Modernisation Theory, Rural Poverty, and Anthropological Perspectives in Tanzania
This paper will be centered upon the development issue of rural poverty in Tanzania, South Africa. In the eyes of west, the Tanzanian nation have struggled in the wake of post independence, with limited access to western markets, primitive farming methods and a lack of economic diversity, rural poverty has devastated thousands. This paper will synthesise various rural development policies and their effects will be analysed through an anthropological lens.
The aim of this paper is to synthesise the development issue of rural poverty in Tanzania and its relationship to modernisation theory and its application. There are four objectives that will be addressed in this paper in order to achieve this aim. Firstly, one must understand modernisation theory, its history, decline and its resurgence during the 1990’s, with an emphasis on how it explains societal ‘development’(Randall & Theobald,1998). Secondly, one must understand rural poverty in Tanzania and its relationship to land fragmentation, unequal resource distribution, through the lens of Modernisation theory. Thirdly, it is essential to define the policies/interventions implemented in an effort to extinguish the fire of rural poverty, consuming the nation. The final section will present the various anthropological perspectives on the consequences of modernisation policies in Tanzania.
The objectives will be achieved, beginning with defining modernisation theory alongside the various key concepts, origins and influential scholars related to the topic. Then an overview of the development issue that was faced in Tanzania as a post-independence/colonial country from the clutches of Germany 1885 - 1919 and later , when the league of Nations mandated that Britain be the lead administrator of Tanzania from 1919 - 1961(Mbogoni,2012). Followed by an outline of the various policies attempting to reduce rural poverty, such as Ujamaa Villages, the nationalisation of industries and rural development programs. Finally, to address the anthropological perspectives, the work of various authors such as C.C Eldrege, Geoffrey Ross Owens, Mai Green and Karen Porter will be synthesised to critique the various modernisation policies used to address the issue of rural poverty in Tanzania.
To begin, modernisation theory must be analysed in order to provide sufficient context for this paper. Various Modernisation theories have shaped society for many decades, as they are viewed as rational models used to understand societal progress and development. The inception of Modernisation, began around the 1950s, drawing on various sociological analyses of works from Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber and Talcott Parsons(Bernstein, 1971). For instance, Walt Rostow, was a major contributor to the modernisation discourse as he proposed in seminal work “The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto” that modernisation was a universal process that each society must participate in. It is marked by the linear transition from a traditional society to a modern industrialised society. Rostow defined 5 key economic stages. 1. Traditional society 2. Preconditions for take-off 3. Take-off 4. Drive to maturity 5. Age of High mass consumption (Rostow,1960). However, modernisation theory is not statically defined, in fact it is a collection of theories with a similar premiss of linear progression, with various concepts that dovetail into various minutiae offering distinct differences. For instance, Talcott Parsons defined the concept as “A shift from ‘ascription to ‘achievement’ as the primary basis for social stratification” (Parsons, 1951). Rather than focusing on the economic stages of development like Rostow, Parson expanded beyond economics, into the sociological and cultural aspects, arguing that the shift from ‘ascription’ to ‘achievement’ delineates modern societies. (Parsons, 1951). Samuel P.Huntington provides a sufficient all encompassing perspective by stating that “Modernisation is a complex process involving not only economic and technological change but also change in social, political and cultural institutions” (Huntington, 1965). This is yet another dovetail with a more critical approach to defining modernisation theory. In Huntingtons’ seminal work “Political Order in Changing Societies” he argues that in order for Development/Modernisation, to be successful, the political must not be forgotten, economics alone is not sufficient for development to occur. Huntington argues that the state is ‘indispensable to economic development’ (Huntington,1968). Evidently, Huntington’s work, shed light upon the various blind spots present in modernisation theory discourse. While this section has been rather tangential, it has provided a sufficient overview of modernisation discourse, as a group of interrelated theories which attempt to explain the metamorphic process found in every society. However, often overlooked is the bias of modernisation theory regarding the cold war. During this time, many scholars refrained from communist/socialist works in the act of self preservation. The west poured vast resources into those who supported western superiority. However, Andre Gunder Frank in his work “Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America” critiqued modernisation theory for its ethnocentric assumptions and postulated that it was a tool for Western dominance. Frank, argued that modernisation theory was comparable to ‘intellectual imperialism’ aimed at combating alternative models of development associated with communist ideology (Frank, 1967). Curiously, Walt Rostow in a self critique, acknowledged that modernisation theory was crafted as a tool to counter the appeal of communist ideals during the cold war, hence the use of “Non-Communist Manifesto” in the title of his book(Rostow, 1960). This has provided a balanced discourse of modernisation theory which is necessary in order to grasp the concepts to follow in this paper.
Now that a firm grasp of modernisation theory has been achieved, it may now be applied to the development issue surrounding Tanzania, South Africa. The country has a history of hardship as it has struggled for independence, and its issues with rural poverty as a result. Context of Tanzania is necessary to fully grasp the development issue of rural poverty. To begin, Tanzania was under German colonial rule during the 19th century and was known as German East Africa (Mbogoni,2012). This led to major social and economic refactor as European values were forced upon the Tanzanian people, which spanned from 1885 to the year 1919 as the population were subject to forced labour in the name of resource exploitation. However, after world war I, the League of nations nominated Britain to be the head administrator of then Tanganyika. The British colonial administrators restructured governance and displacement of people from fertile lands for European settlers. The British colonial rule ended in 1961 when Tanzania gained independence under the leadership of Julius Nyerere (Mbogoni,2012). Nyerere, aimed to steer the country towards a socialist and collectivist way of life, in fact Nyerere stated “he major means of production are in the hands of the state, and the benefits of production are equitably shared among the people” in his book “Ujamaa: Essays on Socialism” which highlights his affiliations to say the least. However, during this time, rural poverty became a major issue, as rural regions struggled with limited access to markets for their agricultural produce. Furthermore the remoteness of the rural Tanzanian people exacerbated the issue of rural poverty due to this lack of connection to the global market. Furthermore, even with less constrained access to the global market, the farming techniques used are very inefficient and outdated, which hindered productivity and limited potential for any economic growth, which of course is directly related to high rates of rural poverty, a vicious cycle. Not to mention a sever lack of economic diversity, the production of low value goods from subsistence agriculture was not nearly enough to propel the rural Tanzanian people out of poverty, this meant that minor fluctuations in the agricultural market plunged rural communities deeper into poverty regularly(Nyerere, 1987). However, Nyerere attempted to implement various policies to fight the cycle of rural poverty which will be discussed in later in the paper.
Angus Deaton’s work, “The Analysis of Household Surveys: A Microeconometric Approach to Development Policy” (Deaton, 1997), offers valuable insights into the cyclical nature of poverty and the challenges faced by households in developing economies. While Deaton’s work is not specifically focused on Tanzania, the principles he discusses can be applied to understand the dynamics of poverty cycles in the Tanzanian context. Furthermore, in Tanzania, the cycles of poverty are intricately linked to various factors, including historical legacies, economic structures, and social dynamics. Let’s explore how Deaton’s concepts can be related to the Tanzanian scenario: For example, Deaton emphasizes the importance of understanding income volatility in households. In Tanzania, rural communities often rely on subsistence agriculture, and their income is highly dependent on agricultural productivity. Fluctuations in weather patterns, market prices, and other external factors contribute to income volatility, leading to cycles of prosperity and hardship.(Waters,2000) Not to mention Deaton’s work highlights the role of access to resources in shaping household well-being(Deaton, 1997). In Tanzania, issues such as land fragmentation and unequal resource distribution contribute to disparities in economic opportunities among rural communities. Limited access to productive resources perpetuates cycles of poverty.(Asmerom.2010)
To bein with the policies and interventions used it is important to understand the government of Tanzania, He was a prominent figure known for his major contributions to African socialist ideals and more notably his application of socialist ideals in nation building(Mwakikagile, 2007), many of which will be discussed in the coming sections.
Moving on to the various policies and interventions used to fight the epidemic of rural poverty in Tanzania. In the 1960s, Nyerere and his administration aimed to create what they named ‘Ujamaa Villages’, Ujamaa meaning ‘familyhood’in the Swahili dialect. The aim was to dismantle the effects of colonialism and construct an ‘equitable society’(Elis, 2003). Ujamaa villages were built on 4 key principles. Firstly, an emphasis of collective living was made, in order to increase the sharing of resources and responsibilities. Secondly residents of Ujamaa villages were encouraged to farm land as a community, by working together and avoiding individual farming strategies used in subsistence farming. Thirdly, this allowed the Ujamaa villages to strive for self reliance, as the benefits of shared resources and increased agricultural output from communal farming methods allowed production of local goods and services which meant Ujamaa residents were not subject as subject to the oscillation of the western market, reducing dependence upon external resources and government aid. Finally, Ujamaa villages promoted literacy, educating both young and old residents, with the creation of community learning centers which facilitated formal education as well as serving as communal spaces(Atchoarena et all,2000). This is also well documented in Nyerere’s work “Education for self-reliance” With the increase in education, it enabled residents to participate in the decision making process of their town, allowing for the empowerment of the villagers, granting them increased agency. This education system also attempted to teach socialist ideals as they reinforced the importance of equality between residents which served to promote cooperation. This had the goal of instilling a sense of communal responsibility which served to reinforce the foundation of Ujamaa villages.(Nyerere,1967)
Julius Nyerere and his administration also aimed to nationalise the industry of Tanzania. The aim was to reduce economic disparity and reduce poverty rates especially in rural areas, by placing various privately owned industries under state control, such as the banking, mining and manufacturing sectors. Essentially turning away from the free market to promote self reliance in the hope that this would reduce levels of poverty. This is a key part of the Arusha Declaration which articulated the movement towards the redistribution of wealth, reducing the vast gap between the poor and rich of Tanzania (Hyden,1980). A quote from the declaration “… we have always said that socialism is the democratic way of life, and the Arusha Declaration is a declaration of the democratic way of life.” emphasises the adoption of socialist ideals which were achieved by the year 1970 as the government successfully took over vast amounts of the Tanzanian industry.(Lofchie, 1997)
Moving forward, there were multiple rural development programs aimed to reduce issue of rural development. The first was the ‘Integrated Rural Development Program (IRDP)’. This was launched in 1970, which introduced modern farming techniques by training farmers and providing them with high quality seeds, education on the importance of diversifying crops, with the goal of increasing the efficiency and output of the agricultural sector in the hope that this would provide higher income to reduce poverty levels. Dr. Juma Mwapachu a Rural Development Scholar stated that “.IRDP was a groundbreaking initiative that recognized the interconnectedness of development. It was not just about economic upliftment but aimed to transform the entire rural landscape."(Mwapachu,2012) Essentially, the legacy ofthe IRDP was a long lasting first step to ‘modernise’ the Tanzanian nation.
Finally, the Kilimo Kwanza initiative by the Tanzanian government, began in 2006 which translates to “Agriculture First” which aimed to transition the still vast number of poverty stricken subsistence farmers in in rural Tanzania, towards ‘commercial agriculture’ in an attempt to modernise the nation(MINISTRY OF HEALTH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, GENDER, ELDERLY AND CHILDREN,2018). This scheme was a ‘people centric’ approach which functioned under the auspices of the Tanzania National Business Council. This council aimed to foster a dialogue between the private and public sectors on strategic matters crucial for economic development. However, despite the substantial efforts and instruments employed within the framework of “Kilimo Kwanza,” Tanzanian agriculture continues to be the primary employer of the country’s labor force 70%. It contributes 24% to the GDP, 30% to exports, and supplies 65% of raw materials for domestic industry (Mkonda & Xinhua, 2016). However, this contribution falls short of the initiative’s envisioned goals.
Now shifting focus to the anthropological perspectives on the modernisation and policies of the Tanzanian people. Geoffrey Ross Owens puts it well by stating, “The impact of Ujamaa on traditional kinship structures was profound. While promoting collectivism, it also prompted shifts in gender roles and family dynamics, revealing the complex interplay between socialist ideologies and local cultures”(Owens,2014). Owens’ work has proven invaluable in understanding how the Ujamaa has impacted the Tanzanian people by highlighting the devastating transformation of the Tanzanian kinship structures brought by Ujamaa. For instance, originally, family units were the primary social and economic entities, with a more local and organic portrayal. However, since the inception of the Ujamaa, pushed the Tanzanian people towards communal living which erased previous kinship structures. Furthermore, the implementation of the Ujamaa scheme is reasonably authoritarian in nature as its top down approach removed agency from the people. In short prompts questions about the practical realities of Ujamaa’s communal vision, the depth of gender empowerment, the impact on cultural identity, and the long-term socioeconomic consequences. (Owens,2014). Such critical insights provide a more nuanced understanding of the complexities and shortcomings of Ujamaa’s transformative agenda within Tanzanian kinship structures.
Mai Green also offers critical insights into the socio-cultural dimensions of the Ujamaa. Her anthropological lens provides a nuanced understanding of how this economic shift influenced the daily lives and social structures of Tanzanian communities. Specifically in her work “After Ujamaa? Cultures of Governance and the Representation of Power in Tanzania” she analysed The establishment of civil society organizations post-Ujamaa doesn’t introduce alternative political structures but reproduces existing hierarchical relationships. Governance as a cultural practice in Tanzania enacts the hierarchical relations between lower and higher tiers in models premised on the conceptualization of the village as both object and lowest level of government."(Green, 2010)
Stoger-Eising examined Julius Nyerere’s socialist ideals and policy through an anthropological lense, exploring the context and effects of the interaction between indigenous African and European ideals/worldviews. In Stoger-Eising’s work, she claims that in Nyerere’s work “The most recurrent themes in his writings are ‘traditional African values’ and the centrality of ‘the traditional African family”, this sets the foundation for Nyerere’s perspectives and what he perceives a ‘traditional African family’ to be, particularly in the context of Ujamaa. Stoger-Eising challenged the perception that Nyerere’s discussions on African socialism and democracy were merely political tactics. Instead, she argues they were grounded in a sincere attempt to integrate indigenous values into the fabric of Tanzanian identity, however, the unintended social effects are rarely discussed.Using an anthropological approach, Stoger-Eising found that Nyerere’s unique conception of ‘traditional African’values arose from the fact that he was socialised in a non hierarchical ‘tribal’society. Furthermore, his intention with Ujamaa was to combine these traditional values with western elements in order to create a uniform Tanzanian identity that would wipe out any ethnic divisions. However, this adds themes of cultural imperialism, as the effect erodes unique cultural identities and leads to the homogenisation of Tanzanian society under a western framework. This loss of cultural diversity is evident in the erosion of social cohesion within families and traditional communities and has alienated those who oppose the new western ideals that were imposed in an authoritarian manor(Stoger-Eising,2011). For example, The Ujamaa socialist movement drastically altered gender roles due to its advocation of a nuclear family. With the creation of Ujamaa villages, the focus upon traditional relations between brotherhood and communal living changed to internal household relations, which became a source of power struggles within Ujamaa villages.(Kelly, 2012)
Related to this refactor of kinship and family relations, is the anthropological work of Karen A.Porter, She states that “Moral evaluations derive from factors of wealth, education, and the extent to which women can fulfill jural obligations to men in new ways.” this encompasses her central argument that changing the socioeconomic landscape in such a drastic way, can impact decisions of moral law. For example, traditionally, the relationship between brothers and sisters were traditionally non competitive ,however, with the introduction of new social relations (Porter, 2004). Amadiume, puts it best by stating that “Women who can uphold lineage responsibilities, act as ‘male daughters’” which introduces this competitive relationship between brothers and sisters within Ujamaa and post-Ujamaa villages/communities.(Amadiume, 1987). In fact with these new responsibilities placed upon women, Porter argues that this gives them a competitive edge as they are now judged by their economic value rather than their sole ability to produce children and connect families through marriage, hence the name of her paper “Marriage is Trouble”.(Porter,2004)
Taking a broader approach now, Kristin D Phillips, political anthropologist, (Phillips,2010) who conducted his fieldwork in the Tanzanian town of Singida, recounts the political ecosystem with a man named Nijuku in a dusty town as an old radio blares in the background. Five months before the 2005 presidential elections, the news of party primariescame across Tanzanian radio. “The general assembly of ruling party Chama Cha Mapinduzi has nominated Foreign Minister Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete as presidential candidate,” the newscaster announced in rapid-fire Swahili. At the time, I was sitting in a streetside workshop in the central Tanzanian town of Singida, watching the tailor Njiku dig into bales of second-hand clothes shipped from New Jersey, tear them to pieces, and sew them into children’s clothes he would sell at cattle auctions all over the region.” “And there you have it,” he said grimly, ripping the zipper out of a pair of trousers. “The leaders of CCM have just chosen our president.” “But the general elections are still five months away,” I observed, “How can you be sure Kikwete will be president?” “CCM has its roots in everywhere,” Njiku replied quietly. “It’s taken up all the earth. There’s no room for other parties to grow. - (Phillips,2010) ”} Essentially the CCM party holds vast resources of image and power, and the people of Tanzania knew that any hope for an opposition was futile due to lack of funding and organisation.
The reason for such all encompassing dominance of the CCM is largely in part due to the CCM leading the Tanzanaian people to independence. Phillips found that the Tanzanian people see the CCM as their so called ‘political father’. This has created an interesting relationship between the Tanzanian people and the government. Phillips argues that this narrative actually masks the various political and socioeconomic disparities which reinforces a sence of gentocracy amoung rural tanzanians. In other words, an oligarchy that leads to limited representation where political power is not diffused but concentrated between older individuals where the concerns, needs and perspectives of a diverse population are not met. Instead authoritarian ideals infect decision making and magnify the top down approach of policy making, which reduces agency of small rural communities(Phillips,2010)
Stoger-Eising examined Julius Nyerere’s socialist ideals and policy through an anthropological lense, exploring the context and effects of the interaction between indigenous African and European ideals/worldviews. In Stoger-Eising’s work, she claims that in Nyerere’s work “The most recurrent themes in his writings are ‘traditional African values’ and the centrality of ‘the traditional African family”, this sets the foundation for Nyerere’s perspectives and what he perceives a ‘traditional African family’ to be, particularly in the context of Ujamaa. Stoger-Eising challenged the perception that Nyerere’s discussions on African socialism and democracy were merely political tactics. Instead, she argues they were grounded in a sincere attempt to integrate indigenous values into the fabric of Tanzanian identity, however, the unintended social effects are rarely discussed.Using an anthropological approach, Stoger-Eising found that Nyerere’s unique conception of ‘traditional African’values arose from the fact that he was socialised in a non hierarchical ‘tribal’society. Furthermore, his intention with Ujamaa was to combine these traditional values with western elements in order to create a uniform Tanzanian identity that would wipe out any ethnic divisions. However, this adds themes of cultural imperialism, as the effect erodes unique cultural identities and leads to the homogenisation of Tanzanian society under a western framework. This loss of cultural diversity is evident in the erosion of social cohesion within families and traditional communities and has alienated those who oppose the new western ideals that were imposed in an authoritarian manor(Stoger-Eising,2011). For example, The Ujamaa socialist movement drastically altered gender roles due to its advocation of a nuclear family. With the creation of Ujamaa villages, the focus upon traditional relations between brotherhood and communal living changed to internal household relations, which became a source of power struggles within Ujamaa villages.(Kelly, 2012)
Related to this refactor of kinship and family relations, is the anthropological work of Karen A.Porter, She states that “Moral evaluations derive from factors of wealth, education, and the extent to which women can fulfill jural obligations to men in new ways.” this encompasses her central argument that changing the socioeconomic landscape in such a drastic way, can impact decisions of moral law. For example, traditionally, the relationship between brothers and sisters were traditionally non competitive ,however, with the introduction of new social relations (Porter, 2004). Amadiume, puts it best by stating that “Women who can uphold lineage responsibilities, act as ‘male daughters’” which introduces this competitive relationship between brothers and sisters within Ujamaa and post-Ujamaa villages/communities.(Amadiume, 1987). In fact with these new responsibilities placed upon women, Porter argues that this gives them a competitive edge as they are now judged by their economic value rather than their sole ability to produce children and connect families through marriage, hence the name of her paper “Marriage is Trouble”.(Porter,2004)
Taking a broader approach now, Kristin D Phillips, political anthropologist, (Phillips,2010) who conducted his fieldwork in the Tanzanian town of Singida, recounts the political ecosystem with a man named Nijuku in a dusty town as an old radio blares in the background.
Five months before the 2005 presidential elections, the news of party primaries came across Tanzanian radio. “The general assembly of ruling party Chama Cha Mapinduzi has nominated Foreign Minister Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete as presidential candidate,” the newscaster announced in rapid-fire Swahili. At the time, I was sitting in a streetside workshop in the central Tanzanian town of Singida, watching the tailor Njiku dig into bales of second-hand clothes shipped from New Jersey, tear them to pieces, and sew them into children’s clothes he would sell at cattle auctions all over the region.” “And there you have it,” he said grimly, ripping the zipper out of a pair of trousers. “The leaders of CCM have just chosen our president.” “But the general elections are still five months away,” I observed, “How can you be sure Kikwete will be president?” “CCM has its roots in everywhere,” Njiku replied quietly. “It’s taken up all the earth. There’s no room for other parties to grow. - (Phillips,2010) ”}
Essentially the CCM party holds vast resources of image and power, and the people of Tanzania knew that any hope for an opposition was futile due to lack of funding and organisation. The reason for such all encompassing dominance of the CCM is largely in part due to the CCM leading the Tanzanaian people to independence. Phillips found that the Tanzanian people see the CCM as their so called ‘political father’. This has created an interesting relationship between the Tanzanian people and the government. Phillips argues that this narrative actually masks the various political and socioeconomic disparities which reinforces a sence of gentocracy amoung rural tanzanians. In other words, an oligarchy that leads to limited representation where political power is not diffused but concentrated between older individuals where the concerns, needs and perspectives of a diverse population are not met. Instead authoritarian ideals infect decision making and magnify the top down approach of policy making, which reduces agency of small rural communities(Phillips,2010)
in conclusion, this paper has thougrougly synthesised and explored the various relationships between modernisation theory, the development issue of rural poverty, and the holistic anthropological approach. This anthropological approach offered multiple crtical insights mainly into the Ujamaa socialist policy, which served to help explain its failure to alleviate poverty. By actually studying these effects and implications of modernisation theory and policy resulting from it, a more holistic understanding of ethnocentrism and cultural hegemony. Therefore, this paper has achieved its goal of understanding how development has shaped Tanzania in the context of rural poverty. Tanzania, a country scared by colonialism and its aftermath the effects of which are still evident today as rural poverty and poverty in general is still a key issue for the Tanzanian people. Evidently there are still echoes of neocolonialsim as western powers still dictate the trajectory of the country via the neoliberal approach that has infested the world bank, offering conditional loans in an attempt to raise the countrys GPD and implement policy that will reduce rural poverty levels. The motivation behind the governments acceptance of these conditional loans is of course to mitigate issues such as land fragmentation, unequal resource distribution and low GPD as previously discussed in the paper. However, the western motivation for offering these loans can be attributed to the neoliberal/economic theory of ‘comparative advantage’ which claims that the free market benefits from increased efficiency and prosperity when actors within begin to specialise in the production of certain goods.(Findlay, 1991). Therefore, encouraging countrys to raise their gpd with neoliberal strategy (rooted in modernisation theory) , highlights the western motivation for attempting to modernise Tanzania. However, while, in theory this macro economic approach seems beneficial, as highlighted by the anthropological section of this paper, this is not necessarily the case when it comes to the lack of a culturally relativistic approach when it comes to implementing policy. Anthropologically, the implementation of these policies has been met with various forms of resistance and effects such as cultural homogenisation with the increase of globalist policy. Anthropologists such as Geoffrey Ross Owens, Mai Green, and Karen Porter, have revealed just how complex the implementation of policy and government intervention truely is when the linear assumptions of modernisation are involved. This highlights the importance of taking a more nuanced and holistic approach to developmental strategy and policy, whilst being aware of possible drawbacks. Therefore, in summary, this paper has emphasised the importance of combining the anthropological perspectives, development policies, politics ,economic perspectives in order to be successful in the future. As Tanzania continues to develop in the eyes of the west, the insights gained from the failures will shape the countrys development. Clearly this is much easier said than done as any approach will have its consequences bot micro and macro. implementation of policy.
Refrences
(2023) National Gender Profile of Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods – United Republic of Tanzania. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc4557en
Atchoarena, D., & Gasperini, L. (2003). Education for rural development: Towards new policy responses. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Bernstein, H. (1970). Modernization theory and the sociological study of Development. Erasmus Universiteit.
Deaton, A. (1997). The Analysis of Household Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8018-5254-4
Ellis, F., & Mdoe, N. (2003).\emph{Livelihoods and Rural Poverty Reduction in Tanzania. World Development, 31(8), 1367-1384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00100-1}
Green, M. (2010a). After Ujamaa? cultures of governance and the representation of power in Tanzania. Social Analysis, 54(1). https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2010.540102
Green, M. (2010b). After Ujamaa? cultures of governance and the representation of power in Tanzania. Social Analysis, 54(1). https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2010.540102
Heyne, P. T. (1965). The World of Economics. Concordia Pub. House.
HYDEN, G. (1980). Beyond Ujamaa in Tanzania: Underdevelopment and an uncaptured peasantry. UNIV OF CALIFORNIA PRESS.
Kidane, A. (2010). \emph{The Poverty Demography Trap in Third World Countries: Empirical Evidence from Tanzania. Environment for Development Initiative. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep14930}
LAL, P. (2010). Militants, mothers, and the National Family: ujamaa, gender, and Rural Development in postcolonial Tanzania. The Journal of African History, 51(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021853710000010
Lofchie, M. F. (2014). The Political Economy of Tanzania: Decline and recovery. University of Pennsylvania Press.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, GENDER, ELDERLY AND CHILDREN. (2018). Antenatal Care Guidelines. https://platform.who.int/docs/default-source/mca-documents/policy-documents/guideline/ARE-MN-21-02-GUIDELINE-2018-eng-National-ANC-Guideline.pdf
Mkonda, M. Y., & He, X. (2016). Efficacy of transforming agriculture for survival to commercial agriculture through “Kilimo Kwanza” initiative in Tanzania. Natural Resources and Conservation, 4(4), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.13189/nrc.2016.040401
Mwakikagile, G. (2010). Nyerere and Africa: End of an era. New Africa Press.
Mwapachu, J. V. (2012). Rethinking africa: Interview with Juma V. Mwapachu. Development, 55(4), 441–448. https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2012.76
Nyerere, J. K. (1967). Education for self‐reliance. The Ecumenical Review, 19(4), 382–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-6623.1967.tb02171.x
Nyerere, J. K. (1987).\emph{Ujamaa: The basis of African socialism. The Journal of Pan African Studies, 1(1), 4-11.}
Nyerere, J. K. (1981). Ujamaa - essays on Socialism. Oxford University Press.
Owens, G. R. (2014). From collective villages to private ownership. Journal of Anthropological Research, 70(2), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.3998/jar.0521004.0070.203
Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Forgotten Books.
Phillips, K. D. (2010). Pater rules best: Political kinship and party politics in Tanzania’s presidential elections. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 33(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1555-2934.2010.01095.x
Porter, K. A. (2004). \emph{“Marriage Is Trouble”. An Analysis of Kinship, Gender Identity, and Sociocultural Change in Rural Tanzania. Anthropos, 99(1), 3–13. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40466302}
Randall, V., & Theobald, R. (1998). Political change and underdevelopment: A critical introduction to third world politics. Macmillan.
Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: A non-Communist manifesto. Martino Fine Books.
Semley, L. (2017). When we discovered gender: A retrospective on IFI Amadiume’s male daughters, female husbands: Gender and sex in an African society. Journal of West African History, 3(2), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.14321/jwestafrihist.3.2.0117
Shao, J. (1986). The villagization program and the disruption of the ecological balance in Tanzania. Canadian Journal of African Studies / Revue Canadienne Des Études Africaines, 20(2), 219. https://doi.org/10.2307/484871
Stöger-Eising, V. (2000). ujamaarevisited: Indigenous and European influences in Nyerere’s social and political thought. Africa, 70(1), 118–143. https://doi.org/10.3366/afr.2000.70.1.118
Waters, T. (2000). The persistence of subsistence and the limits to development studies: The Challenge of Tanzania. Africa, 70(4), 614–652. https://doi.org/10.3366/afr.2000.70.4.614
Y., M. L. E. (2012). Aspects of colonial Tanzania history. Mkuki na Nyota.