Tag Archives: development

Dear Chambi: don’t stop blogging, your voice is needed

from Nipashe, Dec 1, 2016

Dear Chambi,

I hope you don’t mind me writing you a public letter like this. But it feels like the most appropriate way of saying what I want to say.

Because your decision to stop blogging has left me dejected. While I don’t always agree with what you say (I usually do), yours has been one of very few voices asking important but difficult questions. Those who find #UhuruWaKujieleza (freedom of speech) to be an annoyance (or, if we are charitable, an unaffordable luxury,) will be celebrating. We are all worse off as a result. Continue reading

People-powered maps to help girls escape FGM – how to get involved

Filling in the blank spaces …

Can you help girls in Tanzania escape Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) without ever leaving the comfort of your home? Well, there’s a project that some friends of mine are supporting that claims to do exactly that.

If you’re in London next Monday (January 16), there will be a seminar at 5pm at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), where this and two related mapping projects in Tanzania will be the topic. But whether or not you can make it to the seminar, the beauty of this project is that you can contribute from almost anywhere.  Continue reading

Chart #39: Interactive – Gender in Tanzania, from Tanzania Human Development Report

As I mentioned last week, the Tanzania Human Development Report has a wealth of interesting data tables, many of which have data broken down by region for the first time. I plan to explore this data over the next few weeks. To start, I have prepared a dashboard showcasing the report’s data on gender.

Specifically, this includes two things:

1. Analysis by region:

  • A Gender Development Index (GDI) score for each region of mainland Tanzania, based on the health, time spent in education, and living standards of women and men in each region. Along with the GDI score, I have included charts on each of the indicators that is used to calculate the GDI.
  • Women in decision making positions, by region. This gives the percentage of each region’s MPs, councillors and key officials (RCs, RASs, DCs, DASs) who are female and male.
  • You can choose which region to look at by selecting from the drop-down menu.

2. Analysis by indicator:

  • This shows GDI and Human Development Index (HDI) scores for each region, by gender along with scores for the component indicators that make up the HDI, and representation of women in various decision making groups.
  • Again, you can choose which indicators to look at using the drop-down menus.

Continue reading

Four bills later: is blogging with statistics in Tanzania now only for adrenalin junkies?

Nipashe, 25/3/15 - "Media Bills" under tight security

Nipashe, 25/3/15 – “Media Bills” under tight security

By Aidan Eyakuze and Ben Taylor *

At first we were excited. Tanzanian media and freedom of information advocates had been waiting for years for the Access to Information (ATI) and Media Services Bill, and the timetable for the latest parliamentary session included both. Were things finally moving?

The timetable also had bills on Statistics and Cybercrime. Was President Kikwete trying to push through a series of new laws before his time in office comes to an end later this year? He has played a leading role on the global stage on these issues, particularly through the Open Government Partnership (OGP), so perhaps this was an attempt to enshrine open government as his legacy.

Then we were concerned. Why were the ATI and Media Bills not available on the bunge website? Why were they being rushed through under certificates of urgency, severely limiting opportunities for consultation and debate? Continue reading

Chart of the week #33: Multidimensional poverty in Tanzania

Those clever folks at Oxford University, specifically the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), have put together a dataset on multi-dimensional poverty. It covers not just 110 developing countries, but also a total of 803 sub-national regions within countries. Their measure doesn’t look at wealth or income, but instead at ten indicators covering health, education and living standards. According to their website, this

“complements traditional income-based poverty measures by capturing the severe deprivations that each person faces at the same time with respect to education, health and living standards. The MPI assesses poverty at the individual level. If someone is deprived in a third or more of ten (weighted) indicators, the global index identifies them as ‘MPI poor’, and the extent – or intensity – of their poverty is measured by the number of deprivations they are experiencing.

The indicators are years of schooling, school attendance, child mortality, nutrition, access to electricity, sanitation and water supply, the type of household flooring and fuel for cooking and household assets. There’s a full list at the bottom of the post, together with details of criteria for defining households as “deprived” under each measure.

First, let’s look at the various dimensions of poverty in Tanzania, first at the national level and then by zone. For the zone chart, you can choose which indicator you want to look at.

Some thoughts:

1. There’s a pretty clear pattern that people in some parts of the country are poorer than others. In particular, across all the measures, those in the central zone are the most deprived, while those in the Eastern and Northern Zones, and on Zanzibar, are better off. This is not surprising, as these less-poor zones include vibrant economic regions such as Dar es Salaam, Morogoro, Tanga, Kilimanjaro and Arusha.

2. There’s also a clear pattern that, according to the definitions used here, deprivation in Tanzania in health and education is much lower than in living standards. More people lack access to electricity or water supply than health and education services. However, this says nothing about the quality of education services available. As we have seen before, the quality can be very low indeed – see here and here, for example.

Second, how does the intensity of poverty vary between different parts of the country?

For this chart, a household is classed as being in “severe poverty” if they are deprived in over 50% of the indicators (after weightings have been applied), as “poor” if they are deprived in over 33.3% of the indicators after weightings, and as “vulnerable” is they are deprived in between 20% and 33.3% of the indicators after weightings.

Thoughts:

3. In this case, as before, poverty is deepest in the central zone – Dodoma, Singida and Tabora regions – where only a tiny fraction (3%) of the population are neither poor nor vulnerable to falling into poverty. The situation isn’t much better in the Western Zone or Lake Zone either. Once again, only in Eastern Zone and Zanzibar (and to some extent the Northern Zone as well) are the poverty numbers lower.

4. There also a clear difference between urban and rural Tanzania. Poverty and deprivation are much higher in rural areas than urban, according to this data.

So, finally, here is that full list of indicators and criteria:

criteria for deprivation

Aid traceability is a worthy goal, but it will take some time

Cross posted from the blog of the UK-based aid transparency campaign organisation, Publish What You Fund. The original was published on October 20th. 


 


“We will require organisations receiving and managing funds from DFID to release open data on how this money is spent in a common, standard, reusable format. They will need to require this of sub-contractors and sub-agencies – right through the aid chain.”

That was Justine Greening, UK Secretary of State for International Development, speaking in 2012 on DFID’s commitment to transparency.

The UK’s latest Open Government Partnership Action Plan put a date on this, committing DFID to “a requirement of IATI publication by the end of 2015 for all implementing partners.”

The goal is traceability: for British taxpayers to be able to track the flow of funds from DFID in London to a handpump in rural Tanzania or a primary school in Nepal, even where the funds pass through several different organisations on the way. The International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) and DFID’s Development Tracker website are the means to achieve this. Continue reading

Chart of the week #23: Popular support for open government?

Do people in Tanzania, and elsewhere, support the idea of open government? It’s not a question that is asked very often, but a new dataset collected by the World Bank and others seeks to rectify this.

They asked people in 62 countries – including six in Africa – a short set of questions. Here’s some of the data for Africa – choose a question from the list on the right:

The data was collect through an internet survey, which means the data is dominated by responses from wealthier folks in urban areas. But with that caveat in mind, and focusing on Tanzania in particular, what can we see?

Well, a majority said they thought the government was already open (51%) or somewhat open (29%), but nevertheless, a solid three quarters of respondents expressed support for open government. This doesn’t vary much with the different questions asked:

  • 77% would like government to be more open
  • 76% would trust government more if it were more open
  • 75% would like more information about government
  • 78% said citizens should have a say in government spending and contracting
  • 75% said they thought government would be more effective if it was more open