Is social security really underfunded?

Social security in sub-Saharan Africa




1 Introduction

2 Theoretical Foundations
2.1 Definitions
2.2 The need for state social security
2.3 The state system of social security in Europe
2.3.1 Design principles
2.3.2 Model types of social security

3 Social Security Systems in Africa
3.1 Existing systems
3.1.1 State security systems
3.1.2 Self-organized security systems
3.2 Factors influencing the level of social security
3.3 The threat to traditional security
3.3.1 Causes Urbanization AIDS
3.3.2 The status of women in Africa
3.4 Civil society self-help activities
3.4.1 Case studies Women's organizations in Tanzania Community-based health insurance in Senegal
3.4.2 Excursus: On the importance of NGOs - a critical consideration

4 The contribution of German development cooperation to social security
4.1 German development cooperation
4.2 Social security in bilateral state development cooperation
4.2.1 Program
4.2.2 Cooperation countries
4.2.3 Financial benefits

5 Summary




Transl. 1: Forms of risk prevention

Translator 2: Systematics of social security systems in Africa

Translator 3: The African countries south of the Sahara

Tab. 1: Branches of formal security in sub-Saharan Africa

Tab. 2: Development indicators for selected countries

Tab. 3: Development of the urban population in Sub-Saharan Africa (1975, 2001, 2015)

Tab. 4: Spread of HIV / AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa (as of end of 2001)

Tab. 5:"Current" services of bilateral state development cooperation in the area of ​​social security

Fig. 1: The HIV / AIDS cycle in Africa

Fig. 2: The linear model of the old-age pension gap in Africa

Fig. 3: Map of Tanzania

Fig. 4: Map of Senegal


Figure not included in this excerpt

1 Introduction

Social security - understood as the instruments to be used to achieve the goal of social security[1] - has a universal character because it affects the industrialized countries as well as the eastern transition and developing countries. However, the starting position of these countries is very different:

In many industrialized nations the necessity of the "reform of the welfare state" is discussed and in the course of this it is often decided to reduce social benefits; so z. B. currently in Germany due to the health reform that came into force at the beginning of the year. In transition countries, on the other hand, the focus is on the restructuring or reorganization of social security systems and in the countries of the Third World[2] it is primarily about their expansion and development. The situation in developing countries is particularly precarious: According to the World Bank, only 38 percent of those in work in Latin America, 23 percent in Asia and six percent in Sub-Saharan Africa have access to state-organized security systems[3]which, compared to the fully developed European security system, are largely only rudimentary and therefore offer insufficient security.

However, reducing social security to state-organized systems alone would not do justice to the situation in developing countries. Here, social security is mainly provided within the family, relatives and neighbors.

aim The aim of the present work is to present the situation of social security in sub-Saharan Africa; Sub-Saharan Africa - a region that is considered to be the "cradle of humanity", which can be described as diverse in many ways and in which at the same time the majority of the people live in poverty.

The following questions should be answered within the scope of the objective:

- What are the strengths and weaknesses of the existing social security systems?
- Which variables determine the level of social security / social security?
- Which developments and circumstances endanger social security?
- What possibilities are there to promote social security?

This results in the structure of the thesis:

In Chapter 2 The theoretical basics are presented first. Definitions of terms are given in order to explain how a social and individual need for formal security comes about before the state system of social security in Europe is presented. With this in mind, in Chapter 3 the complex of social security systems in sub-Saharan Africa by describing the various systems analytically at the beginning. This is followed by a compilation of selected variables that determine the level of social security / social security. Furthermore, it should be outlined to what extent (current) developments and the understanding of the role of women in Africa specifically influence traditional security. At the end of the chapter, activities of civil society are offered that show how the security deficit can be or will be countered. In a separate chapter (Chapter 4) the aim is to illustrate the importance that German development cooperation attaches to the subject of "social security". Chapter 5 concludes with the summary.

2 Theoretical Foundations

2.1 Definitions

According to PARTSCH, the term "social security" can be traced back to the older phrase "social security", which comes from the translation of the term "social security" that became established in the United States in the 1930s. While "social security" designates a desired goal or a condition, the term "social security" - as mentioned in the introduction - describes the instruments to be used to achieve this goal.[4]

With regard to a narrower definition of the term "social security", it should be noted on the one hand that an integral problem of the definition seems to be the consideration of the very different cultural, political, economic and developmental framework conditions in different societies.[5] On the other hand, when looking through the relevant literature, one repeatedly encounters the definition of the "International Labor Organization" (ILO) from 1952, which determines the minimum standards of social security:[6]

"... the protection which society provides for its members, through a series of public measures, against the economic and social distress that otherwise would be caused by the stoppage or substantial reduction of earnings resulting from sickness, maternity, employment injury, unemployment, invalidity, old age and death; the provision of medical care; and the provision of subsidies for families with children. "

Among other things, LELIVELD has pointed out that this definition is primarily aimed at market-based industrialized countries (and their formal security systems) in which the majority of the population has a permanent job and has a regular income. This definition appears to be insufficient for the special situation of developing countries. He therefore advocates the following definition:[7]

"Social security is firstly, the protection by society, of individuals or social groups against a fall in their standards of living as a result of temporary adversities, and secondly, the amelioration by society, of those standards of living of individuals or social groups which are below an acceptable minimum level. "

Two aspects are therefore considered: the protection against a deterioration in living conditions and the improvement of living standards that are below an acceptable minimum level. This definition turns out to be inter alia. as advantageous for the following reasons:[8]

- It takes into account the fact that in developing countries over a billion people live below the subsistence level and aim therefore not alone is the protection against a deterioration of the living situation.
- It enables traditional and modern forms of security to be included by avoiding designating the state as the sole responsible agency.
- It does not attribute economic and social emergencies solely to loss of income, but also allows risks such as B. Drought, earthquake and epidemic too.

The present work follows this broad understanding of social security.

2.2 The need for state social security

The pursuit of security is "a universal human quality"[9].

In the course of their lives, all people - regardless of whether they live in a highly developed or economically less developed country - are exposed to a wide range of social risks that mean insecurity. These can "... lead to a worsening of your living situation, in extreme cases even to the destruction of your economic, social or physical existence ..."[10]. "Social risks" are dangers that the individual cannot avoid and the consequences of which he is unable to bear alone[11]. Since the possibilities of the individual to cope with the various life risks and their consequences are limited or inadequate, all societies have developed mechanisms (systems) to deal with such risks.[12]

While at an early stage of development of a country, i. H. before its transition from a subsistence economy to a market economy, the basic needs of people (food, shelter, health and care) largely[13] are covered by the traditional systems - extended family, neighborhood and village community - this is no longer guaranteed in modern economic and social systems modeled on the western industrialized countries. A (modern) market economy system is primarily characterized by a division of labor based on money economy, as it emerged in Europe with industrialization. The associated compulsion to search for wage labor leads to mobility, i. H. ultimately to migration to the cities, which leads to rapid urbanization. This results in new forms of urban coexistence and traditional networks of relationships are increasingly disintegrating.[14] Another consequence is that, as a result of the dependency on the money economy, loss of income represents an existential threat, which often affects a large number of dependent people. Furthermore, modernization leads to a differentiation between property and income, which can lead to social inequality and dissatisfaction and thus to a threat to social peace.[15]

These consequences of a socio-economic development process "... lead to a growing importance of formal, legally regulated social security, characterized by standardized benefits granted under well-defined pre-conditions by paid professionals and financed by legally fixed contributions or taxes"[16].

There is therefore a need for risk coverage by the state, i. H. according to state systems of social security, and in a broader sense according to state social policy. In addition, the need for the state to cover socio-political needs can be explained by the fact that individual freedom of choice with regard to self-made risk prevention (saving, voluntary private insurance) harbors dangers for many members of society, e.g. B. a lack of preventive security.[17]

These causal relationships apply to industrial societies as well as to developing countries that are oriented towards the market economy.

In addition to the necessary task of the state to set minimum standards for social security benefits and to grant them to those entitled, the following applies to society: It must be aware of the necessary risk protection for the future, as well as have the willingness and ability to cover the expenses for social security systems and to build the social infrastructure so that formal security systems can emerge as part of state social policy (see also chapter 3.1.2).[18]

2.3 The state system of social security in Europe

In the course of socio-economic change and the resulting socio-political needs described above, all industrial societies - against the background of their own history - have set up social security systems that are based on the design principles, the organization, the quality and scope of the services and the type of financing differentiate (see also trans. 1).[19] What the various systems have in common, however, is the goal of enabling all citizens to have a dignified existence, regardless of whether they have got into an emergency through fault or through no fault of their own.[20]

In the following, only the design principles (core principles) are explained, since the security systems in Western Europe all fall back on the same basic forms (insurance, care, welfare) and the respective dominance enables the countries to be divided into groups and thus an overview of the existing security systems in To give Europe. First, however, are the ingredients[21] which the majority of all social security systems (in the western world) have and which the nine risk areas named in Convention 102 of the ILO (see chapter 2.1) cover.

Translator 1: Forms of risk prevention

Figure not included in this excerpt

1: According to the equivalence principle, the contribution is based on the potential costs of claims settlement.

Source: Lampert / Althammer 2001, p. 228.

A distinction is made between:

in the narrow sense (commonly referred to as social security systems)

- Occupational and disability insurance
- Old age and survivors insurance
- accident insurance
- Health insurance
- Unemployment insurance

in a broader sense

- Provision for war victims
- Social care
- other social transfers (within the framework of housing policy, education promotion policy and family policy)

2.3.1 Design principles

Before the core principles of state security systems are explained, first the explanation of two terms that are used in the pursuit of socio-political goals (in Germany) are fundamental and whose knowledge appears to be important for further understanding.[22]

Solidarity principle

The solidarity principle is a basic principle for the state, society and the economy. In social security in particular, it is an ideological cornerstone and also a fundamental principle of many free-market systems. It obliges society in general or individual organizations and groups (including insured communities) to help disadvantaged people. The awareness of togetherness leads to the fact that social groups are ready to help the socially weak groups ("one for all and all for one").

Principle of subsidiarity

The principle of subsidiarity is based on the freedom (self-determination) and personal responsibility of the individual and individual or solidarity-based self-help. As a result, no social structure should take on tasks that the individual or smaller social structures can solve on their own initiative and responsibility at least as well as the larger unit. This should give every citizen the opportunity to freely develop their personality. If the individual is overwhelmed by this, he should receive appropriate help from the next higher social structures, such as the family, neighborhood or independent providers (e.g. charities) and ultimately from the state. In addition, the state or other socio-political bodies have the task of shaping or changing the social and economic conditions in such a way that everyone finds the prerequisites that are necessary to develop according to their abilities.

Three core principles are the basis of all social security systems in Europe:[23]

- the insurance principle
- the supply principle
- the principle of care

The insurance principle

The principle of social insurance is based on protecting the majority of citizens from social risks through mutual risk compensation; therefore there is compulsory insurance for all employees. The Financing is provided through wage-related contributions, d. H. through contributions that are measured proportionally to earned income and paid by the employer and employee. The social insurance principle is characterized by the principle of solidarity: on the one hand, the social insurance contributions are not based on individual risk probabilities (e.g. the contributions are not dependent on age or family status) and, on the other hand, the benefits are not strictly linked to the contribution amount. Furthermore, there are neither risk nor benefit exclusions, so those who are particularly threatened by particular risks and thus by economic and social weakness are not disadvantaged.

The insurance principle is the basis for the German system and for the typical localization as Bismarck system or conservative regime (see chapter 2.3.2).

The supply principle

When applying the supply principle, the benefits are not through contributions, but through the state budget, so financed by taxes. There is a legal entitlement to certain public services (e.g. civil servants 'and war victims' benefits) if special advance payments, in particular for the state, have been provided. Examples are civil servants and military service.

Like the insurance principle, the supply principle is determined by the principle of solidarity.

The principle of care

The welfare principle takes effect when the situation of a member of society, measured by income, falls below a defined subsistence level. The transfer payments (in kind, cash or services) provided for support are financed through tax revenuesIn contrast to the supply principle, the need is checked beforehand. Services, e.g. B. in the form of social assistance, however, are only granted on a subsidiary basis, i.e. if relatives who are obliged to provide maintenance are unable to provide support.

The principle of care is characteristic of the Beveridge model(see chapter 2.3.2).

2.3.2 Model types of social security

As already mentioned, the European Commission differentiates between four types of social security in Europe, depending on the dominance of the core principle; consequently, there is no uniform European security model.[24]

The continental European model

This type, also known as the Bismarck model, has its origins in the world's first social insurance schemes introduced in the 1880s by the then German Chancellor Bismarck. Countries in which this principle dominates are Germany, France, Austria and the Benelux countries. Social insurance is characteristic as a core area of ​​the social security system; d. H. social security is directly - or indirectly for family members - linked to the income position. The benefits are therefore mainly financed by contributions. Gaps in security are covered by a separate network of welfare services.

The Anglo-Saxon model

The origin of the Anglo-Saxon model is the Beveridge Report of 1948. In this model, also called the Beveridge model, the emphasis is on the principle of care. It is represented by Great Britain and Ireland and is characterized by the fact that comprehensive social security is guaranteed, in which, in addition to social security benefits at a low level, means-tested welfare benefits are of great importance.

The Scandinavian model

This group includes Denmark, Sweden and Finland. The model is characterized by the fact that social security benefits are defined as civil rights and, accordingly, all citizens are entitled to the same tax-financed security benefits. Employees receive additional income-related benefits from compulsory company systems (exception: unemployment insurance). Overall, the level of social benefits can be assessed as high.

The rudimentary model

The southern European countries (Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece) are assigned to this security model. As a rule, mixed insurance systems are to be found here, which are made up of company and social insurance systems, with large gaps in security and the overall level of benefits to be classified as comparatively low. The security systems of these countries (still) assume that additional security is provided by the primary networks (family and private charity).

3 Social Security Systems in Africa

After the understanding of social security in Europe and thus also its actual essential factor - namely formal security - has been explained, the social security systems in Sub-Saharan Africa are to be presented in this chapter.

3.1 Existing systems

Just as there is no internationally uniform definition for the term "social security", different classifications for the term "social security systems" can be found in the literature.[25]

The present work is based on a system that distinguishes between non-state (informal[26] ), d. H. privately self-organized security systems, and state (formal / formal) systems that are state-organized or are based on state law, differentiated (see over. 2).[27] In the following, the state security systems will first be subjected to an analytical consideration, especially since this is appropriate after the previous chapters.

Translator 2: Systematics of social security systems in Africa

Figure not included in this excerpt

Source: Own illustration.

3.1.1 State security systems

There were 172 countries worldwide at the end of the 1990s[28]that had branches of (direct) formal security systems, including most of the African countries. However, the systems that exist in Africa cannot be compared with the fully developed systems that can be found in the OECD countries, some CEE transition countries and a few Latin American and Arab countries, and which include a majority of the important branches of social security.[29]


In contrast to the European state social security system, African systems are almost exclusively linked to a permanent employment relationship and a regular income and thus only offer access to a small part of the population: primarily workers and employees in registered companies in the formal sector[30] - often referred to as the modern, protected sector - as well as civil servants, civil servants and the military. The latter group, including their relatives, usually do not make any financial contribution to their own social security.[31] The majority of the working population - and the population as a whole - are thus excluded from state security. This affects the rural population (small farmers, landless farmers and agricultural workers), small traders / self-employed[32] and others in the informal sector[33] Employed and unpaid family members (especially housewives)[34]who lack sufficient organization to exert pressure on the political rulers and demand (more) state security[35]such as B. the trade unions in Europe at the end of the 19th century. These connections show why the coverage of state social security in the African countries is so low; for sub-Saharan Africa it is 5-10% of all employed persons[36].


The existing (direct) formal security systems in Africa usually have their origins in the colonial era and are still shaped by this time today. At that time, colonizers initially saw the need for the Europeans living there, but increasingly also for the working locals, to guarantee a minimum of social security.[37] After gaining independence, the development of the systems was left to the discretion of the governments. This is the reason for the various forms that exist today in the individual countries and also within them[38] and at the same time explains why it is difficult to give an overview of the spectrum of formal security systems in Africa.

The following statements must be made for the formal security system[39]:

- How Tab. 1 It can be seen that some branches of social security in sub-Saharan Africa do not exist at all (exception: South Africa and the unlisted Mauritius). The risks covered almost without exception are the areas of old age, occupational disability and death of the breadwinner, as well as accidents at work, with social protection following accidents at work being the first to be introduced in African countries; in the Anglophone countries by the "Workmen's Compensation Act" around 1930 and in the francophone countries by the "French Oversea's Labor Act" in 1952.[40]

Due to the chronic underfunding and the small number of members, even the existing insurance companies do not offer adequate benefits.[41]

- With regard to medical care, the situation is as follows: A few countries in sub-Saharan Africa still have free health services parallel to health insurance - formerly mainly available in the Anglophone countries - financed by state budget funds. But due to the high cost, among other things. caused by HIV / AIDS, this can no longer be guaranteed and patients have to share in the costs, which excludes a growing number of the poor. For the majority of African countries, medical care is mainly provided through non-governmental channels, mainly through church organizations[42] and in some countries in West and East Africa within the framework of health insurance associations[43](see chapter 3.1.2), takes place.

Tab. 1: Branches of formal security in sub-Saharan Africa

Figure not included in this excerpt

Source: Supplemented from SSA 2003, p.16 f.

- Family protection takes place i. d. Usually in the form of widow's and orphan's pensions. It is noticeable here that this exists without gaps in the former French colonies and is not used in the formerly British colonies (exception: South Africa and Mauritius).
- With regard to social assistance, which is not included in the table, it should be noted that these and other state welfare measures do not reach the majority of those entitled; in addition, the offers outside of less urban areas do not exist in most African countries anyway.[44] Therefore, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are also here[45] active[46].
- The cover of the in Cape. 2.1 These risks usually take place through social insurance (see Tab. 1), Provident Funds, and Employer Liabilities. The latter are a form of insurance that obliges the employer to assume the costs; the amount of the compensation to be paid for the individual case is fixed by law. With a few exceptions, Provident Funds exist in the African states that were previously under British administration. They mainly serve to protect against old age, occupational disability and death. Pension funds are a kind of compulsory savings system for all employees: The amounts paid in bear annual interest and the accumulated capital is paid out either on a key date ("lump sum") or when the risk arises.[47] According to ZÖLLNER, this security system should be viewed as a preliminary stage of social (insurance) security, as there is no risk compensation in accordance with the solidarity principle and no periodic payment is guaranteed.[48] The extreme vulnerability to inflation is also to be viewed critically[49] and the fact that the state uses the contributions of the insured as a cheap source of borrowing[50].
- "Social Safety Net" - are an example of direct security systems: The target group-specific support programs were created in the 1990s to cushion the worsening social problems - caused by the structural adjustment programs implemented by the IMF and World Bank in many developing countries in the 1980s ( SAPs) - has been introduced.[51] They often fail to reach large parts of the target groups, as many programs start with work ability. So the poorest remain mostly undersupplied.

Further problems arise from the lack of logistics and the weak, corrupt administrative structures.[52]

According to SCHMIDT, the successful implementation of social security systems (based on the European model), which are primarily based on the insurance principle, is primarily linked to the following requirements:[53] which, however, are not or only partially available in the countries of Africa and other developing countries[54]:

- a functioning money economy
- stable economic development
- the existence of savings
- developed credit and insurance markets
- a functioning administrative infrastructure
- the existence of trade unions

3.1.2 Self-organized security systems

Traditional security systems

Traditional security systems are private solidarity networks (solidarity communities) on which around 90% of the population in Africa depend.[55] They are essentially based on membership of the family, relatives, neighborhood, age or occupation group and are often locally limited to a certain ethnic group or population group.[56] The predominant form of economy in traditional societies, for which these forms of security are characteristic, is agrarian subsistence production.[57]

Shaped by religion and spirituality, social norms regulate who has to provide which services for the protection of the elderly, the sick, orphans, widows and other needy people.[58] Important principles that determine action and redistribution are solidarity and reciprocity, whereby "traditional solidarity" is a system of mutual help and support and a network of exchange relationships (understood as a process of giving, receiving and reciprocating[59] ) describes within communities that should help secure the existence of the individual and the community.[60] It should be mentioned that the importance of traditional forms of security goes beyond the purely economic value. KLOCKE-DAFFA reports that exchange relationships are maintained even where there is no longer any economic necessity, because "maintaining social communication and one's reputation as a responsible giver" also determine the social affiliation and identity of the individual.[61]


[1] Partsch 1983, p. 13.

[2] The terms "developing countries" and "third world" are used synonymously here.

[3] World Bank 1997, p. 57.

[4] Partsch 1983, p. 13 and Zöllner 1997, p. 21.

[5] Lingenberg 1997, p. 12.

[6] ILO 1984, p. 2 f.

[7] Leliveld 1991, p. 210.

[8] Based on FES 1996, p. 77 f. And Leliveld 1991, p. 204 ff. And the literature cited there.

[9] Partsch 1983, p. 23; quoted from Kaufmann 1970, p. 10.

[10] Gsänger 1994, p. 247.

[11] Partsch 1983, p. 30.

[12] Gsänger 1994, p. 247 f. And Bossert 1988, p. 212.

[13] According to RIMLINGER, the security of a three-generation family is among pre-industrial, agrarian
Conditions endangered only by war, epidemics and crop failures; Partsch 1983, p. 28; quoted in Rimlinger 1968, p. 130.

[14] Lingenberg 1997, p. 18 f.

[15] On the characteristics of a modern society see Zacher 1988, p. 21 ff.

[16] Bossert 1988, p. 213 f.

[17] FES 1996, p. 16.

[18] Ibid., P. 14 ff.

[19] Lampert / Althammer 2001, p. 227.

[20] Leienbach 1998, p. 218.

[21] Lampert / Althammer 2001, p. 226.

[22] The following statements are based on Lampert / Althammer 2001, p. 422 f. And FES 1996, p. 23 f.

[23] The explanations are based on Lampert / Althammer 2001, p. 227 ff. And FES 1996, p. 26 f.

[24] The explanations in this chapter are based on Hanesch 1998, p. 15 f. And European Commission 1996,
P. 9 f. And 33 f.

[25] JÜTTING points out the different types of classification; Jütting 1999, p. 9.

[26] In the literature reviewed, the term "informal security" is defined differently. Often he will
understood as the third way between traditional and state security. In the present work, however, the term is to be seen solely as a demarcation to formal security; based on z. B. Zwanecki 2001.

[27] Based on BMZ 1999, p. 4 ff .; Scientific working group for universal church tasks of the German
bishops' conference 1997, p. 36 ff .; Zwanecki 2001, p. 21.

[28] In relation to the branches of illness, maternity, work accident, unemployment, occupational disability, old age, death of the breadwinner, medical care and familysee chap. 2.1); SSA 1999, p. Xli. It should be said, however, that only those countries that are members of the ILO are taken into account. So z. B. Namibia is not listed in the SSA list, although there is evidence of formal security systems in place in this state.

[29] BMZ 2002, p. 11.

[30] According to NOHLEN, the formal sector in developing countries has the following characteristics: good pay, a high degree of unionization, extensive compliance with labor protection provisions and concentration of activity on large companies that produce with capital-intensive technology and operate in oligopolistic markets; Nohlen 2000, p. 266 f.

[31] Gsänger 1993, p. 68 f. And p. 75.

[32] They are often unable to pay the employer's and employee's share for the insurance; ILO 2000, p. 196.

[33] On the characteristics of the informal sector see chap.

[34] BMZ 2002, p. 12 and Gsänger 1993, p. 67.

[35] Burgess / Stern 1991, p. 42 and FES 1996, p. 89.

[36] ILO 2002, p. 29.

[37] Sooth 1992, p. 49 ff.

[38] Zwanecki 1999, p. 30.

[39] For more detailed descriptions of formal security in individual countries, see Gruat 1990, pp. 406 f., Zwa-
necki 2001, p. 13 ff. and in particular SSA 2003, p. 25 ff.

[40] Zwanecki 2001, p. 30.

[41] Singers 2001, p. 13.

[42] Jütting 1999, p. 20 f.

[43] Gsänger 2003, p. 3.

[44] Gsänger 2003, p. 3.

[45] On the definition of NGOs see Mabe 2001, p. 446 f.

[46] BMZ 2002, p. 11.

[47] Zwanecki 1999, p. 32.

[48] Zöllner 1983, p. 561.

[49] Fuchs 1988, p. 43.

[50] Lingenberg 1997, p. 26; quoted from Sigg 1994, p. 68.

[51] As a rule, SAPs aimed to overcome balance of payments crises. Starting with stabilization measures for the purpose of restoring the macroeconomic equilibrium and containing inflation, inter alia. Cuts in public services or increases in user fees (e.g. for medical services).

[52] Gsänger 2003, p. 3.

[53] Schmidt 1993, p. 119 f .; supplemented by FES 1996, p. 89.

[54] FES 1996, p. 89 and Jütting 1999, p. 18 f.

[55] BMZ 1996, p. 4.

[56] BMZ 1999, p. 4.

[57] Lingenberg 1997, p. 26.

[58] At this point, we recommend the dissertation by KLOCKE-DAFFA to the interested reader. The work offers a detailed analysis of the social relationships of the Nama groups living in Namibia.

[59] Klocke-Daffa 1998, p. 14.

[60] FES 1996, p. 84 f.

[61] Klocke-Daffa 1998, p. 374 and p. 378.

End of excerpt from 74 pages