The recent debate surrounding Prime Minister Elijah Ngurare’s engagement with Namibia’s growing community of “Order With Me” entrepreneurs has exposed a broader and more important conversation about the future direction of our economy.
The criticism levelled at the meeting is understandable.
Namibia cannot import its way to prosperity. A country that seeks sustainable growth must ultimately manufacture, process and add value to its own resources. It must encourage domestic industries, create productive jobs and reduce dependency on foreign goods.
Yet dismissing the thousands of young Namibians who have built livelihoods through small-scale import businesses would be equally short-sighted.
The emergence of the “Order With Me” phenomenon is not evidence of an economic failure by young people. Rather, it reflects their determination to survive and innovate in an environment where formal employment opportunities remain scarce.
Many of these entrepreneurs started with little more than a smartphone, social media and personal networks. They have built businesses without grants, large loans or inherited wealth. They have identified demand in the market and responded to it. That is entrepreneurship in its purest form.
Government should therefore resist calls to treat these businesses as somehow less legitimate than traditional enterprises.
Instead, the discussion should focus on how Namibia can nurture these young entrepreneurs while simultaneously encouraging them to transition towards greater local value addition.
One issue that deserves urgent attention is taxation and regulatory burdens on emerging small businesses.
Across the world, countries that have successfully built vibrant small and medium enterprise sectors have recognised that new businesses require breathing space during their formative years.
In the United Kingdom, small businesses benefit from tax relief schemes and simplified reporting requirements. South Africa provides turnover tax systems specifically designed for micro enterprises to reduce administrative burdens. Rwanda, often praised for its ease of doing business reforms, has implemented simplified tax structures aimed at encouraging businesses to formalise rather than remain informal.
Singapore, one of the world’s most successful business hubs, offers generous tax exemptions for start-ups during their initial years of operation. The logic is straightforward: allowing small businesses to grow first ultimately creates larger taxpayers later.
Namibia should adopt similar thinking.
The country needs a differentiated approach that recognises the difference between multinational corporations and a young entrepreneur operating from a spare bedroom.
Introducing temporary tax relief measures for start-ups, reducing customs complexity, simplifying registration procedures and expanding access to affordable financing would go a long way towards helping small businesses graduate into larger enterprises.
Such reforms should not be viewed as handouts. They are investments in future economic growth.
Critics are correct, however, to raise concerns about excessive reliance on imported goods.
Namibia’s long-term prosperity cannot be built solely on buying products from factories in China and reselling them locally. The challenge for policymakers is to create pathways that allow today’s importers to become tomorrow’s manufacturers, distributors and exporters.
School uniforms, furniture, leather products, cosmetics, processed foods and clothing are all sectors where local production could gradually replace imports.
Countries such as Ethiopia and Bangladesh provide valuable lessons. Both nations started with relatively small enterprises before developing competitive manufacturing industries that now employ millions of people.
The transition did not happen overnight. It required deliberate government policies, investment incentives and patience.
Young entrepreneurs should therefore not be seen as opponents of industrialisation. They should be viewed as its potential foundation.
What Namibia needs is not a choice between supporting import-based SMEs and supporting local manufacturing. The two objectives can and should complement one another.
Government engagement with these entrepreneurs should also be welcomed rather than criticised. Policymaking cannot occur in isolation. Leaders have a responsibility to listen to all sectors of society, including those operating outside traditional economic structures.
The Prime Minister’s meeting has at least achieved one positive outcome: it has sparked a necessary national conversation about entrepreneurship, taxation and economic transformation.
The challenge now is to move beyond social media outrage and towards practical solutions.
Namibia’s economy desperately needs more business owners, not fewer. It needs more young people creating opportunities instead of waiting for employment. It needs more innovation and less bureaucracy.
Most importantly, it needs policies that recognise that today’s small trader could become tomorrow’s industrialist.
If properly supported, the young entrepreneur who currently imports products through an “Order With Me” business may one day employ dozens of Namibians, manufacture locally and contribute significantly to the country’s tax base.
Punishing these businesses before they have had the opportunity to grow would be a costly mistake.
The role of government should not be to erect barriers to enterprise, but to create conditions in which enterprise can flourish.Namibia’s future economic success will not be determined solely by large corporations or state institutions. It will also be shaped by thousands of ordinary citizens with ambition, resilience and the courage to start small.
They deserve support, sensible regulation and a fair opportunity to grow.
That investment will pay dividends for the entire country.
