Climate change is one of the biggest challenges and threats that humanity has ever faced. It has been acknowledged as “one of the greatest challenges of our time” by the United Nations. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines climate change as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”.1 This definition slightly differs from the definition of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which refers to climate change as “a change in the state of the climate that can be identified by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer”. 2 The IPCC’s definition therefore refers to any change in climate over time, irrespective of the causes, whether due to natural variability or anthropogenic causes.
Climate change has largely resulted from anthropogenic influences on the climate system. In 2014, the IPCC reported that human influence on the climate system is clear, and that recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. These influences have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems. These impacts necessitate global actions to mitigate its causes, adapt to, and cope with the impact thereof. These actions are being taken through commitments to international instruments such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol. 3 It has been acknowledged that a certain amount of climate change is apparently unavoidable, regardless of reductions in emissions, thus necessitating adaptation.4 Human adaptation to a changing environment has been going on for millennia, but the current scenario calls for a sense of urgency.5
Namibia ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1995 as a Non-Annex I Party. Namibia therefore has an obligation to submit information in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 1 of the UNFCCC. Such Reports include the National inventory of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by sources and removals by sinks GHGs, and also National Communications to the Convention. Namibia acceded to the Kyoto Protocol in 2003. The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that sets binding targets for industrialised countries (Annex 1 countries) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to an average of 5% against 1990 levels over a five-year period, between 2008 and 2012.
Namibia’s Initial National Communication (INC) to the Conference of Parties of the UNFCCC was submitted in 20026 in accordance with decisions taken at various COPs to the UNFCCC.
The Second National Communication (SNC) was submitted in 2011.7 The Third National Communication is due to be submitted by the end of 2015. However, with the adoption of the Cancun Agreements at COP16 in 2011 held in Mexico, the reporting by non-Annex I Parties in national communications, including national GHG inventories, should also include information on mitigation actions, their effects and support received. Such Parties should also submit Biennial Update Reports (BURs). Thus, Namibia submitted its first BUR in 2014.8 According to the requirements, BURs should contain updates on national GHG inventories, information on mitigation actions, needs and support received and institutional arrangements done by the Party, and should be submitted every two years. The Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) through the Directorate of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Division of Multilateral Environmental Agreements, is responsible for overseeing the coordination of climate change issues in Namibia.
Despite its insignificant contributions to greenhouse gas emissions, southern Africa is very susceptible to the impacts of climate change, including sea level rise, increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events such as floods and droughts. Southern Africa is already a largely water-stressed region, with high frequencies of drought. Climate change is exacerbating this problem, considering that the region’s susceptibility in the agricultural sector is rooted in its widespread rain-fed agriculture.9 The vulnerability of the region’s agricultural sector to climate change has been well documented in, amongst others, the National Communications to the UNFCCC (e.g. Botswana (2001), Mozambique (2003), South Africa (2000) and Zimbabwe (1998)). Moreover, scientific modelling suggests that southern Africa will be hit harder by climate change than most regions of the globe, becoming hotter and drier.10
In many countries of the region, close to 70% of the population lives in rural areas where their direct dependence on the natural ecosystem with its goods and services is high. The impacts of climate change are more pronounced in these rural communities, who are often poor and marginalised. Their livelihood is largely dependent on agriculture. Studies have identified seven sectors where Namibia is most vulnerable to climate change. These include water resources, marine resources, agriculture, biodiversity and ecosystems, coastal zones and systems, health, and energy. Therefore, Namibia has to take measures and actions designed to mitigate the effects of climate change and to enable communities to cope with and adapt to its effects.
This section of the chapter highlights the projected changes in climate in southern Africa and place Namibia in this context. The vulnerability of Namibia to climate change and its effects on various sectors of the economy and on biodiversity are also highlighted. Measures taken by the Namibian Government and other stakeholders to deal with the challenges of climate change are also summarised.
2 Namibia’s Contribution to Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are categorised into three main groups according to differing commitments. Thus, certain groups of developing countries are recognised by the UNFCCC as being especially vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change, including countries with low-lying coastal areas and those prone to desertification and drought. These are classified as non-Annex 1 countries. Most developing countries, including Namibia are categorised as non-Annex 1 countries. According to the UNFCCC process, for countries in this category the baseline values for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is pegged at 1994 as the base year. The IPCC Guidelines11 require that emission estimates should be compiled for the sectors of Energy, Industrial Processes and Product Use (IPPU), Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) and Waste.
The abundant scientific literature on the subject indicates clear evidence that the global climate has changed and will continue to change over the next century, both globally and locally, due to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These increases are mainly due to human activity, most notably the use of fossil fuels. IPCC (2001) reported that Africa’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is insignificant, being 50-100 times less than Europe’s and 100 to 200 times less than America’s. Just like many other countries in southern Africa, except South Africa, Namibia’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is insignificant.12
Namibia neither produces fossil fuels of its own, nor refines any fossil fuels though explorations have been taking place. Therefore, only fossil fuel consumed and combusted in the country was used to estimate emissions in the energy sector under Fuel Combustion Activities. 13 The Namibian economy is not energy-intensive, as it relies primarily on agriculture, fisheries and mining without much secondary processing.14 Du Plessis15 did a greenhouse gas emissions inventory for 1994, while Hartz and Smith16 did a comprehensive review of the greenhouse gas inventory of Namibia for 2000 and compared this with the inventory of 1994. They analysed anthropogenic sources and sinks for greenhouse gases from energy industries, manufacturing industries and construction, the transport sector, the commercial/institutional sector, the residential sector, agriculture, fishing, forestry and other sectors. They compared greenhouse gas emissions of carbon dioxide (CO²), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N²O) for 1994 and 2000 per sector. The recent analysis indicated that Namibia remained a net GHG sink in 2010.17 In fact, the sink capacity increased despite a widening of the scope of analysis compared to the year 2000 and 1994. The net removal of CO² reached 22,895.53 Gg. Total CH4 emissions was 204.86 Gg, N²O stood at 6.81 Gg while the indirect GHGs nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) and sulphur dioxide (SO²) were at 35.07, 314.92, 34.05 and 3.76 Gg respectively.18
The energy sector produced 2200 Gg CO²-equivalents in 2000 compared to 1905 Gg CO²- equivalents in 1994.19 However, in 2010, the Energy sector emitted 2,561.49 Gg, the Industrial Processes and Product Use (IPPU) sector 2,220.98 Gg and the Waste sector 2.47 Gg.20 The transport sector is a significant emitter of CO² (about 50% of total national CO² emissions in 1994) because of the great distances travelled in order to distribute goods and services within the country. This is quite clear in the energy review for Namibia done by Capôco et al.21 The agricultural sector contributed 6,738 Gg CO²-equivalents in 2000 compared to 3,712 Gg CO²- equivalents in 1994 while the energy sector contributed 2,200 Gg CO²-equivalents in 2000 compared to 1,905 Gg CO²-equivalents in 1994. As Namibia cultivates only a very small amount of rice in flooded fields (which has potential for significant methane production), it means the major sources of methane are domestic livestock (more from enteric fermentation in livestock and less from manure management), burning of the veld, burning of agricultural residues and CH4 from agricultural soils. Methane accounted for emissions of 4,302.1 Gg CO²- eq, CO² for 4,784.9 and N²O for 2,109.9 Gg CO²-eq. The important sink (27,680.46 Gg) of CO² that the sector AFOLU represents shifted the net balance to make Namibia a net sink of 16,483.49 Gg CO²-eq for 2010. Emissions of NO² are small and mostly derived from the burning of savannas. Recent analyses now show that the Agriculture, Forest and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector was a net sink of 27,680.47 Gg CO² in 2010.22 Waste contributed 180 Gg CO²-equivalents in 2000 while the 1994 value stood at 63 Gg CO²-equivalents. Methane emission by 2010 indicated that in general the AFOLU sector topped the different sectors for CH4 with 194.79 Gg followed by the Waste sector with 6.89 Gg, the Energy sector with 3.11 Gg and IPPU with 0.07 Gg.23 The Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use sector emitted 95% of the total 204.86 Gg of CH4 followed by the Waste and Energy Sectors.
It is clear that greenhouse gas emissions in Namibia have increased between 1994 and 2000. However, land-use change and forestry have had the effect of removing CO² with values of - 10,560 Gg CO²-equivalents and -5,716 Gg CO²-equivalents in 2000 and 1994, respectively. Thus, there has been a net effect of -1,442 Gg CO²-equivalents in 2000. With the data given above for 2010, this means that Namibia has been a net sink of CO². Vegetation growth captures CO² and increases the rate of transpiration. The clearing of vegetation has the opposite effect. Namibia has a significant land area that is bush encroached by species such as Acacia mellifera, Terminalia sericea, and Dichrostachys cinerea. Bush encroachment results from commercial ranching practices which lead to overgrazing and upsetting the natural balance between woody plants and grasses such that the woody component proliferates. Though agriculturally undesirable, the impact of bush encroachment is highly significant for Namibia’s greenhouse gas emissions profile because bush-encroached areas serve as huge sinks for CO². It remains to be seen how the on-going de-bushing programmes will impact this situation.
In the final analysis, therefore, it is clear that Namibia contributes little to global greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, Namibia is estimated to be a net sink for CO², in 1994, in 2000 and in 2010, mainly due to increasing woody biomass in the rangelands due to bush encroachment. The Table below presents an overall comparison of the aggregated emissions by Sector and by GHG24 and serves to emphasise the fact that Namibia is a net sink.
AFOLU (combined with Agriculture)
CH4 (in CO²-eq)
N²O (in CO²-eq)
Total GHG Emissions
Net GHG Emissions
3 Climate Trends and Predictions
Future trends in climate are predicted using modelling approaches based on past and present patterns. There are several climate models used worldwide but all of them provide the basis for projections of future climate change scenarios, the most used being General Circulation Models (GCMs). The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report25 discusses and evaluates these models at length while the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report highlights the current situation and future trends in global climate. The heterogeneity in the new generation of climate models and an increasing emphasis on estimates of uncertainty in the projections raise questions about how best to evaluate and combine model results in order to improve the reliability of projections.26 GCMs work on a spatial scale of 200-300km, therefore this limits their projections for changes at a local scale.27 Nevertheless, GCMs remain a fundamental tool used for assessing the causes of past change and projecting changes in the future.
There is undisputed evidence for climate change at global level, much of which is attributed to human activity. However, understanding how global climate change may manifest itself at the local level is still a challenge.28 At a global level, it is widely recognised that there has been a detectable rise in temperature over the last few decades. This rise in temperatures cannot be explained unless human influence is taken into account. 29 The regional distribution of temperature increases is not uniform; some regions have experienced greater change than others.30 Globally, the rate of average temperature increase has been quicker during the latter half of the 20th century than before. This increase in the rate of change is expected to continue, potentially resulting in more rapid changes of climate in the future.31 Surface temperature is projected to rise over the 21st century under all assessed emission scenarios in GCMs.32 This will result in more frequent heat waves which will last longer, and that extreme precipitation events will become more intense and frequent in many regions. The ocean will continue to warm and acidify, and global mean sea level to rise. In fact, the IPCC warns that continued anthropogenic emissions of GHGs will cause further warming and long-lasting changes in all components of the climate system which would increase the likelihood of severe and irreversible impacts for people and ecosystems.33
There is greater variability in global rainfall, therefore changes in rainfall are harder to detect, both spatially and temporally. Changes in global rainfall patterns have been detected in many parts of the globe. In southern Africa, there have been moderate decreases in annual rainfall and there have also been detectable increases in the number of heavy rainfall events in the region.34 Trends also indicate an increase in the length of the dry season and increases in average rainfall intensity,35 suggesting a shorter but more intense rainfall season. Other aspects of global change are increases in intensity and spatial extent of droughts since the mid-1970s; increases in the duration of heat waves during the latter half of the 20th century; shrinking of arctic ice caps since 1978; widespread shrinking of glaciers, especially mountain glaciers in th tropics; increase in upper ocean heat content; increases in sea level at a rate of 1.8mm per year between 1961 and 2003, with a faster rate of 3.1mm per year between 1993 and 2003.36
There is only a limited amount of studies detailing historical climate trends involving Namibia. Due to the arid nature of the country, natural variability is extremely high and is complicated by decadal variability.37 There is evidence that changes in temperatures in Namibia have followed global trends as described above. There has been a tendency for warmer temperatures in the latter half of the 20th century, which is generally 1-1.2°C warmer than at the beginning of that century. However, this magnitude of warming is greater than the global mean temperature change,38 which is worrisome for Namibia. An increase of 1°C generally implies an increase in evaporation of 5%. Some literature put it at a maximum temperature increase of 2-6°C in the interior of the country.39 For a country with already high evaporation rates (reaching more than 2,660mm per annum in some areas) this has serious consequences, as will be discussed in a separate section below.
Meteorological data for 25 years from the Namibia Meteorological Services indicates that there have been consistent increases in daily maximum temperatures at seven stations (Lüderitz, Keetmanshoop, Windhoek, Hosea Kutako International Airport, Sitrusdal, Grootfontein and Okaukuejo).40 The frequency of days with maximum temperatures above 25°C has significantly increased over this period. Midgley et al. 41 examined long-term
temperature and rainfall records from 15 weather stations that had data with durations of between 25 and 60 years in Namibia and the Northern Cape (South Africa), and 53% of the stations showed significant increases in temperature over their recording period, while none showed a significant decline. There has also been a decrease in the frequency of days with minimum temperatures below 5°C.42 Modelling changes in temperature in Namibia suggest a minimum towards the coast and an increase further inland during all seasons, with minimum expected increases during summer of 1-2°C and maximum changes of 2-3.5°C.43 Generally, it is predicted that Namibia will become hotter with predicted increases in temperatures of between 1°C and 3.5°C in summer and 1°C to 4°C in winter over the period 2046-2065.44
Rainfall patterns are a bit difficult to decipher compared to temperatures. The long-term rainfall records for Namibia (1915 to 1997) suggest an overall national mean of 272mm. In the period from 1981 to 1996 only two of the 16 years had rainfall above this mean.45 The variation in rainfall year-to-year is extremely high (in excess of 30% everywhere in the country, rising to 70% in southern Namibia and 100% in the Namib Desert). DRFN and CSAG46 reported that there are no obvious trends in rainfall patterns over a 100-year period, between 1901 and 2000 in Namibia. However, there have been significant increases in the length of the dry season and decreases in the number of consecutive wet days in some areas.
The onset of the rainy season is delayed in the north and the end of the rains is earlier than before. 47 Using different climate modelling scenarios, for the winter period, the lower estimates of change suggest a drying in the south and wetting in the north, whilst upper estimates of change suggest a wetting over most of the country except in the far southwest where reduced rainfall is projected.48 During summer, the lower estimate of change suggests drying over most of the country except for an increase in rainfall over the coastal regions.
Recent experiences by local communities combined with meteorological data confirm real changes in climate patterns over the last few decades in Namibia. Delayed on-set of the rainy season and the shortening of the growing season have been reported. There have been unbearably hot summer temperatures and more frequent droughts. Communities in the northern and north-eastern parts of the country have experienced more severe flooding which has caused significant suffering among local communities. Nunes et al.49 conducted a study in Ohangwena where communities reported variability in rainfall patterns characterised by high intensity of rainfall over a shorter period of time, late coming of the rain, quick disappearance of surface water, less cold winters than before and much stronger and hotter summer sun.
These trends in rainfall and temperature patterns, observed by communities in northern Namibia, were confirmed through trend analysis by Mitchell et al.50 of the period 1900 to 2000.
4 Potential Impacts of Climate Change
Arid environments are areas that receive less than 250mm of rain per annum, semi-arid environments receive between 250mm and 500mm and hyper-arid environments receive less than 100mm per annum. In Namibia, annual rainfall is low and highly variable between years, ranging from an average of 25mm in the southwest to 700mm in the northeast. Thus, the greatest proportion of the Namibian environment is arid to semi-arid. The coefficient of variation of rainfall is also very high, ranging from 25% in the northeast to more than 80% along the coast in the west. Not only does Namibia receive little rain, it also experiences high rates of evaporation due to high solar radiation, low humidity and high diurnal temperatures. This makes the arid nature of the country even worse because the availability of water to plants, animals and humans is limited. It is estimated that only about 1% of rainfall ends up replenishing the groundwater aquifers.51 This makes the Namibian environment harsh for most organisms, including people. This aridness of the country is caused by weather patterns prevailing in regions with oceanic cold currents – the cold Benguela Current that flows north along the west coast – and situated between 20° and 30° North and South, where dry air of the Hadley Cells descends.
Global climate change has resulted in changes to the normal patterns of weather and climate in Namibia, causing significant stress on various economic sectors of the country. The natural conditions described above make Namibia very susceptible to the effects of climate change because it is already a stressed system. In general, most countries in southern Africa are vulnerable to climate change effects but to varying degrees depending on local conditions. The likelihood that an individual or group of people will be exposed to, and will be adversely affected by new climatic circumstances, depends on the characteristics of the individuals or groups in terms of their capacity to anticipate, cope with, resist and recover from the impacts of environmental change.52 The capacity to adapt to climate change varies among regions and socio-economic groups in the sense that those with the least capacity to adapt are generally the most vulnerable. This also depends on the resources available for mitigation and adaptation.53
Africa will be negatively affected by climate change, more so because of the poor socio-economic conditions which exacerbate the vulnerability of the continent’s population. This is particularly so because vulnerability to environmental change does not only depend on changes in frequency or duration of climatic conditions but also on the capacity to respond adequately to those changes.54 Poverty and prevailing levels of income disparity influence the resource base of households and this determines the resilience of households to deal with impacts of climate change. Africa’s capacity to respond is severely hampered by lack of resources. Climate change will affect the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), particularly the goals concerning the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, reducing child mortality, combating disease, and ensuring environmental sustainability.55 There is no doubt that climate change will also affect the attainment of the recently adopted United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for the same reasons. Namibia’s situation is not very different from neighbouring southern African countries. If anything, the local environmental conditions make Namibia even more vulnerable. Namibia is an upper-middle-income country with US$4,820 per capita GDP,56 with about 19.5% of households living in poverty57. There are considerable income disparities as reflected by the Gini-coefficient of 0.5971.58 Being a country that is highly dependent on its natural resource base of minerals, fisheries, agriculture and wildlife, coupled with variable rainfall, frequent droughts and reliance on subsistence agriculture, Namibia is highly vulnerable to climate change.
DRFN and CSAG59 critically reviewed the vulnerability of Namibia to the effects of climate change. They compared mainly the Zambezi and Karas regions, in the northeast and south, respectively. These two regions differ in their average climatic conditions and livelihood systems. Zambezi receives higher rainfall than Karas. Livelihood systems in Zambezi are based on subsistence-oriented maize cultivation, which is combined with a small number of goats and cattle for domestic purposes, approximately supporting 12,000 farming households.60
Livelihoods in Zambezi used to be flexibly organised around seasonal movement of water but nowadays the region is considered vulnerable to flooding of wetlands.61 In Zambezi natural shocks such as floods for those living in low-lying wetlands, droughts and climate change, livestock diseases and pests are factors that make people vulnerable. Alcohol abuse enhances people’s vulnerability considerably.62 In 2009, close to 700,000 people were either directly or indirectly affected by floods in the north and north-eastern parts of Namibia which cost an estimated N$1.7 billion (1% of GDP) worth of damages and losses, both public and private.63 On the other hand, natural conditions and livelihood systems in southern Namibia are very different from Zambezi. Rural production is dominated by raising small stock such as goats and sheep. In the Karas Region, vulnerability is related to loss of employment, disability and sickness (including HIV and AIDS), having many dependents and orphans.64 Overall, it is predicted that there will be a 10% decrease in rainfall in the northern and southern regions of Namibia, and a 20% decrease in the central regions, by 2050, and that these figures will worsen to 20% and 30% respectively by 2080.65
A number of sectors of the Namibian economy were identified as being the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, namely agriculture, biodiversity and ecosystems, coastal zone, health, marine resources and water. These are discussed below.
Agricultural production is closely linked to climate, especially precipitation and temperature. The Namibian climate is characterised by semi-arid and hyper-arid conditions and highly variable rainfall (though about 8% of the country is classified as semi-humid or sub-tropical). These conditions alone pose a great challenge to agricultural production in the country. Yet, agriculture is the 6th largest contributor to GDP. The sector contributes 4.5-7% to GDP but supports over 70% of the population.66 The Namibia Agronomic Board67 reports that the contribution of this sector has been declining in recent years for reasons that may include impacts of climate change. 56.7% of Namibians live in rural areas68 and the main basis for their livelihoods is subsistence agriculture69. Newsham and Thomas noted that smallholder farming is an important source of livelihood for the majority of Namibians living in rural areas.70 However, some urban dwellers are also full-time, part-time or weekend farmers. Crop production plays an important role in household food security, particularly in the northern parts of the country where pearl millet (mahangu) is a subsistence dry-land crop and a major staple food. However, mahangu harvests have been affected by extensive flooding and poor yields in the last few years,71 an indication of possible impacts of climate change on crop production. Maize, wheat, rice and other grains and horticultural crops are also produced. Livestock production (especially cattle, goats and sheep) is the driver of the agricultural economy, with meat being a major export of Namibia.
There have been attempts to model the potential impacts of climate change on agricultural production,72 but such attempts have been constrained by the lack of reliable data (in some cases) as well as the inherent uncertainties within the General Circulation Models (GCMs) themselves when applied to a local scale. A modelling attempt for Rundu, in the Kavango East Region, has indicated that the number of days exceeding 34°C during the six hottest months of the year will increase from 67 to 118 between 2046 and 2065.73 This means that even a hardy crop such as mahangu will struggle to withstand such prolonged dry periods. Current climatic trends suggest a shorter growing season with a late onset of the rains and an early cessation of the rains. This will significantly impact on agricultural production.
During the 2008/9 season, the Agronomic Board of Namibia74 observed that “floods and droughts can easily occur simultaneously and even within close geographic proximity, as we have seen for the past few years”. They contend that grain production, especially mahangu surplus production, could seriously be hampered if solutions in terms of crop insurance, production methods, cultivars, alternative crops, and financing schemes are not found. These are not encouraging signs as climate projections indicate that the growing season will start later than usual in the northeast, with onset of rains delayed by about half a day per year (meaning that currently the season starts about 20 days later than during the last century). This indicates early cessation of the growing season and significant negative impacts on the agriculture sector.75
The livestock subsector will also be negatively affected by climate change. Grazing rangelands are affected by alterations in precipitation regimes, temperature and atmospheric concentrations of CO². All these factors affect net above-ground primary productivity (NPP). There is likely going to be shifts in ratios of C3/C4 species of grasslands, changes in evapotranspiration and run-off and changes in forage quality. If the quantity and quality of NPP is reduced as predicted, then cattle production will also decline. Changes in climate will lead to alterations in the boundaries between rangelands and other biomes such as deserts and forests through shifts in species composition and indirectly through changes in wildfire regimes and opportunistic cultivation. Midgley et al’s 76 modelling analysis projected significant changes in vegetation structure and function in several areas of Namibia by 2080, where arid vegetation types will increase in cover by almost 20% by 2050, and up to 43% by 2080 in the absence of CO² fertilisation effect.
Heat and water stress on livestock will lead to decreases in feed intake, milk production and rates of reproduction.77 Higher average temperatures have been reported to reduce conception rates in cattle, largely due to the positive correlation between high rectal temperatures and lower fertility rates, and partly as a consequence of appetite-suppressing tendencies of heat stress.78 Changes in climate may affect the distribution of livestock diseases as well as the timing of their outbreaks or their intensity. For vector-borne diseases, the distribution patterns of the vectors may be altered by changes in temperature and rainfall, thus influencing potential distribution of diseases. It is reported that climate appears to be more frequently associated with the seasonal occurrence of non-vector borne diseases than their spatial distribution.79 The changes that may be necessary in Namibian farming systems to enable adaptation to climate change were discussed by Kuvare et al.80
4.3 Biodiversity, Ecosystems and Tourism
Despite the harsh arid climatic conditions described above, the Namibian landscape supports a remarkable biodiversity, especially its plant species. More than 4500 plant taxa have been recorded,81 almost 700 of which are endemic to the country, and a further 275 of which are Namib Desert endemics shared with southern Angola.82 The endemism of plant species is concentrated in five centres, namely the Kaokoveld in the northwest, the Otavi highland in the Kalahari basin in the east, the Kavango regions in the northeast, the Auas Mountains on the western edge of the central plateau, and the succulent-rich southern Namib.83 These landscapes and biodiversity are important tourist attractions for the country.
The natural ecosystems of Namibia are also vulnerable to climate change, given that the biodiversity of neighbouring South Africa has been found to be vulnerable to climate change because the two countries share similar bio climates (southern regions of Namibia and north-western South Africa), and they possesses similar biome types. Before Midgley et al.’s84 assessment, there had been no previous quantified assessments of vulnerability of plant biodiversity to climate change in Namibia. Projections for warming and drying are harsh for central and western parts of southern Africa, with extreme warming centred on Botswana.85 Terrestrial areas that are particularly vulnerable to climate change are the western escarpment and the south-western succulent Karoo.86
Midgley et al87 used a dynamic global vegetation model (DGVM) to explore the effects of climate change on ecosystem structure, function and dominance of plant functional types in Namibian ecosystems. The main plant functional types they analysed were broad categories such as C4 grasses, deciduous trees and C3 herbaceous and shrub types. Elevated CO² levels that may result from anthropogenic causes potentially increase the water-use and nutrient-use efficiency of plants that use the C3 photosynthetic pathway,88 and this will favour woody plants with a high degree of investment in carbon-rich support tissue (such as trees) relative to herbaceous species.89 Seven vegetation structural classes are defined as occurring in Namibia under the current and future conditions by the DGVM, namely desert, arid shrub land/grassland, grassy savanna, mixed savanna, woody savanna, mixed shrub land/grassland and C3 shrub land/grassland. Projections of impacts on total vegetation cover were monitored through analyses of changes in bare ground and leaf area index (LAI).
Results of projections of the impacts of climate change on biodiversity indicated a reduction in vegetation cover over the central highlands by 2050, with further reductions to 2080. The greatest absolute cover reductions are projected for the Kaokoveld region in the extreme northwest, and in the Kalahari basin in the southeast, with less significant reductions recorded at higher altitudes in the central highlands. Midgley et al.90 also showed that direct effects of rising atmospheric CO² on total cover were not significant and projected changes in LAI were more diverse, indicating significant reductions in areas of highest decrease in vegetation cover as expected. However, such areas are of limited spatial extent, and much of the country is projected to experience LAI changes of between +10% and –10%. There will be an expansion of the two most arid vegetation types, desert and arid shrub land/grassland, mainly at the expense of grassy savanna and mixed savanna vegetation types. The arid vegetation types are projected to increase by almost 20% by 2050, and up to 43% by 2080, in the absence of a CO² fertilisation effect, but with CO² amelioration, the expansion of desert in 2080 is reduced from 43% to just less than 30%.91
The current vegetation is dominated by grassy savanna but this is projected to decline substantially by 2050, with significant cover and biomass reductions in the central highlands and north-eastern plains, a scenario which will be exacerbated by effects of elevated CO² by 2080. The effect of elevated CO² is by facilitating the increase of currently relatively scarce C3-dominated vegetation types, woody savanna, mixed grassland, and C3 grassland/shrub land. This means that currently uncommon vegetation types will become widespread in the north-eastern part of the country, suggesting a strong potential for bush encroachment in these regions. In addition, the potential fire frequency is predicted to increase somewhat in the northeast region under the elevated CO² scenarios only. The distribution of deciduous trees will also decline in extent – they will suffer a reduction in both biomass and cover throughout their current range, showing a general retreat towards the north-eastern Kalahari. Projections also suggest that NPP will be significantly reduced by between 0.5 and 1t/ha in the central-north-western regions and by up to 0.5t/ha in the north-eastern Kalahari.92 Overall, the SDGVM projections reveal a significant negative impact of climate change on ecosystem NPP, vegetation structure and cover, and the distribution of dominant plant functional types. These effects are strongest in the central/northwest regions and the north-eastern parts.
Impacts of climate change at species level will lead to high species losses, with mean species loss of between 40 and 50% by 2050 and between 50 and 60% by 2080.93 However, these patterns of species loss and turnover will vary markedly in space. There will also be significant changes in plant community composition resulting from these species losses. Species turnover ranges of between 40 and 70% were projected, with much of the change to occur under climate regimes projected for 2050. Projected local extinctions at the pixel scale, assuming that there are no species migrations, are in excess of 80% in the north-eastern and northern Kalahari, dropping to below 20% from the edge of the escarpment into the coastal desert zone.94 There will be high species turnover in the north-eastern parts of the country, with an overall trend of a reduction in turnover from northeast to west and south-west. The majority of species will suffer declining range size while a minority will experience significant increases in range size. This finding suggests that future climate change may be an advantage to a small subset of species that might be able to capitalise on the novel climatic conditions in this country, but that this will depend strongly on their migration capacity.95 Endemic species will have overall lower susceptibility to climate change (19% and 12% will be classified extinct and critically endangered, respectively by 2080) than non-endemic species. This is largely due to the fact that endemics are both arid-adapted and located in regions of lower projected climate change.
The tourism sector contributes significantly to the Namibia economy. In 2006, it contributed 14.2% to the GDP while the estimate for 2008 was 15.6%96 and was expected to be 19.9% in 2011 and 22.4% in 2017.97 The effects of climate change on ecosystems and biodiversity described above will negatively impact on tourism. Projected declines in vegetation cover in most parts, and significant changes in vegetation structure with associated changes in fauna will impact on tourism. Livelihoods of rural communities will be negatively affected since a significant number rely on tourism ventures within communal conservancies.
4.4 Coastal Zone
Worldwide, coastal areas are very important economic zones which provide many goods and services to humanity. About 38% of the world’s population lives within 100km of a coastal area. Yet these areas, too, are under serious threat from the effects of climate change. One of the impacts of climate change is a rising sea level due to melting glaciers and ice caps of the Arctic and Antarctica. Globally, the IPCC98 indicated that the sea level rose at a rate of 1.8mm per year between 1961 and 2003, with a faster rate of 3.1mm per year between 1993 and 2003.
Sea level is projected to rise by between 30cm and 100cm by the year 2100, relative to the 1990 level. The rate of rise is projected to be relatively steady, accelerating slightly over time, although storm surges are expected to be the main source of damage to coastal infrastructure. Coasts will be exposed to increasing risks of coastal erosion and by 2080 millions more people than today will experience floods every year due to sea level rise. The most affected people will be those in low-lying, densely-populated mega deltas of Asia and Africa.99 Namibia will not be spared from some of these effects.
Namibia’s coastline stretches some 1 800km long and consists of 78% sandy beaches, 16% rocky shores and 4% mixed sandy and rocky shores, with only 2% of the shore backed by lagoons. The coastline is very important for tourism and recreation activities, which contribute significantly to the Namibian economy. Four major towns are situated along the coast, namely Lüderitz, Walvis Bay, Swakopmund and Henties Bay. Walvis Bay is located between one and three metres above sea level, in a semi-sheltered bay surrounded by an erodible coastline. The coastal aquifers which supply water to the town are susceptible to salt intrusion which would be further exacerbated by sea level rise. A sea level rise of 0.3m, now regarded as virtually certain, will flood significant areas, and a one metre rise would inundate most of the town during high tide.100 The other three towns, Swakopmund, Henties Bay and Lüderitz, are less vulnerable to rising sea levels due to their relatively safe topographic positions. It was reported that in the near future, most of Namibia’s coastal towns would be able to deal with impacts of severe weather conditions but in the long-term they need to carefully plan adaptation strategies to deal with the effects of climate change.101 Walvis Bay was cited as particularly vulnerable and should safeguard its continued economic activity by properly planning for future effects. Overall, coastal areas will experience increased incidence of flooding and inundation.102
There is an intrinsic link between energy and development.103 This makes the impact of climate change on the energy sector an important one since a number of economic sectors are dependent on energy. The demand for energy is increasing due, partly, to the increase in human population. Poverty and lack of adaptive capacity and limited coping strategies by most rural communities in Namibia only serve to exacerbate the situation. These communities are very vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
About 78% of Namibia’s energy is imported as petroleum products, electricity and coal, while the remaining 22% is made up by biomass fuel (mostly wood).104 The bulk of this energy is consumed by the transport sector. While contributing between 8 and 16% to the GDP, the mining sector is also a major consumer of energy. Namibia imports most of its electricity but has limited local generation at the Van Eck coal-fired power station in Windhoek, the Paratus diesel-powered station at Walvis Bay and the Ruacana hydro-electric power station on the Kunene River. Recent droughts have severely reduced electricity generation from the Ruacan plant. Given the projected decline in rainfall and more frequent droughts that are likely to result from climate change, regional hydroelectric generation will be severely curtailed. In areas where rainfall is anticipated to increase in the tropical regions of southern Africa including the catchments of the Kunene River in Angola, there may be potential for increased generation of hydroelectricity. Energy consumption is projected to increase and the persistently high fuel prices will directly affect accessibility of transport, price of goods and services and the cost of living in general.
With plenty of sunshine most of the year, Namibia has great potential to develop solar-powered electricity. This is an option which has not been fully utilised, given the current looming energy crisis, not just in Namibia but in the while sub-region. Midgley et al.105 projected that bush encroachment may increase in some parts of the country as a result of climate change. This may provide firewood to local communities. However, care must be taken not to utilise it in a way that will increase greenhouse gas emissions and reduce the carbon sink of the country.
4.6 Human Health and Well-Being
Human health, well-being and livelihoods are strongly dependent upon the state of global ecological and biophysical systems. Climate change is one of the global change factors which have adverse effects on human health. Changes in temperature, precipitation and other factors may lead to short- and long-term changes in the physical environment, many of which may have direct and indirect impacts on human health.106 This may be through its impacts on aspects such as water quality and availability, nutrition status of humans, and distribution and abundance of vector organisms due to changing temperature and rainfall patterns. The impact of climate change on human health has increasingly attracted attention after it was highlighted in the IPCC’s First107 and Second108 Assessment Reports. In its Fourth and Fifth Assessment Reports, the IPCC projects that globally there will be increased malnutrition, diarrhoea, cardio-respiratory and infectious diseases; increased morbidity and mortality from heat waves, floods and droughts; changes in distribution of some vectors and substantial burden on health services.109 Young et al.110 reviewed existing knowledge on the impacts of climate change on health in the SADC region. They noted that there have been no substantial studies assessing the association between climate change and health in the SADC region, and where research has been done it focused only on infectious diseases (particularly malaria). Even then, very little has been done to determine the relationship between climate change and disease.
Namibia’s health system is decentralised to enable it to be responsive to the needs of the population. Thus, the public healthcare system is organised into directorates at the national and regional levels. The Government has invested tremendously in the healthcare system since independence. Despite this, general life expectancy has not improved, partly because of the HIV/AIDS pandemic.111 Young et al.112 reported that the infant mortality rate was 47 per 1,000
in 2007, down from 65 per 1,000 in 1990, and adult mortality (15-60 years old) was 365 per 1000 in 2007. The main causes of adult mortality are HIV and AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. The maternal mortality rate has been on the increase, from 225 per 100,000 live births in 1992 to 449 per 100,000 live births in 2007.113 Infant mortality is higher in rural areas and in the wetter north, compared to urban areas and the more arid south, with main causes of death being diarrhoea (42%), malnutrition (40%), malaria (32%) and acute respiratory infections (30%).114 These causes of death have a strong link to environmental influences, especially climatic factors. For instance, drought decreases the nutritional status of humans and reduces availability of clean water rendering the population vulnerable and susceptible to attacks by various infections.
There have been records of recent increases in the incidence of malaria in the country. This is consistent with a predicted increase in the area exposed to malaria where 60% of the population lives. This gives an indication of the magnitude of the impacts of changing temperature on the range of the Anopheles mosquito, the vector for the malaria parasite. Indeed, it has been reported that rising temperatures are likely going to lead to increased frequency, greater spread and increased transmission rates of vector borne diseases.115 Sleeping sickness, carried by the tsetse fly (Glossina morsitans), is currently not present in Namibia although the cattle version (nagana) occurs in eastern Zambezi.116 Both these forms of disease are projected to decrease under future climate projections because of a reduction in habitat availability for the tsetse fly. Government117 also predicts the possibility of incursion of lymphatic filariasis (elephantiasis), dengue fever and yellow fever from countries to the north with changes in climatic conditions.
Therefore, major impacts of climate change on health will result from decreasing crop yields and food security, increasing water scarcity in some areas, extreme weather events (floods, droughts, heat waves, etc.), and changes in the distribution patterns and abundance of parasites and disease vectors. In the final analysis, the effects of climate change on Namibia will increase the pressure on human health and other health-related aspects of the economy and may lead to an increase in disease burden in communities.
4.7 Fisheries and Marine Resources
Namibia’s fisheries sector is dependent upon the highly productive marine ecosystem driven by the upwelling of the cold, nutrient-rich Benguela Current. The upwelling is caused by the interaction of south-easterly winds with the north-flowing current and the topography of the seabed. Currently there are no reliable scientific projections to suggest either an increase or a decrease in the Benguela fisheries yield as a result of climate change.118 Links between environmental variability and fisheries dynamics are also poorly understood and large environmental anomalies or extreme events, such as the Benguela Niño, have negative impacts.119 Marine ecosystems continue to be regarded as vulnerable pending more conclusive studies. Recent studies have shown that sea surface temperatures over the northern Benguela region appear to have become persistently warmer since 1993, consistent with global predictions of rising surface water temperature. It is possible that observed reductions in pilchard stocks since 1993 could be partially explained by warmer seas.120
Any changes in the distribution and intensity of winds would affect the fisheries sector as it has direct impact on the upwelling dynamics of the Benguela system. Roux121 described four possible scenarios that could result from climate change. The first is a possible reduction in coastal upwelling intensity through a slackening of the south Atlantic trade wind circulation. This would reduce the productivity of the ecosystem and the species that characterise the Benguela system could suffer major reductions in stock size and distribution. The second would be an increase in average summer wind stress and coastal upwelling intensity which would enhance enrichment and potential primary production. This could benefit some pelagic species and their predators due to increased productivity. The third is that the frequency and severity of Benguela Niño events would increase, with a direct risk of large-scale population fluctuations, particularly of pelagic species. The fourth is a possible best-case scenario but probably the least possible where there would be low amplitude gradual affects that would lead to a succession of rapid regime shifts between semi-stable states of the system. These regime shifts would affect primarily the dominant pelagic species, which would in turn, induce large changes in the entire system.122
4.8 Water Resources
The agriculture sector is the major user of water in Namibia, consuming close to 75% of water in the country.123 Several other sectors such as mining (3.3%), services (2.9%) manufacturing (2.4%) and domestic (12.2%) sectors also have significant demands for water. Any changes that result in a decline in water supply will have serious repercussions on human livelihoods and the economy of the country.
Increases in temperature will have a marked increase in evaporation. It is estimated that for every degree of temperature rise, evaporation increases 5%. Therefore, there will be less water available for recharge and storage. The length of inundation of seasonally flooded terrestrial wetlands will therefore decrease due to increased evaporation. In some instances, this may lead to increased salt content of pans and pools and make them less suitable for human and animal consumption. Increased temperatures will also lead to increases in evaporation from plants, which will mean that plants will pump out more ground water, further depleting underground water. All this will lead to a reduction in the size and productivity of many wetlands,124 negatively affecting human livelihoods that are critically dependent on these wetlands.
It is predicted that rainfall over the Angolan catchments of the Zambezi, Kavango, Cuvelai and Kunene rivers will decrease by 10-20% for 2045-2065, leading to a 25% reduction in run-off and drainage into these river systems.125 Of all the rain that falls in Namibia, less than 1% recharges groundwater and only 2% remains as surface water storage while the rest evaporates.126 The whole of Namibia experiences a net water deficit, meaning that evaporation exceeds rainfall throughout Namibia, with average water deficit being highest in the southeast (over 2,300mm/year) and lowest in Zambezi (less than 1,300mm/year).127 Water deficit in southern areas ranges between 2,100mm/year to more than 2,500mm/year, resulting in most terrestrial wetlands being ephemeral. Predictions are that southern Africa will receive 10 to 20% less rainfall by 2050. Such reductions in areas with rainfall regimes of 400-1,000mm per annum may lead to a drop in perennial surface drainage of 75% and 25%, respectively by 2050.128 The magnitude of surface water shortage may even be higher in drier areas of Namibia, which actually form the bigger proportion of the country.
An estimated 60% of Namibia’s population lives near the major wetlands, with the highest population density along the perennial Kavango River.129 Most of these communities are largely poor and highly dependent on the river and floodplains for water and other resources. The projections outlined above therefore spell gloomy prospects for these people, who were identified as being extremely vulnerable to environmental change.130
5 Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change in Namibia: Actions Taken
The above account has highlighted the vulnerability of Namibia to climate change and the effects this may have on the environment, the economy and human livelihoods. The country is experiencing an increase in frequency and severity of disasters. The potential losses due to disasters is set to increase as the impacts of climate change continue to unfold.131 The IPCC warns that many aspects of climate change and associated impacts will continue for centuries, even after anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases have been stopped.132
It is therefore important that the country takes steps to mitigate these effects. Under the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol and other international instruments, national governments that are party to these conventions and treaties have obligations to introduce measures in order to mitigate further environmental deterioration and to reduce the effects these changes have on humanity and the environment. Namibia, being party to the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol, must put in place policies and measures that meet the above objectives.
Available literature highlights why climate change adaptation and mitigation are critical issues not only for Namibia and southern Africa, but the world over. It is conceded though, that a certain amount of climate change is unavoidable, regardless of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.133 It must be noted that effects of climate change will act in combination with other drivers of ecosystem degradation, for instance, communities in the region already face high levels of vulnerability and numerous stresses due to poverty, HIV/AIDS, food insecurity, and political instability.134 Hence measures put in place must take cognisance of these interactive effects and approach them in a holistic manner.
Namibia established the Namibian Climate Change Committee (NCCC) in 2001 with the main function of advising and making recommendations to Government on climate change including how to meet its obligations to the UNFCCC. The NCCC is hosted by the Directorate of Environmental Affairs in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism. Its membership is drawn from representatives of various Government ministries, NGOs, parastatals and the private sector. Thereafter, Cabinet approved the first National Policy on Climate Change (NPCC) in 2011135 and the National Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (NCCSAP) in 2014136, which set out the country’s direction towards addressing climate change mitigation.
Thus, Namibia has taken several steps in addressing the issue of climate change and other global change challenges. In addition to the formation of the NCCC, other important steps under the obligations of the UNFCCC include (but are not limited to) the following:
6 Concluding Remarks
Climate change has emerged as one of the greatest challenges of all time as it is cross-cutting across all sectors of the economy. Namibia is very vulnerable to the effects of climate change due to the arid nature of the country, limited capacity to deal with the effects and inadequate technical and financial capacity for adaptation, given that there is a myriad of other challenges (e.g. poverty, HIV and AIDS, unemployment) that need to be dealt with in addition to climate change. The evidence for impacts of climate change are very clear, manifested by more intense flooding, shortening of the growing season, more frequent droughts, rising average summer and winter temperatures, frequent heat waves, among many other effects. These conform to predictions from General Circulation Models (GCMs) that paint a gloomy picture of rising temperatures and declining rainfall in most areas. There will be an accelerated decrease in biodiversity, increasing evaporation leading to water scarcity, low crop yields leading to food shortages and insecurity, declining marine productivity, flooding of coastal areas and changes in the distribution of disease patterns and their vectors. The economic sectors of Namibia that will be affected most are agriculture, biodiversity and ecosystems, coastal areas, energy, health, marine resources and water. As a signatory to the UNFCCC and other international instruments, Namibia is taking steps to minimise the impacts of climate change on the people and the economy by putting in place relevant policies, structures and institutions for dealing with climate change and enhancing adaptive and mitigation capacity. Namibia’s greenhouse gas emissions are insignificant. In fact, Namibia is a net sink for CO² as indicated by the two GHG inventories done so far. Hence, efforts should be less on cutting down emissions but more on adaptation, coping strategies, and disaster management.
1 UN (1992).
2 IPCC (2007a).
3 UN (1998).
4 IPCC (2007a).
5 Nielsen / Reenberg (2010).
6 GRN (2002d).
7 GRN (2001a).
8 GRN (2014).
9 CEEPA (2006); IPCC (1997); Hulme (1996).
10 IPCC (2007a); DEAT (2007).
11 IPCC (2006).
12 GRN (2002d); Hartz / Smith (2008).
13 GRN (2014a).
14 GRN (2002d).
15 Du Plessis (1999).
16 Hartz / Smith (2008).
17 GRN (2014a).
19 GRN (2002d).
20 GRN (2014a).
21 Capôco et al. (2007).
22 GRN (2014a).
24 Adopted from GRN (2014a).
25 IPCC (2007a).
26 IPCC (2010).
27 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
29 IPCC (2001).
30 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
32 IPCC (2014a).
34 IPCC (2007a).
35 New et al. (2002).
36 IPCC (2007a).
37 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
38 Midgley et al. (2005).
39 GRN (2010d).
40 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
41 Midgley et al. (2005).
42 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
44 GRN (2011b).
45 GRN (2002d).
46 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
49 Nunes et al. (2010).
50 Mitchell et al. (2004) in Midgley et al. (2005).
51 GRN (2002d).
52 Galvin et al. (2004).
53 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
55 Galvin et al. (2004).
57 NSA (2012:156).
59 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
63 GRN (2009b).
64 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
65 GRN (2010d).
66 GRN (2011a:3).
67 NAB (2006).
68 NSA (2012:22).
69 NSA (2012:56).
70 Newsham / Thomas (2009).
71 NAB (2006).
72 Dirkx et al. (2008).
74 NAB (2009).
75 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
76 Midgley et al. (2005).
77 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
78 Newsham / Thomas (2009).
80 Kuvare et al. (2009).
81 Barnard (1998).
82 Maggs et al. (1998).
83 Maggs et al. (1994).
84 Midgley et al. (2005).
85 IPCC (2001).
86 GRN (2010d).
87 Midgley et al. (2005).
88 Drake et al. (1997).
89 Bond / Midgley (2000); Bond et al. (2003).
90 Midgley et al. (2005).
96 GRN (2011b:27).
97 GRN (2010c:28 and 2011a:27).
98 IPCC (2007a).
99 IPCC (2007b).
100 GRN (2002d).
101 Consulting Services Africa et al. (2009).
102 GRN (2010d).
103 Bradley-Cook (2008).
104 GRN (2002d).
105 Midgley et al. (2005).
106 DRFN (2009).
107 IPCC (1990).
108 IPCC (1995).
109 IPCC (2007a and 2014).
110 Young et al. (2010).
111 DRFN (2009).
113 DRFN (2009).
114 GRN (2002d).
115 Husain et al. (2008).
116 GRN (2002d).
118 GRN (2002d).
119 Reid et al. (2007).
120 Ibid; Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (2002).
121 Roux (2003).
122 Reid et al. (2007).
123 GRN (2002d).
124 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
125 GRN (2011a).
126 GRN (2002d).
127 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
129 Heyns et al. (1998).
130 DRFN / CSAG (2010).
131 GRN (2011d).
132 IPCC (2014a).
133 IPCC (2007a).
134 Shackleton et al. (2008); Ziervogel et al. (2006a).
135 GRN (2011b).
136 GRN (2014b).
137 GRN (2011d).
138 Mfune et al. (2009b).
139 GRN (2014b).
140 Cf. GRN (2011b).
141 GRN (2011d).
142 DRFN (2009).
143 GRN (2014a).
© 2017 Hanns Seidel Foundation Namibia