SARPN Home

POVERTY, ENERGY & GENDER > Regional seminar	Poverty Energy & Gender Home

POVERTY, ENERGY & GENDER

[Back to proceedings]

Seminar proceedings & outputs > Minutes of discussions

Day 1: 29th May 2002

Namibia’s Energy Sector: An Overview by Mr Martin Heita, Director of Energy, Ministry of Mines and Energy Mr. Martin Heita, Director of Energy of the Ministry of Mines and Energy, presented the first presentation, entitled “Namibia’s Energy Sector – An Overview”, copies of which were made available to participants during the lunch break. The presentation covered Namibia’s 13 regions, Basic Facts of Namibia, The Energy Sector, the Ministry of Mines and Energy’s Directorate of Energy, its Policies, Plans, Directives and Acts and its Projects and Programmes. The presentation also included information on Rural Electrification and the Restructuring of the Electricity Supply Industry (ESI). Mr. Heita’s presentation was followed by an open question/comment and answer/response session.

Participant: From where is Biogas sourced? What is it? Mr. Martin Heita: The technology of using cow manure was imported from India and Mr. Noddy Hipangelwa can be consulted for more information. Ms. Namate will also present a paper on biogas and the question can then be further discussed. Participant: Is there a plan in place as to how to regulate Rural Electrification? Mr. Martin Heita: The plans include the electrification of rural schools, clinics, community centres, and business areas in the hope of reducing the process of community members migrating to urban areas to seek employment. Namibia is working on its own and while it has little assistance from other SADC countries, there is still an exchange of information with them. The Ministry works with private sector consultants and its role is more one of support and to provide funding to projects. We work in consultation with the private sector and outsource fieldwork to this sector. The Ministry’s support extends across the SADC region but it should be noted that each country has different priorities and financial constraints. The importance of rural community empowerment must be emphasised (Mr. Heita indicated a on a map of Namibia an example of the Karas Region - a school in this region is to be electrified and provide surrounding households with electricity. These households will not pay for the connection, but only the consumption. The Revolving Fund is a fund for community members to access and repay at low rates. Ten percent the Ministry’s N$ 30 million budget is dedicated to rural electrification, including off-grid and grid areas. Participant: How are the funds raised? Mr. Martin Heita: A levy of 10 c per litre is charged on the pump price, and 3 c per litre is paid to the National Energy Fund. Levies have always been limited to petroleum but legislation is in process to acquire funds in a similar manner from other energy sources. Participant: Namibia is classed as one of the first countries to apply gender policies, so why has the Ministry of Mines and Energy excluded the Namibian Biomass Strategy which is a document to indicate how objectives should be achieved? Mr. Martin Heita: We have held workshops on policy and are working on it (referred back to his presentation). Participant: You don’t mine coal, yet this is used at the Van Eck Power Station. Is this economical? Mr. Martin Heita: The station was constructed in the early ‘70s, but no, it isn’t economical. Fortunately, we don’t use that power station daily, but reserve it for emergencies (e.g. when South Africa cannot supply). The Paratus station at Walvis Bay is also very expensive to run and only used for emergencies. Participant: Is non-payment of electricity also a problem in this country? How does one close the gap? Mr. Martin Heita: Yes, it is a lot of work to recover this money from users. The Electricity Control Board (ECB) implements the pre-payment system for lower income projects and rural electrification to ease the burden. Participant: How is the private sector reacting to the restructuring of electricity provision? Will the private sector be part of the REDs and will they be happy with this? Mr. Martin Heita: We promote private sector participation. Nampower contributes funding to the project. Participant: How will you prevent the project losing momentum if it is not in the interests of the private sector? Mr. Martin Heita: We are looking for a formula on how to include the private sector in a way that everyone benefits. Government’s commitment will continue BUT the private sector invests therein. To what extent will rural electrification continue? We say, leave it to the government and pass the assets to them. This is still under debate and has not yet been finalised. Participant: When Kudugas is in operation, Namibia will possibly export electricity to other countries. Will Namibia’s needs still be catered for? Mr. Martin Heita: There still much discussion. However, if a power plant in Oranjemund or Walvis Bay (still to be determined) can produce 800 MW of power, our national consumption of 330 MW will be covered. Of course, we want self-sufficiency, but there should be sufficient power for Namibia to enter into trade agreements with southern African countries. South Africa has warned us now already that with escalating demand in that country, they do not expect to be able to supply electricity to Namibia beyond the year 2007. We need to start sourcing alternatives now. Participant: Does your electricity supply system charge recovery? What subsidies are there? Mr. Martin Heita: Mr. Shilamba of the ECB will cover this issue in his presentation.

Namibia’s Electricity Control Board and the Liberalisation of the Electricity Supply Industry by Mr Paulinus Shilamba, Electricity Control Board The second presentation, “Namibia’s Electricity Control Board and the Liberalisation of the Electricity Supply Industry” was presented by Mr. Paulinus Shilamba, GM: Technical Services of the Electricty Control Board of Namibia. He covered the Status of ESI Reforms and licensing in Namibia, introduced general information, explained the present ESI structure and gave conclusions of the ESI Restructuing Study (ESI Market Structure, Distribution Structure and Regional and Local Authority Issues). Mr. Shilamba also outlined ESI deficiencies, covered ESI Policy Goals and Restructuring Objectives and touched on the Policy on Private Sector Participation in the ESI. Other aspects of the presentation included Electricity Sector Governance, ECB Policy- and Legal Framework, Areas of Regulation, the ECB’s main functions, Setting up of the Licensing System, Licencing Conditions, Lessons from the Transitional Licensing Process, ECB participation in ESI Restructuring and the Way Forward. Copies of Mr. Shilamba’s presentation were made available to participants during the lunch break. The presentation was followed by an open question/comment and answer/response session.

Participant: To what extent does the ECB regulate the technical and economic aspects of Rural Electrification? Mr. Shilamba: This is not regulated as it is a Social National Programme. We will, however, address this through licensing to get input from all distributors to share information and problems with us. the Government allocates the funding but they stakeholders are expected to report back. Participant: Some complain that electricity bills are mysterious and very high but do not indicate how the amount due was calculated. Is the pre-paid system better than the meter system or are there also problems? Mr. Shilamba: Both systems have pros and cons. The pre-paid system is suitable for small customers – both rural and urban. Pre-paid electricy works especially well for rural areas. Larger companies, however, are overcharged using the pre-paid system so we stick to the conventional system for them. We will address these issues in the National Tariff Study. Participant: To develop a picture of what the future will look like, I’d like to ask what is the relationship between the ECB and the Ministry of Mines and Energy? Mr. Shilamba: The ECB is independent and experiences no political interference. We are working with government policy as indicated in the White Paper to which we also contributed. Worldwide, investors seek stable systems. The government may change but the regulator stays the same. We want to see government’s policy applied within the legal framework and for the environment to remain stable. Our government understands that we as a regulatory body must be independent and can only influence the ECB through the Board. It leaves daily operational issues up to us. Participant: How many board members are there and how are they elected? Mr. Shilamba: The Ministry of Mines and Energy selects all five members. They are non-executive and subject to a Chairman. The Board does not consist of any stakeholders, no members represent any specific group. They are selected on their professionalism only. Participant: What is the term of a board member? Mr. Shilamba: The term is four years but initially two are members for two years and the other three for four years. Thereafter it will be four years for all members. Participant: What is the information exchange between the ECB and Ministry of Mines and Energy? Policy is in place but still lacks clarity. Why has the Tariff Study only been done now? Mr. Shilamba: Restructuring commenced in 1996 starting with the Energy White Paper and referring to guidelines within the legal framework and was introduced. The deficiency then was the tariff but this is not a government issue. It only takes effect when the ECB puts it in place. Perhaps it has been slow, but this process is not an overnight one. It is difficult to implement and we have a two-year period in place. Participant: What is the issue actually? Mr. Shilamba: The main thing is for the tariff to be cost-effective. The ECB has to deal with the nitty-gritty and decide how to implement it. Each Municipality uses its own formula. Some have reported that the customers pay for the Rural Electrification, others do not charge, while still others charge depreciation on the assets. Having found this, we agreed this must change and conducted a study to see how to do it. We must have a common, national tariff methodology. The ECB should regulate the income and how distributors regulate themselves. Participant: To align poverty and gender, why analyse electricity increases? Is it about cost, industrialisation or both? What is the position of the ECB when distributors apply for tariff? How do you accept or reject? Mr. Shilamba: If the price is low, we enhance affordability, but the price can be higher due to cost recovery. The ECB can be seen as a government agency although it is independent. We want to realise goals jointly with government and have a vision for 20 to 30 years. Consumption is growing – the Ramatex Textile Factory has started up and will require 25 MW, the new Scorpion Mine will require 80 MW. More mines are coming. There will be more industry. The ECB must liaise with government, Nampower and Investors to invest in new generation in terms of supply level AND affordability. We must plan in advance to gradually introduce price hikes rather than have sudden price shocks. Our study shows that most distributors are under-recovering. Customers must pay 3 – 5 % more each year or the ECB cannot be sustained. When distributors approach us for tariff revisions, we must work within the guidelines of the National Tariff Study without the customers suffering. Participant: Please explain how the National Tariff Study has considered the poor? Mr. Shilamba referred back to his presentation: We agreed to assist customers in lower income areas. We also address connection fees without overcharging (e.g. customers pay a small deposit and then pay consumption). Participant: What did you mean when you said “Government will encourage and promote the participation of black Namibians in all aspects of he ESI, including ownership structures of generation and supply? Mr. Shilamba: During the Apartheid system, most Namibians had little opportunity for participation in development. Now all Namibians – especially previously disadvantaged people can participate. There is little capacity so we want to encourage joint ventures to ensure the development of black Namibians. Speaker Ms. Alix Clark: With the dominance of the public sector in the ECB, do you believe that if the private sector comes in, there won’t be competition? Mr. Shilamba: The public sector has failed to deliver. Perhaps policy is good, but the public sector is not good at an operational level. The private sector is good at operations, however. The Ministry is taking this up through the private sector participation. Worldwide success has shown that we get their expertise but of course there is going to be competition and politics. But, if prices go down, they are more affordable. Speaker Ms. Alix Clark: Good regulatory framework is needed. A public monopoly is easier to regulate than a private one. Participant: Black women fall under Gender Involvement, are you giving them the information? Mr. Shilamba: This is a Ministry issue, not an ECB issue. The Ministry does make provision for this in the White Paper Another Participant: Black participation and empowerment is up to the government. The government tender system also looks at the disadvantage and gender issues in tender awards. A third Participant: Through our country’s tender system, we consider whether the tenderer consists of women, whether they are foreign, black or previously disadvantaged even if they are slightly more expensive than other tenderers.

2.1.3 The Namibian Rural Electrification Project by Ms Davidzo Namate, Acting Chief Electrical Engineer, Ministry of Mines and Energy Ms. Davidzo Namate, Acting Chief Electrical Engineer at the Ministry of Mines and Energy presented the third presentation for the day, namely “The Namibian Rural Electrification Project”. Ms. Namate covered Energy Policy Goals, Policy and Rural Electrification, Objectives of Rural Electrification and the History thereof. She then covered Rural Electrification Statistics, the Namibain Rural Electrification Master Plan and the Road Ahead. Copies of Ms. Namate’s presentation were made available to participants during the lunch break

Participant: What about cooking and ironing with Solar Power? Ms. Namate: Cooking and ironing using solar panels is very expensive and we are targeting the lower income groups. Various Participants: You mentioned that only 100 Solar Technicians were trained. That’s a small number. I’d like to know how many were male and how many female and is there support afterwards in terms of follow up training? Apart from Solar panels, are there other ways to obtain power? What about community contribution – they can’t just depend on the government. Are we mobilising the communities within their regions? Mr. Noddy Hipangelwa: We trained 100 technicians, of which about 10 were female. The programme took place from 1997 to 2000 and was funded by the GTZ. There is more demand now so we are looking into more training. Gender balance? Yes, this is what we want. We are trying to address the issue but there are not many technical people. The newspaper advertisements bring the public’s attention to the training available but only a few women apply. A third Participant: You indicate that funding is a problem but you can train 100, they can then have understudies who train under them and they, in turn, train still more people. The pace of delivery is too slow. Thirty years is just too long, people want electricity/power now. Participant: Social upliftment is a priority. Do you offer the woman who collects wood to re-sell and not just use in her household, an alternative means of generating income or do you just telly her to stop cutting wood? Another Participant: Why didn’t you offer solar cooker with panels so they can cook, or, for instance, the Tsotso stove. These are excellent. Manufactured, sold and used by black females. They are fuel-saving stoves, easy to use, use less wood, have less hazards associated with it, cook is so easy.. This was excluded and the ladies never recognised. Ms. Namate: The Ministry has a programme to find appropriate technologies, which includes solar cookers. We are trying to combine suitable options. Participant: You indicated in your presentation that you have 15000 connections have been made but only 350 centres have been electrified. There is a problem with the figures. Ms. Namate: Remember that when we say ‘centres’ we refer to villages as centres as well. Participant: You really must reduce the 30 year span. You cannot deprive the African child of Information Technology, Education and access to other fundamental technology because of lack of access to electricity/power. The issue of funding is easy. Do integrated planning. For instance, if there is a Solar Panel manufacturer or supplier in Russian and he sees the sustainability of an area/project, he will want to invest in Africa. He will, if he can see sustainable planning over time. We also have money through NEPA – all it takes is integrated planning, not just two years, but long-term planning means access to funding and SADC countries are investor-friendly. If investors invest, they create employment. Get things together – integrated planning between countries, cross border. Another Participant: In South Africa it costs R 3,000 per connection but in Namibia it costs N$ 17,000. We brought ours down from R 7,000 to R 3,000, how can Namibia’s be so high. A third Participant: But the density in SA is smaller… Same Participant as before third one: It doesn’t matter. Look at the area and decide which technology is the best. A fourth Participant: Look at the consumption. If you are poor, you use less, don’t install a geyser for instance. Connect lower ampages. A fifth Participant: What about upgradeability? Fourth Participant: No. Just work on affordability per house. A Sixth Participant: On off-grid electrification: the solar system is only for those individuals who participate. It isn’t for the community. Is this affordable? Ms. Namate: The government is trying to level the ground between solar and grid so that people in the village don’t own the system but buy units from the electricity body in that village. For instance, we have the ‘Powercan’ where community members recharge a battery at the Community Centre. Fifth Participant: We are looking at the appropriate model. The first one is the Ownership Model, and then there is the Fee for Service. In between these two options is the one where the Minstry of Mines and Energy has a Community Group collect the money from the people and use the funds to pay for the maintenance of their system. A Seventh Participant: Use the low amp system. The poor use the low amp system and those with capital can go for the higher amps. The problem is the supplier sells as much as possible to make money. We need integrated planning: install low amps, use solar, female producers etc. The big ones want to earn money and there is political conflict. First Participant: Energisation is a government responsibility. We all want to meet your objectives but in a) a responsible manner and b) with national interests at heart – in this case, SADC interest. Government must take charge of energisation or it will always be dependent on Nampower. Ms. Namate: Government has as its responsibility electrification. the Ministry dictates and we co-operate with planning. An Eighth Participant: It’s just my observation. I think the efforts by the Namibian initiatives are positive but I do have one concern – level grid and off-grid field. How do measure it? A Ninth Participant: Have you looked at Solar customers being supported, costs of installation paid by ministries because grid customers don’t pay. You say you have funding of N$ 40 – 50 million but only 10 % is allocated to Solar. Where is the equity? Perhaps look at how many people would qualify for off-grid rather than grid? How did you come up with the 10 %? Response: Even in grid connection (due to financial constraints), you don’t cover everybody. There is a limit within a certain radius.

Gender, Energy and Poverty: A Situational Analysis by Mr Daniel Motinga, Namibia Economic Policy Research Unit Mr. Daniel Motinga of Nepru, presented an overview of his Paper: Gender, Energy and Poverty: A situational analysis. He covered: Conceptualising Poverty; Linking Gender, Energy and Poverty; Main Sources of Energy; Mode of Transport; Relative Energy Conversion Efficiencies (Barnett 2000); Energy, Poverty and Gender in Space and the Way Forward. Before opening the floor for discussion, Robert Schultz formally introduced Mr. Scott Drimie of the Southern African Regional Poverty Network (SARPN). Mr. Drimie explained that SARPN acts as a regional facility to provide platforms to depend and widen debate to better understand poverty. He noted his hope that participants would take lessons back to their institutes in their own countries to lodge with policy. SARPN is a repository of information. It’s website is very active and changes daily. He invited participants to share their papers and work so that SARPN’s repository is enhanced and the information can go out to others. He mentioned that a policy kit would be worked through on Friday. He said it is important not only to link Energy, Poverty and Gender but to see what can actually be done. He stressed the importance of not just feeding into the organisation but to bear in mind 1) Energy, Poverty and Gender and the associated problems and 2) What happens after this Seminar.

Participant: Sorry to correct you on your figures, but access to electricity in South Africa is not 48% but has increased to around 66%. Mr. Motinga: Noted. My apologies! Participant: Please define the difference between chronic and transient poverty. Mr. Motinga: Transient poverty is when I have a certain number of sheep that I sell but am setback by say 50% when there is a drought. When the rains come, I am back to selling my usual amount. Chronic poverty is when one is permanently poor. Participant: We always have recommendations. You’ve outlined women involvement. There are so many other energy sources, we need to look at men’s involvement in collection thereof. You don’t give recommendations in your paper. Mr. Motinga: I give you the situation but I don’t prescribe. That’s why I deliberately skipped discussin ‘The Way Forward’. Mr. Motinga: Just to get the discussion going. I go to my village and suddenly we have electricity but no-one is rushing off to open garages and welding business. We need to establish the missing links. Participant: The time factor of women must also be considered. They collect wood for example, every day, but no one considers the 2 hours. If time is saved they could use those hours for better things. Another Participant: On wood collecting: we need to provide more efficient sources but, for example, in Malawi, wood is not just used for energy but it is sold as an economic activity. Look at policy issues with economic empowerment issues. Still Another Participant: Policy-makers can do so much. SADC lacks civil society involvement in developmental areas. Women are good managers of energy. Link up with economic development. Take the Energisation programme in South Africa. We must also supply the road, the telecommunications, other ways of creating economic development. Without those things, electrification hardly makes an impact. Assist the locals with an infrastructure. A fourth Participant: Does it mean that electricity on its own does not miraculously change things? Yes. Of course. We must provide other services, develop society, train them e.g. Mr. Motinga mentioned the welding business – help them with developing a business plan so that it can survive. Or take subsistence farming. Plant highly valued vegetables and plants and therefore saleable – not just for subsistence. Civil society needs to participant. Another Participant: Electrification will not increase the well being of people. It doesn’t necessarily put people in the position create wealth. Let’s look at what infrastructure is necessary for economic development. A sixth Participant: Poverty with respect to energy – you need capital to get connected to improved services. This touches male and female. Which source of energy is used in selling? Ten years ago, women collected the firewood but were disadvantaged. Women empowerment over five years, now the men fetch the wood. The Rural Electrification Project: there is no capital to connect better energy services. The poor get poorer with accounts in arrears, and so it goes, back and forth. Earlier you spoke of pre-payment. The people have an indirect because they become more energy aware and better manager their energy resources. Mr. Motinga: Yes. There are internal dynamics there. Let’s discuss this. In Britain, too, users of electricity also have the advantage of disconnecting the supply. In many households – female-headed households – in SADC, societal networks and support systems must be considered. Mr. Motinga: Do we give all female-headed households free energy? I’m saying this to be controversial to keep the discussion going. Several Female Participants respond: No! That is not empowerment. Another Participant (Male): That increases dependence. Another Participant: First Education. How will you sustain it. It’s no good just installing electricity and the consumer does not know what to do with it. Give the project to the community. Mr. Motinga: Government has a large role to play. There are many other concerns too. Participant: If it is a ‘freebie, the community won’t take responsibility. Mr. Motinga: Hungry stomachs don’t care Participant: The community needs to have choices – not just Biomas OR Electricity. Another Participant: It’s a complicated topic. We are trying to put up issues and these are other people’s perceptions. Their standard of living needs to be raised and now electricity comes but the woman can’t sell her wood. Another Participant: Do a feasibility study first. Get the community’s input. Teach them the role of electricity and what to do with it. Don’t just install it and go. The community must come up with the ideas and they own it, they’ll buy into it. Another Participant: Could you give an example? Participant: No, not on electricity but on other income-generating programmes. Still another Participant: In the Eastern Cape, for instance, there is the hybrid system. The Department of Minerals and Energy, together with the CSIR and the Agricultural Research Council, is looking at 1) different forms of energy for communities and 2) the Research Council is assisting. It’s tough – get the communities involved and get them to buy in. Getting the community to plant hybrids themselves. It’s their project. It isn’t the government telling them what to do – if so, when you leave, they abandon the project. Another Participant: We have an examples of a successful PRA in Omaheke and an unsuccessful one we asked the communities for their input and got the ‘wrong answers’ – they want a Community Hall, Vocational Training Centre, Petrol etc.

Basic Requirements for Alleviating Poverty, Access to Energy and Gender Inequalities in Namibia by Mr Mihe Gaomab II, independent consultant Mr. Mihe Gaomab II, an Independent Speaker, presented the fifth presentation, a Paper on Basic Requirements for Alleviating Povery, Access to Energy and Gender Inequalities in Namibia . Mr. Gaomab introduced the content of his paper, highlighted the link between poverty and energy, outlined the existing Namibian situation in terms of Social Services, the Education Sector, Small Business development and Women. He also discussed Social Indicators in Selected African countries and selected years, the Energy Poverty Framework and Energy Development Goals. In addition, Mr. Gaomab’s presentation covered Selected Economic Welfare Indicators by Language Group, Policies and Programmes, SME Development and Strategies for this development and Empowering of Rural Women.

Participant: On Education: do you have an idea of the percentage of male and female scholars who drop out of school? Mr. Heita: Yes, for example pregnancy. Another Participant: They young female is also involved in the household dynamics. A third Participant: I believe that the Namibian male drop-outs are higher than the female number. We must link education with social issues like “Let’s condomise”. Mr. Gaomab: Access top education also affects the household and its income. The needs of the poor are not addressed by the Education system. When I say that I mean that efficiency is the problem. Education was previously reserved as a luxury service to a small minority. Primary Healthcare reformation has started and seems effective. Aids is still a problem of course. Look at the statistics (Mr Gaomab refers to aa Table indicating Social Indicators, Selected African Countries and Selected Years). Participant: You mentioned the problem with poverty reduction initiatives where the needs of the poor are not addressed. What are those needs? Mr. Gaomab: The sub-needs of the rich. From an economic view, the poor spend their money on basics such as shelter, food and housing. There are market-related issues. Providers and specific needs. Have a framework to cover it. Participant: On Energy Source Transparency – do you have any way to see which are priorities? Mr. Gaomab: This is not easy to determine. Participant: Yes, the ‘elite’ with the higher income also use wood for braainging and candles for dinner. It’s not just for basic needs. Another Participant: Yes, even in South Africa. Participant: The needs of the poor – many SADC countries base their strategy on getting loans from outside countries. We must address that aspect. Mr. Gaomab: I wouldn’t say it’s a good thing to borrow money from the IMF to use to reduce poverty. Participant: Too expensive! That costs you more! Participant: You mentioned that 1 Billion in the developed economies consume 60% energy supply while 5 billion in developing economies use 40%. So who is wrong? Who must change? The rich don’t want to reduce – they must give up something. The poor want to improve their own lives – have a car, a television. Reduce poverty but nobody who is rich wants to be poor. Mr. Gaomab: Mr. Abraham Lincoln advised to gradually increase rather than take from the rich to make the poor richer. There be income equality. Work on policies, change them. Participant: On Energy Development Goals: A private supplier like Nampower or Namwater is commercial. Their objective is profit. Mr. Gaomab: That is a monopoly but they are to provide a basic need. They are focused on urban households. Rural areas – that’s about 70% of our population need attention. We must measure against our role to play, get policies in place. Are your personnel qualified and able to provide services. Another Participant: Nampower does play a social role and there are also other players. Everyone should contribute and make an effort Nampower invests in the nation. Another Participant: You can’t just say electricity is going to the people who can afford the connection – many can’t afford appliances so they don’t contribute further to the economy. Another Participant: Say 12 million goes into the social commitment, that’s 12 million less than you would have made if you electrify. Another Participant: Can it cover maintenance? Another Participant: Who owns the assets? Mr. Gaomab: You see, there is a top-down approach. All must be involved in this social investment in terms of energy provision as a responsibility. Participant: With regard to subsidising. The poor are also responsible. They can’t just expect the government to do it all. Mr. Gaomab: Encourage community participation. Another Participant: Let those who do have, help those who don’t. Do the poor pay tax? Another Participant: They do. They pay sales tax. Maybe not income tax, but sales tax. Participant: There is so much emphasis on electricity all the time. There are other things too like people said. Plant trees nearby so they don’t have to walk far, waste so much time. Mr. Gaomab: Yes. Provision of infrastructure for the poor vs. job creation. It’s not an ‘either or’, but use resources to create jobs and in the energy sector.

Regional Policies pertaining to Gender, Energy and Poverty Alleviation by Ms Alix Clark, independent consultant Ms. Alix Clark, an Independent Speaker, presented the last presentation, entitled “Regional Policies pertaining to Gender, Energy and Poverty Alleviation”. Ms. Clark gave an overview, discussed National Energy Policies and Gender, and Gender (and Energy) Policy/Initiatives. This was followed by “Now What?” question and answer talk. Thereafter, Ms. Clark discussed Power Sector Reforms, Structural Changes, Changes in Industry Ownership, Implications of reform on the poor and ended with Conclusions. Copies of this presentation are to be available to participants on Day 2 of the Seminar.

Participant: In your conclusions you excluded women from the Energy Sector, which you had indicated previously they should be more involved in. Ms. Clark: I had two sets of recommendations. One was to improve access, the other to tackle Gender. Ms. Clark: Energy Policy has encompassed Gender but the information gets lost, it isn’t carried through. Participant: Targeting rural women – will it then be better for rural men? Even get them involved in income generating activities or they will still be conducting normal tasks. A concern is that this may affect the household. If the woman earns the money, she may feel he has no right to it. There is also intellectual poverty – a lack of education. But then look at the household dynamics… Ms. Clark: It’s very complex. One of the effects of enabling women to general income, sometimes the men just take the money and take over. There are many cultural issues to be looked at closely. It’s not about burdening the woman, but empowering her. And with enterprise, she could get people to help and then she won’t be burdened. Participant: Two rural men were arrested for killing a crocodile they felt was a threat. Men also fetch water. Rural men shouldn’t be left out. Participant: You spoke about liberalising the electricity supply. Will there be a secure supply? E.g. if there is a war, will the government protect that company to ensure supply. Ms. Clark: Even if you liberalise there will still be licensing. We must look deeper and you will see regulations. Utilities shouldn’t stop production. They’re there to make a profit, is it likely they will halt operations. Participant: Yes, they could just leave it or destroy it and claim from insurance. Ms. Clark: But isn’t it the plant operators who stop production, rather than the shareholders or people who have interests in it? Ms. Clark: This is not about stepping on men, it is about empowering women. There is a huge burden on women to collect energy resources for the household needs. Improving people’s lives – that’s the idea. Participant: On the issue of men being excluded. Take the example of a migrant labourer who leaves home to find work and leaves his wife and children at home. A projects comes in and the government is keen for the woman to be involved. THE man returns, the woman has taken over and there is now no social space for the man. The man will either take over a big project or step away and leave it in the hands of the woman and go and do something else. That’s dangerous. Another Participant: It would be tragic if men saw it as emasculating. Gender concerns both Genders. The idea is not to alienate men. If a project uses a woman, then the woman must somehow let the man feel involved. Ms. Clark: And it’s to level the playing field Another Participant: Take the reform process – passing business into private hands – it just goes back to private monopoly. When the market gets complicated (opened up, allowing generators and business freedom), there are still financial and technical barriers. How can we restructure when the government wants to deliberately prevent others from receiving benefits? Ms. Clark: South Africa is a special case. It is big and sophisticated but most African countries’ capacity is too small to genera competition. Let’s first understand the situation before putting in reforms. There are both political and economic barriers which prevent development. Governments stopping processes to increase access to regulate tariffs…we don’t have a solution now but need an independent regulator to look after the public and customers. Market Power does have an effect. We need an independent regulator. Participant: Gender equality – we are going to be biased but our strategy should be to include men e.g. energise communities, act as mentors and not alienate them from the community. Participant: Single buyer system in Namibia. Nampower is now the generator and transmitter and distributor. How doe we know it is 100% independent? Mr. Heita: When looking at the single buyer system, Nampower has what we need. We have no option. It is a temporary arrangement to use them. Pricing and so on needs to be scrutinised by the ECB as an independent group and they are not part of Nampower. There aren’t many options right now. in Namibai. Nampower is now the generator and transmitter and distributor. How doe we know it is 100% independent?

Day 2 >>