Namibia country report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

monthly pensions and limited remittances from employed family members became themain sources of support. Starved of cash, only a few people, predominantly pensioners,were able to acquire small stock.Benjamin, a 76-year-old beneficiary at Skoonheid since 1991 is a case in point. As a farmworker he accumulated a small herd of goats thanks to farmers giving him a goat fromtime to time on top of his wages and food rations. He could not remember how many hehad, but by the time he settled at the scheme, he did not have any goats. He had sold all ofthem because livestock proved to be a liability when looking for work: most farm ownersdid not want to employ people with livestock, or otherwise they limited the number of headthat workers could keep. He was not able to save any of the proceeds from the sales as hehad to sustain himself during spells of unemployment.Having neither livestock nor money on settling at Skoonheid, he helped to debush land forthe communal garden and then helped to cultivate the garden. In return he received foodrations and produce. When the food rations were stopped in 1998, he received only rationsfrom the garden. He stopped working in the garden in 2000 as he wanted to rest, but still hereceived some rations from the garden thanks to the local Resettlement Committee takinga decision to continue supplying garden produce to old people even though they no longerworked in the garden. In 2008 he received his own small portion in the garden, i.e. a plotof about 0.05 ha. He bought seed with his pension money and grew vegetables there, andstated that one good harvest enabled him to feed himself for a year.Accumulating livestock on group resettlement schemes was fraught with risks and threats.The most important of these at Drimiopsis and Skoonheid were the presence of poisonousplants and stock theft. Some pensioners were able to buy goats. A few years after setting atSkoonheid, Benjamin had used some pension money to buy 3 goats. These increased to 6but then decreased to 2 in 2008. One reason for this loss was the presence of a poisonousplant at Skoonheid referred to as slangkop (snake head). Benjamin said that most peoplethere had lost their few head of small stock to this plant. Skoonheid was said to be suitablefor cattle and sheep, but not for goats. In a few cases, stock owners lost their livestock tothieves. William, one of the victim’s of theft at Drimiopsis, arrived there in 1992 with 22goats, all of which, along with his 2 horses, were stolen, so he stopped farming livestock.Compared to the Omaheke group schemes, the Hardap schemes had more beneficiarieswho originated in communal areas. Born and raised in communal areas, they left in searchof employment, and many ended up as labourers on commercial farms. Thenceforth, theirtrajectories were very similar to those of the beneficiaries in Omaheke. Another regionaldifference was the ethnic composition of beneficiaries on the group schemes: in Hardap thecomposition was more heterogenous than in Omaheke.Hendrik, of Nama descent, was born in 1952 in the Hoachanas area in today’s HardapRegion. He had worked for most of his life on one commercial farm in the region, whichwas sold to the government in 2000. Though asked to stay on to look after the farm andits infrastructure, which he did for a while, he was never offered permanent resettlement160 ● Livelihoods after land reform: Namibia country report (2010)
there. Instead, the MLRR advised him to resettle at Westfalen, and he moved there withhis wife in 2002. The Ministry’s office in Mariental allocated to Hendrik a single camp ofapproximately 200 ha where he kept about 43 goats and sheep as well as 2 horses.Absolom, aged 27, had lived at Westfalen since 2004. He hails from Ohangwena Regionin northern Namibia, and was raised in the village of Ongenga located close to the borderwith Angola. He did not receive any form of schooling. After moving to Hardap, he foundtemporary work in Mariental as a grocery packer. He applied for resettlement at Westfalenwith the expectation of becoming self-employed. At the time of the field visit, he had nolivestock and spent most of his time working in the communal garden. He was not married,but lived with his partner and their three children in a house built for them by the Ministry.His partner also worked in the garden. With the help of Ministry officials, the scheme wasselling its garden produce in Mariental and Windhoek.A few individuals, mostly in Hardap, were able to accumulate small numbers of livestockfrom the proceeds of the communal gardens. Magdalena, aged 32, hails from a village inOshana Region in northern Namibia, and was resettled at Westfalen in 2000. By the time ofthe field visit she had not received any papers from the Ministry as proof of resettlement. Shewas single with a 4-year-old daughter who lived with her. Since being resettled, she hadaccumulated a few goats which she kept in a kraal close to her house. She would sell someof them whenever she needed income, but had not slaughtered any for own consumption.Crops damaged by water problems at Bernafey.Water provision at Westfalen.A good harvest at Bernafey.A good harvest at Westfalen.Livelihoods after Land Reform: Namibia country report (2010) ● 161
Page 2 and 3:
© Land, Environment and Developmen
Page 4:
Leading the Fieldis a publication o
Page 8 and 9:
AcknowledgementsThe three-and-a-hal
Page 17 and 18:
2 LAND REFORM ANDPOVERTY: NATIONALP
Page 19 and 20:
Poverty in Omaheke.Poverty in Harda
Page 21:
the concern was expressed that “i
Page 24 and 25:
As will be discussed below, a numbe
Page 28 and 29:
from Germany in 1907 (Werner forthc
Page 31:
2.4 Land reform and rural developme
Page 34 and 35:
The Agricultural (Commercial) Land
Page 38 and 39:
Policy (RoN 1998: 1). What defined
Page 40:
The determination of a viable unit
Page 44 and 45:
Cabinet Minister who argued that th
Page 47 and 48:
in Hardap criticised government for
Page 49 and 50:
A farm in Hardap - enforcing privat
Page 51 and 52:
The process from land acquisition t
Page 53 and 54:
Herero traditional leaders ascribed
Page 55 and 56:
Table 5: Institutions involved in l
Page 59 and 60:
3 REGIONAL CONTEXTS3.1 HardapSpanni
Page 61 and 62:
Namibia as a whole has declined ste
Page 63:
Plowing for crop cultivation at Sko
Page 69:
Bernard bought a farm through the A
Page 72 and 73:
All of the AALS farmers surveyed in
Page 74 and 75:
Marketing channels for weaners in O
Page 78 and 79:
The tight financial position of som
Page 80 and 81:
4.3 Typology of livelihood strategi
Page 82 and 83:
he had about 600 in 2008. In additi
Page 84 and 85:
The second stage of the ‘cyclical
Page 86 and 87:
did not offer alternative land, but
Page 88 and 89:
4.4.4 The ‘broekskeur en vasbyt
Page 91:
in town is too fast and one is not
Page 94 and 95:
Table 9: Age and gender distributio
Page 96 and 97:
Figure 1: Education levels in FURS
Page 98 and 99:
Only two beneficiaries in the whole
Page 100:
5.1.3 Settlers’ relationship with
Page 103 and 104:
stated that they would be able to f
Page 105 and 106:
cows of all three farmers were serv
Page 108 and 109:
Table 19: Gross incomes of FURS liv
Page 110 and 111:
stock theft there. The closest poli
Page 112 and 113:
5.2.5 MarketingTable 21 summarises
Page 114 and 115:
the remainder of the year, goats ar
Page 116 and 117:
5.2.7 SkillsAlthough many FURS bene
Page 118: The most common crops grown were ma
Page 121: 5.5 Livelihood trajectoriesBased on
Page 124 and 125: Previously a part-time farmer in a
Page 126: of the allocated unit, but the numb
Page 129 and 130: e accommodated by the National Rese
Page 131 and 132: 6 GROUPRESETTLEMENTSCHEMESOfficiall
Page 134 and 135: Low levels of education further lim
Page 136: William did not really want to farm
Page 139 and 140: age, they decided that he had worke
Page 141 and 142: which was too far away to visit as
Page 144 and 145: Expenses for the group scheme farme
Page 146 and 147: phoned the MLR in Gobabis to send a
Page 148 and 149: they never learnt to save. They sho
Page 150 and 151: idea was to grow crops and sell the
Page 152: At Bernafey, 7 beneficiaries involv
Page 156 and 157: Housing at BernafeyHousing at Drimi
Page 158 and 159: 6.3.2 Other livelihood strategiesBe
Page 161 and 162: 6.3.2.3 Piece workWork on other far
Page 163 and 164: A shop at Drimiopsisshop as a livel
Page 165 and 166: When Alfons settled at Skoonheid in
Page 167: Farm workerLoses job / unemployedBe
Page 171 and 172: the major issues identified in sect
Page 173 and 174: LaLR fieldwork at Bernafey.LaLR stu
Page 175 and 176: such external support was available
Page 177 and 178: formal lease agreement. Many people
Page 179: communal areas at minimal costs for
Page 182 and 183: study sample also complained about
Page 184 and 185: The National Resettlement Policy pr
Page 186: REFERENCESAbrahams, K. 1982. “The
Page 189 and 190: Namibia Agricultural Union. 2003. A
Page 191 and 192: Livelihoods after Land Reform: Nami
show all

Namibia country report

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?