As a Black Namibian entrepreneur, I have often wondered whether we are asking the right questions about economic empowerment.
We speak proudly of Black success stories. We celebrate the entrepreneurs who have built companies, created jobs and entered sectors historically closed to the majority of Namibians. We celebrate Black professionals in boardrooms, Black politicians in government and Black executives leading major institutions.
But when we examine the ownership of some of the most fundamental productive assets in our economy, a difficult question emerges: Are we really transforming the structure of our economy, or are we merely celebrating exceptions to a system that remains largely unchanged?
Agriculture forces us to confront this question directly.
In Namibia, white farmers continue to dominate the ownership of commercial agricultural land. In South Africa, white individuals similarly own the overwhelming majority of identifiable individually owned agricultural land. The statistics are not merely numbers. Behind them lies a deeper question about economic power, intergenerational wealth and who controls the productive assets capable of creating wealth for decades, even centuries.
The question is not whether white farmers should be removed from agriculture. That would be both unjust and economically destructive. Many white farmers have accumulated enormous knowledge, expertise and capital over generations. Namibia needs productive farms, food security and a successful agricultural sector. We should not destroy what works simply because of the racial history of ownership.
But neither should we pretend that the current situation is acceptable simply because some Black Namibians have succeeded in agriculture.
The fundamental question is this: Should certain sectors simply be left to remain dominated by white people, or should government redouble its efforts to ensure that Black Namibians become major players in agriculture?
My answer is clear: Black Namibians must become major players.
This is not an argument for racial exclusion. It is an argument for economic inclusion.
There is a dangerous tendency in Namibia to confuse the existence of a few successful Black entrepreneurs with genuine transformation. A handful of Black-owned farms, companies or mining interests can create the appearance of progress while the underlying ownership structure remains largely unchanged.
We must ask ourselves whether we are satisfied with producing a few exceptional Black success stories while the majority remain spectators in sectors that generate wealth.
Agriculture is not simply another industry. Land is a productive asset. It generates income, creates employment, supports industries, produces food and can be passed from one generation to another. The ownership of productive agricultural land therefore has enormous implications for the distribution of wealth in Namibia.
If Black Namibians remain largely excluded from commercial agriculture, then the consequences will be felt far beyond farming communities. We will continue to have a generation of young people with limited access to productive assets and limited opportunities to build intergenerational wealth.
Government must therefore move beyond slogans and political speeches.
Land reform must be accompanied by serious agricultural empowerment. It is not enough to transfer land to beneficiaries and then leave them without finance, equipment, technical expertise, markets or infrastructure. A farm without access to capital can become a burden rather than an opportunity.
The state should establish far more ambitious programmes to support Black commercial farmers, particularly young people. This should include affordable long-term finance, agricultural insurance, irrigation infrastructure, access to technology, mentorship and guaranteed market opportunities.
The government should also examine whether public procurement can be used more strategically to create markets for emerging Black farmers. Schools, hospitals, the military and other public institutions purchase enormous quantities of food. A greater proportion of those procurement opportunities should be deliberately opened to Namibian farmers who are building sustainable agricultural enterprises.
At the same time, Black Namibian entrepreneurs must accept that empowerment is not merely about receiving land or government assistance. Ownership must be accompanied by competence, discipline and investment.
We cannot demand transformation while ignoring the importance of productivity. A Black-owned farm that fails because of poor management does not advance the cause of empowerment. Nor does a white-owned farm that is productive but excludes meaningful local participation represent a complete solution to Namibia’s economic challenges.
We need both transformation and performance.
The private sector also has a responsibility. Established commercial farmers should be encouraged, and where appropriate required through policy, to enter meaningful partnerships with emerging farmers. These partnerships must not be designed merely to satisfy bureaucratic requirements. They should transfer knowledge, technology, market access and ownership.
Ultimately, Namibia must decide what kind of economy it wants.
Do we want an economy in which Black Namibians are mainly employees, consumers and beneficiaries of government programmes? Or do we want an economy in which they own farms, factories, mines, financial institutions, technology companies and major commercial enterprises?
For me, the answer is obvious.
A country cannot build broad-based prosperity while the majority of its people remain largely excluded from ownership of its productive assets.
The success of a few Black farmers should therefore not be used to prove that transformation has been achieved. Instead, it should demonstrate what is possible when opportunity, capital and determination come together.
Black agricultural success should not be an illusion created by a handful of exceptional individuals.
It should become a defining feature of Namibia’s economic future.
The objective should not be to replace one racial monopoly with another. The objective should be to create a competitive, productive and inclusive agricultural sector in which Black Namibians are no longer marginal participants but major owners, producers and decision-makers.
That is not a threat to agriculture.
It is the transformation agriculture, and Namibia, urgently needs.
