Somewhere in Zambia, a young developer is building software on an ordinary laptop.
Another entrepreneur is testing an agricultural solution with a handful of farmers. Someone is developing a financial product, an education platform or a technology that could make a public service work better.
The problem is rarely a shortage of ideas.
The harder question is what happens after the idea has been built.
Zambia has spent years building parts of an innovation ecosystem. Zambia Information and Communications Technology Authority has run its ICT Innovation Programme for years, while organisations such as BongoHive have provided incubation, mentorship, business development and connections to capital.
The ecosystem is growing.
But Zambia should now ask a more difficult question:
Are we investing enough in helping young innovators become sustainable businesses?
The ecosystem is no longer starting from zero
It is important to acknowledge the work already being done.
ZICTA's ICT Innovation Programme provides training, mentorship and commercialisation support to young ICT innovators. The 2025 programme, for example, selected 100 innovators from more than 500 applicants, with 10 receiving commercialisation support.
BongoHive has also become an important part of Zambia's entrepreneurship infrastructure. Its programmes cover everything from early-stage validation to investment readiness, while its reported ecosystem activity includes support to hundreds of enterprises and access to grants and investors.
There are also institutions such as the National Technology Business Centre, universities, private-sector programmes, development partners and technology communities contributing to the pipeline.
This matters.
A country cannot build an innovation economy by government alone.
But neither can it build one through competitions and accelerator programmes alone.
The missing middle
The difficult stage for many startups comes after the pitch competition.
The founder has built something.
There are early customers.
The product works.
Perhaps there is even some revenue.
But the business is still too small to attract conventional finance, too young to absorb regulatory costs easily and too early to have the management systems of an established company.
This is the missing middle of the startup ecosystem.
It is where promising companies can stall.
A young Zambian technology company may need K100,000 to improve its product, hire one developer, acquire equipment, meet compliance costs and pursue customers.
That amount may be too large for the founder's personal savings and too small or risky for conventional lenders.
The result is predictable: the founder returns to consulting, employment or another business to finance the startup.
The innovation survives as a side project, rather than becoming a company.
Zambia should consider a Startup Act
This is where the conversation about a Startup Act deserves serious consideration.
A Startup Act should not simply become another government programme with a logo, an application form and an annual awards ceremony.
Its purpose should be to address the structural problems that make it difficult for young companies to survive their earliest years.
That could include a clearly defined legal status for qualifying startups, simpler regulatory procedures, easier access to government programmes, incentives for early-stage investment, mechanisms for regulatory sandboxes and stronger links between startups and public procurement.
The exact design would require consultation with founders, investors, regulators, tax authorities, lawyers and established businesses.
But the principle is straightforward:
A company that is three months old should not necessarily face the same practical burden as a company that has been operating for thirty years.
This is not an argument for removing accountability.
It is an argument for recognising that early-stage businesses have different constraints.
Government can become a customer, not just a funder
One of the most powerful forms of support may not be a grant.
It may be a customer.
Government is one of the largest purchasers of goods and services in the country. If appropriately designed, public procurement could give credible Zambian startups opportunities to prove their products in real environments.
A young company building school-management software, agricultural technology, health systems or public-service tools learns considerably more from serving 20 real institutions than from winning another pitch competition.
The National ICT Policy implementation plan already recognises the importance of commercialising locally developed technology, developing an ICT startup framework, supporting local developers and establishing innovation funding mechanisms.
The challenge is turning these intentions into a predictable pathway from innovation to market.
Funding should follow the company's journey
Not every innovator needs venture capital.
Some need a small prototype grant.
Others need working capital after securing their first customers.
Some need equipment.
Others need help obtaining certification, intellectual-property protection or access to larger markets.
This suggests that Zambia's innovation financing system needs to become more diverse.
There should be room for grants, patient capital, angel investment, revenue-based finance, procurement opportunities and eventually conventional investment.
The objective should not be to manufacture startups.
It should be to give viable ones enough room to discover whether they can become businesses.
And investment should reach beyond Lusaka
An innovation ecosystem concentrated in Lusaka cannot fully represent Zambia's innovation potential.
The country's economic problems are distributed across its provinces.
Agriculture, mining, logistics, education, health, tourism and energy all generate problems that require local solutions.
That is why programmes that reach outside Lusaka matter.
The national innovation initiatives already show the potential for a broader approach, with previous programmes mapping innovators across provinces including Copperbelt, Southern, North-Western, Western and Luapula.
A serious national innovation strategy should make geography a feature, not an afterthought.
The return is bigger than the startup
Investing in young innovators is not simply about producing a handful of successful technology companies.
It is also about building capabilities.
A founder who learns how to develop a product, manage a team, sell to customers, raise capital and comply with regulation creates knowledge that can circulate through the economy.
Employees trained by one startup may later build another.
A failed product can produce a founder with better knowledge for the next attempt.
An early customer can become a reference point for another Zambian company.
This is how ecosystems deepen.
Zambia does not need to copy Silicon Valley
The objective should not be to recreate Silicon Valley in Lusaka.
Zambia has different capital markets, infrastructure, purchasing power and economic structures.
Its startups are likely to emerge from problems specific to Zambia and the wider African market: unreliable connectivity, agricultural productivity, financial inclusion, logistics, energy, education, mining and public-service delivery.
That is an advantage if policy is designed around actual local problems.
The country already has many of the pieces: ZICTA's innovation programmes, BongoHive and other hubs, universities, private-sector partners, development organisations and government institutions working on technology and entrepreneurship.
The next stage is coordination and continuity.
From celebrating innovators to building companies
Zambia is getting better at finding young innovators.
The next challenge is keeping them.
A pitch competition can identify talent. An accelerator can sharpen a business model. A grant can build a prototype.
But a company needs customers, capital, infrastructure, skills, predictable regulation and time.
That is why the conversation around a Startup Act is worth having.
Not because every young person with an idea should receive government support.
But because the country should become better at distinguishing between an idea, an experiment and a genuinely promising young business — and then creating a system that gives the latter a fair opportunity to grow.
The question for Zambia is no longer whether its young people can innovate. The evidence suggests they can. The question is whether the country's institutions are prepared to invest in what happens after the innovation has been discovered.
