- Page 2 and 3: © Land, Environment and Developmen
- Page 4: Leading the Fieldis a publication o
- 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 and 168:
Farm workerLoses job / unemployedBe
- Page 169 and 170:
there. Instead, the MLRR advised hi
- 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