**9. Conclusion and way forward**

The paper has demonstrated that in the context of Botswana, standard of living and well-being have varied by historical period, beginning from pre-colonial, through colonial, and post-colonial eras to the present. Also evident is the fact that community development has been a key tool for promoting social development, with a view to improving standard of living and wellbeing of the population. The variations in levels of social provision noted, have essentially been a function of the social and economic changes, and challenges that the country has experienced over the years, and which in some respects it continues to experience. However, despite the noted challenges, Botswana's socioeconomic trajectory, including its social protection regime, remains quite robust and has, over the years, grown from strength to strength. Be that as it may, a number of shortfalls have been noted in regard to the social development efforts of the country, particularly if Sen's capabilities framework is used to define standard of living and well-being.

Some commentators have expressed concern that the government's approach to some community development initiatives has tended to be rather top-down, suggesting lack of participation of the masses in decision making. This of course does not augur well for successful community development. Ferguson-Brown [73], among others, argued that the top-down approach (to community development) which involves trying to change attitudes to suit national plans rather than identifying needs at community level may actually have alienated the people. Alienated people do not participate; they may become overly dependent on the government. The government does seem to admit that some of its strategies may have inadvertently created a dependency syndrome among the populace. The Ministry of Local Government, for instance, while addressing this theme, observed that emphasis on service delivery, rather than on strengthening community governance structures for economic empowerment, had led to unbridled dependency on government social support mechanisms [55].

The country's social protection regime appears to be doing relatively well. According to the Regional Hunger and Vulnerability Programme (RHVP),

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

Botswana boasts of one of the most comprehensive state-led social protection regimes in the southern African region. The same agency further noted that in Botswana, "Programming for poor, vulnerable and excluded groups is comprehensive by African standards…." ([62]: 1). The RSVP has gone so far as to claim that the social protection system in Botswana can serve as a 'model for Africa'. Even so, concerns have been raised in respect of the social protection system, and these include the apparent tendency on the part of the relevant authorities to simply focus on ensuring that social protection services are made 'available' and 'accessible' to everyone who qualifies, without putting sufficient attention to whether indeed the services are actually 'being utilized' by all concerned. Apparently, this has essentially been a function of inadequate monitoring and evaluation measures in place [28]. Other areas of concern raised in regard to social protection initiatives in place include lack of clear mechanisms that are in place for effective redistribution of the national wealth. Such is bound to impact negatively on standards of living and wellbeing.

RHVP [62]: 3 has observed thus, "*While most Batswana have benefited from these achievements, the new wealth is very unevenly distributed and many individuals and groups are marginalized economically, socially and/or geographically*". Other than that, there has been concern that the social protection schemes had tended to suffer from lack of coordination, poor implementation, ineffective utilization of resources and lack of accountability [28]. Concern has also been expressed to the effect that some of the schemes have promoted a dependency syndrome. Gadbolae [74], for instance, argued that one of the social protection schemes (Destitute Persons Programme) had ushered in a dependency syndrome. What was needed, he argued, are effective mechanisms to facilitate capacity building and empowerment with a view to facilitate self-reliance.

To its credit though, the government appears to be open to learn from experience, which in itself is a major plus. It (government) has continued to push ahead with its community development agenda, as well as expansion of its social protection regime meant to benefit mainly the needy. It is little wonder therefore that Statistics Botswana [75] reported a decline in the overall number of persons living below the poverty datum line from 499,467 in 2002/3 to 373, 388 in 2009/10. Though more recent figures were not immediately available, this positive trend appears to be continuing, suggesting the standard of living and wellbeing of the population (as defined by Sen,) continues on an upward trajectory, credit to the various community development initiatives currently in place across the country.
