The contribution of non-formal social protection to social development in Botswana

Abstract

This article documents the non-formal system of social protection in Botswana, identifies opportunities for synergies between the non-formal and formal systems, and considers the challenges of integrating the two. Non-formal initiatives depend on traditional forms of social protection such as self-help, self-organisation, membership of a social group and cultural norms of community solidarity, reciprocity and obligations; whereas the formal social protection system is undergirded by statutes and laws, institutionalised in policy and legislation, publicly funded and delivered within national norms and eligibility criteria. The article argues that integrating the two could produce a complementary and responsive system of social protection that takes account of indigenous and other non-formal systems of support and enhances the delivery of social protection services, and that other countries in the region might derive lessons from Botswana's experience.

Keywords:

• Botswana
• formal social protection
• non-formal social protection
• self-help
• social development

1. Introduction

At just over two million, Botswana has a relatively small population. At independence in 1966, the country was ranked among the poorest in the world, but its position improved in the 1970s when diamonds were discovered. In recent times, Botswana has set an example of socioeconomic and political stability in the sub-region. Among the 15 members of the SADC (Southern African Development Community), the country's HDI (human development index) compares quite favourably at 0.694, being inferior only to that of the Seychelles (0.845) and Mauritius (8.04) and superior to all the rest, including South Africa (0.683) (NDSD, 2010). This incontrovertibly depicts a vibrant economy. Even so, up to a third of the population may be living below the national poverty datum line (Statistics Botswana, 2011). In addition, Botswana is among the countries in the sub-region hardest hit by HIV and AIDS. As at 2009, 331 432 citizens aged 15 and above were living with AIDS and 61 840 citizens aged 0 to 17 had lost their parents to AIDS (NACA, 2009). Those largely affected by poverty and disease are older people, children, youth and female-headed households. The government of Botswana has therefore opted to provide a fairly comprehensive formal social protection system. Non-formal social protection initiatives have played a critical role in promoting welfare and there is now debate about whether or not to integrate the two systems. Many commentators appear to support integration. For instance, the SADC Protocol has called for integration, but without spelling out the concomitant issues and challenges.

Since there is a dearth of documentary evidence on the role of the non-formal system of social protection in Botswana, this article aims to help fill the gap by examining how the non-formal system affects social development in Botswana. The Batswana government has recently indicated that it intends to develop a more holistic and integrated social development policy (Ministry of Local Government, 2010a). Documenting the contribution of the non-formal system will be useful for planning purposes. The non-formal system is important since the formal social protection initiatives currently in place in Botswana may not be sustainable given the country's narrow economic base and the current global economic crisis (RHVP, 2011). Successful integration of the two systems would undoubtedly strengthen the provision of social protection in the country, and such integration might serve as a model for the rest of southern Africa, where governments struggle to meet their social protection obligations.

Non-formal initiatives are locally arranged social protection measures that are predicated on people's cultural beliefs, norms and values. Olivier et al. (2008) note that the core values of the non-formal system include, among others, self-help, inherent solidarity, reciprocity, and contribution obligation and entitlement. These values are socially and culturally determined. In other words, non-formal social protection consists of self-organised safety nets based on membership of a particular social group or community that includes family, kinship, age group, neighbourhood or ethnic group. Olivier & Dekker (2003:562) state that non-formal social protection is the ‘counterpart’ of formal initiatives, ‘covering social protection mechanisms outside the formal social security paradigm’. The non-formal mechanisms are self-regulating, involve local community members in the provision of care and support, and are culturally motivated. They deliver a variety of benefits, including income and psychosocial and emotional support. In Botswana, the non-formal system complements the formal to an enormous extent, so it is important to explore the role it plays.

Formal social protection initiatives, on the other hand, are based on statutory arrangements provided by the state through policies and legislation. The World Bank defines (formal) social protection as public measures to provide income security for individuals (Kaseke, 2004). The International Labour Organization explains that the goal of (formal) social protection is not mere survival, but social inclusion and the preservation of human dignity (Kaseke, 2004). The term ‘formal social protection’ means public intervention to provide support to the critically poor and to help individuals, households and communities to manage risk (Holzmann & Jorgensen, 1990). Various African Union documents describe formal social protection as a ‘package’ of policies and programmes to reduce the poverty and vulnerability of large segments of the population and their exposure to risks, promote efficient labour markets, and enhance people's capacity to protect themselves against lack or loss of adequate income and basic social services (Partnership for African Social & Governance Research, 2011).

Before independence in 1966, the majority of the Batswana relied on the subsistence economy and non-formal social protection. With time, urbanisation began to undermine the non-formal social protection system as people migrated from rural villages to urban areas, abandoning vulnerable people such as the elderly and the frail. Social ills mushroomed. In response, the government launched the National Development Plan (1970–1975), in which it articulated for the first time the need to promote formal social protection based on the principles of social justice and equality of opportunity (GoB, 1970). To this end, the government mandated the then Social Welfare Unit to develop a social protection regime that would address the problems of poverty and destitution. The foundation was laid for the establishment of a minimum level of social protection, which is discussed below. However, the shortcomings of the formal system persisted, hence the continued role played by non-formal social protection. It is therefore pertinent that the nature and role of the non-formal system be documented.

Despite the growth of the formal social protection system, the people of Botswana cling to the non-formal system for many reasons. The formal system has disadvantages of programme gaps and inadequate reach of programmes for poor and vulnerable persons (Ellis et al., 2009; RHVP, 2011), and it lacks the comprehensive and inclusive policies that would contribute to long-term human security and enable people to get out of the quagmire of poverty. Various factors have eroded traditional cultural practices and systems of support – changes in economic conditions bringing poverty and vulnerability, changes in social and family structures, migration, HIV/AIDS – yet despite these negative impacts on non-formal social support, many people continue to rely on it, as documented below.

Globally, views differ on how the formal system of social protection should relate to the non-formal system. Some authors (e.g. RHVP, 2011) argue that formal social protection systems should be integrated with and build on rather than substitute for non-formal social support systems. Others, however, argue that although the non-formal system should continue while the formal system is being established, once it is established the formal system can replace the non-formal (Nhabinde & Schoeman, n.d.). Proponents of the latter school of thought thus see the non-formal system as transitory. This article argues that the former view, which calls for integration of the two systems, is more realistic for Botswana. Yet in Botswana today there is limited recognition of this view given that insufficient attention has been paid to what actually exists and how the two systems might work together. The reality is that developing countries such as Botswana, with their limited resources, cannot afford to discard the non-formal system that is still the mainstay of the majority of ordinary people.

The rest of this article is structured as follows. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework, Section 3 describes the non-formal systems of social protection in Botswana and Section 4 the formal systems, Section 5 considers possibilities for integrating the two and the various challenges, and Section 6 concludes and offers suggestions for the way forward. Note that we use the term ‘non-formal’ to mean organised but happening outside the formal system that is guided by laws, rather than ‘informal’, which would simply mean occurring in a manner that is not organised.

2. Social development and social protection

‘Social development’ is a relatively new concept that originated in the Global South and is associated with efforts by governments and non-government actors to improve the living conditions of millions of poor people the world over. Midgley (1995:250) sees it as ‘a process of planned change designed to promote the well-being of the population in conjunction with a dynamic process of economic development’. Patel (2005) argues that social programmes that enable people to participate in the productive economy are the most effective way to enhance their welfare and achieve economic development. Midgley & Tang (2001) say that social development requires purposeful intervention from state and non-state actors and the creation of organisational and institutional arrangements at national level that harmonise economic and social policies within a comprehensive commitment to people-centred development, and that to this end government action through protective policy and legislation is indicated. Gray (1996) points out that social development discourages dependency, promotes the active involvement of people in their own development, employs a multi-faceted, multi-sectoral approach, and encourages partnership between the state and other stakeholders. Proponents therefore argue that well-being is about development of people, and that social investment in key social services actually contributes to economic development.

Patel (2005) observes that South Africa has adopted a social development approach to social welfare that includes social protection and developmental welfare services based on a rights-based approach, active citizenship, participation in development, and empowerment of the socially excluded and marginalised. She envisages a leading role for the state in social development in partnership with individuals, families, communities, civil society organisations and the private sector. She points out that post-apartheid social development policies have attempted to integrate the formal and the non-formal systems of support through a partnership approach to welfare service delivery, but that many institutional challenges remain (Patel, 2008). She considers social development programmes to be investments with significant economic and social benefits to society and not a drain on societal resources (Patel, 2005:85).

Social development is thus about opportunities for participation and for vulnerable groups to pursue a sustainable livelihood. It addresses the socioeconomic and political concerns of individuals and communities about critical challenges associated with pervasive threats to their livelihoods and dignity, and their very lives. In developing countries such as Botswana, primary threats to social development are poverty, unemployment and disease, including HIV/AIDS. Consequently, any meaningful definition of social development must encompass social protection, since this is the heart of the matter.

The term ‘social protection’ covers, broadly, public and private measures, or a combination of the two, designed to protect individuals against life-cycle crises that curtail their capacity to meet their needs (Kaseke & Dhemba, 2007; Mpedi, 2008; Midgley, 2013). Social protection transcends the market focus of the social policy approach and includes the contribution of the state and other actors in development and innovations at household, neighbourhood and community levels. Considerable attention has been focused on formal systems of social protection at the expense of the non-formal systems. Yet the need to account for activities outside the formal sphere cannot be over-emphasised. Non-formal arrangements such as indigenous forms of social provision and efforts by CBOs (community-based organisations), FBOs (faith-based organisations) and NGOs (non-governmental organisations) play a critical role in assisting individual households and communities (Midgley, 1994; Maes, 2003; Olivier & Dekker, 2003; Foster, 2004; Patel, 2005, 2008; Mpedi, 2008). The formal system on its own has not been able to cater sufficiently to the needs of ordinary people in developing countries such as Botswana. Poverty, unemployment, war, famine, harvest failures, floods, chronic illness and loss of assets continue to cripple many developing economies, leaving people without any meaningful form of support. Further, the HIV/AIDS pandemic has forced many communities to rely more on the non-formal social support system, putting this system under severe pressure.

The non-formal system includes what Patel et al. (2012) refer to as indigenous practices: essentially community-based welfare practices that historically have promoted social welfare. The Regional Hunger and Vulnerability Programme (RHVP, 2010) refers to the non-formal system as ‘informal insurance’, explaining that it comprises two main features, social reciprocity and household asset building, and argues that formal and non-formal systems can co-exist to provide more comprehensive social protection.

Donors, NGOs and governments in a number of countries have built on indigenous practices to support poor and vulnerable persons. Examples of these practices include the sharing of produce from the chief's fields in Swaziland, small livestock transfers in Zimbabwe, burial societies in Lesotho and farm input support in Mozambique and Malawi. These are examples of social protection strategies built on traditional ways of providing support; they are innovative new initiatives designed to suit contemporary conditions (RHVP, 2007).

As this brief literature review shows, attempts are being made to mainstream the discourse on the non-formal social protection system by placing it firmly in the public domain. According to the RHVP (2010), non-formal approaches on the African continent have been eroded in recent decades, for reasons such as urbanisation, industrialisation and regionalisation. But the non-formal social protection system has not ceased to exist. Indigenous welfare practices continue to play a significant role in social development although they are seldom recognised. For this reason their contribution needs to be noted and documented.

The RHVP (2011) argues that because of its long-standing commitment to state-led social protection, its solid governance and its economic potential, Botswana of all African countries has the best chance of expanding its social protection system. However, the RHVP (2011) discusses only the formal social protection system in Botswana and does not appreciate the role of the non-formal system.

3. Non-formal social protection in Botswana

Three types of non-formal support are common in Botswana: family and kin, community support networks and mutual aid associations. Although research has shown that rural–urban migration, and famine, HIV/AIDS and other shocks, have weakened the effectiveness of such support (Apt, 2002; Emmanuel et al., 2011), indigenous welfare practices still operate in many African countries, Botswana included, and will continue to provide support to the poor and vulnerable (Shaibu & Wallhagen, 2002; Maes, 2003; Foster, 2007; Ntseane & Solo, 2007; Mpedi, 2008; Patel et al., 2012).

3.1 The extended family and kin support systems

In sub-Saharan Africa the extended family system, defined by Schapera (1970) as a group of families closely united by blood or marriage, is the most effective support for a household facing a crisis (Foster, 2007). Members of extended families assist each other socially, economically, psychologically and financially. Such assistance may take the form of regular urban–rural and inter-household income transfers. When crops fail, family members in town will send food and cash to needy relatives in rural areas. A relative in town who becomes unemployed will receive food from the rural areas or be received back into the rural homestead. Households experiencing income stress due to HIV and AIDS may send their children to live with relatives, who become responsible for feeding the children in their care (Foster, 2004, 2007; Miller et al., 2006; USAID, 2010).

The extended family also fosters children orphaned by AIDS. Fostering of children by aunts, uncles, grandparents and other relatives is common in Africa. In sub-Saharan Africa, an estimated 90% of orphaned children live with extended family members (Miller et al., 2006). Working or income earning households provide support in the form of food, access to education, shelter, clothing, psychosocial support and other basic needs (Foster, 2004; Miller et al., 2006).

In Botswana the extended family, driven by principles of solidarity and reciprocity, continues to provide a safety net in times of crisis. Members come together to carry out important domestic and economic activities: building or thatching huts, clearing the fields, weeding, harvesting, helping one another with gifts, livestock and other commodities. Well-to-do families foster or formally adopt relatives' children. The concept of motlhoki (‘destitution’) has always existed in the Setswana vocabulary, but the extended family has always been there to provide support and care.

3.2 Community support networks

Community support networks also continue to play an important role in meeting critical needs, be they spiritual, social or economic. In the pre-colonial era, this assistance was provided by the village chiefs, neighbours and other community members. Prior to independence, the chief occupied a position of privilege and power over his people (Wass, 1969; Schapera, 1970), and it was under his auspices that non-formal social protection was arranged. Two main non-formal social protection schemes were regulated by the chiefs: masotla (large tribal pastures) and kgamelo (milk cattle). The masotla belonged to the chief, and crops grown on these pastures were stored in tribal granaries (difalana) and then distributed to the community in times of starvation and to disadvantaged individuals from time to time. The chief sometimes gave kgamelo to the poorer members of the community to supplement their livelihood, but these animals were more often entrusted to prominent commoners for herding (Schapera, 1970; Denbow & Phenyo, 2006); milk from these animals would often be given to vulnerable groups in the community (Schapera, 1970).

Other support systems, such as mafisa, majako, go tshwara teu or bodisa and letsema or molaletsa, were provided by neighbours or the community. The mafisa system (lending cattle to the poor) was a special contract according to which destitute people were given cattle by wealthy relatives (Schapera, 1970). The majako system allowed poor people to work in the fields of the rich in return for a share of the harvest. Go tshwara teu or bodisa gave able-bodied poor people the opportunity to break the cycle of poverty by looking after cattle and receiving a cow each year in return (BIDPA, 1997). Letsema or molaletsa allowed members of the community to perform voluntary work on behalf of a deserving family. Although this type of support is diminishing, it still exists in some rural areas.

Community-based initiatives tend to focus on responding to poverty and unemployment and mitigating the impact of HIV/AIDS. Some attempts have been made to integrate the formal and the non-formal systems. Below, we review three such initiatives.

Introduced by the government in 1995, the CHBC (community home-based care) model provides comprehensive care services at home and at community levels in order to meet the physical, psychological, social and spiritual needs of terminally ill patients, including people living with AIDS and their families (Department of Social Services & Ministry of Local Government, 2005). Volunteers from the community are trained to work with family members to provide support such as bathing the patient, cleaning the homestead, cooking and assisting the patient to adhere to medication. NGOs and CBOs are also involved (NACA, 2010). Assistance is also provided in the form of a monthly food basket, transport, relocation, counselling, rehabilitation and burial.

In 2009 the number of registered patients was 3242, compared to 5745 in 2002. The decline in the number of beneficiaries reflects the transformation that free anti-retroviral treatment has achieved in the lives of individuals living with HIV (Ministry of Local Government, 2010b). The CHBC programme has helped the majority of the beneficiaries to return to an economically active life. Further, the CHBC model demonstrates how government programmes (formal social protection) can be integrated into non-formal initiatives spearheaded by community organisations and NGOs.

The FSP (Family Strengthening Programme) is an initiative that fosters community involvement. It has been run since 2008 by SOS Children's Villages, an independent NGO that takes care of orphans and abandoned, destitute and traumatised children. The FSP is a community-based child care programme aimed at strengthening the capacity of families and communities to take care of children (SOS Botswana, 2011). The programme supports disadvantaged families faced with adverse external circumstances within their communities. Beneficiaries include single parents and households headed by siblings or grandparents. The programme complements government efforts by targeting vulnerable children who do not qualify for the orphan care programme but are very poor and needy. By 2010 the programme had reached an estimated 1526 children. The programme works in close partnership with social workers, community leaders and community volunteers.

Finally, there is BOCAIP (Botswana Christian AIDS Intervention Programme), a national level FBO that operates a network of 11 Christian HIV/AIDS counselling centres in 11 districts across the country. The organisation works in close partnership with local churches, religious leaders, FBOs and other HIV/AIDS service networks. With approximately 130 employees spread across the country, BOCAIP's primary goal is to mobilise and coordinate the Christian community to implement HIV-related behavioural change interventions, products and services (BOCAIP, 2008). In 2010, BOCAIP provided a total of 39 555 counselling sessions in locations across Botswana. These included pre-test, post-test and ongoing supportive sessions as well as marital or relationship and spiritual counselling. A further 5527 home visits were made to provide psychosocial support. An estimated 23 000 people were reached in clinics, workplaces, churches and schools (BOCAIP, 2010). Notably, these interventions help people by providing services, not cash, and are designed to improve human capabilities.

3.3 Mutual aid associations

Responding to specific member-defined contingencies, mutual aid associations embrace the principles of botho (i.e. ubuntu)3 reciprocity and solidarity (Ntseane & Solo, 2007). These aid associations include burial societies and savings and credit enterprises, the three most dominant forms of non-formal social support initiative in southern Africa (Foster, 2007).

3.3.1 Burial societies

Burial societies (diswaeti) are self-reliant institutions found in many villages and urban settings in Botswana (Ngwenya, 2003). They fall into three categories: work-based societies that draw memberships from workplaces in urban settings, ethnic-oriented burial societies that are predominantly defined along ethnic lines, and communal burial societies whose memberships cuts across social and physical boundaries.

Social networks within kin relations often determine membership of a burial society (Ngwenya, 2003). The primary role of the society is to provide emergency relief to members and their relatives during bereavement. The support rendered may be in the form of financial contributions as well as physical labour during funerals, and psychosocial support and other essential services to allow the family time to grieve with dignity for their loved one. Burial societies receive no external financial support (Ngwenya, 2003). Members collectively pay an agreed subscription fee that ranges from P5 to P30 (less than US$1 to about US$4.5).4 Older and destitute members of these societies often use their monthly cash transfers, such as pensions and destitute cash allowance, to pay for these subscriptions (Seleka et al., 2007). These societies all have member-nominated management committees who oversee the financial assets, facilitate fund-raising activities and maintain contact with key stakeholders.

3.3.2 Savings and credit associations

The financial sector in Botswana comprises both the formal and non-formal sub-sectors. Commercial and merchant banks are regulated by the Banking Act of 1995. Included in the non-formal sector are self-regulated financial transactions, including those overseen by rotating savings and credit associations, pawn shops and landlords, and financial transactions between friends and relatives. Available data show that non-formal financial activities continue to grow in urban and semi-urban areas and major villages (Mosene, 2002). This sector is apparently dominated by women (Okurut & Thuto, 2010). These activities play a key role in meeting financial needs, particularly for those who have limited access to the formal financial market. Commercial banks in Botswana lend money to individuals who have secure and permanent jobs or are able to offer collateral security for loans. Such conditions tend to drive many low income earners to non-formal financial sources.

Okurut & Thuto (2010) have established that medium and low income earners are the target clientele for non-formal institutions. The SACCOS (savings and credit co-operative society) at the University of Botswana, which has a membership of 300, is an example of a workplace-based initiative. Member benefits include investment and credit facilities, low income loans, high interest income on savings and a share of the SACCOS's profits (Kealeboga, 2011).

4. Formal social protection in Botswana

In Botswana, national planning principles of democracy, development, self-reliance and unity have been emphasised since independence, and it is these same principles that have guided formal social protection in the country (GoB, 1970). Below, we briefly review each of the formal social protection schemes.

4.1 Programme for Destitute Persons

The rationale for this programme is ‘to ensure that government provides minimum assistance to the genuine destitute persons to ensure their good health and welfare’ (GoB, 2002). The programme targets individuals without assets, people with mental and physical disabilities, minor children without family support, and victims of natural disasters or temporary hardships. Destitute persons who are able-bodied are provided with rehabilitation activities that enable them to become self-sufficient and hence exit the programme. Benefits for this means-tested programme include a food basket, shelter, medical care, transport, funeral expenses, exemption from service levies and other necessary services. Children under the age of 18 are eligible to receive school uniforms, toiletries, transport, protective clothing, boarding requisites, tuition fees and street clothes (Ntseane & Solo, 2007). The monthly food basket is worth between P450 and P750, and there is also a cash component of P81. Currently, 40 865 individuals are registered on this programme (Ministry of Local Government, 2010a).

4.2 The Orphan Care Programme

A social allowance programme, this programme is not means-tested. It is open to children under the age of 18 who do not have parents and lack access to basic necessities. The programme has done much to respond to the immediate needs of orphans. Benefits for orphans include a nutritionally balanced monthly food basket worth P216 developed by the Ministry of Local Government and Lands in partnership with the Ministry of Health, clothing, toiletries, assistance with educational needs and psychosocial support. In 2002, 39 571 children were on the government's register, while by 2004 the figure had increased to 47 964. By 2008/9 the figure had risen to 48 119 (RHVP, 2011).

4.3 Vulnerable Group and School Feeding Programmes

These twin programmes distribute meals and nutritional supplements to people who are vulnerable to malnutrition. Beneficiaries include pregnant and lactating mothers, nutritionally at risk under-fives and tuberculosis patients. Supplementary feeding is provided to all under-fives, while food rations are distributed to lactating mothers. The School Feeding Programme targets all school children in government schools. Students receive at least one meal per day. In 2009/10 the figure for registered primary school beneficiaries stood at 261 513 and for secondary school beneficiaries at 165 097. The Vulnerable Group Feeding Programme, which targets adults and pre-school children at nutritional risk, has been quite popular: in 2009/10 there were 239 985 beneficiaries (RHVP, 2011).

4.4 Universal Old Age Pension scheme

This scheme was introduced to arrest the increasing vulnerability of older people, a result of the rural-to-urban migration which is severely weakening the extended family structure. All older people are eligible, irrespective of their socioeconomic backgrounds. Those registered under other schemes such as the Programme for Destitute Persons are still eligible to receive their pension benefits if they qualify on account of age. The cash transfer is made through beneficiaries' bank accounts or at the post offices (Ministry of Local Government, 2010b). The number of beneficiaries steadily increased from 84 577 in 2003 to 86 859 in 2006. In 2010, 91 446 beneficiaries received P220 per month each.

4.5 Remote Area Development Programme

This programme is rolled out in designated settlements through the Department of Social Services. It targets over 90% of remote area dwellers in 64 settlements in seven districts (BIDPA, 1997). Virtually all remote area dwellers are eligible to receive rations and allowances based on their destitution. The government has also established the Economic Promotion Fund to create employment opportunities for remote area dwellers. The Fund provides seed money for business-oriented activities, including game ranching, handicrafts and agricultural activities such as poultry rearing and livestock production and related activities such as tannery (Seleka et al., 2007). An estimated 43 070 beneficiaries are currently enrolled in this programme (Ministry of Local Government, 2010a; GoB & UNDP, 2010).

4.6 Ipelegeng Programme

Ipelegeng is a nationwide government sponsored programme that targets unskilled and semi-skilled labour, and it is envisaged as a source of supplementary income. It involves carrying out essential development activities across the country with the objective of providing short-term employment support and relief. Local authorities assign public works tasks to beneficiaries, such as collecting litter, minor construction, clearing of fields, maintenance of buildings and secondary roads. Current wage rates are pegged at P18/day for casual labourers and P24/day for their supervisors. An estimated 19 431 people benefited from the programme in 2010, compared to 14 363 in 2008 (Ministry of Local Government, 2010a).

5. Synergies, opportunities and challenges

It is evident from the above discussion that the formal and non-formal social protection systems have the same goal – that of providing various forms of support to a variety of social groups. The relevant focus areas are generally similar: they include food and basic needs for various categories of people including the extremely poor, destitute and older persons. There is therefore a need to build synergies between the two systems. Four points suggested by Olivier et al. (2008) for consideration when integrating formal and non-formal social safety net systems in Africa can usefully be adapted to help find the best way to do this in Botswana:

•	Properly understand social protection arrangements: It is pertinent to understand the reasons for the existence of the non-formal forms of social protection, the different types, their role and the nature of the current relationship between the formal and the non-formal social safety nets in Botswana before attempting integration.
•	Preserve the cultural basis of traditional social protection arrangements: It is important to ensure that integrative measures do not destroy the cultural basis of non-formal social protection. If integrative measures are seen to disrupt the cultural basis, ordinary people are likely to resist them.
•	Appreciate that non-formal initiatives are not a substitute for formal measures: Traditional arrangements should not be seen as the ultimate medium serving the social protection needs of the people in any given country. Formal safety nets continue to play a critical role, and they ought to be revamped with a view to increasing their clientele base.
•	Consider issues of compatibility: Start with initiatives that lend themselves more easily to integration. An example would be to consider seriously the relationship between burial societies and savings clubs (non-formal) in relation to modern social insurance schemes (formal).

While the integration of the formal and non-formal systems has been advocated by many, the purpose of integration should be to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the social protection regime. The greatest benefit of successful integration, where the two systems truly complement each other, is the extension of sufficient levels of social protection to those in need (Olivier et al., 2008).

There are a number of challenges to the integration of formal and non-formal systems in Botswana: the apparent lack of acknowledgement of the non-formal system and how it complements the formal system; a lack of clear understanding of the different types of non-formal initiatives and their role; and the fact that indigenous welfare systems tend to lack organisational capacity and resources, both human and material. Hence, mechanisms are needed to recognise the strengths and limitations of both systems and to create a new system that builds on the strengths of each in order to progressively build a national social protection regime for all citizens. Government and international partners need to provide assistance such as capacity building and financial and technical expertise.

Further, Olivier et al. (2008) argue that in instances where the formal and the non-formal co-exist, the non-formal systems tend to get over-burdened, sometimes even entirely substituting for the formal. For Botswana this is particularly true in the context of the high HIV prevalence and declining social and economic conditions. The challenge therefore is to ensure that integrative measures do not destroy the spirit of solidarity and reciprocity that is embedded in the indigenous welfare system.

Finally, as other countries in the southern African region attempt to develop and grow their social protection systems, account needs to be taken of non-formal provisions and how these might be integrated into the overall system of social protection based on country-specific conditions.

6. Conclusion and the way forward

This article has considered the nature of social protection in Botswana. It noted that, unlike in other African countries, the formal system in Botswana has fairly wide coverage, yet gaps still do exist. These have been filled by the non-formal system, which continues to play a critical role in social protection today. From the analysis, it can be concluded that the non-formal social protection system is an integral part of Botswana's welfare regime, despite the fact that its contribution has not been officially appreciated.

In regard to the way forward, we call for the integration of the formal and non-formal systems as this would aid the development of a comprehensive social protection regime in Botswana. Such a development would, without doubt, enhance service delivery, particularly among vulnerable groups, and address the needs of the poor and the vulnerable more effectively. If the government of Botswana takes this route, the country could offer a lesson to other sub-Saharan African countries on how to develop a social protection floor that is more responsive to the local context.

Notes

³For a definition of this concept, see Whitworth & Wilkinson (2013).

⁴1 USD = 7 to 7.5 BWP at the time of writing.