The youth fund: Dead on arrival?
The Development Bank of Namibia recently launched the Youth Fund, a loan scheme ostensibly designed to empower young Namibians to start businesses and create economic opportunities. Yet, the Fund sits idle, with “little to no uptake” from the very demographic it seeks to uplift. This scenario is both perplexing and revealing, pointing to deeper systemic flaws in how youth-targeted economic interventions are conceptualized and implemented in Namibia.
The Youth Fund’s poor performance raises the fundamental question: was it designed with the realities of young Namibians in mind? Debt, particularly in the context of a weak job market and an unforgiving economic climate, is a daunting prospect. Many youths already struggle under the weight of existing financial burdens, including the contentious NASFAF student loan repayments. To ask them to take on more debt—without simultaneously creating a supportive ecosystem for entrepreneurship is to ask them to take a leap of faith over a chasm.
It is easy to label Namibian youth as risk-averse. But risk aversion does not emerge in a vacuum it is born from experience. Too many young people have seen peers venture into business, only to fail due to lack of mentorship, limited access to markets, or suffocating bureaucracy. Without robust support structures, training, mentorship, access to networks, simply throwing money at the youth will not yield results.
Countries like Rwanda and Kenya have demonstrated that youth funds succeed only when paired with incubation hubs, business development services, and market access initiatives. In Rwanda, the YouthConnekt initiative integrates financing with mentorship and networking, ensuring that beneficiaries are not only funded but guided to success. Namibia’s Youth Fund appears to lack these critical wrap-around services.
The narrative that Namibian youth are entitled, expecting “free land” or handouts, is often wielded to dismiss their legitimate grievances. While entitlement may exist in pockets, it is reductive to use this as the primary explanation for the Fund’s failure. The youth have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to work hard when given meaningful opportunities. The problem lies not in their character but in a system that routinely fails to create environments where effort translates into success.
The timing of the Youth Fund’s launch may also have contributed to its dormancy. Namibia’s youth are grappling with high unemployment, economic uncertainty, and lingering mistrust of institutions. Without aggressive outreach, transparent communication, and demonstrations of success stories, skepticism is inevitable. Did DBN consult youth organizations? Did they conduct a feasibility study to understand what kind of financial instruments the youth actually need, grants, equity financing, or low-interest micro-loans? The evidence suggests they did not.
Namibia can learn from other countries where youth-targeted funds have thrived. In Nigeria, the Youth Entrepreneurship Support (YES) Program combines loans with technical and managerial training. In Ghana, the National Entrepreneurship and Innovation Plan (NEIP) offers grants alongside business incubation. The common denominator? These programs do not treat youth financing as a standalone silver bullet; they embed it within a larger ecosystem of support.
The broader question emerging from this debacle is: who truly represents Namibian youth today? Many of the voices that once championed youth causes have been co-opted into the very systems they once opposed. The free land demonstrations are a stark reminder of how quickly movements can be diluted when leadership trades advocacy for comfort. Without strong, independent youth leadership to articulate their needs, policies like the Youth Fund risk being top-down impositions that fail to resonate.
The DBN Youth Fund, in its current form, is not just a missed opportunity, it is a case study in how not to design youth policy. Namibia must move beyond tokenistic gestures and develop holistic programs that combine financing with mentorship, capacity building, and access to markets. Above all, policies must be informed by genuine consultation with the youth themselves, not assumptions about what they need.
If Namibia wants its young people to embrace entrepreneurship, it must first build a bridge of trust, capacity, and opportunity. Until then, the Youth Fund will remain what it is today: a dormant pool of potential, waiting for a spark that never comes.
