Africa's entrepreneurs focusing on sustainability are the continent's changemakers
Stewardship — keeping what we have in trust for our children — lies at the heart of sustainability, and Africa must tell its own story in its own voice.
This was the message from a panel discussion hosted by Nelson Mandela University's (NMU's) Mandela Institute for Sustainable Futures (MISF) earlier this month, which explored how sustainability can be framed in an African context.
The event brought together thought leaders from South Africa and Nigeria, who emphasised that African solutions must be indigenous, inclusive and innovative.
In his keynote address, Professor Bheki Mngomezulu, director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy at NMU, highlighted Africa's rich resources and the need to redefine sustainability through African epistemologies, or ways of knowing.
'A subject like history should be reintroduced — we relegated it to oblivion. In 1994 we had the opportunity to commission books and we squandered it,' he said, calling for African-centred books to be commissioned to trace African inventions.
He was critical of both colonial legacies and post-colonial African leadership failures. 'Africans are thinking but not implementing — we should have progressed much faster but we cannot blame the West for all of our wrongs,' he said.
'How do we shift the narrative that Africans have to catch up?' he asked, stressing that African leaders needed to take responsibility and work collaboratively with academics to address sustainability issues.
But he cautioned that research should not be conducted purely for the sake of research; it had to be in service of society.
The conversation underscored the power of narrative in changing attitudes, advocating for pan Africanist intentionality and the celebration of African achievements.
From Nigeria, Dr Nneka Okekearu, director of the Enterprise Development Centre at Pan-Atlantic University, echoed this, saying that Africa's sustainability story must remain true to its roots while looking to the future.
Her key takeaways were:
• Africa has always been sustainable; our roots run deep.
• Entrepreneurs are our changemakers; turning ideas into action.
• Inclusion matters; everyone has a role to play.
• Innovation is local; homegrown solutions are thriving.
• Circular is the future; waste less, do more.
• Tell our story; Africa's voice, Africa's way.
• You are the movement; build it together.
'Let us celebrate local success stories, scale what is working and share South Africa's unique voice globally,' she said, stressing the importance of youth and women's empowerment and the circular economy.
She also gave inspiring examples of African-led sustainable entrepreneurship. These include:
Chioma Ogbudimkpa, founder and creative director of Redbutton, is a sustainable women's fashion brand that fuses African aesthetics, local materials and art to create apparel using yarns made from the invasive water hyacinth.
Amara Nwuneli has transformed a landfill in Lagos into a youth-led, community-based recycling initiative.
Ecotutu is a Nigerian start-up that provides solar-powered food storage for farmers using sustainable cooling technology.
'Africa's entrepreneurs are our changemakers,' she said.
Dr Mia Strand, a postdoctoral research fellow with NMU's Institute for Coastal and Marine Research, challenged participants to centre African ways of knowing in ocean conservation and sustainability.
She highlighted the legacies of colonialism in conservation, which often silenced indigenous voices and imposed external models.
'How can we centre ubuntu and communalism in ocean sustainability? How do we make sure we do not reproduce and reinforce coloniality?' she asked.
She made a strong call for global cognitive justice, noting: 'It is important that this process is African-led — the United Nations sustainable development goal 14, Life Below Water, is not a one-size-fits-all situation, and consideration must be given to specific context.
'What and whose research, methods and knowledges are we including, and not including?
'How do we come together to make this an inclusive process, to ensure that it is actually informed by African ways of knowing and being with the ocean, and connecting with the ocean?'
The panel, facilitated by Dr Shashi Cullinan Cook, said that framing sustainability in Africa demanded more than just replicating global frameworks. It called for intentional, African-led visioning, inclusion of indigenous knowledge and empowerment of local communities to take ownership of their sustainable future.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
2 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Response to Chrispin Phiri's open letter
After two decades reporting from front lines I've learned that truth in conflict is rarely clean. Photo: Said Khatib/AFP When a government spokesperson devotes an On 21 July 2025, department of international relations and cooperation spokesperson Chrispin Phiri published an open letter accusing me of promoting 'clickbait', 'unsubstantiated hogwash' and undermining the integrity of South African media. His response was directed at a In that blog, I raised a set of concerns based on documents shared with me by a source, Justin Lewis. These included allegations that certain South African officials may have had foreknowledge of the 7 October Hamas attacks and played a role in enabling legal access to international courts on Hamas's behalf. I never claimed that the allegations were confirmed, only that they deserve to be taken seriously and properly looked into. As a journalist, it is not my role to suppress serious allegations simply because they are unproven — it is my responsibility to bring them to light when they raise legitimate public interest concerns. In doing so, I make clear what is allegation and what is fact, and I seek responses from all relevant parties. That is how scrutiny, accountability, and responsible journalism work. Which is why two days later I Phiri's letter acknowledged that clarification — only to dismiss it as 'damage control'. Instead of presenting factual rebuttals, he delivered a lecture peppered with sarcasm and insults, calling my work reckless and unethical, and accusing me of misleading the public. This exchange, at its core, comes down to a clear line of argument on both sides. My position is that journalists have a duty to raise serious allegations — especially when they involve governments, foreign policy or international law. Not because all allegations are true, but because the public deserves to know what questions are being asked, and what answers are being avoided. Phiri's position, on the other hand, is that because Justin Lewis has made exaggerated and questionable claims elsewhere, the allegations I raised should never have been aired. But journalism doesn't work that way. Bad people can stumble onto important truths. Flawed sources can raise valid concerns. A journalist's job is not to vouch for a source's biography — it's to follow a story where it leads, verify what can be verified, and disclose what can't. That's what I did. Within 48 hours, I published a follow-up. I clarified the context not because the allegations were proven or disproven, but because responsible journalism requires transparency when new information comes to light. What Phiri offered in response was not a factual correction, but a character attack against both the source and me. After two decades reporting from front lines in Gaza, Syria, Ukraine, Russia, Israel and beyond I've learned that truth in conflict is rarely clean. Sources sometimes collapse under scrutiny. When that happens, you take responsibility, correct, and move forward. That is exactly what I did. What I did not do was present fiction as fact. I reported on allegations. I clarified their status. I acknowledged the problems. And I continued asking questions. If the government believes those questions are baseless, it should present evidence to the contrary. It should clarify timelines, communications and diplomatic steps taken before and after 7 October. Instead, it has chosen to mock the person raising them. The department's refusal to engage with the core concern, South Africa's foreign policy conduct and the credibility of its international alliances, is telling. Their silence on substance, and volume on character, only fuels public doubt. And for the record: I do not claim South Africa collaborated with Hamas. I do not claim the allegations are proven. I do claim they are serious enough to merit scrutiny. That scrutiny should not be met with institutional outrage. Phiri's letter suggests that by platforming concerns, I violated the principles of journalism. But journalism is not built on silence. It's built on inquiry. You follow leads. You evaluate sources. You clarify what cannot be confirmed. That's what I did. That's what I will continue to do. South Africa's case at the International Court of Justice is not what I was writing about. My focus was narrower: what was said, shared or supported before the events of 7 October? Were there missteps or blind spots in our diplomatic positioning? And if so, shouldn't we want to know? In his closing, Phiri quotes Nelson Mandela: 'Our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.' I would add this: our democracy is incomplete without the freedom to question our own government especially when the stakes involve war, ideology and lives. I'll continue to ask hard questions, report without fear, and correct when needed — not because it's popular, but because journalism demands it. A free press doesn't need permission to investigate — and it certainly doesn't answer to the government it is questioning. Paula Slier is a South African-born war correspondent and journalist.
The Herald
3 hours ago
- The Herald
Ramaphosa tells Liberation Movements Summit it's time Africa processed its raw materials
Ramaphosa said the countries needed to be united in efforts to rid society of corruption and crime. "... and we need to work together, drawing on each other's experiences, to rebuild and renew our movements. Our movements were built through the struggles of the young people of the time. Today, we must rebuild our movements the same way,' he said. 'The impatience of young people is not something that we should fear. It is to be welcomed because it signals the determination of new generations of citizens to strive for a better life, for a more just society.' He said youth leagues should not be ceremonial wings of movements but must be engines of ideological clarity, economic innovation, digital activism and organisational unity and renewal. Liberation movements, he said, were under siege, with most having to contend with declining electoral support, shifting demographics and frustrated young people in various countries. Ramaphosa said the continent was also grappling with economic inequality and foreign interference. 'These trends speak to a deeper crisis, the disconnect between our founding narratives and the lived realities of a new generation of young people. It is a generation that sees and appreciates less of our past victories and more of our present shortcomings,' he said. Ramaphosa said the disconnect within the population emboldened external attacks on sovereignty, independence, development and security. 'In fact, there has been ample evidence that international actors use the legitimate grievances of our people to attack progressive governments. We have seen a revival of the forces of unilateralism, neocolonialism and imperial extraction.' He stressed that there can be no true freedom without the liberation of women, saying society cannot thrive if women are excluded. 'If girls are unable to complete school, if women cannot find decent work or run their own businesses, if they do not receive equal pay for equal work, if they are vulnerable to violence and abuse, then our freedom will not be complete and our societies will remain forever poor,' he said. Ramaphosa said he welcomed the comprehensive resolutions which include land equity for women, reproductive rights and the call to mainstream women in leadership, trade, learning and in peace processes. 'We echo the call to centre the Pan-African Women's Organisation in our regional agenda and commit to elevating women's voices and leadership in every aspect of our movement, government and the private sector.' Ramaphosa said one of the most dangerous narratives today was the weaponisation of migration. 'We must reject xenophobia in all its forms. Migration itself must not be seen as a threat. It is a consequence of underdevelopment, war, global inequality, not a moral failing of those who move in search of hope.' SowetanLIVE
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
July 2021 Unrest: Did SA's Political Leadership Learn Any Lessons?
Residents of Soweto protest outside the Maponya Mall in Soweto, on July 14, 2021 against the wave of violence and looting that afflicted the Gauteng and KwaZulu Natal. Image: AFP Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu July 2025 marks the fourth anniversary of the July 2021 unrest. On the evening of July 9, 2021, riots broke out across KwaZulu-Natal. In the evening of July 11, 2021, these riots had spread to Gauteng. By the time this civil unrest ended, over 350 people had lost their lives. Some were injured while others lost their property, businesses and jobs. Racial tensions rose in KZN. This untenable situation aggravated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. By August 12, 2022, over 5,500 people had been arrested in connection with these riots – some cases are still active. But how did we get here? Could the riots have been prevented? Who should be held responsible for acting recklessly, thereby leading the country into this chaos? More importantly, did our political leadership learn anything from this incident to ensure that the country does not descend into chaos again in the future? If not, where is our country going? To answer some of these and other related questions, it is of cardinal importance to trace the origin of this incident, reflect on how it unfolded, and compare it with the current situation as a precaution on what could potentially happen if the political leadership turns a blind eye on the concerns raised by South Africans, which leave them frustrated. In a nutshell, the 2021 unrests were caused by factors which could have been easily avoided if the political leadership and the legal fraternity had demonstrated erudite leadership, objective reading of the situation and nonpartisan action. Firstly, the Zondo Commission misread the political mood in the country. It lacked objectivity in handling the witnesses who appeared before it. The great mistake was for this structure to behave like a court. In a court of law, there is a litigant and a defendant. By contrast, in the case of a commission, everyone who appears before it is a witness. Unlike a court of law, the job of the commission is to get facts right, compile a report, and make recommendations to be considered by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and relevant bodies. When former President Jacob Zuma appeared before the Zondo Commission, he received a hostile reception and was treated differently. When this issue was raised, some people outside of the Commission argued that such treatment was justified because Zuma was accused of wrongdoing. This was the first mistake. Given this hostile treatment, Zuma refused to return to the Commission. Justice Zondo approached the Constitutional Court and asked it to rule on Zuma's decision. He went further to prescribe a sentence of two years if the court found him guilty. This was bizarre. It is not common for a litigant to play the role of a judge. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ In its ruling, the court instructed Zuma to return to the Zondo Commission within a stipulated time. It went further to state that it was depriving him of his right to remain silent as had been the case, for example, with the late Dudu Myeni. This was also strange. When Zuma failed to appear before the Commission as instructed to do so, he was accused of contempt of court. Subsequently, Justice Sisi Khampepe read a ruling which was riddled with emotions, sending Zuma to jail for fifteen months with no option of a fine. Zuma was given until July 4 to hand himself in, failing which the police were instructed to arrest him on July 7. Khampepe defended her ruling by saying that Zuma was the one who appointed the Commission. As such, it did not make sense why he was frustrating its function. This statement was misplaced on many grounds. Firstly, Zuma did not voluntarily establish the Commission; he was forced by a court of law to do so as Sec 84(2)(f) of the Constitution states. Even then, his prerogative to appoint the person to chair the Commission was removed from him by Advocate Thuli Madonsela's report. Lastly, Sec 9(1) of the Constitution states that 'everyone is equal before the law.' Indeed, Zuma was sent to Estcourt prison. This happened although some South Africans had already raised concerns that the political leadership and the judiciary had colluded to crucify Zuma. Word spread that if Zuma were incarcerated, there would be riots. The political leadership ignored this warning. There was dereliction of duty on the side of the security cluster. When it became clear that the intelligence agency, the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the metro police were struggling to contain the situation, the South African Defence Force (SANDF) was deployed in Gauteng and KZN to suppress the riots as part of Operation Prosper. Eventually, the situation calmed down. On September 5, 2021, Arthur Fraser released Zuma on medical parole. Zuma served his parole period and was supposed to be a free man. Intriguingly, the court ruled that Fraser had erred in his decision to release him. The fact that Zuma had completed his parole period did not seem to matter. He was sent back to Estcourt Correctional Service. Eventually, President Ramaphosa released him together with other prisoners. By then, the damage had already been done. Now, the earlier question becomes relevant. What lessons did the political leadership (including the President) learn from this episode? Zuma's matter was a trigger. The real causes of these unrests included political, social and economic factors, which resulted in frustration. The Frustration-Aggression Theory states that when people are frustrated, they resort to unlawful behaviour and join non-governmental forces which resonate with their situation. Currently, South Africans are frustrated. Issues such as corruption, crime, poor standards of living, political appointments, factional politics, increases in petrol prices, and other issues lead to frustration. What is the political leadership doing to contain the situation? Should there be another spark to ignite the inferno, how prepared is the coalition government to deal with that situation? Looking at how things are happening in the country, there is no sign that lessons were learnt from the 2021 riots. * Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu is Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy at Nelson Mandela University. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
