Cultural Capital and the Sustainability of NGOs’ Development Programs in Zimbabwe: An Integrative Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the compatibility of the development programs which are implemented by the Non-Governmental Organizations’ (NGOs) in the Midlands, Matabeleland and Masvingo provinces of Zimbabwe with the cultural sustainability and sustainable development in these cultural communities. This paper argues for the integration of cultural capital in the developmental projects which are implemented by the NGOs in the provinces of Zimbabwe. This paper is based on the data which was collected from five NGOs and six cultural communities which are the beneficiaries of the NGOs’ development programs. The theoretical underpinnings of this paper are situated in cultural conservatism, a philosophy which valorises the traditional cultural institutions and the organic change of these cultural communities. This study establishes that, the programs implemented by the NGOs in Zimbabwe are predetermined and are detached from the cultures of the communities in which they are implemented. In view of the argument that culture is an important component in development, both as cultural capital and in defining development, this paper concludes that the prescriptive NGOs’ development programs are detrimental to cultural sustainability and sustainable development in Zimbabwe. Therefore, this paper argues that there is need to integrate the cultural capital of the communities in the designing and implementation of the NGOs development programs in Zimbabwe.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".