Switching Gears: From Needs to Assets Based Approach to Community Development in Nepal
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mode of community development is changing in Nepal. The increased flow of international aid for local development, the rise of grassroots organizations, and the political transition to democratic system have created an environment for the adoption and trial of different development approaches. Currently, some of the widely practiced approaches to poverty reduction and social development are the needs-based approach, the sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA), the rights-based approach (RBA), and/or the participatory rural appraisal (PRA). The rights-based approach is gaining prominence mostly among non-government organizations (NGOs). Despite the introduction of the latter three development approaches the needs-based approach to community development is still widely practiced both by government and non-government organizations. The needs-based approach, also known as a traditional approach, is generally understood as a deficit model which focuses on the community’s needs, deficiencies and problems. The critics of this traditional approach argue that such an assessment of the community may help it internalize a negative picture of itself and become powerless. Contrary to this traditional model, the Assets Based Community Development (ABCD) approach empowers community members and strengthens the effectiveness of government agencies and NGOs by drawing on the resources, abilities and insights of local residents to find the ways of overcoming their own challenges. This paper analyzes the ABCD approach and argues for the need to combine the ABCD with SLA, RBA and PRA. The inclusion of the ABCD approach will have sustainable development impacts on the community if intentionally and consistently employed. The paper analyzes theoretical literature on community development in relation to approaches employed in Nepal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it