Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 4 / 4 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 11:05 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 8 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 4 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 12 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 4 / 4 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T07:22:50.524834+00:00 — 2026-10-22T11:05:23.725394+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 7 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2023 | 2 |
| 2024 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 4 | 12 | 17 | 4/4 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 100.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The gender wage gap exists in South Africa because men outnumber women. Women's standing compared to men shows this. Gender equality requires equal opportunities and resources for women and men. Sustainable Development Goal 5 addresses gender equality. This article examines social, economic, political, institutional, and other factors that hinder SDG 5's implementation in South Africa to highlight gender inequality's challenges. The study employed qualitative desktop analysis to acquire data. To learn about gender and related terminology, the literature was reviewed. The literature review required reading journal articles, books, research papers, newspapers, websites, government documents, and acts. The results show that institutional and legal frameworks have been used to address gender equality in the nation. Despite equal prospects for men and women, prejudice against women exists, especially in the workplace. Uneven opportunity, underrepresentation, and gender bias are examples. The findings show that gender equality in South African national, provincial, and municipal institutions requires political, financial, institutional, and capacity-building resources. The essay offers SDG-5 strategies.
This study offers a thorough examination of South Africa's National Development Plan (NDP), emphasising its dedication to advancing gender equality in higher education. Notwithstanding constitutional assurances of equality, considerable gender discrepancies endure in South African higher education institutions (HEIs), with women encountering institutional obstacles that impede their entry and achievement. The research utilises a systematic review approach, consolidating current academic literature to discern the problems and opportunities related to the NDP's gender equality objectives. Critical findings indicate that structural obstacles, including socio-cultural views and financial limitations, substantially hinder women's engagement in higher education. The under-representation of women in leadership positions within higher education institutions fosters a cycle of inequity, as cultural beliefs and institutional regulations frequently neglect the distinct problems encountered by female students. The investigation underscores the necessity of employing an intersectional approach to comprehend the intricacies of gender inequality in higher education. This study emphasises the importance of executing targeted interventions and unified national policies to cultivate an inclusive educational environment that empowers women and corresponds with the overarching objectives of sustainable development. By resolving these difficulties, South Africa can advance towards genuine gender equality in its higher education system, thereby fostering national development and social progress.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the unequal and inadequate access to opportunities by both men and women in South Africa, as well as the progress made in achieving gender equality and promoting women's empowerment, which are embedded in the Millennium Development Goals and Sustainable Development Goals, respectively. The paper is virtuously theoretical and relies upon literature to present its arguments, soliciting information from published journals, reports, and previous studies. Access is primarily a gendered phenomenon worldwide, pertaining to the subsets of, inter alia, access to information, rights, land, money, education, skills, political participation, and opinion. Gender equity and equality are high on the developmental agenda of women in almost every country. South Africa, being part of international treaties and conventions on gender equity, is obliged to advance the empowerment of women and eliminate all forms of gender discrimination. The development of women, their access to essential resources, and their participation in important positions of decision-making are still challenges in most countries. It is commonly known that everywhere in the world, women face constraints that limit their capacity to contribute to production, well-being, decision-making, growth, and most importantly, empowerment, which in turn promotes independence. Women face discrimination in access to productive resources such as land; they face wage inequality in rural labor markets; and they are also more likely to work part-time, seasonal, and/or low-paying jobs when engaged in wage employment. Despite the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 and the inauguration of the Annual 16 Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children by the South African government, which are aimed at fighting the perpetual inequalities and abuse of women and children, gender inequality, women's disempowerment, and unequal access to opportunities are still predominant in the country.
Girls and women continue to suffer at the hands of patriarchal society that excludes them in family resource allocation. The primary objective of this paper is to examine the challenge that leads to the exclusion of family resource allocation in the form of educational resources for African girls and women. This paper adopts a self-study research approach, which is undergirded by interpretivism philosophical methodology. Intersectional feminism offers a lens for questioning the domination and supremacy of patriarchal society that perpetuates girls’ and women’s vulnerability in the acquisition of family resources in this age. We then discuss how girls and women lead lives marred by hunger, poverty, and inequality. Furthermore, we discuss gender violence and inequality, girl commodification, lessons from matriarchal and patriarchal polities, and gender discrimination at the workplace. We recommend that gender stereotypes and discrimination be eliminated in all social settings; and that at family, society and workplace levels. Finally, that educational institution should reconstruct curricula that should purposively interrogate girls and women's gender stereotyping and discrimination, GBV and other gender issues.
This study offers a thorough examination of South Africa's National Development Plan (NDP), emphasising its dedication to advancing gender equality in higher education. Notwithstanding constitutional assurances of equality, considerable gender discrepancies endure in South African higher education institutions (HEIs), with women encountering institutional obstacles that impede their entry and achievement. The research utilises a systematic review approach, consolidating current academic literature to discern the problems and opportunities related to the NDP's gender equality objectives. Critical findings indicate that structural obstacles, including socio-cultural views and financial limitations, substantially hinder women's engagement in higher education. The under-representation of women in leadership positions within higher education institutions fosters a cycle of inequity, as cultural beliefs and institutional regulations frequently neglect the distinct problems encountered by female students. The investigation underscores the necessity of employing an intersectional approach to comprehend the intricacies of gender inequality in higher education. This study emphasises the importance of executing targeted interventions and unified national policies to cultivate an inclusive educational environment that empowers women and corresponds with the overarching objectives of sustainable development. By resolving these difficulties, South Africa can advance towards genuine gender equality in its higher education system, thereby fostering national development and social progress.
Girls and women continue to suffer at the hands of patriarchal society that excludes them in family resource allocation. The primary objective of this paper is to examine the challenge that leads to the exclusion of family resource allocation in the form of educational resources for African girls and women. This paper adopts a self-study research approach, which is undergirded by interpretivism philosophical methodology. Intersectional feminism offers a lens for questioning the domination and supremacy of patriarchal society that perpetuates girls’ and women’s vulnerability in the acquisition of family resources in this age. We then discuss how girls and women lead lives marred by hunger, poverty, and inequality. Furthermore, we discuss gender violence and inequality, girl commodification, lessons from matriarchal and patriarchal polities, and gender discrimination at the workplace. We recommend that gender stereotypes and discrimination be eliminated in all social settings; and that at family, society and workplace levels. Finally, that educational institution should reconstruct curricula that should purposively interrogate girls and women's gender stereotyping and discrimination, GBV and other gender issues.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the unequal and inadequate access to opportunities by both men and women in South Africa, as well as the progress made in achieving gender equality and promoting women's empowerment, which are embedded in the Millennium Development Goals and Sustainable Development Goals, respectively. The paper is virtuously theoretical and relies upon literature to present its arguments, soliciting information from published journals, reports, and previous studies. Access is primarily a gendered phenomenon worldwide, pertaining to the subsets of, inter alia, access to information, rights, land, money, education, skills, political participation, and opinion. Gender equity and equality are high on the developmental agenda of women in almost every country. South Africa, being part of international treaties and conventions on gender equity, is obliged to advance the empowerment of women and eliminate all forms of gender discrimination. The development of women, their access to essential resources, and their participation in important positions of decision-making are still challenges in most countries. It is commonly known that everywhere in the world, women face constraints that limit their capacity to contribute to production, well-being, decision-making, growth, and most importantly, empowerment, which in turn promotes independence. Women face discrimination in access to productive resources such as land; they face wage inequality in rural labor markets; and they are also more likely to work part-time, seasonal, and/or low-paying jobs when engaged in wage employment. Despite the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 and the inauguration of the Annual 16 Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children by the South African government, which are aimed at fighting the perpetual inequalities and abuse of women and children, gender inequality, women's disempowerment, and unequal access to opportunities are still predominant in the country.
The gender wage gap exists in South Africa because men outnumber women. Women's standing compared to men shows this. Gender equality requires equal opportunities and resources for women and men. Sustainable Development Goal 5 addresses gender equality. This article examines social, economic, political, institutional, and other factors that hinder SDG 5's implementation in South Africa to highlight gender inequality's challenges. The study employed qualitative desktop analysis to acquire data. To learn about gender and related terminology, the literature was reviewed. The literature review required reading journal articles, books, research papers, newspapers, websites, government documents, and acts. The results show that institutional and legal frameworks have been used to address gender equality in the nation. Despite equal prospects for men and women, prejudice against women exists, especially in the workplace. Uneven opportunity, underrepresentation, and gender bias are examples. The findings show that gender equality in South African national, provincial, and municipal institutions requires political, financial, institutional, and capacity-building resources. The essay offers SDG-5 strategies.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |