Resource Allocation: Namibia
Following independence in 1990, Namibia undertook a comprehensive education reform focused on increasing access, equity, democracy and lifelong learning in schools (1). During my time in Namibia, I realized equity was still a major problem in the education system. Many school resources were distributed unequally, with some schools facing shortages in textbooks, printing paper, chairs, and desks while others had wireless internet and Smart Boards. This unequal distribution was not only between large cities and villages, but also within rural areas. It was common for neighboring schools to have very differing resources, especially in the northern parts of the country. Several sources play a role in this inequity including colonial legacy, government involvement, and lack of incentive for human capital.
Colonial Legacy The pre-independence legacy largely shaped the inequities in resource distribution between regions in Namibia. Under the rule of South Africa, Namibia’s education system was designed to reinforce apartheid causing vast disparities in resource allocation along racial and ethnic lines (2). With the majority of the northern region comprised of villages and homesteads, the population was a large majority black. However in the south, larger cities and the closer proximity to the South African border created a greater white population. This divide continues to exist in Namibia, leading to racism in society and thus schools. This geographic divide between north and south also increases the likelihood of resource inequalities between these regions. In addition, colonial legacy impacted resource inputs with very limited support for learners with special needs, orphans, and other vulnerable children (3). This is particularly detrimental for the high rate of orphaned children due to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Namibia is still working to dissolve the negative impacts of pre-independence on the education system, a process that will take many years to rectify. Government Involvement Along with pre-independence factors, the Namibian government determines much of the resource allocation in schools. There are two main factors that appear to affect how resources are distributed: tribal representation in the government and the hierarchy of institutions. The Oshivambo tribe constitutes about half of Namibia’s population and live primarily in the northern regions of the country (4). As the largest tribe, Oshivambo people are heavily represented in the government. This has caused problems for resource distribution in schools since the Oshivambo officials support more funding and resources in the northern regions, their homelands. I noticed this influence most when talking with other volunteers who did not live in the northern regions and described dismal school buildings and restroom facilities. Along with tribal influence, resource allocation is affected by the hierarchy of educational institutions through which funds must pass before reaching individual schools. The central government determines the budget for educational spending, the Ministry of Education further determines how this budget is to be distributed to regions, and finally local authorities decide which schools will receive certain resources (5). This process of passing funds and resources through numerous institutions allows for more manipulation and distribution inequality before the resources ever reach individual school level. Human Capital A final source of inequity between schools is that of quality teachers. Without incentive or some form of compensation, teachers rarely choose to live and work in rural villages due to the limited lifestyle in these areas (3). Additionally, some teachers in rural regions are unable to engage in professional development because of distance, time, and cost constraints. This limits their abilities in the classroom and ultimately limits the success of students. As a result of these obstacles and lack of incentive, highly qualified teachers work mainly in cities thus depriving marginalized children in rural areas of quality teachers. |
1. UNESCO. (2004). National Report on the Development of Education in Namibia. Ministry of Basic Education, Sport and Culture, 1-19.
2. USAID. (2006). Quality primary education. USAID/Namibia Africa, n. pag.
3. Ministry of Education. (2007). General Education. ETSIP, 1-14.
4. USAID. (2006). Namibia Overview. USAID/Namibia Africa, n. pag.
5. South African Community Development. (2000). Module 14: Curriculum practice. The Commonwealth of Learning, 32-37.
2. USAID. (2006). Quality primary education. USAID/Namibia Africa, n. pag.
3. Ministry of Education. (2007). General Education. ETSIP, 1-14.
4. USAID. (2006). Namibia Overview. USAID/Namibia Africa, n. pag.
5. South African Community Development. (2000). Module 14: Curriculum practice. The Commonwealth of Learning, 32-37.