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: 2 / 2 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 01:29 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.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 10 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 10 | 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 2 / 2 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): 2026-10-21T07:22:57.149314+00:00 — 2026-10-22T01:29:06.479640+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 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 8 | 2 | 2/2 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 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 Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 9 | 9 | 1/1 | 9.0 | 9 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1.0 | 1 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The amalgamation of traditional and modern governance systems represents a transformative advancement in contemporary African government. This study examines the concept of "hybridity governance" within the African context, providing a comprehensive theoretical framework that integrates modern institutional procedures with traditional governance systems. The paper examines the evolution of African governance from pre-colonial to post-colonial eras, illustrating the emergence of hybrid governance as a response to internal dynamics and external influences. It accomplishes this by utilising historical studies. The philosophical underpinnings are investigated, highlighting organisational and social concepts that elucidate the acceptance of hybrid models. The paper elucidates the applications, accomplishments, and challenges of hybrid government in several African nations through various empirical case studies. A critical examination examines the consequences of these governance paradigms for public administration in Africa. It underscores opportunities for innovation and enhanced flexibility, while also emphasising intrinsic challenges such as job ambiguity and conflict. The report concludes with forecasts regarding the future trajectory of hybrid governance in Africa, considering the interplay of local socio-political dynamics, global interconnectedness, and technological advancements. This article serves as a vital resource for policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders interested in the evolving governance paradigm in Africa, providing valuable applications and recommendations.
This paper examines the conflicts arising from the coexistence of traditional leadership and democratic local governance in Dukuduku, KwaZulu-Natal, a region marked by overlapping authority and contested land claims. Despite constitutional recognition, traditional leadership in post-apartheid South Africa remains ambiguously defined, leading to clashes with democratically elected structures over roles, responsibilities, and territory. This study uses a qualitative methodology to analyse archival materials, media sources, and meeting records and conducts semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders, including traditional leaders, senior citizens, and subsistence farmers. The findings reveal that introducing a local government system under the Amakhosi jurisdiction precipitates confrontations, particularly where duties intersect. In Dukuduku—proclaimed a state forest—the recognition of traditional authority creates disputes over land ownership and governance, complicating the administration of land and impacting service delivery. The analysis suggests that the institutional "invention" and subsequent "recognition" of traditional leadership in areas like Dukuduku not only challenge the perceptions of state land but also exacerbate power struggles, thereby affecting local development and governance. The study contributes to understanding the dynamic interplay between traditional and democratic governance systems in rural South Africa. It highlights the implications for policy and local administration in managing such dual governance structures effectively. This study explains how hard it is to combine traditional structures with a modern democratic framework. It also gives us a better understanding of what this means for rural governance and land management in changing societies.
The amalgamation of traditional and modern governance systems represents a transformative advancement in contemporary African government. This study examines the concept of "hybridity governance" within the African context, providing a comprehensive theoretical framework that integrates modern institutional procedures with traditional governance systems. The paper examines the evolution of African governance from pre-colonial to post-colonial eras, illustrating the emergence of hybrid governance as a response to internal dynamics and external influences. It accomplishes this by utilising historical studies. The philosophical underpinnings are investigated, highlighting organisational and social concepts that elucidate the acceptance of hybrid models. The paper elucidates the applications, accomplishments, and challenges of hybrid government in several African nations through various empirical case studies. A critical examination examines the consequences of these governance paradigms for public administration in Africa. It underscores opportunities for innovation and enhanced flexibility, while also emphasising intrinsic challenges such as job ambiguity and conflict. The report concludes with forecasts regarding the future trajectory of hybrid governance in Africa, considering the interplay of local socio-political dynamics, global interconnectedness, and technological advancements. This article serves as a vital resource for policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders interested in the evolving governance paradigm in Africa, providing valuable applications and recommendations.
This paper examines the conflicts arising from the coexistence of traditional leadership and democratic local governance in Dukuduku, KwaZulu-Natal, a region marked by overlapping authority and contested land claims. Despite constitutional recognition, traditional leadership in post-apartheid South Africa remains ambiguously defined, leading to clashes with democratically elected structures over roles, responsibilities, and territory. This study uses a qualitative methodology to analyse archival materials, media sources, and meeting records and conducts semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders, including traditional leaders, senior citizens, and subsistence farmers. The findings reveal that introducing a local government system under the Amakhosi jurisdiction precipitates confrontations, particularly where duties intersect. In Dukuduku—proclaimed a state forest—the recognition of traditional authority creates disputes over land ownership and governance, complicating the administration of land and impacting service delivery. The analysis suggests that the institutional "invention" and subsequent "recognition" of traditional leadership in areas like Dukuduku not only challenge the perceptions of state land but also exacerbate power struggles, thereby affecting local development and governance. The study contributes to understanding the dynamic interplay between traditional and democratic governance systems in rural South Africa. It highlights the implications for policy and local administration in managing such dual governance structures effectively. This study explains how hard it is to combine traditional structures with a modern democratic framework. It also gives us a better understanding of what this means for rural governance and land management in changing societies.
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 |