2023 NGO law imposes strict registration and operating requirements, hindering grassroots organising.

Heavy reliance on external donors; limited core or institutional support.

Gaps in digital tools, long-term strategic planning and governance frameworks.

Strong local networks, participatory governance programmes, and growing interest in feminist governance models.

Registration under the Societies Act: few restrictions, but bureaucratic delays and no enabling legislation for NGO–government cooperation.

Mostly international partners; a few organisations receive government subventions.

Weak M&E systems, inconsistent leadership succession, poor digital presence.

Gender advocacy momentum, youth digital skilling, and a strong HIV/AIDS sector.

Work on governance, GBV and LGBT+ rights is constrained by overlapping religious, customary and political authority.

Donor dependent, with limited institutional support.

Women are 50.4% of the population but hold only 2% of high-level government positions.

Community-led gender advocacy, media and storytelling for social change, and engagement with customary leaders for legitimacy.

Freedom of association is constitutionally protected, but CSOs operate in a politically constrained environment.

Heavy donor reliance; local philanthropy is weak.

M&E, strategic planning and digital capability are underdeveloped in many organisations.

Strong CSO presence in conflict zones, humanitarian response, women's rights and youth empowerment.

Restricted civic space: public gatherings require approval and freedom of association is often challenged.

Predominantly donor-driven, with limited government support or domestic philanthropy.

Many CSOs operate informally or with weak structures; challenges in M&E and strategic planning.

Strong presence in health (especially HIV/AIDS), gender advocacy, and a growing cohort of youth-focused organisations.

A fragmented CSO space dominated by LCN, with no umbrella structures for grassroots and youth organisations.

Language barriers in accessing grants; CSOs compete with government for the same donor funds.

Limited digital presence, institutional support and M&E systems. Researchers face resistance unless they are trusted insiders.

Youth-led activism, environmental advocacy, and digital and creative platforms.

Freedom of association exists but is subject to administrative bottlenecks and shifting regulations.

Highly donor dependent, with limited domestic philanthropy.

Predominantly urban-based; rural CSOs face capacity and funding constraints. Digital divide, weak M&E, ad hoc policy influence.

Active youth-led, environmental and health-focused movements.

Regulated by the NGO Board of Malawi and the Ministry of Gender, Community Development and Social Welfare.

Highly donor reliant; domestic philanthropic support is minimal.

Strong in urban areas, limited in rural districts. Coordination gaps, limited tech infrastructure, inadequate M&E.

High literacy among CSO leaders; active in elections, education and GBV work.

Registered and regulated under the Registrar of Associations and NGOs, under the Ministry of Social Integration, Social Security and National Solidarity.

Limited local philanthropy; heavy reliance on international development cooperation and private sector CSR.

Capacity varies widely: strong urban organisations, but rural reach and digital transformation remain constrained.

Strong track record in health, gender equality, climate action and youth.

Restrictive legal framework under scrutiny; Decree 40/2018 makes NGO registration burdensome.

Dominated by foreign donor support; weak domestic philanthropic base.

Strong urban concentration; rural CSOs face logistical and financial barriers. Political interference and weak M&E systems.

Women-led and youth organisations are active on GBV, climate and livelihoods.

Governed by the Namibian Constitution and Companies Act; NGOs are seeking clearer enabling legislation.

Reliance on international donors, with limited domestic philanthropic support.

Coordination gaps between national and local CSOs, inadequate rural outreach, and project-based funding that limits sustainability.

High education levels and strong gender advocacy movements.

Governed by the Registration of Associations Act; a formal but burdensome process.

Limited donor base; most support comes from international NGOs and private philanthropy.

Small CSO base, leadership gaps and donor dependency.

Strong networks in gender, environment and youth.

Regulated through the Nonprofit Organisations Act and Companies Act; strong but complex compliance requirements.

A combination of international donors, local philanthropic institutions and corporate social investment.

Funding competition, sustainability pressures, burnout, and political co-optation in some sectors.

A vibrant civil society ecosystem with national advocacy and service delivery networks.

Regulated under the NGO Act (2002); recent amendments introduced additional compliance requirements.

A mix of donor and government funding, with CSR support increasing.

Shrinking civic space, legal ambiguities, and registration barriers for grassroots CSOs.

A diverse CSO ecosystem, especially in health, environment and education.

Governed by the NGO Act; amendments are under review for alignment with constitutional freedoms.

Heavily dependent on donor aid, with emerging domestic philanthropy and faith-based support.

Urban–rural divide, barriers to policy participation, and shrinking civic space.

Strong regional and district-level networks; leadership in youth, gender and the HIV response.

Governed under the Private Voluntary Organisations (PVO) Act; recent amendments increase state control and oversight.

Strong presence of international donors; weak domestic philanthropic base.

Political interference, registration delays, digital surveillance, and shrinking civic space.

Robust advocacy on governance, elections and women's rights, with wide rural presence.