Ohangwena Region Disclaimer

Home , Eenhana, Engela, Ohangwena Region, Ondangwa, Oshikango

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001

Empowered lives.

Resilient nations.

This Report is an independent publication commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme at the request of the Government of Republic of Namibia. The analysis and policy recommendations contained in this report however, do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government of the Republic of Namibia or the United Nations Development Programme or its Executive Board.

ISBN: 978-99916-887-1-8

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission

For electronic copy and a list of any errors or omissions found as well as any updates subsequent to printing, please visit our website: http://www.undp.org.na/publications.aspx pReface

This report is the result of collaborative work between the Government of the Republic of Namibia (GRN), the United Nations Development programme (UNDp) and the centre for the analysis of South african Social policy at the Oxford Institute of Social policy at the University of Oxford

n November 2009, the Khomas Regional decade could be measured when the 2011 Census Council requested UNDP to assist in designing becomes available and is subsequently used for an objective criterion or set of criteria, devoid carrying out a similar analysis. of political and other considerations, which the Council could use in allocating development This report presents, using tables, charts and resources. Subsequent discussions led to an digital maps, a profile of multiple deprivation in agreement that other stakeholders, especially the Ohangwena region at data zone level, which is a Central Bureau of Statistics needed to be involved relatively new statistical geography developed and that the criterion or set of criteria needed to for purposes of measuring deprivation at a small Igo beyond income poverty considerations. It was area level. This technique of profiling deprivation also agreed that rather than focus on Khomas at datazone level, each with approximately region alone, the criterion or set of criteria needed 1000 people only, enables the identification to be applicable to, or cover the entire country. and targeting of pockets of deprivation within Specifically, it was agreed that a composite index Ohangwena region for possible use in panning for of multiple deprivation, the Namibia Index of and implementation of development interventions. Multiple Deprivation (NIMD), be constructed at The aim of the exercise was to produce a profile of both national and regional levels. Since the scope relative deprivation across Ohangwena region in and depth of analysis needed for the development order for the most deprived areas to be identified of the NIMD required very detailed and reliable and clearly delineated. In this way, it would be data and information, it was agreed that the possible for regional and constituency level 2001 census data, though ‘outdated’, be used policy and decision makers, as well development as the source of information for preparing the practitioners, to consider a particular domain of inter alia NIMD. Accordingly, the NIMD being presented in deprivation, or to refer to the overarching NIMD this report reflects the situation in Ohangwena for each constituency or datazone, in , region at the 2001 time-point only. UNDP and the allocating and applying development resources GRN recognize that the report does not speak to and interventions. The NIMD can also be used possible changes in relative deprivation that may as a platform for effecting a paradigm shift in have occurred in the Ohangwena region since development planning towards increased focus 2001. Nevertheless the 2001 NIMD could serve as on and targeting of deprived areas and sectors; a benchmark against which change over the last as well as interrogating the causes of inequality

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 1 in access to basic services within the region. The Policy at the Oxford Institute of Social Policy at NIMD at datazone level should be viewed as adding the University of Oxford, under the leadership and to the existing body of information and knowledge, guidance a national steering committee chaired including local knowledge systems, about poverty by Mr Sylvester Mbangu, Director of the Central and deprivation in Ohangwena region and the large Bureau of Statistics, with the participation of family of existing planning and resource allocation representatives of the thirteen Regional Councils. tools and methodologies already in use at the In addition to providing the funds for carrying regional and constituency levels. out the project, UNDP provided overall oversight and technical backstopping to the project through This project was undertaken by Professor Michael Ojijo Odhiambo, Senior Economist and Johannes Noble, Dr Gemma Wright, Ms Joanna Davies, Dr Ashipala, National Economist. David Avenell is Helen Barnes and Dr Phakama Ntshongwana of thanked for his assistance with producing the the Centre for the Analysis of South African Social datazones.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 2 Table Of cONTeNTS

Section 1: Introduction 5

1.1 Background 5 1.2 Defining poverty and deprivation 6 1.3 The concept of multiple deprivation 6 Section 2: Datazones 7

Section 3: Methodology 8

3.1 An introduction to the domains and indicators 8 Domains 8 Indicators 8 3.2 Material Deprivation Domain 9 Purpose of the domain 9 Background 9 Indicators 10 Combining the indicators 10 3.3 Employment Deprivation Domain 10 Purpose of the domain 10 Background 10 Indicator 11 Combining the indicators 11 3.4 Health Deprivation Domain 11 Purpose of the domain 11 Background 11 Indicator 12 3.5 Education Deprivation Domain 12 Purpose of the domain 12 Background 12 Indicators 12 Combining the indicators 12 3.6 Living Environment Deprivation Domain 13 Purpose of the domain 13 Background 13 Indicators 14 Combining the indicators 14

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 3 3.7 Constructing the domain indices 15 3.8 Standardising and transforming the domain indices 15 3.9 Weights for the domain indices when combining into an overall Index of Multiple Deprivation 1+ Section 4: Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001: Kavango Region 17

4.1 Multiple Deprivation 17 4.2 Domains of deprivation 21 Section 5: conclusion and Some policy Recommendations 31

annex 1: Indicators included in the NIMD 2001 33

Material Deprivation Domain 33 Employment Deprivation Domain 33 Health Deprivation Domain 33 Education Deprivation Domain 33 Living Environment Deprivation Domain 33 appendix 2: Domain and overall NIMD scores and ranks 34

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 4 SecTION 1: INTRODUcTION

This report presents the datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 (NIMD 2001) for the Ohangwena region. The NIMD is a composite index reflecting five dimensions of deprivation: income and material deprivation; employment deprivation; education deprivation; health deprivation; and living environment deprivation.

The NIMD and the component domains of the project was to construct measures of multiple deprivation were produced at datazone level using deprivation at constituency level in order to provide data from the 2001 Population Census. Datazones a more detailed analysis of deprivation which are small areas containing approximately the same would enable Khomas Regional Council, and other number of people (average 1,000). The datazone regional councils across Namibia, to rank their areas level NIMD therefore provides a fine-grained in order of deprivation, and also to set them in the picture of deprivation and enables pockets of context of all other areas in Namibia. The datazone deprivation to be identified in Ohangwena region. level index presented in this report draws from the The report is structured as follows: The background previous constituency index, and covers, in detail, information and the conceptual framework which the entire country including Ohangwena region. In underpins the model of multiple deprivation is constructing the NIMD at datazone level however, described in this introductory section. In Section 2 the rationale for and process of constructing datazones are described. Section 3 introduces the domains and indicators that were included The NIMD and the in the NIMD and summarises the methodological approach that was used in constructing the NIMD. component domains of In Section 4 datazone level results for Ohangwena deprivation were produced region are presented, while conclusions and some general policy recommendations are presented in at datazone level using data Section 5. 1.1 background from the 2001 Population Census. As will be elaborated

Initially a NIMD was created at constituency level in Section 2, datazones for the Khomas Region, but applicable to other regions of the country as well, using data from the are small areas containing 2001 Population Census at constituency level after approximately the same a two-day consultative process on the domains and indicators with members of the Central Bureau of number of people Statistics, civil servants from the Council and staff members of UNDP. The objective of this phase of (average 1,000)

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 5 it became necessary to make some small changes multiple deprivation is underpinned by the idea to some of the domains and indicators initially that there exists separate dimensions of deprivation used in the constituency level study. These changes which can be recognised and measured, and are explained in detail in Section 3 of this report. are experienced by individuals living in an area. As such, the constituency level index has also been Multiple deprivation is therefore conceptualised as revised to give a comparable measure. The initial a weighted combination of distinct dimensions or results of the work at the datazone level were domains of deprivation. An area level score for each presented to, and validated by, representatives of domain is produced and these are then combined all the 13 Regional Councils at a workshop held in to form an overall Index of Multiple Deprivation. Ondangwa in November 2011. 1.2 Defining poverty and relative Although the area itself is not deprived, it can deprivation nonetheless be characterised as deprived to other areas, in a particular dimension of deprivation, on the basis of the proportion of people in the area Townsend (1979) sets out the case for defining experiencing the type of deprivation in question. ‘Individuals, families and groups can be said to be in poverty in terms of relative deprivation as follows: In other words, the experiences of the people in an poverty if they lack the resources to obtain the types area give the area its deprivation characteristics. It of diet, participate in the activities and have the living is important to emphasize that the area itself is not conditions and amenities which are customary or at deprived, though the presence of a concentration least widely encouraged or approved in the societies of people experiencing deprivation in an area may to which they belong’ give rise to a compounding deprivation effect, (Townsend, 1979, p31). but this is still measured by reference to those individuals. Having attributed the aggregate of Though ‘poverty’ and ‘deprivation’ have often individual experience of deprivation to the area been used interchangeably, many have argued however, it is possible to say that an area is deprived that a clear distinction should be made between in that particular dimension. And having measured them (see for example the discussion in Nolan and specific dimensions of deprivation, these can be Whelan, 1996). Based on this line of thought, it can understood as domains of multiple deprivation. In be argued that the condition of poverty means not his article ‘Deprivation’ Townsend also lays down having enough financial resources to meet a need, the foundation for articulating multiple deprivation whereas deprivation refers to an unmet need, as an aggregation of several types of deprivation which is caused by a lack of resources of all kinds, (Townsend, 1987). Townsend’s formulation of not just financial. multiple deprivation is the starting point for the 1.3 The concept of multiple model of small area deprivation which is presented deprivation in this report.

The starting point for the NIMD is a conceptual model of multiple deprivation. The model of

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 6 SecTION 2: DaTazONeS

Datazones are a new statistical geography for Namibia created especially for this version of the NIMD 2001. This section provides a non-technical overview of the process of creating the datazones and summarises their characteristics. Internal homogeneity

The methodology adopted is based on a similar : It is important that process undertaken in South Africa (Avenell et al., datazones comprise EAs of similar characteristics. 2009) which in turn was adapted from techniques This helps to ensure that the datazone geography developed in the United Kingdom (see, for example, created is ‘meaningful’ in that, for example, in Martin et al., 2001). Datazones were built up urban areas housing of a similar type are grouped from Census Enumeration Areas (EAs) to create a together within one datazone and that those living standard uniform geography across Ohangwena in EAs within a single datazone share similar socio- region based on the existing EA geography which economic characteristics. In order to achieve this nest within the eleven constituency boundaries. all EAs were analysed using a technique known Though a datazone may be created from a single as cluster analysis. This technique groups EAs EA, it is usually created by merging one or more across the country and the region into a small contiguous EAs which share common characteristics number of ‘families’ based on a variety of relevant in accordance with a set of pre-defined rules. The characteristics. The datazones were checked actual creation of datazones was undertaken using and validated by obtaining aerial photography a variety of geographical programming techniques underlays for the mapping software and visually (see Avenell et al., 2009). A set of rules governing inspecting boundary positions. the merging process was drawn up to ensure that the datazones had, as close as was possible, the following characteristics: Though a datazone Population size

: Datazones are designed to have may be created from a a similar resident population size - this allows single EA, it is usually comparability across the region. The target population size was 1,000 with a minimum of 500 created by merging and maximum of 1,500. A total 233 datazones were created for the Ohangwena region. one or more contiguous Population density EAs which : Datazones should comprise EAs of similar population density. This is important share common to ensure that urban areas become distinct from rural areas. The datazone algorithm incorporated characteristics in thresholds to ensure that, wherever possible, urban areas became tightly bounded. accordance with a set of pre-defined rules. Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 7 SecTION 3: MeThODOlOGy

3.1 an introduction to the domains

and indicators than one domain. So, for example, if someone was unemployed, had no qualifications and had Domains no access to basic material goods they would be captured in the Employment Deprivation, Education The NIMD was produced using the 2001 Namibian Deprivation and Material Deprivation domains. Population Census which was supplied by the The indicators were chosen following an extensive Namibian Central Bureau of Statistics for the consultation process with representatives of the Central Bureau of Statistics, Khomas Regional purposes of this project. Whilst the intention 2 should always to be concept-led rather than ‘data- Council and UNDP . driven’, the project team was restricted to selecting indicators from the range of questions included within the 2001 Census. The NIMD was produced at datazone level (and also at constituency level on The NIMD was a comparable basis). There are 233 datazones and produced using the 11 constituencies in Ohangwena region. The NIMD contains five domains of deprivation: 2001 Namibian • 1 Population Census • Material Deprivation • Employment Deprivation which was • Health Deprivation • Education Deprivation supplied by the Living Environment Deprivation Namibian Central

Each domain is presented as a separate domain Bureau of Statistics index reflecting a particular aspect of deprivation. for the purposes Each domain seeks to measure only one dimension of deprivation, avoiding overlaps between the of this project domains and providing a direct measure of the Indicators deprivation in question. Individuals can however, experience more than one type of deprivation Each domain index contains a number of indicators. at any given time and it is therefore conceivable There are 11 indicators in total in the NIMD. The that the same person can be captured in more aim for each domain was to include a parsimonious

1 2 This refers to material goods, that is, assets or possessions. During the consultation process a number of other domains were discussed. These included: access to recreation facilities, level of participation in community activities, crime, food security, provision of emergency services, and availability of affordable transport. Unfortunately data relating to these issues were not available within the Census. These issues could be incorporated into further iterations of the NIMD if appropriate administrative or geographical data becomes available. Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 8 (i.e. economical in number) collection of indicators that comprehensively captured the deprivation for In any event, the 2001 each domain, but within the constraints of the data available from the 2001 Census. When identifying Census did not have an indicators for the domains, it was important to income question and so an ensure that they are direct measures of the domain of deprivation in question and specific to that income poverty indicator, if domain. included, would need to be In the construction of that index the indicators were modelled from a different data discussed at length during the consultation process and every effort was made to ensure that they source such as the Namibian were appropriate for the Namibian context. The Household Income and domains need to allow different geographical areas to be distinguished from one another; therefore it Expenditure Survey would be unhelpful to identify a deprivation which In the following sub-sections the domains and is experienced by most people in most areas as this indicators which make up the NIMD 2001 are would not enable the areas to be ranked relative to described. each other in terms of deprivation. 3.2 Material Deprivation Domain

purpose of the domain With the exception This domain measures the proportion of the of changes to three population experiencing material deprivation indicators in the newly in an area by reference to the percentage of the population who are deprived of access to basic constituted Living material possessions. background Environment

Deprivation Domain, In other indices that have followed this model (e.g. UK indices), an Income Deprivation Domain the indicators are was created. However, there is an argument that the same as those used such a domain is inappropriate within an Index of Multiple Deprivation, because - as explained above in the previous - deprivation can be regarded as the outcome of constituency level index. lack of income rather than the lack of income itself.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 9 •

To follow Townsend, within a multiple deprivation Number of people living in a household with no measure, only the deprivations resulting from a access to a telephone/cell phone. combining the indicators low income would be included so low income itself would not be a component, but lack of material possessions would be included. In any event, the A simple proportion of people living in households 2001 Census did not have an income question and experiencing either one or both of the deprivations so an income poverty indicator, if included, would was calculated (i.e. the number of people living in need to be modelled from a different data source a household with no access to a television/radio such as the Namibian Household Income and and/or with no access to a telephone/cell phone Expenditure Survey. Such modelling work is being divided by the total population). 3.3 employment Deprivation undertaken separately for the Central Bureau of Statistics (now Namibia Statistics Agency) by Lux Domain Development and will provide a complementary purpose of the domain small area measure of income poverty. For these reasons, a material deprivation domain was produced. A lack of access to basic material goods This domain measures employment deprivation can be understood as a proxy for low income. The conceptualised as involuntary exclusion of the 2001 Census included questions about access to working age population from the world of work material goods (e.g. television, radio, newspaper, by reference to the percentage of the working age telephone and computer) which are internationally population who are unemployed. background accepted and widely used as measures of variations in living standards. The 2001 Census recorded employment status in Of the possible material goods that could be line with the International Labour Organisation included as indicators, access to a television/radio (ILO) ‘labour force framework’ and the ‘priority ‘regardless of the amount of time and telephone/cell phone were selected as they rules’ which give precedence to employment over devoted to it, which in extreme cases may be only one represent important modes of communication all other activities hour’ and a means of accessing information crucial to one’s life and livelihood. The quality of the services (Hussmanns, 2007, p6). Therefore a person provided however, were not be taken into account. was considered to be employed if during the seven Indicators days prior to the Census night they worked for • at least one hour for pay, profit or family gain. It Number of people living in a household with no follows that unemployment was defined as a access to a television or a radio; or situation of a total lack of work. The definition of

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 10 combining the indicators th unemployment adopted by the 13 International Conference of Labour Statistics (ICLS) stipulates The domain was calculated as those identified as three criteria which must be simultaneously met for unemployed and aged 15 to 59 inclusive divided by a person to be considered unemployed. According the number of people who are economically active to this official definition, the unemployed are those in that age group. persons within the economically active population 3.4 health Deprivation Domain (aged 15-65 inclusive) who during the reference period (for the 2001 Census this is the seven days purpose of the domain prior to Census night) were: 1. Without work, i.e. in a situation of total lack of This domain identifies areas with relatively high work; and rates of people who die prematurely. The domain 2. Currently available for work, i.e. not a student measures premature mortality but not aspects of forthcoming or homemaker or otherwise unavailable for behaviour or environment that may be predictive work; and of health deprivation. 3. Seeking work, i.e. taking steps to seek background employment or self-employment. Although the consultation process raised the Using the 2001 Census however, it was not possible importance of measuring people’s health status; to measure whether unemployed people were and access to health facilities and healthcare, available for work and seeking work. Though these issues could not be measured using the 2001 other indices have also included people of Census data. It was therefore not possible to include working age who cannot work because of illness any measures of morbidity or access to health or disability, as they are involuntarily excluded services. Instead a form of standardised mortality from the world of work and internationally are ratio known as Years of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) regarded as the ‘hidden unemployed’ (Beatty et was used. An internationally recognised measure al., 2000), the consultation group wanted to limit of poor health, the YPLL measure is the level of this domain to the economically active population unexpected mortality weighted by the age of the and therefore disabled or long-term sick people individual who has died (for details about how this were not included. The age band was modified to indicator was constructed see Blane and Drever, 15-59 inclusive to reflect a concept of working age 1998). An area with a relatively high death rate in a ceteris paribus relevant to Namibia. young age group (including areas with high levels Indicator of infant mortality) will therefore , • have a higher overall YPLL score than an area with

Number of people aged 15-59 inclusive who a similarly relatively high death rate for an older are unemployed. age group.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 11 3.5 education Deprivation Domain

The YPLL measure is purpose of the domain

related to life expectancy This domain measures deprivation in educational attainment for people aged 15 to 59 inclusive. in an area. Areas with low background life expectancy will have high YPLL scores Elsewhere in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) region it has been shown that the level of educational attainment in the working age adult population is closely linked The YPLL indicator is a directly age and gender to an individual’s employment status and future standardised measure of premature death (i.e. 3 opportunities for those individuals and their death under the age of 75) . The YPLL measure dependants (Bhorat et al., 2004). is related to life expectancy in an area. Areas The 2001 Census includes a record of the level with low life expectancy will have high YPLL of education completed and a record of illiteracy. scores. Equally high levels of infant mortality and These two questions provide the best available perinatal mortality as well as high levels of serious measures of educational attainment and make up illness such as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis will all the indicators for this domain. The consultation contribute to reduced life expectancy in an area process additionally raised the importance of and therefore high YPLL scores. Thus, although affordable education and availability of tertiary the YPLL is a mortality measure, it does, implicitly, education opportunities, but again, these could not reflect the extent of serious ill-health in an area. be adequately captured using the 2001 Census. And although it would have been possible to use Indicators infant mortality, under-five mortality, and life • expectancy as indicators, YPLL in effect combines Number of 15-59 year olds inclusive with no all these issues into a single indicator and is schooling completed at secondary level or therefore a broader and more useful overview of • above; or health deprivation in an area. Indicator Number of 15-59 year olds inclusive who are • illiterate. combining the indicators Years of potential life lost

A simple proportion of the working age population (aged 15 to 59 years old inclusive) who had not

3. Because the direct method of standardisation makes use of individual age/gender death rates it is often associated with small numbers. An empirical Bayes or ‘shrinkage’ technique is therefore used to smooth the individual age/gender death rates in order to reduce the impact of small number problems on the YPLL.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 12 completed schooling at secondary level or who the previous constituency level index. However, at are illiterate was calculated (i.e. the number of datazone level, all individuals in a high proportion people with no schooling completed at secondary of datazones were found to lack electricity for level or above or who are illiterate divided by the lighting. These datazones would all be given population aged 15 to 59 inclusive). the same overall score for this domain, and so it 3.6 living environment Deprivation would not be possible to discriminate between Domain datazones in terms of their level of deprivation. For this reason the indicator was altered slightly purpose of the domain to include paraffin alongside electricity (and solar power) as the measure of access to energy for This domain measures both inadequacy in housing lighting. The inclusion of paraffin however, does conditions and a lack of basic services to the not imply any judgement about its suitability for home. lighting purposes, but is rather a means of enabling background datazones to be properly ranked on this domain.

The 2001 Census questionnaire provides indicators Access to clean drinking water and sanitation on households’ access to basic amenities. These facilities is essential for the good health of the aspects of the immediate environment in which population and thus an important indicator to people live impact on the quality of their life and include in this domain. An indicator of no access to provide good measures of deprivation in terms of piped water within the home or within 200 metres access to services. of the home was included. The threshold of 200

Measuring access to electricity as a basic amenity is a useful indicator of living environment deprivation. Access to clean Three Census indicators were considered: main source of energy for cooking, lighting and heating. drinking water and Although cost, availability and effectiveness are sanitation facilities factors in the consumption of all energy supplies, it has been argued that in certain instances, the is essential for the choice of fuel for cooking may be influenced by good health of the cultural preference rather than availability alone, whereas the use of electricity for lighting would population and thus generally be the preferred choice, if available, and therefore provides a more valid measure of an important indicator deprivation in terms of access to energy for lighting to include in (Bhorat et al., 2004). This was the measure used in this domain

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 13 metres was regarded by the consultation group as felt that the most appropriate measure of crowding preferable to a threshold of 400 metres (the MDG was to classify three or more people per room as a measure). Though in the previous (constituency) deprivation. Setting the capacity cut-off at two or index people without flush toilets or ventilated pit more people per room was considered. However, it latrines were regarded as deprived, investigation of was felt that this lower capacity would capture too this indicator at datazone level revealed that again, many non-deprived people, for example relatively a high proportion of datazones scored 100 percent. well-off couples sharing a one room urban Therefore, as with the access to energy indicator, apartment. Indicators an additional criterion was added: long drop pit latrines were included alongside flush toilets and • ventilated pit latrines. Again, the inclusion of long Number of people living in a household without drop pit latrines does not imply adequacy, but the use of electricity, paraffin or solar power for is included simply as a means of discriminating • lighting; or between datazones. Number of people living in a household without access to a flush toilet or pit latrine (ventilated The quality of housing construction provides an • or long drop); or important indicator for the quality of day-to-day Number of people living in a household without life and vulnerability to shocks such as adverse piped water/borehole/borehole with covered weather conditions (Bhorat et al., 2004; Programme tank (but not open tank)/protected well inside of Action Chapter 2 World Summit for Social • their dwelling or yard or within 200 metres; or Development Copenhagen 1995). There was much Number of people living in a household that is discussion during the consultation process about • a shack; or traditional dwellings and their adequacy. Though Number of people living in a household with the 2001 Census contains fairly precise information three or more people per room. combining the indicators about materials used in the construction process, there is no way of identifying whether the resultant buildings were of a high quality or not. It was A simple proportion of people living in households therefore agreed that only shacks could be reliably experiencing one or more of the deprivations was identified as constituting inadequate housing. calculated (i.e. the number of people living in a household without electricity, paraffin or solar The crowding indicator is calculated by dividing power for lighting and/or without adequate toilet the number of people in the household by the facilities and/or without adequate water provision number of rooms excluding bathrooms, toilets, and/or living in a shack and/or in overcrowded kitchens, stoops and verandas. Different versions conditions divided by the total population). of the crowding indicator were considered. It was

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 14 3.7 constructing the domain indices

In all domains apart from the Health Deprivation As Censuses can be Domain, the overall score is a simple proportion regarded as a sample of the relevant population, and so can be easily interpreted. As Censuses can be regarded as a from a super-population, sample from a super-population, it is important it is important to to consider and deal with large standard errors. A technique that takes standard errors into account consider and deal with but still enables one to then combine the domains large standard errors. into an overall index of multiple deprivation is called Bayesian shrinkage estimation. Specifically, A technique that takes the scores for datazones can be unreliable when the deprived population is small and so the shrinkage standard errors into technique was applied to each of the domains. The account but still enables ‘shrunk’ estimate is the weighted average of the original datazone level estimate and an appropriate one to then combine larger spatial unit. The weight is based on the the domains into an standard error of the original datazone estimate and the amount of variation within the constituency. overall index of multiple For further details about this technique see Annex 2 of the 2001 NIMD National Report available at deprivation is called http://www.undp.org.na/publications.aspx and Bayesian shrinkage also Noble et al. (2006b). 3.8 Standardising and transforming estimation the domain indices

standardise the scores before any combination could take place. A form of standardisation and Having obtained a set of domain indices, these transformation is required that meets the following needed to be combined into an overall Namibia criteria. First it must ensure that each domain Index of Multiple Deprivation and in order to has a common distribution; second, it must not combine domain indices which are each based on be scale dependent (i.e. conflate size with level of different metrics there needed to be some way to deprivation); third, it must have an appropriate

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 15 degree of cancellation built into it; and fourth, it must facilitate the identification of the most deprived datazones. The exponential transformation of the A form of standardisation ranks best meets these criteria and was applied and transformation is in the NIMD 2001. For further details about this technique see Annex 3 of the 2001 NIMD National required that meets the Report available at http://www.undp.org.na/ publications.aspx and also Noble et al. (2006b). following criteria. First it 3.9 Weights for the domain indices when combining into an overall must ensure that each Index of Multiple Deprivation domain has a common distribution; second, it must Domains are conceived as independent dimensions not be scale dependent (i.e. of multiple deprivation, each with their own additive impact on multiple deprivation. The conflate size with level of strength of this impact, though, may vary between deprivation); third, it must domains depending on their relative importance. As a starting point, equal weights for the domains have an appropriate degree were recommended and this was supported by the of cancellation built into it; consultation group. Each domain was therefore assigned a weight of 1. The NIMD was therefore and fourth, it must facilitate constructed by adding the standardised and the identification of the most transformed domain indices with equal weights. deprived datazones. The exponential transformation of the ranks best meets these criteria and was applied in the NIMD 2001. For further details see Annex 3 and Noble et al. (2006b)

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 16 SecTION 4: DaTazONe level NaMIbIaN INDex Of MUlTIple DepRIvaTION 2001: OhaNGWeNa ReGION

4.1 Multiple Deprivation

shows the datazones in Ohangwena in relation to the overall NIMD (i.e. the five separate domains In this section a profile of multiple deprivation of deprivation combined together). The lightest in Ohangwena region, at both constituency and shading relates to the least deprived datazones. datazone levels, is presented. Using the data from The map provides an easy to interpret picture of the the NIMD it is possible to compare the 233 datazones pattern of multiple deprivation in the Ohangwena and 11 constituencies within Ohangwena. Map 1 region.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 17

18 Map 1

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 18 Table 1 below shows some of the data underlying Omulonga constituency, and is therefore given this map. The NIMD 2001 score, national rank a rank of 1 among the datazones in Ohangwena. (where 1=most deprived and 1,871=least deprived) If ranked alongside all datazones in Namibia, it th and Ohangwena rank (where 1=most deprived ranks as the 5 most deprived. Fifty-six of the 233 and 233=least deprived) for the 20 most deprived datazones in Ohangwena are in the most deprived datazones in Ohangwena are shown. Appendix 2 10 percent of datazones in Namibia in terms of provides this information for all of the datazones multiple deprivation (the cut-off for the 10 percent in Ohangwena. most deprived is a rank of 187). The least deprived datazone in Ohangwena is located in Engela and is TableThe most 1: The deprived 20 most datazone deprived in datazones Ohangwena in is the in Ohangwenaranked at Region 1,686 in Namibia as a whole. NIMD rank NIMD rank – Datazone constituency NIMD score – within national Ohangwena

1085 Omulonga 358.4 5 1 1093 Omulonga 349.9 7 2 1080 Omulonga 348.6 8 3 1053 Oshikango 346.5 9 4 1002 Omundaungilo 334.1 20 5 1094 Omulonga 330.8 21 6 1069 Oshikango 325.1 26 7 962 Ohangwena 321.3 29 8 1107 Omulonga 320.5 32 9 902 Endola 317.4 37 10 942 Epembe 310.1 42 11 1091 Omulonga 309.2 45 12 907 Endola 307.5 49 13 1102 Omulonga 305.5 52 14 954 Epembe 304.1 53 15 993 Okongo 303.0 54 16 976 Okongo 301.4 59 17 1087 Omulonga 299.6 67 18 1072 Oshikango 299.6 68 19 934 Engela 299.2 69 20

national The eleven constituencies in Ohangwena vary in the interquartile range for the overall NIMD. This terms of the range of deprivation of their datazones. is based on the ranks (i.e. where the most Chart 1 shows the minimum, maximum and deprived datazone in Namibia is ranked 1, and the median rank of datazones in each constituency and least deprived datazone is ranked 1,871).

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 19

Interpreting the Charts: For details on how to interpret the chart please see the ‘How to interpret interquartile range charts’ description in section 4.1 of the national report available at http://www.undp.org.na/publications.aspx

Interpreting the Charts: For details on how to interquartile range charts’ description in section interpret the chart please see the ‘How to interpret 4.1 of the national report available at http://www. undp.org.na/publications.aspx

The vertical green line for each constituency shows constituency represents the rank of the median Thethe range vertical of the green ranks ofline the for datazones each constituency in that datazone shows within the that range constituency. of the ranks The median of the constituency (including the dots which appear rank in Endola and Omulonga is lower (more datazones in that constituency (including the dots which appear at either end of the line for at either end of the line for some constituencies). deprived) than in the other constituencies. If the some constituencies).Several of the Several constituencies, of the particularlyconstituencies box, isparticularly relatively short Oh thisangwena, indicates that Eenhana datazones and Engela, Ohangwena,have a large Eenhana range and of Engela, deprivation have a . large are ranked in a narrow range, with similar NIMD range of deprivation. ranks (and therefore more or less similar levels of The green box for each constituency showsmultiple the range deprivation). of the Most NIMD of the ranksconstituencies, of the middle 50The percent green box of for datazones each constituency in the shows constituency the with (the the exceptioninterquartile of Eenhana range). and EngelaThe horizontalhave a line withinrange the of the box NIMD for ranks each of constituencythe middle 50 percent represents relatively the ranknarrow o rangef the for median the middle datazone 50 percent. within that constituency.of datazones in The the constituencymedian rank (the interquartilein Endola andIf Omulonga this box sits towardsis lower the (more bottom deprived) of the chart than in the otherrange). constituencies. The horizontal lineIf the within box the is box relatively for each shortit tells th is us indicates that datazones that indatazones the constituency are ranked in a narrow range, with similar NIMD ranks (and therefore more or less similar levels of multiple deprivation).Datazone levelMost Namibian of the Indexconstituencies, of Multiple Deprivation with the 2001exception - Ohangwena of Eenhana Report and Engela 20have a relatively narrow range for the middle 50 percent.

If this box sits towards the bottom of the chart it tells us that datazones in the constituency are concentrated in the most deprived part of the national distribution of the NIMD. If the box sits towards the top of the chart it tells us that datazones in the constituency

20 are concentrated in the most deprived part of rates. So for example, 85.8 percent of the population the national distribution of the NIMD. If the box in Engela constituency experienced material sits towards the top of the chart it tells us that deprivation in 2001. The within Ohangwena datazones in the constituency are concentrated in ranks are shown as well as the domain scores, for the least deprived part of the national distribution. each constituency in Ohangwena (where 1=most For Ohangwena region, datazones in all of the deprived). constituencies are concentrated towards the most deprived end of the distribution. This is In terms of material deprivation, the most particularly the case for datazones in Endola, deprived constituencies in Ohangwena are Epembe, Omulonga, Omundaungilo, Ondobe and Epembe, Omundaungilo and Okongo with a very Ongenga constituencies. high 99 percent, 99 percent and 98 percent of the population,n respectively, experiencing material Further analysis shows that eight of the eleven deprivation in these constituencies. constituencies in Ohangwena have datazones in the most deprived 10 percent of datazones on the In relation to employment deprivation, the overall NIMD. The eight constituencies and the most deprived constituency is Endola (with number of datazones that are in the most deprived 78 percent of the relevant population being 10 percent of datazones on the overall NIMD employment deprived in 2001), followed by within Ohangwena are as follows: Endola (3 of 24), Ongenga (72 percent). Epembe and Okongo have Engela (1 of 22), Epembe (3 of 17), Ohangwena comparatively low proportions of the relevant (1 of 19), Okongo (2 of 26), Omulonga (9 of 34), population experiencing employment deprivation Omundaungilo (1 of 9) and Oshikango (3 of 23). at 8 percent and 4 percent, respectively. In all of 4.2 Domains of Deprivation the constituencies in Ohangwena over 60 percent of the relevant population was education deprived in 2001. The most deprived constituency however Although it is not possible to calculate multiple was Epembe with 69 percent of the relevant deprivation rates as such, each of the individual population being education deprived. domains of deprivation can be presented at constituency and datazone levels, and for all In terms of living environment deprivation, in domains except health the domain scores can be all of the constituencies a very high proportion compared. (over 90 percent) of the population experience living environment deprivation. The most Table 2 provides the domain scores for each deprived constituency is Epembe (with almost constituency in Ohangwena, excluding health as the 100 percent of the total population experiencing health score is not calculated as a rate. The other living environment deprivation in 2001) and the four domains are in the form of simple deprivation least deprived constituency is Engela (with 94

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 21 percent of the total population experiencing living A datazone with a relatively high death rate in a environment deprivation in 2001). young age group (including areas with high levels of infant mortality) will have a higher score than a The domain scores and ranks for each of the daatzone with a similarly relatively high death rate datazones in Ohangwena are presented in Appendix for an older age group, all else being equal. The 2. As in Table 2, four of the five domains are measure is related to life expectancy in an area, so expressed as rates. Health deprivation is expressed datazones with low life expectancy will have high as the years of potential life lost in that datazone. scores on this domain.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 22 9 8 1 2 5 3 4 6 7 11 10 rank iving l iving (within deprivation deprivation Ohangwena) environment environment 95.9 96.1 94.4 99.8 95.7 99.4 98.8 99.2 99.0 96.2 96.1 iving l iving rate (%) rate deprivation deprivation environment environment 9 5 1 8 6 2 3 4 7 11 10 rank (within ducation e deprivation Ohangwena) 62.9 63.0 66.2 64.2 67.5 67.3 66.9 62.9 68.5 66.1 65.2 ducation rate (%) rate e deprivation deprivation 8 1 7 6 3 9 5 2 4 10 11 rank (within deprivation Ohangwena) mployment e mployment 8.2 3.6 26.2 78.1 30.0 38.9 63.7 19.4 39.5 72.2 43.9 rate (%) rate deprivation deprivation mployment e mployment 6 5 7 8 2 4 1 3 9 10 11 rank (within Material Material deprivation Ohangwena) 88.6 89.4 85.8 79.5 82.4 98.6 65.3 93.7 98.9 98.3 79.7 rate (%) rate Material Material deprivation deprivation onstituency c Eenhana Endola Engela Ohangwena Omulonga Omundaungilo Ondobe Ongenga Epembe Okongo Oshikango Table 2: Domain scores and ranks for each constituency in the Ohangwena Region in the Ohangwena for each constituency and ranks 2: Domain scores Table

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 23 Table 3 shows the percentage of each constituency’s to have datazones in the most deprived 10 percent nationally datazones that are in the most deprived 10 percent in terms of education deprivation. Over 70 percent of datazones for each domain. All of the of the datazones in Epembe and Okongo are in the constituencies in Ohangwena feature amongst the most deprived 10 percent of datazones nationally most deprived 10 percent of datazones in Namibia in terms of material deprivation. Almost 90 percent on two or more of the domains. Omulonga is the of Endola’s datazones are in the most deprived only constituency to have datazones in the most 10 percent nationally in terms of employment deprived 10 percent nationally for all five of the deprivation, and Ongenga has a similarly high domains as it is the only constituency in Ohangwena percentage of datazones (84 percent) in the most deprived 10 percent. Table 3: percentage of datazones in most deprived 10 percent of datazones in Namibia Number of Material employment health education living env. constituency datazones deprivation deprivation deprivation deprivation deprivation

Eenhana 19 21.1 10.5 10.5 0.0 26.3 Endola 24 0.0 87.5 16.7 0.0 0.0 Engela 22 0.0 18.2 27.3 0.0 0.0 Epembe 17 70.6 0.0 11.8 0.0 47.1 Ohangwena 19 5.3 10.5 36.8 0.0 5.3 Okongo 26 76.9 0.0 11.5 0.0 26.9 Omulonga 34 11.8 52.9 32.4 2.9 23.5 Omundaungilo 9 44.4 0.0 33.3 0.0 33.3 Ondobe 21 9.5 9.5 23.8 0.0 52.4 Ongenga 19 0.0 84.2 31.6 0.0 0.0 Oshikango 23 8.7 17.4 39.1 0.0 17.4

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 24 Table 4 shows the percentage of each constituency’s and Okongo have datazones in the most deprived 10 within Ohangwena datazones that are in the most deprived 10 percent percent for four of the five domains. The 10 percent of datazones for each domain. most deprived datazones in terms of health can be Again Omulonga is the only constituency that has at found in all constituencies; this is not the case for least one datazone in the most deprived 10 percent any other domain. of datazones for each domain. Epembe, Ohangwena

Table 4: percentage of datazones in most deprived 10% of datazones in the Ohangwena Region Number of Material employment health education living env. constituency datazones deprivation deprivation deprivation deprivation deprivation

Eenhana 19 0.0 0.0 10.5 0.0 15.8 Endola 24 0.0 37.5 4.2 0.0 0.0 Engela 22 0.0 4.5 13.6 0.0 0.0 Epembe 17 35.3 0.0 5.9 5.9 5.9 Ohangwena 19 5.3 5.3 26.3 10.5 0.0 Okongo 26 46.2 0.0 3.8 26.9 15.4 Omulonga 34 2.9 26.5 8.8 17.6 5.9 Omundaungilo 9 33.3 0.0 22.2 0.0 22.2 Ondobe 21 0.0 0.0 14.3 33.3 33.3 Ongenga 19 0.0 10.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 Oshikango 23 0.0 4.3 4.3 0.0 17.4

The following maps present each of the five least deprived datazones. It is intended that these domains at datazone level for Ohangwena region. maps should provide accessible profiles of the As with Map 1, the lightest shading relates to the domains of deprivation in the Ohangwena Region.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 25

Map 2

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 26

Map 3

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 27

Map 4

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 28

Map 5

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 29

Map 6

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 30 SecTION 5: cONclUSIONS aND SOMe pOlIcy RecOMMeNDaTIONS

The analysis presented in this report has identified particular areas – both datazones and constituencies – where deprivation is high relative to other areas in Ohangwena region. This analysis can support pro-poor policy formulation processes and programmatic interventions in many ways.

By providing reliable and objective information on, and profiling the distribution of, multiple deprivation and the distribution of the individual By providing reliable domains of deprivation across the region, the and objective information analysis presented in this report can provide planners; policy and decision makers at the regional on, and profiling the level with the evidence base on which to plan and distribution of multiple make decisions regarding resource allocation and the geographic areas (constituencies and deprivation and the individual datazones) and sectors in which to prioritise public investments, government support and service domains of deprivation delivery. Specifically, the analysis can be useful in across the country, the NIMD the following ways: Temporal analysis of nature, scope and effects of can provide policy and poverty reduction programmes decision makers with the : By describing the geographical distribution and extent of individual evidence base on which to dimensions of deprivation and overall multiple deprivation at constituency and datazone levels, make decisions regarding this report provides a baseline map of deprivation resource allocation and the against which progress in poverty reduction in these areas can be measured over time, that is geographic areas and sectors between successive censuses (2001 and 2011 in which to prioritise public censuses). The NIMD is based on data relating to 2001 time- line and significant changes may have investments, government taken place since then. It will thus be necessary to support and service conduct further analyses using the 2011 Census data and information in order to shed light on the delivery relating to the extent to which changes have occurred in the region and possible reasons for any noted changes. various domains of deprivation Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 31 Interrogating the causes of inequality

: The report constituencies and datazones characterised by could be used by the regional authorities to initiate severe multiple deprivation could be targeted for the process of interrogating the causal factors of integrated development projects and programmes. such wide inter- and intra-constituency (datazone The most deprived areas vary by domain, and not all level) variations with respect to specific domains areas show a uniform degree of deprivation across and the overall combined and weighted index of the domains. This should be taken into account deprivation. when selecting a measure of deprivation to use Better planning and targeting of development as it is important to choose the most appropriate resources: measure for the particular policy purpose. Regional Councils have two distinct sources of development revenue – transfers It should be noted however, that the NIMD, as relative from central government and locally generated presented in this report, provides a profile of resources. The NIMD allows for better planning deprivation in Ohangwena region and for and targeting of such resources on the basis of even the least deprived areas, such as Eenhana relative deprivation to the datazone level. Priorities constituency, contain pockets of deprivation. They can then be identified at the constituency and are simply less deprived than other areas with datazone levels that could be addressed through higher levels of deprivation such as Omulonga integrated development approaches. Importantly, constituency. As such, spatially targeted policy funds could be targeted to and ring-fenced for those initiatives should be regarded as a complement to, sectors/domains in which specific constituencies rather than a substitution for, mainstream pro-poor and datazones are particularly deprived or to policies and strategies that the Regional Council and the most deprived constituencies and datazones National Government are already implementing in within a constituency. It is also conceivable that Ohangwena region.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 32 aNNex 1: INDIcaTORS INclUDeD IN The NIMD 2001

Material Deprivation Domain •

Number of 15-59 year olds (inclusive) who are Numerator illiterate • Denominator

Number of people living in a household with • no access to a television or a radio; or Population aged 15-59 (inclusive) living environment Deprivation Domain Number of people living in a household with no access to a telephone/cell phone Denominator Numerator •

Total population Number of people living in a household employment Deprivation Domain without the use of electricity, paraffin or solar • power for lighting; or Numerator Number of people living in a household • without access to a flush toilet or pit latrine Number of people aged 15-59 who are • (ventilated or long drop); or unemployed Number of people living in a household Denominator without piped water/borehole/borehole with covered tank (but not open tank)/protected Total economically active population aged 15-59 well inside their dwelling or yard or within inclusive • 200 metres; or health Deprivation Domain Number of people living in a household that is • a shack; or Numerator Number of people living in a household with • three or more people per room Denominator Years of potential life lost education Deprivation Domain

Total population Numerator •

Number of 15-59 year olds (inclusive) with no schooling completed at secondary level or above; or

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 33 aNNex 2: DOMaIN aND OveRall NIMD ScOReS aND RaNKS 77 72 58 36 95 38 37 23 33 153 163 111 188 204 218 164 143 214 187 232 227 152 229 110 rank NIMD 56.6 98.3 90.2 206.6 200.6 229.5 247.4 186.2 168.7 132.2 200.2 211.5 250.4 145.6 262.4 188.1 281.2 235.4 278.6 206.7 280.5 289.9 230.2 285.0 score NIMD 7 1 81 12 46 53 62 89 36 91 52 95 156 205 180 138 152 233 144 222 134 230 175 204 rank iving l iving deprivation deprivation environment environment 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 97.8 93.4 96.8 98.7 99.9 99.9 99.8 98.0 99.9 99.9 49.0 99.8 98.4 87.0 98.7 99.9 81.6 99.8 97.2 93.6 score iving l iving deprivation deprivation environment environment 90 26 34 53 64 83 54 38 85 154 152 221 191 202 203 227 206 133 174 151 233 139 184 128 rank ducation e deprivation 64.2 67.4 71.5 64.4 71.0 60.6 69.9 55.8 59.6 69.1 59.5 55.1 67.9 59.2 65.4 62.3 64.4 44.5 65.3 61.4 69.6 70.4 65.6 67.9 score ducation e deprivation deprivation 19 87 22 90 65 78 232 154 221 144 214 182 178 129 200 167 209 181 139 220 132 114 161 190 rank h ealth deprivation deprivation 71.9 644.1 229.4 683.4 480.4 295.8 744.0 586.0 521.3 359.5 323.5 972.7 701.4 506.9 229.9 733.9 807.2 614.8 431.1 1707.6 1013.0 1685.7 1178.5 1081.1 score h ealth deprivation deprivation 4 2 92 15 81 56 52 63 164 194 137 111 134 146 110 162 161 156 126 167 145 203 117 165 rank deprivation mployment e mployment 6.8 4.2 17.2 55.0 30.3 45.0 85.0 31.7 61.0 26.0 45.0 18.8 19.2 70.9 89.5 21.4 72.8 37.1 16.2 26.6 69.2 42.3 17.0 90.3 score deprivation deprivation mployment e mployment 46 66 95 74 77 88 43 27 34 61 170 103 107 119 139 127 123 112 189 114 223 210 194 220 rank Material Material deprivation 98.6 97.8 86.0 96.0 97.4 97.2 96.4 95.7 98.6 95.3 99.3 94.5 91.9 93.5 93.9 95.0 77.6 94.9 98.9 43.6 61.4 72.1 47.5 97.9 score Material Material deprivation deprivation onstituency Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Endola Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Endola c Eenhana Eenhana Endola Eenhana Endola Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Eenhana Endola 882 881 883 888 895 877 879 880 884 887 890 894 Datazone 876 878 897 889 896 886 891 893 875 885 892 898 This table presents the scores and ranks for every datazone in Ohangwena for the health five the domains score is and calculated as the a overall rate. So NIMD. for For example, 61.4% all of the domains population except in datazone 875 in Eenhana score higher a and datazone, that in mortality) constituency premature of experienced measure (a lost life potential material of years the as expressed is Health 2001. in deprivation 1=most deprived). each datazone (where for shown are ranks The within Ohangwena health deprivation. greater indicates

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 34 79 10 55 60 50 68 88 30 71 52 13 44 59 39 155 230 142 220 206 196 105 149 109 159 183 221 231 131 198 136 160 85.7 59.5 204.9 246.3 317.4 211.9 127.1 165.7 266.9 177.3 231.5 207.0 230.4 260.5 270.9 203.1 252.6 188.7 237.9 286.6 125.6 250.7 216.1 268.8 175.0 307.5 274.4 214.4 203.0 261.5 277.6 92 86 64 73 197 141 214 104 198 206 192 151 195 177 217 221 135 107 225 126 216 150 123 182 231 186 208 136 111 166 172 95.1 98.5 91.1 99.5 94.9 93.3 95.5 98.0 95.3 96.9 88.6 87.1 98.7 99.3 85.2 99.0 88.9 98.0 99.0 96.4 78.2 99.8 96.1 99.8 92.9 98.7 99.2 97.6 99.9 97.2 99.9 41 89 58 60 95 56 71 209 107 125 172 179 190 131 135 198 228 132 223 175 230 218 134 155 195 181 211 103 137 145 112 58.7 70.3 66.5 65.8 62.5 61.8 60.6 67.5 65.4 69.4 65.3 60.3 54.4 65.4 69.4 67.2 55.8 62.1 49.2 56.6 69.5 65.3 64.1 68.7 60.4 61.6 58.4 66.7 65.3 64.9 66.2 4 7 57 94 68 88 52 69 10 51 66 92 43 75 99 71 137 138 201 135 212 170 119 126 113 196 230 173 106 125 211 704.8 701.7 351.0 716.0 935.4 316.6 996.3 571.7 792.8 756.3 945.0 809.0 371.5 557.8 110.0 837.2 758.6 905.3 317.0 1238.7 1166.6 3042.0 1301.5 1152.2 2019.4 1302.8 1177.1 1398.1 1122.0 2277.3 1149.8 8 9 5 16 54 17 47 70 29 26 57 11 55 78 59 42 91 66 68 32 88 37 212 193 160 166 141 220 159 121 100 2.4 6.9 1.7 84.8 72.3 84.7 74.3 66.5 80.7 88.3 19.9 81.5 70.9 85.8 71.5 87.7 16.7 28.1 63.2 69.9 89.5 75.0 55.1 68.1 20.9 67.9 79.1 56.9 77.1 40.9 52.1 92 72 82 57 89 67 54 96 136 148 213 137 184 131 196 211 165 183 135 179 147 117 182 116 108 229 176 169 101 122 161 96.3 92.6 90.6 97.6 60.0 96.7 92.0 80.3 98.3 92.9 96.4 97.7 71.0 60.1 87.4 80.5 98.3 92.7 81.4 96.0 91.1 94.7 81.0 94.7 95.2 23.0 82.2 86.2 95.8 94.1 88.1 Endola Endola Endola Engela Engela Endola Endola Engela Engela Endola Endola Endola Endola Endola Endola Engela Engela Engela Endola Endola Endola Endola Endola Engela Engela Engela Endola Endola Endola Engela Engela 902 901 900 928 929 903 899 918 919 917 914 915 916 913 905 927 922 920 912 910 909 906 904 926 924 921 911 908 907 925 923

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 35 20 78 64 11 22 49 56 15 85 157 197 233 225 224 202 180 173 175 128 112 169 209 158 107 108 171 119 124 129 203 151 55.4 299.2 204.1 175.3 247.0 256.0 104.0 106.6 170.2 190.9 196.3 195.4 217.8 229.1 198.1 161.7 310.1 293.7 272.6 266.8 203.2 230.7 230.7 196.6 224.8 220.4 216.9 304.1 169.3 206.7 240.7 94 40 56 48 35 30 11 58 61 43 75 39 98 32 60 67 24 212 162 190 110 232 224 228 219 133 178 199 187 109 105 99.8 92.2 97.7 95.7 99.2 69.3 86.7 82.6 88.2 98.8 96.9 94.9 96.1 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.2 99.9 99.5 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.7 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 28 80 78 27 69 24 45 39 40 10 43 29 91 57 55 51 74 143 123 180 217 200 104 106 148 222 187 201 167 193 189 71.5 65.0 68.1 65.8 68.1 71.5 61.6 56.7 59.9 66.7 68.8 66.6 64.7 55.8 61.0 71.6 59.8 70.1 70.3 70.3 72.9 70.1 71.5 62.8 67.4 69.5 69.5 69.9 60.5 68.4 60.7 37 18 24 97 73 11 60 82 31 79 158 131 176 227 179 191 123 213 193 231 142 153 207 184 112 222 148 183 109 202 127 86.8 618.2 738.9 537.0 922.7 165.2 511.0 427.4 764.2 299.8 410.8 700.0 647.5 325.8 472.0 809.3 220.0 672.2 479.7 821.4 350.1 754.0 1489.8 1770.7 1649.1 1144.8 2009.5 1223.5 1058.2 1588.3 1069.7 1 49 30 90 14 140 132 184 206 198 150 113 224 158 105 231 199 208 196 218 170 191 189 233 182 213 202 135 232 215 139 8.9 3.2 5.9 1.0 0.6 4.6 3.0 6.4 2.0 7.3 7.5 0.5 9.2 2.2 4.2 0.6 2.2 29.2 95.3 74.1 32.1 79.6 24.7 44.1 21.4 49.0 55.7 15.5 31.1 85.3 29.7 7 3 94 50 84 19 22 58 78 42 20 31 12 26 35 87 49 55 40 188 111 125 145 205 174 200 126 195 106 171 164 78.1 95.1 93.6 91.3 65.4 84.0 96.1 98.5 96.6 69.0 93.6 71.7 99.8 99.7 95.4 99.9 98.1 99.9 96.9 98.6 99.8 99.0 99.8 99.4 98.9 96.5 98.5 98.3 98.7 85.6 87.7 Engela Engela Engela Engela Ohangwena Engela Engela Epembe Engela Engela Engela Ohangwena Epembe Epembe Engela Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Epembe Ohangwena Ohangwena 935 936 934 933 960 937 939 940 931 932 938 959 941 942 930 944 943 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 958 957

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 36 8 26 93 17 74 91 75 43 81 228 226 213 192 184 141 166 135 216 134 201 176 210 207 145 127 167 185 144 103 162 106 90.4 288.4 236.1 301.4 101.8 148.3 183.6 188.6 213.2 199.8 214.5 248.7 142.5 236.2 214.9 171.6 195.4 248.6 160.7 163.4 321.3 210.6 219.1 275.0 199.4 188.5 210.7 232.3 201.1 230.9 244.7 9 97 19 78 79 69 63 29 84 80 74 87 42 44 229 137 200 124 139 163 183 160 209 158 173 132 202 116 147 106 157 99.7 81.7 98.7 99.9 94.4 99.0 99.8 98.6 97.7 96.4 97.7 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 92.9 97.8 97.2 98.8 93.8 99.1 98.0 99.4 99.8 99.8 99.9 99.8 97.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 3 19 61 97 22 35 59 86 47 44 11 14 23 93 13 171 153 215 119 142 188 166 213 208 199 168 164 173 146 231 176 62.6 72.0 64.3 57.3 69.3 67.0 71.7 71.0 66.0 65.0 69.4 60.8 63.0 67.8 70.1 57.8 58.9 62.8 60.0 76.9 70.1 63.5 72.9 62.3 64.8 72.4 71.6 67.2 48.6 61.9 72.6 6 2 50 77 63 13 55 89 85 14 64 17 15 39 98 218 118 226 198 162 175 195 219 223 165 228 205 177 180 159 147 246.1 793.8 365.7 614.4 168.5 539.0 991.8 400.0 234.3 217.3 597.3 158.0 343.5 531.6 509.9 617.8 674.1 922.5 1324.9 1083.2 1200.2 1863.7 1255.5 2391.8 1041.8 1838.5 1189.7 1781.5 1802.2 4547.3 1460.9 31 75 97 82 84 207 147 185 131 181 201 227 174 124 123 217 200 119 154 106 219 179 230 211 225 214 171 216 186 228 195 3.2 8.7 4.4 0.7 2.0 4.4 1.8 0.6 2.4 0.9 2.2 2.1 0.7 8.7 6.6 79.2 25.9 64.8 53.5 33.9 10.2 12.1 38.9 39.3 60.6 41.3 23.4 48.3 58.5 10.4 14.2 1 9 5 8 86 71 23 16 30 17 91 47 48 45 29 118 149 206 150 167 191 162 173 156 181 158 104 215 218 105 204 99.9 94.6 96.6 99.9 90.6 63.9 90.2 86.6 75.4 87.9 97.6 84.7 89.4 81.1 89.3 99.6 95.5 99.8 58.1 51.8 95.5 99.0 99.8 65.5 96.3 98.6 98.5 98.6 99.9 99.0 99.9 Okongo Ohangwena Okongo Okongo Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Okongo Okongo Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Okongo Okongo Ohangwena Ohangwena Ohangwena Okongo Okongo Ohangwena Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo 976 975 980 981 969 974 968 970 971 972 977 979 973 967 964 965 978 982 966 963 962 990 983 961 991 984 985 986 987 988 989

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 37 5 73 16 92 61 96 46 99 67 62 40 63 35 34 86 205 114 172 115 102 148 199 191 190 200 117 132 174 219 116 179 165.9 228.1 196.5 249.5 303.0 228.1 236.1 232.7 207.6 173.4 184.1 184.3 258.7 173.2 334.1 227.5 215.8 235.2 196.3 274.0 233.8 254.8 129.9 256.8 276.5 256.2 281.9 228.1 192.0 284.3 240.1 2 4 6 3 77 37 59 21 22 82 71 70 68 34 20 72 55 10 65 13 27 28 142 120 188 170 103 215 159 140 130 99.9 98.4 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.1 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 97.4 99.9 99.9 99.6 89.6 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 97.7 98.5 98.9 99.9 6 4 2 8 67 20 88 99 46 98 33 68 73 84 16 121 149 108 130 212 109 232 163 117 136 116 229 226 120 196 158 74.0 68.9 74.3 65.9 78.6 71.9 67.6 64.6 66.3 65.5 58.3 66.3 46.8 63.5 66.9 66.1 70.1 67.0 65.3 71.1 66.1 68.8 68.4 50.0 55.1 67.9 66.0 60.4 73.2 72.2 63.9 8 1 26 21 96 76 49 23 40 59 61 74 215 105 216 101 172 163 187 194 229 217 210 225 168 233 197 157 128 124 102 0.0 295.4 838.3 294.8 868.7 558.2 608.1 440.5 406.9 135.9 262.8 317.9 191.3 572.6 923.1 369.6 625.1 748.3 763.0 865.9 1631.4 1690.2 2090.6 1120.8 1367.5 1662.8 1426.1 1227.0 4561.7 1218.9 1136.5 71 72 46 61 98 143 125 221 226 205 222 210 197 204 229 223 192 209 177 114 168 152 183 175 101 155 157 108 104 169 173 1.6 0.7 3.6 1.4 6.1 3.8 0.6 1.0 7.2 2.5 2.8 9.0 27.9 38.5 11.2 43.5 16.1 24.6 11.9 51.9 23.3 65.9 21.4 47.0 50.4 65.6 74.5 69.6 15.9 53.4 13.6 4 2 75 36 28 15 13 11 41 10 69 18 21 14 73 37 70 59 56 99 32 80 227 225 208 224 219 232 192 209 199 97.3 99.9 32.4 42.3 98.8 99.3 99.9 99.8 99.8 99.9 98.7 99.9 97.6 99.8 99.8 99.8 97.4 98.8 97.6 98.0 98.3 95.8 62.7 99.0 43.1 50.5 12.0 74.4 62.3 96.8 69.5 Okongo Okongo Ondobe Ondobe Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Okongo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Omundaungilo Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe 992 993 1021 1022 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1003 1004 1002 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1017 1011 1018 1016 1012 1013 1014 1015 1019 1020

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 38 4 57 25 83 87 54 48 94 31 53 45 42 65 70 211 161 121 130 139 194 125 156 122 168 181 120 126 140 137 118 154 262.9 289.0 151.6 241.3 239.0 202.3 224.2 267.1 216.2 213.9 273.0 177.7 219.9 204.6 236.0 346.5 223.4 286.2 267.7 198.5 190.5 274.3 224.4 219.4 213.6 275.4 214.0 255.8 224.9 251.3 206.0 96 16 33 51 49 15 66 50 41 193 189 223 191 128 210 114 122 146 185 121 213 148 119 176 207 194 115 153 161 201 184 95.5 95.8 86.8 95.6 98.9 92.9 99.1 99.1 98.1 96.3 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.1 99.9 99.9 91.8 98.0 99.1 97.1 93.1 99.9 95.5 99.1 98.0 97.7 99.9 99.9 94.4 96.3 99.9 7 9 25 82 21 32 31 65 37 183 100 210 192 225 178 111 129 138 113 219 105 170 204 182 160 205 124 156 197 147 150 61.4 71.5 66.8 58.6 60.6 67.9 55.3 73.9 73.1 71.8 71.1 61.9 66.2 65.5 65.3 66.2 56.4 66.7 62.6 59.5 61.6 71.1 69.0 63.7 59.5 70.6 64.1 60.3 65.8 64.8 64.5 9 5 48 53 83 44 54 25 28 81 56 84 35 93 186 206 150 151 204 103 134 160 188 164 174 203 120 130 224 116 100 442.8 327.6 649.9 653.4 343.7 851.0 720.6 616.8 603.7 436.9 347.5 541.2 791.3 215.2 739.9 936.6 804.0 872.8 1367.6 2026.4 1278.4 1050.2 1393.1 1263.5 1640.5 1604.6 1061.7 1247.2 2622.5 1044.2 1521.1 7 25 83 53 95 41 73 69 76 74 28 20 62 39 64 65 45 67 27 48 44 33 188 178 120 144 136 151 109 116 122 7.6 82.3 60.0 89.0 72.6 54.0 76.2 10.7 65.5 40.9 26.7 67.8 63.8 65.2 80.9 83.6 69.4 76.7 68.8 68.4 74.6 30.3 24.6 45.7 68.1 81.1 74.2 42.5 40.4 74.7 78.9 85 39 63 68 81 44 90 76 79 113 154 102 120 159 151 222 115 124 144 212 133 146 190 121 153 230 185 128 231 110 129 96.6 94.9 89.8 98.8 95.7 94.3 89.2 97.9 90.2 43.9 94.8 93.6 91.4 60.1 97.7 92.9 96.8 91.3 98.6 76.9 94.2 89.8 96.3 97.3 20.8 79.5 93.4 96.9 14.7 95.1 93.2 Ongenga Ongenga Oshikango Oshikango Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Ondobe Oshikango Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ondobe Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ongenga Ondobe Ondobe Ongenga Ongenga Ondobe Ongenga Ongenga 1046 1045 1052 1053 1047 1044 1043 1041 1025 1023 1024 1026 1027 1051 1048 1042 1039 1040 1028 1050 1049 1038 1033 1034 1029 1030 1037 1035 1031 1032 1036

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 39 7 3 82 89 76 41 97 19 66 69 29 80 21 28 32 24 133 147 101 215 170 182 113 178 223 186 138 217 222 212 189 244.6 237.8 215.8 248.2 208.0 233.1 276.3 144.5 235.1 299.6 255.2 325.1 197.0 189.5 252.1 287.0 228.6 193.2 113.6 245.5 188.4 213.9 142.0 298.3 119.7 151.5 185.0 287.5 285.3 348.6 289.8 5 8 14 83 93 26 17 85 88 47 131 143 220 129 113 149 164 154 101 112 226 203 218 165 127 179 227 211 196 108 118 98.8 98.4 88.0 98.9 99.9 99.1 98.0 99.9 97.7 99.8 97.9 99.8 99.6 99.9 99.2 99.9 83.6 93.6 88.5 99.9 97.6 98.9 96.9 99.8 82.6 92.7 95.3 99.3 99.8 99.1 99.9 79 12 49 76 42 62 72 75 63 214 140 161 122 159 126 127 102 216 118 186 115 207 144 224 101 110 194 157 177 114 220 57.4 68.1 65.1 72.7 63.6 69.9 65.9 68.2 63.9 70.1 65.7 65.7 66.7 57.1 66.0 69.3 61.1 68.5 68.2 69.2 66.2 59.1 64.9 55.6 66.8 66.3 60.5 64.0 61.9 66.2 56.0 3 67 33 27 30 86 36 70 34 47 29 72 16 41 133 115 141 143 208 171 145 192 122 149 104 107 117 169 111 155 121 727.7 805.9 700.0 698.1 324.3 568.1 681.3 415.2 846.5 772.9 666.2 831.7 798.7 572.6 812.1 640.8 791.0 1167.1 1554.6 1613.7 1595.3 1038.4 1497.8 1150.9 3832.6 1521.3 1382.4 1598.6 1146.2 1786.7 1414.9 6 10 85 35 79 38 18 93 89 43 77 94 34 87 22 12 19 149 190 115 133 129 102 180 176 148 107 163 187 118 130 7.4 8.3 86.6 58.1 77.7 62.9 76.8 84.6 24.8 43.1 54.7 56.8 31.7 34.7 74.8 51.7 10.2 11.4 25.5 47.5 17.6 63.3 54.6 41.6 78.3 57.1 83.1 33.9 85.5 89.2 84.1 6 33 51 38 83 93 97 53 60 109 207 157 226 141 166 155 152 163 197 132 198 187 160 180 168 216 221 142 130 201 177 99.0 95.1 98.4 63.3 89.3 35.6 91.6 98.8 87.3 89.4 89.8 87.7 71.0 92.9 96.7 70.7 79.1 96.2 89.0 95.9 81.1 98.3 86.4 53.1 44.7 91.6 99.9 93.0 68.8 97.9 81.8 Omulonga Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Omulonga Omulonga Oshikango Omulonga Omulonga 1076 1075 1068 1066 1067 1074 1070 1069 1062 1065 1077 1072 1073 1071 1060 1061 1057 1063 1064 1082 1078 1079 1055 1056 1058 1059 1080 1081 1054 1084 1083

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 40 1 2 6 9 98 18 51 12 47 14 84 90 27 163 153 111 193 195 177 146 150 104 123 100 165 208 164 143 218 152 227 98.3 200.6 206.6 229.5 234.1 299.6 358.4 270.3 180.3 177.4 309.2 273.9 194.1 349.9 330.8 210.0 207.0 231.9 221.8 233.5 199.9 305.5 163.1 241.1 200.2 211.5 237.0 132.2 206.7 287.8 320.5 18 99 57 23 38 76 25 54 45 90 31 122 119 148 100 125 168 169 102 181 174 145 171 167 155 193 189 191 223 146 117 99.1 99.1 98.0 99.6 99.9 99.7 99.0 97.5 97.4 99.6 99.9 96.5 99.9 99.9 99.9 97.2 98.3 97.3 99.9 97.5 99.9 99.9 97.9 95.5 95.8 99.8 95.6 86.8 98.1 99.9 99.1 5 1 90 30 52 17 81 70 18 96 77 48 66 94 15 50 87 92 64 36 152 154 141 169 185 203 227 165 202 184 162 67.4 64.2 64.4 71.2 65.1 69.9 74.0 72.1 68.0 68.8 62.7 78.9 72.1 67.1 61.3 68.9 67.2 72.4 69.9 68.2 70.0 67.7 67.3 69.1 59.5 55.1 63.4 59.6 70.6 61.4 63.6 9 28 81 45 42 62 95 38 46 20 91 32 80 48 53 58 12 156 185 108 110 146 140 166 199 136 189 206 134 152 160 631.6 457.9 926.3 827.3 812.7 589.4 680.6 956.4 700.6 365.6 714.8 434.9 720.6 327.6 648.0 616.8 1604.6 1061.7 1386.4 1414.2 1209.6 1480.0 1385.4 1704.1 1565.3 1068.1 1367.6 2026.4 1278.4 1231.9 1941.4 3 7 39 64 50 60 51 36 24 21 96 58 40 99 86 23 53 95 25 80 41 74 13 112 142 128 103 127 153 172 138 76.7 68.8 73.4 69.9 89.7 73.0 44.9 27.9 77.1 82.5 83.2 53.7 34.9 70.4 51.4 36.0 76.3 52.4 23.9 57.8 13.6 83.0 89.0 72.6 54.0 82.3 62.4 76.2 29.8 65.2 85.4 68 25 65 52 24 85 98 64 62 121 228 140 217 193 178 175 134 233 186 172 202 143 100 138 203 214 102 120 113 159 133 2.3 97.7 94.2 99.5 28.5 91.7 52.6 73.2 81.8 97.8 82.9 98.3 99.5 92.8 79.3 85.5 66.4 91.5 95.8 92.0 66.2 58.2 96.6 95.7 95.9 94.3 94.9 97.8 89.2 97.9 92.9 Ongenga Ongenga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Ongenga Ongenga Omulonga Ongenga Ongenga Omulonga Ongenga Omulonga Ongenga 1048 1049 1085 1087 1086 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1094 1099 1093 1095 1096 1097 1098 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1046 1047 1105 1044 1045 1106 1043 1107 1042

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 41 36 38 72 77 79 23 58 95 37 33 52 68 13 44 88 10 30 204 131 159 149 229 232 110 188 187 155 142 214 198 183 90.2 56.6 168.7 281.2 216.1 203.1 207.0 278.6 250.4 247.4 246.3 230.2 289.9 186.2 262.4 188.1 235.4 280.5 204.9 211.9 285.0 145.6 268.8 175.0 252.6 307.5 274.4 237.9 317.4 188.7 286.6 8 5 85 17 14 49 26 93 83 101 179 118 226 203 165 213 143 196 112 227 211 218 114 210 129 113 131 149 220 164 154 99.6 99.9 96.9 99.8 99.1 83.6 93.6 99.9 97.6 91.8 98.4 95.3 99.2 82.6 92.7 88.5 99.1 92.9 98.9 99.1 99.9 99.9 99.9 98.8 98.0 88.0 99.9 97.7 99.8 99.8 97.9 53 26 38 54 34 83 85 41 60 191 195 223 198 128 233 151 133 107 221 206 139 209 172 174 181 211 175 103 218 137 230 69.9 60.6 71.5 55.8 60.4 60.3 70.4 65.6 44.5 69.6 71.0 65.4 64.4 67.9 66.5 67.9 55.8 59.2 65.3 58.7 70.3 62.5 62.3 61.6 58.4 62.1 66.7 56.6 65.3 69.4 49.2 3 30 25 41 29 47 34 54 27 67 44 86 33 36 70 145 111 149 104 122 117 115 208 155 107 186 192 133 141 171 143 681.3 812.1 846.5 666.2 798.7 772.9 805.9 324.3 831.7 640.8 442.8 415.2 700.0 727.7 568.1 698.1 1595.3 1640.5 1414.9 1598.6 1382.4 1521.3 1263.5 1613.7 3832.6 1167.1 1393.1 1038.4 1554.6 1497.8 1150.9 6 62 22 77 94 76 35 83 43 85 69 93 79 10 38 89 18 190 102 107 176 118 163 180 115 187 130 149 148 133 129 7.4 8.3 51.7 69.4 83.1 89.2 47.5 63.3 54.6 11.4 41.6 17.6 10.2 63.8 77.7 43.1 33.9 60.0 24.8 74.8 58.1 67.8 25.5 54.7 62.9 86.6 76.8 56.8 31.7 84.6 34.7 6 53 83 93 51 38 39 33 166 198 190 221 142 160 168 187 212 157 155 216 201 154 207 180 152 109 226 163 197 141 132 87.3 98.3 99.9 96.7 70.7 96.2 76.9 44.7 91.6 89.0 86.4 79.1 60.1 98.4 98.8 89.3 89.4 53.1 98.8 68.8 89.8 99.0 63.3 81.1 89.8 95.1 35.6 87.7 71.0 91.6 92.9 Oshikango Omulonga Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Ongenga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Omulonga Oshikango Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango 1062 1079 1080 1060 1061 1063 1050 1058 1059 1064 1055 1057 1051 1068 1069 1067 1065 1056 1053 1054 1052 1076 1066 1078 1077 1075 1074 1072 1073 1070 1071

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 42 20 78 64 55 60 22 11 50 39 71 59 157 197 175 173 233 202 169 180 105 109 112 230 209 206 196 221 220 160 231 136 55.4 85.7 59.5 299.2 204.1 247.0 175.3 195.4 256.0 196.3 170.2 198.1 190.9 231.5 266.9 230.4 260.5 229.1 161.7 293.7 310.1 165.7 177.3 270.9 125.6 127.1 203.0 277.6 250.7 214.4 261.5 54 45 25 90 31 47 88 76 99 23 38 18 57 167 155 181 171 146 145 108 127 117 174 223 193 191 100 169 125 168 102 97.5 99.9 99.9 99.9 97.9 99.8 96.5 97.3 99.9 98.1 98.3 99.3 99.9 98.9 99.8 99.1 97.2 86.8 95.5 95.6 99.9 99.7 99.6 99.9 99.9 97.4 99.0 97.5 99.9 99.9 99.6 28 80 27 69 45 24 89 58 71 95 56 143 123 180 148 217 104 187 106 135 131 228 132 125 201 190 134 179 112 155 145 71.5 68.1 65.0 71.5 65.8 61.6 64.7 56.7 66.7 68.8 61.0 66.6 65.3 65.4 54.4 65.4 70.1 71.6 65.8 67.5 69.4 59.8 60.6 68.7 67.2 65.3 61.8 69.5 66.2 64.1 64.9 20 80 53 58 12 32 16 72 48 91 42 45 46 38 95 62 189 136 199 152 140 166 160 121 169 156 206 146 185 110 108 434.9 714.8 365.6 648.0 589.4 700.6 616.8 791.0 572.6 956.4 631.6 327.6 680.6 457.9 812.7 926.3 827.3 1704.1 1068.1 1278.4 1231.9 1941.4 1565.3 1786.7 1146.2 1367.6 1414.2 1386.4 1385.4 1480.0 1209.6 3 86 23 99 41 80 40 13 74 19 12 34 87 25 60 95 58 50 96 21 24 51 36 172 153 128 138 127 103 112 142 57.8 13.6 23.9 83.0 52.4 76.2 62.4 34.9 76.3 29.8 85.4 65.2 36.0 84.1 85.5 78.3 57.1 82.3 51.4 89.7 69.9 54.0 70.4 44.9 73.4 53.7 83.2 82.5 27.9 73.0 77.1 98 24 64 62 60 97 25 52 65 138 203 100 214 143 159 202 133 172 177 130 113 186 140 120 233 193 228 134 178 217 175 2.3 92.0 66.2 95.8 58.2 95.9 99.5 91.5 97.8 97.9 89.2 66.4 97.9 95.9 92.9 85.5 99.5 81.8 93.0 94.9 79.3 91.7 94.3 98.3 97.8 73.2 28.5 92.8 81.8 52.6 82.9 Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Ongenga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Ongenga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Ongenga Omulonga Omulonga Ongenga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga 1102 1103 1101 1104 1105 1099 1100 1106 1107 1043 1098 1084 1082 1042 1097 1085 1083 1081 1045 1096 1086 1044 1094 1095 1091 1089 1087 1093 1090 1088 1092

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 43 8 26 49 93 75 74 56 15 85 228 192 134 184 141 166 135 201 176 207 128 225 224 171 119 151 158 107 108 124 129 203 90.4 288.4 183.6 272.6 214.9 188.6 236.1 248.6 213.2 199.8 214.5 248.7 171.6 195.4 266.8 163.4 217.8 104.0 106.6 196.6 224.8 321.3 206.7 203.2 230.7 230.7 220.4 216.9 304.1 169.3 240.7 5 8 93 83 14 49 17 131 149 220 189 143 129 113 154 164 112 122 226 203 101 210 114 165 196 119 148 213 227 211 218 98.8 98.0 88.0 95.8 98.4 98.9 99.8 99.1 97.9 99.8 99.9 97.7 99.9 99.2 99.9 99.1 83.6 93.6 99.6 92.9 99.1 97.6 95.3 99.1 98.0 91.8 99.9 82.6 92.7 88.5 99.9 3 39 61 97 22 35 86 40 78 91 10 43 29 57 55 51 74 153 171 188 208 166 215 168 164 199 222 200 167 189 193 64.3 62.6 60.8 70.3 69.3 71.7 67.0 58.9 63.0 57.3 71.0 67.8 62.8 70.3 68.1 67.4 63.5 60.0 76.9 55.8 59.9 72.9 70.1 71.5 62.8 69.5 69.5 69.9 68.4 60.7 60.5 9 3 36 70 27 67 33 30 47 29 81 28 25 54 44 34 133 141 143 115 171 208 134 145 186 117 104 155 122 149 107 700.0 727.7 698.1 805.9 568.1 324.3 720.6 681.3 442.8 798.7 846.5 640.8 772.9 666.2 831.7 2026.4 1497.8 1150.9 1613.7 3832.6 1167.1 1554.6 1595.3 1382.4 1598.6 1061.7 1604.6 1640.5 1263.5 1393.1 1521.3 7 79 10 53 18 89 43 35 85 38 83 94 64 69 39 62 76 77 129 149 133 115 102 190 176 118 107 130 163 180 187 7.4 8.3 62.9 86.6 72.6 89.0 84.6 34.7 56.8 24.8 74.8 77.7 31.7 43.1 58.1 76.8 51.7 60.0 11.4 41.6 47.5 54.6 68.8 67.8 76.7 69.4 63.8 33.9 17.6 10.2 63.3 33 85 51 38 93 83 68 39 109 102 141 132 163 157 197 155 207 226 198 166 154 160 142 121 190 212 201 168 187 216 221 99.0 95.1 96.6 98.4 98.8 95.7 91.6 92.9 87.7 89.3 71.0 89.4 63.3 96.2 35.6 96.7 70.7 87.3 97.7 89.8 98.8 89.0 91.6 94.2 76.9 60.1 68.8 86.4 79.1 53.1 44.7 Omulonga Omulonga Ongenga Oshikango Oshikango Ongenga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Omulonga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Ongenga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Ongenga Ongenga Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango Oshikango 1076 1075 1046 1068 1069 1047 1070 1071 1072 1067 1073 1065 1066 1063 1074 1060 1061 1062 1048 1052 1053 1064 1059 1049 1050 1051 1054 1055 1057 1056 1058

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 44 5 61 17 91 81 43 96 16 92 200 213 117 190 210 216 226 132 191 145 205 106 127 148 199 167 185 162 102 115 144 103 173.2 334.1 258.7 148.3 301.4 227.5 184.3 160.7 142.5 101.8 236.2 215.8 184.1 210.6 165.9 230.9 244.7 219.1 275.0 235.2 207.6 173.4 199.4 188.5 303.0 201.1 232.7 228.1 236.1 210.7 232.3 45 54 26 90 85 88 31 25 23 47 57 38 18 76 99 155 127 167 179 118 169 125 168 108 117 181 171 102 145 174 100 97.9 99.9 99.9 98.9 99.9 99.8 97.5 96.9 99.8 99.1 99.8 99.9 99.9 97.4 99.9 99.0 97.5 99.3 99.9 99.1 96.5 97.3 99.6 99.9 99.9 99.9 98.3 99.9 97.2 99.7 99.6 2 19 99 47 59 46 13 44 98 11 14 20 88 23 93 163 117 232 142 109 213 119 212 173 121 176 146 108 130 231 149 63.5 72.0 66.9 66.1 46.8 70.1 65.0 69.4 70.1 66.3 72.6 70.1 57.8 66.0 67.0 58.3 72.9 72.4 65.9 78.6 62.3 61.9 64.8 66.3 65.5 71.9 67.6 71.6 67.2 48.6 64.6 80 86 20 72 58 16 41 12 38 46 95 62 91 42 45 32 152 189 192 169 136 185 111 199 108 110 121 140 166 146 156 648.0 434.9 415.2 572.6 714.8 457.9 812.1 365.6 926.3 827.3 812.7 791.0 589.4 700.6 680.6 956.4 631.6 1068.1 1038.4 1704.1 1146.2 1231.9 1786.7 1414.9 1941.4 1480.0 1385.4 1209.6 1414.2 1386.4 1565.3 6 3 80 23 93 86 34 87 12 22 13 99 24 96 36 21 51 19 40 58 60 50 172 148 138 153 112 142 128 103 127 62.4 83.0 54.7 13.6 57.8 78.3 25.5 57.1 29.8 23.9 44.9 85.5 83.1 89.2 85.4 52.4 82.5 53.7 27.9 77.1 83.2 73.0 84.1 34.9 76.3 70.4 51.4 89.7 69.9 73.4 36.0 6 98 97 64 53 62 65 52 60 24 25 214 152 203 138 180 130 100 193 177 143 178 175 134 217 202 233 186 140 228 172 2.3 95.9 58.2 95.9 89.8 97.8 66.2 92.0 81.1 98.3 99.9 93.0 97.9 95.8 97.8 98.3 73.2 81.8 97.9 99.5 91.5 81.8 82.9 92.8 99.5 52.6 66.4 79.3 91.7 28.5 85.5 Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga Omulonga 1105 1104 1082 1077 1106 1103 1102 1078 1079 1080 1081 1107 1101 1091 1094 1089 1083 1084 1099 1100 1090 1092 1093 1085 1088 1098 1095 1096 1086 1087 1097

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 45 RefeReNceS

Avenell, D., Noble, M. and Wright, G. (2009) ‘South African datazones: A technical report about the development of a new statistical geography for the analysis of deprivation in South Africa at a small area level’, CASASP Working Paper No. 8, Oxford: Centre for the Analysis of South African Social Policy, University of Oxford.

Child Indicators Research Barnes, H., Noble, M., Wright, G. and Dawes, A. (2009) ‘A geographical profile of child deprivation in South

Africa’, , 2(2): 181-199. The South African Index of Multiple Deprivation for Children 2001, Barnes, H., Wright, G., Noble, M. and Dawes, A. (2007) Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council Press.

Regional Studies Beatty, C., Fothergill, S. and Macmillan, R. (2000) ‘A theory of employment, unemployment and sickness’,

34(7), 617-630. Dimensions of Poverty in Post-Apartheid South Africa

Bhorat, H., Poswell, L. and Naidoo, P. (2004) , Cape Town: Development Policy Research Unit, University of Cape Town.

British Medical Journal Blane, D. and Drever, F. (1998) ‘Inequality among men in standardised years of potential life lost, 1970-93’,

, 317: 255-256A Review of Poverty and Inequality in Namibia,

Central Bureau of Statistics (2008) Windhoek: Central Bureau

of Statistics, National Planning) Measurement Commission. of Employment, Unemployment and Underemployment – Current International Standards and Issues in their Application, Hussmanns, R. (2007 International Labour Organisation, United Nations.

Environment and Planning Martin, D., Nolan, A. and Tranmer, N. (2001) ‘The application of zone-design methodology in the 2001 UK

Census’, , 33: 1949-1962. The English Indices of Deprivation 2010, McLennan, D., Barnes, H., Noble, M., Davies, J., Garratt, E. and Dibben, C. (2011) London: Department for Communities and Local Government.

The Provincial Indices of Multiple Deprivation for South Africa Noble, M., Babita, M., Barnes, H., Dibben, C., Magasela, W., Noble, S., Ntshongwana, P., Phillips, H., Rama, S., 2001 Roberts, B., Wright, G. and Zungu, S. (2006a)

, Oxford: University of Oxford, UK. The South African Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 at Datazone Level, Noble, M., Barnes, H., Wright, G., McLennan, D., Avenell, D., Whitworth, A. and Roberts, B. (2009a) Pretoria: Department of Social Development.

Social Indicators Research Noble, M., Barnes, H., Wright, G. and Roberts, B. (2009b) ‘Small area indices of multiple deprivation in South Africa’, , 95(2): 281-297.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 46 The English Indices of Deprivation 2007, Noble, M., McLennan, D., Wilkinson, K., Whitworth, A., Barnes, H. and Dibben, C. (2008)

London: Department for Communities and LocalThe Government.Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2001 Noble, M., Smith, G.A.N., Wright, G., Dibben, C. and Lloyd, M. (2001)

, Occasional Paper No 18, Belfast: Northern Ireland Statistics and ResearchWelsh Agency. Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000, Noble, M., Smith, G.A.N., Wright, G., Dibben, C., Lloyd, M. and Penhale, B. (2000)

National Assembly for Wales. Developing Small Area Indices of Multiple Deprivation in Southern Africa: A Scoping Study Noble, M., Whitworth, A., Allen, J., Wright, G. and Roberts, B. (2007)

. Report for the Southern AfricaScottish Trust. Indices of Deprivation 2003 Noble, M., Wright, G., Lloyd, M., Dibben, C., Smith, G.A.N. and Ratcliffe, A. (2003) , Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.

Environment and Planning A Noble, M., Wright, G., Smith, G.A.N. and Dibben, C. (2006b) ‘Measuring multiple deprivation at the small-area level’, Resources,, 38(1): 169-185. Deprivation, and Poverty

Nolan, B. and Whelan, C.T. (1996) Journal of Social Policy , Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Townsend, P. (1987) Poverty‘Deprivation’, in the United Kingdom: A Survey, 16: of 125-145. Household Resources and Standards of Living

Townsend, P. (1979) ,

Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Allen Lane and PenguinHuman Books. Development Report 2009 - Overcoming Barriers: Human Mobility and Development United Nations Development Programme (2009)

, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.UNDP Namibia Economic Review 2007,

United Nations Development Programme Namibia (2007) Windhoek:

UNDP Namibia. The South African Index of Multiple Deprivation for Children 2001 at Datazone Level, Wright, G., Barnes, H., Noble, M. and Dawes, A. (2009a)

ThePretoria: South Department African Index of of Social Multiple Development. Deprivation 2007 at Municipality Level,

Wright, G. and Noble, M. (2009)

Pretoria: Department of Social Development. The South African Index of Multiple Deprivation for Children 2007 at Municipality Level, Wright, G., Noble, M., Barnes, H. and Noble, S. (2009b) Pretoria: Department of Social Development.

Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 47 Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001 - Ohangwena Report 48 Disclaimer

ISBN: 978-99916-887-1-8

For electronic copy and a list of any errors or omissions found as well as any updates subsequent to printing, please visit our website: http://www.undp.org.na/publications.aspx Datazone level Namibian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2001

Empowered lives.

Resilient nations.

Ohangwena Region