Do project exit practices align with established theories? a comparative case study analysis of selected agriculture-related donor-supported projects in Tanzania
| dc.contributor.author | Mkomagi Jeremiah V. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Mosha Devotha B. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ahmad Athman K. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-07-11T05:17:35Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-07-11T05:17:35Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2022-12-12 | |
| dc.description | The sub Saharan Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities | |
| dc.description.abstract | To address the challenge of ensuring project sustainability, the utilization of well-defined exit strategies has gained significant prominence within the realm of development discourse. However, a notable inconsistency appears to exist between the prevailing application of these strategies and the existing body of knowledge. This study seeks to ascertain the extent to which project exit practices harmonize with established theoretical frameworks. The investigation focuses on two distinct donor-funded agriculture-related projects, employing a comparative case study methodology. The research methodology encompassed in-depth interviews, deliberative focus group discussions (FGDs), and comprehensive surveys. Under the proposition put forth by Levinger and McLeod 2002 for effectual project exits, the data analysis procedure integrates qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and thematic analysis techniques. The results derived from QCA indicate that, out of the six elements proposed by Levinger and McLeod, the ISFM project diligently applied four, whereas the ECOACT project implemented merely three. Notably, both projects aligned with the practice of planning exit strategies from project inception, fostering collaborative partnerships and linkages, as well as enhancing the capacities of local beneficiaries. Conversely, the aspect of allowing roles and relationships to naturally evolve was uniquely evident solely within the ISFM project. Furthermore, the research projects introduced pivotal measures like establishing farmers' groups, training lead farmers, and cultivating community-based seed production systems, all of which were integral components of their respective exit strategies. In summation, the findings of this study reveal a nuanced scenario where certain facets of project exit practices resonate with established theories, while others do not. As a pragmatic suggestion, project managers are advised to seamlessly integrate exit strategies during project conceptualization, proactively seek and cultivate partnerships with local private entities, and contextualize the application of exit elements proposed by Levinger and McLeod based on the specific exigencies of their projects | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://www.suaire.sua.ac.tz/handle/20.500.14820/7746 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher | College of Social Sciences and Humanities, SUA | |
| dc.subject | Project exit practices | |
| dc.subject | Project sustainability | |
| dc.subject | Development discourse | |
| dc.subject | Exit strategies | |
| dc.subject | Donor-funded projects | |
| dc.subject | Agriculture-related projects | |
| dc.title | Do project exit practices align with established theories? a comparative case study analysis of selected agriculture-related donor-supported projects in Tanzania | |
| dc.type | Article |