Ejecución de Proyectos

Figure 4: Sources of water available for use in Namibia – 1998 Re-produced from: (Heyns et al. 1998:58)

25 _{Produced by Monika Feinen.}

4.2. Socio-economic facts about Kunene Region

Namibia is administratively subdivided into thirteen regions, one of which is the Kunene Region far in the Northwest. Kunene Region is comprised of six constituencies: Epupa, Kamanjab, Khorixas, Opuwo, Outjo, and Sesfontein. Kunene Region encompasses vast stretches of extremely arid land, covering an area of 114,293 km2. According to the national census of 2011, 74 per cent of Kunene’s population live in rural areas – compared to 57 per cent of Namibia’s population in general. The three biggest centres of Kunene Region population-wise are Khorixas and Outjo in the south, and the regional capital Opuwo in the north, the latter of which accounts for about 7,700 inhabitants. Opuwo and Khorixas are also regional administrative centres with offices of the regional branch of the DWSSC.26

With an average population density for the whole region of 0.8 persons/km², compared to the corresponding figure of 2.6 persons/km² for the entire Namibian territory, Kunene is the most sparsely populated region in the country according to the 2011 census. In comparison with the census of 2001, population figures slightly increased in the urban areas of Kunene Region as opposed to a small decrease in the rural areas. Kunene Region is marked by relatively high levels of illiteracy and unemployment. Out of all inhabitants above 15 years of age, 35 per cent cannot read and write, and out of all economically active people above 15 years of age, 36 per cent were counted as unemployed. There is a marked variation in many of the socio-economic indicators for Kunene Region, just as for the entire country between rural and urban areas. For Kunene Region in 2011 the literacy rate in urban areas stood at 85.2 per cent, while in rural areas it was as low as 56 per cent. When looking across the LINGS research area it is notable that the literacy rate was highest in Khorixas Constituency (83.8 per cent) in Kunene South, and lowest in Epupa Constituency, with a predominantly Himba population, in the north of the region (29.4 per cent). In comparison with other Namibian regions such as Caprivi, where poverty is as high as 35.2 per cent, Kunene has a medium poverty rate at 15.9 per cent, with a decreasing tendency over the past ten years, close to the overall national poverty rate of 15.3 per cent. Between 1993 and 2003, inequality declined in almost all regions of Namibia, followed by a renewed increase between 2004 and 2010 in seven out of a total of 13 regions, Kunene being one of them. Poverty indicators however recorded significant reductions at national and regional levels during the same period (Republic of Namibia. Namibia Statistics Agency 2012:5). The percentage of female-headed households is comparably low – 40 per cent in Kunene, 44 per cent at the national level, and a

26

maximum level of over 55 per cent in Omusati and Ohangwena Regions (Republic of Namibia. Namibia Statistics Agency 2014b).

4.3. Water resources in Kunene Region

In terms of its hydroclimate the Kunene Region extends across the driest, western-most stretch of the Namib Desert along the north-western coast towards the Omusati and Oshana Regions in the east – a zone with around 300 mm of mean annual rainfall (compare Blümel and Leser 2002; Republic of Namibia. Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development 1991). Water resources found in the Kunene Region mostly originate from its only perennial river – the Kunene – constituting Namibia’s border with Angola in the far north-west, as well as from a cluster of ephemeral rivers in the west and the aquifers connected to them. According to FAO’s Country Profile for Namibia: ‘Although the ephemeral rivers of Namibia have dry sandy or rocky river beds for most of the year, they are conduits for subsurface flow and contain a number of wetlands defined as “shallow, swampy or marshy areas with little or no water flow” or “waterlogged solid dominated by emergent vegetation”. In Namibia this description applies to most sections of all westward flowing rivers north of the Kuiseb River’ (FAO 2005:5). These frequently dry riverbeds, several of which are located in Kunene Region, are thus an important resource for the local economy as water can be found at least seasonally on their surface, but water can also be found in dug wells in the riverbeds during most part of the year.

The locations of settlements in Kunene Region are determined by two main factors: the availability of grazing for livestock, and of drinking water for both humans and livestock. Subsistence agriculture is adapted to the arid local conditions and mainly based on livestock production, and only to a lesser extent on irrigated cultivation of crops. Livestock breeding and gardening still constitute the prevalent forms of land use. Both ethnically and economically in terms of sources of household income, the southern part of Kunene Region shows a higher diversification than its north. Tourism- and community-based wildlife management have become increasingly important since the end of the 1990s. The two latter economic activities are often linked together in areas where groups of people can apply for so-called ‘communal area conservancies’, which have to be officially gazetted by the government, and which give local communities the opportunity to take part in the management of wildlife and tourism, and to benefit financially and in terms of workplaces. Two other CBM models present in Namibia’s Kunene Region are community forests, which regulate access to and economic benefit from the use of plant resources, and the

communal area conservancies that regulate access to and economic benefit from wildlife resources, both of which work along similar lines.27 Both of these CBM models are regulated through national legislation, and refer to bounded territories and local ‘communities’ – the boundaries of which define membership of community forests or conservancies. While some of the communal area conservancies cite measurable economic outcomes for their members, the community forests are not yet successful in terms of generating income. In general terms though, the trend to grant local people access to previously state-owned natural forest and wildlife resources has added to the opportunities for local people to obtain a cash income based on regular wages and/or occasional paid labour in the sector of community-based natural resources management.

The IWRM booklet produced for Kunene Region in 2010 provides a chart displaying the proportional water-use allocations to different sectors for 2008 – unfortunately not displaying any percentage values, and thus not being particularly clear. It shows however, that by far the biggest proportion of water available in the Kunene River Basin is used for livestock (around 70 per cent), while irrigation and tourism take the next biggest pieces of the pie. Smaller amounts of water are allocated to urban supplies, rural domestic use, and mining.

Figure 5: Water-use allocation - Kunene River Basin28

27

Kunene Region currently has 36 registered communal area conservancies and 6 community forests on its territory (as of October 2014), see:

http://www.nacso.org.na/SOC_profiles/Registered%20Communal%20Conservancies.pdf, and:

http://www.nacso.org.na/dwnlds/refs/Community%20forests.jpg; both of them last accessed 28 February 2016.

Water infrastructure for household supply in Kunene Region consists mainly of boreholes previously drilled by the colonial administration, and more recently by the DWSSC. There are areas where on average more than one borehole is available per community (Menestrey Schwieger 2015b:64). The pump infrastructure installed on these boreholes consists variously of hand- pumps, diesel pumps, solar installations, wind pumps, and electrical pumps. In addition there are protected springs and hand-dug wells, some of which have also been equipped with pumps. As well as the pumps, the water-point infrastructure includes water tanks or open reservoirs, and frequently basic infrastructure to water livestock (see some exemplary photos in Appendix 11.2). The kind and condition of water storage facilities ranges from open cement constructions left over from colonial times, which are frequently porous and leaking, to closed polyethylene tanks and troughs, sometimes additionally equipped with taps. The existing infrastructure can also be divided into categories depending on its construction date and context – with building material that changed over time, and certain types of pumps that were installed by certain donors. All the solar pumps existing in Kunene Region, for instance, were installed by a project funded by ICEIDA between 2007 and 2012. The hand-pumps and wind pumps mostly originate from colonial times. Handpumps have often been rehabilitated several times, and more were installed after Namibia’s independence by the NRCS. The most frequently installed hand-pump types in Kunene Region in 2000 were the ‘Zimbabwe Bush Pump’ and the ‘India Mark III’ Pump (Windhoek Consulting Engineers 2001).29

Except in the population centres, the vast majority of people in Kunene Region do not have a tap water supply in their private houses or on their premises, but have to go to the communal water point in order to collect water, either directly from the pump where installed, or from a reservoir – sometimes closed and equipped with a tap water outlet specifically for drinking water supply.

29

See for more detail on the pump types and their spread throughout countries of the Global South chapter 8.3.3.

Figure 6: Typical layout of a water point in Kunene Region

Provision of access to safe drinking water has been one of the development priorities of the independent government and it has been increasing steadily nationwide between 1990 and 2010. In 2012 according to the WHO and UNICEF, the proportion of people without access to an improved source of drinking water was 13 per cent of the rural population and only 2 per cent of the urban population (World Health Organization and United Nations Children's Fund 2014:65).30 Questions concerning data accuracy or rather the exact indicator used can be posed here though, as the national census conducted by the Namibian authorities in 2011 quoted above had indicated the figure for lack of access to ‘safe drinking water’ at 37 per cent for Namibia’s rural areas. In any case some progress has been made as at Independence in 1990 that proportion had been 45 per cent and 1 per cent respectively, marking the vast difference in coverage between rural and urban areas at the end of the Apartheid era.

30 _{As the Joint Monitoring Programme of WHO and UNICEF defines elsewhere, an improved drinking-water} source is one that, by nature of its construction or through active intervention, is protected from outside contamination, in particular from contamination with faecal matter (http://www.wssinfo.org/definitions-

Fencing Stand pipe (human consumption) Cattle trough (livestock watering) Reservoir (polypropylene/ concrete) Borehole equipped with pump

Recent statistics on the accessibility of safe drinking water in the two population and housing censuses of 2001 and 2011 continue to pose questions for some of Namibia’s rural areas in particular (see figures from the 2011 census below). According to the national census, over the ten-year period since 2001 in eight out of the 13 regions the proportion of households with access to a safe water source has actually gone down – with the national figure having gone down by 7.2 per cent during that period from 87.2 per cent in 2001 to 80 per cent in 2011. The regions with the biggest decline according to those figures are those along Namibia’s northern borders – Omusati (-30.5%), Ohangwena (-21.5%), Oshikoto (-18.2%), and Caprivi (-13.3%).

While in 2001 Kunene was the region with the second lowest proportion of households with access to a safe drinking water source, at 72.8 per cent, by 2011 there were three regions where conditions were worse than in Kunene. However, conditions have not improved on the whole, as the proportion of households with access to a safe water source in Kunene Region over the ten years between 2001 and 2011 has gone down by 5.8 per cent to 67 per cent. By 2011 only Kavango, Ohangwena, and Omusati Regions were showing lower percentages.

Across Kunene Region the constituency with the lowest rate of households with access to a safe water source in 2011 was Epupa at 28.3 per cent. Epupa Constituency mirrors the negative trend of the entire Kunene Region as access to safe water sources has gone down since 2001 when it stood at 36.3 per cent. At the time of the 2011 census in Epupa Constituency 13 per cent of all households reported to rely on unprotected wells as their main source of water.

What remains striking is the difference between Namibia’s urban and rural areas in coverage rates of almost 20 per cent on the national level (urban coverage in 2011 was at 97.7 per cent – and at 98.4 per cent in 2001 – while rural coverage lagged behind at 62.8 per cent in 2011 compared to 79.9 per cent in 2001). In Kunene Region, the difference between urban and rural coverage is vast at 39 per cent (Republic of Namibia. Namibia Statistics Agency 2014a).

At the time of writing I have not found any explanation for this downwardly trend in terms of access to safe water sources in Kunene Region and in fact across Namibia. In any case it does not speak positively for the outcomes the implementation of community-based water management has had at the rural water points in communal areas, 18 years after its introduction. It does not become entirely clear from the census reports available however, whether part of it might be based on differences in data collection and the definition used for ‘safe water access’. The data contained in the report on the 2011 census provides more detail on the type of main water source used by households (see table 5 below), and it is not explained in the report text which of those sources were falling into the category of ‘safe drinking water source’.

The WHO defines ‘improved drinking water sources’ as: ‘bottled water; rainwater; protected boreholes springs and wells; public stand-pipes and piped connections to houses’ (World Health Organization 2007:49). As the World Health Organization (WHO) itself points out regarding health indicators in relation to water access, the definition of safe drinking water is not made very clear by the list of MDG indicators, as it mostly only speaks of ‘access to an improved drinking water source’. ‘Improved sources’, however, may or may not actually be ‘safe drinking water’, according to the WHO. What is more, the water-related MDG in itself has been criticized for not necessarily reflecting trends of access and water quality for those people with the greatest needs.31

For the LINGS research areas, the quality of the water could not be tested during the field stays between 2010 and 2012. Based on the information from some of the communities, there are cases where even the borehole supply was not a hundred per cent suitable for human consumption, as it contained too much salt (such as in the cases of Kleinrivier and Omuangete). Another danger for human health can result from cattle water points that are too close to the water point for human consumption, which was observed in many communities in the research area. Such a situation can lead to potential groundwater contamination that can also affect the borehole water. Development initiatives in rural water supply in Kunene Region such as the long- lasting hand-pump rehabilitation and improvement of sanitation at the water points by the Red Cross have been motivated by the objective of preventing water contamination and thus improving the health status of local communities (Swedish Red Cross Society 2010:16).

Table 4: Water-related statistics on Kunene Region, based on the 2001 national census report Epupa Kamanjab Khorixas Opuwo Outjo Sesfontein Kunene Namibia

Population 13,129 6,454 11,501 20,892 9,154 7,605 68,735 1,830,330

Households with safe water (%) 36.0 87.0 82.1 69.6 89.2 67.7 72.9 87.2 Households less than 1km from water source (%) 15.0 68.5 62.6 29.6 68.7 27.1 45.4 54.1 Households more than 1km from water source (%) 20.3 1.8 1.3 19.0 1.0 9.5 9.4 9.2

Source: Population and Housing Census of 2001, National Report and Report on Kunene Region

31

Figure 7: Percentage of households with access to safe drinking water – Namibia32

Figure 8: Percentage of households with access to safe drinking water – Kunene Region33

32

Source: Population and Housing Census of 2011 Republic of Namibia. Namibia Statistics Agency 2014b. 33

Source: Population and Housing Census of 2011, Kunene Region Republic of Namibia. Namibia Statistics Agency 2014a. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Omusati Ohangwena Kavango Oshikoto Caprivi Oshana Omaheke Karas Hardap Otjozondjupa Erongo Khomas Kunene Urban Rural Namibia 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Epupa Sesfontein Opuwo Khorixas Kamanjab Outjo Kunene Urban Rural Namibia

Table 5: Households by main source of water for cooking/ drinking

Epupa Kamanjab Khorixas Opuwo Outjo Sesfontein Kunene Rural Urban Namibia

Population 17,325 7,760 12,137 26,236 11,863 8,229 83,550 61,494 22,056

Households with safe water (%) 28.3 83.0 78.0 61.6 89.4 61.0 67.1 55.0 94.0 80.0

…water from public pipe 3.2 11.45 14.2 19.0 30.0 11.8 16.2 8.0 34.0 21.5

…piped water outside 2.8 40.1 25.3 14.6 19.4 16.6 19.0 14.6 28.7 19.7

…piped water inside 1.19 13.76 24.5 8.6 23.7 6.0 13.3 5.4 31.0 30.1

…water from borehole with open tank 11.3 5.8 4.05 11.4 5.0 11.5 19.0 12.0 0.08 no data

…water from borehole with tank covered 19.0 17.1 13.5 15.0 15.0 25.0 16.6 24.0 0.1 6.8

...water from protected well 2.66 0.4 0.44 4.2 0.8 1.4 2.0 2.8 0.12 1.9

…water from unprotected well 13.3 0.04 0.12 6.2 0.2 2.5 4.0 5.6 0.57 no data

…water from canal 0.07 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.15 0.2 0.07 0.1 0.01 no data

...water from river/ dam/ stream 14.3 9.95 14.4 15.0 4.8 23.0 18.0 26.0 0.17 8.3

…water from other sources 0.03 1.33 3.2 5.6 0.4 1.8 14.9 1.4 5.0 11.6

Source: Population and Housing Census of 2011, Main Report and Regional Tables for Kunene Region34

People in Kunene mostly use plastic or metal containers of various sizes to fetch water – depending on the economic situation of the household and the means available to transport the containers, ranging from going on foot to using a donkey cart or – in rare cases – a private vehicle. At the homestead, people either fill bigger tanks with the water they fetch so they can store it for several days in containers of up to around 1,000 litres storage capacity, or they just keep it in the smaller containers of around 20 litres until they need to go fill them at the water point again. It hereby becomes obvious that both the quantity and size of water containers that people possess and the distances from their houses to the nearest water point will cause large variations in the way in which taking care of the household’s daily water needs affects their lives – and their patterns of water consumption.35 _{According to the WHO, ‘in urban areas, a distance of not more} than 200 metres from a house to a public stand post or any other adequate point source may be considered reasonable access. In rural areas, reasonable access implies that people do not have to spend a disproportionate part of the day fetching water for the family's need’ (World Health Organization 2007).

Household water consumption in Kunene Region is also affected significantly by seasonal variations of water supply, as is shown in Linke’s ethnography of Kunene South (Linke 2015:142ff.), and in Menestrey’s analysis for Kunene North (Menestrey Schwieger 2015b:76). Apart from the water points with boreholes, alternative natural and man-made water sources for population and livestock, such as natural springs and rivers, hand-dug wells and earth dams, also exist, though they are used mainly during the rainy season and in the three to six months afterwards. Rainwater is also collected in the vicinity of the houses and stored to be used for various kinds of domestic consumption (see for the LINGS research area in Kunene South Linke 2015:141ff.). Communities use these alternative water sources mostly for livestock and in addition to the boreholes, and sometimes exclusively, during the rainy season, and as long as these natural sources still hold water after the rainy season.

4.4. Namibian legislation and administrative structures for rural water supply –

1920 to 1990

After the first water legislation, which had focused on the development and use of artesian water