Communities and Habits of Citizenship : Everyday Participation in Kondoa, Tanzania

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Communities and Habits of Citizenship : Everyday Participation in Kondoa, Tanzania © 2022 the Authors Published version Nguyahambi, Ajali M.; Kontinen, Tiina Nguyahambi, A. M., & Kontinen, T. (2022). Communities and Habits of Citizenship : Everyday Participation in Kondoa, Tanzania. In K. Holma, & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Learning, Philosophy, and African Citizenship (pp. 115-134). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-03094882-5_7 2022 Communities and Habits of Citizenship: Everyday Participation in Kondoa, Tanzania Ajali M. Nguyahambi and Tiina Kontinen 1Introduction This chapter builds on and contributes to the debates on experienced, lived and multi-scalar citizenship that widens its conceptualizations beyond a legal status and membership defined by individuals’ rights and responsibilities vis-á-vis a state. Recent literature in citizenship studies has suggested more nuanced, multifaceted and contextualized understandings (Clarke et al., 2014; Isin & Nyers, 2014; Lazar & Nuijten, 2013; Shachar et al., 2017; Yuval-Davis, 1999,2008). The novel contextual definitions of citizenship are especially relevant for research in Africa because, as a wealth of scholarship has pointed out, most existing theorization on citizenship focuses upon experiences in Europe and North America, and thus ignores the institutional and everyday realities of the majority of the world (Comaroff & Comaroff, 2012;Isin,2015; Kabeer, 2005; Kabeer & Kabir, 2009; Robins et al., 2008). A. M. Nguyahambi University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania T. Kontinen (B) University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2022 K. Holma and T. Kontinen (eds.), Learning, Philosophy, and African Citizenship, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94882-5_7 115 116 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN In response to these suggestions, and in continuation of our previous research on the topic (Holma & Kontinen, 2020b; Holma et al., 2018; Nguyahambi & Chang’a, 2020; Nguyahambi & Kontinen, 2020), we introduce a perspective drawing on the work of John Dewey (1859– 1952), a pragmatist philosopher whose ideas have had a huge impact in fields related to democracy and education (Garrison et al., 2016; Stitzlein, 2014). Based on the Dewey-inspired conceptualizations of Holma and Kontinen (2020b; Holma et al., 2018), we understand citizenship as something that is constructed by participating in communities and everyday practices in the course of taking care of shared issues. Additionally, we draw on a definition of learning as acquiring habits of citizenship through participating in these practices and reformulating them in response to disruptions (ibid.). Building on these definitions, we analyse qualitative interviews conducted in the rural location of Kondoa District in Dodoma Region, Tanzania. We address two main questions: (1) In what kinds of diverse communities and practices do people participate in their everyday lives? (2) What kinds of habits of citizenship are learned through such participation? In what follows, we first elaborate on the particular conceptualization of citizenship and learning inspired by Dewey’s work as a contribution to current citizenship studies. Then we will provide a short introduction of the empirical context and the methods used, followed by presentation of the findings of our empirical analysis. In conclusion, we reflect upon the implications of the proposed perspective for understanding citizenship in sub-Saharan Africa in particular, and for contextualized notions of citizenship in general. 2Pragmatist Perspective on Citizenship In this section, we elaborate on our perspective on citizenship and learning, drawing extensively on the contributions of Holma and Kontinen to the book, Citizenship practices in East-Africa: Perspectives from Philosophical Pragmatism (2020a). Based on Dewey’s philosophical pragmatism, they elaborate a conceptualization of citizenship as “constructed in practices taking place in communities involved in the public, thus, in shared activities that have an aim of taking care of shared issues, and thereby realizing citizenship habits both acquired and reformulated, thus learned, in the course of taking part in these communities” (Kontinen & Holma, 2020: 228). This definition is a starting COMMUNITIES AND HABITS OF CITIZENSHIP … 117 point for our exploration of citizenship in the context of rural Tanzania and provides a useful angle for the debates on multiple and localized definitions of citizenship. A growing body of literature in the field of citizenship studies argues for expanding state-centred conceptualizations and promotes the elaboration of more nuanced and multiple understandings of citizenship (Clarke et al., 2014; Isin & Nyers, 2014; Lazar, 2012;Lazar&Nuijten,2013; Maas, 2013; Shachar et al., 2017; Yuval-Davis, 1999,2008). These contributions have suggested the exploration of multiple scales, levels and communities, where citizenship as the rights and duties of members is constructed, and citizenship as belonging and identity is negotiated. The discussions have suggested focusing on “embodied” citizenship in contrast to its “abstract categories” (Yuval-Davis, 2008: 160), scrutinizing the “actual constitution” instead of the “normative ideals” of citizenship (Lazar & Nuijten, 2013), paying attention to how people “act as citizens” (Lister, 1998) and exploring “multi-scalar communities of citizenship” (Clarke et al., 2014: 9, 141). Overall, more context-sensitive analysis of practical manifestations of citizenship has been called for. Pragmatist ideas contribute to conceptualizing citizenship as actualized and enacted by real people in particular contexts. In general, any pragmatist theorization and inquiry depart from the social practices taking place in different kinds of communities. For Dewey, the idea of citizenship relates to the notions of public and community, geared towards deliberating and acting on joint matters. In Dewey’s approach, the notion of public refers to the sphere where people attend to such shared issues, and where people take part in diverse communities in the form of groups participating in joint practices in their everyday lives (Dewey, 1927: 238– 366). In contrast to some other action-oriented perspectives, such as “acts of citizenship” (Isin & Nyers, 2014), Dewey’s notion does not explicitly define citizenship as political participation, nor does it necessarily include elements of claim-making. Rather, it resonates with views wherein citizenship is seen as emerging in a myriad of community groups (Lister, 1997: 29) or in a variety of daily routines, in spite of or in addition to claimmaking activities (Clarke et al., 2014: 132). In a similar vein, Dewey’s conceptualizations guide exploration of the kinds of communities that consist of people engaged in a variety of practices and addressing shared issues in any context. Contextualized examination of citizenship is especially relevant in locations such as Tanzania. Obviously, much of the theorization on 118 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN citizenship is embedded in European and North American historical and societal contexts (Chung, 2017;Isin,2015). As such, it does not adequately address or resonate with, on the one hand, the consequences of colonialism for shaping what is labelled “citizenship” in parallel of speaking of “subjects” in relation to colonial powers and, on the other, specific formations of state-citizens relations in postcolonial, independent African nations (Aminzade, 2013; Comaroff & Comaroff, 2012; Dorman, 2014; Mamdani, 1996; Manby, 2009). Therefore, it has been argued that more nuanced conceptualizations of citizenship need to start from contextualized experiences, practices and perspectives. It has been suggested (Lazar, 2013; Mohanty & Tandon, 2006) that, rather than drawing from Western-based assumptions or one-size-fits-all theoretical frameworks, exploration should focus on how “people see themselves in relation to others, and what this implies for their understanding of citizenship in the world as they know it” (Kabeer, 2005: 3). For instance, Englund (2004: 2) has pointed out the irrelevance of state-centric citizenship for ordinary inhabitants in African countries and instead suggests scrutinizing diverse arenas where material and social connectedness— what could be called economic citizenship (Ahimbisibwe & Ndidde, this volume; Kessler-Harris, 2001)—and members’ expectations and obligations emerge vis-á-vis communities other than the state. Examples of such meaningful communities include religious groups (Jones, 2012), producer co-operatives (King, 2015), micro-finance schemes (Ssendi & Anderson, 2009) and community-based organizations (Dill, 2009). In a Deweyan perspective, each such community is likely to address shared issues and, thus, become an arena for cultivating certain kinds of habits, the “acquired predispositions to ways or modes of responses” (Dewey, 1922: 32). The notion of habits of citizenship, we suggest, refers to a tendency to think and act in a taken-for-granted manner upon issues such as participation, rights, obligations, membership and identities. Habits are formed in a particular cultural and social context (Dewey, 1927: 334–335) and through human experience of interaction between the self and material and social environments (Hildreth, 2012: 922–923). Therefore, habits are always formed in certain societal and historical circumstances (Holma & Kontinen, 2020b). For instance, Stitzlein (2014: 63) shows, in the context of the United States, how habits of democracy in citizenship develop through interaction in social groups; however, given the contextualized nature of habits, the kinds COMMUNITIES AND HABITS OF CITIZENSHIP … 119 acquired depend on the characteristics of the social groups and communities attracting participation. In addition to democratic or active habits, practices such as aligning with authority (Dorman, 2014: 170) or being passive by choice in repressed environments (Alava, 2020) may also be habit-forming. Yet learning, in the pragmatist perspective, does not only refer to acquirement and, thus, continuous reproduction of certain habits. In contrast, the notion of habit enables change as a response to a disruption to those habits. From the Deweyan point of view, as a consequence of disruption the habits of citizenship might come under reflection in a new situation where the old, taken-for-granted habits do not work, and communities start to experiment with new ways of thinking and action (Dewey, 1916: 107–108; Hildreth, 2009: 795–196; Holma et al., 2018). Guided by the conceptualization of citizenship habits as acquired in the course of participation in communities that address shared issues, in what follows we scrutinize a specific location in rural Tanzania in order to understand the kinds of communities in which people participate and the habits of citizenship that are learned in the process. 3Introduction to the Context and Methods Tanzania shares characteristics such as colonial history and aid dependency with many other African countries. It is, however, a unique example of a long-lasting and somewhat successful nation-building during the first two decades after attainment of independence in 1961. Despite having more than 120 ethnic groups, division along ethnic, religious and racial lines is less significant in Tanzania than in neighbouring countries (Mushi, 2009; Swilla, 2009). When the state has played an important role in nation-building, historians describe how citizenship as sense of belonging has merely emerged in non-state arenas characterized by people’s selforganization (Halisi et al., 1998;Mpangala,1992). Different patterns in Tanzania’s social, economic and political development have influenced the nature and current status of citizenship and continue to do so (Aminzade, 2013). The state-centric, one-party system of governance from 1961 to the mid-1980s shaped people’s understanding of the current multiparty system among citizens, experienced as a top-down initiative, and supported particular understandings of the rights and obligations of citizens, wherein the role or citizens is to support the state’s development (URT, 2011). Currently, the citizenship initiatives of civic education implemented by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and related to 120 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN democratic elections and social accountability are playing an important and ongoing role in shaping ideas and practices of citizenship (See also: Nguyahambi et al., 2020). As an entry point, we used a national Tanzanian NGO, SIKIKA, which is active in supporting citizenship revolving around social accountability, and studied one of the locations where it had implemented projects. The data was collected in three wards in Kondoa District, one of the six administrative district areas constituting Dodoma Region, with a population of about 300,000. The main economic activities in the area are farming and herding. The Warangi constitute the dominant ethnic group, comprising more than 91% of the population in the district, and Islam is the main religious affiliation in the area, subsuming some two thirds of the population. However, despite the Warangi being the dominant ethnic group and Muslims the dominant religious group, there is no single village with 100% Warangi and Muslim dwellers. The participants in our qualitative thematic interviews (n=20, 9 females and 11 males), conducted in January 2017, were all Muslims and all Warangi apart from one Maasai and one Sandawe. Most of the interviewees were peasants, although five were also occupied in small businesses. The majority had only primary education, apart from three female interviewees with secondary education and one male interviewee with university level. These interviews comprised a small-scale explorative case study (Yin, 2003) conducted at the beginning of a wider project on practices of citizenship in Tanzania and Uganda (Holma & Kontinen, 2020a). The interviewees had been active in one way or another in the NGO’s initiatives and, therefore, exemplify community members who have the opportunity, capacities and motivation to participate in various groups. The themes discussed included their definitions of citizenship, their belonging to and participation in various groups they considered meaningful for their everyday life, and the rights and obligations they attached to these groups. All the interviews were conducted by native Tanzanians in Kiswahili, a language used daily by all participants and also spoken by the second author. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Our inductive thematic analysis consisted of three rounds, with both authors participating. First, all accounts articulated in the interviews were coded according to their detailed, practical content. Second, from this content, the interview sections discussing participation in some kind of group or community were extracted for more detailed analysis, when types of communities were identified. Third, we used the notion of habit COMMUNITIES AND HABITS OF CITIZENSHIP … 121 to interpret the kinds of citizenship habits acquired, first by identifying habits related to each community separately, and then combining and abstracting these into six broader categories. The habits were constructed based on the taken-for-granted ways research participants described the characteristics of the communities, and the roles and responsibilities attributed to them. Overall, the analysis resulted in identification of six types of communities in which interviewees’ participated—the village community, cultural groups, religious groups, self-help groups, economic groups and civil society organizations—and six categories of citizenship habits: habits of political citizenship, engaging citizenship, economic citizenship, cultural citizenship, responsible citizenship and moral citizenship. Typically, the individuals we interviewed participated in a number of communities; those who were not active were not interviewed in this study. It is, therefore, likely that our interviews did not capture all existing communities or the experiences of those who were passive, not interested or unable to participate. Moreover, the borders between the types and categories identified overlap with each other; for instance, the line between some self-help groups and economic groups was blurred. Thus, the findings provide an illustrative picture of multiple arenas of participation. In 2018 the initial findings were discussed in two feedback sessions with the communities, providing the interview participants and other local inhabitants with the opportunity to comment on the findings and validate our analysis of existing groups and kinds of citizenship. 4Communities and Habits of Citizenship In this section we briefly present our findings on the types of communities in which people participated, the shared issues addressed and the practices undertaken. Then we proceed to our findings on the habits of citizenship acquired through participating in these communities. Communities and Practices The interviewees identified a number of communities where shared issues were addressed and where they actively participated. Most common was the village community to which each registered villager belongs, possessing equal rights and duties according to the law: for instance, to vote and stand for the village council. The village provides an arena 122 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN wherein to participate in making decisions on joint issues and resources (Snyder, 2008), and functions as an official space for addressing common issues in village meetings and general assemblies. As an example of those mentioned, in one of the village meetings it was decided that village members should participate in building a pit-latrine in the village dispensary in order to address a concern over the lack of quality in health-care facilities. The second important type was cultural groups, where villagers strengthen and maintain the cultural heritage of their ethnic groups: for example, the Warangi living in the area participate in group cultural activities such as dance, choirs and sports. These provided leisure and recreation, but also addressed the joint concern of supporting integration between generations, transmission of cultural knowledge and strengthening cultural identity in the area. Cultural groups also presented an educational opportunity in which people learned about their duties and rights in preserving their cultural identity and the welfare of their communities at large. Everyone also mentioned membership in religious groups, mainly Islamic ones. These were important, not only for building spiritual identities through participating in prayers and learning religious morals, but also for addressing practical concerns together. For instance, the interviewees narrated how members contributed to the construction and renovation of mosque buildings, participated in cleaning areas for worship and education and mobilized support for the teachers in madrasas. Self-help groups were established by economically and socially disadvantaged community members, especially women, in order to mobilize resources, with the expectation of helping each other during times of sorrow and joy, kwenye shida na raha. These groups addressed the general problem of poverty and economic insecurity in the face of surprising challenges. In Tanzania, as in many other African countries, forming self-help groups dates back to pre-colonial times (Aikaruwa et al., 2014; RodimaTaylor, 2014). They provide social protection from unexpected challenges and can help to secure small credits and capital, which members cannot access elsewhere due to their limited economic capacity. Members have a duty to participate frequently in group meetings and to contribute money to the joint cashbox. They also have the right, in turn, to benefit from credit or a gift from the group if in sudden need. Selfhelp groups were, therefore, both economically and socially significant. COMMUNITIES AND HABITS OF CITIZENSHIP … 129 for certain religious festivities. Interviewees also felt that it was their duty to make sure that the young ones learned good morals and ethical values in order for them to become ethical persons with proper civic characters which, in turn, were linked to wide-spread and often quoted national values, such as the peace, harmony, unity and togetherness attached to the idea of a good society in Tanzania, and the general properties of good citizenry. 5Conclusions We draw three main conclusions from our exploratory analysis of communities and habits of citizenship in this specific part of rural Tanzania. First, the employment of the pragmatist idea of starting exploration of citizenship in everyday practices showed that, in accordance with Englund’s reflections on citizenship in Africa (2004), citizenship vis-á-vis the state did not play an explicitly significant role in everyday lives. Wellbeing, responsibilities, rights, identities and belonging were mostly constructed in relation to diverse proximate communities. The state was practically present at times of general elections, in the village and among its leaders as the lowest level administrative unit, and as a service provider when it came to health care and education. Therefore, the findings support the efforts in citizenship studies to promote multifaceted conceptualizations of citizenship that are formed alongside multi-scalar communities of citizenship (Clarke et al., 2014). At the same time, we provided a new, pragmatist approach, one that understands the moulding of citizenship first and foremost as participation in communities that address shared issues at grassroots levels; here, the habits of citizenship are formulated, to be potentially exercised at broader scales as well. Second, the identified habits of citizenship revolved around features such as responsibility, contribution, negotiation and mutual solidarity, and, thus, around a certain kind of ideal of good citizenship. In contrast, a contestant, claim-making citizenship that would revolve around demanding one’s rights or challenging existing power structures, was absent from participants’ accounts. The new habits of “engaged citizen”, mainly introduced by the NGOs, included some notions of claim-making, but were practically realized through negotiation and establishing good relationships rather than contestation. The hesitance about shifting from existing habits of political citizenship towards more engaged citizenship resonates with the idea that general alignment with 130 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN both the government and traditional authorities is an important characteristic of African citizenship (Dorman, 2014;Hoon&MacLean,2014). Changing such taken-for-granted modes of relating to authority might not happen within the time-frame of NGO projects, although they can provide some disruptions and ideas for alternative ways. Third, our exploratory study can inform the design of intentional efforts to promote citizen engagement as a means of enhancing local development. Previous research (Gaventa, 2016; King, 2015) has indicated that successful efforts to support citizens’ engagement have taken into account the fact that people’s own priorities often concern economic improvements in their daily lives rather than increased opportunities for political claim-making. However, the lessons learned also show that by starting with already existing groups geared towards local livelihood, cultural or religious priorities, the capacities and motivation for having a voice and engaging with the power holders can gradually increase as well (ibid.; Gaventa & Barret, 2012). Our methodological approach of asking prospective project participants about their existing communities of participation and their ideals of good citizenship, rather than starting with the introduction of new practices, might facilitate promotion of long-term change in citizenship habits. References Aikaruwa, D. B., Sumari, G. A., & Maleko, G. N. (2014). Social functionality of self help groups in Tanzania. Journal of Business Administration and Education, 5(2), 99–136. Alava, H. (2020). The everyday and spectacle of subdued citizenship in Northern Uganda. In K. Holma & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism (pp. 90–104). Routledge. Allen, H. (2006). Village savings and loan associations: Sustainable and costeffective rural finance. Small Enterprise Development, 17 (1), 61–68. Aminzade, R. (2013). Race, nation and citizenship in post-colonial Africa: The case of Tanzania. Cambridge University Press. Chung, E. A. (2017). Citizenship in Non-Western contexts. In A. Shachar, R. Bauböck, I. Bloemraad, & M. Vink (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of citizenship (pp. 431–452). Oxford University Press. Clarke, J., Coll, K., Dagnino, E., & Neveu, C. (2014). Disputing citizenship. Policy Press. Comaroff, J., & Comaroff, J. L. (2012). Theory from the South: Or, How EuroAmerica is evolving toward Africa. Routledge. COMMUNITIES AND HABITS OF CITIZENSHIP … 131 Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The middle works of John Dewey (Vol. 9, pp. 1–370). Southern Illinois University Press. Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The middle works of John Dewey (Vol. 14, pp. 1–230). Southern Illinois University Press. Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The later works of John Dewey (Vol. 2, pp. 235–372). Southern Illinois University Press. Dill, B. (2009). The paradoxes of community-based participation in Dar es Salaam. Development and Change, 40(4), 717–743. Dorman, S. R. (2014). Citizenship in Africa. In E. G. Isin & P. Nyers (Eds.), Routledge handbook of global citizenship studies (pp. 161–172). Routledge. Englund, H. (2004). Introduction: Recognizing identities, imagining alternatives. In H. Englund & F. Nyamnjoh (Eds.), Rights and the politics of recognition in Africa (pp. 1–29). Zed Books. Garrison, J., Neubert, S., & Reich, K. (Eds.). (2016). Democracy and education reconsidered Dewey after one hundred years. Routledge. Gaventa, J. (2016). Can participation ‘fix’ inequality? Unpacking the relationship between the economic and political citizenship (Innovation Series, 5). The Coady International Institute. Gaventa, J., & Barrett, G. (2012). Mapping the outcomes of citizen engagement. World Development, 40(12), 2399–2410. Halisi, C., Kaiser, P., & Ndegwa, S. (1998). Guest editors’ introduction: The multiple meanings of citizenship—Rights, identity and social justice in Africa. Africa Today, 45(3–4), 337–350. Hickey, S., & King, S. (2016). Understanding social accountability: Politics, power and building new social contracts. The Journal of Development Studies, 52(8), 1225–1240. Hildreth, R. W. (2009). Reconstructing Dewey on power. Political Theory, 37 (6), 780–807. Hildreth, R. W. (2012). John Dewey on experience: A critical resource for the theory and practice of youth civic engagement. Citizenship Studies, 16(7), 919–935. Holma, K., & Kontinen, T. (Eds.). (2020a). Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism. Routledge. Holma, K., & Kontinen, T. (2020b). Practices and habits of citizenship and learning. In K. Holma & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism (pp. 15–28). Routledge. Holma, K., Kontinen, T., & Blanken-Webb, J. (2018). Growth into citizenship: Framework for conceptualizing learning in NGO interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Adult Education Quarterly, 68(3), 215–234. 132 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN Hoon, P., & MacLean, L. M. (2014). Local communities and the state in Africa. African Studies Quarterly, 15(1), 125–152. Isin, E. F. (Ed.). (2015). Citizenship after orientalism: Transforming political theory. Palgrave Macmillan. Isin, E. F., & Nyers, P. (2014). Introduction: Globalizing citizenship studies. In E. F. Isin & P. Nyers (Eds.), Routledge handbook of global citizenship studies (pp. 1–11). Routledge. Jones, D. B. (2012). Pentecostalism, development NGOs and meaning in Eastern Uganda. In Freeman (Ed.), Pentecostalism and development: Churches, NGOs and social change in Africa (pp. 181–202). Palgrave Macmillan. Joshi, A. (2013). Do they work? Assessing the impact of transparency and accountability initiatives in service delivery. Development Policy Review, 31, 29–48. Kabeer, N. (Ed.). (2005). Inclusive citizenship: Meanings and expressions.Zed Book. Kabeer, N., & Kabir, A. H. (2009). Citizen narratives in the absence of good governance: Voices of the working poor in Bangladesh (Working Paper 331). Institute of Development Studies. Kessler-Harris, A. (2001). In pursuit of equity: Women, men and the quest for economic citizenship in 20th-century America. Oxford University Press. King, S. (2015). Political capabilities for democratisation in Uganda: Good governance or popular organization building? ThirdWorldQuarterly,36(4), 741–757. Kontinen, T., & Holma, K. (2020). Conclusions. In K. Holma & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism (pp. 227–237). Routledge. Lazar, S. (2012). Citizenship quality: A new agenda for development? Journal of Civil Society, 8(4), 333–350. Lazar, S. (2013). The anthropology of citizenship: A reader. Wiley-Blackwell. Lazar, S., & Nuijten, M. (2013). Citizenship, the self, and political agency. Critique of Anthropology, 33(1), 3–7. Lister, R. (1997). Citizenship: Feminist perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. Lister, R. (1998). Citizen in action: Citizenship and community development in Northern Ireland context. Community Development Journal, 33(3), 226–235. Maas, W. (Ed.). (2013). Multilevel citizenship. University of Pennsylvania Press. Mamdani, M. (1996). Citizen and subject: Contemporary Africa and the legacy of late colonialism. Princeton University Press. Manby, B. (2009). Struggles for citizenship in Africa. Zed Books. Mohanty, R., & Tandon, R. (Eds.). (2006). Participatory citizenship: Identity, exclusion, inclusion.Sage. COMMUNITIES AND HABITS OF CITIZENSHIP … 133 Mpangala, G. (1992). Major issues in Tanzanian economic history: Pre-colonial economy and social formations. Dar es Salaam University Press. Mushi, P. A. K. (2009). History and development of education in Tanzania.Dar es Salaam University Press. Nguyahambi, A. M., & Chang’a, H. H. (2020). Social accountability monitoring as an approach to promoting active citizenship in Tanzania. In K. Holma & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism (pp. 209–226). Routledge. Nguyahambi, A. M., Chang’a, H. H., Matunga, B. N., Kilonzo, R. G., & Kontinen, T. (2020). Contextualizing citizenship in Tanzania. In K. Holma & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism (pp. 73–89). Routledge. Nguyahambi, A. M., & Kontinen, T. (2020). “A Good Believer is a Good Citizen”: Connecting Islamic morals with civic virtues in Rural Tanzania. In K. Holma & T. Kontinen (Eds.), Practices of citizenship in East Africa: Perspectives from philosophical pragmatism (pp. 121–138.).Routledge. Robins, S., Cornwall, A., & von Liers, B. (2008). Rethinking ‘citizenship’ in the postcolony. Third World Quarterly, 29(6), 1069–1086. Rodima-Taylor, D. (2014). Passageways of cooperation: Mutuality in postsocialist Tanzania. Africa, 84(4), 553–575. Shachar, A., Bauböck, R., Bloemraad, I., & Vink, M. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook of citizenship. Oxford University Press. Snyder, K. (2008). Building democracy from below: A case from Rural Tanzania. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 46(2), 287–304. Ssendi, L., & Anderson, A. R. (2009). Tanzanian micro enterprise and micro finance: The role and impact for poor rural women. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 18(1), 1–19. Stitzlein, S. M. (2014). Habits of democracy: A Deweyan approach to citizenship education in America today. Education and Culture, 30(2), 61–85. Swilla, I. (2009). Languages of instruction in Tanzania: Contradictions between ideology Policy and Implementation. African Study Monographs, 30(1), 1–14. URT. (2011, January). National Strategy for Civic Education (Draft).The United Republic of Tanzania. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Sage. Yuval-Davis, N. (1999). The ‘multi-layered citizen.’ International Feminist Journal of Politics, 1(1), 119–136. Yuval-Davis, N. (2008). Intersectionality, citizenship and contemporary politics of belonging. In S. Birte & J. Squires (Eds.), Contesting citizenship (pp. 159– 172). Routledge. 134 A. M. NGUYAHAMBI AND T. KONTINEN Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.