Social entrepreneurship in Africa: A systematic multilevel literature review

Social entrepreneurs in Africa play a major role in solving complex problems in their local communities such as addressing poverty and inequality. The processes for problem-solving are therefore twofold – developing solutions for the problems and developing the people in the communities. Social entrepreneurs therefore may develop human capital in problem-solving processes. However, social entrepreneurs are often required to be innovative in solving the problems in communities with little or constrained resources. Involving the people in the communities can therefore be a key to sustainable problem solutions, as human capital is also developed in the process. Such an outcome is a phenomenon that may enhance entrepreneurial ecosystems that are intended to support the good and the just. Nevertheless, how social entrepreneurs in Africa go about developing humans in resource-restricted ecosystems is not clear in literature. This chapter therefore explores the human capital development of social entrepreneurs in Africa through innovative problem-solving processes. Secondary data from the Askoka database are analysed with a thematic analysis to explore and describe processes social entrepreneurs in Africa are applying to solve problems and describe how these processes enable the development of human capital. The findings indicate that social entrepreneurs in Africa are able to develop human capital in their communities with little resources from governments. The findings also indicate that through systemic integration, social entrepreneurs in Africa are able to develop humans who are just able to meet needs and create products and/or services that are useful. The implications of this study may be linked to the recommendations for enhancing entrepreneurial ecosystems that are aimed to enhance the good and the just in addition to meeting needs of people.

PurposeThis paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship, paying special attention to the new narratives that are emerging about this phenomenon in the context of Africa.Design/methodology/approachThe paper addresses this issue, by comparing the meanings of what is called “social” in this context and in developed areas. The paper's particular interest in the use of language and narratives is grounded in the experience of how narratives and stories are genuinely constitutive and perfomative of people's actions.FindingsThis paper reveals that “social” in the social entrepreneurship narratives does not necessarily have the same meaning in different contexts. Specifically, when the phenomenon is re‐interpreted in the context of the discourses that come from a developing area such as South Africa, it adds flexibility and a more local sense to the entrepreneurs' social missions.Research limitations/implicationsThe study was affected by the limited availability of published data on social entrepreneurship in Africa. Economic challenges and failures by governments to access donor funds have resulted in militant governance thereby reducing the role of social entrepreneurship to negligible levels.Originality/valueThe study provides a narrative lens of looking at the challenges that social entrepreneurship is facing in Africa.

This article reviews research on promoting social entrepreneurship and enterprise in Africa. It also presents brief case studies on how select Western universities, NGOs and corporations are partnering with African institutions to help train and launch social entrepreneurs, to open up sources of venture funding and mentoring and to fortify social entrepreneurship ecosystems. The case material highlights opportunities and challenges encountered in supporting social entrepreneurship in Africa and points to research and practical opportunities pertinent to African scholars, educators and practitioners.

Based on a review of the literature and analysis of the prevailing internal and external conditions in Africa, this paper identifies the factors that impact entrepreneurship in the continent and proposes a set of specific interventions that African governments may initiate to stimulate entrepreneurship in the region. The proposed policy interventions include creating a more business friendly climate, building entrepreneurial and institutional capacity, minimising bureaucratic barriers, elevating the stature of entrepreneurship, and facilitating the creation of national and global linkages and networks for African entrepreneurs. Implementing the proposals advanced in this paper, as adapted to the specific conditions in each country, could have significant implications for new business creation, employment development and economic growth in Africa. It could also provide a basis for future empirical studies that assess the relative effectiveness of specific policy interventions in promoting entrepreneurship in Africa and other developing regions.

Previous articleNext article No AccessSavings and Accumulation Strategies of Urban Market Women in Harare, Zimbabwe*Emily Chamlee‐WrightEmily Chamlee‐WrightBeloit College Search for more articles by this author Beloit CollegePDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Economic Development and Cultural Change Volume 50, Number 4July 2002 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/343134 Views: 198Total views on this site Citations: 32Citations are reported from Crossref © 2002 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Krys Ochia Marketplace Entrepreneurs, Mobility Infrastructure, and Linkages, (Jan 2022): 15–48.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87556-5_2Krys Ochia Attributes Impacting Out-Of-Stall Business Contacts, (Jan 2022): 107–135.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87556-5_5Krys Ochia Challenges Facing Urban Marketplace Traders, (Jan 2022): 81–106.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87556-5_4Antonio Padilla-Meléndez, Juan Jose Plaza-Angulo, Ana Rosa Del-Aguila-Obra, Antonio Manuel Ciruela-Lorenzo Indigenous Entrepreneurship. Current issues and future lines, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 34, no.1-21-2 (Feb 2022): 6–31.https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2021.2011962Mapeto Bomani, Evelyn Derera, Mugove Mashingaidze Urbanisation and SME growth in a developing economy: Implications for policy, Corporate Governance and Organizational Behavior Review 6, no.22 (Apr 2022): 123–133.https://doi.org/10.22495/cgobrv6i2p12Amon Simba, Dina Modestus Nziku Women Entrepreneurs in Zimbabwe, (Jun 2022): 251–269.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98966-8_12Dina Rabie RoSCAs in Africa: The Case of Egypt, (Jun 2021): 277–291.https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80071-322-220211016Virgil Storr, Arielle John Cultural Considerations within Austrian Economics, 18 (Jun 2020).https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108761505Francesca Croce Indigenous women entrepreneurship: analysis of a promising research theme at the intersection of indigenous entrepreneurship and women entrepreneurship, Ethnic and Racial Studies 43, no.66 (Jun 2019): 1013–1031.https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2019.1630659Evelyn Derera, Francesca Croce, Maxwell Phiri, Charles O’Neill Entrepreneurship and women’s economic empowerment in Zimbabwe: Research themes and future research perspectives, The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa 16, no.11 (Dec 2020).https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v16i1.787Sumit Agarwal, Wenlan Qian, Ruth Tan Saving, (Oct 2020): 29–96.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5526-8_2Virgil Henry Storr, Arielle John Why Use Qualitative Methods to Study Culture in Economic Life?, (Nov 2018): 25–51.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0193-230620180000020002Arielle John, Virgil Henry Storr Kirznerian and Schumpeterian entrepreneurship in Trinidad and Tobago, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy 12, no.55 (Oct 2018): 582–610.https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-05-2018-0034Jonathan Bauchet, Vance Larsen ROSCA Composition and Repayment: Evidence from Taiwanese Bidding ROSCAs, The Journal of Development Studies 54, no.99 (Jun 2017): 1483–1495.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2017.1333107Shimpei Koike, Mayuko Nakamaru, Tokinao Otaka, Hajime Shimao, Ken-Ichi Shimomura, Takehiko Yamato, ManMohan S. Sodhi Reciprocity and exclusion in informal financial institutions: An experimental study of rotating savings and credit associations, PLOS ONE 13, no.88 (Aug 2018): e0202878.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202878Seyed Kazem Sadr The optimum size of rotating qarḍ ḥasan savings and credit associations, ISRA International Journal of Islamic Finance 9, no.11 (Jul 2017): 15–26.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIF-07-2017-003Jenna Iodice, Pierre Yourougou Female entrepreneurs in Africa: negotiating power and production in the informal markets, Transnational Corporations Review 8, no.44 (Jan 2017): 289–295.https://doi.org/10.1080/19186444.2016.1265786Carol Munn-Giddings, Tomofumi Oka, Thomasina Borkman, Grace L. Chikoto, Jürgen Matzat, Rolando Montaño-Fraire Self-Help and Mutual Aid Group Volunteering, (Jan 2016): 393–416.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-26317-9_19Arvind Ashta, Mawuli Couchoro, Abu Saleh Musa Dialectic evolution through the social innovation process: from microcredit to microfinance, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 3, no.11 (Jan 2014): 4.https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-5372-3-4Virgil Henry Storr On the hermeneutics debate: An introduction to a symposium on Don Lavoie's “The Interpretive Dimension of Economics—Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxeology”, The Review of Austrian Economics 24, no.22 (Dec 2010): 85–89.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-010-0139-8Garry D Bruton, Susanna Khavul, Helmuth Chavez Microlending in emerging economies: Building a new line of inquiry from the ground up, Journal of International Business Studies 42, no.55 (Jan 2011): 718–739.https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2010.58Emily Chamlee-Wright Qualitative methods and the pursuit of economic understanding, The Review of Austrian Economics 23, no.44 (Jul 2010): 321–331.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-010-0114-4ŞEBNEM EROĞLU Informal Finance and the Urban Poor: An Investigation of Rotating Savings and Credit Associations in Turkey, Journal of Social Policy 39, no.33 (Feb 2010): 461–481.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279409990699Virgil Henry Storr The Social Construction of the Market, Society 47, no.33 (Apr 2010): 200–206.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-010-9322-6Petrik Runst Schutzian Methodology as a Progressive Research Agenda Commentary on Lester Embree's “Economics in the Context of Alfred Schütz's Theory of Science, Schutzian Research. A Yearbook of Worldly Phenomenology and Qualitative Social Science 2, no.-1-1 (Jul 2012): 155–163.https://doi.org/10.7761/SR.2.155Lyn S. Amine, Karin M. Staub Women entrepreneurs in sub-Saharan Africa: An institutional theory analysis from a social marketing point of view, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 21, no.22 (Mar 2009): 183–211.https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620802182144Lucy Ssendi, Alistair R. Anderson Tanzanian Micro Enterprises and Micro Finance, The Journal of Entrepreneurship 18, no.11 (Mar 2009): 1–19.https://doi.org/10.1177/097135570801800101Emily Chamlee-Wright, Justus A. Myers Discovery and social learning in non-priced environments: An Austrian view of social network theory, The Review of Austrian Economics 21, no.2-32-3 (Jan 2008): 151–166.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-007-0039-8Emily Chamlee-Wright The Structure of Social Capital: An Austrian Perspective on its Nature and Development, Review of Political Economy 20, no.11 (Jan 2008): 41–58.https://doi.org/10.1080/09538250701661806 Mary Kay Gugerty You Can’t Save Alone: Commitment in Rotating Savings and Credit Associations in Kenya Gugerty, Economic Development and Cultural Change 55, no.22 (Jul 2015): 251–282.https://doi.org/10.1086/508716Emily Chamlee-Wright FOSTERING SUSTAINABLE COMPLEXITY IN THE MICROFINANCE INDUSTRY: WHICH WAY FORWARD?, Economic Affairs 25, no.22 (Jun 2005): 5–12.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0270.2005.00544.xEmily Chamlee-Wright Entrepreneurial Response to ?Bottom-up? Development Strategies in Zimbabwe, The Review of Austrian Economics 18, no.11 (Mar 2005): 5–28.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-005-5591-5

The debate that entrepreneurship is an engine of economic development has been a long-standing one. The higher the level of entrepreneurial activities, the higher the economic development. However, this literature is contradictory or elusive in Sub-Saharan Africa. Entrepreneurial activities are high in Africa, but economic development is not. Using Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM, 2017) data, the chapter discusses some of the contradictory factors. Further data were collected from 60 businesses, 20 each from Cameroon, Nigeria and Uganda for more clarification in 2019. The results show that the economic development is solely measured in economic terms. Entrepreneurship in Africa operates in an embedded context quite different from that of developed nations. Africans are often only making do with the environment in which they find themselves; thus, entrepreneurship in Africa should not be seen as unproductive considering the context and motives of the entrepreneurs.

This chapter provides an overview of the landscape of social and environmental entrepreneurship in Africa. Utilizing quantitative data on 270 social and environmental enterprises operating in Eastern and Southern Africa, some key characteristics of these kinds of enterprises are identified. These characteristics are reflected upon through a contextual lens contributing to wider debates about the nature of social and environmental entrepreneurship and enterprises in Africa. Drawing upon notions of hybridity, and sustainability oriented entrepreneurship, consideration is furthermore given to the convergence of social and environmental goals in these kinds of businesses, and in wider social and environmental innovation in Africa.

Social entrepreneurship is increasingly recognised as an important community response to catastrophes such as ethnic conflict, social issues such as poverty, inequality, and child labour, and environmental challenges such as waste management and climate change (Saebi, Foss, & Linder, 2019; George, Howard-Grenville, Joshi & Tihanyi, 2016a; Sserwanga et al., 2014). In light of the growing literature on social entrepreneurship, and the size and scale of the African continent, surprisingly few studies have engaged with and explored social entrepreneurship in African countries (Rivera-Santos, Holt, Littlewood, & Kolk, 2015; Zoogah, Peng, & Woldu, 2015; Zahra, Gedajlovic, Neubaum, & Shulman, 2009). Our presenter symposium seeks to address two fundamental shortcomings in current organization, management, and entrepreneurship scholarship. First, research in African countries offers the opportunity for greater understanding of how “the diverse, rich life worlds of African people can inform our understanding of management and organization” (AMR, 2021; Kim, Bansal & Haugh, 2019). Second, Africa has been recognized as an important and fertile ground for critically evaluating the relevance of Western theories in non-Western contexts (Nkomo, 2017; Zoogah et al., 2015). Specifically, the learnings derived from a better understanding of how African communities organize local responses to local needs creates opportunities for new insights into how social entrepreneurship seeks to create a better world for communities. Social entrepreneurship in Africa: Entrepreneurial action to create a better world together Presenter: Giacomo Ciambotti; U. Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Presenter: Helen Haugh; U. of Cambridge

One of the most difficult and challenging areas of research in social work practice is to create a philosophy of integration whereby some presumed assumptions are questioned and new areas of collaboration designed for best practices. It is the function of philosophy to question such assumptions and design newer areas of research for the practice in Africa. In this article, we have deigned to question the collaborative work of social work and entrepreneurship. This is what one might describe as the duty of the social innovator, social problem solver in business practices of the commonly defined deliverables from the social entrepreneur. In the social business innovator or entrepreneur, we have the best skills of the entrepreneurship, social philosophy, social work and social interested innovator. Many would have questioned the conjunction between the aggressive business entrepreneur who is profit oriented and the charity oriented non-governmental organizer who cares and works for others happiness. If both are for business and are investors, what kind of investment and profit is the social entrepreneur committed to in his business as different from the profit orientation of the business mogul. In Africa, such questioning and questions lead to a paradigm change in the popular understanding of the emerging area of the social entrepreneurship and the challenge of solving social problems of poverty and crisis in Africa. This article seeks to contribute to such social problem solving by enhancing the public awareness and education on the developmental possibilities of social entrepreneurship in Africa.

Background: Youth unemployment remains entrenched across Sub-Saharan Africa, compelling young founders to navigate severe resource and infrastructure constraints. Digital outsourcing—hiring remote specialists via online platforms—may help youth-led SMEs bridge capability gaps and accelerate growth, yet comparative, demand-side evidence is limited. Using harmonized data from ~700 youth-led SMEs (2020–2023 WBES) and ~950 young entrepreneurs (2019–2020 GEM), this study examines whether, how, and under what ecosystem conditions digital outsourcing enhances firm performance in Kenya, Ghana, Nigeria, and Rwanda, and quantifies cross-national differences in its effects. Objective: To assess whether, how, and under what ecosystem conditions digital outsourcing improves firm performance for youth-led enterprises in Kenya, Ghana, Nigeria, and Rwanda, and to quantify cross-national heterogeneity in effects. Data and Methods: We harmonize firm-level records for ~700 youth-led SMEs from 2020–2023 World Bank Enterprise Surveys and ~950 young entrepreneurs from 2019–2020 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (World Bank, 2023). We estimate weighted OLS, logit, propensity-score matching, and IV-2SLS models, controlling for firm size, age, sector, and human capital, and test ecosystem moderation. Results: Digital outsourcing is associated with a 5.2-percentage-point annual revenue premium, a three-point employment gain, and ~50% higher odds of product innovation. Effects vary by ecosystem quality: ~+8.5 points in Kenya’s “Silicon Savannah,” ~+3 points in infrastructure-constrained Nigeria, and ~+9 points among Rwandan adopters. A mediated-moderation test attributes ~90% of cross-country variance to differences in the ICT Development Index; every five-point IDI gain adds roughly one revenue percentage point. Contribution: Framed by digital-entrepreneurship, bricolage, and institutional-voids perspectives, this is the first multi-country, demand-side analysis showing digital outsourcing as a viable pathway to inclusive, innovation-led youth entrepreneurship in Africa, while demonstrating that returns are contingent on digital-ecosystem maturity. Policy Implications: Expanding affordable broadband, developing outsourcing literacy, and fostering trust-enhancing platforms can unlock measurable growth and job creation for youth-led firms. Targeted, country-specific interventions should prioritize infrastructure reliability and platform trust in lower-IDI contexts and quality scaling in higher-IDI contexts.

Subject area This case focusses on social innovation and social entrepreneurship in Africa, specifically looking at behavioural characteristics of social entrepreneurs, their motivations to create social value and the application of personal initiative theory. The case discusses the self-starting proactiveness and innovation traits of the social entrepreneur. The social business model canvas will be used to analyse the social enterprise’s business model. Study level/applicability Students of social entrepreneurship, development studies, sustainable livelihoods and asset-based development. It is useful for customised or short programmes on social entrepreneurship or for students with a background in business wanting to understand social enterprise as a vehicle for social and economic change. As such, this case is written for Business Management and Entrepreneurship undergraduates or students of elective courses in social entrepreneurship (“understanding” and “remembering” learning activities under Bloom’s taxonomy). When personal initiative theory is used, the case provides an initial understanding of social entrepreneurship in a less developed context for post-graduate students and may be used for higher-order learning activities (“analysing” and “applying”). Case overview The case tells the story of Dr Engr Moses Musaazi, who is a Social Entrepreneur and Managing Director of Technology for Tomorrow (T4T). Troubled with the persistent social problems in his country. Musaazi, through T4T, strived for social innovations to reduce school dropouts of Ugandan girls. While exploring Moses’ journey for solving persistent social problems through social innovations, students will be able to understand, remember, analyse and apply Dees’ (2001) social entrepreneurial behaviours and Santos’ (2012) theory of social entrepreneurship. The case discusses what motivates African social entrepreneurs to start a social venture (Ghalwash, Tolba, & Ismail, 2017). Students will apply personal initiative theory to identify the social entrepreneurial behaviours displayed in the creation of social ventures. To exemplify and analyse the different components of social ventures’ business model, the social business model canvas by Sparviero (2019) will be introduced. Expected learning outcomes The teaching objectives are Objective 1. Students are able to remember, understand, identify and apply the social entrepreneurial behaviours as defined by Dees (2001) and the elements of Santos’ (2012) theory of social entrepreneurship to Dr Moses Musaazi’s case as a social entrepreneur. Objective 2. Students remember, understand and identify what motivates social entrepreneurs in less developed economies to create social value (Ghalwash et al., 2017). Objective 3. Early-stage postgraduate students are able to apply and analyse (also evaluate and create for higher-level post-graduates) personal initiative theory to explain the emergence of social entrepreneurial behaviour and especially how innovation, self-starting and proactiveness may lead to social entrepreneurial venture start-up (Frese, Kring, Soose, & Zempel, 1996). Objective 4. Students use the social business model canvas (Sparviero, 2019) as a tool to understand, analyse and improve a social-enterprise business model. Supplementary materials Supplementary learning materials are provided in the Teaching Note (Table 1). Table1, which includes videos and their description. Also, a link to Uganda’s sustainable development index is provided (the focus is sustainable development goals [SDGs] 3: Good health and well-being, SDG 4: Quality Education, SDG 5: Gender equality, SDG 10: Reduced inequalities). Subject code CSS 3: Entrepreneurship.

Responding to calls for a better understanding of the relationship between social enterprises and their environments, this article focuses on contextual influences on social entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan Africa. We identify four predominantly African contextual dimensions, i.e., acute poverty, informality, colonial history, and ethnic group identity, and explore their influence on the way social ventures perceive themselves and on their choice of activities. Our empirical study of 384 social enterprises from 19 sub-Saharan African countries suggests that ethnic group identity and high poverty levels influence both self-perception and activity choices, while the country's colonial history only influences self-perception and informality has no significant influence on either. These findings point to the need to consider both self-perception and the choice of activities in defining social entrepreneurship. Our study also highlights the importance of African contextual dimensions for understanding social entrepreneurship, and underlines the added value of incorporating insights from African data into management research more broadly.

This paper investigates the determinants of job creation among entrepreneurs in Sub-Saharan Africa using unique panel data from the World Bank Skills Towards Employability and Productivity surveys covering Ghana and Kenya. We construct a novel taxonomy of entrepreneurial transitions based on employment status at startup and survey time: nonemployer-nonemployer, nonemployer-employer, employer-nonemployer, and employer-employer firms. Our identification strategy exploits retrospective information on business characteristics and skill content while controlling for unobserved heterogeneity through detailed family background measures. We find substantial heterogeneity in entrepreneurial outcomes that challenges conventional wisdom about African enterprise development. Employer-employer firms demonstrate remarkable resilience to business environment constraints, being significantly less likely to perceive capital and energy supply constraints compared to nonemployer firms. Our mediation analysis reveals that skill content accounts for 62.6 percent of earnings differences between job-creating and non-job-creating entrepreneurs, with non-routine interpersonal skills explaining 97 percent of this indirect effect. Employer-employer firm owners earn 59.8 percent more than nonemployer-nonemployer counterparts, with skill content mediating 38.6 percent of this premium. Our results provide the first systematic evidence on skill-biased entrepreneurship in Africa, suggesting that targeted interventions focused on high-growth potential firms may be more effective than broad-based entrepreneurship promotion.

Entrepreneurship is a logical consequence of the transformation of our society. From the industrial era to the information age, the north and south find themselves in an almost similar situation: the need to review their socio-economic fundamentals and the need to devise new approaches in the field of work. In the near future where our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will discover the salary by going to visit the museums! Indeed, our economy, based on industrialization and consumption, dates back to the early 19th century; This is infinitely small on the scale of human history. Other models existed. This is a major issue and a great responsibility for Africa. Our difficulties are twofold: the non-support of companies by banks and the immaturity of the working population. This leads to a high corporate mortality rate. Taxation of African countries is not a development tax. She kills them; The section is made up of editors with a wide variety of interests. They share a very strong interest, even a daily obsession, for innovation in the broadest sense, companies that move and move the African continent. Their mission is to share their thoughts on the private sector, to promote inspiring entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs, and to participate in debates on the role of companies in development. Entrepreneurship in Africa is fashionable and full of virtues. Like the term innovation, to which it is often associated, the word entrepreneurship swirls in private and public managerial modes. This is why it is beneficial to step back and frame the issues and strategic approach to in Africa. Everyone is an entrepreneur, some successes are magnified in the big press, even in management training around the figures of transcendent and rich individuals. Entrepreneurs would be innovators, entrepreneurs' bosses, start-ups in the new digital economy, is all-round and financed in new forms. The interest of our article is to analyze in Africa which is a serious matter. The overall approach to is not just about starting a business, but about entrepreneurial acting. Action is broader than action. We engage in a practitioner's approach that builds his relationship to the environment as he discovers and builds it. This is the ambition of the African factory today: to act and think as an entrepreneur, in entrepreneurship.

Africa is a misunderstood continent. Unfortunately, much of the continent's information that is available to the world is that of unfortunate leadership, conflicts, emigration, economic incompetence, health issues and more. But just like every other human, the average African is daily faced with the challenge of meeting his/her needs, and possibly using such to follow up interests within their sphere of influence. In every society, it is important to note the various roles played by stakeholders (government, the private sector, and civil society in the larger frame of its definition) in pursuing a community where human dignity is respected, and sustainable livelihoods assured. While it is important to state that Africa's present socio-economic predicament needs a lot of deliberate efforts, I will deliberately focus on the role of civil society actors in their role as the mediator between the people (grassroots) and opportunities.This piece seeks to discuss the role of the Social Enterprise paradigm in Africa - as an emerging trend in an emerging continent - and to discuss the value proposition of the idea of partnering with - or supporting - social entrepreneurs in Africa: those who are delivering value within developing economies but who are focused on people and development, rather than profit. The piece will also consider possible follow-up mechanisms such as establishing a continuous bi-directional flow of knowledge and management expertise between the Social Enterprise Alliance members in North America (and beyond) and their colleagues in Africa. I hope that at the end of this session, you will have a better understanding of the Social Enterprise landscape in Africa, get updates (facts from the field) from Africa's social entrepreneurs, and discuss practical networking concepts and opportunities.