Namibia 2011 Census

MIGRATION REPORT

Namibia Statistics Agency

2015

January 2015

Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

MISSION STATEMENT
In a coordinated manner produce and disseminate relevant, quality and timely statistics that are fit-for-

purpose in accordance with international standards and best practice

VISION STATEMENT
Be a high performance institution in statistics delivery

CORE VALUES
Performance

Integrity
Service focus
Transparency

Accuracy
Partnership

Page / ii Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

FOREWORD

Migration report is one series of reports that were produced by the Namibia Statistics Agency based on data
from the 2011 Namibia Population and Housing census. Migration is a powerful driver of population change
and can have important consequence of economic, political and social changes. Because of its great impact
on societies, migration needs to be adequately measured and understood. Reliable statistical data is the key
to the basic understanding of this important demographic phenomenon. Yet in many countries, including Na-
mibia, statistics on migration are incomplete, out-of-date or do not exist. Improvement in this area requires
knowledge of the principles of collecting, compiling and analysing migration statistics. Migration is one of the
three factors that affect population size of a particular geographic area, the other factors are fertility and mor-
tality. Analytical reports on the situations of fertility and mortality are presented in separate reports which
were released in 2014. The migration report provides information on internal and international migration
covering both lifetime and short term migrants based on 2011 census data. Thus, report presents evidences
on the migration patterns in Namibia to assist policy makers, planners and researchers in the formulation of
national development programmes, as well as monitoring and evaluating implementation of national pro-
grams.

I would like to thank the government of United States of America through USAID for their financial support to
the US Census Bureau which provided technical support during the production of the this migration report.
Finally, I wish to acknowledge the NSA team, particularly the Demographic and Vital Statistics Division, as well
as the department of Statistics of UNAM for their contribution towards the production of this report. On our
part, we hope that the findings in this report will be put into practice to inform users and guide them when
dealing with issues of t national development as well as regional and international development agenda.

JOHN STEYTLER
STATISTICIANGENERAL
NAMIBIA STATISTICS AGENCY

Foreword

Page / ii Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

FOREWORD

Migration report is one series of reports that were produced by the Namibia Statistics Agency based on data
from the 2011 Namibia Population and Housing census. Migration is a powerful driver of population change
and can have important consequence of economic, political and social changes. Because of its great impact
on societies, migration needs to be adequately measured and understood. Reliable statistical data is the key
to the basic understanding of this important demographic phenomenon. Yet in many countries, including Na-
mibia, statistics on migration are incomplete, out-of-date or do not exist. Improvement in this area requires
knowledge of the principles of collecting, compiling and analysing migration statistics. Migration is one of the
three factors that affect population size of a particular geographic area, the other factors are fertility and mor-
tality. Analytical reports on the situations of fertility and mortality are presented in separate reports which
were released in 2014. The migration report provides information on internal and international migration
covering both lifetime and short term migrants based on 2011 census data. Thus, report presents evidences
on the migration patterns in Namibia to assist policy makers, planners and researchers in the formulation of
national development programmes, as well as monitoring and evaluating implementation of national pro-
grams.

I would like to thank the government of United States of America through USAID for their financial support to
the US Census Bureau which provided technical support during the production of the this migration report.
Finally, I wish to acknowledge the NSA team, particularly the Demographic and Vital Statistics Division, as well
as the department of Statistics of UNAM for their contribution towards the production of this report. On our
part, we hope that the findings in this report will be put into practice to inform users and guide them when
dealing with issues of t national development as well as regional and international development agenda.

JOHN STEYTLER
STATISTICIANGENERAL
NAMIBIA STATISTICS AGENCY

Foreword

Page / iiiNamibia 2011 Census Migration Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

It is important for Policymakers and planners to know about population movements. It should however be
mentioned that migration is a complex subject and without sufficient up to date statistical dated data it is
difficult to give a complete picture of current migration pattern and trends for any population due to lack of
data. Migrants are a diverse group of people who move to different geographic areas for different reasons:
e.g in search for better living conditions, work, family circumstances, study, economic hardship, or even social
unrest. This report examines migration patterns in Namibia based on data from the Namibia 2011 Population
and Housing Census.

The report addresses both internal and international migration. Internal migration refers to those moving
from one region or constituency to another within Namibia. International migration refers to movements
between Namibia and other countries.

The question of interest is how many migrants are there in Namibia? The answer to this question depends on
the time frame and administrative boundaries considered. For instance, are we interested in short-term or
long-term migration? In addition to usual residence in 2011, the census asked about birthplace and previous
residence in 2010, which allows us to measure both lifetime migration and short-term migration patterns.
And what boundary must be crossed for a person to be considered a migrant? At the time of the 2011 Census
Namibia had 13 regions and 107 constituencies. Evidently one is more likely to cross a constituency boundary
than a regional boundary and to reside at a different residence than ones birthplace. The number of internal
migrants recorded in Namibia in 2011 varies accordingly: About 41 thousand residents migrated to different
regions between 2011 and 2010, whereas 707 thousand residents migrated to different constituencies in
2011 compared to places of birth. Given a total population of 2.1 million the share of those migrating also
varies widely from 2 to 34 percent. Internal migration appears to be common in Namibia, as elsewhere in
Africa.

An additional census question about years lived at the usual residence indicates that the lower figure (2 per-
cent) greatly underestimates short-term population mobility. About 15 percent of the usual residents report-
ed that they had lived at their usual residence for less than one year.

Internal migration varies across regions. Over 40 percent of those residing in Khomas and Erongo in 2011
were born outside those regions, which suggests net migration flows into those regions from elsewhere.
In contrast more than one in six people born in Ohangwena and Omusati now reside in other regions. The
square tables appendices in this report indicate both inflows and outflows from region to region, as well as
the implied net flow per region.

Within regions, there is further diversity 11 regions had constituencies that included both net gainers and
net losers of migrants.

In regard to lifetime migration, Oranjemund constituency in //Karas region showed the largest net propor-
tional inflow since birth (+360.7 percent), while Ohangwena constituency in Ohangwena region showed the
largest outflow (-43.0 percent). As to short-term migration Steinhausen in Omaheke region recorded the larg-
est net inflow in 2011 compared to 2010 (+5.4 percent), while Kabbe in Zambezi region recorded the largest
outflow (-25.1 percent). All of these outliers reflect unique circumstances. For instance, the massive outflow
from Kabbe between 2010 and 2011 was likely due to a major flood in 2010.

As to international migration, more than 93 thousand residents or about 4.5 percent of the population in
2011 were born outside of Namibia. The top five countries of the foreign born were Angola (38,076), South
Africa (21,209), Zambia (10,299), Zimbabwe (5,770) and Germany (3,670). Compared to citizens, non-citizens
are disproportionately male and concentrated at young and middle-age adults, with larger proportions of
both the best and least educated. Reliable information about migrant outflows from Namibia to abroad is
more limited yet indirect evidence suggests that numerical outflows have been relatively comparable to in-
flows over the past decade (NSA, 2014c). Thus population growth due to net international migration over the
past decades was likely fairly negligible.

Executive Summary

Page / iv Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Migrants tend to display certain demographic characteristics. The major demographic characteristics of mi-
grants (both internal and international) concerns their age the propensity of lifetime migration is notably
highest at ages 25-59, while the likelihood of short-term migration is highest at ages 20-34. Migration is also
somewhat more common among males. As to other social characteristics, short-term migration tends to be
most prevalent among the never married and the better educated. Migration patterns are also related to
employment and occupation. For instance, migrants tend to go where jobs are moving from regions where
unemployment rates are high to regions where it is low.

A large portion of migration involves that from rural to urban areas. The percentage living in urban areas
increased from 27 percent in 1991 to 33 percent in 2001 and to 43 percent in 2011. The urban percentage
across regions differs dramatically, with Erongo and Khomas both exceeding 85 percent, while Ohangwena,
Omusati and Oshikoto all the mirror opposite less than 15 percent. The national urban share is projected to
grow to 67 percent in 2041 as urban areas grow and rural areas gradually shrink.

WHO (2014) in its African Health Observatory noted that while urbanization brings along development and
other good opportunities, it is also associated with health challenges such as overcrowding, pollution, poor
sanitation, unhealthy lifestyles and all these factors contribute to poor health for citizens of a country. These
harsh conditions are reflected in the Namibia urbanization environment and likely to have more impact on
the economic and social development of shack dwellers in the informal settlements. According to the 2001
census Moses //Garoeb constituencies in the Khomas region, for example, where the shack dwellers occur-
rence has been continuing, 50.6 percent of the households in these constituencies had no toilet facilities and
this situation improved slightly to 48.6 percent in 2011 (2001 census, NPC-CBS and 2011 census, NSA). City
of Windhoek (1995) findings shows that 85 percent of the inhabitants in the informal settlements came from
the northern regions. They have a lower level of education, are unemployed and younger, with lower income,
hence only able to afford paying very little toward meeting their housing needs. The findings in this report
indicate that 63% of the respondents cited unemployment as the main reason for migrating to urban areas.

Executive Summary

Page / iv Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Migrants tend to display certain demographic characteristics. The major demographic characteristics of mi-
grants (both internal and international) concerns their age the propensity of lifetime migration is notably
highest at ages 25-59, while the likelihood of short-term migration is highest at ages 20-34. Migration is also
somewhat more common among males. As to other social characteristics, short-term migration tends to be
most prevalent among the never married and the better educated. Migration patterns are also related to
employment and occupation. For instance, migrants tend to go where jobs are moving from regions where
unemployment rates are high to regions where it is low.

A large portion of migration involves that from rural to urban areas. The percentage living in urban areas
increased from 27 percent in 1991 to 33 percent in 2001 and to 43 percent in 2011. The urban percentage
across regions differs dramatically, with Erongo and Khomas both exceeding 85 percent, while Ohangwena,
Omusati and Oshikoto all the mirror opposite less than 15 percent. The national urban share is projected to
grow to 67 percent in 2041 as urban areas grow and rural areas gradually shrink.

WHO (2014) in its African Health Observatory noted that while urbanization brings along development and
other good opportunities, it is also associated with health challenges such as overcrowding, pollution, poor
sanitation, unhealthy lifestyles and all these factors contribute to poor health for citizens of a country. These
harsh conditions are reflected in the Namibia urbanization environment and likely to have more impact on
the economic and social development of shack dwellers in the informal settlements. According to the 2001
census Moses //Garoeb constituencies in the Khomas region, for example, where the shack dwellers occur-
rence has been continuing, 50.6 percent of the households in these constituencies had no toilet facilities and
this situation improved slightly to 48.6 percent in 2011 (2001 census, NPC-CBS and 2011 census, NSA). City
of Windhoek (1995) findings shows that 85 percent of the inhabitants in the informal settlements came from
the northern regions. They have a lower level of education, are unemployed and younger, with lower income,
hence only able to afford paying very little toward meeting their housing needs. The findings in this report
indicate that 63% of the respondents cited unemployment as the main reason for migrating to urban areas.

Executive Summary

Page / vNamibia 2011 Census Migration Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS

FOREWORD........................................................................................................................................................ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................................iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................................................................................v

LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................................................vi

LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................................................vi

Chapter 1 - Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1

Chapter 2 Internal Migration...........................................................................................................................6

Chapter 3 Migrant Characteristics...................................................................................................................11

Chapter 4 International Migration...................................................................................................................15

Chapter 5 Urbanization...................................................................................................................................19

Chapter 6 Concluding observations.................................................................................................................23

APPENDICES.....................................................................................................................................................39

REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................................................40

Table of Contents

Page / vi Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

LIST OF TABLES PAGE

Table 1.1: Populations and Percent Distribution by Area and 2
Census Year (1991, 2001, 2011)
Table 1.2: Internal Migrants Based on Various Time Frames 3
and Boundaries, 2011
Table1.3: Lifetime Migrants in Namibia and Selected African 4
Countries by Administrative Boundaries
Table 2.1: Population by Place of Enumeration and Place of 6
Usual Residence, Namibia 2011
Table 2.2: Population by Place of Usual Residence and Place of 7
Birth, Namibia 2011
Table 2.3: Population by Place of Usual Residence in 2010 and 2011 7
Table 2.4: Percent Distribution of Duration at Usual 8
Residence (in years) by Region, 2011
Table 3.1: Lifetime Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, 11
and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)
Table 3.2: Short-term Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, 12
and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)
Table 4.1: International Migrant Stock by Development 15
Level and area
Table 4.1: Citizens and Non-Citizens by Usual Residents 16
Table 5.1: Urban Populations by Town, 2001 and 2011 19

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1a - Lifetime Migrants by Age and Sex, 2011 5
Figure 1.1b - Non Migrants by Age and Sex, 2011 5
Figure 2.1 Lifetime Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)* 9
Figure 2.2 Short-term Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)* 10
Figure 3.1 Proportion Migrating at each Age and Sex, Short-term 12
and Lifetime Migration
Figure 3.2 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Marital Status and 13
Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 3.3 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Education and 13
Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 3.4 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Occupation and 14
Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 3.5 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Employment 14
Status and Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 4.1 Non-Citizens by Age and Sex 17
Figure 4.2 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportional Distribution 17
by Education
Figure 4.3 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by 18
Employment
Figure 4.4 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by Occupation 18
Figure 5.1 Percent Urban by Region, 1991, 2001, 2011 19
Figure 5.2 Urban and Rural Projected Population, 2011-2041 20
Figure 5.3 Age and Sex Structure of Urban Areas, 2011 21
Figure 5.4 Age and Sex Structure of Rural Areas, 2011 21

APPENDICES 24

APPENDIX I: QUESTIONS ASKED IN THE 2011 CENSUS ABOUT MIGRATION 24
APPENDIX II: MIGRATION TABLES 25
APPENDIX III: TEAM MEMBERS OF NAMIBIA 2011 CENSUS MIGRATION REPORT 39

List of Tables and Figures

Page / vi Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

LIST OF TABLES PAGE

Table 1.1: Populations and Percent Distribution by Area and 2
Census Year (1991, 2001, 2011)
Table 1.2: Internal Migrants Based on Various Time Frames 3
and Boundaries, 2011
Table1.3: Lifetime Migrants in Namibia and Selected African 4
Countries by Administrative Boundaries
Table 2.1: Population by Place of Enumeration and Place of 6
Usual Residence, Namibia 2011
Table 2.2: Population by Place of Usual Residence and Place of 7
Birth, Namibia 2011
Table 2.3: Population by Place of Usual Residence in 2010 and 2011 7
Table 2.4: Percent Distribution of Duration at Usual 8
Residence (in years) by Region, 2011
Table 3.1: Lifetime Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, 11
and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)
Table 3.2: Short-term Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, 12
and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)
Table 4.1: International Migrant Stock by Development 15
Level and area
Table 4.1: Citizens and Non-Citizens by Usual Residents 16
Table 5.1: Urban Populations by Town, 2001 and 2011 19

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1a - Lifetime Migrants by Age and Sex, 2011 5
Figure 1.1b - Non Migrants by Age and Sex, 2011 5
Figure 2.1 Lifetime Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)* 9
Figure 2.2 Short-term Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)* 10
Figure 3.1 Proportion Migrating at each Age and Sex, Short-term 12
and Lifetime Migration
Figure 3.2 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Marital Status and 13
Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 3.3 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Education and 13
Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 3.4 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Occupation and 14
Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 3.5 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Employment 14
Status and Sex, Ages 15 and Above
Figure 4.1 Non-Citizens by Age and Sex 17
Figure 4.2 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportional Distribution 17
by Education
Figure 4.3 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by 18
Employment
Figure 4.4 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by Occupation 18
Figure 5.1 Percent Urban by Region, 1991, 2001, 2011 19
Figure 5.2 Urban and Rural Projected Population, 2011-2041 20
Figure 5.3 Age and Sex Structure of Urban Areas, 2011 21
Figure 5.4 Age and Sex Structure of Rural Areas, 2011 21

APPENDICES 24

APPENDIX I: QUESTIONS ASKED IN THE 2011 CENSUS ABOUT MIGRATION 24
APPENDIX II: MIGRATION TABLES 25
APPENDIX III: TEAM MEMBERS OF NAMIBIA 2011 CENSUS MIGRATION REPORT 39

List of Tables and Figures

Page / 1Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 1 - Introduction

The study of migration in any country is challenging for at least three reasons. First, unlike the other factors
which influence population growth (fertility and mortality), the vital events of which are clearly defined,
measurements of migration can differ based on any number of criteria. Second, migrants are a diverse group
of people who move for different purposes. Reasons for migrating may include employment opportunities,
family circumstances, study, economic hardship or social unrest. Third, accurate measurement of the two
broad categories of migration internal and international requires different types of data and present
unique analytical challenges.

Migration, both internal and international, has impacts on the demographic and socio-economic aspects of
a country. In terms of demography, migration affects the size, growth, distribution and composition of the
population. Migration prompts the improvement of economic growth and development or puts pressure
on resources if not well planned. This report provides an overview of internal and international migration in
Namibia based on results from the 2011 Population and Housing Census. The tables and figures contained in
this report will provide evidence about the migration patterns in Namibia that may assist policy makers, plan-
ners and researchers in developing new policies, strategies for improving the population wellbeing. Migration
dynamics can be valued simply by comparing population counts across time.

The migration from rural to urban areas often leads to urbanization. Urbanization is defined as the shift of the
population from a rural to urban environment which predominantly results in the physical growth of urban
areas. Around the world urbanization is taking place on a massive scale, about 66 percent of the world pop-
ulation is projected to be in urban areas by 2050 (UN, 2014). Namibia is no exception; rural-urban migration
remains high since independence in 1990 and continues growing every day. Its worth noting that the growth
rate for urban areas is more than that of the total population and this is all due to the heavy influx of popula-
tion into urban areas from all corners rural areas in the country.

Migration, both internal and international, and urbanization can be viewed as crucial in demographic tran-
sition (low fertility, high life expectance, etc.).More importantly, in the economic and social transformation
of the population as it drives development and poverty reduction, urban living is always associated with
higher levels of education, better health infrastructures, greater access to social services and opportunity of
employment. However, in Namibia little is known whether this influx of migration to urban areas is helping
to boost up the economic growth or is contributing to poverty. In some instances high urban migration does
not result in employment opportunities or reduction in poverty. Nevertheless, one has to note for example
that unplanned and rapid urban growth may threaten urban development when the necessary infrastructure
or mechanisms (policies and strategies) are not put in place and properly implemented to the benefit of
everyone.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 2 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Objectives of the report

The census enumerated people at the place where they spent the Census Reference Night (28 August 2011).
Information was collected on place of enumeration, place of usual residence, place of birth and place of usual
residence 12 months prior to the census.

Migration is one of the three factors that determines changes in population size, distribution and structure.
The others are fertility and mortality. Apart from fertility and mortality, migration, both internal and interna-
tional, impacts the demographic and socio-economic aspects of a country. In terms of demography, migration
affects the size, growth, distribution and composition of the population. Migration also leads to urbanization.
Thus this report will provide baseline indicators for monitoring and evaluation of the national development
policies in the tourism sector and estimates for the future population of the country.

Specific objectives therefore are to:

" Provide estimates of internal and international migrants in Namibia
" Provide information on demographic and socio-economic characteristics of migrants
" Provide information on urbanization

This report therefore looks at and depicts the situation of migration, both internal and international, as well
as the urbanization in Namibia which can help policy makers to design and develop proper mechanism to
ensure that migration is properly managed in Namibia especially that of the urban areas.
Table 1.1 shows regional and rural/urban counts recorded in the 1991, 2001 and 2011 censuses, as well as
the percent distribution of the populations across these areas. The proportion living in urban areas increased
dramatically across the three censuses, from 27 percent (1991) to 33 percent (2001) to 43 percent (2011).
The highly urbanized regions of Erongo and Khomas, which made up 15.7 percent of the population in 1991,
constituted 23.3 percent of the population in 2011. The growth of such urban areas occurred despite the fact
that fertility (the primary engine of national population growth) in urban areas is below that of rural areas
(NSA, 2014a). What fuelled the growth of urban areas was migration from rural areas and such trend is likely
to continue (NSA, 2014c).

Table 1.1 Populations and Percent Distribution by Area and Census Year (1991, 2001, 2011)

Area
Total Population Percent Distribution

1991 2001 2011 1991 2001 2011

Namibia 1 409 920 1 830 330 2 113 077 100.0 100.0 100.0

Urban 382 680 603 612 903 434 27.1 33.0 42.8

Rural 1 027 240 1 226 718 1 209 643 72.9 67.0 57.2

Erongo 55 470 107 663 150 809 3.9 5.9 7.1

Hardap 66 495 68 249 79 507 4.7 3.7 3.8

//Karas 61 162 69 329 77 421 4.3 3.8 3.7

Kavango 116 830 202 694 223 352 8.3 11.1 10.6

Khomas 167 071 250 262 342 141 11.8 13.7 16.2

Kunene 64 017 68 735 86 856 4.5 3.8 4.1

Ohangwena 179 634 228 384 245 446 12.7 12.5 11.6

Omaheke 52 735 68 039 71 233 3.7 3.7 3.4

Omusati 189 919 228 842 243 166 13.5 12.5 11.5

Oshana 134 884 161 916 176 674 9.6 8.8 8.4

Oshikoto 128 745 161 007 181 973 9.1 8.8 8.6

Otjozondjupa 102 536 135 384 143 903 7.3 7.4 6.8
Zambezi 90 422 79 826 90 596 6.4 4.4 4.3

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 2 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Objectives of the report

The census enumerated people at the place where they spent the Census Reference Night (28 August 2011).
Information was collected on place of enumeration, place of usual residence, place of birth and place of usual
residence 12 months prior to the census.

Migration is one of the three factors that determines changes in population size, distribution and structure.
The others are fertility and mortality. Apart from fertility and mortality, migration, both internal and interna-
tional, impacts the demographic and socio-economic aspects of a country. In terms of demography, migration
affects the size, growth, distribution and composition of the population. Migration also leads to urbanization.
Thus this report will provide baseline indicators for monitoring and evaluation of the national development
policies in the tourism sector and estimates for the future population of the country.

Specific objectives therefore are to:

" Provide estimates of internal and international migrants in Namibia
" Provide information on demographic and socio-economic characteristics of migrants
" Provide information on urbanization

This report therefore looks at and depicts the situation of migration, both internal and international, as well
as the urbanization in Namibia which can help policy makers to design and develop proper mechanism to
ensure that migration is properly managed in Namibia especially that of the urban areas.
Table 1.1 shows regional and rural/urban counts recorded in the 1991, 2001 and 2011 censuses, as well as
the percent distribution of the populations across these areas. The proportion living in urban areas increased
dramatically across the three censuses, from 27 percent (1991) to 33 percent (2001) to 43 percent (2011).
The highly urbanized regions of Erongo and Khomas, which made up 15.7 percent of the population in 1991,
constituted 23.3 percent of the population in 2011. The growth of such urban areas occurred despite the fact
that fertility (the primary engine of national population growth) in urban areas is below that of rural areas
(NSA, 2014a). What fuelled the growth of urban areas was migration from rural areas and such trend is likely
to continue (NSA, 2014c).

Table 1.1 Populations and Percent Distribution by Area and Census Year (1991, 2001, 2011)

Area
Total Population Percent Distribution

1991 2001 2011 1991 2001 2011

Namibia 1 409 920 1 830 330 2 113 077 100.0 100.0 100.0

Urban 382 680 603 612 903 434 27.1 33.0 42.8

Rural 1 027 240 1 226 718 1 209 643 72.9 67.0 57.2

Erongo 55 470 107 663 150 809 3.9 5.9 7.1

Hardap 66 495 68 249 79 507 4.7 3.7 3.8

//Karas 61 162 69 329 77 421 4.3 3.8 3.7

Kavango 116 830 202 694 223 352 8.3 11.1 10.6

Khomas 167 071 250 262 342 141 11.8 13.7 16.2

Kunene 64 017 68 735 86 856 4.5 3.8 4.1

Ohangwena 179 634 228 384 245 446 12.7 12.5 11.6

Omaheke 52 735 68 039 71 233 3.7 3.7 3.4

Omusati 189 919 228 842 243 166 13.5 12.5 11.5

Oshana 134 884 161 916 176 674 9.6 8.8 8.4

Oshikoto 128 745 161 007 181 973 9.1 8.8 8.6

Otjozondjupa 102 536 135 384 143 903 7.3 7.4 6.8
Zambezi 90 422 79 826 90 596 6.4 4.4 4.3

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 3Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

i. Criteria for Defining a Migrant

How many migrants are there in Namibia? The answer to this question depends on a variety of factors, most
importantly the time frame and administrative boundaries considered. For instance, what administrative
boundary must be crossed for a person to be considered a migrant? At the time of the 2011 Census, Namib-
ia had 13 regions and 107 constituencies. Clearly one does not have to travel as far to cross a constituency
boundary as for a regional boundary.

Similarly, are we interested in short-term or long-term migration? The census asked about ones usual res-
idence in 2011, as well as the areas of birth and the previous residence in 2010 (see Appendix 1 for the se-
quence and wording of questions). In this report an individual will be considered a lifetime migrant if the area
of birth does not match the area of current residence. Similarly, an individual will be considered a short-term
migrant if the area of usual residence in 2010 and 2011 do not match. Of course both of these figures may
understate overall population mobility even when residences do match at the two endpoints, an individual
might have moved in between them. An additional flaw in the wording of the question about previous resi-
dence is that it asked about where people usually lived since September 2010 (Appendix 1). This wording
may have caused some respondents who actually did live at a different residence a year ago to report their
current residence as their former residence, biasing downwards estimates of short term migration. Migration
should be estimated at distinct points in time.

The number of internal migrants recorded in Namibia in 2011 varies based on the above considerations. Table
1.2 shows that internal migrants varied from 41 thousand (residence in a different region in 2011 compared
to 2010) to 707 thousand (residence in a different constituency in 2011 compared to the constituency of
birth). Given a total population of 2.1 million, the share of those considered to be migrants also varies widely
from 2 to 34 percent.

Table 1.2 Internal Migrants Based on Various Time Frames and Boundaries, 2011

Time Frame of
Migration

Administrative Boundary Crossed

Region Constituency

1 year
(Short Term)

40 867 64 768

Lifetime 474 592 707 256

Note: Includes those who resided in an area of Namibia in 2011 which
differed from the area of the previous residence in 2010 or the place of birth

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 4 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

ii. Internal Migration in Namibia in Regional Perspective

How does internal migration in Namibia compare to internal migration in other countries? Table 1.3 provides
estimates of lifetime migration in Namibia and several other African countries for which data was readily
available (Bell and Muhidin, 2009). Valid comparisons are not easy to establish. At any administrative level
(e.g. regions or constituencies) more migration will be expected in countries that have more administrative
divisions, since any given move will be more likely to cross an administrative boundary. The year of data col-
lection should also be kept in mind (for all countries other than Namibia, estimates shown are from censuses
taken around 2000). With these factors in mind, internal lifetime migration in Namibia around 2001 was likely
comparable to that in Ghana, Kenya and South Africa, but higher than that in Uganda and Rwanda. 1

Between 2001 and 2011 the proportion of internal lifetime migrants in Namibia, defined at the regional level,
increased from 19.6 to 22.5 percent. In 2011, when defined at the constituency level, the proportion of inter-
nal migrants is far higher, at 33.7 percent.

*Note: Namibia based on internal migration within national boundaries, which may bias estimates of lifetime migration
downwards if other countries include international migrants among lifetime migrants. Source for countries other than
Namibia: Bell and Muhidin (2009)

Table1.3 Lifetime Migrants in Namibia and Selected African Countries by Administrative Boundaries

Country
Census

Year
Administrative

Boundary
Number of

Divisions
Lifetime

Migrants
Proportion

Migrating
Namibia 2001 Region 13 358 822 19.6
Namibia 2011 Region 13 474 592 22.5

Constituency 107 707 256 33.7

Ghana 2000 Region 10 3 329 320 17.8
District 110 5 206 990 27.8

Kenya 1999 Province 8 3 496 560 12.6
District 69 5 622 520 20.3

Rwanda 2001 Province 12 801 890 10.4

South Africa 2002 Province 9 6 717 270 15.4

Uganda 2001 Region 4 1 288 730 5.2

District 56 3 577 610 14.6

1 Additional factors which complicate cross-national comparisons include age distribution: areas with larger
proportions of young and middle aged adults will tend to have more migrants since migration is most com-
mon at these ages. Similarly, in addition to the number of divisions in each administrative level, differences
in the geographic size of each division may be relevant. Finally, consistent coding of results is important
responses such as Dont Know, if not removed from migration tabulations, may bias upwards the results.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 4 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

ii. Internal Migration in Namibia in Regional Perspective

How does internal migration in Namibia compare to internal migration in other countries? Table 1.3 provides
estimates of lifetime migration in Namibia and several other African countries for which data was readily
available (Bell and Muhidin, 2009). Valid comparisons are not easy to establish. At any administrative level
(e.g. regions or constituencies) more migration will be expected in countries that have more administrative
divisions, since any given move will be more likely to cross an administrative boundary. The year of data col-
lection should also be kept in mind (for all countries other than Namibia, estimates shown are from censuses
taken around 2000). With these factors in mind, internal lifetime migration in Namibia around 2001 was likely
comparable to that in Ghana, Kenya and South Africa, but higher than that in Uganda and Rwanda. 1

Between 2001 and 2011 the proportion of internal lifetime migrants in Namibia, defined at the regional level,
increased from 19.6 to 22.5 percent. In 2011, when defined at the constituency level, the proportion of inter-
nal migrants is far higher, at 33.7 percent.

*Note: Namibia based on internal migration within national boundaries, which may bias estimates of lifetime migration
downwards if other countries include international migrants among lifetime migrants. Source for countries other than
Namibia: Bell and Muhidin (2009)

Table1.3 Lifetime Migrants in Namibia and Selected African Countries by Administrative Boundaries

Country
Census

Year
Administrative

Boundary
Number of

Divisions
Lifetime

Migrants
Proportion

Migrating
Namibia 2001 Region 13 358 822 19.6
Namibia 2011 Region 13 474 592 22.5

Constituency 107 707 256 33.7

Ghana 2000 Region 10 3 329 320 17.8
District 110 5 206 990 27.8

Kenya 1999 Province 8 3 496 560 12.6
District 69 5 622 520 20.3

Rwanda 2001 Province 12 801 890 10.4

South Africa 2002 Province 9 6 717 270 15.4

Uganda 2001 Region 4 1 288 730 5.2

District 56 3 577 610 14.6

1 Additional factors which complicate cross-national comparisons include age distribution: areas with larger
proportions of young and middle aged adults will tend to have more migrants since migration is most com-
mon at these ages. Similarly, in addition to the number of divisions in each administrative level, differences
in the geographic size of each division may be relevant. Finally, consistent coding of results is important
responses such as Dont Know, if not removed from migration tabulations, may bias upwards the results.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 5Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

iii. Lifetime Migrants (and Non-Migrants) by Age and Sex

The age-sex distribution of lifetime migrants and non-migrants is shown in Figure 1.1a and 1.1b. Figure 1.1a
shows that the majority of migrants are young and middle aged adult (20-39 years). These are people who
may move for educational purposes or employment opportunities.

It is clear that the age selective for non-migrant is different when compared to the age pyramid for non-mi-
grant (Figure 1.1b). i.e. middle age population is more likely to migrate than younger and older age groups.

Figure 1.1a - Lifetime Migrants by Age and Sex, 2011

Figure 1.1b - Non Migrants by Age and Sex, 2011

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page / 6 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 2 Internal Migration

The term internal migration refers to movement within the boundaries of a given country. The 2011 census
asked the following questions to capture the morbidity of the population internally and internationally. These
were able to depict a person who moved to an area other than that of his or her usual residence:

i. Place of birth refers to the place where the respondents mother was usually living when she gave
birth (not the town or hospital where the respondent was born).

ii. Place of usual residence refers to the place where a person usually lives for the most part of any
year (at least six month) and should not be confused with home town or where a person originally
came from.

iii. Place of previous residence i.e. usual residence since September 2010 refers to where the person
was usually living from September 2010 to August 2011.

iv. Duration of residence refers to the number in completed years lived at the usual place of residence.

Table 2.1 compares the region where a person was enumerated to the region of their usual residence. In
areas experiencing more immigration than emigration (positive net migration), such as Erongo and Khomas,
usual residents were fewer than those enumerated, while Omusati and Ohangwena showed the opposite
pattern. These results show that 99 percent of the total population enumerated in Namibia was found where
they usually lived, while 4 percent in Ohangwena and close to 3 percent in Omusati regions were enumerated
somewhere else. The table further shows that regions (Khomas, Erongo, Otjozondjupa, Karas,...) associated
with urban areas had more people enumerated than usually living there.

Table 2.1 Population by Place of Enumeration and Place of Usual Residence, Namibia 2011

Area Enumeration Usual residence Percent*

Namibia 2 113 077 2 094 316 99

Erongo 150 809 142 403 94
Hardap 79 507 78 818 99
//Karas 77 421 75 168 97
Kavango 223 352 227 254 102
Khomas 342 141 334 399 98
Kunene 86 856 83 292 96
Ohangwena 245 446 255 180 104
Omaheke 71 233 71 279 100
Omusati 243 166 249 571 103
Oshana 176 674 170 251 96
Oshikoto 181 973 178 654 98
Otjozondjupa 143 903 136 823 95
Zambezi 90 596 91 224 101

Outside Namibia NA 17 908 NA
Dont know NA 157 NA
Other Categories NA 696 NA

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

*The percent refers to those usually resident in each area compared to those enumerated there.

Page / 6 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 2 Internal Migration

The term internal migration refers to movement within the boundaries of a given country. The 2011 census
asked the following questions to capture the morbidity of the population internally and internationally. These
were able to depict a person who moved to an area other than that of his or her usual residence:

i. Place of birth refers to the place where the respondents mother was usually living when she gave
birth (not the town or hospital where the respondent was born).

ii. Place of usual residence refers to the place where a person usually lives for the most part of any
year (at least six month) and should not be confused with home town or where a person originally
came from.

iii. Place of previous residence i.e. usual residence since September 2010 refers to where the person
was usually living from September 2010 to August 2011.

iv. Duration of residence refers to the number in completed years lived at the usual place of residence.

Table 2.1 compares the region where a person was enumerated to the region of their usual residence. In
areas experiencing more immigration than emigration (positive net migration), such as Erongo and Khomas,
usual residents were fewer than those enumerated, while Omusati and Ohangwena showed the opposite
pattern. These results show that 99 percent of the total population enumerated in Namibia was found where
they usually lived, while 4 percent in Ohangwena and close to 3 percent in Omusati regions were enumerated
somewhere else. The table further shows that regions (Khomas, Erongo, Otjozondjupa, Karas,...) associated
with urban areas had more people enumerated than usually living there.

Table 2.1 Population by Place of Enumeration and Place of Usual Residence, Namibia 2011

Area Enumeration Usual residence Percent*

Namibia 2 113 077 2 094 316 99

Erongo 150 809 142 403 94
Hardap 79 507 78 818 99
//Karas 77 421 75 168 97
Kavango 223 352 227 254 102
Khomas 342 141 334 399 98
Kunene 86 856 83 292 96
Ohangwena 245 446 255 180 104
Omaheke 71 233 71 279 100
Omusati 243 166 249 571 103
Oshana 176 674 170 251 96
Oshikoto 181 973 178 654 98
Otjozondjupa 143 903 136 823 95
Zambezi 90 596 91 224 101

Outside Namibia NA 17 908 NA
Dont know NA 157 NA
Other Categories NA 696 NA

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

*The percent refers to those usually resident in each area compared to those enumerated there.

Page / 7Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Table 2.2 compares those usually resident in each region to those who were born there. Once again, Erongo
and Khomas stand out for having far more usual residents than those who were born there, an indication of
net migration. Compared to the population born in those regions, net migration rates were over 68 per 100
population.

Table 2.3 provides information on the movement of people between usual place of residence and previous
residence i.e. September 2010. Zambezi region has lost a significant number of its people i.e. 5.5% to other
regions between 2010 and 2011, a situation that could be attributed to flood in 2010 (IFRC, 2010).

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

*Growth rate per hundred at previous residence.

Area
Usual

residence
Place of

birth
Percent *

Net
migration
rate (per

100)**
Namibia 2 094 316 2 017 035 96 4

Erongo 142 403 84 470 59 69
Hardap 78 818 85 645 109 - 8
Karas 75 168 65 358 87 15
Kavango 227 254 243 380 107 - 7
Khomas 334 399 190 797 57 75
Kunene 83 292 83 991 101 - 1
Ohangwena 255 180 323 568 127 - 21
Omaheke 71 279 73 283 103 - 3
Omusati 249 571 302 827 121 - 18
Oshana 170 251 174 321 102 - 2
Oshikoto 178 654 176 835 99 1
Otjozondjupa 136 823 121 203 89 13
Zambezi 91 224 91 357 100 0

Outside Namibia 17 908 93 622 523 - 81
Dont know 157 407 259 - 61
Other Categories 1 344 0 NA NA

Table 2.2 Population by Place of Usual Residence and Place of Birth, Namibia 2011

*Births in each area divided by 2011 usual residents (expressed as a percent).
**Growth rate per hundred born in each area.

Table 2.3 Population by Place of Usual Residence in 2010 and 2011

Area Enumeration
Usual residence

- 2010
Percent*

Namibia 2 113 077 2 094 316 99

Erongo 15 0809 14 2403 94

Hardap 7 9507 7 8818 99

Karas 7 7421 7 5168 97

Kavango 22 3352 22 7254 102

Khomas 34 2141 33 4399 98

Kunene 8 6856 8 3292 96

Ohangwena 24 5446 25 5180 104

Omaheke 7 1233 7 1279 100

Omusati 24 3166 24 9571 103

Oshana 17 6674 17 0251 96

Oshikoto 18 1973 17 8654 98

Otjozondjupa 14 3903 13 6823 95

Zambezi 9 0596 9 1224 101

Outside Namibia NA 1 7908 NA

Dont know NA 157 NA

Other Categories NA 696 NA

Page / 8 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

In addition to the current usual residence the census asked how many years individuals had resided at that
residence. Table 2.4 shows the proportional distribution by duration. In Namibia over 14 percent (more than
300 thousand) responded that they had lived at their current residence for less than one year, which is more
than four times those who lived in a different constituency than the year before (Table 1.2). Short-term mi-
gration is higher when measured by the duration question for several reasons. First, respondents may have
moved more than once within the past year. Second, the duration question did not specify a particular bound-
ary thus an individual who moved down the street during the past year might have reported living at the
current residence for less than a year, even though they did not cross a major administrative boundary. Third,
as mentioned earlier, the phrasing of the question of previous residence may have biased downwards esti-
mates of short-term migration.

Table 2.4 Percent Distribution of Duration at Usual Residence (in years) by Region, 2011

Migration patterns differ not only between regions but also between constituencies. Figure 2.1 shows lifetime
net migration rates for both regions and constituencies. 11 regions contained constituencies showing both net
gains and net losses of migrants. Erongo and Khomas have experienced high rates of in-migration, implying
that the majority of residents in these regions were born elsewhere. However, Ohangwena and Omusati have
the highest rate of out-migration, implying that the majority of the people born in these regions usually live
elsewhere. At a constituency level Oranjemund in //Karas region showed the largest net proportional inflow
since birth (+360.7 percent), while Ohangwena constituency Ohangwena region showed the largest outflow
(-43.0 percent).

Several appendices provide additional details about internal migration. Appendices 2 and 3 show square
tables of region-to-region inflow and outflow for lifetime and short-term migration, as well as implied net
migration and net migration rates per region. Appendices 4 and 5 provide further details about lifetime and
short-term migration among constituencies.

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

Area Usual Residence
Reported
Duration

Less than 1 1-3 4-9 10-19 20+

Total 2 112 381 2 098 289 307 635 428 125 480 486 473 593 408 450

Percent Distribution

Namibia 2 112 381 2 098 289 15 20 23 23 20

Erongo 142 403 140 555 16 24 25 20 14

Hardap 78 818 78 084 18 21 22 19 21

//Karas 75 168 74 523 17 21 24 20 18

Kavango 227 254 226 304 11 19 24 26 20

Khomas 334 399 331 897 19 28 25 19 9

Kunene 83 292 82 619 15 22 24 20 19

Ohangwena 255 180 254 046 11 17 21 26 25

Omaheke 71 279 70 788 18 23 24 19 16

Omusati 249 571 248 388 11 15 20 26 28

Oshana 170 251 169 220 13 18 21 23 25

Oshikoto 178 654 177 916 13 18 22 25 22

Otjozondjupa 136 823 135 874 16 22 25 21 16

Zambezi 91 224 90 813 15 21 23 24 18

Namibia Area not Stated 474 454 38 13 14 14 21

Outside Namibia

AFRICAN 12 918 12 343 45 14 11 10 19

ASIA 666 587 49 16 6 4 24

EUROPE 2 983 2 882 49 5 6 8 33

OCEANIA 157 157 36 8 14 21 20

N. AMERICA 591 589 29 10 15 16 31

S. AMERICA 119 118 23 10 19 28 20

Dont know 157 132 17 19 9 17 37

Page / 8 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

In addition to the current usual residence the census asked how many years individuals had resided at that
residence. Table 2.4 shows the proportional distribution by duration. In Namibia over 14 percent (more than
300 thousand) responded that they had lived at their current residence for less than one year, which is more
than four times those who lived in a different constituency than the year before (Table 1.2). Short-term mi-
gration is higher when measured by the duration question for several reasons. First, respondents may have
moved more than once within the past year. Second, the duration question did not specify a particular bound-
ary thus an individual who moved down the street during the past year might have reported living at the
current residence for less than a year, even though they did not cross a major administrative boundary. Third,
as mentioned earlier, the phrasing of the question of previous residence may have biased downwards esti-
mates of short-term migration.

Table 2.4 Percent Distribution of Duration at Usual Residence (in years) by Region, 2011

Migration patterns differ not only between regions but also between constituencies. Figure 2.1 shows lifetime
net migration rates for both regions and constituencies. 11 regions contained constituencies showing both net
gains and net losses of migrants. Erongo and Khomas have experienced high rates of in-migration, implying
that the majority of residents in these regions were born elsewhere. However, Ohangwena and Omusati have
the highest rate of out-migration, implying that the majority of the people born in these regions usually live
elsewhere. At a constituency level Oranjemund in //Karas region showed the largest net proportional inflow
since birth (+360.7 percent), while Ohangwena constituency Ohangwena region showed the largest outflow
(-43.0 percent).

Several appendices provide additional details about internal migration. Appendices 2 and 3 show square
tables of region-to-region inflow and outflow for lifetime and short-term migration, as well as implied net
migration and net migration rates per region. Appendices 4 and 5 provide further details about lifetime and
short-term migration among constituencies.

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

Area Usual Residence
Reported
Duration

Less than 1 1-3 4-9 10-19 20+

Total 2 112 381 2 098 289 307 635 428 125 480 486 473 593 408 450

Percent Distribution

Namibia 2 112 381 2 098 289 15 20 23 23 20

Erongo 142 403 140 555 16 24 25 20 14

Hardap 78 818 78 084 18 21 22 19 21

//Karas 75 168 74 523 17 21 24 20 18

Kavango 227 254 226 304 11 19 24 26 20

Khomas 334 399 331 897 19 28 25 19 9

Kunene 83 292 82 619 15 22 24 20 19

Ohangwena 255 180 254 046 11 17 21 26 25

Omaheke 71 279 70 788 18 23 24 19 16

Omusati 249 571 248 388 11 15 20 26 28

Oshana 170 251 169 220 13 18 21 23 25

Oshikoto 178 654 177 916 13 18 22 25 22

Otjozondjupa 136 823 135 874 16 22 25 21 16

Zambezi 91 224 90 813 15 21 23 24 18

Namibia Area not Stated 474 454 38 13 14 14 21

Outside Namibia

AFRICAN 12 918 12 343 45 14 11 10 19

ASIA 666 587 49 16 6 4 24

EUROPE 2 983 2 882 49 5 6 8 33

OCEANIA 157 157 36 8 14 21 20

N. AMERICA 591 589 29 10 15 16 31

S. AMERICA 119 118 23 10 19 28 20

Dont know 157 132 17 19 9 17 37

Page / 9Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

*Increase/decrease of usual residents compared to those born in each region, divided by those born in each region
(see Table 2.2).

Figure 2.1 Lifetime Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)*

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

Page / 10 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Intra-regional diversity is also observed in regard to short-term migration (Figure 2.2). Steinhausen (Oma-
heke region) recorded the largest net inflow in 2011 compared to 2010 (+5.4 percent), while Kabbe (Zambe-
zi region) recorded the largest outflow (-25.1 percent). All of these outliers reflect unique circumstances. For
instance, the massive outflow from Kabbe between 2010 and 2011 was likely due to a major flood in 2010
(IFRC, 2010).

Figure 2.2 Short-term Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)*

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

Page / 10 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Intra-regional diversity is also observed in regard to short-term migration (Figure 2.2). Steinhausen (Oma-
heke region) recorded the largest net inflow in 2011 compared to 2010 (+5.4 percent), while Kabbe (Zambe-
zi region) recorded the largest outflow (-25.1 percent). All of these outliers reflect unique circumstances. For
instance, the massive outflow from Kabbe between 2010 and 2011 was likely due to a major flood in 2010
(IFRC, 2010).

Figure 2.2 Short-term Net Migration Rate (per 100 born in each area)*

Chapter 2: Migrants Characteristics

Page / 11Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 3 Migrant Characteristics

This chapter presents demographic and socio-economic characteristics of migrants in Namibia. Most studies
on migration have concluded that most migrants come from a segment of the population which has differ-
ent socio-economic characteristics from the people who are in the place of destination and place of origin
(Ravenstein, 1885). In most cases a migrant is able to change his/her socio-economic status during or after
migration, for instance, social life, level of education completed, marital, occupation and employment status.
Given that such socio-economic characteristics typically change across ones lifetime, Niikondo (2012) indicat-
ed that migrants to cities and towns in Namibia come from rural areas in search of employment opportunities
and those with better education, as well as the youth, were more interested in investing in urban properties
to have better urban life.

3.1 Age-Sex Structure

The age-sex composition of migrants is important because it relates to many other characteristics. Thus it is
also important to know the age - sex composition of migrants. Table 3.1 shows the age distribution of life-
time (see also Figure 1.1a). These migrants include internal and international migrants as well as those who
responded Dont Know, regarding their usual residence. Compared to Namibias population overall, most
lifetime migrants are at ages 15-39, with about 54 percent. There is evidence however that a large proportion
of migrants to urban areas are in the middle-aged group and Niikondo (2011) found that 68% of people within
the age group of 18-30 were interested in urban life.

In terms of sex ratio generally there are more male lifetime migrants for ages 15-39 as compared to females.
Furthermore, the sex ratio for lifetime migrants is fairly uniform at most ages, but peaking at 1.04 for ages
30-39.

Table 3.1 - Lifetime Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)

Age group
Lifetime

Migrants
Percent by

Age
Sex Ratio

0 - 4 27 122 3.4 0.96

5 - 9 47 616 5.9 0.94

10 - 14 59 548 7.4 0.92

15 - 19 73 835 9.2 0.90

20 - 24 101 914 12.6 1.00

25 - 29 97 958 12.2 1.02

30 - 34 86 391 10.7 1.04

35 - 39 73 336 9.1 1.04

40 - 44 57 392 7.1 1.02

45 - 49 46 784 5.8 0.98

50 - 54 34 981 4.3 0.93

55 - 59 26 542 3.3 0.96

60 - 64 20 814 2.6 0.91

65 - 69 15 044 1.9 0.80

70 - 74 11 661 1.4 0.79

75 - 79 8 163 1.0 0.71

80+ 16 764 2.1 0.53

Total* 805 865 100.0 0.96
*Includes internal migrants (707,256) and others

Chapter 3: Migrants Characteristics

Page / 12 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Table 3.2 shows the age distribution of short-term migrants. These migrants include internal and international
migrants as well as those who responded Dont Know, regarding their usual residence. Compared to Namib-
ias population overall, most short-term migrants are at ages 15-34, with about 56 percent. In terms of sex
ratio, generally there are more male short-term migrants except for ages 15 and below. Furthermore the sex
ratio for short-term migrants is fairly uniform at most ages, but declined to 0.81 for ages 65 years and above.

Table 3.2 - Short-term Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)

Age group
Short-term

Migrants
Percent
by Age

Sex Ratio

1 - 4 7 764 9.0 0.98

5 - 9 6 028 7.0 0.93

10 - 14 5 542 6.4 0.89

15 - 19 9 432 11.0 0.87

20 - 24 16 761 19.5 1.03

25 - 29 12 896 15.0 1.17

30 - 34 8 945 10.4 1.37

35 - 39 5 927 6.9 1.54

40 - 44 3 987 4.6 1.65

45 - 49 2 767 3.2 1.77

50 - 54 1 915 2.2 1.63

55 - 59 1 163 1.4 1.46

60 - 64 845 1.0 1.35

65+ 1 973 2.3 0.81

TOTAL* 85 945 100.0 1.12

Figure 3.1 shows the likelihood of lifetime migration within each age and sex group the number of migrants
divided by the population at the same age and sex group. Lifetime migration is most common at 20-55 - ages
at which about half or more of men and women resided in a different area than where they were born. A
decline in lifetime migration at the oldest ages might indicate return migration that is, the older population
may return home to their birthplace once they stop working. The peak likelihood of short-term migration is
lower and more concentrated at ages 20-34 - young adult ages at which work and family factors may lead to
greater mobility.

Figure 3.1 Proportions Migrating at each Age and Sex, Short-term and Lifetime Migration

Note for short-term migration, the age category 0-4 refers to those at 1-4

Chapter 3: Migrants Characteristics

*Includes internal migrants (64,768) and others

Page / 12 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Table 3.2 shows the age distribution of short-term migrants. These migrants include internal and international
migrants as well as those who responded Dont Know, regarding their usual residence. Compared to Namib-
ias population overall, most short-term migrants are at ages 15-34, with about 56 percent. In terms of sex
ratio, generally there are more male short-term migrants except for ages 15 and below. Furthermore the sex
ratio for short-term migrants is fairly uniform at most ages, but declined to 0.81 for ages 65 years and above.

Table 3.2 - Short-term Migrants by Age, Percent by Age, and Sex Ratio (Males/Females)

Age group
Short-term

Migrants
Percent
by Age

Sex Ratio

1 - 4 7 764 9.0 0.98

5 - 9 6 028 7.0 0.93

10 - 14 5 542 6.4 0.89

15 - 19 9 432 11.0 0.87

20 - 24 16 761 19.5 1.03

25 - 29 12 896 15.0 1.17

30 - 34 8 945 10.4 1.37

35 - 39 5 927 6.9 1.54

40 - 44 3 987 4.6 1.65

45 - 49 2 767 3.2 1.77

50 - 54 1 915 2.2 1.63

55 - 59 1 163 1.4 1.46

60 - 64 845 1.0 1.35

65+ 1 973 2.3 0.81

TOTAL* 85 945 100.0 1.12

Figure 3.1 shows the likelihood of lifetime migration within each age and sex group the number of migrants
divided by the population at the same age and sex group. Lifetime migration is most common at 20-55 - ages
at which about half or more of men and women resided in a different area than where they were born. A
decline in lifetime migration at the oldest ages might indicate return migration that is, the older population
may return home to their birthplace once they stop working. The peak likelihood of short-term migration is
lower and more concentrated at ages 20-34 - young adult ages at which work and family factors may lead to
greater mobility.

Figure 3.1 Proportions Migrating at each Age and Sex, Short-term and Lifetime Migration

Note for short-term migration, the age category 0-4 refers to those at 1-4

Chapter 3: Migrants Characteristics

*Includes internal migrants (64,768) and others

Page / 13Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

3.2 Marital Status

Studies have suggested that migrants tend to be single. However, recent studies have found that adult pop-
ulation can be expected to be married and generally married people are expected to move together, thus
there is a considerable higher proportion of married migrants than single, divorced or widowed (Timor-Leste,
2010).

Figure 3.2 presents the proportion of migrants by marital status. Those who never married or in consensual
unions were most likely to have migrated between 2010 and 2011, compared to those separated or widowed.
Such differences might be due in part to their age rather than marital status. For instance, those who never
married tend to be at younger adult ages where migration is less likely.

Figure 3.2 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Marital Status and Sex, Ages 15 and Above

3.3 Education

Another major factor to be considered in terms of migrants is educational attainment. Figure 3.3 reflects the
proportion of migrants within each education group. About 6 percent or more of those with at least a sec-
ondary education were short-term migrants, a higher share than for those with less education. Thus migrants
with high educational status migrate more compared to those with no or less educational attainment. These
findings might reflect the job opportunities available for better educated workers, which may require them
to move.

Generally there are more male migrants than female migrants who have completed tertiary education. These
findings are similar to what was found by other researchers - that more male migrants have higher level of
education attainment than female migrants.

Chapter 3: Migrants Characteristics

Figure 3.3 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Education and Sex, Ages 15 and Above

Page / 14 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

3.4 Occupation

The occupation composition of migrants provides information on the distribution of working migrants among
different classifications of profession. As seen in Figure 3.4 occupational groups that include the better edu-
cated (such as legislators, professionals and technicians) do not exhibit higher migration. Occupations exhib-
iting the most short term migration were armed forces, service workers and elementary occupations.

Figure 3.4 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Occupation and Sex, Ages 15 and Above

3.5 Employment

Generally it is expected that the labour force participation rate is higher for migrants than non-migrants due
to main motives for migrating being work. Figure 3.4 shows that in Namibia migration varies by employment
status and sex. In general there are more employed migrants than unemployed migrants. Among males mi-
gration seems most common among the employed, while for females migration seems most common among
the unemployed. Other evidence suggests that employment opportunities attract migrants in-migration
is highest in regions where unemployment is lowest (not shown). Further investigation into these patterns
would be helpful.

Figure 3.5 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Employment Status and Sex, Ages 15 and Above

Chapter 3: Migrants Characteristics

Page / 14 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

3.4 Occupation

The occupation composition of migrants provides information on the distribution of working migrants among
different classifications of profession. As seen in Figure 3.4 occupational groups that include the better edu-
cated (such as legislators, professionals and technicians) do not exhibit higher migration. Occupations exhib-
iting the most short term migration were armed forces, service workers and elementary occupations.

Figure 3.4 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Occupation and Sex, Ages 15 and Above

3.5 Employment

Generally it is expected that the labour force participation rate is higher for migrants than non-migrants due
to main motives for migrating being work. Figure 3.4 shows that in Namibia migration varies by employment
status and sex. In general there are more employed migrants than unemployed migrants. Among males mi-
gration seems most common among the employed, while for females migration seems most common among
the unemployed. Other evidence suggests that employment opportunities attract migrants in-migration
is highest in regions where unemployment is lowest (not shown). Further investigation into these patterns
would be helpful.

Figure 3.5 Proportion Migrating (Short-term) by Employment Status and Sex, Ages 15 and Above

Chapter 3: Migrants Characteristics

Page / 15Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 4 International Migration

4.1 International Migrant Stock

The term international migration refers to movement of people between Namibia and other countries.

Globally there were 232 million international migrants in 2013. Of these nearly 59 per cent lived in developed
regions, while the developing regions hosted 41 per cent of the worlds total. (United Nations, 2013).

Table 4.1 shows that between 1990 and 2013 the number of international migrants worldwide rose by over
77 million or by 50 per cent. Much of this growth occurred between 2000 and 2010. During this period 4.6
million migrants were added annually, compared to an average of 2 million per annum during the period
1990-2000 and 3.6 million per annum during the period 2010-2013. The developed regions gained 53 million
or 69 per cent of the 77 million international migrants added worldwide between 1990 and 2013, whereas
the developing regions added 24 million or 31 per cent. While the north gained the largest absolute number
of migrants between 1990 and 2013, since 2000 the average annual growth rate in international migrant
stock in the south outpaced the growth rate in the north: 2.3 per cent per annum versus 2.1 per cent per an-
num, respectively. Since 2010 the annual growth rate slowed in both the north and the south to 1.5 per cent
in the developed regions and 1.8 per cent in the developing regions.

Table 4.1 International Migrant Stock by Development Level and area

Area

International Migrant Stock
(Millions)

Average Annual Change in
Migrant Stock (Millions)

Average Annual Growth
rate in Migrant Stock

(Percentage)

1990 2000 2010 2013
1990-
2000

2000-
2010

2010-
2013

1990-
2000

2000-
2010

2010-
2013

World 154.2 174.5 220.7 231.5 2.0 4.6 3.6 1.2 2.2 1.6
Developed
Regions

82.3 103.4 129.7 135.6 2.1 2.6 1.9 2.3 2.3 1.5
Developing
Regions

71.9 71.1 91 95.9 -0.1 2 1.6 -0.1 2.5 1.8

Africa 15.6 15.6 17.1 18.6 0.0 0.2 0.5 0 0.9 2.8
Asia 49.9 503.4 67.8 70.8 0.1 1.7 1 0.1 3 1.5
Europe 49 56.2 69.2 72.4 0.7 1.3 1.1 1.4 2.1 1.5
LAC 7.1 6.5 8.1 8.5 -0.1 0.2 0.2 -0.9 2.2 1.8
NA 27.8 40.4 51.2 53.1 1.3 1.1 0.6 3.7 2.4 1.2
Oceania 4.7 5.4 7.3 7.9 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.5 3.1 2.6

Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2013). Trends in International Migrant Stock: The
2013 Revision-Migrants by Age and Sex (United Nations database, POP/DB/MIG/Stock/Rev.2013/Age).
Note: LAC refers to Latin America and the Caribbean, while NA refers to Northern America

Chapter 4: International Migration

Page / 16 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

4.2 Non-Citizens

The 2011 census asked all people to state their country of citizenship, of which Namibians and non-Namibians
are reported in table 4.1. The table indicates that the census enumerated almost 68 thousand non-citizens.
About two-thirds of non-citizens (47 thousand) indicated their usual resident is abroad, the vast majority of
whom were born in Africa (39 thousand). The other third of non-citizens (22 thousand) resided in Namibia.

Appendix 6 provides more detail on those who were born abroad, such as the specific country of birth as well
as whether those born abroad were citizens or not. Among the foreign born the top five countries of origin
were Angola (38,076), South Africa (21,209), Zambia (10,299), Zimbabwe (5,770) and Germany (3,670). These
were also the top five countries of origin for non-citizens, although for citizens Botswana replaces Zimbabwe
for the fourth spot. Aside from African countries and Germany the top country of origin of the foreign born
was China (1,241), of whom 82 were reported to be citizens.

Table 4.2 Citizens and Non-Citizens by Usual Residents

Area
Usual Residents Namibian Citizens Non - Namibian Citizens

TOTAL 2 112 381 2 044 590 67 791

Regions of Namibia 2 018 694 1 997 515 21 179

Erongo 84 470 83 239 1 231

Hardap 85 645 85 079 566

//Karas 65 358 64 728 630

Kavango 243 380 241 373 2 007

Khomas 190 797 188 121 2 676

Kunene 83 991 83 261 730

Ohangwena 323 568 321 194 2 374
Omaheke 73 283 72 652 631

Omusati 302 827 300 298 2 529
Oshana 174 321 172 409 1 912

Oshikoto 178 152 176 408 1 744

Otjozondjupa 121 203 118 450 2 753
Zambezi 91 357 89 997 1 360
Namibia Area not Stated 342 306 36

Outside Namibia 93 280 46 720 46 560

African 83 038 43 816 39 222
Asia 2 251 365 1 886

Europe 6 398 1 759 4 639
Oceania 241 103 138
N. America 1 066 537 529

S. America 286 140 146

Dont know 407 355 52

Chapter 4: International Migration

Page / 16 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

4.2 Non-Citizens

The 2011 census asked all people to state their country of citizenship, of which Namibians and non-Namibians
are reported in table 4.1. The table indicates that the census enumerated almost 68 thousand non-citizens.
About two-thirds of non-citizens (47 thousand) indicated their usual resident is abroad, the vast majority of
whom were born in Africa (39 thousand). The other third of non-citizens (22 thousand) resided in Namibia.

Appendix 6 provides more detail on those who were born abroad, such as the specific country of birth as well
as whether those born abroad were citizens or not. Among the foreign born the top five countries of origin
were Angola (38,076), South Africa (21,209), Zambia (10,299), Zimbabwe (5,770) and Germany (3,670). These
were also the top five countries of origin for non-citizens, although for citizens Botswana replaces Zimbabwe
for the fourth spot. Aside from African countries and Germany the top country of origin of the foreign born
was China (1,241), of whom 82 were reported to be citizens.

Table 4.2 Citizens and Non-Citizens by Usual Residents

Area
Usual Residents Namibian Citizens Non - Namibian Citizens

TOTAL 2 112 381 2 044 590 67 791

Regions of Namibia 2 018 694 1 997 515 21 179

Erongo 84 470 83 239 1 231

Hardap 85 645 85 079 566

//Karas 65 358 64 728 630

Kavango 243 380 241 373 2 007

Khomas 190 797 188 121 2 676

Kunene 83 991 83 261 730

Ohangwena 323 568 321 194 2 374
Omaheke 73 283 72 652 631

Omusati 302 827 300 298 2 529
Oshana 174 321 172 409 1 912

Oshikoto 178 152 176 408 1 744

Otjozondjupa 121 203 118 450 2 753
Zambezi 91 357 89 997 1 360
Namibia Area not Stated 342 306 36

Outside Namibia 93 280 46 720 46 560

African 83 038 43 816 39 222
Asia 2 251 365 1 886

Europe 6 398 1 759 4 639
Oceania 241 103 138
N. America 1 066 537 529

S. America 286 140 146

Dont know 407 355 52

Chapter 4: International Migration

Page / 17Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

4.2.1 Age and Sex Structure of Non-Citizens

Figure 4.1 shows the age and sex pattern of non-citizens, which is fairly similar to the pattern shown by mi-
grants (Figure 1.1a). The results show that the majority of non-citizens are young and middle aged adults (20-
39 years). These are people who may move for educational purposes or employment opportunities.

Figure 4.1 Non-Citizens by Age and Sex

4.2.2 Education of Non-Citizen

Figure 4.2 compares the proportional distribution of citizens and non-citizens education attainment. Educa-
tion attainment of non-citizens and citizens varies considerably. The result indicates that non- citizens display
higher proportions of both better and lesser educated people.

Figure 4.2 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportional Distribution by Education

Chapter 4: International Migration

Page / 18 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

4.2.3 Employment of Non-Citizen

Figure 4.3 compares the proportional distribution of citizens and non-citizens employment status. The result
shows that non-citizens are more likely to be employed.

Figure 4.3 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by Employment

4.2.4 Occupation of Non-Citizen

Figure 4.4 compares the proportional distribution of citizens and non-citizens occupation status. The result
indicates that non-citizens include higher proportions of managers, professionals and technicians. That said,
the proportion of non-citizens working in elementary positions (16 percent) is the same as for citizens.

Figure 4.4 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by Occupation

Chapter 4: International Migration

Page / 18 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

4.2.3 Employment of Non-Citizen

Figure 4.3 compares the proportional distribution of citizens and non-citizens employment status. The result
shows that non-citizens are more likely to be employed.

Figure 4.3 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by Employment

4.2.4 Occupation of Non-Citizen

Figure 4.4 compares the proportional distribution of citizens and non-citizens occupation status. The result
indicates that non-citizens include higher proportions of managers, professionals and technicians. That said,
the proportion of non-citizens working in elementary positions (16 percent) is the same as for citizens.

Figure 4.4 Citizens and Non-Citizens Proportion Distribution by Occupation

Chapter 4: International Migration

Page / 19Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 5 Urbanization

A critical aspect of migration is rural to urban migration. Today more than 54 percent of the worlds popula-
tion lives in urban rather than in rural areas. It is projected that 66 percent of the worlds population will live
in urban areas by 2050 (UN, 214 ). For Namibia it is projected that close to 60 percent of the population will
live in urban areas by 2030 (NSA, 20142), an indication that rural-urbanization transformation is taking place
right here in Namibia at a vast scale. It is important to note that increasing concern over land is expressed.

5.1 Urban Population by Region

Urban areas are attracting more people with high hopes of finding better opportunities. Generally for Namib-
ia as a whole, there is an increase of population living in urban areas. Figure 5.1 shows that the percentage
living in urban areas increased from 27 percent in 1991 to 43 percent in 2011 (Table 1.1). Yet the percent ur-
ban across regions differs dramatically. In 2011 Erongo and Khomas were both more than 85 percent urban,
while Ohangwena, Omusati and Oshikoto were the mirror opposite, less than 15 percent urban (Figure 5.1).

Figure 5.1 Percent Urban by Region, 1991, 2001, 2011

5.2 Projected Urban Population

Figure 5.1 shows that urban population is projected to increase dramatically while the rural population is ex-
pected to gradually shrink. By 2041, 67 percent of the Namibia population is expected to live in urban areas
(NSA, 2014c). This is an indication that Namibia will transit from being a mostly rural society to a mostly ur-
ban one. It is projected that over a third of the Namibia population is projected to live in Khomas and Erongo
regions (figure 5.1).

2 UN Economic and Social Affairs World Urbanization Prospects, highlights, revision 2014

Chapter 5: Urbanization

Page / 20 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Zaman, Alam & Islam (2009) has found that the challenges of urbanization are:

i. Unplanned and unguided spontaneous urbanization with continuously mounting problems;
ii. Lack of advanced planning for utility services, shelter and infrastructure;
iii. Lack of advanced planning for road infrastructure and public transportation, installation of electric,
gas, water, sewerage and telephone lines;
iv. Lack of comprehensive urbanization comprising all civic amenities like parks, lakes and other recrea
tional facilities;
v. Absence of regulatory framework of urban public land and waterways to prevent their misuse;
vi. Absence of conscious policy for utilization of urban public land and waterways which could be used
as resources for building civic amenities;
vii. Inadequate environmental concerns for protection of urban waterways, disposal of solid wastes
viii. Lack of concern for poor and slum dwellers;
ix. Absence of regulatory support for citizens protection against exploitation by home developers and
other private utility providers;
x. Absence of strong mechanism for coordination of infrastructure development and provision of utili
ties in all city corporation areas.

Figure 5.2 Urban and Rural Projected Population, 2011-2041

5.3 Age and Sex Structure for Urban Areas, 2011

Rural and urban areas exhibit different age and sex structures (Figure 5.3 and 5.4).

The population pyramid for urban areas in 2011 is bulky in the middle and has a relative narrow apex, indicat-
ing that urban areas have a large proportion of working age population (NSA, 2013:p.31). This is an indication
that young adults are more prevalent in urban areas due to rural-urban migration, which tends to peak at
these ages.

Chapter 5: Urbanization

Page / 20 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Zaman, Alam & Islam (2009) has found that the challenges of urbanization are:

i. Unplanned and unguided spontaneous urbanization with continuously mounting problems;
ii. Lack of advanced planning for utility services, shelter and infrastructure;
iii. Lack of advanced planning for road infrastructure and public transportation, installation of electric,
gas, water, sewerage and telephone lines;
iv. Lack of comprehensive urbanization comprising all civic amenities like parks, lakes and other recrea
tional facilities;
v. Absence of regulatory framework of urban public land and waterways to prevent their misuse;
vi. Absence of conscious policy for utilization of urban public land and waterways which could be used
as resources for building civic amenities;
vii. Inadequate environmental concerns for protection of urban waterways, disposal of solid wastes
viii. Lack of concern for poor and slum dwellers;
ix. Absence of regulatory support for citizens protection against exploitation by home developers and
other private utility providers;
x. Absence of strong mechanism for coordination of infrastructure development and provision of utili
ties in all city corporation areas.

Figure 5.2 Urban and Rural Projected Population, 2011-2041

5.3 Age and Sex Structure for Urban Areas, 2011

Rural and urban areas exhibit different age and sex structures (Figure 5.3 and 5.4).

The population pyramid for urban areas in 2011 is bulky in the middle and has a relative narrow apex, indicat-
ing that urban areas have a large proportion of working age population (NSA, 2013:p.31). This is an indication
that young adults are more prevalent in urban areas due to rural-urban migration, which tends to peak at
these ages.

Chapter 5: Urbanization

Page / 21Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Figure 5.3 Age and Sex Structure of Urban Areas, 2011

5.4 Age and Sex Structure for Rural Areas, 2011

The population pyramid for rural areas in 2011 has a bulky base and a small proportion of working age people
and a large proportion of the elderly people (NSA, 2013:p.31). This is also an indication that people are mi-
grating to urban areas for better employment, education and other socio economic status.

Figure 5.4 Age and Sex Structure of Rural Areas, 2011

5.5 Urban Population by Towns in Namibia

The urban populations by town as of 2001 and 2011 are shown in Table 5.1. The most populous towns in
2011 were Windhoek (325,858), Rundu (63,431) and Walvis Bay (62,096). Those with the largest percentage
growth between 2001 and 2011 were Outapi and Ondangwa, each of which more than doubled.

Chapter 5: Urbanization

Page / 22 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Table 5.1 Urban Populations by Town, 2001 and 2011

Area 2001 2011 % Change

Katima Mulilo 22 134 28 362 28%

Henties Bay 3 285 4 720 44%

Arandis 3 974 5 214 31%

Karibib 3 726 5 132 38%

Usakos 2 926 3 583 22%

Omaruru 4 761 6 300 32%

Swakopmund 23 808 44 725 88%

Walvis Bay 43 611 62 096 42%

Aranos NA 3 683 NA

Mariental 9 836 12 478 27%

Rehoboth 21 308 28 843 35%

//Karasburg 4 075 4 401 8%

Keetmanshoop 15 778 20 977 33%

Luderitz 13 295 12 537 -6%

Oranjemund 4 451 3 908 -12%

Rosh Pinah NA 2 835 NA

Nkurenkuru NA 618 NA

Rundu 36 964 63 431 72%

Windhoek 233 529 325 858 40%

Khorixas 5 890 6 796 15%

Opuwo 5 101 7 657 50%

Outjo 6 013 8 445 40%

Eenhana 2 814 5 528 96%

Helao Nafidi NA 19 375 NA

Gobabis 13 856 19 101 38%

Otjinene NA 2 102 NA
Outapi 2 640 6 437 144%
Oshikuku NA 2 761 NA
Okahao NA 1 665 NA
Ruacana NA 2 985 NA

Ondangwa 10 900 22 822 109%

Ongwediva 10 742 20 260 89%
Oshakati 28 255 36 541 29%
Omuthiya NA 3 794 NA
Tsumeb 14 929 19 275 29%
Grootfontein 14 249 16 632 17%
Okahandja 14 039 22 639 61%
Okakarara 3 296 4 709 43%
Otavi 3 813 5 242 37%
Otjiwarongo 19 614 28 249 44%

Note: NA indicates that these towns were not considered to be urban in 2001

Chapter 5: Urbanization

Page / 22 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Table 5.1 Urban Populations by Town, 2001 and 2011

Area 2001 2011 % Change

Katima Mulilo 22 134 28 362 28%

Henties Bay 3 285 4 720 44%

Arandis 3 974 5 214 31%

Karibib 3 726 5 132 38%

Usakos 2 926 3 583 22%

Omaruru 4 761 6 300 32%

Swakopmund 23 808 44 725 88%

Walvis Bay 43 611 62 096 42%

Aranos NA 3 683 NA

Mariental 9 836 12 478 27%

Rehoboth 21 308 28 843 35%

//Karasburg 4 075 4 401 8%

Keetmanshoop 15 778 20 977 33%

Luderitz 13 295 12 537 -6%

Oranjemund 4 451 3 908 -12%

Rosh Pinah NA 2 835 NA

Nkurenkuru NA 618 NA

Rundu 36 964 63 431 72%

Windhoek 233 529 325 858 40%

Khorixas 5 890 6 796 15%

Opuwo 5 101 7 657 50%

Outjo 6 013 8 445 40%

Eenhana 2 814 5 528 96%

Helao Nafidi NA 19 375 NA

Gobabis 13 856 19 101 38%

Otjinene NA 2 102 NA
Outapi 2 640 6 437 144%
Oshikuku NA 2 761 NA
Okahao NA 1 665 NA
Ruacana NA 2 985 NA

Ondangwa 10 900 22 822 109%

Ongwediva 10 742 20 260 89%
Oshakati 28 255 36 541 29%
Omuthiya NA 3 794 NA
Tsumeb 14 929 19 275 29%
Grootfontein 14 249 16 632 17%
Okahandja 14 039 22 639 61%
Okakarara 3 296 4 709 43%
Otavi 3 813 5 242 37%
Otjiwarongo 19 614 28 249 44%

Note: NA indicates that these towns were not considered to be urban in 2001

Chapter 5: Urbanization

Page / 23Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Chapter 6 Concluding observations

Discussion and Conclusion

i. Internal Migrants
The number of internal migrants recorded in Namibia in 2011 varies from 41 thousand (residence in a differ-
ent region in 2011 compared to 2010) to 707 thousand (residence in a different constituency in 2011 com-
pared to the place of birth). Generally in Namibia one is more likely to cross a constituency boundary than a
regional boundary and to reside at a different residence than ones birthplace place. Therefore efforts must
be put in place to develop all constituencies equally in order to reduce migration from one constituency to
another.

At regional level migration varies widely. Over 40 percent of those residing in Khomas and Erongo in 2011
were born outside those regions, which suggests net migration flows into those regions from elsewhere. In
contrast more than one in six people born in Ohangwena and Omusati now reside in other regions.

In regard to lifetime migration Oranjemund (//Karas region) showed the largest net proportional inflow
since birth (+360.7 percent), while Ohangwena constituency (Ohangwena region) showed the largest out-
flow (-43.0 percent).

As to short-term migration Steinhausen (Omaheke region) recorded the largest net inflow in 2011 com-
pared to 2010 (+5.4 percent), while Kabbe (Zambezi region) recorded the largest outflow (-25.1 percent). All
of these outliers reflect unique circumstances. For instance the massive outflow from Kabbe between 2010
and 2011 was likely due to a major flood in 2010.

ii. International Migration
As to international migration more than 93 thousand residents in 2011 were born outside of Namibia, or
about 4.5 percent of the population. The top five countries of the foreign born were Angola (38,076), South
Africa (21,209), Zambia (10,299), Zimbabwe (5,770) and Germany (3,670). Compared to citizens, non-citi-
zens are disproportionately male and concentrated at young and middle-age adults, with larger proportions
of both the best and least educated. Reliable information about migrant outflows from Namibia to abroad
is more limited, yet indirect evidence suggests that numerical outflows have been relatively comparable to
inflows over the past decade (NSA, 2014c). Thus population growth due to net international migration over
the past decades was likely fairly negligible.

iii. Demographic and Socio-Economic Characteristics of migrants
The major demographic characteristics of migrants (both internal and international) concerns their age
the propensity of lifetime migration is notably highest at ages 15-39, while the likelihood of short-term mi-
gration is highest at ages 15-34. Migration is also somewhat more common among males. As to other social
characteristics, short-term migration tends to be most prevalent among the never married and the better
educated. Migration patterns are also related to employment and occupation. For instance, migrants tend
to go where jobs are moving from regions where unemployment rates are high to regions where it is low.

iv. Urbanization
The percentage living in urban areas increased from 27 percent in 1991 to 33 percent in 2001 to 43 percent
in 2011. The urban percentage across regions differs dramatically with Erongo and Khomas both exceeding
85 percent, while Ohangwena, Omusati and Oshikoto are the opposite with less than 15 percent. The na-
tional urban share is projected to grow to 67 percent in 2041 as urban areas grow and rural areas gradually
shrink.

In conclusion it is worth mentioning that Namibia will transit from being a mostly rural society to a most-
ly urban one due to migration. In future censuses and surveys further consideration of which migration
questions should be included, how they should be phrased and how they should be ordered would be very
helpful.

Conclusion

Page / 24 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I: 1 QUESTIONS ASKED IN THE 2011 CENSUS ABOUT MIGRATION

Appendices

Page / 24 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I: 1 QUESTIONS ASKED IN THE 2011 CENSUS ABOUT MIGRATION

Appendices

Page / 25Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

APPENDIX II: MIGRATION TABLES

Table A1. Lifetime Migration from Region to Region Inflows, Outflows, and Net Migration

Appendices

AP
PE

ND
IX

 II:
 M

IG
RA

TIO
N  

TA
BL

ES
 

Ta
ble

 A
1.  

 Li
fe:

m
e  M

igr
a:

on
 fr

om
 Re

gio
n  t

o  R
eg

ion
   

Infl
ow

s,  
Ou

Gl
ow

s,  
an

d  N
et

 M
igr

a:
on

To
ta
l

Er
on

go
Ha

rd
ap

Ka
ra
s

Ka
va
ng
o

Kh
om

as
Ku
ne
ne

Oh
an
gw

.
Om

ah
ek
e

Om
us
a5

Os
ha
na

Os
hik

ot
o

Ot
joz

on
.

Za
mb

ez
iO

ut
sid

e  
co
un
tri
es

Do
n`
t  

kn
ow

No
t  

sta
te
d

Infl
ow

Ou
Cl
ow

Ne
t  

M
igr
a5
on

Ra
te
 of

 N
et
 

M
igr
a5
on

To
ta
l

2  1
12

 38
1

84
 47

0
85

 64
5

65
 35

8
24

3  3
80

19
0  7

97
83

 99
1

32
3  5

68
 73

 28
3

 30
2  8

27
 17

4  3
21

 17
6  8

35
 12

1  2
03

 91
 35

7
 93

 62
2

   4
07

 1  
31

7
 55

4  3
51

 55
4  3

51
   0

   0
Er
on

go
 14

2  4
03

 63
 14

4
 4  
10
9

 2  
84
3

 3  
15
9

 8  
57
4

 4  
81
4

 12
 01

9
 1  
81
0

 12
 35

3
 7  
57
9

 6  
84
2

 6  
49
4

 1  
13
1

 7  
43
0

   2
7

   7
5

 79
 25

9
 21

 32
6

 57
 93

3
   1

Ha
rd
ap

 78
 81

8
   8
30

 61
 37

5
 3  
16
1

   9
56

 4  
66
1

   1
96

 1  
39
5

 1  
16
7

 1  
18
7

   8
93

   5
21

   6
61

   1
86

 1  
61
3

   3
   1
3

 17
 44

3
 24

 27
0

-­  6
 82

7
   0

Ka
ra
s

 75
 16

8
   8
46

 2  
78
6

 48
 94

9
 3  
43
3

 2  
45
1

   2
35

 3  
68
5

   3
92

 3  
75
7

 3  
00
3

 1  
53
4

   7
76

   8
46

 2  
45
6

   3
   1
6

 26
 21

9
 16

 40
9

 9  
81
0

   0
Ka
va
ng
o

 22
7  2

54
   2
52

   1
86

   1
66

 21
3  6

16
   7
23

   1
66

 1  
16
9

   4
00

   9
59

   8
72

   6
86

 1  
22
5

 1  
37
4

 5  
44
4

   2
   1
4

 13
 63

8
 29

 76
4

-­  1
6  1

26
   0

Kh
om

as
 33

4  3
99

 9  
19
4

 13
 05

5
 6  
72
7

 9  
23
5

 15
0  5

06
 2  
99
5

 28
 64

6
 10

 17
4

 31
 02

6
 15

 13
6

 15
 71

1
 11

 50
7

 4  
96
1

 25
 29

0
   1
61

   7
5

 18
3  8

93
 40

 29
1

 14
3  6

02
   1

Ku
ne
ne

 83
 29

2
 1  
29
4

   2
75

   1
53

 1  
18
1

 1  
16
3

 69
 30

1
   8
68

   3
03

 2  
53
0

   9
44

   5
37

 2  
43
1

   6
11

 1  
65
3

   5
   4
3

 13
 99

1
 14

 69
0

-­    6
99

   0
Oh

an
gw

en
a

 25
5  1

80
 1  
60
7

   2
55

   4
29

   3
77

 3  
60
2

   1
39

 22
9  1

29
   1
16

 3  
53
1

 5  
04
5

 4  
77
9

 1  
18
9

   1
99

 4  
73
9

   6
   3
8

 26
 05

1
 94

 43
9

-­  6
8  3

88
   0

Om
ah
ek
e

 71
 27

9
   4
28

 1  
22
7

   4
22

 1  
47
3

 4  
04
3

   5
59

   9
27

 56
 05

2
 1  
31
2

   7
24

   4
23

 2  
04
6

   2
42

 1  
37
1

   2
1

   9
 15

 22
7

 17
 23

1
-­  2
 00

4
   0

Om
us
a5

 24
9  5

71
 1  
07
0

   2
13

   3
61

   2
86

 3  
14
7

 1  
17
5

 6  
50
2

   1
35

 22
4  6

54
 5  
05
2

 1  
50
1

   8
89

   2
26

 4  
31
9

   2
6

   1
5

 24
 91

7
 78

 17
3

-­  5
3  2

56
   0

Os
ha
na

 17
0  2

51
 1  
40
5

   3
13

   6
74

   5
00

 2  
82
1

   4
69

 13
 80

1
   1
92

 12
 05

4
 12

3  9
57

 8  
13
7

 1  
13
8

   9
09

 3  
80
3

   1
4

   6
4

 46
 29

4
 50

 36
4

-­  4
 07

0
   0

Os
hik

ot
o

 17
8  0

06
 1  
36
5

   3
68

   4
79

 1  
39
0

 3  
21
1

   4
51

 19
 60

8
   2
22

 3  
95
5

 7  
68
3

 13
1  9

53
 3  
39
2

   3
55

 3  
24
0

   7
   3
27

 46
 05

3
 44

 88
2

 1  
17
1

   0
Ot
joz

on
dju

pa
 13

6  8
23

 2  
86
0

 1  
36
6

   8
79

 6  
65
6

 5  
33
9

 3  
01
3

 5  
29
3

 2  
19
4

 4  
91
3

 2  
96
6

 3  
90
2

 89
 07

9
 1  
06
4

 6  
97
2

   1
0

   3
17

 47
 74

4
 32

 12
4

 15
 62

0
   0

Za
mb

ez
i

 91
 22

4
   1
07

   6
3

   7
0

 1  
03
4

   3
55

   4
49

   2
63

   5
7

   3
40

   3
63

   1
51

   2
32

 79
 18

2
 8  
55
5

   3
   0

 12
 04

2
 12

 17
5

-­    1
33

   0
Ou

tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

 17
 90

8
   6
0

   5
1

   3
9

   3
4

   1
76

   1
8

   2
20

   6
7

   2
24

   8
4

   4
9

   1
00

   6
9

 16
 71

1
   5

   1
 1  
19
7

 76
 91

1
-­  7
5  7

14
-­    1

Do
n`
t  k
no
w

   1
57

   0
   0

   4
   0

   1
1

   0
   6

   0
   5

   4
   2

   2
   1

   1
0

   1
12

   0
   4
5

   2
95

-­    2
50

-­    1
No

t  s
tat

ed
   6
48

   8
   3

   2
   5
0

   1
4

   1
1

   3
7

   2
   2
7

   1
6

   1
07

   4
2

   1
   1
6

   2
   3
10

   3
38

 1  
00
7

-­    6
69

-­    1

Ta
ble

 A
2.  

   S
ho

rt-­
te

rm
 M

igr
a:

on
 fr

om
 Re

gio
n  t

o  R
eg

ion
   

Infl
ow

s,  
Ou

Gl
ow

s,  
an

d  N
et

 M
igr

a:
on

To
tal

Er
on

go
Ha

rd
ap

Ka
ra
s

Ka
va
ng
o

Kh
om

as
Ku
ne
ne

Oh
an
gw

.
Om

ah
ek
.

Om
us
a5

Os
ha
na

Os
hik

ot
o

Ot
joz

on
.

Za
mb

ez
i

Ou
tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

Do
n`
t  

kn
ow

No
t  

sta
te
d

Infl
ow

Ou
Cl
ow

Ne
t  

M
igr
a5
on

Ra
te
 of

 N
et
 

M
igr
a5
on

To
tal

2  0
34

 73
1

 13
4  9

47
 75

 68
3

 71
 98

6
 21

8  3
99

 31
7  3

65
 79

 74
5

 24
6  2

08
 68

 53
8

 24
1  9

01
 16

4  1
41

 17
2  2

11
 13

1  1
72

 92
 66

1
 18

 91
6

   1
38

   7
20

 45
 93

8
 45

 93
8

   0
   0

Er
on

go
 13

7  0
64

 13
1  9

65
   2
07

   2
32

   2
00

 1  
04
1

   2
30

   4
06

   1
15

   5
45

   3
60

   3
48

   4
79

   6
04

   3
22

   1
   9

 5  
09
9

 2  
98
2

 2  
11
7

   0
Ha

rd
ap

 76
 10

9
   1
40

 74
 11

5
   2
40

   9
4

   6
71

   4
9

   6
5

   1
46

   6
0

   4
9

   3
4

   1
09

   2
79

   5
7

   0
   1

 1  
99
4

 1  
56
8

   4
26

   0
Ka
ra
s

 72
 76

2
   1
14

   2
09

 70
 50

0
   2
15

   3
94

   2
2

   1
22

   1
23

   1
12

   1
55

   6
8

   1
15

   5
18

   9
3

   0
   2

 2  
26
2

 1  
48
6

   7
76

   0
Ka
va
ng
o

 21
8  0

08
   8
1

   4
3

   5
7

 21
6  2

40
   2
97

   5
6

   6
0

   9
1

   4
2

   9
6

   1
01

   2
59

   4
34

   1
41

   1
   9

 1  
76
8

 2  
15
9

-­    3
91

   0
Kh
om

as
 32

2  9
78

 1  
03
3

   7
61

   4
72

   5
78

 31
0  6

96
   1
97

 1  
16
3

   6
74

 1  
15
6

 1  
06
6

   8
62

   9
91

 1  
70
2

 1  
61
3

   1
0

   4
 12

 28
2

 6  
66
9

 5  
61
3

   0
Ku
ne
ne

 79
 80

2
   1
56

   2
3

   1
2

   9
1

   1
59

 78
 48

1
   3
1

   3
1

   1
24

   9
2

   4
6

   2
50

   2
54

   4
7

   0
   5

 1  
32
1

 1  
26
4

   5
7

   0
Oh

an
gw

en
a

 24
5  2

32
   2
43

   2
3

   6
4

   7
0

   5
28

   3
6

 24
2  3

61
   2
4

   2
38

   5
05

   5
91

   1
50

   2
16

   1
79

   1
   3

 2  
87
1

 3  
84
7

-­    9
76

   0
Om

ah
ek
e

 68
 76

4
   9
4

   8
8

   3
1

   1
54

   5
82

   4
3

   7
3

 67
 05

0
   8
2

   8
0

   5
7

   2
14

   1
83

   3
3

   0
   0

 1  
71
4

 1  
48
8

   2
26

   0
Om

us
a5

 24
1  0

45
   2
13

   3
2

   8
7

   2
1

   5
78

   1
18

   2
73

   2
5

 23
8  1

26
   6
16

   2
57

   1
63

   3
65

   1
69

   0
   2

 2  
91
9

 3  
77
5

-­    8
56

   0
Os

ha
na

 16
4  1

71
   2
02

   3
4

   9
8

   6
0

   6
31

   8
7

   7
22

   4
0

   7
96

 16
0  0

61
   6
81

   1
78

   4
06

   1
66

   1
   8

 4  
11
0

 4  
08
0

   3
0

   0
Os

hik
ot
o

 17
1  8

51
   2
05

   3
1

   6
5

   8
7

   4
72

   5
0

   6
19

   2
0

   2
24

   6
43

 16
8  7

15
   3
15

   2
31

   1
07

   3
   6
4

 3  
13
6

 3  
49
6

-­    3
60

   0
Ot
joz

on
dju

pa
 13

1  8
25

   4
00

   9
8

   8
1

   4
54

   8
90

   2
52

   2
37

   1
87

   2
60

   2
52

   3
37

 12
7  8

42
   3
05

   1
73

   0
   5
7

 3  
98
3

 3  
33
0

   6
53

   0
Za
mb

ez
i

 87
 84

0
   5
6

   1
1

   3
8

   9
6

   1
53

   1
13

   2
0

   7
   2
6

   8
7

   2
2

   6
0

 86
 65

2
   4
98

   1
   0

 1  
18
8

 6  
00
9

-­  4
 82

1
   0

Ou
tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

 16
 54

6
   4
2

   7
   8

   3
5

   2
57

   1
0

   5
4

   5
   1
09

   7
5

   7
6

   4
0

   5
07

 15
 31

7
   4

   0
 1  
22
9

 3  
59
9

-­  2
 37

0
   0

Do
n`
t  k
no
w

   1
31

   1
   0

   1
   0

   8
   0

   1
   0

   0
   1

   1
   0

   1
   1

   1
16

   0
   1
5

   2
2

-­    7
   0

No
t  s
tat

ed
   6

03
   2

   1
   0

   4
   8

   1
   1

   0
   1

   3
   1
5

   7
   4

   0
   0

   5
56

   4
7

   1
64

-­    1
17

   0

Us
ua
l  re

sid
en
ce
,  

20
11

Bir
th
 pl
ac
e  r

eg
ion

 

Us
ua
l  re

sid
en
ce
 

20
11

Pr
ev
iou

s  r
es
ide

nc
e.  
20
10

Page / 26 Namibia 2011 Census Migration Report

Table A2. Short-term Migration from Region to Region Inflows, Outflows, and Net Migration

Appendices

AP
PE

ND
IX

 II:
 M

IG
RA

TIO
N  

TA
BL

ES
 

Ta
ble

 A
1.  

 Li
fe

:m
e  M

igr
a:

on
 fr

om
 Re

gio
n  t

o  R
eg

ion
   

In
flo

ws
,  O

uG
low

s,  
an

d  N
et

 M
igr

a:
on

To
ta
l

Er
on

go
Ha

rd
ap

Ka
ra
s

Ka
va
ng
o

Kh
om

as
Ku
ne
ne

Oh
an
gw

.
Om

ah
ek
e

Om
us
a5

Os
ha
na

Os
hik

ot
o

Ot
joz

on
.

Za
m
be
zi
Ou

tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

Do
n`
t  

kn
ow

No
t  

sta
te
d

Infl
ow

Ou
Cl
ow

Ne
t  

M
igr
a5
on

Ra
te
 of

 N
et
 

M
igr
a5
on

To
ta
l

2  1
12

 38
1

84
 47

0
85

 64
5

65
 35

8
24

3  3
80

19
0  7

97
83

 99
1

32
3  5

68
 73

 28
3

 30
2  8

27
 17

4  3
21

 17
6  8

35
 12

1  2
03

 91
 35

7
 93

 62
2

   4
07

 1  
31

7
 55

4  3
51

 55
4  3

51
   0

   0
Er
on

go
 14

2  4
03

 63
 14

4
 4  
10
9

 2  
84
3

 3  
15
9

 8  
57
4

 4  
81
4

 12
 01

9
 1  
81
0

 12
 35

3
 7  
57
9

 6  
84
2

 6  
49
4

 1  
13
1

 7  
43
0

   2
7

   7
5

 79
 25

9
 21

 32
6

 57
 93

3
   1

Ha
rd
ap

 78
 81

8
   8
30

 61
 37

5
 3  
16
1

   9
56

 4  
66
1

   1
96

 1  
39
5

 1  
16
7

 1  
18
7

   8
93

   5
21

   6
61

   1
86

 1  
61
3

   3
   1
3

 17
 44

3
 24

 27
0

-­  6
 82

7
   0

Ka
ra
s

 75
 16

8
   8
46

 2  
78
6

 48
 94

9
 3  
43
3

 2  
45
1

   2
35

 3  
68
5

   3
92

 3  
75
7

 3  
00
3

 1  
53
4

   7
76

   8
46

 2  
45
6

   3
   1
6

 26
 21

9
 16

 40
9

 9  
81
0

   0
Ka
va
ng
o

 22
7  2

54
   2
52

   1
86

   1
66

 21
3  6

16
   7
23

   1
66

 1  
16
9

   4
00

   9
59

   8
72

   6
86

 1  
22
5

 1  
37
4

 5  
44
4

   2
   1
4

 13
 63

8
 29

 76
4

-­  1
6  1

26
   0

Kh
om

as
 33

4  3
99

 9  
19
4

 13
 05

5
 6  
72
7

 9  
23
5

 15
0  5

06
 2  
99
5

 28
 64

6
 10

 17
4

 31
 02

6
 15

 13
6

 15
 71

1
 11

 50
7

 4  
96
1

 25
 29

0
   1
61

   7
5

 18
3  8

93
 40

 29
1

 14
3  6

02
   1

Ku
ne
ne

 83
 29

2
 1  
29
4

   2
75

   1
53

 1  
18
1

 1  
16
3

 69
 30

1
   8
68

   3
03

 2  
53
0

   9
44

   5
37

 2  
43
1

   6
11

 1  
65
3

   5
   4
3

 13
 99

1
 14

 69
0

-­    6
99

   0
Oh

an
gw

en
a

 25
5  1

80
 1  
60
7

   2
55

   4
29

   3
77

 3  
60
2

   1
39

 22
9  1

29
   1
16

 3  
53
1

 5  
04
5

 4  
77
9

 1  
18
9

   1
99

 4  
73
9

   6
   3
8

 26
 05

1
 94

 43
9

-­  6
8  3

88
   0

Om
ah
ek
e

 71
 27

9
   4
28

 1  
22
7

   4
22

 1  
47
3

 4  
04
3

   5
59

   9
27

 56
 05

2
 1  
31
2

   7
24

   4
23

 2  
04
6

   2
42

 1  
37
1

   2
1

   9
 15

 22
7

 17
 23

1
-­  2
 00

4
   0

Om
us
a5

 24
9  5

71
 1  
07
0

   2
13

   3
61

   2
86

 3  
14
7

 1  
17
5

 6  
50
2

   1
35

 22
4  6

54
 5  
05
2

 1  
50
1

   8
89

   2
26

 4  
31
9

   2
6

   1
5

 24
 91

7
 78

 17
3

-­  5
3  2

56
   0

Os
ha
na

 17
0  2

51
 1  
40
5

   3
13

   6
74

   5
00

 2  
82
1

   4
69

 13
 80

1
   1
92

 12
 05

4
 12

3  9
57

 8  
13
7

 1  
13
8

   9
09

 3  
80
3

   1
4

   6
4

 46
 29

4
 50

 36
4

-­  4
 07

0
   0

Os
hik

ot
o

 17
8  0

06
 1  
36
5

   3
68

   4
79

 1  
39
0

 3  
21
1

   4
51

 19
 60

8
   2
22

 3  
95
5

 7  
68
3

 13
1  9

53
 3  
39
2

   3
55

 3  
24
0

   7
   3
27

 46
 05

3
 44

 88
2

 1  
17
1

   0
Ot
joz

on
dju

pa
 13

6  8
23

 2  
86
0

 1  
36
6

   8
79

 6  
65
6

 5  
33
9

 3  
01
3

 5  
29
3

 2  
19
4

 4  
91
3

 2  
96
6

 3  
90
2

 89
 07

9
 1  
06
4

 6  
97
2

   1
0

   3
17

 47
 74

4
 32

 12
4

 15
 62

0
   0

Za
m
be
zi

 91
 22

4
   1
07

   6
3

   7
0

 1  
03
4

   3
55

   4
49

   2
63

   5
7

   3
40

   3
63

   1
51

   2
32

 79
 18

2
 8  
55
5

   3
   0

 12
 04

2
 12

 17
5

-­    1
33

   0
Ou

tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

 17
 90

8
   6
0

   5
1

   3
9

   3
4

   1
76

   1
8

   2
20

   6
7

   2
24

   8
4

   4
9

   1
00

   6
9

 16
 71

1
   5

   1
 1  
19
7

 76
 91

1
-­  7
5  7

14
-­    1

Do
n`
t  k
no
w

   1
57

   0
   0

   4
   0

   1
1

   0
   6

   0
   5

   4
   2

   2
   1

   1
0

   1
12

   0
   4
5

   2
95

-­    2
50

-­    1
No

t  s
tat

ed
   6
48

   8
   3

   2
   5
0

   1
4

   1
1

   3
7

   2
   2
7

   1
6

   1
07

   4
2

   1
   1
6

   2
   3
10

   3
38

 1  
00
7

-­    6
69

-­    1

Ta
ble

 A
2.  

   S
ho

rt-­
te

rm
 M

igr
a:

on
 fr

om
 Re

gio
n  t

o  R
eg

ion
   

In
flo

ws
,  O

uG
low

s,  
an

d  N
et

 M
igr

a:
on

To
ta
l

Er
on

go
Ha

rd
ap

Ka
ra
s

Ka
va
ng
o

Kh
om

as
Ku
ne
ne

Oh
an
gw

.
Om

ah
ek
.

Om
us
a5

Os
ha
na

Os
hik

ot
o

Ot
joz

on
.

Za
m
be
zi

Ou
tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

Do
n`
t  

kn
ow

No
t  

sta
te
d

Infl
ow

Ou
Cl
ow

Ne
t  

M
igr
a5
on

Ra
te
 of

 N
et
 

M
igr
a5
on

To
ta
l

2  0
34

 73
1

 13
4  9

47
 75

 68
3

 71
 98

6
 21

8  3
99

 31
7  3

65
 79

 74
5

 24
6  2

08
 68

 53
8

 24
1  9

01
 16

4  1
41

 17
2  2

11
 13

1  1
72

 92
 66

1
 18

 91
6

   1
38

   7
20

 45
 93

8
 45

 93
8

   0
   0

Er
on

go
 13

7  0
64

 13
1  9

65
   2
07

   2
32

   2
00

 1  
04
1

   2
30

   4
06

   1
15

   5
45

   3
60

   3
48

   4
79

   6
04

   3
22

   1
   9

 5  
09
9

 2  
98
2

 2  
11
7

   0
Ha

rd
ap

 76
 10

9
   1
40

 74
 11

5
   2
40

   9
4

   6
71

   4
9

   6
5

   1
46

   6
0

   4
9

   3
4

   1
09

   2
79

   5
7

   0
   1

 1  
99
4

 1  
56
8

   4
26

   0
Ka
ra
s

 72
 76

2
   1
14

   2
09

 70
 50

0
   2
15

   3
94

   2
2

   1
22

   1
23

   1
12

   1
55

   6
8

   1
15

   5
18

   9
3

   0
   2

 2  
26
2

 1  
48
6

   7
76

   0
Ka
va
ng
o

 21
8  0

08
   8
1

   4
3

   5
7

 21
6  2

40
   2
97

   5
6

   6
0

   9
1

   4
2

   9
6

   1
01

   2
59

   4
34

   1
41

   1
   9

 1  
76
8

 2  
15
9

-­    3
91

   0
Kh
om

as
 32

2  9
78

 1  
03
3

   7
61

   4
72

   5
78

 31
0  6

96
   1
97

 1  
16
3

   6
74

 1  
15
6

 1  
06
6

   8
62

   9
91

 1  
70
2

 1  
61
3

   1
0

   4
 12

 28
2

 6  
66
9

 5  
61
3

   0
Ku
ne
ne

 79
 80

2
   1
56

   2
3

   1
2

   9
1

   1
59

 78
 48

1
   3
1

   3
1

   1
24

   9
2

   4
6

   2
50

   2
54

   4
7

   0
   5

 1  
32
1

 1  
26
4

   5
7

   0
Oh

an
gw

en
a

 24
5  2

32
   2
43

   2
3

   6
4

   7
0

   5
28

   3
6

 24
2  3

61
   2
4

   2
38

   5
05

   5
91

   1
50

   2
16

   1
79

   1
   3

 2  
87
1

 3  
84
7

-­    9
76

   0
Om

ah
ek
e

 68
 76

4
   9
4

   8
8

   3
1

   1
54

   5
82

   4
3

   7
3

 67
 05

0
   8
2

   8
0

   5
7

   2
14

   1
83

   3
3

   0
   0

 1  
71
4

 1  
48
8

   2
26

   0
Om

us
a5

 24
1  0

45
   2
13

   3
2

   8
7

   2
1

   5
78

   1
18

   2
73

   2
5

 23
8  1

26
   6
16

   2
57

   1
63

   3
65

   1
69

   0
   2

 2  
91
9

 3  
77
5

-­    8
56

   0
Os

ha
na

 16
4  1

71
   2
02

   3
4

   9
8

   6
0

   6
31

   8
7

   7
22

   4
0

   7
96

 16
0  0

61
   6
81

   1
78

   4
06

   1
66

   1
   8

 4  
11
0

 4  
08
0

   3
0

   0
Os

hik
ot
o

 17
1  8

51
   2
05

   3
1

   6
5

   8
7

   4
72

   5
0

   6
19

   2
0

   2
24

   6
43

 16
8  7

15
   3
15

   2
31

   1
07

   3
   6
4

 3  
13
6

 3  
49
6

-­    3
60

   0
Ot
joz

on
dju

pa
 13

1  8
25

   4
00

   9
8

   8
1

   4
54

   8
90

   2
52

   2
37

   1
87

   2
60

   2
52

   3
37

 12
7  8

42
   3
05

   1
73

   0
   5
7

 3  
98
3

 3  
33
0

   6
53

   0
Za
m
be
zi

 87
 84

0
   5
6

   1
1

   3
8

   9
6

   1
53

   1
13

   2
0

   7
   2
6

   8
7

   2
2

   6
0

 86
 65

2
   4
98

   1
   0

 1  
18
8

 6  
00
9

-­  4
 82

1
   0

Ou
tsi
de
 

co
un
tri
es

 16
 54

6
   4
2

   7
   8

   3
5

   2
57

   1
0

   5
4

   5
   1
09

   7
5

   7
6

   4
0

   5
07

 15
 31

7
   4

   0
 1  
22
9

 3  
59
9

-­  2
 37

0
   0

Do
n`
t  k
no
w

   1
31

   1
   0

   1
   0

   8
   0

   1
   0

   0
   1

   1
   0

   1
   1

   1
16

   0
   1
5

   2
2

-­    7
   0

No
t  s
tat

ed
   6

03
   2

   1
   0

   4
   8

   1
   1

   0
   1

   3
   1
5

   7
   4

   0
   0

   5
56

   4
7

   1
64

-­    1
17

   0

Us
ua
l  re

sid
en
ce
,  

20
11

Bir
th
 pl
ac
e  r

eg
ion

 

Us
ua
l  re

sid
en
ce
 

20
11

Pr
ev
iou

s  r
es
ide

nc
e.  
20
10