**8. Community development, standard of living and well-being in Botswana today**

There is broad consensus that the government of Botswana has, over the years channeled a considerable amount of resources towards community development, thereby positively impacting the standard of living and wellbeing of the population [55, 56]. The poverty headcount index, for example, declined from 59% in 1985/1986 to 30.2% in 2002/2003 [26, 57] and then again to 23% in 2009/2010 [58]. Apparently, poverty in Botswana, as in many other developing countries, has mostly been measured using the poverty datum line (PDL), which is an estimate of the monthly cost of a basket of goods and services required to adequately meet the needs of a household. Currently, the country's PDL is calculated at P878.87 (\$97.65), and basing on this figure, nationally, a whopping 19.3% of the population lives below the PDL. While some of those living below the PDL have wages from employment, pensions, and remittances, those in extreme poverty are often unemployed or engage mostly in household and caregiving roles [59]. This group is the main target of the country's social safety nets, otherwise called the social protection system. Let us consider the impact of the social protection initiative in some detail.

To ensure opportunities for healthy and sustainable livelihood, and improved standard of living and well-being, especially for those living below the PDL, the government of Botswana, as noted earlier, introduced a formal social protection system, which constitutes public measures to provide income security for individuals [27, 47]. The social protection system is a public intervention mostly to support the poor and help households and communities to manage risk, and reduce poverty and vulnerability among the population [60]. Ntseane and Solo [28] concurred that, the government of Botswana, in an attempt to improve livelihoods and reduce poverty, introduced social safety nets for individuals,

#### *Standard of Living, Well-Being and Community Development: The Case of Botswana DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97680*

families and groups. The packages introduced included *social allowance schemes* (e.g. orphan care basket, school feeding programme, community home based care); *social assistance schemes* (e.g. destitute persons programme, needy students programme, labour based drought relief programme, *ipelegeng*) and *social insurance schemes* (e.g. pension scheme, workman's compensation) [27].

The various social protection schemes have played a major part in terms of preventing and protecting individuals against life cycle crises and helped many meet basic needs and enhance their welfare [27, 28]. Over the years, the government of Botswana has invested a fair share of the national income towards social protection programmes, to shelter the said vulnerable and disadvantaged groups from poverty, even though spending has declined due to diverse challenges that the country has faced [61]. Well-managed mineral wealth and political stability have however made it possible for the government to promote these social protection measures to improve standard of living and wellbeing [42, 62]. Even though the government has introduced social protection programmes to address the burden of poverty, apparently a considerable majority of the population continues to struggle in economic terms [42, 57, 63]. Even so, heavy social development investment by the government has paid tangible dividends in promoting social services, including literacy (education) and health.

Apparently literacy did not feature highly on the list of priorities in the precolonial and colonial eras; it was only 10 years after Independence that the government seriously took note of this need [64]. Ever since, education has been adjudged a critical developmental priority in Botswana. The government therefore has invested quite considerably in education through expanding infrastructure and services [65]. The heavy investment in education has been meant to ensure that all citizens have access to at least 10 years of basic education. The National Commission on Education of 1976, and the National Policy on Education of 1977 proposed changes in the education policy, to allow those who were illiterate to get back into the education system and access basic education [64]. According to The Revised National Policy on Education of 1994 Botswana's priority is universal access to basic education (10 years in school) [66].

The increased education expenditure allowed free education in all public schools and reduced average distance to school). Furthermore, government efforts went into ensuring that vulnerable groups had access to education by introducing needy students assistance programme for children from poor families, as well as a school feeding programme [28]. Other than that, the government established a national literacy programme to improve literacy levels, as well as free distance learning programmes [28]. These improvements over the years have seen a rise in the adult literacy rate in Botswana, which as at 2014 was reported to stand at 85.9%, an increase from 68.58% in 1991 [40, 67]. There is some consensus that those with higher education tend to have lower rates of poverty and a better standard of living. It would therefore not be far-fetched to assume that these efforts have had a positive impact where standard of living and wellbeing of the masses is concerned.

Health standards have been improving since Independence. However, it experienced a drawback when the country was hit by the HIV and AIDS pandemic in the 1990s, which caused a decline in economic growth as the government was forced to divert a considerable amount of resources to fighting HIV [46]. The government however, vigorously fought this scourge with all its might. HIV and AIDS awareness and education campaign measures were put in place and by 2002, free HIV Antiretroviral (ART) medication had been introduced to all HIV positive citizens. Currently, it is estimated that about 90% of those requiring ART do have access [68, 69].

Even so, as can be imagined, these initiatives came at a cost in financial terms. The consequences of these challenges and the limitations of Botswana's diamondled development model became apparent: economic growth slowed down, while inequalities remained high and job creation became limited [10], threatening standard of living and wellbeing. Despite the challenges, the government has forged ahead with its commitment to ensuring better standard of living and wellbeing of its citizens. Evidently, the government's commitment to the provision of social services to improve standard of living, remains unquestionable. This is confirmed by such indices as improved performance in universal access to health services, and also the fact that over 95% of the population live within 15 kilometers radius of a health facility [70].

Furthermore, apart from health, the government has also, over the years, invested heavily in such services as shelter [71], water and sanitation for the wellbeing of individuals [70, 72]. Additionally, efforts at provision of social welfare services have continued. As indicated in the National Development Plan 11, '… *existing social protection programmes were strengthened through enhancement of policies and strategies that aimed at cushioning the vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of the society, restoring their dignity, and improving their quality of life'* ([70]: 193). This clearly demonstrates that the government is seized with efforts to improve standard of living and wellbeing of the population.
