Prof. R. Mupedziswa, PhD University of Botswana Presented at “Are Diamonds there Forever ?” Conference, Lansmore Hotel, Gaborone August, e.

Organisation of Paper Introduction Formal social protection system in Botswana Shortfalls of the formal social protection system Sustainability concerns The case for a social development perspective Non-formal social protection system Interface - formal/non-formal systems “Diversification” through an integrated model? Concluding remarks

Basic Argument of Paper The paper argues that the government of Botswana has over the years promoted a social protection system which is the envy of many sister countries in the SADC region. The measures have had a major positive impact in respect of the fight against poverty. However, since the social protection system in place is highly dependent on revenue from the country’s mineral wealth, particularly diamonds, long term sustainability of the social protection system has been questioned. The paper makes a case for the integration of formal and non-formal (traditional) social protection systems, to come up with a social development perspective of social protection which ultimately promotes self reliance (as opposed to giving of handouts).

Introduction At independence in 1966, Botswana was a poor country with its people depending on subsistence economy (in particular cattle/beef. Judicious use of mineral resources since the mid 1970s transformed the country’s fortunes, later resulting in Botswana attaining middle income status. Over the years, Botswana has done quite well economically compared to several other SADC countries as can be noted from several basic socioeconomic indicators (See Table 1).

Selected Socioeconomic indicators of SADC Countries 2010 (GoSA, 2010) HDI GINI Coefficient Access to Improved water Average% real GDP Growth 1990 – 2008* GDP per capita (PPP) US$ 2006** Angola0, %6,28 4, Botswana ,9696%5,3213, DRC0,38944,4346%-1, Lesotho0,51452,578%3,93 1, Madagascar0,54347,2447%2, Malawi0,49339,0276%3, Mauritius0, %4,8810, Mozambique0,40247,1142%6,41 782,57 Namibia0,68674,3393%4,41 6, Seychelles0,84542,087%3,6318, South Africa0,68357,7793%2,68 9, Swaziland0,57250,6860%3,56 5, Tanzania0,53034,6255%4,79 1, Zambia0,48150,7458%2,61 1, ZimbabweN/A50,181%-0,

Introduction (Continued) In the early years, government efforts focused mostly at economic growth (Ntseane & Solo, 2007). With time, it became apparent that economic growth alone would not be a sufficient condition for total eradication of poverty (Seleka, et al., 2007). The government of Botswana then made deliberate efforts to introduce a formal social protection system (social safety nets) for welfare improvement (Ntseane & Solo, 2007).

Formal social protection system - Botswana Ellis, Devereux & White (2009) have grouped the social protection measures into 4 broad categories: (1). Food and basic needs deprivation of the extremely poor, the destitute, and older persons (e.g. Destitute P. Programme, Orphans & Vulnerable Children., etc.). (2) Low yields and other natural disasters (e.g. Ipelegeng (Ntseane & Solo, 2007). (3) Impact of HIV & AIDS on households. (e.g. CHBC). (4) Income and assert depletion resulting from retirement, sickness, death. (E.g. Pension scheme).

Social protection system-Botswana Type of Program me Target group Targeting Mechanis m Coverage &Number of Beneficiarie s Type of transfer Value & frequenc y of transfer Governme nt of Botswana Annual expenditu re Expenditu re per beneficiar y Destitute Persons Program me Poor and destitute individuals unable to work Proxy means- testing + referral by community representati ves National; 40, 865 (2010), almost all rural Food and cash Food P450 – 750, Cash P81 monthly P214m (2008/09) P5,596 (2008/09) Orphan Care Program me Under 18s without a biological or adoptive parent Categorical + referral by community representati ves National registered orphans (2008/2009) Food; school fees, uniform, etc.; clothing Food: P monthly; other: variable P254m (2008/09) P5,286 (2008/09) School feeding Prim/Sec All school children in Governme nt school Categorical National; Primary261,51 3; Secondary ; (2009/10) Food Variable; 1 meal daily; RADS 2 meals; borders 3. Primary schools P208m; Secondary P135m (2009/10) Secondary P820 (2009/10) Vulnerab le group feeding Adults and pre-school children at nutritional risk Categorical National 239, 985 (2009/2010) Food Variable, normally monthly P216m P35 (2009/10) Old Age Pension All citizens aged 65+; Categorical; register with DSS through local authority National; (2009/10) Cash P220 Monthly. P337m (2009/10) P3,688 (2009/10) World War 2 Veterans WW vets, or surviving spouse or children below 21 Categorical; beneficiary register with DSS through local authority National; 2940 WW2 Vets (2009/10) Cash P359 Monthly P30m (2009/10) P10,250 (2009/10) Remote Area Dwellers Remote communiti es; Basarwa individuals Geographica l + proxy means testing +categorical community 42,597 mainly in64 settlements in 7 districts (2008/2009) Infrastruct ure developme nt; grants for income generation Variable P32m (2008/200 9) P775 (2008/09) Ipelegeng Able- bodied adults needing low-waged employme nt Self- selection; in principle available to all, but rotated when over- subscribed National; 19,431 person- years (2009/10) Cash P18/day (P24/day for supervisor s) 22-day cycle P221m (2009/10) P11,384 (2009/10) Commun ity Home- based Care Very ill individuals Categorical referral by doctors National /5; /9 Food, transport, counseling, rehabilitati on Food up to P500(P120 0 tube feeding) Monthly 2005 P 53 million (2008/09) P14,265 (2008/9)

Shortfalls of the formal social protection system in Botswana. Alleviation of hunger rather than providing sustainable livelihoods (Gadibolae (2010). Lack of scope to graduate out of schemes, hence creates dependency syndrome (Ntseane & Solo, 2007). Challenges with targeting, coordination, and implementation deficiencies (Ntseane & Solo, 2007; Mupedziswa & Ntseane, 2012; BIDPA & World Bank, 2014).

Shortfalls (continued) A recent Social Protection Assessment study by BIDPA in conjunction with The World Bank noted that, “While Botswana has many social protection programmes, some of them are rather small relative to the target group they intend to cover or to the number of poor people, which limits their effectiveness” (Balise, 2014). The same study reportedly noted that safety net programmes were fragmented, are implemented by different government ministries, in the process diluting scarce administrative capacity.

Sustainability Concerns. Despite the shortfalls, Botswana’s social protection system remains quite impressive, by SADC standards. The authoritative South Africa-based Regional Hunger & Vulnerability Programme (RHVP) (2011) noted that Botswana has a very impressive track record in terms of long standing commitment to state-led social protection Work by other researchers (e.g. Mupedziswa & Ntseane, 2012 a, b) has corroborated the observation that Botswana has indeed done well in regard to commitment to rolling out welfare improvement measures.

Sustainability concerns (Continued) The Social Protection Assessment study by BIDPA/WB (2014) indicated that the government spent P5.3 billion on its social protection programmes in the fiscal year 2012/13. This figure, which represents 4.4% of GDP, is very impressive and the government ought to be commended for such commitment. However, concern has been expressed over long term sustainability of the social protection system, especially since emphasis is on giving of handouts.

Case for social development approach The existing social protection system predicated on remedial approach (handouts), though noble, should be viewed as only a short term measure since it is ‘relief’-oriented. For the long term, the government may wish to consider ways of working towards promoting the social development perspective. The social development approach emphasises capacity building and empowerment towards self reliance (Elliot, 2012). The approach appreciates the connection between social and economic goals, and stresses the idea of planned change. Social justice is adjudged critical. (Hall, 1990).

Lessons from the River Story The analogy by the American social organiser of the last century, Saul Alinsky of the ‘River Story’ might be instructive in appreciating the need for a social development perspective. The analogy of the leaking water tap too corroborates the need to promote a social development approach. The Chinese saying about catching fish is moulded along similar lines………..

Non-formal social protection system The non-formal system may be the missing ingredient towards realisation of the social development approach. Traditionally Botswana depended on non-formal social protection measures, steeped in people’s cultural beliefs, norms and values, with botho spirit playing a key role. Social groups (e.g. community, kinship ties, family, etc. operated on basis of such values as (e.g. self-help, inherent solidarity, etc )(Olivier, Kaseke & Mpedi, 2008).

Non-formal social protection system (examples) Tribal granaries (defalana), milkpad cattle (kgamelo), tribal fields (masotla), all of which fell directly under regulation of the Chief. Self-organised mutual support systems e.g. mafisa (lending cattle to the poor) ; go tshwara teu or bodisa (poor looked after rich people’s cattle in return for a cow); majako (poor worked in field of rich in return for portion of harvest); letsema/molaletsa (voluntary work for poor), etc. Modern-day non-formal social protection initiatives include burial societies; credit and savings associations.

Interface between formal & non- formal social protection systems Type of Vulnerability Formal Social Protection Initiatives Non-Formal Social Protection Initiatives Food and basic needs deprivation of the extremely poor, the destitute and older persons Destitute Persons Programme Remote Area Dwellers Programme Vulnerable Groups Feeding Programme School Feeding Programme Needy Students Allowance Extended family Neighbourhood support Chiefs granary Food and basic needs deprivation of older people Old Age Pension World War II Veteran Scheme Extended family Neighbourhood support Chiefs granary Impacts of HIV and AIDS Orphan Care Programme Community Home Based Care Burial societies Savings and Credit Associations Low yields and other natural disasters Ipelegeng Labour based Drought Relief Programmes Majako Letsema Extended family Retirement, sickness, occupational injuries and death Government Pension Scheme Health Insurance Schemes Workmen’s Compensation Maternity Benefits Extended family Burial Societies Neighbourhood Support Savings and Credit associations

Diversification of social protection systems through their integration ? The non formal social protection system essentially ‘persists’ in Botswana today essentially because it still has an important role to play. RHVP (2011) has expressed concern that while Botswana has developed an impressive social protection system, only a small segment of the population does benefit. Concern has also been voiced over such issues as inadequacy and restrictive nature of the provisions in the formal social protection system.

Diversification through integration (continued) It is for these and related reasons that the paper proposes integration of the formal and non formal social protection systems. Ideally debate should focus on which initiatives from the two systems are amenable to integration and which aren’t. If the idea of integration were to be taken on, the first step would probably be to identify those initiatives with potential, and then find ways of building synergies between them. As Diagram 1 shows, integration is not an end in itself, but rather should be viewed as a means to an end (i.e. realisation of the social development approach and ultimately poverty eradication.

Integrated social protection model: Steps towards poverty eradication Formal social protection system Integrated approach - Social developmental orientation - Capacity build - Self-reliance - Poverty eradication Non-formal social protection system

Concluding remarks Government of Botswana has done extremely well in terms of commitment to state-led social protection initiatives. However questions have remained regarding long term sustainability of the initiatives. There is however need for an integrated approach which would bring together the formal and non formal social protection systems. The idea would be to promote a social development approach which in turn would help build capacities for self reliance, and ultimately poverty eradication.