Empowering Rural Women Agripreneurs Through Financial Inclusion: Lessons from South Africa for the G20 Development Agenda

Abstract

In the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa, rural women agripreneurs encounter ongoing structural challenges in accessing formal finance, securing land rights, and gaining leadership roles, despite their vital contribution to agriculture and food security. This research combines a thematic review of secondary sources from 2018 to 2024 with an embedded case study based on primary qualitative data with women involved in the Citrus Growers Association–Grower Development Company (CGA–GDC) public–private partnership. This dual approach connects local, real-world entrepreneurial experiences with global financial inclusion initiatives, especially the G20 Women’s Empowerment Principles and the G20 Development Agenda. The findings highlight a consistent gap between policy and practice: while frameworks at both national and international levels advocate for women’s financial inclusion, actual implementation in rural agribusiness often neglects gender differences. Women’s engagement is limited by insecure land rights, restricted access to formal credit, male-controlled cooperative management, and insufficient gender-specific data monitoring. Drawing comparative insights from Kenya, India, and West Africa, the study proposes seven interconnected policy suggestions, such as establishing gender-disaggregated data systems, expanding women-led cooperatives, reforming land tenure laws, including entrepreneurial financial literacy in capacity-building programmes, and utilising gender-sensitive digital finance solutions. By connecting grassroots empirical evidence with global policy discussions, this study aims to contribute to academic debates and practical efforts to develop gender-responsive financial ecosystems, thereby boosting women’s economic independence, entrepreneurial activity, and rural progress in South Africa and similar contexts in the Global South.

1. Introduction

Agriculture continues to be a key driver of inclusive economic growth, especially in rural South Africa, where it supports livelihoods, creates jobs, and ensures food security. In this setting, rural women agripreneurs are vital but often overlooked. Their ability to reshape the agricultural sector is frequently hindered by ongoing structural obstacles, including restricted access to formal finance, insecure land rights, limited cooperative support, and ingrained gender biases within financial and institutional frameworks (Ntisana, 2022; Qomfo, 2020; Christian et al., 2018). Recent research highlights the importance of localised entrepreneurial growth, especially for young people and women in the Eastern Cape. In this region, small-scale agribusiness has become a vital activity for survival and transformation (Magadla et al., 2024; Donga & Chimucheka, 2024). This research concentrates on the Eastern Cape province, a key but underdeveloped agricultural area in South Africa. Despite its significant role in national citrus production, the region remains plagued by deep-rooted poverty and inequality, particularly affecting women farmers (Olawuyi & Mushunje, 2024). Public–private partnerships (PPPs), such as the Citrus Growers Association–Grower Development Company (CGA–GDC) initiative, have become a key development tool for improving the agricultural sector. This initiative specifically focuses on transforming black citrus growers into sustainable, commercially successful businesses (Mbangiswano, 2021).

While PPPs like the CGA–GDC model have demonstrated early successes such as raising household incomes, boosting export activity, and offering better technical support, they also expose several underlying issues. These problems include uneven skills transfer, limited monitoring mechanisms, insufficient gender mainstreaming, and weak stakeholder engagement (Mbangiswano, 2021; Sikhosana, 2022). Growing concerns suggest that, despite their potential, these models may perpetuate existing inequalities rather than eliminate them unless they are intentionally designed to emphasise gender and equity considerations (Simatele & Maciko, 2022; Akande et al., 2023).

Women entrepreneurs in Sub-Saharan Africa encounter well-known obstacles to obtaining credit, such as collateral demands, high interest costs, and inefficient regulations. These systemic challenges hinder the expansion of women-owned businesses and restrict their overall economic involvement. Recent data from multiple countries indicate that although fintech innovations and government initiatives offer potential, their effectiveness is limited by infrastructure gaps, weak regulatory frameworks, and low trust levels (Irene et al., 2025). Existing research highlights fragmented efforts toward gender-responsive financial inclusion and a lack of localisation of global frameworks like the G20 Women’s Empowerment Principles in rural farming areas. This gap is especially critical given South Africa’s commitments in the National Development Plan (National Planning Commission, 2012) and Agenda 2063 to better incorporate women into formal economic value chains (Ntisana, 2022; Qomfo, 2020). This study critically examines the disparity between policy promises and the actual experiences of rural women agripreneurs in South Africa’s Eastern Cape, with a focus on agribusiness public–private partnerships (PPPs). The results reveal scalable practices such as cooperative microfinance, digital payments, and agribusiness PPPs that can enhance gender-equitable access to credit, training, and markets. The findings also underscore the importance of increased institutional accountability, participatory governance, and gender-sensitive interventions. The paper is organised as follows: An overview of relevant theoretical frameworks, an explanation of the methodological approach, a presentation of results, a comprehensive discussion, and concluding policy recommendations and limitations.

2. Theoretical Framework

This research is based on an interdisciplinary theoretical foundation combining gendered development theory, inclusive finance, and participatory rural appraisal. Central to it is Feminist Political Economy (FPE), which critically examines how gender relations intersect with economic structures, especially in marginalised areas like rural South Africa (Sikhosana, 2022; Qomfo, 2020). FPE questions the presumed neutrality of markets and government institutions, highlighting that structural inequalities such as land dispossession, gendered labour divisions, and limited access to financial services are not accidental but are systematically created and maintained by policy oversights and institutional arrangements. By emphasising how economic and social systems sustain gendered exclusion, FPE offers an essential perspective for understanding the shortcomings of current approaches to agrarian and financial development.

2.1. Feminist Political Economy and Gendered Development

Recent empirical research highlights the deep gender gaps in financial inclusion, showing that rural women face disproportionate barriers to accessing formal financial services, which harms their well-being and household economic outcomes (Lwanga Nanziri, 2016). Gupta’s (2025) systematic review supports this, linking limited financial access for rural women to negative nutritional and welfare effects on entire households, and illustrating how women’s financial exclusion sustains cycles of rural poverty and food insecurity. Bhabha et al. (2011) emphasise how institutional neglect, legal issues, and geographic marginalisation deepen gender vulnerabilities, leading to intergenerational exclusion from development systems. Her work points out the complex disadvantages rural women face—not just as economic actors but also as socially invisible within formal policy and financial frameworks. Building on this, Fraser (2013) describes injustice as rooted in both economic inequality and cultural misrecognition, which must be addressed to achieve genuine gender justice. In rural farming areas, this involves tackling material inequalities like land and credit access, as well as challenging the norms that undervalue women’s contributions and leadership potential.

These perspectives link to Inclusive Finance Theory, which redefines financial inclusion as more than just access to credit or banking. It is seen as a wider process involving empowerment, institutional accountability, and fair participation in development.

2.2. Inclusive Finance Theory and Financial Inclusion

Institutional barriers continue to pose major challenges to achieving gender equity in the financial and agribusiness sectors. The FAO (2023) underscores the urgent need for institutional reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa, pointing out that women-led agribusinesses are often excluded from formal financial systems because of gender-blind policies and a lack of structural support. At the same time, the World Economic Forum (2024) highlights significant opportunities through gender-focused agritech public–private partnerships (PPPs), showing how inclusive digital financial tools and specific capacity-building efforts can greatly enhance the participation and productivity of rural women farmers.

The idea of financial inclusion extends beyond mere access to banking or credit; it is part of a broader empowerment process involving control over productive resources, decision-making independence, and agency in market interactions (Akande et al., 2023; Ntisana, 2022). This view aligns with the World Bank’s expanded approach, which incorporates digital innovation, cooperative finance, and inclusive value chains as key development enablers. However, this study criticises mainstream financial inclusion discussions for their limited focus on intersectional exclusions related to race, gender, and geography. Cross-regional comparisons show that while access is important, true inclusion also depends on women’s empowerment, literacy, and institutional design (Bhatia & Singh, 2019; Khokhar et al., 2020; Lenka & Barik, 2018). This suggests a shift from purely transactional definitions toward relational and transformative models. The framework also incorporates public–private partnership (PPP) theory in agricultural development, viewing PPPs as collaborative efforts that aim to align public policies with private sector efficiency. Yet, unless intentionally inclusive, PPPs risk replicating inequalities, especially if they exclude women from technical training, leadership, or landownership opportunities (Mbangiswano, 2021; Christian et al., 2018). Consequently, this study evaluates PPPs not only as economic tools but also as institutional spaces where gender norms are either reinforced or challenged. While inclusive finance provides a foundation for expanding access, it must be implemented through institutional models that either uphold or challenge exclusion. In agribusiness, PPPs exemplify such models, necessitating critical assessment of their gender responsiveness and structural inclusivity.

2.3. Public–Private Partnerships and Gender Equity

Effective PPPs in agriculture are increasingly recognising the importance of explicitly incorporating gender-responsive frameworks. Pandey et al. (2025) demonstrate that including gender criteria in agricultural extension PPPs greatly improves their success, encouraging more rural women to participate and leading to better programme results. Likewise, the (World Bank, 2024) World Bank’s PPP Gender toolkit offers practical guidance and assessment tools aimed at systematically embedding gender considerations throughout the entire project lifecycle. These resources emphasise the need for thorough gender-responsive planning from the start, ensuring women’s roles progress from mere participation to genuine leadership and decision-making positions.

The research also draws on Participatory Development and Rural Appraisal (PRA) concepts, emphasising community knowledge, shared governance, and adaptive programming as key for sustainable inclusion (Simatele & Maciko, 2022). It examines whether women agripreneurs in the Eastern Cape actively participate in their development or merely receive imposed interventions. These theoretical approaches offer a solid basis for analysing the institutional, cultural, and structural factors behind financial exclusion and exploring how integrated value-chain initiatives in the citrus sector can promote gender-equitable agrarian change in South Africa’s Eastern Cape. Overall, the literature highlights important gaps, notably the limited focus on the intersection of gender, finance, and institutional arrangements within rural agricultural PPPs in South Africa. Filling this gap is crucial for developing effective, gender-responsive policies.

Figure 1 illustrates the analytical framework that guides this study. It comprises four key themes: gender inclusion, policy alignment, land rights, and the CGA–GDC case study, forming the basis for assessing public–private partnerships in the Eastern Cape citrus industry. Each theme encompasses sub-elements like leadership participation, institutional gaps, and informal finance systems, all of which help shape gender-responsive recommendations. Figure 2 depicts the conceptual map of pertinent academic works that inform this study. The network links themes such as financial inclusion, women’s empowerment, agribusiness development, and rural policy innovation across various geographic areas. These studies played a key role in shaping the analytical and policy perspective of the current research.

Despite progress, significant gaps remain in the current literature, especially concerning detailed aspects of financial inclusion like secure land tenure, household dynamics, and overlapping exclusion factors. Ogundare and Njualem (2025) point out ongoing issues with gender-based land tenure insecurity, a vital yet often neglected aspect of rural women’s financial empowerment. Additionally, Akande et al. (2023) note that intersectional issues such as women’s roles and decision-making power within households and communities are seldom well incorporated into existing agricultural development strategies. These gaps restrict policy effectiveness and underscore the need for more intersectional research to support inclusive development.

3. Materials and Methods

This study employed a qualitative research approach based on thematic analysis of the existing literature, complemented by detailed case study evidence. Literature sources were found through structured searches in academic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, using keywords like financial inclusion, gender equity, rural women agripreneurs, and public–private partnerships. The sources included peer-reviewed articles, policy reports, and empirical studies published from 2018 to 2024. Key themes were identified and refined via manual coding and repeated reading, ensuring a comprehensive review of the literature (Thomas & Harden, 2008). This method enabled us to systematically map existing knowledge, critically assess current practices, and pinpoint gaps in gender-responsive financial inclusion.

When secondary sources presented conflicting evidence, a critical comparative analysis was conducted to explore possible explanations, such as differences in methodology, research context, sample makeup, or data collection periods (Iwu et al., 2025; Papaioannou et al., 2016; Thomas & Harden, 2008). If reconciling the findings proved impossible, these discrepancies were clearly reported, and their implications for interpretation were discussed, adhering to the transparency principles outlined by Noblit and Hare (1999). This method maintained analytical clarity while acknowledging divergent viewpoints within the synthesis.

The core of the analysis focused on the partnership model between the Citrus Growers Association and the Grower Development Company (CGA–GDC). This initiative was chosen because of its key role in helping black citrus farmers become competitive commercial producers through targeted support in training, market integration, and enterprise growth. Its focus on inclusive agricultural finance and its integration into the rural economy of the Eastern Cape made it a valuable example for exploring broader themes of gender empowerment and systemic inclusion. This case study is based on empirical fieldwork by Mbangiswano (2021), whose master’s research in the Sarah Baartman and Amathole Districts explored how historically disadvantaged communities—especially women—experience PPPs like the CGA–GDC. Using qualitative interviews and field observations, Mbangiswano examined women’s participation in training, access to input finance, perceptions of fairness in value-chain inclusion, and their visibility in strategic decision-making forums. These insights guided the current study’s analysis and ensured its relevance to the local context.

A wider range of empirical data from Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia was examined to compare thematic trends, including obstacles to inclusion and institutional support mechanisms (Ifediora et al., 2022; K. Singh et al., 2021). The analysed document set features South Africa’s National Financial Inclusion Policy, the Eastern Cape Rural Development Strategy, and key empirical studies (e.g., Mbangiswano, 2021; Ntisana, 2022; Akande et al., 2023). While this study synthesises diverse secondary sources like policy reports and case studies, it recognises methodological limitations due to the lack of new primary data collection. Conducting primary fieldwork could have yielded deeper insights into the lived experiences of rural women agripreneurs. Nevertheless, by integrating an existing primary-data-based case study within a broader thematic synthesis, the research connects grassroots empirical evidence with international policy discussions, offering valuable policy insights despite its limitations.

4. Results

4.1. Gendered Participation in Public–Private Partnerships

The CGA–GDC citrus development programme has made progress in enhancing market access and infrastructure for black citrus farmers in the Eastern Cape. However, a gender-disaggregated analysis highlights clear disparities in access, participation, and outcomes. Although the programme has positively impacted farming communities overall, it remains insufficiently attentive to gender dynamics in the citrus value chain. Women, in particular, continue to face marginalization in key aspects of the initiative. Their representation in management and ownership roles within CGA–GDC-supported enterprises is minimal, with many confined to informal or subordinate tasks. While many women have attended capacity-building workshops, their roles often remain limited to supportive tasks rather than core technical training. This pattern of exclusion hampers their ability to influence or benefit from agribusiness development meaningfully. Regarding finance, most women agripreneurs depend on informal savings schemes such as stokvels, which, although accessible and community-oriented, lack the scalability and institutional recognition needed to support larger agribusiness ventures.

Several structural barriers drive these inequities. A key issue is the persistent insecurity of land tenure. Without formal land titles, women are often barred from accessing agribusiness credit schemes that require collateral. Additionally, public–private partnership frameworks are mostly gender-neutral in design and implementation. The lack of inclusive planning procedures and gender-sensitive monitoring means women’s needs and contributions are frequently ignored or inadequately documented. Post-training technical support is also inconsistent, with women often excluded from ongoing mentorship and follow-up, which are vital for consolidating their learning and entrepreneurial development. These factors show that, although PPPs in the citrus sector have boosted productivity and market access, they have not achieved true gender equality. Instead of dismantling deep-rooted inequalities, the current approach risks reinforcing them—unless intentional, transformative, gender-sensitive reforms are adopted. Figure 3 summarises these disparities, highlighting systemic barriers like insecure land tenure, limited access to formal finance, gender-blind institutional structures, and inadequate follow-up support.

4.2. Policy Alignment and Institutional Gaps

An analysis of national and provincial policies reveals a persistent gap between the stated goals of gender inclusion and their real-world application in rural agribusiness. While strategies such as the Eastern Cape Rural Development Strategy highlight women’s empowerment, they often lack concrete enforcement mechanisms, clear measurable indicators, or specific deadlines for achieving gender equity. This disconnects between policy intentions and practical execution directly impacts the success of financial inclusion and empowerment programmes aimed at rural women entrepreneurs.

At the cooperative level, institutional cultures are still predominantly male-dominated. Agricultural cooperatives remain structured and governed in ways that restrict women’s participation, with minimal formal incentives or quotas to promote fair representation. Consequently, women are under-represented in strategic planning, leadership roles, and benefit-sharing arrangements even though they are actively involved in agricultural production.

Furthermore, evaluation and monitoring systems in agricultural finance and extension are either lacking or poorly developed. There is no formal mechanism to evaluate gender-specific results, which hampers policymakers and implementers from tracking progress or making timely adjustments. This gap is particularly worrying given South Africa’s broader commitments under initiatives like the National Development Plan (2030) and Agenda 2063, both of which stress the importance of gender-responsive development.

The academic literature reinforces these institutional shortcomings. Akande et al. (2023) and Ntisana (2022) point out the common lack of gender performance indicators in agricultural public–private partnerships, which hampers accountability and learning. Similarly, Mbangiswano (2021) observed that even though women often participate in project implementation at the grassroots level, they are mostly excluded from programme design, decision-making roles, and value-chain governance. This lack of strategic visibility undermines the broader goals of inclusive finance and sustainable agrarian reform.

Information asymmetry intensifies these issues. Women farmers often report limited access to programme details, eligibility requirements, and redress mechanisms—leaving them poorly informed and less able to benefit from financial inclusion efforts. When combined with the findings from the CGA–GDC case, these systemic weaknesses underscore the need for broad institutional reforms to ensure that policies aimed at empowering women are effectively implemented.

Table 1. Summary of key data sources and findings.

Data Source	Focus Area	Insight	Strength of Evidence
CGA–GDC Reports	PPP implementation	Lacks gender-disaggregated data	Strong
Policy Documents	Institutional alignment	High intent, weak enforcement	Strong
Mbangiswano (2021)	Empirical case data	Women excluded from strategic decision-making	Strong (primary case study)
Academic Literature	Theoretical context	Structural inequality reinforced	Strong

summarises these institutional gaps and the strength of evidence from reviewed sources, revealing common issues across policy documents and empirical research.

4.3. Figures and Tables

To assist with the analysis, key findings from this study have been summarised in a cross-referenced table (Table 1) that links core insights with the main data sources used. This table shows how evidence from policy documents, academic studies, and empirical case studies collectively reveals ongoing gender disparities in financial inclusion and agribusiness participation. For example, while CGA–GDC reports show improvements in production capacity and market access, they often lack gender-specific data, which limits their usefulness in assessing women’s empowerment. The table also highlights a common theme in policy documents: strong rhetorical promises of gender inclusion but weak implementation and accountability measures. These issues are also noted in academic research and local case studies, such as Mbangiswano (2021), which points out women’s continued exclusion from leadership roles and strategic participation in value chains within PPP frameworks.

To visually synthesise these findings, Figure 1 shows a conceptual diagram of the systemic constraints faced by women agripreneurs in the citrus value chain. These include tenure insecurity, limited access to formal finance, gender-blind institutional design, and inadequate follow-up support. The diagram emphasises the interconnectedness of these barriers and highlights the importance of an integrated, gender-responsive approach to agrarian development. Together, the visual and tabular representations provide a clear, comprehensive view of the multiple challenges rural women encounter in accessing and benefiting from inclusive finance within the Eastern Cape citrus sector. They also serve as useful references for policymakers and practitioners seeking intervention points for reform. Figure 2 depicts the conceptual mapping of key academic works informing this study. The network links themes like financial inclusion, women’s empowerment, agribusiness development, and rural policy innovation across diverse geographic contexts. These studies were crucial in shaping the analytical and policy perspective of this research. To reinforce the theoretical base, a Litmaps bibliometric visualisation was created (Figure 2). The diagram shows how foundational studies, such as Burgess (2005) and Demirgüç-Kunt and Klapper (2013), are connected to more recent, context-specific contributions, including Moyo (2022) and Donga and Chimucheka (2024). Influential works like Lenka and Barik (2018), Bhatia and Singh (2019), and K. Singh et al. (2021) act as thematic links across gender equity, institutional finance, and cooperative development. This visual mapping helped identify intellectual lineages and thematic intersections that inform the scope and framing of the current analysis.

To strengthen this study’s analytical basis, a variety of data sources were reviewed and integrated, as shown in Table 1. The CGA–GDC reports offered valuable insights into how public–private partnerships (PPPs) operate in the citrus sector; however, a key limitation was the lack of gender-disaggregated data, which hinders effective monitoring of women’s participation. Policy documents, including national and provincial frameworks, demonstrated a consistent rhetorical commitment to gender inclusion but lacked enforceable mechanisms or measurable indicators, exposing a gap between policy intent and implementation. The case study by Mbangiswano (2021) provided essential real-world evidence, revealing that rural women are often excluded from strategic decisions in cooperative and PPP structures, despite participating in production and training. Complementing these findings, the broader academic literature affirmed that structural inequalities—especially regarding land, finance, and institutional access—are deeply rooted and remain largely unchallenged by current inclusion efforts. Together, these sources form a comprehensive evidence base, combining institutional insights with grassroots perspectives, and support the study’s call for gender-responsive reforms in rural agrarian finance. The reviewed literature encompasses a diverse yet thematically consistent body of work examining the intersection of gender, finance, and rural development in both South African and international contexts. As summarised in

Table 2. Summary of the key literature on gender, finance, and agripreneurship, highlighting thematic focus, geographic scope, and methodological approaches.

Source	Theme	Geography	Methodology
Akande et al. (2023)	Financial literacy	South Africa	Quantitative survey
Bhatia and Singh (2019)	Gender equity and inclusion	India	Mixed-method
Lenka and Barik (2018)	Digital financial inclusion	India	Discourse analysis
Ntisana (2022)	Agrarian finance	Eastern Cape, SA	Qualitative analysis
K. Singh et al. (2021)	CSR and inclusion	India	Quantitative
Qomfo (2020)	Land reform and gender	Eastern Cape, SA	Qualitative

, recent studies such as Akande et al. (2023) and Ntisana (2022) focus on South Africa, particularly in the Eastern Cape, regarding financial literacy and agrarian finance. Using quantitative and qualitative methods, respectively, these studies highlight ongoing barriers women encounter in accessing formal financial systems. International research, notably from India, offers a comparative dimension: Bhatia and Singh (2019) and Lenka and Barik (2018) analyse gender equity and digital financial inclusion through mixed methods and discourse analysis, providing insights into how financial technologies and institutional narratives influence inclusion outcomes. K. Singh et al. (2021) also examine the role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in enhancing financial access. Meanwhile, Qomfo (2020) investigates land reform and gender equity in the Eastern Cape using qualitative approaches, emphasising that secure land tenure is fundamental to financial inclusion. Taken together, these studies highlight the complex nature of gendered financial exclusion and underscore the need for integrated, context-aware strategies both locally and within broader G20 and Global South frameworks.

The reviewed literature reveals consistent patterns that highlight the structural aspects of gender-based exclusion in rural agribusiness contexts. As summarised in

Table 3. Categorisation of Literature: Thematic patterns such as exclusion from cooperative governance and informal finance reliance were identified through NVivo-based coding and are summarised in Table 1 (authors’ compilation based on Mbangiswano, 2021; Ntisana, 2022; Qomfo, 2020).

Theme	Sub-Themes	Description	Representative Evidence	Source
Gendered Exclusion	Training participation, leadership exclusion	Women are primarily involved as support participants in training and seldom hold strategic roles.	‘We attend but we don’t speak; the men run things.’	Mbangiswano (2021)
Access to Finance	Informal finance reliance, no collateral	Women rely on stokvels due to limited access to formal credit and financial literacy.	‘I borrow from friends because banks don’t take me seriously.’	Ntisana (2022); Akande et al. (2023)
Land Tenure Challenges	No title deeds, communal land access barriers	The inability to use land as collateral limits access to loans.	‘Our land is traditional, so no title to use for loans.’	Qomfo (2020); Moyo (2022)
Governance Gaps	Male-dominated co-ops, lack of quotas	Cooperatives are primarily managed by men, with women having minimal representation.	‘Only men are in the leadership meetings.’	Christian et al. (2018); Mbangiswano (2021)
Institutional Misalignment	Policy vs. practice disjunction	Gender policies are in place but lack local implementation and enforcement.	Policies emphasise gender inclusion, but local officers often overlook them.	Sikhosana (2022);

, five recurring sub-themes emerge across empirical studies and policy documents: gendered exclusion, limited financial access, insecure land tenure, governance gaps, and institutional misalignment. These themes collectively show how women are systematically marginalised at multiple levels of the agribusiness value chain. Although women often attend training sessions, they tend to occupy support roles with minimal influence over decision-making processes (Mbangiswano, 2021). Access to finance remains limited due to reliance on informal savings mechanisms like stokvels and the lack of collateral or credit histories (Ntisana, 2022; Akande et al., 2023). Land tenure insecurity further intensifies exclusion, as communal land access and the absence of formal titles prevent women from participating in formal financial systems (Qomfo, 2020; Moyo, 2022). Governance structures within cooperatives and PPPs are often male-dominated, with few provisions for gender quotas or inclusive leadership paths (Christian et al., 2018). Additionally, despite formal commitments to gender equality in national and provincial policies, a gap persists between policy rhetoric and real implementation, mainly due to the lack of enforceable mechanisms and monitoring systems (Sikhosana, 2022). Overall, these themes demonstrate that exclusion is not accidental but ingrained in institutional frameworks and development practices.

Figure 3 illustrates the dual-layer barriers faced by rural women agripreneurs trying to access public–private partnership (PPP) benefits in the Eastern Cape. On the institutional side (panel a), gender-blind PPP frameworks lead to bottlenecks like low female leadership representation and poor enforcement of gender-inclusive policies, creating conditions that sustain exclusion. At the individual level (panel b), structural barriers such as lacking land ownership, limited access to formal financial services, and exclusion from training further hinder women’s participation in agribusiness value chains. These combined factors show that exclusion results not just from individual disadvantages but from systemic design flaws that maintain inequality at both institutional and personal levels. The model supports the study’s claim that meaningful change requires an integrated approach, including reforming governance structures and improving access points for rural women to engage with agribusiness systems.

5. Discussion

This study’s findings reveal a rising trend where financial inclusion initiatives, especially those employing gender-neutral strategies, often fall short of delivering equitable results for rural women agripreneurs. The CGA–GDC citrus partnership in the Eastern Cape exemplifies this issue. Although the programme has achieved notable progress in commercialising black citrus producers—particularly through enhanced market access, training, and infrastructure—it has failed to fundamentally incorporate gender equity into its design and execution. As a result, women’s empowerment within these agribusiness value chains remains limited and marginal.

A key insight from the research is that financial inclusion is more than just providing access to credit or banking services; it is a transformative process. It includes institutional, relational, and sociocultural factors that influence whose voices are heard, whose contributions are valued, and who benefits. In the CGA–GDC case, women were often seen as passive participants, invited to workshops or given nominal roles, but they were mostly excluded from strategic decision-making, technical mentoring, and leadership opportunities. This highlights deeper structural issues such as insecure land tenure, limited access to formal credit, and ongoing gender biases within cooperatives and public–private partnerships.

These findings are consistent with broader research on African entrepreneurial ecosystems, which also highlights that structural and institutional barriers remain significant hurdles for women’s agripreneurship (Iwu et al., 2025). In both the Eastern Cape and across Africa, resource constraints such as inadequate infrastructure, weak governance, and limited institutional support persistently restrict women’s entrepreneurial progress. The COVID-19 pandemic has further intensified these challenges, emphasising the importance of resilience strategies like gender-sensitive mentorship, capacity-building, and supportive policies to strengthen women’s participation in agribusiness value chains.

Financial exclusion significantly contributes to the barriers faced. In the Eastern Cape, issues like reliance on collateral-heavy loans, weak institutional support, and exclusionary practices mirror common regional trends across Sub-Saharan Africa. Irene et al. (2025), analysing survey data and econometric models from multiple countries, found that women entrepreneurs often face disadvantages due to high collateral demands and interest rates, restricting their access to mainstream finance. While fintech solutions and government initiatives show promise as alternatives, their success is often hampered by infrastructural and regulatory hurdles. Overall, this regional evidence demonstrates that experiences of financial exclusion, such as those in the Eastern Cape, are part of systemic barriers that pervade the broader African entrepreneurial environment.

The lack of gender-disaggregated data in policy and evaluation frameworks worsens these problems. Without regular tracking of women’s participation and results, it becomes hard to measure progress, find gaps, or refine strategies. This data gap reflects broader global patterns. For instance, assessments by the World Bank indicate that in countries such as Indonesia and parts of Sub-Saharan Africa, mobile financial services do not sufficiently reach rural women if legal gender inequalities, especially those related to land ownership and collateral, persist (World Bank, 2024; Panter & Arekapudi, 2018). Likewise, the OECD (2022) reports that many well-funded programmes aimed at empowering women in agribusiness underperform when women are excluded from governance or value-chain planning.

Conversely, encouraging global examples show that targeted, gender-sensitive strategies can produce more inclusive outcomes. In Latin America and West Africa, projects using women-led microfinance networks and various agent models have achieved higher participation and better client retention among rural women (Reitzug, 2021). These approaches offer valuable insights for reassessing South Africa’s financial inclusion strategy. They demonstrate that representation and agency are central, not peripheral, to successful inclusive finance and agricultural transformation.

This study’s findings emphasise the importance of carefully redefining the concept and practice of financial inclusion. It involves more than just expanding access to credit; there is an urgent need to reform institutional procedures, remove structural obstacles, and encourage genuine participation. To accomplish this, gender-sensitive public–private partnership (PPP) frameworks are essential, along with land policies that emphasise fairness and participatory approaches that centre on the real experiences of rural women.

5.1. The Untapped Role of Digital Financial Services

Although digital financial tools are expanding globally to promote inclusion, their use in the rural agricultural areas of the Eastern Cape remains limited. Rural women agripreneurs face various structural challenges in adopting mobile banking and fintech services, including limited access to smartphones, digital illiteracy, and inadequate internet infrastructure. For instance, mobile money services such as MTN Mobile Money and Capitec’s user-friendly banking apps are accessible in South Africa, yet their adoption by rural women farmers is low. This is due to language barriers, lack of awareness, and trust issues with formal financial institutions.

Global comparisons show that tailored digital interventions can bring transformative results. In Kenya and India, gender-sensitive digital credit scoring and agent-based models have greatly increased financial participation among rural women (Lenka & Barik, 2018; Reitzug, 2021). These innovations, especially when paired with community training, offer scalable solutions for South Africa. For example, incorporating digital wallets into cooperative savings schemes could improve transparency, reduce cash-handling risks, and help women establish formal credit histories, even if they were previously unbanked.

5.2. Policy Recommendations: Advancing Gender-Inclusive Financial Ecosystems in South Africa and the G20

This study presents seven interconnected, evidence-based policy recommendations designed to promote inclusive and gender-equitable rural economies. These recommendations emphasise domestic reforms and align with the broader G20 Women’s Empowerment and Financial Inclusion agenda. Lessons from international experiences offer insights into successful gender-responsive public–private partnership (PPP) strategies and pathways for institutional reform. The FAO (2023) emphasises policies like mandatory gender-disaggregated reporting and targeted financial products as essential for fostering inclusive agribusiness growth. Furthermore, the World Economic Forum (2024) shows how combining agritech innovations with gender-sensitive PPP models can greatly enhance financial access and economic empowerment for rural women, urging scaling of these approaches. Building on these insights, South Africa’s agricultural policies could adopt similar structured reforms to tackle systemic financial issues and embed gender equity at all operational levels.

5.2.1. Institutionalise Gender-Disaggregated Data Systems in PPPs and Agribusiness Programmes

Governments and agencies should be required to gather and report gender-specific data on participation, leadership, credit access, and training in all PPPs and public agribusiness initiatives. As highlighted by the G20 Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion (GPFI), reliable data is crucial for identifying gender disparities, modifying policies, and maintaining accountability for impact (World Bank, 2024; Akande et al., 2023).

5.2.2. Scale Women-Led Cooperatives and Inclusive Agrarian Financial Services

Informal entrepreneurship is a vital economic pathway for many women in rural regions. Consequently, cooperative models should recognise the realities of informal markets and focus on building social capital as a key asset (Ndlovu-Hlatshwayo & Nesamvuni, 2022). Moreover, local financial systems need to work on expanding and formalising women-led savings groups and agricultural cooperatives. Evidence from Côte d’Ivoire, the DRC, and India indicates that gender-diverse, community-based financial networks enhance access, trust, and retention in underserved rural markets (Reitzug, 2021; Lenka & Barik, 2018). Supporting these networks with blended finance and public subsidies can further facilitate women’s ownership and leadership.

5.2.3. Reform Land Tenure and Collateral Systems Through a Gender Equity Lens

Land access is essential for eligibility for credit. In South Africa’s communal regions, women agripreneurs face persistent tenure insecurity, which is a major obstacle. G20-aligned land reform strategies must secure women’s legal ownership and joint titling rights, embedding these rights within traditional and local governance structures (Qomfo, 2020; Panter & Arekapudi, 2018). Such reforms facilitate access to formal finance and strengthen women’s economic empowerment.

5.2.4. Introduce Gender Quotas and Leadership Pipelines in Agribusiness Governance

Formal gender quotas and mentorship programmes should be implemented in cooperatives, PPP governance boards, and extension service teams. These initiatives guarantee that women are not just involved in execution but also have a role in strategic decision-making. The OECD (2022) shows that diverse governance correlates with improved development results and stronger institutions. Additionally, governance efforts must tackle socio-cultural barriers that limit women’s visibility and leadership, especially in male-dominated agri-industries (Ebewo et al., 2025).

5.2.5. Co-Design Financial Literacy and Training Programmes with Rural Women

Training initiatives need to go beyond generic models. Employing participatory rural appraisal (PRA) techniques, programmes should be developed collaboratively with rural women to ensure they are culturally appropriate, language-accessible, and build trust. This local ownership improves results in areas like financial literacy, technology use, and ongoing participation (Simatele & Maciko, 2022; Mbangiswano, 2021). Studies show that integrating entrepreneurial coaching into training programmes significantly enhances women’s self-confidence and encourages long-term business involvement (Molema et al., 2024; S. Singh et al., 2022).

5.2.6. Leverage Gender-Sensitive Digital Financial Inclusion Tools

Digital financial services such as mobile money, e-wallets, and fintech-driven credit scoring can greatly enhance financial access for rural women agripreneurs. However, this potential remains largely untapped due to persistent issues like gender biases in the design of digital tools, poor rural infrastructure, and widespread digital illiteracy. To address these obstacles, South Africa can follow the G20 High-Level Principles for Digital Financial Inclusion by promoting fintech platforms that incorporate voice navigation and are available in local languages, making them more user-friendly for women with limited formal education. Building rural digital infrastructure—focusing on improving mobile network coverage and smartphone access—is essential to make these services reachable in remote areas. Collaborating with women’s groups to co-create and deploy mobile financial solutions can build trust and ensure the tools are tailored to local needs. Case studies from Kenya and India demonstrate that agent-based models, where women act as intermediaries or fintech agents, significantly increase both the uptake and ongoing use of digital financial services (Lenka & Barik, 2018; Reitzug, 2021).

5.2.7. Align National Policy with G20 Women’s Empowerment Frameworks

As a G20 member, South Africa is strategically positioned to align its rural development and gender inclusion policies with the G20 Women’s Empowerment Principles and the G20 High-Level Principles for Digital Financial Inclusion. This involves embedding G20-compatible gender metrics and indicators into national development plans to foster consistent monitoring and accountability across sectors. Additionally, South Africa can host peer-learning forums that facilitate knowledge exchange with other G20 and African Union nations on successful agrarian inclusion practices. Developing strong reporting systems to monitor rural women’s financial participation—explicitly connected to Sustainable Development Goals and G20 standards—will help institutionalise gender equality within financial ecosystems. These initiatives will reinforce South Africa’s leadership in promoting inclusive rural finance strategies across the Global South.

5.2.8. Embed Entrepreneurial Coaching in Agribusiness Development Programmes

Entrepreneurial coaching plays a vital role in boosting women’s self-efficacy, resilience, and long-term business expansion, especially in underserved rural areas. Integrating coaching into agribusiness development aids in closing the gap between financial access and ongoing entrepreneurial success. This approach should extend beyond standard training by providing personalised mentorship, confidence-building activities, and peer learning networks (Molema et al., 2024; Ebewo et al., 2025).

Evidence from women-focused coaching programmes in male-dominated sectors like construction shows that targeted entrepreneurial support not only enhances technical skills but also builds stronger leadership abilities and strategic decision-making (Ndlovu & Ebewo, 2023). In rural agrarian areas, coaching must be tailored to specific contexts, considering informal entrepreneurial routes, community limitations, and sector-specific dynamics (Ndlovu-Hlatshwayo & Nesamvuni, 2022). International reviews confirm that entrepreneurial coaching is a scalable tool for encouraging inclusive economic participation and closing gender-based performance gaps in both developed and developing countries (Vuciterna et al., 2024). Incorporating it into financial inclusion strategies can boost the effectiveness and equity of rural development efforts.

Future research should focus on primary fieldwork involving rural women agripreneurs to better understand their experiences and evaluate the long-term effects of financial inclusion programmes. Emphasis should be placed on assessing how entrepreneurial coaching influences self-confidence, resilience, and leadership skills. Conducting quantitative research on gender-sensitive public–private partnership (PPP) outcomes and making cross-country comparisons within G20 and Global South settings can identify best practices. Furthermore, investigating intersectional factors like age, informality, and climate vulnerability can enhance insights into inclusive agricultural development.

6. Conclusions

Although South Africa’s situation is unique, the insights gained from exploring gender-responsive financial inclusion provide useful lessons for other G20 countries facing similar rural financial access issues. This research combined a thematic review of secondary sources (2018–2024) with a case study based on qualitative fieldwork in Mbangiswano (2021). The fieldwork focused on women agripreneurs’ experiences within the Eastern Cape’s Citrus Growers Association–Grower Development Company (CGA–GDC) partnership. This empirical approach enhances the analysis by incorporating direct accounts of women’s experiences regarding access to finance, land, training, and leadership in a prominent agribusiness project.

The findings reveal a two-sided story: Initiatives like the CGA–GDC partnership have enhanced technical skills, market access, and commercial prospects for black citrus producers. However, these benefits are unevenly shared, with women still facing challenges such as insecure land rights, exclusion from formal credit systems, and limited representation in cooperative and PPP governance structures. This highlights the ongoing gap between policy commitments to gender equity and their practical implementation into entrepreneurial opportunities. By combining local empirical insights with global comparative data, this study proposes seven interconnected policy recommendations. These include institutionalising gender-disaggregated data, reforming land tenure laws, promoting entrepreneurial financial literacy, and utilising gender-sensitive digital financial tools. These strategies align with the G20 Women’s Empowerment Principles and the G20 FIWE 2025 agenda, offering actionable steps toward creating gender-responsive financial ecosystems.

This study contributes to the broader discussion on women’s financial inclusion and entrepreneurship by linking grassroots entrepreneurial experiences with policy reforms that are scalable and tailored to local contexts. The Eastern Cape example shows that addressing structural and institutional obstacles, along with gender-sensitive support like mentorship, entrepreneurial coaching, and peer networks, is crucial for unlocking women’s potential as agripreneurs. These strategies can promote inclusive rural development in South Africa and offer lessons applicable to similar settings across the Global South. Future research should include primary fieldwork to monitor entrepreneurial progress, assess the long-term effects of PPP reforms, and explore intersectional factors such as age, climate vulnerability, and informality. This approach will enhance understanding of how women’s financial inclusion can shift from a developmental goal to an actionable reality that boosts entrepreneurial resilience, expands women-led businesses, and fosters equitable, sustainable growth.