Development in a Namibian Context

In coming together for ReConnect I have had some discussions with other volunteers about the meaning of development.  In Namibia, the land of contrast, you find people living in huts and shacks North of the red line for the most part and in Windhoek alone you find both larges homes and shacks separated by only a few kilometers.  Let me first explain the red line divides the North from the south.  North of the red line land is considered to be communal grazing land so you will find animals, including goats and cattle, wandering free along roads, even in cities like Ondangwa and Oshakati.  Historically, I believe during the Apartheid people were limited in mobility and restricted to the area north of the red line, only permitted to travel south for work.

Anyways back to my original question about what development and modernization in the Namibian context means.  I don’t understand if it means moving  people from mud and stick huts to homes made with both zinc walls and roofs.  Or does it mean adding homes to the electrical and water grid?  Or is the answer found in increasing awareness of learners and communities through literacy and education?  For me I struggle with this question because typically it seems in the Namibian context zinc shacks are considered preferable to huts and cinderblock and zinc homes are preferable to entirely zinc homes.  To be honest though I struggle to see the benefits from the zinc homes because they are so bloody hot with the metal creating an oven like effect.  The learners will say what makes them preferential is that they last longer.  For me it is also difficult because when I see a shack I immediately associate it with either shanty towns for favelas in Brazil through my American lens.  However in Namibia some of the teachers reside in shacks, and teachers are considered to be well off here.  Not only are they well off but you go into their shacks and discover there is electricity and they actually feel quite comfortable despite the deficit of natural light.  This experience has already forced me to reconsider some of the associations I immediately make with particular images.  But again back to my question are these zinc homes considered to be developed, especially when the huts actually remain cool?  Then in terms of adding people to the electrical and water grid, it seems like such a great idea, however electricity and water can be expensive and it could mean that by adding this expense to someone’s budget you are forcing them to live beyond their means.  If they are unable to pay the water or electrical bill what good is it that they are connected.  On a side not about how to connect a homestead to the water grid means that you as an individual must dig a trench to the nearest water pump and meter and then you go to the region and request that they connect your pipe/hose to the water grid.  The region does not develop infrastructure though for individuals, just for villages and you as an individual have to build the infrastructure to add yourself to the grid.  As a volunteer there seems that much of what will be accomplished over the next two years, at least at my site as far has possibly adding an additional block for a library and computer lab is dependent on initiative taken by my own community because without their help and interest it will not be successful, at least long term.  It’s just hard because I am constantly wondering what development actually is because it seems like the way that they did things might have been a particular way for a reason and is sometimes better than the new and improved way of doing things.

Some pics from around Windhoek:

A vie from my bedroom at ReConnect

Cool can wall in Windhoek

“Scrap can be useful”