doi:10.1016/j.ecosys.2011.09.003 · Cited by 380
Mapping the Outcomes of Citizen Engagement
Gaventa, J., & Barrett, G. (2012) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.05.014 · Cited by 332
Brown, H. L., Bos, D. G., Walsh, C. J., Fletcher, T. D., & RossRakesh, S. (2016) · Journal of Environmental Planning and Management · doi:10.1080/09640568.2014.984017 · Cited by 88
The Sorry State of M&E in Agriculture: Can People-centred Approaches Help?
Haddad, L., Lindstrom, J., & Pinto, Y. (2010) · IDS Bulletin · doi:10.1111/j.1759-5436.2010.00177.x · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Mansuri, G.
- Venue
- The World Bank Research Observer
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-03-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-39
- ISSN
- 0257-3032 (ISSN-L)
- 1564-6971
- OpenAlex
- W3124897234
- Cited by
- 1,194
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 171.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.