Realities of programme beneficiaries and nutrition gardens in Masvingo, Zimbabwe
A plethora of studies has established that nutrition gardens have been utilized in Zimbabwe to alleviate poverty in recent years. This article interrogates the realities of the intended programme beneficiaries of a poverty alleviation intervention in Zimbabwe. The authors drew from the work of...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
2020
|
| Online Access: | http://journalarticle.ukm.my/16989/ http://journalarticle.ukm.my/16989/1/41600-133079-1-SM.pdf |
| Summary: | A plethora of studies has established that nutrition gardens have been utilized in Zimbabwe to
alleviate poverty in recent years. This article interrogates the realities of the intended programme
beneficiaries of a poverty alleviation intervention in Zimbabwe. The authors drew from the work
of Robert Chambers to unpack the marginalization of the realities of the intended beneficiaries and
the sustainability of selected nutrition gardens in Zimbabwe. Central to Robert Chambers’ work is
the argument that imposed development initiatives are problematic due to lack of programme
beneficiary consultation. A purposive sample of 15 participants, made up of 12 beneficiaries of
the nutrition gardens and three community leaders were selected for this study. Data was generated
utilizing photo-elicitation interviewing and photographs. Thematic data analysis was adopted to
analyse the transcribed data. The findings from this study revealed that the selected nutrition
gardens in Zimbabwe succumbed to numerous sustainability challenges. Due to these challenges
livelihoods of vulnerable communities were lost. The study further noted that the sustainability
challenges of the selected nutrition gardens were attributable to the one size fits all approach
adopted in the introduction of the nutrition gardens and inadequate research before the
implementation of the nutrition gardens. The study also established that there was no programme
beneficiary consultation. It is recommended that poverty alleviation interventions should prioritize
the realities of the intended beneficiaries. |
|---|