THE UNEQUAL STRUGGLE TO LIVE

The Zambia 2010 Living Conditions Monitoring Survey Report is now published and available. It makes interesting reading, though it runs to 304 pages. However, an electronic version can be easily downloaded through the Zambian Economist site:
http:/www.zambian-economist.com

The 2010 ZLCMS followed on from the 2006 ZLCMS, both looked at community needs and the impact of programmes designed to promote social, economic and community development in the community. They collected data on the sort of social and economic development people would like to see in their community.

There were 14 categories and participants could choose 4. They also enquired about any recent changes in the last year and the extent to which they were an improvement. Having the two reports meant that comparisons and changes over time could be examined too. The table below contains the 2010 % figures listing people's choice of projects.

DEVELOPMENT	Rural	Urban	Zambia
Health	47.0	27.1	39.9
Food and other Consumer Goods	42.0	34.4	39.3
Water Supply	41.8	24.0	35.4
Education	34.1	24.5	30.7
Agricultural	33.5	7.3	24.1
Roads	22.6	24.3	23.2
Employment	5.2	18.9	10.1
Police/Security	9.2	8.3	8.9
Sanitation	4.2	17.3	8.9
Hammer mills	12.4	2.3	8.8
Credit	6.6	8.5	7.3
Housing	3.6	6.5	4.6
Transport	4.3	2.5	3.6
Not stated	2.7	9.8	5.3

 

Number of households: 16 000 000 (Rural) 891 000 (Urban) 2 491 000 (All Zambia) 176 000 (Western Province)

We see 40% of all Zambian households overall wanted health services provided in their community; this was the first choice in rural areas, but not in urban areas where people most wanted food and other consumer goods. Unsurprisingly, the number of households listing water supply, education, agricultural and hammer mills is higher in rural than urban areas, while households wanting employment and sanitation is higher in urban than rural areas. This was also the case in 2006.

Over time there have been interesting drops in percentages such as urban households wanting employment (33% in 2006 compared to 19% in 2010). This suggests that the urban economy is creating jobs. This is to be expected if the reported annual growth rate of 6-7% is to be believed. Health services, food and consumer goods and water supply came in first second and third for both years, however, the number of households preferring these fell from 48% in 2006 to 39% in 2010. The proportion stating that they would like a water supply fell from 43% in 2006 to 35% in 2010, with the rural and urban proportions falling by similar levels.

 

The desire for better roads increased from 17% in 2006 to 24% in 2010.

In 2010, around 50% of households overall indicated that they would like to see roads improved in their communities; though this proportion has dropped from 59% in 2006, although it was the top project to be improved in 2006.

Almost 30% of households in 2010 indicated that they would like health and education facilities to be improved in their communities; in rural areas, 37% wanted an improvement in education facilities and 31% with health facilities, whilst n urban households the desire for health facilities was substantially higher than education facilities, 27% and 16% respectively. Urban households also generally preferred improved sanitation and police/security, whilst rural people opted for agriculture and hammer-mills. There were similar trends in 2006.

Both the 2010 and 2006 LCMS considered a period of 12 months prior to the survey when asking whether projects or changes had taken place in the community. In both 2010 and 2006, most households said the greatest changes were in the field of communication with the coming of cellphone networks. More urban than rural households were affected and over all the percentage dropped from 49-36%. This was also the trend for improved radio and TV reception.

Transport services were ranked 6th in both years, with twice as many urban than rural respondents listing this.

Police services ranked 9th in both years, again urban households listed this project roughly three times more frequently than the rural population.

School rehabilitation moved from 26% in 2006 to 15% of households in 2010; in 2006, the rural proportion was 30% with the difference between the two areas narrowing. The only projects for which importance scores increased notably over time were ‘building of new school’ and ‘rehabilitation of an existing school’.

To summarise, the most important and greatest impact projects were cell phone, radio reception, health services, transport, hammermill and new schools. Other areas where there were falls in importance and noted improvements were found in sanitation, piped water and vet services

We have from time to time kept an eye on the food basket so it is good from this report to have a chance to monitor it over time.

 

FOOD BASKET FOR A FAMILY OF SIX 2004-2010 in Unrebased Kwacha

ITEMS	Quantity	UP 2004	Cost2004	UP 2006	Cost2006	UP2010	Cost2010
Cooking Oil	2.5l	19 628	19 628	17 653	17 653	28 698	28 698
Beans	2 kg	4760	9520	6041	12082	8746	17492
Dry Fish	1 kg	21856	21856	22317	22317	30522	30522
Kapenta	2kg	30062	60124	30336	60672	49225	98450
Milk	2l	2005	8020	2186	8744	3298	13192
Onion	4kg	3040	12160	3864	15456	4765	19060
Groundnuts	3kg	5425	16275	5743	17229	7705	23115
Salt	1kg	1880	1880	2424	2424	4516	4516
Tomatoes	4kg	1846	7384	2253	9012	3073	12292
Roller Meal	25kg x 3.6	25220	90792	26288	94637	47736	171850
Vegetables	7.5kg	1437	10777	2070	15525	2185	16388

 

Total Cost: K258 416 (2004)                        K275 751 (2006)                   K435 574 (2010)

Poverty Line: K57 172 (2004)          K61007 (2006)                      K96 356 (2008)

(Adult Equivalent)

 

The report dealt with a number of different areas using statistics gathered from 2010 census. It covered a wide range of topics, including demographics, migration, health education, economic activities, household assets, income and expenditure, poverty analysis and coping strategies, housing, child health and nutrition and ending with community development.

It was also useful to be able to take a few snap-shots of Western Province from the tables and see where we stand in the league table in comparison with the rest of Zambia.

 

2010

Toilets: No facilities (% of Households)

Western Province                              Zambia

53.4%                                                  12.6%

 

Fuel Use:

Firewood                     87                                    57                   

Charcoal                      7.0                                   27

Electricity                    2.5                                   16

 

Light Energy:

Paraffin                       30                                      42

Electricity                    3.5                                    19

Candles                       22                                      22

Diesel                          4.6                                     8.0

Fire                              31                                     7.5

Torch                           0.6                                    0.2

Solar                            0.8                                    1.0

Other                           1.5                                    1.5

None                           5.0                                    1.0

 

Electric Connection:

Yes                              4.0                                     22

No                               94                                      77

 

Access to treated drinking water:

Yes                              6.0                                    32

No                               94                                      68

 

Living in traditional daub, wattle, mud and thatched hut:

75                                                                                              38

 

Living in an improved dwelling - (zinc roofed ‘flat’):

15                                                                                              23    

 

Meals per day:

One:                            5.0                                        4.0

Two:                            62                                         46

Three:                          33                                         47       

 

% of Household Expenditure on Food and Non-food items:

Food items                  58                                           42

Non food items           42                                           58

 

Monthly Household Expenditure:

Total                            K482                                         K970

Food                            K278                                         K470

Non-Food                   K202                                          K486

Per Capita                   K121                                          K226   `

 

In reading this report and seeing all these figures you realize that these are millions of individual people's life stories. This awful poverty is not God's fault for he has provided us with all the earth's resources, nor is it the fault of the poor since most are born in to it.  Nor can it just be put down to greed, indifference, incompetence, corruption or a legacy from colonialism, though all have had a share in creating it. This is not just an economic and political matter it is a moral one. How long are these  gross inequalities going to be allowed to continue? These statistics bring to light widespread social injustice that ignores hunger and stunted children, the alienation of the poor and the indignity of impoverished lives.

 

In 2 Corinthians 8 Paul gives some practical advice on the matter:

Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard-pressed but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, as it is written: 'They who gathered much did not have too much, and they who gathered little did not have too little.'