Key Concepts in the New Institutional Economics

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Profile of Poverty

It has been noted in section 5.2. above that Namibia is relatively well off in economic terms. Its per capita income of US$ 1,930 (World Bank, 2005) places her in the category of middle income countries. This statistical average however hides high inequalities within the society. This inequality is graphically illustrated by figures from the most recent survey, the Namibia Household Income and Expenditure Survey (NHIES) 2003/2004. It has been estimated that the 10% of households with the highest income account for nearly half the total income in the country. The 2% of the households with the highest income account for 15% of the total income, while the 25% of the Namibian households with the lowest income account for only 6% of the income. Finally, the per capita income for the 25% of the households with the lowest income is abut N$ 1,600 compared to almost N$ 150,000 for the 2% with the highest income (NPC, 2006:40)
Using the food consumption ratio as an indicator of poverty, the picture is not much different. This ratio measures food consumption as a proportion of overall consumption and is considered to be more robust indicator of poverty. Results show that the 5% households with the lowest income have a food consumption ratio between 80 and 100%, whereas the 2% households with the highest income have a food consumption of less than 40% (ibid., 40).

Causes of Poverty

The causes of poverty in any country are multifaceted and complex and Namibia is no exception. Schade (2000) however identifies two major causes of poverty in Namibia. The first is lack of employment caused by low potential for agricultural production, caused by poor soil and low and erratic rainfalls in most parts of the country. In addition the economy, which is largely based on the export of raw materials using capital intensive methods, has not been able to create sufficient jobs. Manufacturing has the potential to generate more jobs but its contribution to the Namibia economy has been relatively low (ibid.).
The failure of the economy to create jobs is a consequence of its lacklustre performance. GDP growth has not been sufficient to absorb the increasing numbers of people looking for work. Thus unemployment has been on the increase. As the Government admits, total employment fell over the period 1991-1997 by some 9.5% (GRN, 2004a:62). The declining levels of employment were particularly evident in the primary industries, notably agriculture and mining, where employment declined by about 29% between 1991 and 1997, or about 5.6% per annum per average (ibid.).
Overall, unemployment in the ‘strict sense’ rose from 19.4% measured during the 1993/1994 NHIES to 19.9% in 1997, while unemployment in the ‘broad sense’ rose from 32.9% to 34.8% respectively (Schade, 2000:119). While the 2001 census puts the rate of unemployment in Namibia at 31% (NPC, 2003:41) more recent government figures indicates it to be as high as 33.8% (GRN, 2004a: 62).
The high unemployment rate therefore is clearly one of the major causes of poverty in Namibia. The other one identified by Schade and which is directly relevant to this study is the unequal distribution of assets, particularly of real estate. The statistics regarding rural land are sobering. Despite the fact that such a large proportion of Namibians derive their livelihood from the land, access and ownership of land is highly unevenly distributed. For instance, approximately one hundred and fifty thousand communal tenure farmers and their families strive to survive from about 43% of agriculturally usable land compared to 4300 commercial farmers sharing the remaining 57% (Schade, 2000:120). The communal areas are overcrowded, and overstocked with livestock, and consequently suffer from severe environmental degradation. The land in these areas simply cannot offer adequate and sustainable livelihoods for the population who live there.

READ The National Small Enterprise Development Strategy in Ethiopia

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION.
1.1 Background
1.2 Research Problem.
1.3 Conceptual/Analytical Framework
1.3.1 Transaction Costs
1.3.2 Property Rights
1.3.3 Institutions
1.4. Aim, Objectives and Hypotheses
1.5 Preliminary Literature Review.
1.6 Originality and Contribution of Researc
1.7 Methodology.
1.8 Terminology.
1.9 Scope and Limitation.
1.10 Structure of Thesis
CHAPTER TWO: REAL ESTATE MARKETS AND POVERTY ALLEVIATION – CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Key Concepts in the New Institutional Economics.
2.3 Institutional Analysis and Real Estate Markets.
2.4 Real Estate Markets and Poverty: A Conceptual Framework for Research
2.5 Hernando de Soto and ‘The Mystery of Capital’
2.6 Real Estate and Poverty Alleviation: Theory and Evidence
2.7 Knowledge Gaps.
2.8 Research Agenda.
2.9 Concluding Summary
CHAPTER 3 URBANISATION, INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS AND POVERTY ALLEVIATION – CONCEPTS AND POLICIES
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Urbanisation and Growth of Informal Settlements
3.3 Dealing with Urban Informal Settlements: Evolution of Policy
3.4 Dealing with Urban Poverty: Concepts and Policy.
3.5 Informal Real Estate Markets and Poverty Alleviation: Review of Policy Framework
3.6 Conclusions
CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY.
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Methodological Challenges in Informal Real Estate Market Research
4.3 Methodology in Economics: Contrasting Orthodox and Heterodox Approaches.89
4.4 Methodology in NIE Researc
4.5 Study Research Methodology
4.5.1 Dealing with Conceptual and Practical Challenges
4.5.2 Methodological Approach
4.5.3 Case Study Research.
4.6 Research Design.
4.7 Research Execution
4.8 Concluding Summary
CHAPTER 5: NAMIBIA, WINDHOEK AND KATUTURA: A SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE.
CHAPTER 6: PRESENTATION OF DATA
CHAPTER 7: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
CHAPTER 8: SUMMARY, CONTRIBUTION AND FURTHER RESEARCH.
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B