A Freelance Registry For Namibia’s Informal Workers

For many Namibians, earning a living does not begin with a permanent contract, a payslip or an office-based job. It may involve selling food from a roadside stall, repairing phones, driving passengers, doing domestic work, building homes or taking short-term assignments online. These workers keep households moving and contribute to local economies, yet their work often remains invisible in official labour and economic statistics.

The Popular Democratic Movement’s proposed freelance registry is intended to give informal workers a recognised place in the economy. Rather than treating self-employed people as an afterthought, the plan would create a structured record of people who earn through casual, independent or project-based work. That record could support access to information, training, finance, public programmes and a stronger voice in policy decisions.

The idea will be familiar to Australians who have watched the growth of sole traders, app-based delivery riders, independent contractors and online freelancers. A Melbourne graphic designer with an Australian Business Number, or ABN, may have a clearer administrative identity than a Namibian street trader, but both can face irregular income, weak bargaining power and uncertainty about protections. The systems differ, while the underlying concern is recognisable.

For PDM, a registry would sit within a wider programme of democratic participation, transparency, social justice and national development. Its value would depend on whether registration is affordable, voluntary in the right circumstances, secure and linked to practical benefits. A database by itself cannot improve livelihoods; it must become a bridge between workers and the institutions that are meant to serve them.

Why informal work needs public recognition

Informal workers are often described through what they lack: a formal employer, a written contract or a fixed workplace. That language can obscure the skills and enterprise involved. A tailor serving customers in Katutura, a market trader in Oshakati and a carpenter moving between construction sites are all providing goods or services. Their income may be inconsistent, but their contribution is real.

Without recognition, these workers can struggle to prove their earnings when applying for a loan, renting premises or seeking support after a crisis. They may also find it difficult to challenge non-payment, unsafe conditions or exploitative fees. A registry could establish a basic official identity for each participant, recording their occupation, location, contact details and chosen business activity without forcing every worker into the same category.

The Australian comparison is useful here. A sole trader may register an ABN, keep invoices and use a business bank account, while a casual gig worker may have records spread across several platforms. Even with these tools, an Australian worker can still face unpaid time, fuel costs and uncertain superannuation. In Namibia, where access to formal banking and digital services may be more uneven, a simple public registration pathway could have a larger practical effect.

Recognition should not become a licence to burden people with new fees or paperwork. Many informal workers operate on narrow margins, and a requirement designed for a large company would be unsuitable for a small food seller or domestic worker. The registry must reflect the scale and nature of the work it records.

What the registry could provide

A well-designed system could begin with a straightforward registration card or digital profile. Workers might identify their occupation, service area, preferred contact method and whether they work alone, through a cooperative or as part of a small enterprise. Registration points in Windhoek, regional centres and community facilities would help people who lack reliable internet access or confidence with online forms.

The record could then support a directory of available services. A customer looking for a plumber, translator, seamstress or computer technician could find registered providers, while workers could display a recognised status when competing for assignments. Verification would need to be proportionate. The registry should confirm identity and basic activity without promising that every listed worker has the same qualifications or insurance.

Practical benefits could include referrals to business training, tax guidance, occupational safety information and financial literacy programmes. A registered worker might also receive alerts about government tenders, local markets, apprenticeships or emergency support. For workers in remote areas, the system could connect them with cooperatives and mobile outreach teams rather than requiring repeated travel to a central office.

The plan could also help public authorities understand where work is taking place and which sectors require attention. Reliable, privacy-protected data might show demand for childcare, transport, repairs or agricultural services in different regions. That evidence would be more useful than broad assumptions about employment, provided the data is collected ethically and published in an accessible form.

Safeguards for a fair and trusted system

Trust will determine whether workers register. People may worry that their details could be used for unnecessary enforcement, political targeting or the withdrawal of existing support. PDM’s approach therefore needs clear rules about the purpose of the registry, who can access information, how long records are kept and how individuals can correct mistakes.

The database should collect the minimum information required to provide recognition and services. Sensitive details should not be displayed publicly, and registration should not expose a worker’s home address or financial history. An independent complaints process would give people a way to challenge inaccurate entries, unfair treatment or misuse of their data.

The Australian experience shows why these safeguards matter. Workers often move between platforms, clients and short contracts, while agencies may classify them differently for tax, welfare or workplace purposes. A Namibian registry should avoid becoming another layer of confusing administration. Plain language, paper options and assistance in local languages would make participation more realistic.

There should also be a clear separation between registration and access to basic rights. A person should not lose the ability to earn, seek healthcare or receive emergency assistance simply because they have not yet joined the system. Registration can open doors, but it must not close essential ones. The programme should be designed around dignity rather than suspicion.

Connecting registration with income and opportunity

The strongest case for the proposal is its potential to connect informal workers with real economic opportunities. A registry could support group purchasing, cooperative finance and shared workspaces. Several independent builders, for example, might combine their registered profiles to bid for a larger project while retaining their individual businesses. Market associations could use verified membership to negotiate for storage, transport or safer trading areas.

Public procurement is another important avenue. Government departments and municipalities spend money on cleaning, repairs, catering, maintenance and events. Transparent pathways for registered micro-businesses to compete for smaller contracts could keep more public expenditure within local communities. Contract terms would need to include reasonable payment schedules, since late payment can destabilise a small operator faster than it affects a large company.

For an Australian audience, the comparison might be a local tradie moving from word-of-mouth jobs to formal quotes and council work. In Sydney or Brisbane, an ABN, insurance and digital invoicing may help that worker access commercial clients. In Namibia, the registry could play part of that connecting role while also linking people to training and cooperative structures that are less common in formal contracting.

A successful programme would also recognise workers who do not fit standard business categories. Domestic workers, home-based producers, cultural practitioners, seasonal labourers and digital freelancers may require different support. A registry that treats everyone as a generic entrepreneur will miss the reasons people enter informal work and the barriers they face.

Participation, accountability and national development

The registry should be shaped with workers, not simply announced to them. Consultations with market committees, youth groups, disability organisations, women’s associations, trade unions and regional authorities could identify practical obstacles before the system is launched. A pilot in selected communities would allow PDM and its partners to test registration methods, costs and data protections.

Youth participation deserves particular attention. Young Namibians may combine casual work, study, online projects and periods of unemployment. A registry could help them document experience and find training, yet it should not present self-employment as a substitute for decent jobs. The wider economic strategy must still address education, industrial development, infrastructure and stable employment.

In Australia, many freelancers use platforms such as Airtasker, rideshare applications or online marketplaces, but platform visibility does not guarantee fair conditions. Namibia can learn from that experience while building a system suited to its own geography and institutions. A worker in Darwin, a rider in central Sydney and a market seller in Windhoek all need income security, but the routes to it will not be identical.

Public reporting would help keep the initiative accountable. PDM could publish clear information about registration numbers, regional coverage, services delivered and complaints resolved, while protecting personal data. Workers who need clarification or wish to participate in the programme can use the party’s official contact channel to engage with its representatives and obtain current information.

A freelance registry for informal workers can become more than an administrative list. If it is voluntary where appropriate, affordable, secure and tied to finance, training, fair procurement and civic representation, it can make invisible work easier to recognise and support. That approach aligns economic policy with democratic practice: people who sustain communities should have a visible place in the decisions and opportunities that shape their future.