Interacting Barriers to Youth Enterprise Growth in Eastern Zambia: A Context-Weighted Constraint Reinforcement Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53819/81018102t70104Abstract
Youth entrepreneurship is widely promoted as a response to unemployment in Zambia, yet many youth-owned enterprises remain active without moving beyond survival. This study examined how barriers combine, vary by place and restrict the conversion of entrepreneurial effort and resources into growth. An interpretive comparative qualitative design was used in Chipata, Petauke and Lundazi. Data came from 50 in-depth interviews with youth entrepreneurs, 10 key informant interviews and three focus group discussions involving 24 participants. Reflexive thematic analysis, supported by NVivo, was strengthened through source triangulation, an audit trail, reflexive memoing, negative-case review, peer debriefing and cross-case matrices. Seven constraints were identified: limited finance, weak business management capability, restricted markets, inadequate infrastructure, difficult institutional processes, climate-related risk and saturation in low-entry sectors. The analysis shows that these barriers are not additive. They reinforce one another through recurring mechanisms: weak records restrict finance; low capital limits stock and market reach; infrastructure raises costs and reduces bargaining power; institutional opacity discourages formalization; and climate shocks deplete the small buffers needed to restart. Place changes the weight of these mechanisms. The article introduces the Context-Weighted Constraint Reinforcement Framework (CWCRF), an extension of entrepreneurial ecosystem and institutional perspectives. It explains how constraints reinforce one another, differ across contexts, hinder the conversion of resources into enterprise growth, and generate feedback that sustains a survival trap. The findings support coordinated, context-specific interventions combining affordable finance, practical mentoring, buyer linkages, infrastructure, simplified procedures, and climate-resilient enterprise support.
Keywords: youth entrepreneurship; enterprise growth; interacting barriers; entrepreneurial ecosystem; institutional constraints; rural enterprise; Zambia
References
Abdulai, A. (2023). Dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystem and entrepreneurship development: Evidence from Africa. Cogent Business & Management, 10(3), Article 2292315. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2292315
Abdulai, A., Hussain, N. R., & Queku, Y. N. (2026). Capacity of innovation and entrepreneurship development in Africa: Does institutional quality matter? Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 15, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-025-00603-8
Ahmed, H. M. S., & Ahmed, Y. A. (2021). Constraints of youth entrepreneurs in Ethiopia. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 11, 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40497-021-00292-z
Amini Sedeh, A., Pezeshkan, A., & Caiazza, R. (2022). Innovative entrepreneurship in emerging and developing economies: The effects of entrepreneurial competencies and institutional voids. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 47(4), 1198–1223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-021-09874-1
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2024). Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in Palliative Medicine: A review of published research and introduction to the Reflexive Thematic Analysis Reporting Guidelines (RTARG). Palliative Medicine, 38(6), 608–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241234800
Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. (2008). Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: Where are we today and where should the research go in the future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00213.x
Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56, 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
Chigunta, F. (2002). Youth entrepreneurship: Meeting the key policy challenges. Oxford University.
Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. (2022). Study report on MSMEs’ access to markets in Zambia.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2014). Youth and agriculture: Key challenges and concrete solutions.
Giwu, O., Ntlanga, S. S., Bontsa, N. V., Mdiya, L., Gwala, L., Makamane, A., & Mdoda, L. (2025). Youth aspirations and participation in agricultural enterprise: A case study in Umzimvubu Local Municipality, Eastern Cape Province. Cogent Food & Agriculture, 11(1), Article 2488110. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2025.2488110
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2024). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2023/2024 global report: 25 years and growing. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.
Hennink, M. M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine, 292, Article 114523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316665344
International Fund for Agricultural Development. (2019). Creating opportunities for rural youth.
International Labour Organization. (2024). Global employment trends for youth 2024.
Leger, M., Arsenijevic, J., & Bosma, N. (2025). The role and effectiveness of non-formal training programmes for entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic literature review. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 37(1–2), 214–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2024.2348046
Liguori, E., Winkler, C., Winkel, D., Marvel, M. R., Keels, J. K., van Gelderen, M., & Noyes, E. (2019). The entrepreneurship education imperative: Introducing EE&P. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 2(4), 263–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515127419879890
McKenzie, D. (2017). Identifying and spurring high-growth entrepreneurship: Experimental evidence from a business plan competition. American Economic Review, 107(8), 2278–2307. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151404
McKenzie, D., & Woodruff, C. (2014). What are we learning from business training and entrepreneurship evaluations around the developing world? The World Bank Research Observer, 29(1), 48–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkt007
Msimango-Galawe, J., & Majaja, B. (2022). Mapping the needs and challenges of SMEs: A focus on the City of Johannesburg entrepreneurship ecosystem. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), Article 2094589. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2094589
Mulema, J., Mugambi, I., Kansiime, M., Chan, H. T., Chimalizeni, M., Pham, T. X., & Oduor, G. (2021). Barriers and opportunities for youth engagement in agribusiness: Empirical evidence from Zambia and Vietnam. Development in Practice, 31(5), 690–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2021.1911949
Mwila, M., & Ngoyi, L. (2019). The use of ICT by SMEs in Zambia to access business information services and investments: Barriers and drivers. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 9, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-019-0145-7
Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N., & Walmsley, A. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(2), 277–299. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0026
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
Ofosu-Appiah, S., Boahen, P. A. N., & Agbenyegah, A. T. (2025). Socio-ecological barriers to youth entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 14, Article 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-025-00484-x
Ogujiuba, K. K., Eggink, M., & Olamide, E. (2023). Impact of elements of finance and business support on the SME business ecosystem in South Africa: An econometric analysis. Sustainability, 15(11), Article 8461. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118461
Premand, P., Brodmann, S., Almeida, R., Grun, R., & Barouni, M. (2016). Entrepreneurship education and entry into self-employment among university graduates. World Development, 77, 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.08.028
Schoof, U. (2006). Stimulating youth entrepreneurship: Barriers and incentives to enterprise start-ups by young people. International Labour Office.
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). SAGE.
Stam, E., & van de Ven, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics, 56(2), 809–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00270-6
van der Westhuizen, T. (2023). Youth entrepreneurship: An ecosystem theory for young entrepreneurs in South Africa and beyond. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-44339-8
Welter, F. (2011). Contextualising entrepreneurship: Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x
World Bank. (2021). Access to finance and capacity building of women-led small and medium enterprises in Zambia: W-SME survey report.
World Bank. (2024). Promoting skills development for youth in Zambia: A review of the landscape of TEVET and skills development.
Zhang, J., van Gorp, D., & Kievit, H. (2023). Digital technology and national entrepreneurship: An ecosystem perspective. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 48, 1077–1105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09934-0
