Programme Director at Cascador, Amanda Etuk, an Africa-focused platform supporting growth-stage founders building impactful businesses, discusses the concept of responsible capital deployment in this interview with FELIX OLOYEDE
Nigeria’s startup ecosystem is frequently seen through a tech lens. Why have real sector industries been largely overlooked in mainstream investment discussions?
Nigeria’s startup narrative has been shaped heavily by the visibility and scalability of tech, especially fintech, which naturally attracts attention from both media and investors. Tech businesses are easier to understand from a venture capital lens. They scale quickly, require less physical infrastructure, and can deliver outsized returns within shorter timeframes. That fits neatly into the expectations of many global investors.
From the Cascador perspective, however, this focus has created a blind spot. Real economy sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, logistics, and healthcare are often perceived as slower, more complex, and more capital-intensive. They involve operational challenges, regulatory friction, and longer payback periods, which can deter investors looking for quick exits. As a result, they have been under-represented in mainstream investment conversations.
There is also a narrative issue. Tech startups tend to have clearer storytelling through digital products, user growth metrics, and familiar business models, while businesses in the real sector can be harder to present despite their deep impact. Yet these sectors are where the majority of Nigerians live and work and where transformative, inclusive growth actually happens.
At Cascador, we see this as a missed opportunity. Real economy entrepreneurs are solving foundational problems such as food security, job creation, and local production while building resilient businesses with tangible impact. The challenge is not a lack of opportunity, but a mismatch between the dominant investment lens and the realities of these sectors. Bridging that gap is critical to unlocking Nigeria’s full economic potential.
How would you define the “real economy” within Nigeria’s current business environment?
From the Cascador perspective, the “real economy” refers to businesses that are directly involved in producing goods and delivering essential services that meet everyday needs. In Nigeria’s context, this includes sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, healthcare, logistics, education, and energy. These are businesses that operate beyond digital platforms and are deeply embedded in the physical economy.
What distinguishes the real economy is its direct link to livelihoods and productivity. These businesses create jobs at scale, strengthen local value chains, and contribute to economic resilience by reducing dependence on imports and building domestic capacity. They are often more operationally intensive, requiring infrastructure, talent, and long-term investment, but their impact is both tangible and far-reaching.
In today’s Nigerian business landscape, the real economy represents the foundation on which sustainable growth is built. While tech can enable and enhance efficiency, it is these sectors that drive food security, industrialisation, and broad-based prosperity. At Cascador, we see the real economy not as separate from innovation, but as an area where innovation is urgently needed and where it can have the most meaningful impact.
How do the “enabling environments” needed to scale a real-sector business differ from those required for a software or tech startup?
The enabling environments are quite different, and that difference is often underestimated.
For real-economy businesses, infrastructure and policy play a much more direct role in whether the business can function efficiently at all. Reliable power, transport, logistics, and access to inputs are not just nice to have; they are fundamental to operations. When those are weak, they become a constant drag on the business, effectively an ecosystem tax that founders have to manage alongside everything else. In that kind of environment, a lot of time and capital are spent on solving the basics instead of focusing on growth.
Policy also matters in a very practical way. Issues around import duties, FX access, and regulatory bottlenecks can directly impact cost structures and margins. When policies are inconsistent or unclear, it becomes difficult for businesses to plan, invest, and scale with confidence.
For software or tech startups, those constraints are less immediate. They are typically more asset-light and can scale faster without the same level of dependence on physical infrastructure. Their enabling environment is more about access to capital, talent, digital infrastructure, and increasingly, pathways to liquidity and exits.
What we see on the ground is that when infrastructure works and policies are clear and consistent, real sector businesses are able to focus on core fundamentals, improving operations, strengthening their value proposition, and scaling efficiently. When those conditions are not in place, even strong businesses are forced into a reactive mode, which slows down growth.
So, the key difference is that for real-economy businesses, the enabling environment determines whether they can operate efficiently in the first place, while for tech startups, it is more about how fast and how far they can scale once they have product-market fit.
Data indicates that Nigeria’s GDP expanded by 3.98 per cent in Q3 2025, with agriculture recording 3.79 per cent real growth. Despite this, why does the sector continue to face significant underinvestment?
The growth numbers are encouraging, but they do not fully reflect the underlying realities of the sector.
Agriculture in Nigeria is still widely perceived as high risk, and that perception is grounded in real challenges. From climate variability and post-harvest losses to price volatility and fragmented supply chains, there are multiple layers of uncertainty that make investors cautious. When you add limited insurance coverage and weak risk mitigation structures, it becomes even harder to attract consistent, long-term capital.
There is also a structural issue around how agriculture is financed. Much of the capital available is not suited to the realities of the sector. Agriculture requires patient capital, longer tenors, and financing that reflects seasonality, but what many operators are offered is short-term, high-cost debt. That mismatch makes it difficult for businesses to invest properly and scale.
Infrastructure is another major constraint. Gaps in storage, transportation, power, and processing mean that a significant amount of value is lost along the chain. I keep emphasising infrastructure because of the real impact it has on performance. The average Nigerian, and even more so the entrepreneur, is operating at a significantly higher level of effort just to achieve what would be considered baseline output in more developed environments. That additional burden acts as a drag on efficiency, scale, and, ultimately, returns. When businesses are constantly solving for power, logistics, and basic operational gaps, it limits their ability to focus on growth and value creation.
Finally, there is still a gap in investment readiness across parts of the sector. Many businesses are not yet structured in a way that makes it easy for capital to flow at scale, whether in terms of governance, financial discipline, or data availability. So even where there is interest, deployment can be slow.
What we see on the ground is that there are strong operators building real businesses in agriculture, but they need the right conditions to thrive. When you begin to address risk through guarantees or blended finance, improve infrastructure, and strengthen business fundamentals, capital does start to flow.
So, the issue is not a lack of opportunity. It is a combination of risk perception, structural constraints, and a mismatch between the type of capital available and what the sector actually needs.
About 767 Nigerian manufacturing firms closed in 2023, mainly due to high energy costs and limited access to finance. What urgent measures are required to halt this trend, and what does it reveal about the business environment?
The closures point to a very clear reality: many businesses are not failing because of a lack of demand but because the cost of operating has become unsustainable.
The immediate interventions are fairly straightforward. First is addressing energy costs, whether through a more reliable grid supply or supporting alternative energy solutions that reduce the burden on businesses. Second is access to appropriately structured finance, longer tenors, lower cost, and mechanisms like guarantees that actually allow manufacturers to invest and stay liquid. Third is greater policy consistency, so businesses can plan and manage costs with more certainty.
What this ultimately highlights is the operating reality in Nigeria. Entrepreneurs are carrying a heavy ecosystem burden, from power to logistics to financing, and that is compressing margins and limiting scale. Until those structural constraints are addressed, even strong businesses will continue to struggle to sustain operations.
How can investors be persuaded to look beyond infrastructure risks, recognise the sector’s underlying value, and align their expectations with on-ground realities?
It starts with reframing the conversation from risk-to-risk mitigation and real opportunity.
The reality is that the demand fundamentals are strong. Nigeria has large, underserved markets across key sectors, and businesses that are able to operate effectively here are often building resilient, high-margin models.
The issue is not a lack of value; it is how that value is understood and structured.
To bring investors along, we need to do two things. First, demonstrate that risks can be managed through the right structures, whether that is guarantees, blended finance, or stronger governance and reporting. Second, improve the quality of businesses coming to market so that they are investment-ready and able to deploy capital effectively.
When investors see disciplined operators, clear unit economics, and thoughtful structuring around risk, they are more willing to engage. So, it is less about asking investors to ignore the challenges and more about showing that in this market, with the right approach, the fundamentals still make sense.
What insights are you observing about the everyday challenges and resilience of real-economy entrepreneurs?
What we see on the ground is that entrepreneurs are dealing with a constant layering of challenges, many of which go beyond the core business itself. Power, logistics, FX volatility, and access to finance are not occasional issues; they are daily realities that founders have to actively manage.
There is a lot of resilience, but it is not passive. Entrepreneurs are becoming more disciplined, more resourceful, and more strategic in how they operate. They are finding ways to optimise costs, diversify revenue, and build around constraints.
At the same time, that resilience comes at a cost. A significant amount of time, energy, and capital is spent solving for environmental gaps rather than focusing purely on growth. That is the trade-off.
What stands out is that the businesses that are able to navigate this environment successfully are emerging stronger. They are more efficient, more structured, and ultimately more investable. But it reinforces the point that if we can reduce some of these systemic pressures, the level of growth and impact we would see would be significantly higher.
Could you expand on the potential and broader impact of supporting the real economy in driving GDP growth and job creation?
Supporting the real economy has a direct and multiplier effect on economic development.
These are the sectors that drive production, create jobs at scale, and anchor value chains across the economy. When businesses in agriculture, manufacturing, and logistics grow, they do not just increase output; they stimulate activity across suppliers, distributors, and service providers.
From a GDP perspective, strengthening the real sector leads to more stable and diversified growth. From an employability standpoint, these businesses create large numbers of jobs, particularly for semi-skilled and skilled workers, which is critical in a market like Nigeria.
The impact is both immediate and long-term. When you support real-economy businesses to scale, you are not just growing individual companies; you are building the foundation for broader economic productivity, resilience, and inclusive growth.
What long-term effects could Nigeria face in terms of infrastructure and productivity if this financing gap remains unresolved?
If the financing gap is not addressed, the long-term impact is a continued slowdown in productivity and a weakening of the country’s economic foundation.
You will see underinvestment in critical sectors like agriculture, manufacturing, and infrastructure, which means capacity does not expand in line with demand. That creates persistent supply gaps, higher costs, and increased reliance on imports, all of which put pressure on the economy.
It also limits job creation at scale. The real economy is where most employment comes from, so if these businesses cannot grow, the economy struggles to absorb a growing population.
Over time, it becomes a compounding issue. Infrastructure remains underdeveloped because the businesses that should be driving and benefiting from it are not scaling, and productivity stays low because firms are operating below potential.
Ultimately, it is not just a financing issue; it becomes a structural constraint on growth. Bridging that gap is critical if Nigeria is to unlock higher productivity, stronger GDP growth, and more inclusive economic development.
You promote “responsible capital deployment” in the real economy. What does that entail in practice, and how is it different from conventional venture capital approaches?
When we talk about responsible capital deployment, we are really talking about aligning capital with capability and context.
At Cascador, we see capital as just one part of what a business needs to scale. Through our work, we focus on three core resources that must come together. First is strategy and business fundamentals, ensuring the company has a clear path to scale, strong unit economics, and operational discipline. Second is leadership, because the founder’s ability to make decisions, build teams, and manage growth is often the biggest determinant of success. Third is capital, structured in a way that the business can absorb and deploy effectively.
Responsible deployment means you do not lead with capital alone. You ensure the business is ready, the leadership is equipped, and the funding structure matches the realities of the business. That could mean longer tenors, blended finance, or combining debt, equity, and guarantees in a way that reduces risk and supports sustainable growth.
This is quite different from traditional venture capital models, which often prioritise speed and scale, with an assumption that capital will drive growth and that a few outliers will generate returns. In the real economy, that approach does not always work. These businesses are more capital-intensive, more exposed to external constraints, and require a more deliberate path to scale.
So, the difference is that responsible capital deployment is more disciplined, more tailored, and more focused on long-term outcomes. It is about building businesses that endure, not just grow quickly.
How can the real economy be made attractive enough for venture capitalists who are currently drawn to high-risk, high-reward tech opportunities?
I think the first step is shifting the narrative from hype to fundamentals.
The real economy may not always offer the same rapid, exponential growth stories as tech, but it offers something equally compelling, which is predictable demand, strong cash flows, and real asset-backed value. These are businesses solving essential problems, and that creates resilience.
To make the sector more attractive to venture capital, we need to do two things. First, improve structuring. Not all real economy businesses should be funded like traditional venture deals. Blended finance, revenue-based models, and hybrid debt equity structures can better align risk and return.
Second, we need to strengthen the pipeline. As more businesses become investment-ready, with clear governance, strong unit economics, and disciplined growth, it becomes easier for investors to engage with confidence.
What we are also starting to see is a broader shift in the market. Investors are becoming more focused on value, sustainability, and realistic returns. As that continues, the real economy becomes less of an alternative and more of a natural fit.
So, it is not about forcing venture capital into the sector; it is about evolving both the structure of capital and the quality of businesses so that the opportunity becomes clear and compelling.
Are there particular regulatory or infrastructure reforms that could quickly unlock growth in these real-economy sectors?
Yes, there are a few reforms that could have an immediate catalytic effect.
On the regulatory side, consistency and clarity are key. Streamlining approvals, reducing duplication across agencies, and ensuring more predictable policies around FX, trade, and taxation would significantly improve business confidence and planning.
On infrastructure, power is the most immediate lever. Improving grid reliability or scaling support for embedded and alternative energy solutions would directly reduce operating costs. Logistics is another; better transport networks and port efficiency would lower the cost and time of moving goods.
There is also a role for strengthening credit infrastructure. Expanding guarantee schemes and improving how they are implemented would help unlock financing for businesses that are currently excluded.
Taken together, these are not abstract reforms. They directly impact whether businesses can operate efficiently, focus on their core fundamentals, and scale sustainably.
Cascador alumni have generated more than 67,000 jobs and attracted substantial funding. What key patterns or insights are emerging from these founders’ experiences?
A few clear patterns are emerging from the founders we work with.
First is the importance of discipline over speed. The businesses that are performing well are not necessarily the fastest-growing, but they are the most structured. They have strong financial discipline, clear unit economics, and are very deliberate about how they scale.
Second is leadership evolution. At a certain point, the founder has to transition from being an operator to a leader. The companies that unlock growth are the ones where the founder builds a strong team, puts the right systems in place, and steps back from day-to-day execution.
Third is that capital readiness matters as much as capital itself. Many of our alumni have been able to raise significant funding, but that only happens when the business is prepared, governance is in place, reporting is strong, and there is clarity on how capital will be deployed.
Finally, resilience with adaptability. The environment is tough, so the founders who succeed are constantly learning, adjusting, and refining their models without losing focus on the core problem they are solving.
Overall, the lesson is that building an enduring business in this market is less about chasing growth and more about building the right foundations that allow growth to happen sustainably.
How critical are ecosystem support structures, such as mentorship, advisory networks, and peer learning, in enabling these businesses to scale?
It is absolutely critical, and often underestimated.
In this environment, founders are not just building businesses; they are navigating complexity on multiple fronts at once. Ecosystem support, mentorship, and advisory networks help close that gap by giving them access to experience, perspective, and practical guidance that they would otherwise have to learn the hard way.
What we see consistently is that founders who are plugged into strong networks make better decisions faster. They avoid common pitfalls, strengthen their strategy, and are more prepared to engage with capital providers.
Peer learning is also very powerful. There is real value in founders learning from others who are facing similar challenges. It creates accountability, shared insight, and a sense that they are not operating in isolation.
Ultimately, these forms of support help founders focus on what matters most, building strong, scalable businesses, rather than trying to solve every problem alone.
Finally, moving beyond the tech-driven hype, what is your core message to local and international investors on why Nigeria’s foundational economy represents today’s most compelling investment opportunity?
If you look beyond the hype, the real opportunity in Nigeria sits in the foundational economy because that is where demand is deepest, most consistent, and still largely underserved.
These are sectors like agriculture, manufacturing, logistics, and essential services. They are not built on speculation; they are built on real needs. People need food, movement of goods, housing, and healthcare. That demand does not go away, and in a growing market like Nigeria, it only increases.
What makes the opportunity compelling today is the combination of strong fundamentals and improving discipline. Businesses are becoming more structured, more efficient, and more focused on profitability and sustainability. At the same time, valuations are more realistic, and there is a clearer understanding of what it takes to build enduring companies in this market.
Yes, there are challenges, particularly around infrastructure and operating costs, but that is also where the upside lies. Businesses that are able to navigate these constraints are often more resilient and better positioned for long-term growth.
So, the pitch is simple. This is not a short-term, hype-driven play. It is an opportunity to invest in real businesses solving real problems in a large and growing market, with the potential for strong, sustained returns. And as the ecosystem continues to mature, particularly around financing structures and exit pathways, that opportunity will only become more compelling.
