Recently, I have been restless, not because of the recent confusing summer rains that brought stones from heaven, or the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), but mainly about the sixth National Development (NDP6) and the road to Vision 2030.
I have looked at how countries are increasingly placing location or spatial intelligence at the centre of their national security and development planning. My reflection has led me to conclude that NDP6 will succeed only if Namibia knows not only what to develop, but where to develop first to achieve maximum impact.
I want to make a wild national proposition.
Namibia has entered a critical phase in implementing the NDP6, the plan that will take us to Vision 2030.
Its priorities on economic growth, education, agriculture and environmental sustainability, all share one fundamental characteristic: all these priorities happen somewhere.
This raises a crucial question: Where should government invest first, for whom, and with what expected impact? We are all certain that development should not happen in the abstract.
Roads should connect particular places. Schools should serve specific communities. Hospitals should serve defined populations. Housing should respond to geographically concentrated demand.
Poverty, unemployment, economic opportunity and climate vulnerability all have a spatial dimension.
No wonder many countries are driving towards spatially enabled development planning and implementation. If location is so central to more than 80% of the practical information required to implement NDP6, then spatial planning should no longer be treated merely as a technical function.
It should become a strategic instrument of national development.
It is, therefore, my considered opinion that the president should consider appointing a special adviser on spatial planning and geospatial development to support NDP6 implementation.
Many countries are elevating spatial intelligence, not only for national security reasons, but because of the critical role such intelligence plays in guiding development and bridging the gap between resource allocation and expected national impact.
This suggestion, wild as it may sound, is not about creating another bureaucratic layer or cost, but one that provide the Presidency and the Cabinet with a dedicated strategic function to ensure that the geographic dimension of national development is incorporated into policy, planning, budgeting, investment decisions and monitoring.
Namibia already has the foundation for this transformation: the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). The NSDI should not be viewed merely as a mechanism for producing and sharing maps.
It must be viewed as a national development intelligence infrastructure, bringing together population statistics, poverty, housing, infrastructure, land, economic activity, agriculture, health, education, environmental risks and government investment.
The power of such an integration platform is straightforward. It allows government to move beyond asking, “How much should we allocate?”, to asking the more important question: “Where should we allocate resources first to achieve the greatest impact?”
Alternatively, the National Planning Commission (NPC) should revisit or strengthen its policy oversight role of the NSDI to ensure that spatial intelligence significantly improve the way public resources are allocated.
The government can identify areas with the greatest infrastructure deficits, housing needs, population growth, poverty, unemployment or economic potential and use this evidence to deliberately prioritise investments and resource allocation.
Spatial evidence cannot replace political, social or economic judgement.
Rather, it makes decisions more transparent, evidence-based and defensible. I, therefore, suggest for the highest geographic accountability mechanism for NDP6 by suggesting for a presidential special adviser or for NPC to elevate spatial planning by placing it at the centre of national development planning.
Realistically, NDP6 should not be measured only through national averages. National improvements can conceal communities and regions that remain significantly underserved, undermining the Sustainable Development Goal mantra of “Leave No One Behind – Reach the Furthest Behind First.”
A spatially enabled NDP6 monitoring system could show government where development is progressing, where communities are falling behind, where public investment is taking place, where major gaps remain and whether investments are producing the intended outcomes.
This would transform spatial information from a technical product into a management tool for national development delivery.
A technical and performance-driven presidential special advisory would help connect existing capabilities across the Presidency, NPC, ministries, regional councils and local authorities at the highest level, ensuring that major national decisions are examined through a common national spatial lens.
What is missing to achieve this is a stronger high level spatial coordination and intelligence at the centre of government.
If Namibia wants NDP6 to deliver measurable development where it matters most, location must become a central consideration in national decision-making.
The future of development planning is not only about knowing what to do. It is knowing where to do it, how to do it, why it should be done there, and whether it is making a difference. Let us not remain behind as many countries are prioritising and repositioning spatial intelligence at the centre of governance and development.
– Alex Mudabeti is an executive at the Namibia Statistics Agency. He writes in his private capacity and views contained in this article are his own.
