Conveyers of social security and risk minimization: Informal migrant networks in Namibia Clemens Greiner, Hamburg Conference on Rural-Urban Linkages and Migration Dortmund, October 16 th -17 th 2009
Outline of the presentation Background information on research project, methods and country migration and trans-local dynamics of exchange Patterns of circular migration Effects on the rural side (remittances) Effects on the urban side (rural-to-urban-transfers and services) Conclusion 2
The research project SFB 389 ACACIA (Arid Climate, Adaptation and Cultural Innovation in Africa), Cologne Subproject: Demographic, economic and social transformations in a Namibian multiethnic region Case study: Between kraal and township: Processes of migration in northwestern Namibia 2005 to 2007 3
Data base and methodological background Social Anthropology 13 months fieldwork Multi-sited ethnography Interviews Household economics Participant observation Census data, genealogy Questionnaire survey 4
The research areas 5
The Fransfontein area 6
Social and ecological structure Arid 250 mm rainfall p.a. Periodic droughts Micro-settlements Communal tenure Subsistence pastoralism - Goat, cattle, sheep Stratification Income diversification 7
Patterns of migration In- and return migration Out migration Retirement Schooling Fostering Home care Unemployment Farm Apprenticeship Work Job hunting 8
Population structure on the farms 9
Urban 10
Connections: the flow of people and goods Circular migration High degree of individual mobility culture of migration Farm household remain a central point of reference Remittances Rural-to-urban Transfers Services 11
Diversified rural incomes Petty trade and odd-jobs 19% Livestock sales 10% Regular income 10% Pensions 28% Remittances (Cash and kind) 33% 12
Remittances Money, groceries, household supplies Most Remittances sent by children/grandchildren 47% of all daughters in urban areas send remittances 37% of all sons in urban areas send remittances Urbanites often support more than one rural household About 80% of rural households receive remittances Average percentage of remittances within per-capita household income: 20%* * Selected households (N=68) 13
Effects of remittances on rural households Female headed households receive more remittances Households depending on remittances often belong to the poorest socio-economic strata The absolute value of remittances rises with the percapita-income of households 14
Rural-urban-transfers Meat, diary products, money Younger people and women relatives receive higher transfers In 2005, rural-urban transfers had about the same value as remittances! Cyclical variability (e.g. in times of drought) 15
Exchange of services => Rural Fostering Care for sick and disabled Caring for livestock => Urban Brigdehead to the outside world (Geschiere/Gugler 1998) Absorption of new migrants 16
Conclusion Multilateral informal social security networks Mutual dependency between rural and urban areas Reciprocal exchange relations that enable both sides access to specific goods and benefit from price differences Increases resilience in rural and in urban areas Importance of old age pensions 17
Toward a translocal livelihoods perspective 18