I T IS THE LAND THAT MATTERS

85

(Gyimothy 2000). Nonetheless, quality experience should be described and interpreted in relative terms so as to ‘fit the purpose’ for which it is designed (Juran 1979). An examination of quality assurance in customer care has clearly demonstrated that if hospitality and tourism business are to achieve a quality system to meet customer expectations, then the provision of material resources alone is insufficient (Sweeney and Wanhill (1996).

A rural development and community project requires a holistic approach. Seldom is this approach followed. The assumption is often that land use, law, politics, regional development and marketing are natural processes that are inherently in place, or what Howitt (2001) criticises as mistakenly thought of as ‘common sense’. However, these disciplines are necessary for one to be able to comprehensively undertake a successful community project. They are important because they affect the implementation of such projects. Therefore, they form an essential component to be integrated in the planning and implementing phases of a community project such as Salambala Conservancy.

There are three basic elements that seem to complement CBT, i.e. nature, economic livelihoods and cultural preservation, and three identifiable types of tourists, i.e.

adventure, culture and ecotourists. Together they would enable the Conservancy authorities to understand and prioritise the motives of tourists’ travel, e.g. physical, psychological, spiritual reasons and so on. These motives together should meet the principles of sustainability, community needs, the disciplines above and the legislation in place. When a systems approach is considered (Jafari 1983), over time community-based tourism can be re-oriented to specific objectives and can be cemented with other land-use plans. A systems approach allows the use of other disciplines in researching, planning, implementing and evaluating CBT.

86

cattle, chickens and goats, to a lesser extent pigs, for survival. Many are also dependent on gathering from the core area. The majority indicated they cut housing poles (73.2 per cent), collect firewood (37.5 per cent), cut thatching grass (39.3 per cent), and gather wild fruits (19.6 per cent) from the core area. Under current regulations, the residents of Salambala are required to have a permit in order to cut housing poles in the core area.

According to the survey, however, very few cut housing poles with permits from the Khuta. They say it is expensive to travel to Bukalo to obtain permits. Such responsibilities could easily be decentralised to village Indunas or alternatively school authorities. Apart from the formal sectors that some households’ members are part of, many (42 per cent) are involved in informal economic activities. In addition to agriculture, these activities include traditional beer brewing, piecework, seasonal fishing and selling. The combination of these activities constitutes the economic coping strategies in Salambala. Although not evidenced with hard facts in this study, some households depend on funds sent by relatives and/or the governments’ pension system.

More youthful and working-age people in towns usually send their children to live with grandmothers in the rural areas. Funds from relatives are then sent to the respective families living in the countryside.

Namibia and South Africa are the only two countries in southern Africa that have a system of pension payments. Regardless of whether the person has worked or not, the aged (65 years), disabled, physically and mentally challenged qualify for the payments.

Lack of identification documents (many complained about this issue) is, however, a problem. Without the document no pension is paid. No matter how little (N$250 per month) the pension may be, it is usually shared and used by the whole household unit. In other words, it is not only the recipient who uses the money but also the people (dependants) with whom he or she lives. In some instances, the pension also pays for school fees in addition to buying household groceries.

Funds from relatives are also used for the same purpose. At the time of research 50 kg of maize-meal, which is the staple food in the region, was costing N$90. The residents have to buy maize-meal in Katima Mulilo at a transport cost of about N$15. In the floodplains, the transport cost is N$50. Maize-meal prices are much higher in local groceries. According to the survey, considering that the households in Salambala have

87

more mouths to feed, many households are economically challenged. It is no wonder that many households in the Conservancy, as the findings indicate, have a tendency of being loyal to subsistence agriculture. Due to the redundancy that was created after independence, particularly for those who served in the South West African Territorial Force (SWATF), most households rely on subsistence farming. Nonetheless, about 60.7 per cent of the respondents indicated they would not reduce dependence on agriculture even if other opportunities such as employment arose in Salambala.

As far as they are concerned, it takes ageing, sicknesses and death for one to stop farming. They argue that formal work and other ways of livelihood offer no security and may cause social disappointments. No, because I regard this work [employment]

temporal, and because when you make a mistake they fire you. I will depend only on land (Q45). Another respondent echoed, No, I would remain a farmer because I don’t rely on such jobs, because I might be dismissed... and then suffer again… I will do both work and farm (Q44). Even though this is partly the reason, the major (17.9 per cent) reason is that they consider employment to be for the younger generation. In the view of some elderly people, trying to work in Salambala Conservancy is not worth it because work is for young people (Q47) and that they have other high priorities, too.

Previously, drought affected Caprivi’s agricultural production for the years 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996 and 2000, and as hence it is not surprising that some people indicated If it is a drought time… there is no choice, I will work (Q32). In a situation of poverty one has to do all it takes to find a way of living. Likewise the people of Salambala, on a day-to-day basis, have to find a way of living. It was therefore not unexpected that about 10.7 per cent of the respondents indicated that they would do both, if work opportunities were there, in order to attain maximum resources at their disposal. In an event where Salambala would offer employment opportunities I will do both to maximise my earnings (Q13).

Whereas others (those who indicated yes) had hopes of selling crafts and arts to potential tourists, working and sending funds to family, others want to use land as pasture only and to try out partnerships with companies from elsewhere. The majority of people in the Conservancy desire to continue and expand crop cultivation. Potential partnership with companies is an innovative idea but regrettably such a move would

88

most likely be blocked under communal land law. In Salambala, land is not yet a scarce commodity. The problem is tenure and ownership of land. This will continue to hamper many development efforts and dreams in the area for a while. The need to put land tenure in place is urgent.

As a business idea, partnership with companies means that land has to be managed properly, declared private and be fenced, the last of which is unlikely to be tolerated both by the community and the Khuta as it means reduction in access to grazing land presently not owned by the community but used communally. In the event that both the Khuta and the community accept a partnership venture as a potential solution, a significant reduction in the number of current livestock and particularly cattle numbers would be required in Salambala. The 56 households surveyed in this study owned the total of 1079 cattle. It remains to be seen if anything may alter the attachment to cattle.

While some respondents (12.5 per cent) indicated to have been involved in a land dispute because of the resettlement from the core area, 87.5 per cent had not heard or got involved in a land-related dispute because of the resettlement. Those who had been involved complained that while in Salambala [core area], some people took our farmland… we have serious problems. There is just no way to survive. Now we have no place (Q47). Nonetheless, bearing in mind the current settlement pattern, it is unlikely that such farmland dispute had been provoked by the resettlement from the core area.

Furthermore, land problems in communal areas are difficult to solve because the claims are made that ‘my grandfather used to live and/or farm in this or that area’ without any form of document for verification. This is not to suggest that such a system is too primitive but rather to simply point to the fact that such a system is no longer compatible with today’s way of life. In the present case, it is well known that the families still own houses where they lived previously and they have houses where they reside now.

Although it is not articulated, this matter is partly a question of place attachment but essentially a question of need for land and tenure security. Such problems are undoubtedly likely to increase. The recent migration patterns and the fact that there is no change in ownership between the former place and the new one only underline the need for an urgent but contextual and proper reform of communal land.

89