Social entrepreneurship in Namibia and transformation of personality and society in a new socio-technological order

Business
Authors:
Abstract:

This research provides a comprehensive analysis of the sociocultural foundations of social entrepreneurship development in Namibia and examines its role in transforming individuals and society in the context of a new socio-technological order. The relevance of this study is driven by acute socio-economic challenges in developing African countries, including high unemployment rates, dominance of informal economies, gender inequality and lack of inclusive mechanisms for social development. The research methodology is based on a systems approach and incorporates methods of participant observation, statistical analysis, comparative case study analysis and critical literature review, enabling the integration of theoretical and practical dimensions of the problem. The primary research findings include: 1) a first systematic analysis of the relationship between African Ubuntu philosophy and contemporary social entrepreneurship practices in the Namibian context, demonstrating that traditional sociocultural values of collectivism and community solidarity create a favorable foundation for socially-oriented business; 2) development of an original conceptual 3C Partnership model (Coordination — Capacity building — Cultural adaptation) that describes mechanisms for overcoming institutional barriers in developing countries through the integration of technological innovations, local capacity development, and cultural adaptation; 3) identification and systematization of mechanisms through which social entrepreneurship influences individual and societal development at three levels: individual (development of entrepreneurial competencies and self-efficacy), organizational (creation of hybrid models and formalization of the economy), and societal (strengthening of social capital and transformation of social practices). The scientific novelty of this research lies in establishing the critical role of sociocultural factors as a system-forming element in the development of entrepreneurial ecosystems in the context of a new socio-technological order, thereby expanding existing theoretical understanding of the interaction between culture, innovation, and economic development in developing countries. The practical significance consists in developing an operationalized conceptual model directly applicable to designing and implementing social entrepreneurship support programs in developing African countries, as well as providing empirically-grounded recommendations for policymakers, international organizations and social development practitioners.

  • References

    1. Defourny J., Nyssens M. (2017) Fundamentals for an International Typology of Social Enterprise Models. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28 (6), 2469–2497. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9884-7

    2. Mair J., Marti I. (2006) Social Entrepreneurship Research: A Source of Explanation, Prediction, and Delight. Journal of World Business, 41 (1), 36–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002

    3. George Y.S. (2023) Ubuntu as an Ethical Framework in Business Ethics for African Socio-Economic Development. International Journal of Philosophy, 11 (3), 63–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20231103.13

    4. Solomon G.E., Maistry S.M. (2025) The potential of ubuntu in shaping an African perspective of entrepreneurial education. Journal of Education, 100, 207–228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i100a12

    5. Ojong N., Simba A., Dana L.-P. (2021) Female Entrepreneurship in Africa: A Review, Trends, and Future Research Directions. Journal of Business Research, 132, 233–248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.032

    6. Nicholls A. (2006) Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199283873.001.0001

    7. Udah H., Tusasiirwe S., Mugumbate R., Gatwiri K. (2025) Ubuntu philosophy, values, and principles: An opportunity to do social work differently. Journal of Social Work, 25 (4), 433–451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14680173241312749

    8. Mbiti J.S. (1969) African Religions and Philosophy, Johannesburg: Heinemann.

    9. Akinola A.O., Uzodike U.O. (2018) Ubuntu and the Quest for Conflict Resolution in Africa. Journal of Black Studies, 49 (2), 91–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934717736186

    10. Ramose M.B. (2002) The philosophy of ubuntu and ubuntu as a philosophy. In: Philosophy from Africa: A text with readings (eds. P.H. Coetzee, A.P.J. Roux), Cape Town: Oxford University Press, 230–238.

    11. Nabudere D.W. (2005) Ubuntu Philosophy: Memory and Reconciliation. Document. Kigali, Centre for Basic Research. [online] Available at: https://africasocialwork.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/PROFESSOR-D-W-NABUDERE-UBUNTU-AND-RECONCILIATION-.pdf [Accessed 12.01.2025].

    12. Meagher K. (2020) Deciphering African informal economies. In: The Informal Economy Revisited: Examining the Past, Envisioning the Future (eds. M. Chen, F. Carré), London: Routledge, 233–238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429200724-42

    13. Dobson S., Jones P., Agyapong D., Maas G. (2021) Enterprising Africa: Transformation through Entrepreneurship, London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429427725

    14. Blinova M.G. (2016) Sotsialnoye predprinimatelstvo i yego rol v povyshenii kachestva zhizni grazhdan i reshenii sotsialnykh problem. Nauka i obrazovaniye: novoye vremya, 5 (16), 40–45.

    15. Yeroshenko Ye.P. (2019) Razvitiye ekosistemy predprinimatelstva v regionakh Rossiyskoy Federatsii kak osnova sozdaniya uspeshnykh startapov. Ekonomika, predprinimatelstvo i pravo, 9 (2), 123–134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18334/epp.9.2.40772

    16. OECD and European Commission (2015) Social Entrepreneurship: Social Impact Measurement for Social Enterprises (OECD Employment Policy Paper, 10). [online] Available at: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2015/07/social-entrepreneurship-social-impact-measurement-for-social-enterprises_g17a26f0/5jrtpbx7tw37-en.pdf [Accessed 12.01.2025].

    17. CEDEFOP (2022) Entrepreneurship Competence in Vocational Education and Training. Case Study: Latvia, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. [online] Available at: https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/5585_en.pdf [Accessed 12.01.2025].

    18. Abbady H.E.M.A. Klinkenberg E.T.M., de Moel L., Nicolai N., van der Stelt M., Verhulst A.C., Maal T.J.J., Brouwers L. (2022) 3D-printed prostheses in developing countries: A systematic review. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 46 (1), pp. 19–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000057

    19. Ko K.R., Shim J.S., Chung C.H., Kim J.H. (2019) Surgical Results of Limb Lengthening at the Femur, Tibia, and Humerus in Patients with Achondroplasia. Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery, 11 (2), 226–232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2019.11.2.226

    20. Efanov J.I., Tchiloemba B., Izadpanah A., Harris P.G., Danino M.A. (2022) A review of utilities and costs of treating upper extremity amputations with vascularized composite allotransplantation versus myoelectric prostheses in Canada. JPRAS Open, 32, 150–160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2022.03.003

    21. Visagie S.J., Likando C.M. (2025) An exploration of adherence to the World Health Organization's prosthetic standards in Namibia. African Journal of Disability, 25 (14), art. no. 1614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v14i0.1614

    22. Van der Stelt, M., Grobusch M.P., Koroma A.R., Papenburg M. etc. (2021) Pioneering low-cost 3D-printed transtibial prosthetics to serve a rural population in Sierra Leone – an observational cohort study (2021) EClinicalMedicine, 35, art. no. 100874. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100874

    23. Quadrelli D., Canepa M., Di Domenico D., Boccardo N., Chiappalone M., Laffranchi M. (2025) Advances in HD-EMG interfaces and spatial algorithms for upper limb prosthetic control. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 19, art. no. 1655257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2025.1655257

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Previous articleNext article