Eradicating Extreme Poverty and Hunger - Goal 1

Overview

Swaziland has a relatively high GDP per capita income of US$ 2,415. Despite this, 69 per cent of its 1.18 million people live below the national poverty line. More than 70 percent of the Swazi population reside in rural areas and predominately dependent on subsistence farming and/or livestock herding. According to the WFP’s Community Household surveillance (CHS) food monitoring system; food production (mainly maize) represents the primary livelihood activity as subsistence or for cash. However, self-sufficiency in maize production has never been achieved. In a normal year, approximately 60 percent of food consumed in Swaziland is imported.

Income distribution is skewed in Swaziland. According to SHIES 2001, nationally 56 percent of wealth is held by the richest 20 percent while the poorest 20 percent own less than 4.3 percent. Swaziland has recorded a Gini Coefficient of 51 percent (SHIES 2001), which is considered great inequality according to the international standard. This provides one of the major contributory factors to current levels of poverty. The country’s target under the MDGs is to half the income inequality from 51 percent in 2001 to 25 percent in 2015.

 The country suffers from food insecurity with a significant portion of the population dependent on food aid (see Section 2.7 below). According to the agricultural census, 75 percent of households dependent on employment income for their livelihood and only 12 percent is derived from agricultural activities. Thus, with a poor economic performance, the impact on families is quite significant. Agricultural production has been declining in recent years and maize production, in particular, has drastically dropped, thus, rendering households dependent on food aid. Maize being a staple food in Swaziland; hunger and poverty are not only associated with its shortage, but directly affect hunger and poverty. Maize production has declined since 2002 when the country was hit by severe drought and production fell from around 140,000 MT in 1996/97 to 26,000MT in 2006/07.

 The prevailing dry spells, high cost of agricultural production, reduced arable land and HIV/AIDS have exacerbated the already poor agricultural performance thus pushing the population of Swaziland deeper into poverty and hunger situation. Shiselweni and the Lubombo regions are the most vulnerable regions where hunger and poverty are at peak as a result of the above mentioned effects. The Shiselweni and Lubombo region recorded the level of 76 percent and 73 percent, respectively, of the households below poverty line. The other two regions recorded 61 percent and 70 percent (SHIES 2001).

 According to the SHIES 2001, the number of households who have never produced enough food increased from 51 percent to 56 percent and the households which had produced surpluses before dropped from 9 percent to 5 percent Furthermore, the prices for basic foodstuffs like mealie meal and bread has risen radically. Consequently, meeting the MDG goal of eradicating hunger is a challenge for Swaziland presently. The WFP Crop and Food Supply Assessment Mission to Swaziland (2007) observed that 21 percent of the nation’s households are food insecure while 69 percent is living below the poverty line, based on an approach that measures a household’s capacity to access food (purchase power), dietary diversity and production levels. According to Swazi VAC (2006), approximately 40 percent of the poor were not accessing sufficient food, with a further 40 percent receiving food aid.

 Of the 69 percent people living below poverty line, most of them are children.  Malnutrition of children under 5 years has remained one of the major indicators for people who suffer hunger. Present statistics indicate that 39 percent of under-Fives are stunted and this has a huge impact on the MDG goal on infant mortality.

 The Government of Swaziland has been wrestling with the issue of poverty alleviation, reduction and its eventual eradication for four decades. In recent years, the urge for urgent measures to combat absolute poverty has gained momentum. A major initiative in this regard is the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which, in Goal 1, committed countries to half absolute poverty over 1990-2015. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) to which Swaziland is a party, also commits countries to combat poverty not least through improved governance and via increased regional economic cooperation and integration. Swaziland has captured the gist of the international and regional development frameworks through the development of the Poverty Reduction Strategy and Action Plan (PRSAP).

 
Current Policies

Swaziland aims at reducing absolute poverty by half by 2015 and its eradication by 2022 as per the MDGs and National Development Strategy (NDS) targets, respectively. The NDS, which was adopted in 1999.  also seeks by that year to have transformed  the country into a 21^st century culturally united, integrated and politically stable Kingdom ranking amongst the top 10 percent of the medium  human development  countries.  This target is, however, a daunting one considering the reality that, as the 2007 MDG Progress Report  showed,  unless the development tempo is expedited  and the HIV and AIDS  pandemic tackled, Swaziland is likely to attain only three MDGs by 2015 (i.e. universal primary education,  gender equity and women empowerment, and   environmental sustainability). Swaziland will certainly not attain MDG1 on the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. Nor will it be able to ‘halt and reverse’ the spread of HIV and AIDS (MDG6), which is central to addressing poverty and hunger and, indeed, many of the other goals. Government policies have also been guided by global frameworks such as the MDGs and the 6 Dakar Education for All (EFA) goals.

Current Strategies

Given the global and national efforts to make poverty history, several efforts have gone into addressing this problem.  In this regard, the PRSAP is a major policy and strategic document that serves to inform national and sector policies, strategies and programmes. The PRSAP has six pillars, namely, macro-economic stability and accelerated economic growth based on broad participation; fair distribution of the benefits of growth through fiscal policy; empowering the poor to generate income and reduce inequalities; human capital development; improving the quality of life of the poor; and improving governance and strengthening institutions. The poverty focus in the NDS is also in line with the MDGs. Articulated as a pro-poor framework, key NDS macro and sector strategic areas include economic empowerment, agricultural development, and industrialization and environmental management. There is also the Government Programme of Action  2009-2013   whose priorities could be clustered into five main areas: (a). Prudent management of the economy to ensure macro-economic stability and rapid, sustainable economic growth and development; (b) poverty reduction, job creation and food security; (c) efficient access to, and delivery of, basic social services (education, health, water, etc); (d)strengthening governance institutions for improved governance; and, (e) disaster risk reduction especially for vulnerable groups.

Development Challenges

Structural Economic Inequalities

Income Inequalities

Both the 1995 and 2001 Swaziland Household Income and Expenditure Survey (SHIES) showed skewed income inequalities. It was estimated that 10 percent of the population controls 40 percent of the wealth, while the poorest 40 percent control only 14 percent of the wealth.  Partly because of low incomes and other structural constraints, the poor have limited access to quality services. According to SHIES, 70 percent of the population currently lives and derives its livelihood from activities under SNL where poverty levels are high. In 2001 the Gini coefficient was very high – at 0.50 and 0.45 in urban and rural areas respectively, while the overall Gini coefficient was 0.51.

Weak social systems

 Pressure on the social protection system has been worsened by HIV and AIDS, which has contributed immensely to the weakening of the traditional extended family system. It is important to ensure that the assistance in the form of care extended to people living with HIV and AIDS does not weaken further the traditional care systems. 

 There are major challenges in the area of social protection especially in the light of the functional stress currently being suffered by both the traditional and modern systems of social welfare provisioning. Mechanisms for registering those that deserve Government support due to their social and/or economic conditions has been daunting, an aspect that has brought about challenges of access to what is available. The current weak planning capacity for social services provisioning significantly explain this problem. The absence of effectively decentralised systems of delivery has also complicated the challenges at this level. The increased disease burden worsened by the HIV and AIDS pandemic has translated into increased demand for social protection from a system that is ill-equipped to handle the tide of unfulfilled expectations.  

 Inequalities and Discrimination of the Poor and Disadvantaged Groups

Lack of access to, and control of, productive assets such as land and water for the poor’s sustainable livelihoods and lack of power and capacity to participate in policy-making and decisions affecting their destiny is central to the disempowerment that explains low human development in Swaziland.  Traditional land is essentially in the hands of men. Women and poor unmarried men have difficulties accessing it, if at all. Furthermore, they lack collateral to access credit, and the banks are not very amenable to lending to women even if they had the necessary credentials without their husband’s consent. The challenge here is how best to empower the poor and vulnerable groups with the necessary knowledge and skills to make a difference.

 Limited Trade for poverty reduction

Swaziland is very much engaged in regional trade initiatives through its membership of SACU, SADC, and COMESA. It is also involved in international trade. But little effort is being made to widen markets through promotion of internal trade and to improve the quality of products produced in the informal sector for export (e.g. crafts). There is a possibility of Swaziland tapping on “the trade for aid” agenda where it could access resources to promote its trade agenda.  Cultural tourism is an area that could also be quite promising given the Kingdom’s acknowledged leadership in preserving its cultural heritage.

 Weak Capacity for Labour and Employment Creation

Employment opportunities in Swaziland are not increasing not least because of high new entrants into the labour market (youths under 30 years constitute about 70 percent of the population)  ; nor is the country putting much attention to the improvement of working conditions to ensure ‘decent work,’ and to effectively address HIV and AIDS issues at the workplace.  One drawback is the poor relations between Government and the Unions. A tripartite alliance of Government, Employers and Labour promises to improve industrial relations and steer improved employment-generating opportunities. Swaziland is also suffering from a huge brain drain of doctors, nurses, engineers and other professionals for “greener pastures” especially in South Africa and the United Kingdom.

Environmental Degradation and Climate Change

According to the 2007 MDG Report, Swaziland is likely to achieve MDG 7 on environmental sustainability and access to clean water. Nevertheless, there are emerging concerns around air pollution and climate change which need to be addressed. In this regard, the strengthening of the country’s capacity for environmental Impact assessment (EIA) becomes cardinal both to ensure that environmental regulations are adhered to and to avoid delays in the initiation of development projects as a result of lack of an acceptable EIA.

 Potential Areas of Cooperation

Taking into account the current situation, including the outstanding challenges, the following offer opportunities for cooperation in the area of poverty reduction between the Government of Swaziland and many of its stakeholders, including the UN System.

1.      Strengthen the Integration of the Poor in the National Economy: Support the creation of opportunities for production value chain in a way that allows the poor to benefit from their economic activities.  It also entails the creation of an environment for pro-poor growth through PRSAP as the appropriate tool to achieve pro-poor growth.

 2.      Support National Efforts to Address Structural Economic Inequalities: Support economic diversification through well targeted studies and pilot interventions that assist smallholder producers improve their productivity and, consequently, their incomes. Support towards the creation of opportunities for access to irrigation facilities should be among the interventions that target the poor in the disadvantaged regions.  

 3.      Support towards the enhancement of Social Protection Systems: Support Government effort in the design effective social protection systems targeting different levels and categories of the poor and vulnerable, including PLWHA and the elderly. 

4.      Reduce dependence on rain-fed agriculture and increase agricultural production: The current High dependence on rain-fed agricultural production has been conspicuous in the drought prone areas, where hunger and poverty have been in rampant. The challenge therefore is to establish irrigation schemes/development to small-holder farmers so as to increase their yields/productivity.

 5.      Promotion of Trade for Poverty Reduction: To enhance incomes that support the livelihood of the poor, support the building of the requisite capacity of the relevant arms of Government that facilitate the widening of markets through the promotion of internal trade, targeting SMEs and those in the informal sector. This should include support for advocacy and production and informal trade-related studies. Added to this should be the facilitation of the development of a broad-based and employment generating growth strategy that addresses the concerns of smallholder agriculture.

 6.      Studies on the Effects of Environmental Degradation and Climate Change: Support the country’s capacity for environmental impact assessment (EIA) and the enforcement of regulations that prevent human activities that degrade the environment in an unsustainable manner.

 7.      Building Strong Partnerships with other Stakeholders: Partnering with local communities and grassroots organisations in the areas of the design, implementation and monitoring of poverty reduction programme.

 8.      Building Planning Capacity: Strengthening the annual planning and budgetary process through support for the establishment and/or smooth functioning of Sector Working Groups (SWGs) and their coordination so as to improve participatory planning and programme implementation.  The adoption of the MGD-Based Planning is recommended. This calls upon the Government to have a long-term vision that is consistent with the Millennium Declaration, based on nationally-determined priorities, that is supported by medium-term cross-sectoral strategies, which are measured against progress towards concrete MDG outcomes.