NAMIBIA
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
POVERTY INDEX (MPI)
REPORT 2021
NAMIBIA
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
POVERTY INDEX (MPI)
REPORT 2021
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
Mission Statement
Leveraging on partnerships and innovative technologies, to produce
and disseminate relevant, quality, timely statistics and spatial data
that are fit-for-purpose in accordance with international standards and
best practice.
Vision Statement
Be a high performance institution in quality statistics delivery.
Core Values
Integrity
Excellent Performance
Accuracy
Team Work
Accountability
Transparency
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
Contents.
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
PREFACE
FOREWORD NPC | National Planning Commission
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 What is the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
1.2 Purpose of Namibias MPI
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 The Alkire-Foster methodology
2.2Unitofidentificationandanalysis
2.3NamibiaMPIpovertycutoff
2.4StructureofNamibiaMPI
2.5NamibiaMPIdatasource
2.6 Limitations and usage of Namibia MPI
2.7 Institutional framework
3. POVERTY MEASURES BASED ON TOTAL POPULATION
3.1ProfilingmultidimensionalpovertyinNamibia
a.UncensoredheadcountratiosoftheMPIindicators
b. The level of multidimensional poverty in Namibia
c.CensoredheadcountratiosoftheMPIindicators
d.PercentagecontributionofeachindicatortoMPI
3.2. Disaggregation of Poverty Measures
a.PerformanceacrossUrban/Rural
b.PerformanceacrossRegion
c.PerformanceacrossSexofHeadofHousehold
d.PerformanceacrossMainlanguagespokenintheHousehold
e.PerformanceacrossHouseholdsize
f.PerformanceacrossAgeGroups
3.3.DecompositionofCensoredHeadcountRatios
3.4.ComparisonoftheMPItothemonetarymeasure
1
2
3
5
7
9
9
10
11
11
12
12
13
18
18
19
20
20
20
22
23
24
25
26
28
33
34
38
40
42
45
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
4. POVERTY MEASURES BASED ON THE CHILD POPULATION
4.1Profilingchild-basedmultidimensionalpovertyinNamibia
a.UncensoredheadcountratiosoftheMPIindicators
b.ThelevelofmultidimensionalpovertyamongstchildreninNamibia
c.ChildandAdult-basedcensoredheadcountratiosoftheMPIindicators
d.Percentagecontributionofeachindicatortothechildandadultspecific
MPI
4.2.Decompositionofchild-basedpovertyindicators
a.PerformanceacrossUrban/Rural
b.PerformanceacrossRegions
c.PerformanceacrossSexofheadofHousehold
d.Performanceacrosschild-specificagegroups
4.3.Comparisonofthechild-basedMPItothemonetarymeasure
5. ROBUSTNESS CHECKS
6. WAY FOWARD
48
48
48
50
51
52
53
53
55
60
62
64
65
67
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
1
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
List of Figures.
Figure 1:NationalUncensoredHeadcountRatio
Figure 2:NationalCensoredHeadcountRatio
Figure 3: PercentageContributionofeachIndicatortotheNationalMPI
Figure 4: IncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byUrban/RuralResidence
Figure 5: IncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byRegion
Figure 6: PovertyMeasures(HeadcountandIntensity)byRegion
Figure 7:PovertyMeasures(Headcountrateandactualcountofpeople)byRegion
Figure 8: IncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)bySexofHeadofHousehold
Figure 9: IncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byMainLanguageSpoken
Figure 10: Distribution of the Number of Multidimensionally Poor People by Main
Language Spoken
Figure 11: IncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byHouseholdSize
Figure 12: IncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)AgeGroups
Figure 13: CensoredHeadcountRatiosbyUrban/Rural
Figure 14:Spatialcomparisonofpovertymeasures
Figure 15: Venn Diagram Showing Overlaps between National Monetary and
MultidimensionalPovertyRates
Figure 16: ChildandAdultSpecificNationalUncensoredHeadcountRatio
Figure 17: ChildandAdultSpecificNationalCensoredHeadcountRatio
Figure 18: PercentageContributionofeachIndicatortoChildandAdultMPI
Figure 19: Child-BasedIncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byUrban/Rural
Figure 20: Child-BasedIncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byRegion
Figure 21:SpatialDistributionofChildPovertyMeasuresbyRegion
Figure 22: Child-basedPovertyMeasures(Headcountrateandactualcountofchildren)
byRegion
Figure 23:Child-BasedIncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)bySexofHeadof
Household
Figure 24:Child-BasedIncidenceofMultidimensionalPoverty(H)byAgeGroups
Figure 25:Comparisonbetweenmonetaryandnon-monetarychildpovertyrates
Figure 26:HeadcountRatioAcrossRegionsBasedonDifferentPovertyCutoffs
21
23
25
27
30
31
32
34
36
37
39
41
42
45
47
49
51
52
54
57
58
59
64
66
67
69
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
2
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
List of Tables.
Table 1:StructureoftheMPI
Table 2:Incidence,intensityandMultidimensionalPovertyIndex
Table 3:PovertyMeasuresbyUrban/Rural
Table 4:PovertyMeasuresbyRegion
Table 5: PovertyIndicatorsbySexofHeadofHousehold
Table 6:PovertyIndicatorsbyMainSpokenLanguage
Table 7:PovertyMeasuresbyHouseholdSize
Table 8:PovertyIndicatorsbyAgeGroups(years)
Table 9: CensoredHeadcountRatiosbyRegions
Table 10: Comparisonofpovertymeasures,byregions
Table 11:ChildandAdultSpecificIncidence,intensityand
Multidimensional Poverty Index
Table 12: Child-basedPovertymeasuresbyurban/rural
Table 13:Child-basedPovertymeasuresbyRegion
Table 14:Child-basedPovertymeasuresbySexofheadofhousehold
Table 15:ChildPovertyIndicatorsbyage-groups
Table 16: Spearman and Kendall Tau-b
14
22
26
29
33
35
38
40
44
46
50
53
56
60
62
65
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
3
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
Preface.
The main purpose of this report is to present multidimensional poverty measurement and analysis for Namibia at national and regional levels. In so doing, this report details how the Namibia Multidimensional
PovertyIndex(MPI)wasconceptualizedandconstructedusingdatacollected
byNamibiaStatisticsAgency(NSA)throughtheNamibiaHouseholdIncome
andExpenditureSurvey(NHIES)2015/2016(thelatestsuchsurveywehave).
TheNamibiaMPIisbasedontheAlkire-Fostermethod(aflexibletechnique
for measuring poverty or wellbeing) and provides another powerful tool in
NSAsongoingeffortstomeasurepovertyanddeprivationsinthecountry.
Unlike themonetary poverty analysis that is often reported in theNHIES
which isbasedon incomeonly, theMPIhas theadvantageofbeing fully
decomposablefromavarietyofdemographicandsocialvariables(suchas
availabilityofsafedrinkingwater,education,accesstohealthandnutrition
as well as social protection) that keeps people trapped in poverty. MPI
alsorevealstheinterconnectionsamongthosevariablesthatleadtothese
deprivations. Hence, the MPI will enable policymakers to better allocate
resourcesandmoreeffectivelyformulatetargetedpolicies.
OneofthekeyindicatorsoftheSDGsismeasurementofpovertyinallits
dimensions.Hence,theconstructionoftheMPIwillassistinprovidingdata
tomonitorprogresstowardsSDGindicators(specificallyindicator1.2.2).The
NSAwillendeavortocontinuepublishingandenhancingtheMPIoncenew
data set becomes available in order to provide evidence thatwill inform
povertyreductionstrategiesaspertheNationalDevelopmentPlans(NDPs).
This report, therefore, seeks to create a reliable and nationally owned
mechanism that can credibly identify those that are mostly deprived,
beyondthetraditionalmoney-metricmeasuresofpoverty.Thisisparticularly
important given that poverty, especially in an upper middle-income
country like Namibia, is complex andmultifaceted and as such, requires
amultidimensional approach for measuring it. Hence, theMPI has been
adoptedandadaptedtonationallydefinedsetsofdimensionsandindicators
thatreflectthecountrycontextanddevelopmentprioritiesforNamibia.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
4
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
Theproductionprocessofthisreportistheresultoftheon-goingpartnership
andcollaborationbetweentheNSA,UNDP,UNFPA,UNICEFandotherUN
agencies.TheimmensetechnicalexpertisefromOxfordPovertyandHuman
DevelopmentInitiative(OPHI)resultedinthedevelopmentofcapacityand
skills of theNSA and other lineministries staffmembers, as well as the
supervision of the report. Furthermore, OPHI provided technical support
throughouttheprocessofdevelopingthenationalMPI.
We will forever remain thankful to these partners and the entire stakeholders
inourquesttoprovidedataandstatisticsforthedevelopmentoftheland
ofthebrave,Namibia.Furthermore,wewouldliketothankUNICEFforthe
financialsupportinproducingthisinformativereport.
We are excited to have this MPI report to serve as a strategic tool to
informbudgetingandpolicymaking,whilstalsoprovidingbaselinedatafor
measuring progress towards eliminating poverty in all its forms.
ALEX SHIMUAFENI RACHEL ODEDE
Statistician-General and CEO Representative UNICEF-NAMIBIA
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
5
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
Foreword.
NPC | National Planning Commission
In Namibia, over the past years, mapping poverty and understandingtherootcauses thereofhas takencenterstageat thecourseofnationaldevelopment through National Development Plans (NDPs). Income
Poverty rates have, therefore, fallen over the years as per the Namibia
Householdand IncomeandExpenditureSurvey (NHIES) reports. In2004,
theproportionof households thatwerepoor stood at 27.6percent. This
figurehassincefallento17.4percent in2016.Similarly,theproportionof
severelypoorhouseholdshasfallenfrom13.8percentto10.7percentover
the abovementioned timeframe. These figures represent effective policy
interventions towards improving the standards of living and enhancing
the wellbeing of the Namibian population. Notwithstanding the afore-
mentionedsuccess,thelevelsofunevendeclineinthesefiguresacrossthe
regions remains an issue.
Asthestudyofpovertyevolved,itcameclearthatpovertyisamultidimensional
concept relatingnotonly to lackof resources toacquirebasicgoodsand
services,butalsotoastateofdeprivationsresultingfromexclusion.Amore
truth-reflectingmeasure of poverty can therefore not be based solely on
monetary measure but rather on multiple dimension measure of poverty.
Thismulti-dimensionalpovertyindexreportisanothermilestoneindirecting
theprocessofNationalDevelopmentPlanningandaddsvaluetoprevious
knowledge. The measure used gives broader insight in setting development
prioritiescustom-madetoaddresstheneedsofregionsacrossthecountry.
Asper theFifthNationalDevelopmentPlan,prioritizing thealleviationof
poverty inNamibia required accurate and in-depth understanding of the
differentdimensionsofpovertythatpeopleface.
Theconceptofsustainabledevelopmenttakescenterstageduringnational
development planning in Namibia. This means that our development
planning is anchored towards the upliftment of both current and future
generations and responds to the SDGs. This multi-dimensional index,
therefore,enhanceseffortsbythecountrytorigorouslystrivetoendpoverty
inallitsformsinallcornersofthecountryforgenerationstocome.Theindex
revealsthemagnitudeofpovertyintheregions,withinethnicgroups,areas
6
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
ofresidenceandthecountryatlarge.Understandinghowdifferentgroupsof
thepopulationaredeprivedandwhattheyaredeprivedof,willhelppolicy
makersinmakingtargetedpolicieswhichwillcreateefficiencyandhelpin
allocationofresourcesinthecountry.
Maythismeasure,andreportthereof,createaplatformfornationaldialogue
forpolicyformulationtoliftNamibiansoutofmulti-dimensionalpoverty.
OBETH MBUIPAHA KANDJOZE
Director-General of the National Planning Commission
7
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Executive summary.
The MPI is a multidimensional measure of poverty developed by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at theUniversity of Oxford. The index assesses the simultaneous deprivations
that are experienced by people in a society, based on several identified
dimensionsofpovertyinaparticularsetting.
Whilst drawing from the Global MPI, the National MPI for Namibia has
been adjusted and contextualized to better reflect the specific context
and development priorities of the country. As per the Global MPI, the
NationalMPIisbasedonthreedimensions:Livingstandards,Healthand
Education,albeitmeasuredacross11indicators,deemedbythenational
MPI steering committee to be reflective of the Namibian context, and
informedbyavailabledata.Poverty indiceswerealsodecomposedacross
variouspopulationsub-groupssuchasUrban/rural,Region,Sexofheadof
household,Main language spoken in the household,Household-size and
age-group.
BasedondatafromtheNamibianHouseholdIncomeandExpenditureSurvey
(NHIES2015/16),themultidimensionalpovertyincidence(H)isreportedat
43.3percent,meaningthat43.3percentofthepopulationofNamibiaare
multidimensionallypoor.Theaverageintensity(A)is44.0percent,meaning
thatpoorpeople inNamibiaexperience,onaverage,44.0percentof the
weighteddeprivations.TheMultidimensionalPovertyIndex(MPI),whichis
theproductofHandA(H*A),is0.191,thereforethepoorinNamibiaface
19.1percentofthepossibledeprivationsifeveryonewaspooranddeprived
inalltheindicatorsincludedintheindex.
With regards to area of residence, the rural area population was
multidimensionally poorer than the urban population, reported at 59.3
and25.3percent, respectively. This indicates that persons in rural areas
haveahigherchanceofexperiencingmultipledeprivationsthanthosein
urbanareas.Povertyindiceswerealsoexaminedacrossthefourteen(14)
administrative regions of Namibia. An obvious gradient was observed in
theheadcountratiosbyregion,wherebytheincidenceofmultidimensional
povertywashighestinKavangoWest(79.6%),KavangoEast(70.0%)and
Kunene (64.1 %).
8
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Thereportalsoexaminesperformanceacrosscharacteristicsofhousehold
heads. With regards to sex of the heads of households, resultsshowthat
theincidenceofmultidimensionalpovertyishigheramongfemale-headed
households (with a rate of 46%), than male-headed households (with a
rate of 41%). With regards to the main language spoken in the household
decomposition,thehighestheadcountratioofmultidimensionalpovertywas
reported amongst the population whose main language spoken at home was
Khoisan(93%),followedbyRukavango(68%)andZambezilanguages(54%).
The population whose main spoken language was English, and German
reportedthelowestheadcountratiosofmultidimensionalpoverty,eachwith
3percent.
Another decomposition was on household size. The results indicate that
as household size increases, the rate of multi-dimensional poverty also
increases.Theheadcountratioishighestforhouseholdsthathave16ormore
members,at72.8percentcomparedto33.4percentforahouseholdwith
lessthan6members.Abreakdownofthepovertyindicesbyage group was
alsoconsidered.Thehighestheadcountratioisreportedamongchildrenof
1-4years(56%),5-9years(50%)and10-14years(48%).Thelowestheadcount
ratio(33%)isreportedfortheagegroupof25-29years,toimplythatofall
personsaged25-29years,33percentaremultidimensionallypoor.
A child-specificanalysisontheMPIwasalsocarriedoutinthereport,from
whichapproximately16percentofchildrenaged0-17yearsinNamibiaare
both multi-dimensionally and monetarily poor. Further, the proportion of
childrenwhoaremulti-dimensionallypoorisremarkablyhigherinruralareas
thaninurbanareas.About64percentofchildrenwholiveinruralareasare
multidimensional poor compared to 30 percent in urban areas, following
the general population trend. There are also regional level disparities
indeprivation rates. In5of the14 regions inNamibia, thepercentageof
childrenwho aremulti-dimensionally poor is above 60percent, including
KavangoWest (82.3%), Kavango East (74.7%), and Kunene (69.2%). The
lowestratesarefoundintheregionsofErongo(15.7%)and//Karas(21.1%).
In conclusion, it isnoted thatwhilstprogresshasbeenmade in reducing
monetary poverty to 16.7 percent, more than 43.3 percent of Namibias
populationarestilllivinginmultidimensionalpoverty.Thiscallsforadeliberate
andcoordinatedpolicyresponsetodealwiththevariousdeprivationsthat
continuetoimpactonthewellbeingofmanyhouseholdsandtheirchildren.
TheNSAwillendeavortocontinuepublishingandenhancingtheMPIonce
new data set becomes available, to provide evidence to inform poverty
reductionsstrategiesaspertheNationalDevelopmentPlans(NDPs)whilst
alsoprovidingastrategictoolformonitoringprogresstowardsSDGsaswell
as NDPs implementation.
9
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
1. Introduction.
This section looks at the definition of Multidimensional poverty as well as
the motivation for producing an MPI for Namibia.
1.1 What is the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
The MPI is a multidimensional measure of poverty developed by the Oxford
PovertyandHumanDevelopmentInitiative(OPHI)attheUniversityofOxford.
Theindexassessesthesimultaneousdeprivationsthatareexperiencedby
peopleinasociety,basedonseveralidentifieddimensionsofpovertyina
particularsetting.
Many countries now measure multidimensional poverty alongside
monetarypoverty.Thismeansthatacountrywillestimateandreleasetwo
complementaryofficialnationalmeasuresofpoverty.Themonetarypoverty
measure assesses incomeor consumption-expenditurepoverty, according
to national poverty lines. The multidimensional poverty measure reflects
relevantnon-monetaryaspectsofpovertythatmayexist.Multidimensional
poverty considers the many overlapping deprivations that poor people
experienceatvariouslevelsofsociety.
TheMPIreflectsboththeincidenceofpovertywhatproportionofpeople
arepoor -andthe intensityofpovertyhowpoor theyare.Assuch, the
measurerevealswhoispoor,thedimensionstheyarepoorinandthebreadth
of their deprivations. The MPI is broken down by different dimensions and
indicators,toprovideusefulinformationforthetargetingofpublicresources.
Furthermore,itcanalsobedisaggregatedbypopulationsub-groups,tohelp
inensuringthatnooneis leftbehind,ascalledforbytheUnitedNations
2030 agenda for sustainable development.
Since2010,OPHIandUNDPhavejointlycomputedandpublishedtheglobal
MPIintheHumanDevelopmentReporttocompareacutemultidimensional
povertyacrossmorethan100developingcountries.However,thismeasure
isintendedforinternationalcomparabilityandisnotadaptedforthespecific
circumstancesofagivencountry.Thus,manycountrieshavedevelopedtheir
ownnationalMPIs to inform targetedpolicy interventionsatnationaland
sub-national levels.
10
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
1.2 Purpose of Namibias MPI
The national MPI for Namibia was designed mainly for two main reasons.
Thefirstistoprovideupdatedmultidimensionalpovertystatisticstoinform
policy and programmatic design and implementation. A national MPI
can guide coordinated policy actions by several Offices, Ministries and
Agencies (OMAs), provide cleargoals and targets for each indicator, and
actasamonitoringandaccountabilitytool.Secondly,themeasureisaimed
at complementing monetary poverty statistics released by the NSA, by
providing an understanding of the multidimensional nature of poverty and
thevariousdeprivationsfacedbydifferentgroupsofpeopleinNamibia,by
locationanddemographicgroups.Theevidencegeneratedonthedrivers
of multidimensional poverty will be used to monitor progress on NDPs and
SustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs),particularlySDG1,ofreducing,by
half,theproportionofmen,womenandchildrenofallageslivinginpoverty
in all its dimensions by 2030.
11
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
This chapter presents the methodology adopted for this study. It begins with a
description of the Alkire-Foster method, which is then followed by an explanatory
of the data source. The chapter further presents the structure of Namibias
national MPI, in terms of dimensions; indicators; deprivation cut-offs and weights.
The chapter further discusses the limitations and usage of the index. Thereafter, it
concludes with a presentation of the institutional framework put in place to guide
and coordinate the development of the index.
2.1 The Alkire-Foster methodology
NamibiasnationalMPIisbasedontheAlkire-Foster(AF)methodology,aflexible
technique formeasuring poverty orwellbeing developed by SabinaAlkire and
JamesFosteratOPHI.TheAFmethodologycanincorporatedifferentdimensions
andindicatorstocreatemeasuresadaptedtospecificcontexts.
In summary, theAFmethodology first identifieswho is poor, by constructing a
poverty profile for each individual or household, which shows which indicators
theyaredeprivedin,accordingtothedeprivationcut-offs.Thesedeprivationsare
aggregated intoaweighteddeprivationscore.Theweights foreachdimension
and each indicator are based on normative judgments related to the purpose
of themeasure.Thenextstepwastochooseapovertycut-off,k.An individual
is classified tobe living inmultidimensionalpoverty if his/herdeprivation score
meetsorexceedsthepovertycut-offk,oftheweightedindicators.
Afteridentifyingeachpersonaspoorornon-poor,theinformationwasaggregated
intothreeinformativestatistics.
" The incidence of poverty (denotedbyH),which is theproportionofpeople
identifiedasmultidimensionallypoor,alsoreferredtoastheheadcountratio.
It is the percentage of people out of the total populationwhoseweighted
deprivationscoreisgreaterthanorequaltothepovertycut-offk.
" The intensity of poverty (denoted by A), which is the average proportion
of weighted indicators in which poor people are deprivedthe average
deprivationscoreacrossallpoorpeople.
" TheMPIiscomputedastheproductofthesetwocomponents[i.e.,MPI=H
xA].TheMPIalwaysrangesfromzerotoone,andahighernumbersignifies
greaterpoverty.Thismethodnotonlyidentifieswhoispoorbutalsoprovides
aninnovativemeansbywhichonecanincorporatehowacuteorintensethe
situation of multidimensional poverty is for the poor.
2. Methodology.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
12
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
2.2 Unit of identification and analysis
The unit of identification refers to the level at which deprivations are
measured.Itisthereforetheentitythatisidentifiedaspoorornon-poor
usually the individual or the household. Namibias MPI uses a household as
theunitofidentification.Allmembersforagivenhouseholdarecollectively
classifiedaspoorornon-poordependingoneachindicator.Thisimpliesthat
individual-levelindicatorslikethoseoneducationornutritionarecombined
acrosshouseholdmembers.AspecificexampleisthatfortheNamibiaMPI,
iftheresatleastoneschool-agedchildwhoisnotgoingtoschool(therefore
deprived in the indicator), then all his/her household members are also
consideredtobedeprivedintheindicator.
Thisapproachallowsthemeasuretoincludeindicatorsthatarespecificto
certainagegroups(for instance,schoolattendance),whileacknowledging
intra-household caring and sharing for example, educated household
membersreadingforothermembersorhouseholdmembersbeingaffected
byachildsmalnutrition.
The unit of analysis refers to how the results are reported and analyzed.
NamibiasMPIusestheindividual(person)astheunitofanalysis.Thatis,the
resultspresentedinthisreportarebasedonthepercentageofpeoplewho
areidentifiedaspoorratherthanthepercentageofhouseholds.
2.3 Namibia MPI poverty cut off
TheNamibiaMPIusesapovertycut-offof30percent.Therefore,aperson
isconsideredtobemultidimensionallypoor ifheorshe isdeprived in30
percentormore,ofthesumoftheweightedindicators.Thechosencut-off
nearlyreflectstheglobalMPIi.e.33percent,whichsuggeststhataperson
mustbedeprivedinatleastonefulldimensionsworthofindicatorstobe
consideredmultidimensionallypoor.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
13
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
2.4 Structure of Namibia MPI
A number of factors guided the creation of Namibias MPI. Mainly, the
selectionofdimensions,indicators,andcut-offswasdeterminedthrougha
consultativeprocessoftheSteeringCommittee(summarizedinsection2.7),
drawing on expertise frommany different sectors and reflectingNational
Development Plans (NDPs) and priorities.
Other factors that were considered include the availability of data from
theselecteddatasourceaswellasanexaminationoftheglobalMPIand
its dimensions and indicators (see report at https://ophi.org.uk/global-
mpi-2020/).TheglobalMPIconsistsofthreedimensions:Livingstandards,
HealthandEducation,measuredacross10indicators.
WhiletheNamibiaMPIretainsthesethreedimensions,theindicatorshave
been adjusted to better reflect the specific context and priorities of the
country.
14
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Asaresult,Table1presentsthedimensions,indicatorsandthedeprivationcut-offsthat
wereestablishedasthemostsuitablefromthedatasourceforNamibia:
D
IM
EN
SI
O
N
D
IM
EN
SI
O
N
W
EI
G
H
T
IN
D
IC
AT
O
R
IN
D
IC
AT
O
R
W
EI
G
H
T
W
IT
H
IN
D
IM
EN
SI
O
N
(%
)
Ed
uc
at
io
n
1/3
SCHOOL ATTENDANCE: A household is deprived if at least
one school aged child (aged 7-17 years) is not attending
school.
2/15
YEARS OF SCHOOLING: A household is deprived if all
household members aged 16 years or older have not
completed7yearsofschooling.
1/5
Liv
ing
st
an
da
rd
s
1/3
DRINKING WATER: A household is deprived if it does not
haveaccesstoimproveddrinkingwater1(accordingtoSDG-6).
1/18
SANITATION:Ahouseholdisdeprivedifitssanitationfacility
is not improved2 (according toSDG-6)or it is improvedbut
shared with other households.
HOUSING: A household is deprived if it has inadequate
housingtherooforwallaremadeofrudimentarymaterials3
-ORthedwellingisanimprovisedhousingunit.
TRANSPORTATION ASSETS:
A household is deprived if it does not own at least one of
theseassets:car,busorbakkie.
ICT: A household is deprived if it does not own any of these
assets:radio,TV,smartphone,orcomputer;andthehousehold
doesnothaveinternetaccessathomeorelsewhere.
COOKING AND LIGHTING ENERGY:
Ahouseholdisdeprivedifitusesuncleansources4forcooking
and lighting.
H
ea
lth
1/3
ACCESS TO CLINIC/HOSPITALS:
Ahouseholdisdeprivedifahospitalorclinicismorethana
20-kmdistanceormorethan30minutesonewayfromhome.
1/15
FOOD SECURITY: A household is deprived if it did not have
enough food in the 7 days prior to the survey.
2/15
CHILD NUTRITION: A household is deprived if it has at least
onechildunder5whoisunderweightorstunted.
1Piped (tap) water into dwelling; piped (tap) water on site or in yard/plot; public tap/standpipe; private
tube well/borehole; protected dug well; protected spring and bottled water.
2Pit latrine with slab; pit latrine without slab/open pit; bucket toilet; no facilities/bush or field, other) or it
is improved but shared with other households.
3Wooden poles, sticks and grass, sticks, mud, clay and/or cow-dung, thatch, grass, other or none
4Paraffin, firewood, charcoal, coal, animal dung, other or none for cooking energy; and Wood or wood
charcoal, other, none, battery lamp/torch/cell phone, candles and paraffin for lighting energy.
Table 1: Structure of the MPI
15
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
As listed in Table 1, Namibias MPI has 11 indicators in total.
EDUCATION - Under this dimension, the two (2) indicators of school
attendance and years of schooling resemble those found in the global MPI.
TheindicatorsaimtomonitorandevaluatethefifthNDPsprimaryeducation
completionrateto100percentbytheyear2022,aswellastheMinistryof
Education,ArtsandCultures2013implementationofuniversal,freeprimary
education.Additionally,theindicatorsareattributedtoSDG4,whosetarget
is to ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality
primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning
outcomes. Furthermore, within this dimension the indicator for years of
schooling is allocated a higher weight of 60 percent, with the normative
justificationthatahouseholdwherealladultshavenotcompletedseven(7)
yearsofschoolingmayhaveahigherchanceofbeinginpovertymorethana
householdwithmanychildrenandonlyfewofthemarenotgoingtoschool.
ThisjustificationwaspertheadvicegivenbytheMinistryofEducation,Arts
andCulture.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
16
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
LIVING STANDARD -Thisdimensionhasthehighestnumberofindicators,
six(6).Theindicatorsareequallyweightedwithinthedimension,toreflect
theirequal importanceasdescribed in theSDGsandNDP5 targets.The
drinking water and sanitationindicatorsarebasedonSDG6,whichaimed
at ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation
for all.Theseindicators,whicharealsopartoftheGlobalMPI,arefurther
motivatedbySDG3,whichcallsto ensure healthy lives and promote well-
being for all at all ages.
Goal11oftheSDGstargetsto make cities and human settlements inclusive,
safe, resilient and sustainable. Thefirsttargetofthisgoal,whichistoensure
accessforalltoadequate,safeandaffordablehousingandbasicservices
andtoupgradeslums,motivatedtheMPIsindicatoronhousing.TheNDP5
highlights that as of 2016, 19 percent of theNamibian populationwere
livinginimprovisedhousingunits,whileonly53.4percentofthepopulation
had access to improved sanitation. Furthermore,while the proportion of
householdswithaccesstosafewaterwasreportedhighforurbanareasat
98percentin2016,theruralpopulationproportionwasmuchloweratabout
84percent.Theindicatorsarethereforeaimedatprovidinginformationon
these deprivations.
Furthermore,theindicatorontransportationassetsisbuiltonthebasisof
thesecondtargetofSDG11.Ittargetsto provide access to safe, affordable,
accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety,
notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs
of those in vulnerable situations including women, children, persons with
disabilities and the elderly. In order to provide information linked to safe and
accessibletransportinNamibia,theMPIthereforeconsideredownershipof
transportationassetsasopposedtoonlyhavingaccess.
Cooking and lighting energyisanothercrucialindicator,whichisintendedto
highlightthetypeoffuel/energyusedbyhouseholdsandisattributedtothe
qualityofventilationandrespiratoryhealth.TheNDP5targetstopromote
renewable energy and accelerate rural electrification. The last indicator
underthisdimensionisICT,whichstatesthatahouseholdisdeprivedifit
doesnotownanyoftheseassets:radio,TV,smartphone,orcomputer;and
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
17
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
the householddoes not have internet access at homeor elsewhere. The
NDP5 targets by 2022, thatNamibia has universal access to information,
affordablecommunicationandtechnologyinfrastructureandservices.
HEALTH - Lastly,threeindicatorsmeasurethedimensionofhealth.TheSDG
3 targets to achieve universal health coverage, including access to quality
essential health-care services and access to safe, effective, quality and
affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all.Furthermore,theNDP5s
desired outcome on healthcare is that by 2022, all Namibians will have
access toqualityhealthcare.Finally, the indicatorson food security and
child nutrition arelinkedtoSDG2,whichcallsto end hunger, achieve food
security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. The
NDP5targetsthatBy2022,theproportionoffoodinsecurehouseholdshas
droppedfrom25percentto12percentandfoodproductionhasincreased
by 30%.Within this dimension,access to clinics/hospitals is comparably
allocateda lesserweightof20percent, and thedistanceof20kmor30
minutesthresholdwasprovidedandguidedbytheMinistryofHealthand
SocialServices(MoHSS).
18
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
2.5 Namibia MPI data source
AstheMPIrequiresacompletedeprivationprofileforeachunit(individual
or household), information on all indicators must be available for each
person and come from the same source of data. Amongst the nationally
representative surveys and censuses in Namibia, the 2015/16 Namibia
Household Income and Expenditure Survey (NHIES) which is conducted
every5years,wasselectedfortwomainreasons.Firstly,theyear-longsurvey
collectsdataacrossseveralsocio-economicindicators.Secondly,sincethe
monetarypovertystatisticsarededucedfromtheNHIES,usingitallowsfor
comparisonsofmonetaryandnon-monetarypovertyrates,whichprovides
usefulinformationindescribingthenatureofpovertyinthecountry.
2.6 Limitations and usage of Namibia MPI
Since 2003/4, poverty in Namibia has been officially measured through
the Cost of Basic Needs approach, which is monetary-based. However,
the consideration of non-monetary dimensions in understanding poverty
has gained importance in poverty analysis, especiallywith theUNs 2030
SustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs)callingforanendofpovertyinallits
forms and leaving no one behind.
NamibiasMPIisnotintendedtoreplacethemoney-metricpovertystatistics,
whichisbasedonnationalpovertylines(namely,thefoodpovertyline,the
lower-boundpovertylineandtheupper-boundpovertyline).Rather,theMPI
shouldbeconsideredasacomplementarymeasuretothesemoney-metric
measures,byprovidinganassessmentofdeprivationofbasicsurvivalneeds.
Asmentionedabove,NamibiasMPIisbasedonthe2015/16NHIES.While
thedimensionofeconomicactivitywasdeemedcriticaltothemeasure,this
surveycouldnotprovidedesirableindicatorsonlaborforce(unemployment)
forthisdimension.However,this limitationwillbeaddressedinthefuture
NHIES, as a continuous improvement of theMPI measure. Additionally,
the surveys sample design does not allow for disaggregation of results in
geographicalareasbelowregions,suchastownsandconstituencies.
19
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
2.7 Institutional framework
The structure of the measure is the result of a series of discussions led
by the Namibia Statistics Agency (NSA), National Planning Commission
(NPC),UnitedNationsChildrensFund (UNICEF)Namibia,UnitedNations
Development Programme (UNDP) - Namibia and the United Nations
PopulationFund(UNFPA)Namibia.
ThedesignandcomputationoftheNationalMPIhasincludedconsultations
anddiscussionswiththenationalSteeringCommittee,whichwascomprised
ofvariousOMAs(MinistryofFinance,MinistryofEducation,ArtsandCulture,
MinistryofAgriculture,WaterandLandReform,MinistryofUrbanandRural
Development,NamibiaUniversityofScienceandTechnology,Universityof
Namibia,InstituteforPublicPolicyResearch,NationalPlanningCommission,
MinistryofGenderEquality,PovertyEradicationandSocialWelfare,Ministry
ofHealth and Social Services), to ensure that theMPI is tailored to local
context using Namibia-specific indicators to provide a comprehensive
understandingofcountry-levelmultidimensionalpoverty.
These consultations were necessary for stakeholders to understand their
roles of revising the measure every ten years and making sure the proposed
indicatorsarecollectedinthesurveyTheNSAastheleadinstitutioninthe
developmentoftheNAMPIisresponsibleforupdatingtheestimationswhich
wouldbedoneeveryfiveyears.
20
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
This section presents the multidimensional poverty results for Namibia,
based on the 2015/16 NHIES data. Firstly, the national multidimensional
povertyresultsarepresented,followedbythedisaggregatedresultsacross
demographiccharacteristicssuchasregionandurbanandrural;agegroups;
householdsize;mainspoken languageand, sexofheadofhousehold. In
conclusion,thesectionpresentsaregionalcomparisonofmultidimensional
poverty to the traditional monetary poverty results.
3.1 Profiling multidimensional poverty in Namibia
a. Uncensored headcount ratios of the MPI indicators
Theuncensoredheadcountratioofanindicatorisdefinedastheproportion
ofthetotalpopulationthatisdeprivedinthatspecificindicator,regardless
of whether they are multidimensionally poor or not.
Figure1 shows theproportionof thepopulation that isdeprived ineach
of the11 indicatorsof theMPI.Atnational level, thehighestdeprivation
levels were reported in Transportation Assets (proportion of people from
householdsthatdonotownat leastacar,busorbakkie)at76.2percent.
This is followed by Sanitation (proportion of people from households where
sanitation facility is not improved (according to SDG guidelines) or it is
3. Poverty measures based
on total population.
21
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
improvedbutsharedwithotherhouseholds)at68.9percent,andthenbyCooking
and Lighting Energy (proportion of people from households that uses unclean
sourcesforcookingandlighting)at64.8percent.
The lowest deprivation levelswere reported in ICT (proportion of people from
households who do not own any of these assets: radio, TV, smartphone, or
computer;andthehouseholddoesnothaveinternetaccessathomeorelsewhere)
at3.4percent.ThisisfollowedbySchoolAttendance(proportionofpeopleliving
inahouseholdwhereatleastoneschool-agedchildisnotattendingschool)at9.6
percentandYearsofSchooling(proportionofpeoplefromhouseholdswhereall
membersaged16yearsorolderhavenotcompletedseven(7)yearsofschooling)
at10.1percent.
Figure 1. National Uncensored Headcount Ratio
9.6 10.1
14.8
68.9
47.6
76.2
3.4
64.8
11.9
28.9 26.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
%
22
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
b. The level of multidimensional poverty in Namibia
Table 2 shows the three main measures of multidimensional poverty:
Headcount ratio (H), Intensity (A)andtheAdjustedheadcount ratio (MPI).
TheHeadcountratio(H)representstheproportionofpersonsidentifiedas
multidimensionallypoor,outofthetotalpopulation,basedontheselected
poverty cutoff. The intensity (A) index represents the average proportion
ofweighted indicators inwhich poor people are deprived. TheAdjusted
headcountratio(MPI),whichistheproductoftheincidence(H)andintensity
(A)ofpoverty,representsthedeprivationspoorpeopleareexperiencingas
ashareofthetotalpossibledeprivationsthatcouldbeexperiencedifthe
entirepopulationwaspooranddeprivedinall indicators.TheMPIalways
rangesfromzerotoone,andahighernumbersignifiesgreaterpoverty.
FromTable2,theincidenceofmultidimensionalpoverty (H) inNamibia is
43.3percent.Thisistheproportionofpeoplewhoaredeprivedinatleast
k=30percentoftheweightedindicators.Theintensityofmultidimensional
poverty (A) is44.0percent,whichmeans thatonaverage, thosewhoare
multidimensionallypooraredeprivedinabout44.0percentoftheweighted
indicators.TheNationalMPIis0.191.
Table 2. Incidence, intensity and Multidimensional Poverty Index
Poverty
cutoff (k
value)
Index Value Confidence Interval
k=30%
Headcountratio(H,%) 4.3 41.0 45.6
Intensity(A,%) 44.0 43.2 44.9
MPI 0.191 0.180 0.202
23
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
c. Censored headcount ratios of the MPI indicators
It is important tounderstandhowpeoplearepooraccording todifferent
indicators,asthisinformationisvitaltoshapingpoliciestoreducepoverty.
Figure 2 shows the censored headcount ratio for each of the weighted
indicators.Thisistheshareofthepopulationthatisdeprivedinthatindicator
andisalsomultidimensionallypoor.TheNationalMPIcanalsobecomputed
as the sumof theweightedcensoredheadcount ratios.This implies that,
reducing any of the indicators censored headcount ratios changes the
overall multidimensional poverty index MPI.
FromFigure2,resultsshowthatatnationallevel,thehighestproportion
of people that are multidimensionally poor and deprived per specific
indicator are reported for Transportation Assets (41.2%). This means
that41.2percentof thepopulation isdeprived inTransportationAssets
andalsomultidimensionallypoor.ThisisfollowedbySanitation(40.4%),
Cooking and LightingEnergy (40.0%) andHousing (30.9%). The lowest
censoredheadcountratioisreportedforICT(3.1%)andAccesstoClinics/
Hospitals(8.5%).
Figure 2. National Censored Headcount Ratio
9.3 9.1 11.4
40.4
30.9
41.2
3.1
40.0
8.5
24.9
21.4
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
%
24
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
d. Percentage contribution of each indicator to MPI
OneoftheadvantagesoftheAlkire-FostermethodologyisthattheMPIcan
lookatthecontributionofeachdimension/indicatortotheoverallpoverty
scoretoseewhatiscontributingmoreorlessataparticularpointintime.
Figure3showsthepercentagecontributionofeachweightedindicatorto
the overall national multidimensional poverty index. The graph shows that
the indicators thatcontribute thehighest tomultidimensionalpoverty in
NamibiaareFoodSecurity(17.4%),ChildNutrition(15.0%),Transportation
Assets (12.0%), Sanitation (11.8%), and Cooking and Lighting Energy
(11.7%).TheleastcontributorstopovertyareICT(0.9%),AccesstoClinic/
Hospital(3.0%)andDrinkingWater(3.3%),thisisbecausetheseindicators
havelowcensoredheadcountratiosandhence,theycontributesolittle.
25
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 3. Percentage Contribution of each Indicator to the National MPI
9.7 6.4 3.3 11.8 9.0 12.0 0.9 11.6 3.0 17.4 15.0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
%
School attendance Years of schooling Drinking water
Sanitation Housing Transportation assets
ICT Cooking and lighting energy Access to clinics/hospitals
Food security Child nutrition
3.2. Disaggregation of Poverty Measures
Inordertoexaminethedisparitiesintheprevalenceanddistributionofmultidimensional
poverty in Namibia, a section on the MPI results disaggregated across various
population sub-groups is presented. This provides a better understanding of the nature
ofmultidimensionaldeprivations,whichcanenabletargetedpolicyinterventions,for
instanceimprovingstandardsoflivinginbothurbanandruralareas.
The following sectionpresents results for poverty indices bydifferent subgroups/
characteristics:Urban/Rural,Region,Sexofheadofhousehold,Mainlanguagespoken
inthehousehold,Household-sizeandAge-group.
26
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
a. Performance across Urban/Rural
Table3showsthedecompositionofpovertyresultsacrosstheurbanandruralareasin
Namibia.Ofthetotalurbanpopulationinthecountry,25.3percentaremultidimensionally
poor. The proportion out of the rural area total population that is multidimensionally poor
is59.3percent.
Theintensitylevelsindicatetheproportionofindicatorsinwhichmultidimensionallypoor
peoplearedeprived.Onaverage,everypoorindividualinurbanareasisdeprivedin39.6
percentoftheweightedindicators,comparedto45.7percentforpoorindividualsinrural
areas.
Furthermore,theMPIforurbanareasisreportedat0.100,whichislowerthantherural
areas MPI of 0.271. This reveals that multidimensional poverty is relatively more prevalent
in rural areas.
Table 3. Poverty Measures by Urban/Rural
Area Population share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Urban 47.0 25.3 22.2 28.3 39.6 38.6 40.6 0.100 0.087 0.113
Rural 53.1 59.3 56.5 62.2 45.7 44.7 46.8 0.271 0.256 0.287
National 100 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
27
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure4indicateswhetherthedifferencethatwasreportedintheincidence
ofmultidimensionalpovertyacrossurbanand ruralareas fromTable3, is
statisticallysignificant.Sincethereisnooverlapintheconfidenceintervals
between urban and rural areas, the difference is statistically significant.
Therefore, persons in rural areas have a significantly higher chance of
experiencingmultipledeprivationsthanthoseinurbanareas.
Figure 4. Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H) by
Urban/Rural Residence
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Urban Rural
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
28
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
b. Performance across Region
Table 4 shows the decomposition of poverty results across the fourteen
(14)administrative regionsofNamibia.The incidenceofmultidimensional
poverty is highest in Kavango West (79.6%), Kavango East (70.0%) and
Kunene (64.1%).
Asforthepovertyintensitylevels,Kuneneregionreportedthehighestrateof
59.2percent,whichindicatesthatonaverage,themultidimensionallypoor
individualsintheregionaredeprivedinabout59percentoftheweighted
indicators.
This is followedbyOtjozondjupa (50.9%)andKavangoWest (48.5%).The
MPIishighestinKavangoWest(0.386),Kunene(0.379)andKavangoEast
(0.332).
29
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Region Population share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
//Karas 3.8 19.6 12.9 26.2 39.4 35.8 43.1 0.077 0.047 0.107
Erongo 7.7 16.6 11.7 21.6 38.0 35.9 40.1 0.063 0.044 0.083
Hardap 3.8 26.9 18.3 35.5 40.4 38.4 42.4 0.109 0.071 0.146
Kavango East 5.8 70.0 62.3 77.7 47.4 45.0 49.7 0.332 0.291 0.372
Kavango
West 4.0 79.6 73.0 86.2 48.5 46.7 50.3 0.386 0.348 0.424
Khomas 17.6 25.5 19.5 31.4 39.5 37.3 41.6 0.101 0.076 0.125
Kunene 4.0 64.1 54.2 74.1 59.2 55.0 63.3 0.379 0.304 0.455
Ohangwena 11.4 56.6 50.3 62.8 42.7 41.3 44.2 0.242 0.212 0.272
Omaheke 3.3 51.4 38.0 64.9 43.8 40.5 47.1 0.225 0.171 0.280
Omusati 11.2 50.7 43.8 57.7 41.2 39.1 43.2 0.209 0.177 0.241
Oshana 8.1 33.1 27.1 39.1 37.8 36.3 39.3 0.125 0.102 0.148
Oshikoto 8.3 50.0 43.1 56.9 42.8 40.6 45.0 0.214 0.181 0.247
Otjozondjupa 6.8 40.5 31.5 49.5 50.9 45.2 56.6 0.206 0.149 0.264
Zambezi 4.3 60.7 51.8 69.5 42.9 41.2 44.6 0.261 0.224 0.297
National 100.0 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
Table 4. Poverty Measures by Region
30
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 5 indicates whether the differences that were reported in the
incidence of multidimensional poverty across regions from Table 4, are
statisticallysignificant.SincetheconfidenceintervalreportedforKavango
West, Kavango East and Kunene do overlap, it can be concluded that
persons from these regions have equal chance of experiencingmultiple
deprivations.Figure5also reveals that there is a significantdifference in
theincidencereportedforKhomasandZambeziregions,sincethereisno
overlapintheirconfidenceintervals.
Figure 5. Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H) by Region
19.6
16.6
26.9
70.0
79.6
25.5
64.1
56.6 51.4
50.7
33.1
50.0
40.5
60.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
31
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure6shows thespatialdistributionof the incidenceofmultidimensionalpoverty
in the country, aswell as the intensity levels. Just asobserved inTable4, Figure6
indicatesthatKavangoWest,KavangoEastandKuneneregionshavethehighestrates
ofboththeprevalenceandthedepthofmultidimensionalpoverty.Incontrast,Karas
andErongoregionsareamongstthosewiththelowestrateforboththeincidenceand
severity of multidimensional poverty.
Figure 6. Poverty Measures (Headcount and Intensity) by Region
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(69.99,79.61]
(64.11,69.99]
(60.67,64.11]
(56.55,60.67]
(51.44,56.55]
(50.37,51.44]
(40.50,50.37]
(33.11,40.50]
(26.90,33.11]
(25.47,26.90]
(19.58,25.47]
[16.64,19.58]
Headcount Ratio
Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty H
in Namibia, k=30%
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(50.91,59.16]
(48.48,50.91]
(47.38,48.48]
(43.78,47.38]
(42.94,43.78]
(42.77,42.94]
(41.16,42.77]
(40.40,41.16]
(39.48,40.40]
(39.45,39.48]
(38.00,39.45]
[37.82,38.00]
Intensity
Intensity (A) of Multidimensional Poverty
in Namibia, k=30%
32
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure7showsthespatialdistributionoftheincidenceofmultidimensionalpovertyinthe
country,i.e.,regionalmultidimensionalpovertyratesandnumberofpoorpeoplebyregion
respectively. The analysis was necessary to show that there may be some regions with
relativelylowerincidencerates,buthighnumbersofpoorpeoplebecausetheyhavelarger
populations.Figure7indicatesthatKavangoWest,KavangoEastandKuneneregionshave
thehighestratesofmultidimensionalpoverty.However,intermsofthepopulationcounts,
theregionswiththehighestnumberofpoorpeopleareOhangwena,KhomasandOmusati.
Figure 7. Poverty Measures (Headcount rate and actual count of people) by
Region
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(69.99,79.61]
(64.11,69.99]
(60.67,64.11]
(56.55,60.67]
(51.44,56.55]
(50.37,51.44]
(40.50,50.37]
(33.11,40.50]
(26.90,33.11]
(25.47,26.90]
(19.58,25.47]
[16.64,19.58]
Headcount Ratio
Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty H
in Namibia, k=30%
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(122097,138382]
(96066,122097]
(89180,96066]
(86989,89180]
(68353,86989]
(58770,68353]
(56198,58770]
(55057,56198]
(36269,55057]
(27478,36269]
(21966,27478]
[15771,21966]
Number of poor people
Number of people living in
multidimensional poverty
in Namibia, k=30%
33
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
c. Performance across Sex of Head of Household
Table5showsthedecompositionofpovertyresultsbetweenmaleandfemale-headed
households in Namibia. Of the total population that comes from female-headed
households,46.2percentaremultidimensionalpoor.Conversely,theproportionoutof
themale-headedhouseholdspopulationisloweratabout40.8percent.
Theintensitylevelsindicatethatonaverage,everypoorindividualinafemale-headed
householdisdeprivedinabout43.4percentoftheindicators,comparedtoabout44.7
percentforpoorindividualsinmale-headedhouseholds.
Furthermore, theMPI for thepopulation that resides in female-headedhouseholds is
reportedat0.201,whilethepopulationthatresidesinmale-headedhouseholdsreported
an MPI of 0.182.
Table 5. Poverty Indicators by Sex of Head of Household
Sex of
head of
house-
hold
Population
share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Female 47.2 46.2 43.5 48.9 43.4 42.3 44.5 0.201 0.187 0.214
Male 52.8 40.8 38.0 43.5 44.7 43.6 45.9 0.182 0.169 0.196
National 100 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
34
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure8indicateswhetherthedifferencethatwasreportedintheincidence
of multidimensional poverty across female andmale headed households
fromTable5, isstatisticallysignificant.Althoughthe incidencefor female-
headedhouseholdsishigherthanthatofthemale-headedhouseholds,as
reportedintable5,thedifferenceisnotstatisticallysignificantsincethereis
anoverlapintheconfidenceintervals.
Figure 8. Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H) by Sex of
Head of Household
d. Performance across Main language spoken in the Household
Table6showsthedecompositionofpovertyresultsacrossdifferentlanguage
groupsspokeninNamibia.Thehighestheadcountratioofmultidimensional
poverty is reported amongst the population whose main language spoken
athome isKhoisan (93.4%), followedbyRukavango (67.8%)andZambezi
languages (54.2%). The population whose main spoken language is English
and German reported the lowest headcount ratios of multidimensional
poverty,eachwithabout3percent.
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Female Male
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
35
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
The intensity levels indicate that on average, the depth of poverty is higher amongst the
populationwhosemain spoken language at home is Khoisan (61.5%),Otjiherero (54.3%),
OtherAfricanlanguages(47.5%)andRukavango(47.2%).Thelowestintensityratioisreported
amongst the population whose main spoken language is other European (37.2%), which
indicatesthatofthispopulationsub-group,thosethataremultidimensionallypooraredeprived
in37.2percentofthetotalnumberofindicators.
Furthermore,thehighestMPIwasreportedforthepopulationthatmainlyspeaksKhoisan,at
0.575.
Language Population share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Khoisan 1.4 93.4 85.9 100.9 61.5 54.5 68.6 0.575 0.482 0.667
Zambezi
languages 4.3 54.2 45.0 63.5 42.5 40.8 44.1 0.230 0.193 0.267
Otjiherero 8.8 43.6 35.6 51.7 54.3 50.5 58.0 0.237 0.185 0.288
Rukavango 11.4 67.8 62.9 72.7 47.2 45.8 48.6 0.320 0.294 0.346
Nama/Damara 12.0 43.3 37.9 48.8 43.4 41.5 45.4 0.188 0.162 0.214
Oshiwambo 51.3 42.9 39.9 45.8 40.6 39.7 41.4 0.174 0.160 0.188
Setswana 0.2 15.0 0.4 29.6 40.3 31.8 48.8 0.060 0.001 0.120
Afrikaans 6.5 7.4 4.0 10.8 38.2 34.2 42.3 0.028 0.014 0.043
German 0.2 2.6 -2.7 7.9 38.9 38.9 38.9 0.010 -0.011 0.031
English 1.1 3.3 -0.7 7.3 39.6 29.7 49.4 0.013 -0.004 0.030
Other
European 0.4 9.9 1.7 18.1 37.2 33.2 41.3 0.037 0.009 0.065
OtherAfrican 0.7 14.6 9.2 20.1 47.5 43.0 51.9 0.069 0.045 0.094
Other 1.7 14.8 5.8 23.9 43.7 38.0 49.4 0.065 0.022 0.108
National 100.0 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
Table 6: Poverty Indicators by Main Spoken language
36
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 9 indicates whether the differences that were reported in the
incidence of multidimensional poverty across main language spoken in
Table 6 are statistically significant or not. Since the standard error bars
reported for persons whose main spoken language is Khoisan does not
overlapwithotherlanguages,itcanbeconcludedthatpersonswhomainly
speakKhoisanhaveasignificantlyhigherchanceofexperiencingmultiple
deprivations.Figure9alsorevealsthatthereisnosignificantdifferencein
the incidencereportedforZambezi languages,Otjiherero,Nama/Damara
andOshiwambolanguages,sincethereisanoverlapintheirstandarderror
bars.
Figure 9. Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H) by Main
Language Spoken
93.4
54.2
43.6
67.8
43.3 42.9
15.0
7.4
2.6 3.3
9.9
14.6 14.8
-10.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
%
37
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 10 shows the distribution of the number of multidimensionally poor
peopleacrossmainlanguagespoken.Theanalysiswasnecessarytoshow
thattheremaybesomelanguageswithrelativelylowerincidencerates,but
highnumbersofpoorpeoplebecausetheyhavelargerpopulations.While
table6indicatesthatthehighestincidencerateswerereportedforKhoisan,
followedbyRukavangoandZambezi languages,figure10shows thatout
ofthemultidimensionallypoorpeople,thehighestpopulationcountswere
reported for people who mainly speak Oshiwambo (50.7%), Rukavango
(17.9%)andNama/Damara(12.0%)languages.
Figure 10. Distribution of the Number of Multidimensionally
Poor People by Main Language Spoken
3.1% Khoisan 5.3% Zambezi languages 8.8% Otjiherero 17.9% Rukavango
12.0% Nama/Damara 50.7% Oshiwambo 0.1% Setswana 1.1% Afrikaans
0.0% German 0.1% English 0.1% Other European 0.2% Other African
0.6% Other
38
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
e. Performance across Household size
Table7showsthedecompositionofpovertyresultsacrossvarioushouseholdsizegroups
inthecountry.
Table 7 indicates that the headcount ratio increases as the household size increases.
Thehighestheadcountratioisfoundamonghouseholdsthathave7ormoremembers,
reportedat55.2percentandthelowestisreportedforthehouseholdswithlessthan4
members,reportedat31.1percent.
The highest intensity level of multidimensional poverty is reported amongst persons
whosehouseholdsizeis4-6;and7ormoremembersat44.5percenteach.
The MPI value is highest for the population that resides in households with 7 or more
members.
Table 7. Poverty Measures by Household Size
HH Size Population share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
1-3 23.3 31.1 28.8 33.4 41.6 40.9 42.4 0.129 0.120 0.139
4-6 36.7 38.2 35.6 40.8 44.5 43.5 45.5 0.170 0.158 0.182
7+ 40.0 55.2 51.7 58.7 44.5 43.3 45.8 0.246 0.229 0.263
National 100 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
39
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 11 indicates whether the differences that were reported in the
incidenceofmultidimensionalpovertyacrosshouseholdsizefromTable7,
arestatisticallysignificant.Sincetheconfidenceintervalsdonotoverlapfor
all the reportedhouseholdsizes, itcanbeconcluded that thechancesof
experiencingmultipledeprivationsincreaseashouseholdsizealsoincrease.
Figure 11. Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H) by
Household Size
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
1-3 4-6 7+
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
40
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
f. Performance across Age Groups
Table8 shows thedecompositionofpoverty resultsacrossvariousagegroups in the
country.
Thehighestheadcountratioisreportedfortheyoungeragegroupsi.e.0-4years(56.2%),
5-9years(49.9%)and10-14years(48.5%).Thelowestheadcountratio(32.7%)isreported
fortheagegroupof25-29years,toimplythatofallpersonsaged25-29years,about33
percentaremultidimensionallypoor.
The highest intensity level of multidimensional poverty is reported amongst the 5-9
years age group (45.7%). The depth of poverty is lowest for the age group of 25-29
years (41.0 %).
Furthermore,thehighestMPIvaluewasreportedforthepopulationaged0-4years.
Table 8. Poverty Indicators by Age Groups (years)
Age
groups
Population
share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
0-4 13.6 56.2 53.5 59.0 45.2 44.2 46.3 0.254 0.240 0.269
5-9 11.9 49.9 47.0 52.9 45.7 44.4 47.0 0.228 0.213 0.244
10-14 10.4 48.5 45.4 51.5 44.8 43.7 45.8 0.217 0.202 0.232
15-19 10.7 46.3 43.2 49.4 43.4 42.3 44.5 0.201 0.186 0.216
20-24 10.2 36.9 34.0 39.9 42.0 40.8 43.1 0.155 0.142 0.169
25-29 9.0 32.7 29.9 35.4 41.0 39.9 42.1 0.134 0.123 0.145
30-34 7.2 35.0 32.1 37.9 43.5 42.3 44.7 0.152 0.139 0.166
35-60 21.0 37.1 34.7 39.4 43.7 42.8 44.6 0.162 0.151 0.173
61+ 6.1 45.4 42.3 48.4 44.5 43.5 45.4 0.202 0.187 0.216
Total 100 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
41
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure12indicateswhetherthedifferencesthatwerereportedintheincidence
ofmultidimensionalpovertyacrossagegroupsfromTable8,arestatistically
significantornot.Sincetheconfidenceintervalsreportedforagegroup0-4
doesnotoverlapwithanyotheragegroup,itcanbeconcludedthatpersons
aged0-4yearshaveasignificantlyhigherchanceofexperiencingmultiple
deprivations.Figure12furthershowsthatthereisnosignificantdifference
intheincidencesreportedforagegroups5-9,10-14,15-19and61+since
thereisanoverlapintheconfidenceintervals,whilethereisnosignificant
differencebetweentheagegroups20-24,25-29,30-34and35-60.
Figure 12. Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H) Age
Groups
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-60 61+
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
42
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
3.3. Decomposition of Censored Headcount Ratios
This sub-section presents the censored headcount ratio of indicators across
urban/rural and regions. The censored headcount ratio of a certain indicator
is defined as the proportion of the total population that is deprived in that
specific indicator, and also multidimensionally poor.
Figure 13 shows the censoredheadcount ratiosbetweenurban and rural
areas.Resultsshowthatoverall,ruralareashavethehighestproportionof
peoplethataremultidimensionallypooranddeprivedinall the indicators
comparedtourbanareas.CookingandLightingEnergy,aswellasSanitation
arethetwoindicatorswiththehighestcensoredheadcountratiosforrural
andalmostinurbanareasrespectively.Thelowestcensoredheadcountratio
forurbanareasisreportedforDrinkingWater(0.5%)whileforruralareas,ICT
reportedthelowestat5.1percent.
Figure 13. Censored Headcount Ratios by Urban/Rural
4.1 4.7
0.5
22.5
16.8
24.2
0.8
19.3
1.2
16.3
12.313.9 13.0
21.0
56.3
43.4
56.2
5.1
58.4
15.0
32.4 29.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
%
Urban
Rural
43
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Table 9 on page 44, shows the censored headcount ratios across the 14
administrative regions of Namibia. The table shows that ICT is the only
indicatorwiththelowestproportionofpeoplethatarepooranddeprived
across all regions. Indicators such as Sanitation, Housing, Transportation
Assets,andCookingandLightingEnergyareamongsttheindicatorswiththe
highestproportionsofpeoplethatarepooranddeprivedinthosespecific
indicatorsacrossall regions.Furthermore, the table shows thatKunene is
one of the regions that has the highest proportion of the poor and deprived
in most of the indicators such as Cooking and Lighting Energy (63.0%),
TransportationAssets(61.3%),Sanitation(59.3%)andHousing(52.6%).
44
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Similarly,Erongoisamongtheregionswiththelowestproportionofitspopulationthatispoor
anddeprivedinmostoftheindicatorsi.e.ICT(0.4%),DrinkingWater(2.7%),SchoolAttendance
(3.5%)andAccesstoClinics/Hospitals(4.8%).
Region
Po
pu
la
tio
n
sh
ar
e
(%
)
Sc
ho
ol
a
tt
en
da
nc
e
Ye
ar
s
of
s
ch
oo
lin
g
D
rin
ki
ng
w
at
er
Sa
ni
ta
tio
n
H
ou
si
ng
Tr
an
sp
or
ta
tio
n
A
ss
et
s
IC
T
Co
ok
in
g
an
d
Li
gh
tin
g
En
er
gy
A
cc
es
s
to
C
lin
ic
s/
H
os
pi
ta
ls
Fo
od
s
ec
ur
ity
Ch
ild
N
ut
rit
io
n
//Karas 3.8 3.5 6.2 2.7 13.6 10.4 19.0 0.4 13.9 4.8 9.3 9.9
Erongo 7.7 3.9 2.2 2.2 15.0 12.8 14.5 0.7 10.2 1.7 10.8 4.6
Hardap 3.8 6.4 8.6 1.2 21.1 18.5 26.2 2.7 19.7 3.7 12.5 11.7
Kavango East 5.8 11.1 13.4 28.9 68.4 52.9 68.7 8.9 69.2 8.0 60.2 30.9
Kavango
West 4.0 14.4 21.3 32.1 76.2 71.0 78.2 6.7 79.3 11.8 63.8 33.8
Khomas 17.6 4.3 4.2 0.0 23.7 16.9 24.5 0.7 16.9 2.8 15.2 13.6
Kunene 4.0 37.4 36.5 36.0 59.3 52.6 61.3 11.7 63.0 31.0 36.6 21.5
Ohangwena 11.4 7.9 8.4 19.5 54.7 41.4 54.1 1.6 56.3 12.0 24.7 35.6
Omaheke 3.3 18.1 17.2 5.8 42.3 26.5 47.3 6.4 49.6 24.6 15.8 22.4
Omusati 11.2 8.2 8.0 16.7 50.2 32.0 46.3 3.0 50.5 6.9 18.9 31.2
Oshana 8.1 4.8 4.5 1.6 26.9 22.1 31.7 0.9 32.1 1.2 17.3 16.2
Oshikoto 8.3 9.4 7.3 12.2 49.3 32.3 46.5 1.9 49.5 14.3 26.9 25.1
Otjozondjupa 6.8 17.7 13.1 9.3 34.6 25.9 38.3 4.3 34.6 14.8 25.3 21.0
Zambezi 4.3 7.9 6.5 13.7 58.7 57.1 59.2 6.3 58.8 3.4 51.7 17.9
Table 9. Censored Headcount Ratios by Regions
45
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
3.4. Comparison of the MPI to the monetary measure
As mentioned earlier, since 2003, Namibia has adopted the Cost-Of-Basic-Needs
Approach(CBNA)tomeasuremonetarypoverty.To-date,threepovertylineshavebeen
releasedbytheNSA,namely,theFoodPovertyLine(FPL)thresholdforfoodpoverty;
TheLowerBoundPovertyLine(LBPL)thresholdfortheseverelypoor;andtheUpper
BoundPovertyLine(UBPL)thresholdforthepoor.
This sub-section presents a comparison between the Multidimensional Poverty index
and the 2015/16 monetary poverty rates by region using the UBPL. Table 10 (page
46) and Figure 14 show a comparison of the monetary and multidimensional poverty
rates, and indicates that Kavango East, Kavango West, Kunene, Omaheke, Omusati,
Zambezi regions are amongst those with the highest poverty rates for both measures.
Conversely, Erongo and Karas regions are amongst those with the least poverty rates
for both monetary and multidimensional poverty measures.
Figure 14. Spatial comparison of poverty measures
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(69.99,79.61]
(64.11,69.99]
(60.67,64.11]
(56.55,60.67]
(51.44,56.55]
(50.37,51.44]
(40.50,50.37]
(33.11,40.50]
(26.90,33.11]
(25.47,26.90]
(19.58,25.47]
[16.64,19.58]
Headcount Ratio
Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty H
in Namibia, k=30%
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(37.9,41.5]
(34.2,37.9]
(33.4,34.2]
(27.8,33.4]
(20.2,27.8]
(17.15,20.2]
(14,17.15]
(10.7,14]
(9.7,10.7]
(9.2,9.7]
(4.7,9.2]
[3.7,4.7]
Poverty rate
Moneymetric poverty measure based on the
Upper Bound Poverty Line (UPBL)
in Namibia
46
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Region Total Population Monetary poor MPI poor
//Karas 80561 7409 9.2 15771 19.6
Erongo 165138 6106 3.7 27478 16.6
Hardap 81650 8726 10.7 21966 26.9
Kavango East 124286 51538 41.5 86989 70.0
Kavango West 85863 23854 27.8 68353 79.6
Khomas 377192 17846 4.7 96066 25.5
Kunene 85883 32536 37.9 55057 64.1
Ohangwena 244704 35738 14.6 138382 56.6
Omaheke 70511 24087 34.2 36269 51.4
Omusati 240629 48520 20.2 122097 50.7
Oshana 175053 16930 9.7 57966 33.1
Oshikoto 178370 25010 14.0 89180 50.0
Otjozondjupa 147087 29045 19.7 59574 40.5
Zambezi 92630 30910 33.4 56198 60.7
Namibia 2149556 358254 16.7* 931345 43.3
Table 10. Comparison of poverty measures, by regions
*Cautionary note: The monetary poverty rate differs from the one published in the NHIES
2015/16 basic report, due to a difference in sample size based on the MPI methodology
47
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Given thatmonetary poverty assessment using consumption expenditure
hasbeen theconventionalmeasureofpoverty inNamibia, it is crucial to
compare the twomeasures in this contextual analysis. Figure15presents
thecomparisonbetweenmulti-dimensionalpovertywith theconsumption
expenditurepovertyestimate.Figure15indicatesthatapproximately12.5
percentofpeople inNamibiaarebothmulti-dimensionally andmonetary
poor. The figure further displays that 30.8 percent of the population are
multi-dimensionally poor but notmonetary poor, suggesting that income
aloneisnotagoodpredictorofpovertyacrossthepopulation.Moreover,
52.5percentofpeopleareneithermulti-dimensionallynormonetarypoor.
Figure 15. Venn Diagram Showing Overlaps between National
Monetary and Multidimensional Poverty Rates*
*Cautionary note: The monetary poverty rate differs from the one published in
the NHIES 2015/16 basic report, due to a difference in sample size based on
the MPI methodology
Non-poor = 52.5%
4.2% 12.5% 30.8%
Total Population Monetary Multidimensional
48
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
4. Poverty measures based
on the child population.
This sectionpresents themultidimensionalpoverty results that aremainly
basedonchildren,aged0-17years,whosepopulationshareis42.6percent
out of the total population. In order to provide an insight on the nature
anddepthofmultidimensional poverty amongst children inNamibia, the
sections begin by comparing poverty measures between children (aged
0-17years)andadults(aged18yearsorolder).Thesectionfurtherpresents
a decomposition of the child-based poverty measures, across various
demographic characteristics. The section concludeswith a comparisonof
childmultidimensionalandmonetarypovertyrates.
4.1 Profiling child-based multidimensional poverty in
Namibia
a. Uncensored headcount ratios of the MPI indicators
49
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 16. Child and Adult Specific National Uncensored
Headcount Ratio
10.5 13.6
17.9
72.7
51.5
79.5
3.8
71.3
12.5
32.1 34.5
9.0 7.5
12.4
66.1
44.7
73.8
3.2
60.0
11.4
26.5 20.9
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
%
Children(0-17)
Adults (>17)
Figure16showstheproportionthatisdeprivedineachofthe11indicators
oftheMPI,bythetwo-agegroups:childrenandadults.Thedatashowthat
children(0-17)aremoredeprivedinallindicatorscompareadults.Whilethe
highestdeprivationlevelswerereportedinTransportationAssets,Cooking
andLightingEnergyandSanitationforbothagegroups,theproportionsare
relativelyhigheramongstthechildrenpopulation.
Thelowestdeprivationlevelsamongstthechildrenpopulationwerereported
inICT(3.8%),followedbySchoolAttendance(10.5%)andthirdlybyAccess
toClinics/Hospitals(12.5%).
50
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
b. The level of multidimensional poverty amongst children in Namibia
Table11showsthethreemainindicatorsofmultidimensionalpoverty;Headcountratio
(H),Intensity(A)andtheAdjustedheadcountratio(MPI)basedonthetwopopulationage
groups(childrenandadults).
ThetableshowsthatoutofthepopulationofchildreninNamibia51.3percentareliving
in multidimensional poverty. The intensity of multidimensional poverty (A) amongst the
childrenpopulationis45.1percent,whiletheadultpopulationsintensityrateisreported
at43.0percent.
TheMPIis0.231forchildren(0-17years),whichishigherthanofadults(18+years)of
0.161.
Table 11. Child and Adult Specific Incidence, intensity and Multidimensional
Poverty Index
Population
share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Children
(0-17) 42.6 51.3 0.49 0.54 45.1 0.44 0.46 0.231 0.218 0.244
Adults
(>17) 57.4 37.4 0.35 0.40 43.0 0.42 0.44 0.161 0.151 0.171
National 100 43.3 41.0 45.6 44.0 43.2 44.9 0.191 0.180 0.202
51
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
c. Child and Adult-based censored headcount ratios of the
MPI indicators
Figure17showsthecensoredheadcount ratiopereachof the indicators,
forthetwo(2)agegroups.FromFigure17,resultsshowthatforbothage
groups,thehighestproportionofpeoplethataremultidimensionallypoor
anddeprivedperspecificindicatorarereportedforInadequatetransportation
assets, followedbyadequatesanitation,cookingand lightingenergyand
adequate housing. It is worth noting that the censored headcount ratios
arerelativelyhigherforthechildrenpopulation,inallindicators.Thelowest
censored headcount ratio for the children population is reported for ICT
equipment(3.4%)andAccesstoclinics/hospitals(9.9%).
Figure 17. Child and Adult Specific National Censored
Headcount Ratio
10.2
12.4
14.2
48.1
37.0
48.7
3.4
48.0
9.9
28.7 28.7
8.6
6.6
9.2
34.7
26.4
35.6
2.8
34.1
7.5
22.0
16.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
%
Children(0-17)
Adults (>17)
52
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
d. Percentage contribution of each indicator to the child
and adult specific MPI
Figure 18 shows the percentage contribution of eachweighted indicator
totheoverallmultidimensionalpovertyindexfortherespectiveagegroup
populations,childrenandadults.Figure18shows that the indicators that
contribute the highest to children multidimensional poverty in Namibia
areFoodSecurityandChildUndernutritionallat16.6percent,Inadequate
TransportationAssets(11.7%),Sanitation(11.6%),andUnsafeCookingand
Lighting Energy (11.5%).
Figure 18. Percentage Contribution of each Indicator to Child
and Adult MPI
8.9
10.6
7.2
5.5
3.4
3.2
11.6
12.0
8.9
9.1
11.7
12.3
0.8
1.0
11.5
11.8
2.9
3.1
16.6
18.2
16.6
13.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Children(0-17)
Adults (>17)
%
School attendance Years of schooling Drinking water
Toilet Housing Transportation Assets
ICT Cooking and Lighting Energy Access to Clinics/Hospitals
Food security Child Nutrition
53
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
4.2. Decomposition of child-based poverty indicators
In order to examine the disparities in the prevalence and distribution of children
multidimensionalpovertyinNamibia,thissectionpresentsthedecompositionsofchild-
basedmultidimensionalpovertyindicatorsacrossUrban/ruralareas,Region,Sexofhead
ofhousehold,andchildspecificage-groups.
a. Performance across Urban/Rural
Table12 shows thedecompositionof childpoverty results across theurbanand rural
areasinNamibia.Ofthetotalpopulationofchildreninurbanareas,about30.4percent
aremultidimensionalpoor,while,theproportionoutofthetotalpopulationofchildrenin
ruralareasthatismultidimensionallypooris64.4percent.
The intensity levels indicate the proportion of indicators in which multidimensionally
poorchildrenaredeprived.Onaverage,everypoorchildinurbanareasisdeprivedin
40.3percentoftheindicators,comparedto46.5percentforpoorchildreninruralareas.
Furthermore,MPIforruralareasisreportedat0.299,whichishigherthantheMPIvalue
for urban areas reported at 0.123.
Table 12. Child-based Poverty measures by urban/rural
Area Population share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Urban 38.6 30.4 26.6 34.3 40.3 39.2 41.4 0.123 0.106 0.139
Rural 61.4 64.4 61.4 67.3 46.5 45.3 47.7 0.299 0.283 0.316
National 100.0 51.3 48.7 53.8 45.1 44.1 46.1 0.231 0.218 0.244
54
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure19 indicateswhetherthedifferencethatwasreported inthechild-
based incidence of multidimensional poverty across urban and rural
areas from table12 is statistically significant. Since there is nooverlap in
the confidence intervals between urban and rural areas, thedifference is
statisticallysignificant.Therefore,childreninruralareashaveasignificantly
higher chance of experiencingmultiple deprivations than those in urban
areas.
Figure 19. Child-Based Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H)
by Urban/Rural
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
Urban Rural
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
55
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
b. Performance across Regions
Table13(page56)showsthedecompositionofchildren-basedpovertyresults
acrossthefourteen(14)administrativeregionsofNamibia.Theincidenceof
multidimensionalpovertyishighestinKavangoWest(82.3%),KavangoEast
(74.7%)andKunene(69.2%).Asforthechildpovertyintensitylevels,Kunene
region reported thehighest rateof 62.9percent,which indicates thaton
average, themultidimensionally poor children in the region are deprived
in about 63 percent of the indicators. This is followed by Otjozondjupa,
reportedat52.6percent.
56
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Region Population share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
//Karas 3.1 21.1 13.4 28.9 39.8 35.1 44.5 0.084 0.048 0.121
Erongo 5.7 15.7 9.2 22.1 37.5 34.8 40.3 0.059 0.033 0.084
Hardap 3.4 30.0 19.3 40.6 40.3 38.0 42.6 0.121 0.074 0.167
Kavango East 6.7 74.7 67.5 81.9 48.7 46.1 51.3 0.363 0.323 0.404
Kavango
West 5.2 82.3 76.1 88.5 48.9 47.2 50.6 0.402 0.365 0.439
Khomas 13.3 32.6 24.3 40.9 40.2 37.9 42.4 0.131 0.096 0.166
Kunene 4.5 69.2 58.5 79.8 62.9 58.5 67.3 0.435 0.348 0.522
Ohangwena 13.9 64.1 58.1 70.0 43.3 41.9 44.8 0.278 0.248 0.307
Omaheke 3.4 53.6 37.7 69.6 43.7 39.6 47.8 0.234 0.170 0.298
Omusati 12.6 55.8 48.7 62.9 41.6 39.5 43.8 0.232 0.199 0.266
Oshana 7.5 38.5 31.1 45.9 38.1 36.6 39.6 0.147 0.118 0.175
Oshikoto 9.1 57.4 50.5 64.4 43.5 40.8 46.1 0.250 0.214 0.285
Otjozondjupa 6.9 43.5 33.5 53.6 52.6 46.3 58.9 0.229 0.163 0.295
Zambezi 4.7 66.2 57.4 75.0 44.0 42.0 46.0 0.291 0.253 0.330
National 100.0 51.3 48.7 53.8 45.1 44.1 46.1 0.231 0.218 0.244
Table 13. Child-based Poverty measures by urban/rural
57
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure20indicateswhetherthedifferencesthatwerereportedinthechild-
basedincidenceofmultidimensionalpovertyacrossregionsfromTable13,
arestatisticallysignificant.Sincetheconfidenceintervalsreportedfor//Karas,
ErongoandHardapregionsdooverlap, itcanbeconcludedthatpersons
fromtheseregionshaveequalchanceofexperiencingmultipledeprivations.
Figure20alsorevealsthatthereisasignificantdifferenceintheincidence
reportedforKuneneandOshanaregions,sincethereisnooverlapintheir
confidenceintervals.
Figure 20. Child-Based Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty
(H) by Region
21.1
15.7
30.0
74.7
82.3
32.6
69.2
64.1 53.6
55.8
38.5
57.4
43.5
66.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
58
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 21 shows the spatial distribution of the prevalence of childmultidimensional
povertyinthecountry,aswellastheintensitylevels.
ThefigurealsoindicatesthatKavangoWest,KavangoEastandKuneneregionshavethe
highestratesofboththeprevalenceandthedepthofchildmultidimensionalpovertyin
thecountry.
Figure 21. Spatial Distribution of Child Poverty Measures by Region
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(74.7,82.3]
(69.2,74.7]
(66.2,69.2]
(64.1,66.2]
(57.4,64.1]
(54.7,57.4]
(43.5,54.7]
(38.5,43.5]
(32.6,38.5]
(30,32.6]
(21.1,30]
[15.7,21.1]
Poverty Rate
Child Specific Incidence of
Multidimensional Poverty (H)
in Namibia, k=30%
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(52.6,62.9]
(48.9,52.6]
(48.7,48.9]
(44,48.7]
(43.7,44]
(43.4,43.7]
(41.6,43.4]
(40.3,41.6]
(40.2,40.3]
(39.8,40.2]
(38.1,39.8]
[37.5,38.1]
Intensity
Child Specific Intensity (A) of
Multidimensional Poverty
in Namibia, k=30%
59
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 22 shows the spatial distribution of the incidence ofmultidimensional poverty
amongstchildrenaged0-17yearsinthecountry,i.e.,regionalmultidimensionalpoverty
ratesandnumberofpoorpeoplebyregionrespectively.Theanalysiswasnecessarytoshow
thattheremaybesomeregionswithrelativelylowerincidencerates,buthighnumbersof
poorpeoplebecausetheyhavelargerpopulations.Figure22indicatesthatKavangoWest,
Kavango East and Kunene regions have the highest rates of multidimensional poverty.
However, in terms of the population counts of children, the regions with the highest
numberofmultidimensionallypoorchildrenareOhangwena,OmusatiandOshikoto.
Figure 22. Child-based Poverty Measures (Headcount rate and actual count
of children) by Region
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(74.7,82.3]
(69.2,74.7]
(66.2,69.2]
(64.1,66.2]
(57.4,64.1]
(54.7,57.4]
(43.5,54.7]
(38.5,43.5]
(32.6,38.5]
(30,32.6]
(21.1,30]
[15.7,21.1]
Poverty Rate
Child Specific Incidence of
Multidimensional Poverty (H)
in Namibia, k=30%
Zambezi
Erongo
Hardap
//Karas
Kavango West
Khomas
Kunene
Ohangwena
Omaheke
OmusatiOshanaOshikoto
Otjozondjupa
Kavango East
(64611,81605]
(47640,64611]
(45701,47640]
(39660,45701]
(38979,39660]
(28378,38979]
(27388,28378]
(26603,27388]
(16858,26603]
(9425,16858]
(8144,9425]
[6081,8144]
Number of poor children
(017 years)
Number of children living in
multidimensional poverty
in Namibia, k=30%
60
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
c. Performance across Sex of head of Household
Table14 shows thedecompositionof childpoverty resultsbetweenmaleand female
headedhouseholdsinNamibia.Ofthetotalchildrenpopulationthatresidesinfemale
headed households, about 53 percent are multidimensional poor. Conversely, the
proportionoutofthechildrenpopulationthatresidesinmaleheadedhouseholdswho
aremultidimensionalpoorisabout50percent.
The intensity levels indicate that on average, every multidimensionally poor child in
a female headed household is deprived in 44.5 percent of the weighted indicators
comparedto45.8percentforthepoorchildreninmaleheadedhouseholds.
Furthermore,theMPIforthechildrenpopulationwhoresidesinfemaleheadedhouseholds
is reported at 0.234 while for those children residing in male headed households is
reported at 0.228
Table 14. Child-based Poverty measures by Sex of head of household
Sex of
head of
house-
hold
Population
share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Female 53.1 52.7 49.7 55.6 44.5 43.2 45.7 0.234 0.219 0.249
Male 46.9 49.7 46.3 53.0 45.8 44.5 47.2 22.8 21.1 24.5
National 100.0 51.3 48.7 53.8 45.1 44.1 46.1 0.231 0.218 0.244
61
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure23 indicateswhether thedifference thatwas reported in thechild-
based incidence of multidimensional poverty across female and male
headedhouseholds fromTable14, is statistically significant.Although the
child-basedincidenceforfemale-headedhouseholdsishigherthanthatof
themale-headedhouseholds,asreportedintable14,thedifferenceisnot
statisticallysignificantsincethereisanoverlapintheconfidenceintervals.
Figure 23. Child-Based Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H)
by Sex of Head of Household
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Female Male
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
62
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
d. Performance across child-specific age group
Table15 shows thedecompositionof child-basedpoverty results across child-specific
age groups.
Thehighestheadcountratioisreportedfortheagegroupof2-4years(57.3%)followed
by the age group of 1 years or less (54.7%).
Thetablefurthershowsthattheintensitylevelsofchild-basedmultidimensionalpoverty
is fairlyconstantacrossagegroups,thehighestreportedforthe2-4yearsagegroup
(45.6%) and the lowest reported for the 15-17 years age group (44.2%).
Furthermore,thehighestMPIwasreportedforchildrenintheage-groupof2-4years,at
0.261.
Table 15. Child Poverty Indicators by age-groups
Age
group
Population
share (%) H A MPI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
Value
(%) CI
<=1 13.2 54.7 51.4 58.0 44.7 43.6 45.8 0.245 0.229 0.260
2-4 18.7 57.3 54.3 60.2 45.6 44.4 46.8 0.261 0.246 0.277
5-14 52.4 49.2 46.5 52.0 45.3 44.2 46.4 0.223 0.209 0.237
15-17 15.7 47.9 44.6 51.2 44.2 43.0 45.4 0.212 0.196 0.227
National 100 51.3 48.7 53.8 45.1 44.1 46.1 0.231 0.218 0.244
63
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Figure 24. Child-Based Incidence of Multidimensional Poverty (H)
by Age Groups
Figure 24 indicates whether the differences that were reported in the
child-based incidence of multidimensional poverty across age groups
fromTable15,arestatisticallysignificantornot.Althoughthechild-based
incidencereportedforagegroup2-4ismorethanthatofagegroup<=1,
thedifferenceisnotstatisticallysignificantsincethereisanoverlapinthe
confidenceintervals.
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
<=1 2-4 5-14 15-17
In
cid
en
ce
o
f
m
ul
tid
im
en
sio
na
l p
ov
er
ty
(H
)
In
ci
de
nc
e
of
M
ul
tid
im
en
si
on
al
P
ov
er
ty
(H
)
64
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
4.3. Comparison of the child-based MPI to the monetary
measure
Figure25indicatesthatapproximately16.1percentofchildrenaged0-17
years in Namibia are both multi-dimensionally and monetary poor. About
35.2percentofchildrenaremulti-dimensionallypoorbutnotmonetarypoor,
suggesting that income alone is not a good predictor of poverty among
children. The figure further shows that that 44.2 percent of children are
neither multi-dimensionally nor monetary poor.
Figure 25. Comparison between monetary and non-monetary
child poverty rates*
*Cautionary note: The monetary poverty rate differs from the one published in
the NHIES 2015/16 basic report, due to a difference in sample size based on
the MPI methodology
Non-poor = 44.2%
4.5% 16.1% 35.2%
Total Population Monetary Multidimensional
65
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Robustness checkswere carriedout inorder toassess the stabilityof the
MPImeasuresandconfirmthattheresultspresentedwouldnothavebeen
significantlydifferent,evenifapovertycutoff(k)thatisdifferentfrom30%
wasused.Table16presentstheSpearmanandKendalltaubrankcorrelation
coefficients using the poverty cut-off k=30%, and the ranking of the 14
regionsforalternativepovertycut-offsof20%and40%.Table16showsthat
theKendallTau-bis0.87atk=20%and0.89atk=40%indicatingthatamong
thewholepopulation,theregionalrankingsarepreservedtoalargeextent
underthesealternativechoices.
SimilarresultsareobtainedwhenusingtheSpearmancoefficient.Table16
showsthatSpearmancoefficientis0.96atk=20%and0.97atk=40%.This
meansthattherankcorrelationbetweenthepovertycut-offs(from20%to
30%,from30%to40%)ispreservedtoalargeextentunderthesealternative
choices.
Robustness checks.
Table 16. Spearman and Kendall Tau-b
K=30%
Alternativek=20% Spearman 0.96
Kendall Tau-b 0.87
Alternativek=40% Spearman 0.97
Kendall Tau-b 0.89
66
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
Totestthestabilityofthemeasure,variouscomputationsoftheheadcount
ratio (H)werecalculatedbasedonvariouspovertycut-offs (k).Figures26
showsthedistributionofHacrossvariouspovertycut-offs,forall14regions.
Thefigureindicatesthatthepovertyratesarequitestable,astheorderof
theregionsremainsfairlysimilaracrossallvaluesofk.
Figure 26. Headcount Ratio Across Regions Based on Different
Poverty Cutoffs
Note: The Namibian regions are alphabetically ordered and then ordered as
Reg. 1 to Reg. 14, where //Karas is Reg. 1 and Zambezi is Reg. 14
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
1
H
_
0 20 40 60 80 100
k
Reg. 1 Reg. 2 Reg. 3 Reg. 4 Reg. 5 Reg. 6 Reg. 7
Reg. 8 Reg. 9 Reg. 10 Reg. 11 Reg. 12 Reg. 13 Reg. 14
67
POVERTY INDEX REPORT
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
We acknowledge the shortcomings of the Namibian MPI (particularly
pertainingtotheEconomicactivitydimensionandLandownership),which
wasconstrainedbytheavailabilityofdata.
TheAgencyslong-termvisionfortheNamibianMPIistocontinuegenerating
this index whenever new NHIES data becomes available, to allow for
comparisonswithmonetarypovertymeasurement.
ThenextNHIESistentativelyplannedfor2022/23pendingfunding,hopefully
thiswouldhaveprovidedenoughtimeforpolicyinterventions.Further,the
MPIwillbeusedtoreportontheSDG1aswellasamonitoringtoolforthe
National Development Plans (NDPs).
Way forward.
Namibia Statistics Agency
P.O.Box2133
FGIHouse,PostStreetMall
Windhoek,Namibia
Tel: +264 61 431 3200
Fax: +264 61 431 3253
Email: info@nsa.org.na
www.nsa.org.na