Reuters Blogs

Africa News blog

African business, politics and lifestyle

February 2nd, 2009

Time to build Africa?

Posted by: Duncan Miriri

Where once African officials might have viewed infrastructure projects solely as a good source of kickbacks, these days there is pressure from electorates, at least in some countries, to deliver on promises of improvements.

The growth that many African states have enjoyed in recent years has exposed the failure of the continent’s infrastructure still more starkly – with even South Africa suffering the kind of power outages that much of the rest of Africa has grown far too used to.

Infrastructure is in theory the focus of this year’s African Union summit, although as always it will be overshadowed by crisis in Somalia, Zimbabwe, Congo, Darfur etc…

The global financial crisis is an even bigger threat to hopes of strengthening Africa’s infrastructure.

Last year, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda all set out to borrow money internationally through sovereign bonds, for the upgrade and expansion of roads, water supplies, irrigation schemes and electricity generation capacities. That followed Ghana’s successful launch in 2007 of sub-Saharan Africa’s first Eurobond outside South Africa to help fund infrastructure development.

But the plans of the east African countries have been knocked off course despite early assertions from confident governments that they would not be affected by the global downturn which began in the Western world.

Kenya is exploring alternative ways of raising the $500 million it had originally planned to raise from a debut Eurobond. Tanzania and Uganda both made similar announcements.

But the problem of poor infrastructure remains as pressing as ever and could restrict growth in Africa once the current global financial storm ends.

A senior World Bank official has said Africa risks a “lost decade” of underdevelopment if it neglects projects to boost energy and transport infrastructure because of the global financial crisis – comparing the situation they face now to that in Asian countries a decade ago.

How much of a priority should infrastructure be for African governments at this time? Is there anything they can do to raise the money needed? What do you think?

January 15th, 2009

A tale of two Africas

Posted by: Jeremy Gaunt

Good news and bad news for Africa from the latest take on global risks from the World Economic Forum. Not much danger for most of the continent, it says, from an asset bubble burst. That’s the good. The bad, of course, is that this is because there are not many financial assets to bubble. In fact, it deems the overall exposure even to economic risks is small because African economies are not particularly tied in to global markets.

Actually, the report shows that there are two Africas. Mapped by their susceptibility for economic and asset bubble trouble, most African countries are bunched together in a low risk range. But another, smaller cluster, including Nigeria and South Africa, finds itself in much more peril and shares space on the WEF risk map with Western and Eastern Europe.

Good news, in a contradictory sort of way.

January 14th, 2009

Kenya: Dealing with the hard times

Posted by: Duncan Miriri

Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki’s New Year address had a sobering message; east Africa’s biggest economy should brace for a tough year because of the global financial crisis.

It was not the most encouraging message after a year that had few silver linings for the country of 36 million, still recovering from a bout of post-election violence early last year.

But the global crisis has strained even some of the world’s most advanced economies as well as many across Africa and Kibaki was not about to shield Kenyans from reality. He even cancelled the traditional New Year’s Eve state ball that is held in his official residence in Mombasa, on the steamy Indian Ocean coast.

Government minsters and officials, used to ushering in the New Year with a waltz with their spouses at the party, had to quickly make new plans for the occasion.

Indeed, redrawing plans, revising growth numbers and tightening belts is a routine which Kenyan officials are used to by now. Last week, the economic secretary in the ministry of finance told Reuters that growth estimates for 2008 had been lowered to less than 3.5-4 percent, down from an earlier forecast of 4.5-6 percent.

In the same week, the government stated its intention to declare a national emergency over a drought that has left about 10 million facing starvation.

In the trendy parts of Nairobi, all seems to be fine.

Young urban professionals still flock the numerous malls and coffee houses for a bit of shopping and animated catch-ups over drinks.

But underneath the calm, most have had to tighten their belts. A newspaper cartoonist depicted how hard times were forcing a rethink of cultural norms. Families were dispensing with the tradition of sharing a meal with visitors by asking them to carry their own food.

What expectations do you have for Kenya in 2009? How is the global crisis being felt elsewhere in Africa?

January 11th, 2009

How far will South Africa’s ANC shift?

Posted by: Matthew Tostevin

Given that the leaders of the world’s most firmly capitalist countries are splashing around unprecedented billions to nationalise banks, prop up industry and try to get economies moving, it might seem churlish for anyone to question South Africa’s ruling ANC for planning to spend a bit more freely.

This weekend, the African National Congress set out its election manifesto priorities of creating jobs and improving education and health - promises interpreted by many as marking a generally leftward shift under the leadership of president in waiting Jacob Zuma.

But the plan raises the questions of how the spending will be paid for and how dramatic a shift to the left there will be - of major interest to investors as well as South Africans.

“Zuma did not attach a price tag to the manifesto, but ANC leaders privately admit, to allay fears of a tax hike, that it would be too costly to implement,” said this article in the Sunday Independent.

Africa’s biggest economy has grown significantly since the end of apartheid in 1994, although the dynamism had started to falter even before the global financial crisis spread gloom around the world.

South Africa’s poor and its workers had long complained that the benefits were not being shared around fairly and that only those in a new elite were thriving. The leadership under Zuma, widely expected to become president this year, was always going to be under pressure for more social spending from the ANC grassroots and the party’s union and Communist Party allies.

The pressure may have increased further with the emergence of the new COPE party after the ousting of President Thabo Mbeki. Although COPE’s electoral impact is uncertain and it has not yet spelled out its policies clearly, the fact that close allies of Mbeki are behind it has suggested it is likely to align more with the former president’s stance, seen as ‘pro-business’.

Zuma has always been at great pains to spell out to business leaders and foreign investors that there would be no dramatic changes under his rule. Flight of investment could further weaken the rand, mean job losses just at the moment when the ANC wants to create more and force up government borrowing costs.

That could make it even harder to finance populist pledges without resorting to measures that might create even more financial instability.

This article in South Africa’s Times raised questions over the ANC’s plans for the central bank and whether that would damage its standing as a pillar of macroeconomic stability seen as vital for growth.

It is certainly going to be a very tricky time. How substantial do you think any shift to the left is and would it be for the best? If conflicting promises have been made to different interest groups then which are going to be met? Can they all? If not, then what will be the reaction of those who feel disappointed?

(Picture: President of the ruling African National Congress Jacob Zuma dances on stage at his party’s election campaign launch. Reuters)

January 10th, 2009

Forgiveness in paradise?

Posted by: Richard Lough

If you lived on an archipelago that defined paradise with palm-fringed white sand beaches and emerald green waters, you would expect a relaxed, lazy pace of life.

Lazy would be a generous description of the Seychellois soldier’s wave at the entrance to State House as I arrived with my local colleague George Thande - who is admittedly a regular visitor here.

The Seychelles were ruled by the French before the British and State House in the capital Victoria is every bit the luxurious colonial mansion: a lush garden exploding with tropical colours; an oil painting of Britain’s Queen Victoria hangs in the wood-panelled reception room close to a portrait of Castor, a runaway slave from the 19th century with a fearsome reputation; a Daimler and Rolls Royce are parked on the forecourt.

But President James Alix Michel, cannot afford to be relaxed. This is an exotic destination at the sharp end of the global financial crisis.

The Indian Ocean archipelago may lie thousands of miles from the financial hubs of the world, but the bankers on Wall Street and in the City of London, not to mention the celebrity visitors, help keep the Seychelles’ tourism-dependent economy afloat.

On Friday, however, Michel told Reuters he thought visitor numbers might drop by as much as 25 percent, a painful blow for a heavily indebted economy –  its $800 million debt is somewhat more than 2007 gross domestic product according to World Bank figures. The country, with only 85,000 people, is in desperate need of foreign currency to replenish severely depleted reserves.

When the Seychelles failed to service an interest payment on a $230 million bond late last year, it called in the International Monetary Fund, which pledged a 2-year $26 million rescue package. Now negotiations are underway with creditors over how to re-structure the debts.

On Friday, Michel called on creditors to forgive fifty percent of the country’s debts.

But should they be forgiven or was the previous government reckless in the way it borrowed heavily to invest in social projects such as free education, free healthcare and housing over more than two decades?

Or does the fault lie with the creditors who issued loans they perhaps knew were ultimately unsustainable? The government might well argue that while it had borrowed irresponsibly - if it felt for good reason - but there had been no shortage of people willing to stump up the cash.

President Michel is holding out for an oil strike under the Seychelles’ offshore plateau. Seismic surveys suggested there could be reserves of oil and gas amounting to billions of barrels. But that’s not for years to come.

The Seychelles can’t wait that long.

(Picture 1: Miss New Zealand, Lauralee Martinovich, poses for photographs after taking the 2nd Princess title in the 1997 Miss World Pageant in the Seychelles. Reuters/Mike Hutchings)

(Picture 2: Seychelles’ President James Michel poses for a photograph during an interview with Reuters in Victoria. Reuters/Richard Lough)

November 14th, 2008

Should developing world have more say in crisis talks?

Posted by: Tom Pfeiffer

When world leaders meet in Washington to tackle the global financial crisis, Africa will be represented only by South Africa.

 

African officials meeting in Tunis this week to discuss the impact of the crisis argued that the continent needed better representation, given the effects that the turmoil is having in Africa as well as the continent’s growing financial importance. The complaint could apply equally to other developing countries.

 

The global crisis has come just as many African economies were turning a corner, buoyed by improvements in governance, technological change, debt relief, higher prices for their exports as well as inflows of funds from Asia and from Western investors seeking higher yields.

 

Many African countries have spent decades gearing economic policies to attract more private capital and dispel a reputation as unreliable investment destinations.

 

But turmoil on world markets has cut the supply of money as the world’s biggest banks shift funds from new projects to shoring up balance sheets, leaving African governments wondering how their infrastructure will get built.

 

African officials were dismayed not to have a bigger voice at the summit in Washington.

 

“Africa … was not associated even slightly with the preparation when it’s a question of deciding the future of the world to which this continent belongs, in fact and by right,” said Jean Ping, head of the African Union’s executive Commission.

 

But should Africa be better represented? Compared to its own recent history, African economies have been doing extremely well, but they are still small in global terms. As Africa’s biggest economy, South Africa will be attending, alongside representatives of the main developed and developing countries. Is that enough? What advantage might Africa gain from having a bigger voice at the summit? What about the world’s other poorer regions? Should they have more say too?