When one of Namibia’s most senior economic officials says that the investment required to develop a single oil discovery could exceed the size of the country’s entire annual economy, every entrepreneur should stop and listen.
Bank of Namibia Governor Ebson Uanguta recently put the scale of the proposed Venus development into striking perspective. He said an investment of about US$17 billion could be required, compared with an economy he estimated at US$14 billion to US$15 billion. The comparison is extraordinary. But the more important question is what Namibia does with it.
US$17 billion is an investment estimate, not the value of the oil in the ground. The distinction matters. TotalEnergies has not confirmed it as the final project cost. Venus is nevertheless enormous, with planned production of about 150,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day and approximately 750 million barrels of recoverable resources in its first phase.
For Namibia, this should be viewed not simply as an oil project, but as a major industrial opportunity.
Entrepreneurs know that the biggest opportunities are rarely found in the headline transaction. They are found in the ecosystem surrounding it. A major project creates demand for logistics, accommodation, catering, transport, engineering, security, information technology, financial services, construction, maintenance, professional services, food production, marine services and countless other activities.
That is where Namibia must focus.
The danger is that we become spectators to our own economic transformation. International companies bring capital and expertise; foreign contractors execute major contracts; imported goods fill supply chains; and Namibians are left with jobs and expectations.
That would be a historic missed opportunity.
Local content cannot simply mean employing Namibians at the bottom of the value chain. It must mean deliberately building Namibian companies capable of competing for meaningful contracts, partnering with international firms, raising capital, acquiring technology and eventually exporting their expertise.
This requires preparation now, not when the first barrel is produced.
We also need to be honest about our weaknesses. Many Namibian businesses lack the balance sheets required for large contracts. Some lack international certification, technical capacity, governance systems and the ability to finance working capital while waiting months for payment. Others have limited experience in complex procurement environments.
Government can announce local-content ambitions, but entrepreneurs must build businesses capable of meeting them.
Banks and institutional investors have a role. If Namibia is serious about creating a domestic oil-services economy, financial institutions must develop products that allow credible local businesses to scale. Pension capital, private equity and development finance should be asking how they can finance productive participation rather than simply investing conservatively and watching billions circulate around the country.
There is another opportunity we should not underestimate: infrastructure.
Offshore oil requires ports, roads, telecommunications, electricity, water, warehousing, logistics and specialised services. Investment in this infrastructure should not be designed solely around oil. It should strengthen Namibia’s broader productive capacity and position Walvis Bay and Lüderitz as regional gateways.
The same principle applies to skills. We cannot wait for international companies to arrive and then discover that we do not have enough Namibians with the necessary engineering, maritime, technical, financial and managerial capabilities. Training must anticipate demand.
But there is a deeper question about what kind of economy we want to build.
Oil can make Namibia richer without necessarily making Namibians wealthier. A country can record spectacular export receipts while inequality remains stubborn, local businesses remain small and young people remain unemployed. The history of resource-rich countries provides enough warnings.
The objective should therefore be economic multiplication.
Every dollar entering the oil economy should, where commercially sensible and technically possible, create opportunities beyond the oil industry. A Namibian farmer should supply food. A Namibian technology company should provide digital services. A Namibian logistics company should move equipment. A Namibian manufacturer should produce components. A Namibian financial institution should finance expansion. A Namibian university should produce skills.
That is how an oil discovery becomes an economy.
As an entrepreneur, I am excited by the possibilities, but I am equally concerned about our mindset. We must stop thinking of local participation as a favour granted by multinational companies or government. It is a business proposition. Namibian companies must become competitive, disciplined and ambitious enough to earn their place.
The private sector should demand transparency. If billions are invested, the public should understand fiscal arrangements, local-content commitments, procurement processes and expected national benefits. Responsible resource development requires investor confidence and public confidence.
Uanguta’s comparison should therefore not make us intoxicated by the size of the numbers. It should make us uncomfortable about the size of the opportunity we could squander.
US$17 billion is a staggering figure for a country of Namibia’s size. But the real measure of Venus will not be the money spent offshore. It will be how much economic capability we build onshore.
If Namibia gets this right, oil could finance an entrepreneurial transformation that outlives the oil itself. If we get it wrong, we will have witnessed one of the greatest investment opportunities in our history without building enough Namibian businesses to participate in it.
The oil may belong to the national resource base for now. The opportunity, however, belongs to all of us, collectively, in Namibia.
And entrepreneurs must be ready.
