Page 1 of 11

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 02 Issue 03

March 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 163

Ngo’s Strides towards Sustainable Rural Development in

Zimbabwe

1Vusumuzi Tshuma

Development Practitioner and Lecturer, Development Studies, Zimbabwe Open University

2Abednico Siambombe

On-going Student: Department of Politics and Public Management, Midlands State University,

Zimbabwe.

ABSTRACT

The paper examines the subject of a

seemingly endless debate on complex

relationship between NGO interventions

and sustainable growth in rural Zimbabwe.

It examines how despite numerous strides

by NGOs in their frantic effort to avert

poverty in its various forms, the

marginalised groups of the poor, women

and children continue to wallow in

deprivation. This has drawn rotational

criticism from a section of development

practitioners’, who dismiss NGO work and

aid in general as both “dead” and

unsustainable as it creates more of

dependence than safety nets and

creativeness on localised solutions. On the

contrary, the proponents of developmental

aid perceive NGOs as an alternative to the

rolling back state which is apparently

bankrupt on sustainable development

models of promoting grassroots economic

growth and provision of basic services.

Thus, this research stands at the cutting

edge of development aid paradox vis a vis

sustainable rural development. The

research sought to review the sustainability

of projects implemented by various NGOs

after the end of funding phase against a

common tendency by NGOs to emphasise

on people’s centred approaches of

participation, capacity building and

empowerment. In this enquiry, both the

quality and quantity of aid will be examined

through a scrutiny of project viability and

long term impact on the targeted

communities.

Key Terms: NGOs, Sustainability, Rural

Development.

“Aid is and has been used in wrong ways

many many times in its sixty years history

and thus produced often poor results, but

that doesn’t say that the instrument in itself

is wrong or inadequate and cannot be used

to bring economic and social progress.”

Paul Hoebink

Page 2 of 11

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 02 Issue 03

March 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 164

1Corresponding author. e-mail:

drvusumuzi83@gmail.com

Introduction

Sustainable Development which premise

the current wave programming on poverty

alleviation, people basic needs and rights

can be defined as the continued existence

and maintenance of institutions or

programmes established by NGOs during

an interlude of intervention despite the

absence of funding of such projects. The

common phenomenon on the projects

functionality among rural communities

after the intervention phase is more of

abandonment resulting in almost a total

collapse with isolated benefits to a few

project members. This seemingly short

impact type of projects have led to this

enquiry examining whether community

projects by NGOs are either not sustainable

by their nature, ill designed with no

community participation or aid recipients

are generally not proactive to graduate from

the entanglement of poverty. Objectively,

sustainability should be more of a concern

rather than a paradox for NGOs in their

wholesome interventions in rural

communities.

IFAD (2009) in one of its occasional papers

entitled Sustainability of Rural

Development Projects noted that

sustainable development is not only one of

the principles of engagement to NGOs’

identities and roles, but a critical challenge

for all development agencies. It is not

possible to claim lasting impact in terms of

rural poverty reduction without ensuring

projects sustainability in the benefitting

communities. Despite the continued

interventions by NGOs in rural

communities to alleviate poverty, working

mostly within the premise of the United

Nations Sustainable Development Goals,

the sustainability of the interventions has

remained more of a rhetoric rather than a

practice. Models of rural development have

been rolled out but the output inversely

minimal to justify aid related support. The

reality has been that most community

projects functionality ends when funding or

direct support ceases. The sudden or

gradual death of these interventions is a

result of several factors which among them

include lack of consultation and

engagement of communities during the

initial project identification, total

dependency of communities on external

support and internal dynamics by the

beneficiaries. Taylor and Mackenzie,

(1992:257) argues that, when communities

Page 3 of 11

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning

Available at http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/

e-ISSN: 2395-0463

Volume 02 Issue 03

March 2016

Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 165

are given the opportunity to participate

meaningfully in development initiatives,

“...they have shown themselves to be

perfectly capable of making rational

choices regarding their own destinies”. This

stance by Taylor and Mackenzie suggests

that meaningful involvement and

participation of communities in project

implementation yields to full ownership

which results in projects sustainability.

However, it should be noted that despite

some pitfalls in NGO interventions

especially on project sustainability, NGOs

remain the central government partner in

rural development. In sectors such as

education and health, there is notable

continued support of the interventions

especially by the respective line ministries

with traceable imprints. For example, Plan

International Zimbabwe has built several

schools in Tsholotsho district, rehabilitated

dip tanks and dams, sunk boreholes while

World Vision has constructed a massive

dam in Inkosikazi area under Bubi district

that serves almost the entire district through

drinking water for animals and there is a

viable irrigation scheme by the

communities within the dam proximity.

These are some of the lucrative

interventions by NGOs that has a large

bearing on sustainable rural development. It

is in this line that NGO interventions have

proven to be pivotal in rural development as

the government of Zimbabwe is

economically handicapped in terms of

service delivery for its people and the

national budgets barely caters for rural

community needs. However, in terms of

prioritisation, the rural populace in

Zimbabwe is not much concerned with

interventions on advocacy or much

software but rather infrastructural

development such as building of schools,

clinics and dam construction which is

hardly done by most of the third generation

NGOs who are more into emergency

programs and other short term projects.

Nutritional gardens, goat pass on and

conservation agriculture projects among

other interventions have proven

unsustainable. Christian Care (a local

NGO) has implemented several of these

projects but very few are still operational to

date both in Lupane and Binga districts. In

Binga, the goat dip tanks at Saba and

Lubanda wards and the Fresh Fish Market

at Siachilaba ward has failed to operate

despite massive capital injection into these

projects. The structures are just lying idle

since the project completion in 2012.

The role of the Zimbabwean government as

the regulatory authority of the NGO

operations has remained peripheral,