Botswana’s social workers trade casework for youth entrepreneurship

In Botswana, professionally trained social workers are spending their days screening business plans, disbursing enterprise grants and monitoring youth-run projects rather than delivering the counselling and welfare services their degrees prepared them for. A new qualitative study of twenty social workers employed as Programme Officers in the Ministry of Youth reveals a profession quietly redefining itself at the intersection of social wellbeing and economic empowerment, and argues that this transformation should be embraced rather than resisted. The research, published in SN Social Sciences, offers a rare empirical window into how social work practice adapts when a government assigns it a developmental mandate.

The demographic backdrop makes the stakes clear. Botswana’s 1991 census recorded 475,443 young people aged 12 to 29 years, representing 36 percent of the total population, with roughly 60 percent of the population below age 30. Census data from 2022 indicate the trend has remained stable, with approximately 70 percent of the population under 35 years of age. This youthful structure presents what economists call a potential demographic dividend, but only if supported by appropriate policies and institutional frameworks. Without such support, a large youth cohort intensifies competition for limited labour market opportunities. Persistent youth unemployment, inequality and social exclusion have therefore become defining policy concerns, prompting the Government of Botswana to introduce the National Youth Policy in 1996, review it in 2010, and establish a Ministry of Youth that increasingly draws on social work expertise.

Study author Kabo Diraditsile of Botswana Open University conducted the research in 2019 in Gaborone, using a sampling frame obtained from the Ministry to systematically select twenty professionally qualified social workers, eight males and twelve females. Most participants, fifteen of twenty, were aged between 30 and 39 years, and all held at least a bachelor’s degree in social work, with eighteen holding bachelor’s degrees and two holding master’s degrees. Data were collected through face-to-face semi-structured interviews lasting approximately 40 to 60 minutes, audio recorded with consent and transcribed verbatim. The interviews were conducted and coded in English, with no translation undertaken, thereby avoiding inconsistencies that can arise through translation and back-translation. Thematic analysis was performed by the author and a trained research assistant who independently coded the transcripts, compared interpretations and resolved differences through consensus.

The central finding is that these social workers perceive their roles as distinct from the conventional welfare functions traditionally associated with their counterparts in the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. Rather than providing direct remedial services, participants described work that is largely programme and project oriented, with a strong emphasis on youth empowerment and economic development. One participant, who completed a Bachelor of Social Work at the University of Botswana before being employed as a Programme Officer, explained the reality plainly: although the social work methods and principles were learned at school, Programme Officers function more like project officers. They finance youth projects, most commonly through the Youth Development Fund, explain the guidelines, screen application documents, finance those who qualify and then monitor the funded projects.

What is technically striking is how the classic social work methods persist but have been reoriented. Group work, one of the profession’s foundational techniques, is applied not for therapeutic or psychosocial intervention but as a mechanism for information dissemination, mobilisation and youth engagement. Participants described conducting programme orientations where young people are grouped and informed about Ministry programmes, typically in community halls or kgotla meetings, the traditional forums used across Botswana’s districts. Casework, likewise, takes place in the office when young people come as individuals, but participants noted it bears little resemblance to conventional casework, which would involve understanding personal challenges, assessing needs and developing individualised intervention strategies aimed at improving social functioning. Instead, most interactions centre on programme requirements and application procedures. Community organisation has similarly been redirected toward mobilising young people around common interests, connecting groups to programmes such as arts and culture competitions, sports and recreation competitions and the entrepreneurship-focused Youth Development Fund.

This reorientation generates a measurable professional role tension. Sixteen of the twenty participants, 80 percent, identified challenges associated with practising social work within the youth development environment, while four participants, 20 percent, did not perceive these differences as challenges but rather as a reflection of the distinct scope and mandate of youth development work. Those who identified challenges consistently highlighted the mismatch between professional orientation and institutional performance expectations. Social work emphasises wellbeing, prevention and empowerment, but participants indicated their performance was assessed through programme outputs, particularly how many projects were funded and how many of those were still existing and doing well. Counselling was hardly performed; participants instead referred young people to social workers employed elsewhere who could provide it. The study suggests the challenge is not that social workers lack the knowledge or willingness to apply professional principles, but that the institutional environment determines which aspects of their training can actually be exercised.

The findings also challenge an assumption at the heart of the profession’s identity: that social work is primarily concerned with people experiencing poverty or vulnerability. Within the youth development context, the clientele is socio-economically diverse. One participant explained that a young person can come from a well-off family with the intention to start a business, and that individual is not necessarily vulnerable or poor; some have existing businesses and want to grow them. If they fall within the youth bracket and are not currently in school, the Ministry assists them. Some young people require social protection and psychosocial support, while others require access to finance, entrepreneurship support, skills development or business expansion opportunities. This diversity, the study argues, reinforces the need for a broader conceptualisation of social work practice in youth development, one that combines social protection with empowerment, capability development and economic participation.

Training emerges as a critical gap. Seventeen of the twenty participants, 85 percent, reported having attended training organised or facilitated by the Ministry, particularly in entrepreneurship and youth enterprise development, with trainers including external consultants and, in one well-remembered case, personnel from the International Labour Organization delivering a Gender Entrepreneurship Together Ahead of Youth Enterprises programme. However, most of this training was relatively short, generally lasting about one week, and did not always result in formal certification. Participants also recalled an earlier period when the government supported officers through diploma courses on Youth Development via the Commonwealth of Learning, apparently because the majority of officers lacked any qualification in youth development work. Indeed, one participant could identify only a single colleague holding a qualification in Youth. The three participants who had not received training were relatively new employees with fewer than four years of service, suggesting the absence of training reflected shorter tenure rather than rejection of professional development.

The study situates these findings within Botswana’s expanding social work education landscape. The University of Botswana now offers qualifications from diploma and bachelor’s degrees to master’s and PhD programmes, while other institutions provide training at certificate, diploma and degree levels, a considerable expansion compared with the 1980s and 1990s when the University of Botswana was the principal provider of professional social work education. Employment has diversified beyond traditional welfare services into health facilities, schools, the Botswana Defence Force, the Botswana Police Service, non-governmental organisations, community-based organisations, faith-based organisations and private-sector institutions. Botswana has also been pursuing the establishment of a Social Work Profession Council to strengthen regulation and safeguard professional standards, a development the study links to existing concerns that weak regulation contributes to ambiguity concerning professional roles, competencies and the boundaries of practice.

The study’s implications point toward a developmental approach to social work that integrates the profession’s traditional commitment to social protection and wellbeing with empowerment, participation, prevention, capacity building and socio-economic inclusion. From a policy perspective, the author recommends that youth policies and programmes explicitly incorporate social work competencies in areas such as youth participation, psychosocial support, entrepreneurship, community development and economic empowerment, alongside clearer professional roles and continuous capacity development. For social work education, the findings support integrating entrepreneurship, programme management, youth participation, digital skills and economic empowerment into curricula and continuing professional development, equipping practitioners to work collaboratively with government, communities, private-sector organisations and other professionals. The author acknowledges the study’s limitations: the qualitative design and relatively small sample mean the findings reflect participants’ perspectives and should not be interpreted as statistically representative of all social workers or youth development practitioners in Botswana. Nevertheless, the argument carries weight well beyond Botswana’s borders, offering a template for repositioning social work across Africa and other youthful, developing contexts where young people are not merely recipients of services but active agents of their own socio-economic advancement.

Subject of Research: Social work for youth development in Botswana: a case for a developmental approach

Article Title: Social work for youth development in Botswana: a case for a developmental approach

Article References: Diraditsile, K. (2026). Social work for youth development in Botswana: a case for a developmental approach. SN Social Sciences, 6(11), Article 556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-026-01853-3

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s43545-026-01853-3

Keywords: Social, work, youth, development, Botswana, case, developmental, approach, scientific research