Community Driven Approaches and People’s Welfare in Uganda at Butemba Sub-County in Kyankwanzi District. A cross-sectional study.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51168/insights.v2i10.48Keywords:
Community Driven Approaches, People's Welfare, Butemba Sub-County, Kyankwanzi DistrictAbstract
Background.
People's welfare has been a topic of concern for governments, policymakers, and social scientists for centuries. This study establishes the relationship between community-driven approaches to development and people’s welfare in Butemba Sub-County, Kyankwanzi District.
Methodology.
A cross-sectional study design and case study approach were used. A sample size of 124 was selected using Slovin’s Formula, and both simple random sampling and purposive sampling techniques were employed. Data was gathered through questionnaires, interviews, and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) to capture both quantitative and qualitative information. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software to identify themes and patterns, while ethical considerations were observed to protect participants' rights and confidentiality.
Results.
Respondents aged 30-39 years form the largest group, representing 33.0%. 56.9% of the participants were male. The Participatory Development Approach (PDA) showed a weak, statistically insignificant correlation (0.128). In contrast, the Problem-Solving Approach (PSA) demonstrated a moderate, statistically significant correlation (0.329), indicating a stronger link between its implementation and improved welfare outcomes. The Welfare Approach (WA) also exhibited a weak, insignificant correlation (0.133), suggesting limited impact on welfare despite positive community perceptions.
Conclusion.
Problem-Solving Approach (PSA) demonstrated a moderate, statistically significant correlation with improved welfare outcomes; both the Participatory Development Approach (PDA) and the Welfare Approach (WA) showed weak, statistically insignificant correlations.
Recommendations.
Structured feedback systems, tailored support for marginalized groups, and robust monitoring for welfare initiatives are advised to ensure inclusivity, empowerment, and sustained impact across the community.
References
Bebbington, A., Guggenheim, S., Olson, E., Woolcock, M., & Western, D. (2006). Community-Driven Development: A Critical Review. The World Bank Research Observer, 21(2), 157-178.
Grootaert, C., Narayan, D., Jones, V. N., & Woolcock, M. (2003). Measuring Social Capital: An Integrated Questionnaire. The World Bank Working Paper No. 18. https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-5661-5
Hill, M. (2017). The Determinants of Well-being: A Review of the Evidence. Journal of Public Health, 39(3), e1-e11.
Hood, C. (2018). The Politics of Welfare Reform. Journal of Social Policy, 47(3), 507-526.
World Health Organization. (2020). Noncommunicable diseases. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases
Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS). (2019). Poverty Status Report.
Mansuri, G., & Rao, V. (2004). Community-Driven Development: Myths and Realities. The World Bank Research Observer, 19(1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkh012
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Christine Nabukenya, Dr. Ssendagi Muhammad

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
