EViews 7 Users Guide I

Infrastructures en Afrique EENI The Global Business School 1/90
______________________________________________________________________________
Infrastructures en Afrique

I

N
EE

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

______________________________________________________________________________
Learning unit: Infrastructures en Afrique

Infrastructures en Afrique
‐ Programme de connaissance de l'infrastructure en Afrique
‐ Consortium pour les infrastructures en Afrique (ICA)
‐ Tendances de l’investissement en infrastructures en Afrique
‐ Technologies de l'information et de la communication (TIC)
‐ Une croissance spectaculaire de l'accès aux TIC
‐ La révolution mobile africaine
‐ Irrigation
‐ Énergie
‐ Eau et Assainissement
‐ Ressources et approvisionnement en eau
‐ Analyse de l'infrastructure en Afrique (*)
‐ L’infrastructure et la croissance économique en Afrique
I
‐ L’Infrastructure et la réduction de la pauvreté
‐ Le Cadre institutionnel de l'Afrique pour les infrastructures
‐ L'urbanisation et la prestation de services d'infrastructure
‐ L'intégration régionale et les infrastructures
‐ Transport et logistique en Afrique (1)
N
(*) Seulement en Anglais

Programme de Développement des Infrastructures en Afrique (PIDA) (1)
‐ Introduction au Programme de Développement des Infrastructures en Afrique (PIDA)
‐ Secteurs clés:
‐ Énergie
‐ Transport
EE
‐ Technologies de l'information et de la communication (TIC)
‐ Ressources en eau transfrontalières
‐ Les résultats du PIDA: le développement pour l'intégration régionale
‐ Coûts et investissements.

(1) Analysé dans une autre unité didactique

NOTE: Cet article est basé dans les études du programme de connaissance de l'infrastructure
en Afrique


______________________________________________________________________________
Programme de connaissance de l'infrastructure en Afrique

Le Programme de connaissance de l’infrastructure (AIKP) est le successeur du Diagnostic des
infrastructures nationales en Afrique (AICD), qui est né suite à l'engagement pris par le
Sommet du G8 de 2005 à Gleneagles pour augmenter sensiblement l'APD pour l'Afrique, en
particulier, le secteur des infrastructures et la formation subséquente du Consortium pour les
infrastructures en Afrique (ICA). Ce fut dans le contexte que l'Afrique subsaharienne (ASS)
souffre d'une faiblesse fondamentale des infrastructures de base, et que cela a été un facteur
clé qui empêche la région de réaliser son plein potentiel pour la croissance économique, le
commerce international, et la réduction de la pauvreté.

La réunion inaugurale d’octobre 2005 du Consortium pour les Infrastructures en Afrique qui
s’est tenue à Londres, a reconnu la nécessité d'un programme coordonné visant à générer des
références de base quantitatives et communes. La réunion a donc mandaté la Banque
mondiale pour entreprendre une telle étude, qui devrait:
I

• aider les pays individuellement à comparer les performances relatives dans le secteur
des infrastructures et à formuler des stratégies spécifiques à chaque pays à la lumière
de l'expérience régionale;
N
• aider les donateurs dans la conception de supports appropriés à la réforme de
l'infrastructure, la finance, la réglementation et l'investissement;
• permettre une évaluation améliorée des efforts collectifs pour répondre aux besoins
de l'Afrique en mettant en place une référence de base à partir de la situation actuelle
sur le continent, et
• servir de document de référence sur toutes les questions stratégiques relatives à
l'infrastructure et, par conséquent, un véhicule pour aboutir à un consensus sur les
réponses adéquates aux problèmes de l'infrastructure en Afrique.
EE

http://www.infrastructureafrica.org/

L'étude AICD a innové avec les efforts de la collecte de données primaires couvrant les
infrastructures des services réseaux (TIC, énergie, eau, transport routier, transport ferroviaire,
transport maritime et aérien) de 2001 à 2006 dans 24 pays africains sélectionnés qui
représentent 85% de la population d'Afrique subsaharienne, du PIB et des flux de l’aide aux
infrastructures.

Ces pays sont: Afrique du Sud, Bénin, Burkina Faso, Cameroun, Cap Vert, Côte d'Ivoire,
République démocratique du Congo, Éthiopie, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi,
Mozambique, Namibie, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sénégal, Soudan, Tanzanie, Tchad, Ouganda et
Zambie.

L'étude représente également un effort sans précédent pour la collecte de données
économiques et techniques détaillées sur les infrastructures africaines, relatives aux coûts
budgétaires dans chaque secteur, aux besoins futurs des secteurs en investissement et aux
indicateurs de performance des secteurs. En conséquence, il a été possible, pour la première
fois, de dépeindre l'ampleur des problèmes d'infrastructure du continent et de fournir des

______________________________________________________________________________
estimations détaillées et motivées des besoins de dépenses, du financement des déficits et des
résultats positifs potentiels de l'efficacité des réformes des politiques.

L'AICD a produit une analyse à l'échelle continentale de nombreux aspects de l'infrastructure
en Afrique. Les principales conclusions ont été synthétisées dans un rapport phare intitulé
"Infrastructures africaines: une transformation impérative", publié en Novembre 2009. Ce
rapport s'adressait aux décideurs politiques et nécessairement porté sur les conclusions de
haut niveau. Le rapport a bénéficié d'une large couverture médiatique, alimentant
directement les discussions au sommet des chefs d'Etats et de gouvernement de l'Union
Africaine sur l'infrastructure en 2009. Cette publication phare a contribué à attirer l'attention
du monde entier sur les problèmes de l'infrastructure en Afrique et, est en train de façonner la
manière dont les décideurs voient ces secteurs.

En plus de ce rapport phare, l'AICD a produit de riches documents d'analyse hébergés sur le
portail web de l'AICD qui comprennent:
I

• Volumes technique avec les résultats détaillés sur les TIC, l'énergie, le transport et le
secteur de l'eau;
• Rapports pays analysant les performances des infrastructures et le financement des
déficits à l'échelle nationale;

N
• Rapports régionaux documentant l'étendue de l'intégration régionale des réseaux
d'infrastructures;
• Une série de bases de données en ligne, modèles basé sur le Web, et des atlas
interactif, et
• De nombreux documents de recherche
La Banque mondiale a mis en œuvre l'AICD comme étant une étude ponctuelle spéciale. Le
EE
comité de pilotage a reconnu en Juillet 2008 l'importance stratégique de soutenir l'effort de
collecte de données sur les infrastructures en Afrique. Il a donc recommandé que la phase de
diagnostic de l'étude soit étendue aux autres pays africains, notamment ceux d'Afrique du
Nord sur la période 2009‐2010 (Phase II), et qu'une fois le premier round achevé, le projet soit
transféré à la Banque Africaine de Développement pour servir de référentiel de données sur
les infrastructures en Afrique et assurer, dans l'avenir, une collecte durable des indicateurs
d'infrastructure pour le continent.

C'est dans ce contexte que le Programme de connaissance de l’infrastructure en Afrique (AIKP)
a été initié à la BAD. L'AIKP a une perspective de plus long terme et fournit un cadre pour la
génération de connaissances sur l'infrastructure sur une base plus durable. La réalisation de
cet objectif dépendra de la mobilisation des capacités à deux niveaux, au sein de la BAD et
dans la région. Dans la région, la BAD continuera à faciliter le renforcement des capacités
appropriées dans les pays et les organisations sous‐régionales (OSR) continueront de collecter,
traiter et gérer les bases de données nationales sur les statistiques d'infrastructure. Le cadre
proposé implique que les instituts nationaux de la statistique (INS) intègrent la collecte et la
compilation des statistiques sur les infrastructures dans leur collecte systématique de données
statistiques et leurs activités de compilation.

Certains INS font déjà ça dans un nombre limité de secteurs, mais pas dans tous les secteurs
d'infrastructures. L'objectif est donc de couvrir tous les secteurs, et d'amener tous les pays à le
faire. Cela permettra d'assurer que la capacité dans le pays ne sera pas limitée à l'INS, mais
s'étend à d'autres structures productrices de statistiques sectorielles dans le système
statistique national (SSN).

______________________________________________________________________________

Les données sur les infrastructures proviennent actuellement d'un système de réseau
d'information largement décentralisé dans les pays africains. Le cadre de collecte des données
implique donc, que les organismes de l'infrastructure compilent les données sur les
infrastructures du secteur à un niveau de base, transmettent les données par l'intermédiaire
d'une équipe pays de collecte de données à un organisme centralisateur, dans ce cas l'INS,
pour traiter l'information avant de la transmettre à la BAD pour la validation, le contrôle de
qualité et la diffusion. Avec cet arrangement, toutes les données et statistiques sur les
infrastructures nécessaires deviendraient disponibles à un point nodal et la coordination entre
les organismes de collecte de données et les services nationaux de statistique sera facilitée.

Les deux institutions clés dans le processus de collecte de données sont donc la BAD et
l'équipe pays de collecte de données/INS. La BAD comme un acteur centralisateur: mandate
les équipes pays pour collecter les données brutes; se charge du contrôle de la qualité des
données brutes collectées, collecte les données supplémentaires à partir de bases de données
I
mondiales; procède au traitement des données brutes et globales pour calculer les indicateurs
d’infrastructures, procède également au traitement des données d’enquêtes auprès des
ménages pour la capture des indicateurs de bien‐être; gère la diffusion en ligne des données
sur les infrastructures sur le Portail des données de la Banque, génère des tableaux, des
graphiques et des cartes pour la diffusion Web, se charge des produits de l'analyse des
N
politiques et de la connaissance en vue de la diffusion sur le site web. Les INS et les équipes
pays au niveau décentralisé collectent les données brutes sur le pays en utilisant un modèle de
collecte de données standard; présentent les projets de modèles de collecte de données à la
BAD pour le contrôle de qualité, et se chargent des révisions avant de soumettre des modèles
définitifs.

Le cadre prévoit également le transfert progressif de la capacité d'entreprendre la conversion
des données brutes en indicateurs dérivés et le contrôle de qualité des données collectées
EE
avec de l'assistance technique et de la formation sur place, selon le niveau de développement
de l'infrastructure statistique du pays

Les progrès réalisés à ce jour

Conformément au mandat du Comité directeur de l’AICD de juillet 2008, le personnel de la
BAD et la Banque mondiale ont commencé à travailler en partenariat sur le processus de
transition. Les principales étapes sont les suivantes:

• Transfert des bases de données AICD: La BAD a depuis 2011 pris en charge la
responsabilité de la gestion du site web sur les infrastructures ainsi que la
maintenance des bases de données de l’AICD. Le site web a été lancé le 11 mars 2011.
• Développement d’un cadre pour la durabilité: La Bad a élaboré le Programme de
connaissance de l’infrastructure en Afrique (AIKP) comme un cadre afin de s’assurer de
la durabilité de la collecte de données sur les infrastructures dans les pays africains.
• Formation des Instituts nationaux de la statistique: En avril 2010, la BAD et la Banque
mondiale ont conjointement organisé un atelier de formation régional à Hammamet
en Tunisie en vue de familiariser les points focaux pour les statistiques
d’infrastructures de 42 INS et les représentants des organisations sous régionales clés
avec l’étude diagnostic des infrastructures nationales en Afrique (AICD).
• Retraite de l’équipe conjointe BAD/Banque mondiale: En mai 2010, la BAD et la
Banque mondiale ont conjointement organisé une retraite pour le transfert de
connaissances des procédures détaillées pour la collecte et l’analyse de données et

______________________________________________________________________________
pour parvenir à une compréhension commune du cadre conceptuel de la mise en
œuvre du futur Programme de connaissance de l’infrastructure en Afrique.
• Ateliers de formation pour les pays de la Phase II: La Banque a organisé deux ateliers
sous régionaux de formation sur les outils de collecte de données du 2 au 6 août 2010
à Lomé au Togo et du 5 au 8 octobre 2010 à Hammamet en Tunisie à l’intention de 10
pays africains.
• Manuel sur les statistiques d’infrastructure en Afrique: Un projet du Manuel sur les
statistiques d’infrastructure en Afrique qui fournit une base méthodologique pour les
efforts de la future collecte de données a été élaboré. Ce manuel intègre une
composante TI comme outil de systématisation et de facilitation de la collecte, de la
validation et du traitement de données.
• Activités de la Phase II de la collecte de données: La BAD et la Banque mondiale ont
une responsabilité partagée pour la seconde phase de la collecte de données qui a
commencé en 2010 couvrant 27 pays. La collecte a été complètement effectuée avec
succès dans 17 pays (Angola, Botswana, Comores, Congo, Djibouti, Gabon, Gambie,
I
Liberia, Mali, Mauritanie, Maurice, République centrafricaine, Sao Tomé & Principe,
Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Togo et Zimbabwe) et les efforts sont en cours pour le
lancement de la collecte dans 10 autres pays (Algerie, Burundi, Egypte, Guinée, Guinée
Bissau, Guinée équatoriale, Libye, Maroc, Seychelles et Tunisie) au plus tard en 2011.
N
Les 24 pays qui ont été couverts lors de la Phase I effectueront la collecte de données
en 2011 et ceux de la Phase II en 2012. A partir de maintenant, le plan consiste à
mener des enquêtes toutes les deux années. Le manuel sur les statistiques
d’infrastructure en Afrique fournira des orientations sur la collecte de données, le
contrôle de qualité et les procédures de traitement de données. On s’attend par la
suite à ce que les pays soient en mesure d’intégrer et de financer les statistiques
d’infrastructure afin qu’elles deviennent une activité à part entière des activités
régulières du système statistique national.
EE

Prochaines étapes

Dans les prochains mois, les activités suivantes seront entreprises dans le cadre des efforts de
la BAD en vue de renforcer les capacités appropriées des pays à collecter, à traiter et à gérer
les statistiques d’infrastructure.

• Une réunion du groupe d’experts sera convoquée en avril 2011 pour discuter et valider
le manuel sur les statistiques d’infrastructure en Afrique en vue d’orienter la collecte
de données et les procédures de traitement dans le cadre du AIKP;
• Deux ateliers de formation seront organisés pour former les fonctionnaires des pays
sur les outils de collecte de données sur les infrastructures;
• La collecte de données sera prochainement lancée dans les 10 pays restants;
• L’assistance technique sur la collecte, le traitement et l’analyse de données sera
fournie aux pays de la Phase II qui ont déjà complètement achevé la collecte de
données;
• La BAD apportera une assistance aux 24 pays de la Phase I pour entreprendre le
deuxième round de la collecte de données en 2011;
• Les ateliers sous régionaux de traitement et de validation de données seront organisés
en collaboration avec AFRISTAT, COMESA, CEDEAO, et SADC sur le traitement et la
validation de données sur les infrastructures;
• Un atelier sur le SDNS sera organisé pour les pays africains afin de faciliter l’intégration
des statistiques d’infrastructure dans les activités statistiques nationales;

______________________________________________________________________________
• La BAD lancera les activités de collecte de fonds avec les partenaires au
développement afin de compléter ses ressources.
I
N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
Le Consortium pour les infrastructures en Afrique (ICA)

Le Consortium pour les infrastructures en Afrique (ICA) contribue à l'amélioration des
conditions de vie et du bien‐être des populations africaines en encourageant le
développement des infrastructures en Afrique et en soutenant la promotion des
investissements nécessaires, tant de sources publiques que privées.

ww.icafrica.org

Lancé au cours du Sommet du G8 tenu à Gleneagles en 2005, le Consortium pour les
infrastructures en Afrique a vocation à aider à améliorer la vie et le bien‐être économique des
I
populations africaines en encourageant, appuyant et promouvant l’accroissement de
l’investissement tant public que privé dans l’infrastructure en Afrique. Grâce à son pouvoir de
mobilisation, l’ICA joue un rôle de catalyseur – renforçant et accélérant le développement de
l’infrastructure en Afrique.
N
L’ICA aide également à relever ou à surmonter certains défis et obstacles techniques et
stratégiques au développement de l’infrastructure, ainsi qu’à améliorer la coordination des
activités de ses membres et d’autres sources importantes de financement de l’infrastructure,
notamment la Chine, l’Inde et les partenaires arabes.

Principaux domaines
• Eau
EE
• Énergie
• Transports
• TIC

L’ICA n’est pas un organisme de financement, mais tient lieu de plateforme pour mobiliser le
financement des bailleurs de fonds et du secteur privé aux fins d’exécution des projets et
programmes d’infrastructure en Afrique.

Au nombre des membres de l’ICA figurent les pays du G8, le Groupe de la Banque mondiale, le
Groupe de la Banque africaine de développement, la Commission européenne, la Banque
européenne d’investissement et Development Bank of Southern Africa.

L’ICA est assisté d’un secrétariat restreint qui est abrité par la Banque africaine de
développement à Tunis, Tunisie. Ce secrétariat est financé par les contributions volontaires de
certains membres de l’ICA et son personnel est une combinaison de membres permanents du
personnel de la Banque africaine de développement et d’experts détachés par les pays
membres de l’ICA.

Vision : La vision de l'ICA est que tous les Africains aient accès à des services d'infrastructure
durables et fiables.

Objectif : L'objectif de l'ICA consiste à mobiliser auprès des sources publiques, privées et
mixtes davantage de financement pour la création d'une infrastructure durable en Afrique.


______________________________________________________________________________
But
Le but de l'ICA consiste à hisser l'ICA sur des bases solides en vue de promouvoir avec succès le
développement et le financement d'une infrastructure durable en Afrique.

L'Objectif est une expression mesurable de la situation au niveau supérieur à la réalisation
duquel contribue l'ICA. Il n’est pas censé être réalisé par l'ICA seul, mais par l'ICA, en
collaboration avec de nombreux autres acteurs.

Le But reflète le rôle de l'ICA en tant que principale plateforme en vue de susciter le
changement en matière de développement de l'infrastructure en Afrique. Il est ensuite traduit
en Réalisations qui reflètent l'orientation première de l'ICA, à savoir la collaboration entre les
parties prenantes, contribuant ainsi à l'élimination des obstacles techniques et stratégiques
aux projets d'infrastructure et aux programmes régionaux, et à une bonne compréhension du
secteur grâce à une information et une communication meilleures.

I
Les Réalisations attendues de l'ICA

• Amélioration de la coordination – La coordination en matière de développement de
l'infrastructure en Afrique constitue la raison d’être de l'ICA, l'objectif étant de rendre
plus efficaces les interventions de toutes les parties prenantes.
N
• Facilitation des programmes régionaux d'infrastructure – L'ICA apporte une
contribution en mettant à profit son pouvoir de mobilisation pour amener les parties
prenantes à conjuguer leurs efforts en vue d'identifier et éliminer les obstacles
techniques et stratégiques, ainsi qu'à financer les programmes régionaux
d'infrastructure.

• Renforcement du savoir et de l'information – L'ICA mettra au point des outils de
EE
savoir et analytiques qui permettront d’assurer l'adéquation entre la demande et
l'offre d'infrastructure.

Contributeurs de l'ICA
Le Consortium pour les infrastructures en Afrique est un mécanisme tripartite qui réunit des
bailleurs de fonds bilatéraux, des organismes multilatéraux et des institutions africaines :

• la Banque africaine de développement et Development Bank of Southern Africa font office
de chefs de file des membres africains du Consortium, tandis que la Commission de l'Union
africaine (UA), le Secrétariat du NEPAD et les communautés économiques régionales
participent aux réunions en qualité d'observateurs ;
• les organismes multilatéraux membres de l'ICA sont la Banque mondiale, la Société
financière internationale (SFI), la Commission européenne (CE) et la Banque européenne
d'investissement (BEI) ;
• tous les pays du G8 (Allemagne, Canada, États‐Unis, France, Italie, Japon, Russie, Royaume‐
Uni) sont membres de l'ICA.

Les autres bailleurs de fonds qui apportent des contributions financières importantes à
l'infrastructure en Afrique peuvent devenir membres de l'ICA.

Secrétariat de l'ICA
Le Secrétariat de l'ICA est abrité par la Banque africaine de développement à Tunis, Tunisie.

______________________________________________________________________________
Le Secrétariat est financé par les contributions volontaires de certains membres de l'ICA et son
personnel est une combinaison de membres permanents du personnel de la Banque africaine
de développement et d’experts détachés par les pays membres de l'ICA.
Les principaux membres du Secrétariat sont :
• Mohamed H. Hassan (Coordonnateur du Secrétariat de l'ICA)
• Callixte Kambada (Énergie et TIC)
• Michael K. Kane (Spécialiste en infrastructures)
• Aminata Kone (Assistante d'équipe)

Thèmes et programmes
Le Consortium pour les infrastructures en Afrique est une initiative importante qui a vocation à
améliorer et à accélérer les progrès en vue de satisfaire les besoins impérieux d'infrastructure
de l’Afrique, à l'effet de promouvoir la croissance économique et le développement du
continent. L'ICA aide à surmonter les contraintes nationales et régionales au développement
I
de l'infrastructure, tout en mettant l’accent sur l'intégration de l'infrastructure régionale.

Secteurs d'activité
• Eau
• Énergie

• TIC
N
• Transports
Le Consortium a pour mission de rendre plus efficace le soutien de ses membres au secteur de
l'infrastructure en mettant en commun leurs efforts dans des domaines tels que l’information,
la préparation des projets et les bonnes pratiques.

EE
Bien que le Consortium ne soit pas une agence qui finance les infrastructures, il agit comme
une plateforme pour faciliter la mobilisation des financements pour les projets d’infrastructure
en Afrique.

Cependant le succès de l'ICA sera jugé à l'aune des actions et résultats concrets en termes de
quantité et de qualité de services durables d’infrastructure mis en œuvre pour les populations
d’Afrique, et leur contribution pour le développement du continent.


______________________________________________________________________________
Tendances de l’investissement en infrastructure en Afrique

En 2012, les membres de l'ICA (Consortium pour les infrastructures en Afrique) se sont
engagés plus considérablement vers des programmes d'infrastructure en Afrique qu'ils l’ont
fait en 2011, mais pas autant que 2010.
• La Chine reste le plus grand bailleur de fonds de l'infrastructure en l'Afrique, bien que
ses engagements ont diminué par rapport au niveau de 2011.
• Les pays à forte croissance comme le Brésil, l'Inde et la Corée du Sud jouent un rôle
positif dans la croissance de l'infrastructure.
• Les gouvernements des pays africains investissent davantage dans l'infrastructure
avec les banques régionales de développement qui jouent un rôle plus important.

La tendance la plus encourageante est la rapide mobilisation du capital du secteur privé ‐
mais retombant à des niveaux très bas, il y a un ensemble de tendances décevant. Par
exemple, il y a encore relativement quelques investissements dans les transports, l'eau,
I
l'assainissement et la téléphonie mobile, à maturité à travers le continent il n’y a pas beaucoup
d'intérêt dans les investissements en TIC du secteur privé.

En outre, avec un regard approfondi, il apparaît qu’en enlevant quelques très grands projets
N
(en Afrique du Nord et Afrique du Sud), les tendances sous‐jacentes parmi tous les bailleurs de
fonds sont relativement constantes.

Une autre tendance décevante est le ralentissement des décaissements. La raison de cet écart
entre les engagements et les décaissements n’est pas évidente. Pour une analyse détaillée de
l'ensemble du scénario de l'investissement d’infrastructure en Afrique, vous pouvez
télécharger le rapport annuel 2012 de l'ICA intitulé, les Tendances du financement des
infrastructures en Afrique.
EE

Il y a de grandes variations dans les niveaux d'engagements, notamment dans le secteur de
l’énergie. L’Afrique du Nord et la République d'Afrique du Sud avaient des vastes projets
d'énergie qui ont surpassé le reste du continent en termes d'investissements dans l’énergie.
De même, bien qu'il y ait un engagement constant sur des projets dans l’énergie, les
engagements des projets en eau ont augmenté régulièrement au cours de la période de trois
ans.

Les engagements de non ‐ membres de l'ICA en l'infrastructure en Afrique ont atteint le
plafond de 20 milliards de dollars pour la première fois ‐ même si la contribution de la Chine a
reculé de 14.9bn $ en 2011 à 13.4bn $ en 2012. Cela a été plus que compensé par le Groupe

______________________________________________________________________________
de coordination arabe qui a tendance à investir dans un plus grand nombre de petits projets
que d'autres bailleurs de fonds.

Il y a une préférence marquée pour le capital privé à se répandre dans des projets
énergétiques.

I

N
Il y a quelques tendances intéressantes entre les engagements et les décaissements effectués
par les membres de l'ICA entre 2010‐2012. Le niveau actuel de décaissements de membres de
l'ICA est en retard sur les engagements – illustrant comment le fonctionnement de la finance

EE
est souvent l'objet de retards. Il est cependant très encourageant de voir que les
décaissements de 12,7 milliards de dollars ont été effectués en 2012 – en comparaision avec
8,7 milliards $ en 2011 et 9,7 milliards de dollars en 2010. Mais encore une fois, au cours de
cette période de trois années, près de 60 milliards de dollars d'engagements ont été prises
tandis que les décaissements réels s'élevaient à environ 31 milliards $.


______________________________________________________________________________
En 2013, ICA a mené une enquête d'investisseurs du secteur privé. Cette enquête a permis de
classer les dix pays africains qu'ils considéraient comme les plus attractives. L’Afrique du Sud a
été classé le plus attractif pour les investissements, accompagné par le Kenya au deuxième
rang. Les raisons sont intéressantes.

Un répondant au sondage dit " l’Afrique du Sud ... a mis en place d’infrastructure et un cadre
politique favorable du gouvernement ... " a été le facteur déterminant. La plupart des
répondants ont tenu des propos similaires. De nombreux répondants ont souligné
l'importance en Afrique du Sud du Programme d’Approvisionnement des Producteurs
d’Energie Renouvelables en Afrique du Sud (REIPPP), qui est susceptible d’attirer des
investissements dans les années à venir. Un autre répondant a dit:

« ... La croissance économique du Kenya et l’émergence du secteur des TIC ‐avec un
faible taux de criminalité et de corruption ... " 'était très attirant. Un autre répondant a
dit: « ... le gouvernement kenyan est très pragmatique lorsqu'il s'agit des investisseurs
I
du secteur privé ‐ avec un ajustement du cadre réglementaire ... "

N
EE

Dans l'enquête ICA 2013 des investisseurs d'infrastructure du secteur privé en Afrique, le
risque semble être la principale considération prise en compte au moment de prise de décision
d’investissement , suivi de près par les préoccupations relatives à l'environnement juridique,
réglementaire et la situation politique.

Quand il s'agit de l'obtention de financement, le risque politique est un sérieux défi. Le risque
de crédit et de paiement ainsi que la transparence et la corruption ont été classés
respectivement deuxième et troisième.

Les réponses à l'enquête ont mis en évidence le rôle critique des institutions bilatérales et
multilatérales. La plupart des répondants ont mentionné que le soutien et les garanties de
financement multilatéral sont très importants dans l'atténuation des risques. Les répondants
ont déclaré que la corruption a été atténuée par leurs propres contrôles internes pour assurer
un partenariat transparent des affaires.

Source: Rapport annuel 2012 de l'ICA intitulé, le financement des infrastructures en Afrique
Tendances.

______________________________________________________________________________

Source: 2012 ICA Annual Report entitled, Infrastructure Financing Trends in Africa.

I
N
EE


______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
EE

Engagements financiers de l'ICA

En 2007, les engagements financiers multilatéraux s'élevaient à 8,8 milliards $ ‐ soit 71 % des
engagements globaux du Consortium. La Banque mondiale et la Société financière
internationale totalisent ensemble des engagements d’un montant de 3,58 milliards $ dans la
région. Les engagements du Groupe de la Banque africaine de développement (le Fonds
africain de développement et la Banque africaine de développement) s’élèvent à environ 2
milliards de dollars. La Commission européenne (CE) affiche, pour sa part, des engagements

______________________________________________________________________________
chiffrés à environ 1 milliard $. Les engagements de la Banque européenne d'investissement
(BEI) ont quasiment atteint 1,2 milliards de dollars. Quant à la Banque de développement
d'Afrique australe, ses engagements se chiffrent à 415 millions de dollars.

I
N
EE

L’augmentation la plus sensible concerne le sous‐secteur de l’énergie, où les engagements ont
crû de 75 % par rapport au niveau de 2008 pour atteindre 6,3 milliards de $ EU. La part du
sous‐secteur du transport a crû également, mais seulement de 20 %, pour atteindre 7,1
milliards de $ EU. Le sous‐secteur de l’eau a accusé le recul le plus important soit 18 %, pour
s’établir à 2,1 milliards de $ EU. Bien que les engagements dans le sous‐secteur des TIC aient
presque doublé en 2009, le niveau d’investissement demeure faible, s’établissant à moins de
0,8 milliard de $ EU.

Trends of ICA Commitments to Infrastructure in Africa by Sector, in billions US$

______________________________________________________________________________
I

ICA Total Commitments to African Infrastructure 2005‐2010, in billions US$
N
EE

The figure below provides a summary of trends from 2005 to 2010, visualising the major
growth during this period in 2009, where Sub‐Saharan Africa received US$7.2bn as non‐ODA
support, an increase by 167% from 2008. The North African Region experienced a similar
growth in 2010 where ODA climbed to US$1.9bn and Non‐ODA soared to US$7.0bn. For 2010,
total ICA member commitments reported by region were US$26.7bn, while US$2.4bn was
unallocated. Further information on infrastructure commitments to Africa from 2005 to 2010,
with a regional breakdown and a detailed analysis of the trends in 2009, is presented in Annex
9 of the 2010 ICA Annual Report.

Trends of ICA Total Commitments 2005‐2010, in billions US$

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
Source ICA. For the latest figures on all sectors, consult the 2010 ICA Annual Report.
EE

Source ICA. For the latest figures on all sectors, consult the 2010 ICA Annual Report.


______________________________________________________________________________
Technologies de l'information et de la communication

(TIC)

Internet

À la différence des taux d’accès aux services vocaux, les taux d’accès à l’Internet sont faibles et
ne progressent que lentement en Afrique. Les prix élevés et la disponibilité limitée constituent
les principales causes de cet état de fait, aggravées par le piteux état des réseaux d’accès par
ligne fixe, l’accès limité au spectre radio à large bande, le mauvais état des réseaux dorsaux
nationaux et l’utilisation limitée des ordinateurs.

L’une des principales causes du coût élevé de l’Internet (et des appels vocaux internationaux)
tient au prix de la connexion internationale, déterminé par l’accès physique aux câbles sous‐
marins à fibre optique et le niveau de concurrence sur le marché international. Les pays qui
I
ont accès aux câbles sous‐marins affichent des prix plus abordables pour les appels
internationaux que ceux qui n’y ont pas accès. Néanmoins, les pays qui bénéficient d’un accès
compétitif enregistrent des prix nettement inférieurs à ceux pratiqués par les pays qui
disposent d’un monopole pour la passerelle.

N
L’infrastructure de réseau dorsale pour le trafic de communications entre des points fixes sur
les réseaux est limitée et constitue un obstacle.
Le développement de l’Internet à large bande est limité par l’insuffisance de l’infrastructure de
réseau dorsale. Bien que les opérateurs de téléphonie mobile n’aient pas besoin de réseau
dorsal à grande capacité (ceux‐ci ont créé, en général, leur propre technologie sans fil), les
réseaux dorsaux Internet à large bande ont besoin d’une capacité plus grande, en général, en
EE
utilisant des câbles à fibre optique.

L’offre de service Internet à large bande dans la plupart des pays africains est limitée aux
principaux centres urbains et aux cybercafés, aux entreprises et aux clients résidentiels à
revenu élevé. La couverture du réseau est limitée, les prix sont élevés et les vitesses sont
inférieures à celles d’autres régions du monde. Ce niveau de services limité pourrait être
étendu au niveau national grâce à une infrastructure de réseau sans fil, tout en assurant les
mêmes avantages techniques et économiques que les réseaux vocaux GSM. L’investissement
nécessaire pour couvrir l’ensemble de la population à l’aide de la technologie à large bande
sans fil dont la performance est limitée a été estimé à environ 0,9 milliard de $ EU.

Pour autant qu’il existe un climat compétitif et propice, le secteur privé pourrait apporter la
majeure partie de ce montant, ce qui permettrait à 89 % de la population d’avoir accès à ce
service à large bande limité. L’investissement public nécessaire pour atteindre les 11 %
restants de la population s’élèverait à seulement 0,2 milliard de $ EU.

(Source : AICD)

Téléphones mobiles

Services de communications vocales

L’Afrique subsaharienne affiche un taux de croissance phénoménal de la pénétration des

______________________________________________________________________________
services de TIC depuis le milieu des années 90 – essentiellement pour les télécommunications
mobiles, pour lesquelles le nombre d’usagers du téléphone est passé de 10 millions en 2000 à
plus de 180 millions en 2007. Le marché des lignes fixes a crû à un rythme nettement plus lent,
passant de 10 millions en 2002 à 11,8 millions en 2006.

La concurrence entre les opérateurs de téléphonie mobile s’est muée en une course à
l’accroissement du pourcentage de la population couverte par leurs réseaux. En 2006, un ou
plusieurs réseaux mobiles couvraient 62 % de la population de l’Afrique subsaharienne. Ce
taux de couverture continue de croître au fil des années.

L’accès aux nouveaux services de TIC se développe à un rythme remarquable. À l’échelle du
continent africain, le taux de pénétration de la téléphonie mobile en milieu rural s’élève à 3 %,
tandis que dans les pays à faible revenu, il atteint 13 %. En milieu urbain, les taux de
pénétration oscillent entre 22 % dans les pays à faible revenu et 38 % dans les pays à revenu
intermédiaire. Même les populations au sein des groupes dont le revenu est le plus faible ont
I
accès aux TIC, grâce aux réseaux de téléphonie mobile.

L’utilisation généralisée du service téléphonique prépayé a révolutionné l’accès aux réseaux
mobiles pour les ménages à faible revenu. Selon les estimations, 97 % des consommateurs en
Afrique subsaharienne sont des utilisateurs du service prépayé.
N
Cette croissance rapide de l’accès aux TIC en Afrique est intervenue malgré le coût
relativement élevé des services. Les prix sont en baisse en Afrique, mais pas aussi rapidement
que dans d’autres régions du monde. S’ils pouvaient atteindre les niveaux enregistrés en Asie
du Sud, le taux d’accès aux TIC en Afrique serait nettement plus élevé.

Le prix moyen des appels internationaux en Afrique subsaharienne a baissé considérablement
depuis 2000, mais les prix des appels vers les pays en dehors de la région demeurent
EE
nettement inférieurs à ceux des appels intrarégionaux.

Le coût de l’achèvement de la couverture du réseau de téléphonie mobile pour les
communications vocales en Afrique est relativement modeste. Pour atteindre toutes les
populations mal desservies, il faudrait un investissement de 0,8 milliard de $ EU par an sur une
période de 10 années. À l’heure actuelle, 43,7 % de la population vivent dans des zones qui ne
sont pas couvertes par les réseaux vocaux sans fil. Pour peu que soit créé un environnement
compétitif approprié, le secteur privé pourrait combler la majeure partie de ce déficit,
permettant à 39 % de la population de recevoir un signal vocal. Seul un investissement public
estimé à 0,3 milliard de $ EU par an serait nécessaire pour atteindre les 61 % restants de la
population, afin de combler le déficit de couverture.

(Source : AICD)

Mobile telephone coverage in Africa, 1998 to 3Q 2006

______________________________________________________________________________

I
Africa Continues Going Mobile

N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
I
N
EE
.
Source: IMF

Infrasstructures en
n Afrique EENI The Globa
al Business School
S 23
3/90
________________ __________________________________ ___________
___________
____________
__
I
N
EE
Sub‐SSaharan Africa is the seccond‐largest mobile tech hnology marrket after Asia and the fastest

grow
wing one, witth the GSMAA forecastingg the region
n's mobile ussers will reach 346 million by
2017. This grow wth has leappfrogged traaditional lanndline phon ne connectio ons. The median
m
perceentage of households witth landlines in these 23 ccountries in 2013 is 2% ‐‐‐ unchanged d from
2008.
The ggrowth in mo obile phone ownership in sub‐Saharaan Africa hass not been eequally distributed
acrosss the subco
ontinent or even
e within countries. Mobile phon nes remain most comm mon in
urbann household ds. In 2013,, 80% of urban house eholds had at least one mobile phone,
p
comppared with 6 63% of rural households that have att least one m mobile phonee. This is a ch hange
from six years aggo when 63% % of urban h households h had at least one mobile and 43% off rural
houseeholds did.
Not surprisingly, higher incoome househ holds have a greater percentage
p of mobile phone
p
owneership. Howeever, a majo
ority in even the poorestt 20% of thee populationn report havving at
Interrnational Bu
usiness EENI www.reingex.com
Infrasstructures en
al Business School
S 24
4/90
________________ __________________________________ ___________
___________
____________
__
least one phone in their hou

usehold. Growwth has beeen biggest am
mong sub‐Saaharan Africaans in
the seecond‐lowesst income grooup, increasing 28 perce
entage pointss since 2008..
Still, the annual household growth in mobile phone ownersship slightly outgrew annual a
houseehold incom me in 22 off the 23 coountries whe ere growth was measu ured. In these 22
counttries, the 4%% median annual growtth on house ehold incomee compares with the median m
annual growth rate of househ hold 5%.
I

Botto om Line
With mobile pho one penetrattion in 2013 3 lower in ru
ural areas an nd lowest among house eholds
with lower houseehold incomes, there is definitely ro oom for grow wth in the sub‐Saharan Africa

Sourcce: Gallup

N
markket. However, it may bee difficult to
substtantial investtment in infrrastructure in
Réseaau structuraant d'informaation

o sustain the
n the region..
e current paace of grow wth without more
EE
L’infrrastructure de
d réseau do orsale dispon nible pour assurer
a le traafic de comm
munications entre
des p points fixes ssur les réseaux est insufffisante, ce qu ui freine le d développemeent de l’Internet à
large bande. Celle‐ci nécessitte des réseau ux dorsaux h haut débit, een général à l’aide de câbles à
fibre optique. La portée limitée de ces réseaux
r constitue un ob bstacle au développeme ent du
marché à large baande en Afriq que.

Il existe de grandes disparittés sur le co
ontinent en ce qui conccerne le fon nctionnemen nt des
marchés nationaaux d’infrasstructure do orsale. Danss de nomb breux pays, des contraaintes
implicites et exp plicites limittent le déveeloppement des réseau ux dorsaux, freinant ainsi le
développement d des réseaux àà large bande.

Les pays qui ont eentièrementt libéralisé le marché dess réseaux à laarge bande o ont enregistrré une
croisssance rapidee de la concu urrence en m matière d’inffrastructure. Au Nigeria,, au moins q quatre
des p principaux op pérateurs sont en train d de développe er des réseaux de câbless à fibre optiique à
grand de capacité à même d’assurer des services à large bandee haut débit, tout comm me au
Kenya. Ces réseeaux sont concentrés dans d les priincipaux cen ntres urbainns et les liaaisons
interu urbaines quui représenteent la majo orité des clie ents. Si l’on
n devait éteendre les rééseaux
dorsaaux haut déb bit au‐delà dee ces zones, un certain so outien publicc pourrait s’aavérer nécesssaire.
Les réseaux dorsaux à bande passan nte haut dé ébit constituent un vo olet essentiel de
l’inveestissement n nécessaire ppour les services à large bande en Affrique. Ces rééseaux relien nt des
villes et des aggloomérations aau niveau naational et à travers les fro ontières. Ils relient égaleement
les rééseaux interrnationaux de
d câbles so ous‐marins à à fibre optiq que qui assuurent le trafic de
comm munications entre les con ntinents.

Interrnational Bu
______________________________________________________________________________
La connectivité transfrontalière et interrégionale est sous‐développée en Afrique à l’heure
actuelle. L’investissement unique nécessaire oscille entre 229 millions de $ EU pour un jeu
minimum de liaisons et 515 millions de $ EU pour un réseau interrégional reliant toutes les
capitales africaines à l’aide de câbles à fibre optique. Le secteur privé apporterait la majeure
partie de cet investissement, à mesure que les opérateurs régionaux assureraient la
connectivité de leurs réseaux à travers les frontières.

Le secteur privé pilote également le développement de l’infrastructure internationale des
câbles sous‐marins en Afrique. Parmi les cinq câbles sous‐marins à fibre optique déjà
opérationnels ou en cours de construction sur le continent, seul un fait l’objet d’une
participation directe du secteur public. Quatre appartiennent à des opérateurs privés et sont
financés par ceux‐ci à des conditions commerciales. Ces deux types d’infrastructure dorsale
sont liés. À mesure que les câbles sous‐marins à fibre optique se développeront, les liaisons
transfrontalières pour assurer le trafic jusqu’aux points d’atterrissage deviendront plus viables
sur le plan commercial.
I

Hormis les voies qui relient les principaux centres urbains, les réseaux dorsaux à bande
passante haut débit ont peu de chances d’être viables sur le plan commercial. Le
développement des réseaux dorsaux dans ces régions pourrait nécessiter une forme de
soutien public – financier ou sous forme d’accès plus facile à l’infrastructure existante.
(Source : AICD)

N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
Irrigation

Ressources en eau et stockage

Le développement économique de l’Afrique se ressent d’épisodes de sécheresse et
d’inondations extrêmes qui ne pourront qu’empirer avec la variabilité hydroclimatique
imputable aux changements climatiques.

• Il y a lieu d’accroître les infrastructures de stockage d’eau afin de gérer la variabilité
hydrologique du continent et de mettre pleinement en valeur les ressources en eau en
vue de soutenir le développement.
• En Afrique, les ressources en eau sont sous‐utilisées, d’une manière générale.
Cependant, les utilisations conflictuelles sont monnaie courante.
• L’existence de grands bassins fluviaux transfrontaliers rend complexes la construction
d’infrastructures à grande échelle et la gestion des conflits liés à l’eau.
I
• De solides institutions de gestion de l’eau sont nécessaires au niveau national et dans
les bassins afin d’optimiser l’utilisation de l’eau et de développer l’infrastructure
hydraulique.

N
La gestion de l’eau est primordiale afin de relever les défis de développement du continent.
Bien que l’eau soit essentielle pour l’agriculture, seuls 5 % de la superficie cultivée en Afrique
sont irrigués. L’énergie hydroélectrique est également sous‐exploitée, dans une large mesure,
en Afrique ; moins de 10 % de son potentiel est mis à profit. L’eau pour les populations et les
animaux est essentielle pour la santé et les moyens d’existence. Cependant, seuls 58 % des
Africains ont accès à une source d’eau potable.

Les économies africaines sont tributaires d’une alimentation en eau fiable et suffisante.
EE
Toutefois, la pluviométrie élevée et la forte variabilité hydrologique se traduisent par des
sécheresses et des inondations fréquentes qui minent la croissance économique. Par ailleurs,
les ressources en eau partagées par les pays posent des problèmes politiques et de gestion
complexes.

La réalisation de la sécurité hydrique en vue de soutenir la croissance et de renforcer la
résilience climatique est au cœur de la gestion des ressources en eau en Afrique. Cette sécurité
reflète la capacité d’un pays à fonctionner de manière productive face à la vulnérabilité liée à
l’eau. Il s’agit d’une condition préalable au maintien et à l’accroissement du rendement des
investissements, ainsi qu’à la réalisation d’une croissance économique dynamique. Des
infrastructures et des institutions disposant d’une capacité minimum, adossées à de solides
systèmes d’information sur l’eau, sont nécessaires pour assurer la sécurité hydrique nationale
de base.

La construction de l’infrastructure hydraulique favorisera la croissance, réduira les risques liés
au climat et allégera les conflits liés à l’eau. Tant les grands que les petits projets
d’infrastructure doivent faire partie d’un programme d’investissement équilibré dans le
secteur de l’eau qui assure une alimentation fiable en eau pour les activités humaines,
économiques et qui protège les ressources en eau et l’environnement.

La création d’importantes installations de stockage à usages multiples est nécessaire pour
atténuer les conséquences économiques de la variabilité hydroclimatique, assurer une
alimentation fiable en eau et mettre en valeur les ressources en eau disponibles. Les
approches à petite échelle de la gestion de l’eau améliorent la capacité des populations rurales

______________________________________________________________________________
pauvres à faire face aux chocs hydriques grâce à l’augmentation de la productivité agricole,
assurent une alimentation économique en eau et atténuent l’impact des sécheresses.

Besoins de financement pour les ressources en eau

Le coût annuel estimatif du financement nécessaire pour l’infrastructure hydraulique s’élève à
environ 10 milliards de $ EU, dont près de 80 % pour la création d’importantes installations de
stockage pour l’hydroélectricité à usages multiples, et environ 10 % pour la création d’une
grande capacité de stockage pour l’alimentation en eau en milieu urbain et l’investissement
dans l’exécution de projets d’infrastructure à petite échelle, respectivement. En outre,
l’Afrique aura besoin d’un montant de 1 milliard de $ EU par an pour créer les réseaux
hydrologiques, combler les déficits d’informations sur l’eau et développer les institutions de
gestion de l’eau.

(Source : AICD)
I

Eau potable et assainissement

Principaux faits relatifs à l’alimentation en eau

N
• La population bénéficiaire d’une meilleure alimentation en eau n’a pas crû ces
dernières années. En fait, elle a baissé en milieu urbain.
• Étant donné qu’il faudrait 15 milliards de $ EU par an pour atteindre l’objectif du
Millénaire pour le développement relatif à l’alimentation en eau, et vu que seule la
moitié de ce montant serait disponible, il serait souhaitable que certains pays
envisagent sérieusement d’utiliser des technologies à faible coût.
• La sous‐tarification de l’eau coûte 1,8 milliard de $ EU par an sous forme de
EE
subventions qui ne semblent pas profiter aux pauvres, bien que les prix permettant de
recouvrer les coûts semblent abordables pour la plupart des consommateurs actuels.
• Les inefficacités opérationnelles des sociétés d’alimentation en eau coûtent au
continent 0,9 milliard de $ EU par an, et retardent l’expansion du service et l’entretien
de l’infrastructure.
• En milieu rural, le principal défi consiste à réduire la dépendance des eaux de surface
grâce à un réseau de points d’accès à l’eau durables. À cet égard, les récentes
réformes institutionnelles semblent efficaces.

Besoins de financement dans le secteur de l’alimentation en eau

L’Afrique subsaharienne toute entière a peu de chances d’atteindre l’objectif du Millénaire
pour le développement (OMD) relatif à l’alimentation en eau. Le taux de couverture en milieu
urbain est en baisse, les sociétés éprouvant des difficultés à faire face à l’accroissement de la
population. En milieu rural, plus de 40 pour cent de la population continuent de dépendre des
eaux de surface. D’une manière générale, les puits et les forages sont les sources
d’alimentation en eau qui se développent le plus rapidement.

Le financement nécessaire pour atteindre l’OMD relatif à l’accès à une source d’eau améliorée
est estimé à 16,5 milliards de $ EU par an (environ 2,6 % du PIB du continent). Pour de
nombreux pays, ces coûts semblent prohibitifs. En mettant l’accent sur les technologies à
faible coût, notamment les bornes‐fontaines et les forages, ces pays pourraient réduire le coût
de l’atteinte de l’OMD.


______________________________________________________________________________
Les dépenses consacrées au secteur de l’eau s’élèvent à l’heure actuelle à 3,6 milliards de $
EU, soit un quart du montant nécessaire. Cependant, quelque 2,7 milliards de $ EU alloués au
secteur sont gaspillés, du fait des inefficacités.

La sous‐tarification des services constitue un exemple manifeste d’inefficacité. Les tarifs
moyens de l’eau s’élèvent à environ 0,67 $ EU par mètre cube, ce qui est inférieur au seuil de
recouvrement des coûts d’un peu plus de 1 $ EU par mètre cube. Du fait de la sous‐tarification
de l’eau, le secteur perd au moins 1,8 milliard de $ EU par an au titre des recettes. Le
recouvrement intégral du coût du capital devrait être possible pour une moitié de la
population, mais ne le serait pas pour l’autre moitié.

Les inefficacités opérationnelles des sociétés d’eau coûtent au continent un montant
supplémentaire de 0,9 milliard de $ EU par an et freinent l’extension des services. Même si
toutes ces inefficacités étaient éliminées, le déficit de financement global du secteur de l’eau
s’élèverait encore à 7,8 milliards de $ EU par an (1,2 % du PIB).
I

Principaux faits concernant l’assainissement

• À l’heure actuelle, un tiers des Africains continuent de pratiquer la défécation à l’air
libre et la moitié d’entre eux utilisent des latrines traditionnelles dont les
N
inconvénients pour la santé sont peu connus, dans une large mesure.
• Le défi de l’assainissement revêt différentes formes dans différents pays, ainsi qu’en
milieux urbain et rural. Ces différences nécessitent différentes réponses stratégiques.
• Là où la défécation à l’air libre prévaut, il convient de mettre l’accent sur l’éducation
afin d’encourager les populations à construire et à utiliser des latrines.
• Lorsqu’il existe déjà des latrines traditionnelles, le principal défi consiste à encourager
les populations à adopter des modèles de latrines améliorées.
• Lorsqu’il existe déjà un assainissement amélioré, le problème qui se pose tient à son
EE
extension aux populations à faible revenu et à la mise en place d’un réseau d’égouts
dans les zones à forte densité de population.
• Dans un avenir prévisible, il est probable que les budgets des ménages demeurent la
principale source de financement pour l’investissement dans l’assainissement.

Besoins de financement dans le secteur de l’assainissement

Le montant total du financement nécessaire pour atteindre l’OMD relatif à l’assainissement est
estimé à 6 milliards de $ EU par an, soit environ 0,9 % du PIB du continent africain. Les besoins
d’investissement en capital peuvent être estimés de manière prudente à 4,5 milliards de $ EU
par an (0,7 % du PIB du continent), tandis que les besoins d’entretien sont estimés à 1,5
milliard de $ EU par an (0,2 % du PIB du continent).

Il n’existe aucune donnée fiable concernant les dépenses d’assainissement car les ménages,
pris individuellement, effectuent la majeure partie de ces dépenses. Les estimations montrent
qu’en moyenne, les pays africains investissent environ 0,5 % du PIB dans les nouvelles
installations d’assainissement, ce qui est très proche du niveau d’investissement recommandé.
La moitié des pays semblent investir moins de 0,7 % du PIB, ce qui constitue le niveau
nécessaire pour atteindre l’OMD relatif à l’accès aux services d’assainissement.

Il est difficile de déterminer le pourcentage du montant estimatif des dépenses totales dans le
secteur de l’assainissement financé par le secteur public. Les faits montrent que
l’investissement public dans le secteur de l’assainissement est négligeable, représentant 0,02

______________________________________________________________________________
% du PIB en moyenne. Il semble que les ménages financent la majeure partie des
investissements. Selon les estimations, l’exploitation et l’entretien (notamment des réseaux
d’égouts) nécessitent un pourcentage supplémentaire de 0,2 % du PIB à l’avenir.

Autant les coûts de réalisation de l’OMD relatif à l’assainissement sont élevés, autant les
avantages pour la santé sont importants. Par exemple, l’on estime que l’atteinte de l’OMD tant
pour l’alimentation en eau que pour l’assainissement en Afrique permettrait de prévenir 172
millions de cas de diarrhée par an, soit des économies estimées à 1,8 milliard de $ EU sous
forme de coûts de traitement.

(Source : AICD)

Approvisionnement en eau

L’Afrique subsaharienne est la région du monde où, sur la période 1990‐2004, le nombre de
I
gens n’ayant pas accès à l’eau potable a augmenté de 23 %. C’est la conclusion à laquelle est
parvenue une étude exhaustive menée par l’UNICEF et l’OMS, qui avait pour but d’évaluer les
progrès accomplis dans la réalisation des OMD portant sur l’accès à l’eau.

Bien qu’en Afrique subsaharienne l’accès à des sources améliorées d’eau ait été renforcé de 7
N
% sur la période 1990‐2004, le nombre réel de gens sans accès à l’eau potable provenant d’une
source améliorée a augmenté de près de 60 millions – ce qui trouve son explication dans
l’absence d’investissements dans de nouvelles infrastructures et la croissance démographique.
Une étude récemment menée sur la couverture en matière d’eau potable et d’assainissement
montre que seulement 56 % de la population subsaharienne a accès à l’eau potable – ce qui
laisse près de 340 millions sans aucun accès.

Le tableau est mitigé à travers le continent, certains pays réalisant de meilleurs progrès que
EE
d’autres – en général, les zones rurales restent à la traîne des zones urbaines en matière
d’accès à l’eau potable. Davantage d’efforts sont requis en vue d’atteindre les populations
rurales non desservies et de réduire les risques sanitaires associés à l’absence d’infrastructures
améliorées d’approvisionnement en eau potable dans ces zones.

En Afrique, des millions de femmes et d’enfants peuvent parcourir quotidiennement de
longues distances à la recherche de l’eau, ce qui constitue à la fois un fardeau physique pour
les femmes et un fardeau économique pour les pays concernés dans la mesure où les femmes,
lorsqu’elles assurent la corvée de l’eau, sont soustraites aux activités productives ; quant aux
enfants, ils ratent l’éducation qui leur est si indispensable

Selected irrigation investment indicators for Sub‐Saharan Africa (percent)

______________________________________________________________________________
I

Investment potential for dam‐based and small‐scale irrigation
N
EE

Changes from the baseline for various food‐related indicators for 2020 and 2050


______________________________________________________________________________

I
N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
Énergie

Commerce régional de l'énergie

L’Afrique subsaharienne recèle d’abondantes ressources hydroélectriques et thermiques –
mais seule une infime partie de ce potentiel de production d’électricité a été mise en valeur.
Sur les 48 pays que compte l’Afrique subsaharienne, 21 ont une capacité de production
inférieure à 200 MW, – nettement inférieure à l’échelle d’efficacité minimum – ce qui signifie
qu’ils paient un lourd tribut : les coûts atteignent 0,25 $ EU par KW, soit le double du coût des
systèmes électriques les plus importants de la région.

L’une des raisons qui expliquent cet état de fait est que les ressources énergétiques les plus
économiques de la région sont trop éloignées des principaux centres de demande et sont
situées dans des pays trop pauvres pour mobiliser les milliards de dollars nécessaires pour leur
I
mise en valeur. Par exemple, 61 % du potentiel hydroélectrique de la région sont situés dans
deux pays – la République démocratique du Congo et l’Éthiopie.

La mise en commun des ressources énergétiques dans le cadre du commerce régional de
l’électricité permettrait de réduire les coûts de l’électricité. Les pools énergie de l’Afrique
N
australe, de l’Afrique de l’Ouest, de l’Afrique de l’Est et de l’Afrique centrale, créés
essentiellement pour soutenir les efforts d’échanges d’électricité, sont à différents niveaux de
développement. Pour peu qu’ils mettent pleinement à profit les potentialités économiques, le
commerce régional permettrait de réduire les coûts d’exploitation annuels et d’extension des
réseaux électriques de 2 milliards de $ EU par an – soit environ 5 % des coûts totaux des
systèmes électriques.

Les économies proviendraient essentiellement de la substitution de l’hydroélectricité à
EE
l’électricité thermique, qui se traduirait par une réduction considérable des coûts
d’exploitation, bien que ceci nécessite un investissement initial plus important pour
l’hydroélectricité à haute intensité de capital et le transport transfrontalier connexe. La
rentabilité du transport transfrontalier pourrait atteindre 120 % pour le pool énergie de
l’Afrique australe et, d’une manière générale, plus de 20 % à 30 % pour les autres pools
énergie. En augmentant la part de l’hydroélectricité, le commerce régional permettrait
d’économiser également 70 millions de tonnes d’émissions de carbone par an.

Dans le cadre du commerce régional de l’énergie, quelques grands pays exportateurs
pourraient approvisionner un grand nombre d’importateurs d’électricité. La République
démocratique du Congo, l’Éthiopie et la Guinée seraient les principaux exportateurs d’énergie
hydroélectrique. Jusqu’à 16 pays auraient tout à gagner (d’un point de vue purement
économique) en satisfaisant plus de la moitié de leurs besoins d’électricité par le truchement
du marché régional. Les économies oscillent entre 0,01 $ EU et 0,07 $ EU par kilowattheure.
S’agissant des petits pays qui ne disposent pas de ressources hydroélectriques nationales, le
coût de la construction des lignes de transport transfrontalier serait amorti en moins d’une
année, une fois que les pays voisins auraient créé suffisamment de capacité de production
pour assurer les échanges.

Africa’s chronic power problems have escalated into a crisis affecting 30 countries. This
tolls heavily on economic growth and productivity

The entire installed generation capacity of Africa’s 48 Sub‐Saharan countries is just 68
gigawatts, no more than Spain’s. As much as one‐quarter of that capacity is unavailable

______________________________________________________________________________
because of aging plants and poor maintenance.

In Sub‐Saharan Africa, just one person in five has access to electricity. If current trends
continue, fewer than 40 percent of African countries will reach universal access to electricity
by 2050.

Per capita consumption of electricity in Sub‐Saharan Africa (excluding South Africa) averages
only 124 kilowatt‐hours a year and is falling. The rate of consumption is barely 1 percent of
that in high‐income countries. If entirely allocated to household lighting, it would hardly be
enough to power one light bulb per person for six hours a day.

More than 30 African countries are now experiencing power shortages and regular
interruptions in service, leading many to rely on very costly leased generating plants as an
emergency stopgap (see figure). Frequent power outages mean big losses in forgone sales and
damaged equipment—6 percent of turnover on average for formal enterprises, and as much
I
as 16 percent of turnover for informal enterprises unable to provide their own backstop
generation. The economic cost of power shortages can amount to more than 2 percent of
gross domestic product. For some countries, it has shaved as much as one‐quarter of a
percentage point off annual per capita GDP growth rates.

N
Africa’s power supply crisis has many underlying causes

EE

Africa’s power is very expensive to produce by global standards, yet costs could be
significantly reduced through regional trade

Twenty‐one of 48 Sub‐Saharan countries have a generating capacity of less than 200

______________________________________________________________________________
megawatts, well below the minimum efficient scale. Due to the small scale of most national
power systems and the widespread reliance on expensive oil‐based generation, the average
total historic cost of producing power in Africa is exceptionally high, at $0.18 per kilowatt‐
hour. The average effective tariff is $0.14 per kilowatt‐hour. Compare that with tariffs of
$0.04 per kilowatt‐hour in South Asia and $0.07 in East Asia.

Africa is well endowed with cost‐effective energy resources on a large scale, chiefly
hydropower; however, these tend to be located far from the major demand centers, and their
development is often beyond the means of the countries where they are found. Regional
power trade is the solution. Regional trade would make it possible to harness these more
attractive sources of energy, producing savings of as much as $2 billion each year. The
development of additional hydropower resources through regional trade would also save 70
million tons of carbon emissions annually.

But making regional power trade work is a considerable economic and political challenge, in
I
part because of the many missing links in the continental power‐transmission network. For
more details on regional power trade, see our treatment of regional integration.

Missing links in Africa’s cross‐border transmission network

N
EE

Addressing Africa’s chronic power problems and implementing regional trade will require
major spending in power infrastructure, amounting to some $41 billion per year


______________________________________________________________________________
To meet suppressed demand, keep pace with projected economic growth, and provide
additional capacity to support the rollout of electrification, 7,000 megawatts of new
generation capacity must be built each year—seven times the annual average of the last 10
years. In addition, more than 44,000 megawatts of existing generation capacity requires
refurbishment. The bulk of the new generating capacity will be needed to meet nonresidential
demands.

Raising electrification rates by a modest one percentage point each year will require
extending domestic distribution networks to reach an additional five million households per
year over the next decade. In addition, 22,000 megawatts of cross‐border transmission
capacity are needed to permit the regional pooling of energy resources. The total expansion
cost of $41 billion per year covers new investment and rehabilitation, as well as operations
and maintenance. Almost half of these spending requirements are associated with the
Southern African Power Pool. For more details on how these estimates were made, and to
make customized estimates of your own, explore the power sector spending needs model.
I

Power spending needs ($ billion a year over a decade)
N
EE

Improving the operating efficiency of power utilities through institutional reforms would
save the region $2.7 billion a year—a significant contribution to sector finance

African power utilities typically operate at a low level of efficiency. Almost a quarter of the
power they produce is lost on the distribution network as a result of technical inefficiencies
and various kinds of theft, compared with only 10 percent for a well‐run utility. Less than 90
percent of charges billed to customers are actually collected by utilities, compared with 100
percent for a well‐run utility. In countries such as Burkina Faso, Ghana, Niger, and Uganda, the
value of uncollected power bills can run as high as 1 percent of GDP. Such inefficiencies lead
to cash shortages that prevent utilities from maintaining networks, replacing parts, and
investing in infrastructure improvements.

Reforms are the key to improving utility performance (see figure). Countries that have
embraced the reform agenda, that have well‐developed power regulatory frameworks, and
that do a better job of managing their state‐owned utilities suffer far less from inefficiency
than those that have done little or nothing to fight waste. Measures that seem to have a
substantial impact on reducing hidden costs are private participation in power distribution
and (among state‐owned utilities) performance contracts that offer clear incentives for
managers to improve efficiency.

Reform measures have a material impact on hidden costs

______________________________________________________________________________
I

Reforming poorly designed power sector subsidies would recover an additional $2.2 billion
a year in investment resources for the sector
N
Power prices have risen substantially in recent years but have not kept up with escalating
costs (see figure). As a result, underpricing of power is widespread across Africa, with most
countries recovering no more than their operating costs. In the worst cases—Democratic
Republic of Congo, Malawi, and Zambia—underpricing is so serious that utilities capture less
than half of the revenues they need to operate, creating an economic burden in excess of 2
percent of GDP.

EE
Because few low‐income households in Africa are connected to the electrical grid, power
subsidies largely fail to benefit the poor. The more‐affluent households that currently receive
power are able to afford tariffs closer to cost‐recovery levels, except in countries that rely on
very costly small‐scale diesel generation. However, as regional power trade develops and
production costs drop across the board, tariffs that cover utilities’ costs would become
affordable for the majority of African power consumers.

Electricity costs and revenues by type of power system($/kwh)

______________________________________________________________________________
I

Even if inefficiencies and underpricing could be eliminated, a funding gap of $26 billion per
year would remain

N
Additional funding is needed to bridge that gap. External financing for Africa’s power sector
had almost collapsed by the mid‐1990s. In recent years, however, it underwent a broad‐based
resurgence, with simultaneous growth in development assistance from donors within the
Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development, south‐south cooperation from
non‐OECD countries, and in private participation in infrastructure, primarily for the
development of 3,000 megawatts of independent power projects, most based on thermal
EE
generation (see figure). But at just under $5 billion per year in 2007—before the onset of the
global financial crisis—external finance still falls well short of what is needed to bridge the
financing gap in Africa’s power sector.

Non‐OECD countries, particularly China, have emerged as major new power financiers in
Africa. Chinese funding is focusing on the development of some 10 large hydropower projects
that, once completed, would create 6,000 megawatts of new capacity.

While the external sources that have appeared to date are important, they are unlikely to
provide resources on the scale required. To make substantial progress on Africa’s power
sector agenda, domestic public investment will have to increase. Improving the
creditworthiness of power utilities, through the various reform measures already described,
could pave the way for these companies to access capital markets directly.

External financing commitments for the African power sector have picked up

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
EE


______________________________________________________________________________
Analysis of infrastructure in Africa (*)

Infrastructures and economic growth in Africa

Africa trails other regions in infrastructure, and that lag suppresses growth and
productivity. If Sub‐Saharan Africa could achieve the infrastructure development of
Mauritius, annual GDP growth in the region would rise by more than two percentage
points.

Benchmarking infrastructure services and prices within Africa and across other developing
regions helps identify the main challenges.

Infrastructure has been a major driver of strong economic growth in Africa in recent
years—but better infrastructure could make an even greater contribution
I

Recent improvements in information and communication technology have added as much as
one percentage point to the per capita growth rate in Africa, more than the contribution made
over the same period by ambitious macroeconomic stabilization and structural policies.

N
Not all forms of infrastructure have contributed equally to growth, however. The spread of
telecommunications has made the greatest contribution (see figure). In contrast, deficiencies
in the power sector have had a retarding effect, reducing per capita growth for Africa as a
whole by 0.11 percentage points and for Southern Africa by as much as 0.20 percentage
points. Improving Africa’s infrastructure to the level enjoyed today by the regional leader on
infrastructure, Mauritius, could add as much as 2.2 percentage points to annual per capita
growth.

EE
Changes in regional growth ascribable to changes in different kinds of infrastructure

In many countries, limitations in infrastructure, particularly power, depress productivity at
least as much as red tape, corruption, and lack of finance

According to enterprise surveys, deficient infrastructure depresses firm productivity by around
40 percent. For a subset of countries—among them Botswana, Ethiopia, and Mali—power is
the most limiting infrastructure factor, cited as a major business obstacle by more than half of
firms in more than half of countries (see figure). Poorly functioning ports and slow customs
clearance are significant constraints for Burkina Faso, Cameroon, and Mauritius. Deficiencies in

______________________________________________________________________________
broader transport infrastructure and information and communication technology are less
prevalent overall but acute in some countries, such as Benin and Madagascar.

Contribution of infrastructure to total factor productivity of firms:
I
N
EE

On several basic infrastructure indicators, low‐ and middle‐income African countries lag
behind their peers in the developing world

The gap is particularly noticeable in the density of paved roads, power‐generation capacity,
and coverage of telephone landlines. This has not always been the case. In the 1960s (for
roads), 1970s (telephones), and 1980s (power), Africa’s stocks were quite similar to those in
South and East Asia. Over time, Africa expanded its infrastructure stocks more slowly than did
other developing regions, and a gap opened (see figure).

The comparison with South Asia—where per capita incomes are similar to Africa’s—is
particularly striking. In 1970, Sub‐Saharan Africa had almost three times more electrical
generating capacity per million people as South Asia. By 2000, however, South Asia had left
Africa far behind—it now has almost twice the generating capacity per million people.
Similarly, in 1970, Africa had twice the landline telephone density of South Asia, but by 2000
South Asia had drawn even.


______________________________________________________________________________

Growth of Africa’s infrastructure stocks compared with Asia’s
I
N
EE

Infrastructure endowments vary widely within Africa

Substantial regional variations in infrastructure existed at the time of independence in the
early 1960s, particularly in paved roads, generating capacity, and telephone landlines.
Southern Africa started with relatively high endowments and achieved some of the highest
annual growth rates in infrastructure stocks over the last four decades, thereby retaining its
leading position. At the other end of the spectrum, East Africa tends to have the lowest stocks
of most forms of infrastructure.


______________________________________________________________________________
There is also a striking diversity in outcomes across these different groups of countries (see
table). The infrastructure gap between Africa’s middle‐income countries and the continent’s
poorer countries is to be expected, as is the lag associated with the fragile states. However,
especially striking is the extent to which resource‐rich countries lag behind others in their
infrastructure endowment, despite their greater wealth. In recent years, resource‐rich
countries have devoted their additional wealth not to infrastructure development but to
paying off foreign debt. Poor governance (corruption) may also prevent the transformation of
natural‐resource wealth into infrastructure.

Intraregional perspective on Africa’s infrastructure deficit
I

N
The prices paid by African consumers for infrastructure services are exceptionally high by
global standards

The tariffs charged in Africa for power, water, road freight, mobile telephone service, and

EE
Internet access are several multiples of those paid in other parts of the developing world (see
table). There are two explanations for Africa’s high prices. First, the cost of providing these
services is genuinely higher in Africa than elsewhere owing to the small scale of production,
the use of suboptimal technologies, and the inefficient use of resources by ineffective
management. Second, the high prices reflect the general absence of competition and
inadequate price regulation.

Power provides the clearest example of a sector where costs are genuinely higher in Africa
than elsewhere. Many small countries rely on small‐scale diesel generation that can cost up to
$0.40 per kilowatt hour in operating costs alone—about three times as high as countries with
larger power systems (above 500 megawatts), which typically are hydro‐based. On the other
hand, high road freight tariffs in Africa can be traced to excessive profit margins made possible
by the absence of competition—often because of restrictive market regulation.

Africa’s high‐cost infrastructure

______________________________________________________________________________

Infrastructure spending needs

To build the infrastructure it needs to support growth and meet stated development goals,
Africa will have to spend about $93 billion a year for a decade. Two‐thirds of that sum would
I
be for investments; the remaining third for maintenance.

AICD has produced detailed estimates of infrastructure spending needs for individual sectors
and countries in Africa, taking into account new investments, the refurbishment of existing

N
infrastructure, and ongoing operations and maintenance.
To close the infrastructure gap with other regions, meet the Millennium Development Goals,
and achieve national targets in Sub‐Saharan Africa within 10 years, an annual investment of
$93 billion would be required

A study recently conducted in 24 African countries shows that the poor state of infrastructure
in Sub Saharan Africa – its electricity, water, roads, and information and communications
EE
technology (ICT) – cuts national economic growth by 2 percentage points every year and
reduces business productivity by as much as 40 percent.

“Africa’s Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation” finds that Africa has the weakest
infrastructure in the world, but ironically Africans in some countries pay twice as much for
basic services as people elsewhere. This study argues that well functioning infrastructure is
essential to Africa’s economic performance and that improving inefficiencies and reducing
waste could result in major improvements in African’s lives.

The necessary expenditure represents 15 percent of the region’s gross domestic product (GDP)
and more than twice the amount estimated by the Commission for Africa in 2005. About two‐
thirds of the total represents capital expenditure to fund the creation of new infrastructure
assets and the rehabilitation of existing assets that have fallen into disrepair (see table). The
remaining one‐third is needed to operate and maintain new and existing infrastructure. The
power sector accounts for 40 percent of the required investment. Transport and water each
account for a further 20 percent.

Only a portion of the needed investment is presently being made. The difference between
needed investment and present investment is the “financing gap,” which is discussed in the
next section. The spending needs presented here are based on the objective of redressing
Africa’s infrastructure backlog within 10 years. If the horizon is extended, reaching the targets
may become less daunting.

Overall infrastructure spending needs for Sub‐Saharan Africa

______________________________________________________________________________

I
The burden of meeting these spending needs looks daunting for the region’s low‐income
countries, particularly the fragile states

In dollar terms, the investment estimates divide fairly evenly among the middle‐income

N
countries, the resource‐rich countries, and low‐income non‐fragile states (each group requiring
investments of $28 to $30 billion a year), whereas the needs of the low‐income fragile states
are somewhat lower in absolute terms, at $13 billion a year.
Nevertheless, the burden that the required spending represents for the national economy
varies hugely across the country groups. Whereas middle‐income and resource‐rich countries
would have to spend no more than a challenging but potentially feasible 10 to 13 percent of
GDP to close the infrastructure gap, low‐income non‐fragile states would need to spend an
EE
implausible 23 percent of their GDP, and fragile states an impossible 37 percent of GDP.

Economic burden of infrastructure spending needs for different types of countries

______________________________________________________________________________
I
N
EE

The largest spending needs are those of the power sector in Sub‐Saharan Africa—a
staggering $41 billion per year

Investment on this scale would allow the refurbishment of more than 44,000 megawatts of
existing generation capacity, plus the addition of 7,000 megawatts of new generation capacity
each year—about half in the form of multipurpose hydropower development. By contrast,
over the past decade, the region added just 1,000 megawatts of new capacity each year, not
even enough to keep up with population growth. The investment would also develop 22,000
megawatts of cross‐border transmission capacity to support regional trading of power, a
necessary step in achieving economies of scale in power generation. It would also allow for the
creation of five million new household connections each year, the minimum needed for
electrification rates to continue to grow at the modest pace of one percentage point each
year. Almost half of the power spending needs relate to the Southern African Power Pool,
which is Africa’s largest power market, centered in South Africa (see table).

Power spending needs, by African region

______________________________________________________________________________

The annual spending needs of the region’s water and sanitation sector are $22 billion, much

I
The MDG target for access to safe water is 75 percent of the population by 2015, versus 58
percent in 2006. The target for improved sanitation is 63 percent of the population by 2015,
versus 31 percent in 2006. To meet the water goal, the number of people with access to safe
water must increase by 28.9 million a year, compared with recent progress of just 10.5 million
a year. To meet the sanitation goal, the number of people with access to improved service

N
would need to increase by 34.5 million a year, compared with recent progress of 7.1 million a
year. About two‐thirds of the estimated spending is needed to extend services to unserved
populations and to rehabilitate existing networks (see table).
Although the size of the unserved population is smaller for water than for sanitation, the
associated investments are greater for water because of the high cost of extending water‐
supply networks, whereas improved sanitation often can be provided through less costly on‐
site facilities. Estimates assume that the relative prevalence of different water and sanitation
EE
modalities—such as boreholes, standposts, and private taps—would remain broadly similar to
what they are today.

Water and sanitation spending needs

Africa’s transport sector requires some $18 billion in annual investment, almost half for
operations and maintenance

This is the level of spending required to give the region the connectivity it will need to ensure
future growth (see table). The challenges are great. Connecting capital cities with international
border crossings and major deep‐sea ports, for example, would require a 100,000 kilometer
network of regional roads, and significant upgrades have to be made to associated regional rail
corridors and major port and airport hubs.

Extending the regional road network by a further 150,000 kilometers would allow provincial
capitals and cities of 25,000 or more people to be linked to their respective national capitals.

______________________________________________________________________________
An additional 600,000 kilometers would provide all‐season road access to populations living on
good agricultural land. In urban areas, an additional 46,000 kilometers of paved roads are
needed to improve mobility within cities. The costs of improving regional, national, and rural
road connectivity are roughly equal in magnitude, ranging from $2.4 to 2.9 billion each year.

Transport spending needs
I

N
At $9 billion annually, Africa’s need for investment in information and communication
EE
technology is relatively modest, and most of the needed investment could be provided by
the private sector

Private investment has been the driving force behind the exponential growth of mobile
telephone access in Africa over the last decade. As a result of those investments, the
percentage of Africa’s population living within range of a global systems mobile signal rose
from 5 percent in 1999 to 57 percent in 2006, as more than 100 million Africans became
mobile‐telephone subscribers. Strong market‐driven investment in the sector is expected to
continue; however, modest levels of public subsidy will likely be needed to achieve universal
access in rural areas. A public subsidy of $0.2 billion per year over the next decade would be
needed to extend a voice signal to the estimated 5 percent of the population who are not
commercially attractive to serve, concentrated mainly in sparsely settled areas.

An annual subsidy of similar magnitude would be required to provide a modest public‐access
broadband service using WiMAX technology. Higher‐speed broadband access, however, would
entail substantial development of fiber‐optic cables around the continent. Private finance
would likely be forthcoming for the segments with the highest traffic. But the more ambitious
the aspirations for extending connectivity, the larger the component of public finance
required.

To develop the economically viable irrigation schemes necessary to boost Africa’s
agricultural productivity, the continent requires $3.3 billion per year in investment


______________________________________________________________________________
At present, only six million hectares of African farmland are irrigated—less than 20 percent of
the total cultivated area deemed to be suitable for irrigation from an agro‐ecological
perspective. Furthermore, because of poor maintenance and mismanagement, irrigation
systems on a quarter of the presently irrigated area have fallen into disuse and would require
significant rehabilitation efforts to be returned to service.

An additional 7 million hectares could be opened up to irrigation if spending could be raised to
$3.3 billion a year. The bulk of this would be small‐scale irrigation with the remainder
consisting of large‐scale schemes associated with large or existing dams.

In general, average economic returns on small‐scale schemes (at 25 percent) are substantially
higher than those on large‐scale schemes (16 percent). These results are highly sensitive to the
assumed costs of irrigation development: $3,000 per hectare for water distribution from
existing large‐scale dams, and $2,000 per hectare for on‐farm investment under small‐scale
schemes. If higher costs are assumed, the number of viable hectares declines sharply. In most
I
cases, irrigation is found to be viable only when high‐revenue‐yielding crops are grown,
generating at least $2,000 per hectare per year. The areas in which irrigation investments can
be justified simply to grow staple food crops are small.

Irrigation spending needs

N
EE
Spending Patterns

Africa’s infrastructure spending needs are substantial. Africa already spends $45 billion a year
on infrastructure, two‐thirds of which is domestically financed from taxes and user charges.
Most financing for capital investment is obtained from external sources. By taking a detailed
look at government budgets, as well as financial accounts of the various state‐owned
enterprises and quasi‐governmental entities that provide infrastructure services, AICD has
traced the patterns of expenditure in recent years, providing a detailed picture of how current
resources are being used.

Africa is already spending $45 billion a year to address its infrastructure needs—about half
of the amount needed to achieve its goals and to catch up with other developing regions

Existing spending on infrastructure in Africa is higher than previously thought, once off‐budget
spending (including state‐owned enterprises and extra‐budgetary funds) and external
financing (aid and private participation in infrastructure) are taken into account (see table).
Some countries already spend more than enough in some infrastructure sectors to cover the
needs identified by AICD.

Existing spending on Africa’s infrastructure needs

______________________________________________________________________________

Middle‐income countries spend the most on infrastructure in absolute terms, but low‐
I
income states make the greatest effort relative to the size of their economies

In absolute dollar terms, by far the highest spending takes place in the few middle‐income
countries of the region, reflecting their much larger purchasing power. Fragile states, by

N
contrast, spend very little in absolute terms. But when spending is expressed as a percentage
of gross domestic product, the two country groups spend similarly, devoting around 5 to 7
percent of their GDP to infrastructure (see figure).
The nonfragile low‐income states, by contrast, make a substantially larger effort, devoting
some 9 percent of GDP to infrastructure. Overall, capital spending on infrastructure absorbs 4
percent of Sub‐Saharan Africa’s GDP. Compare this with China, which by 2006 had raised
infrastructure capital spending to 14 percent of GDP.
EE

The economic burden of existing infrastructure spending in different types of countries

Domestic public finance contributes about half of total infrastructure spending—and much
more in middle‐income countries—with the balance coming from external sources


______________________________________________________________________________
The public sector is by far the region’s most important source of finance for infrastructure. In
most African countries, domestic public sector resources—comprising tax revenues and user
charges—contribute about half of total infrastructure spending. The balance is provided by a
range of external sources, including official development assistance from the countries of the
Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development, official finance from non‐OECD
countries (such as China, India, and countries in the Middle East), and private participation in
infrastructure.

Most external finance is used for investment—broadly defined to include asset rehabilitation
and reconstruction—and in most cases does not provide for operation and maintenance. In
recent years, private participation in infrastructure has been the largest source of external
finance, followed by aid. In the middle‐income countries of the continent, domestic public
sector resources account for the bulk of spending on all types of infrastructure.

Clear patterns of specialization can be found among sources of external finance
I

Across sectors, private participation in infrastructure is strongly concentrated on information
and communication technology, which offers the highest commercial returns of any
infrastructure sector. OECD aid has tended to focus on public goods with high social returns,
notably roads and water. Much of the finance obtained from non‐OECD countries has gone to

N
energy and, to a lesser extent, railways that serve industrial and mining sites.
Across countries, private participation in infrastructure has been strongest in the middle‐
income countries and resource‐rich countries, where the ability to pay for services is greatest.
Non‐OECD finance has been concentrated in resource‐rich countries, where the links between
infrastructure and resource development are strong. Most OECD aid flows are to other low‐
income states with limited domestic resources but fairly good institutional capacity. The fragile
states get relatively little aid from any source.
EE

Sources of financing for capital investment in infrastructure

Efficiency Gap

Africa already devotes significant resources to infrastructure, but not all of those resources are
being effectively used. Large sums are lost to inefficiency. By comparing Africa with
international best practice, AICD quantified the major inefficiencies and identified policy
measures to redress them. Key measures include prioritizing budget allocations, raising budget

______________________________________________________________________________
execution, improving revenue collection, reducing overstaffing, increasing cost recovery,

ensuring adequate maintenance, and reducing distribution losses. Those steps could cut
Africa’s infrastructure spending requirements by $17 billion each year.

Africa’s infrastructure providers waste $7.5 billion a year on inefficiencies such as
overstaffing, distribution losses, undercollection of revenue, and poor maintenance.

State‐owned enterprises typically retain more employees than they need, often in response to
political pressure to provide jobs. This issue affects state‐owned enterprises across the board,
but it is particularly prevalent among state‐owned telecommunications companies. The excess
wage bill associated with such companies amounts to some $1.3 billion each year (see table).

African power and water utilities suffer distribution losses that are twice as high as
international benchmarks, costing the region $1.8 billion a year. Part of the problem is poor
network maintenance, which leads to physical leakage. Poor network management permits
I
clandestine connections and various forms of theft.

Power and water utilities also face serious problems in collecting their bills, largely because of
social and political impediments to disconnecting services, which have produced a culture of
nonpayment. Under collection of fuel taxes is also problem in the road sector, amounting to

N
$2.9 billion a year.
Maintenance of infrastructure assets is often deferred to the point where the assets must
undergo rehabilitation, which is usually much more costly than preventive maintenance. While
it is hard to document the precise extent of under maintenance, the fact that 30 percent of
Africa’s infrastructure assets are in need of rehabilitation illustrates the scope of the problem.
For roads alone, under maintenance leads to excess capital spending of $1.4 billion a year, as
countries continually reconstruct the same assets rather than create new ones.
EE

Potential gains from improving operational efficiency of infrastructure service providers

Owing to social and political pressures, infrastructure services are typically sold at prices well
below the full capital costs of production, a habit with a price tag of $4.7 billion a year.

Two‐thirds of African power and water utilities apply tariffs that comfortably cover operating
costs, but only one‐fifth of the same utilities fully recover their capital costs. If operating costs
were fully recovered by all African power and water utilities, the savings would be $2.5 billion
a year. Full recovery of operating costs and capital costs would save $4.7 billion a year. Raising
tariffs to cost‐recovery levels is easier said than done, as it raises a host of social and political
challenges.

Under pricing is also apparent in the road sector. There has been a widespread movement
toward the use of fuel levies and taxes as indirect user charges. For this tactic to work,

______________________________________________________________________________
however, fuel levies must be set high enough to cover the maintenance costs of the road
network. Comparing existing fuel levies with the levels needed to assure road maintenance
makes it possible to estimate the extent of under pricing. Even if fuel levies were fully
collected, only one‐third of African countries would fully cover maintenance costs. It is
estimated that the overall revenue shortfall amounts to $0.6 billion a year.

Potential gains from improving cost recovery from infrastructure services
I

Although funding for infrastructure falls short, some countries appear to be over‐funding
some forms of infrastructure by as much as $3.3 billion a year.

N
Although funding for infrastructure is generally in short supply, some forms of infrastructure
are overfunded. Most of the overspending is found in countries that have maintained state
ownership of telecommunications monopolies. By ruling out competition in this dynamic
sector, monopolies deprive the state of future tax revenues from expanded business activity
while using scarce public resources for activities that can be provided by the market. Transport
is the other sector that presents opportunities for budget reallocations, particularly in low‐
income countries that overinvest in the construction of road networks while under investing in
EE
their maintenance.

Potential gains from more efficient allocation of existing infrastructure spending

More thorough execution of capital budgets could raise effective investment in
infrastructure by $1.9 billion a year.

Central governments often have trouble spending the sums they budget for infrastructure. On
average, African countries leave unspent one‐quarter of their capital budgets and one‐third of
their recurrent budgets for a given fiscal year (see table). Poor timing of project appraisals and
late releases of budgeted funds, often because of procurement problems, prevent resources
from being used within the budget cycle. Delays in fund releases are also associated with poor
project preparation, leading to changes in the terms agreed with contractors in the original
contract (deadlines, technical specifications, budgets, costs, and so on). In other cases,
budgeted funds are reallocated in response to political or social pressures. Historically, the

______________________________________________________________________________
roads sector is where budgets have been the most consistently under spent—sometimes by as
much as 60 percent.

If the bottlenecks in capital execution could be resolved, countries could increase their capital
spending by about 30 percent without any increase in current budget allocations. The
associated savings of $1.9 billion suggests that the resolution of these planning, budgeting, and
procurement challenges should be central in the region’s reform agenda.

Budget variation ratios for capital spending in infrastructure sectors, by country type
(averages)

I

N
More efficient use of existing resources could release an additional $17.4 billion in finance
for infrastructure each year.
More efficient use of existing resources could release an additional $17.4 billion in finance for
infrastructure each year. The largest potential gains ($7.5 billion a year) come from addressing
operating inefficiencies, notably better road maintenance and greater efficiency of power

utilities. The second‐largest potential gain ($4.7 billion a year) would come from raising user
EE
charges for infrastructure services. Better pricing of power would produce the greatest
dividends. The next‐largest saving ($3.3 billion a year) is to be had through better allocation of
existing resources across sectors, as resources are transferred from areas that seem to be
overfunded to those that are clearly underfunded. Finally, raising budget‐execution ratios
through improvements in the public expenditure framework could capture a further $1.9
billion a year.

Potential gains from higher efficiency and the remaining funding gap

Funding Gap

______________________________________________________________________________

Maintaining present levels of expenditure on infrastructure and eliminating operational
inefficiencies will not be enough to provide all of the funding needed to meet Africa’s
infrastructure needs. How much more will be required to close Africa’s infrastructure funding
gap? AICD identified the countries and sectors that are likely to face the highest deficits. For
countries where the funding gap appears insurmountable, low‐cost technologies offer
alternative ways of meeting infrastructure targets.

A substantial infrastructure funding gap would remain even if all inefficiencies were
eliminated

About three‐quarters of the $31 billion annual gap relates to capital spending and the
remainder to operations and maintenance. The power sector accounts for about $23 billion of
the gap; water supply and sanitation for an additional $11 billion per year. AICD found no
financing gap for information and communication technology or transport, except in fragile
I
states.

The bulk of the financing gap appears in the resource‐rich and low‐income countries.
Considered as a percentage of gross domestic product, the shortfall is least burdensome (2 to
4 percent of GDP) for the resource‐rich and middle‐income countries. The nonfragile low‐
N
income countries as a group face a shortfall of 9 percent of GDP, and the fragile states an
insurmountable 25 percent.

Closing the infrastructure financing gap will require raising additional funds, but that is only
part of the answer. Lower‐cost technologies and other efficiencies will be important as well.

All major sources of additional finance for African infrastructure have been affected by the
global financial crisis
EE

External finance for Africa’s infrastructure was buoyant in the years leading up to the global
financial crisis of 2008/09, swelling from $4 billion in 2002 to $20 billion in 2007. Over the
same period, domestic public finance in many countries also benefited substantially from
strong economic growth and high prices for natural resources.

However, the current global financial crisis has put the brakes on all of these sources of
finance. Domestic public finance, the largest source of funding today, shows little scope for
increase. Historical evidence suggests that infrastructure spending suffers disproportionately
during periods of fiscal compression. Aid may not grow as promised—indeed, it may shrink—
because of budget pressures in OECD countries, although strong replenishments of multilateral
agencies in the mid‐2000s, as well as natural lags in implementing projects financed under the
recent scale‐up, could help to cushion the blow.

The future of finance from non‐OECD donors is also unclear, as the economies that have been
providing these resources have slowed with the economic recession. Private participation in
infrastructure is highly sensitive to the downturn in global markets, as the credit crunch makes
it increasingly difficult for deals to reach financial closure. Finally, local capital markets have so
far contributed little to infrastructure finance, except in South Africa. They could eventually
become more important in some of the region’s larger economies, but it will take some time
to implement the necessary financial market reforms.


______________________________________________________________________________
By extending the time horizon to between 13 and 30 years, most countries could meet
current infrastructure targets within their present budget envelope—but only if efficiency
were improved

The spending needs presented here are based on the objective of redressing Africa’s
infrastructure backlog within 10 years. To meet this target, middle‐income, resource‐rich, and
low‐income nonfragile states would need to increase their current infrastructure spending by
50 to 100 percent, while the fragile states would need to increase theirs by an impossible 350
percent.

Extending the time horizon for the achievement of these goals could make the targets more
affordable. But how long a delay would be needed to make the infrastructure targets
attainable without increasing existing spending envelopes? The answer is that the time horizon
would need to be lengthened from 10 years to more than 30 years for most of these countries
to be able to meet the targets with their existing resource envelopes (left‐hand panel in
I
figure). For the low‐income fragile states, the existing resource envelope would still need to be
doubled, even with a 30‐year delay.

If countries are able to capture the various efficiency gains identified, the story is altogether
different. In this case, the time horizon would need to be lengthened from 10 years to 13 years
N
for middle‐income countries, from 10 years to 20 years for resource‐rich countries and
nonfragile low‐income countries, and from 10 years to 30 years for low‐income fragile states
(right‐hand panel in figure). These findings underscore the long‐term importance of addressing
efficiency issues, since the associated benefits compound over time.

Variation in resources needed to meet infrastructure targets as time horizon lengthens
EE

By adopting lower‐cost technologies that allowed more people to be served more quickly,
savings of about 30 percent could be achieved for some types of infrastructure

There are alternative ways of meeting any infrastructure target, with each alternative having a
unique profile of cost and quality. Where budgets are constrained, policy makers face a choice
between providing a high level of service to a few people or a lower level of service to a
broader cross‐section of the population. Critical trade‐offs must be considered. For these
reasons, one should not jump to the conclusion that a high level of service is always in a
country’s best interest.

The range of cost‐saving technologies varies considerably across sectors. A wide range of
alternatives exists for water and roads, for example. Unfortunately, for the power sector,

______________________________________________________________________________
where the greatest investment is needed, there are few alternatives for reducing the cost of
generating electricity.

In the case of water and sanitation, the cost of achieving the Millennium Development Goals
drops by 30 percent with greater reliance on lower‐cost technologies. This saving could be
achieved, for example, if all additional people served in urban areas were reached by public
standposts and improved latrines rather than piped water and flush toilets, and if all additional
people served in rural areas were reached by boreholes and traditional latrines as opposed to
standposts and improved latrines. In the case of roads, the cost of reaching regional and
national connectivity targets could be reduced by 30 percent by adopting lower standards for
trunk roads. This saving could be achieved, for example, if a single‐surface‐treatment road in
fair condition were substituted for an asphalt road in good condition.

Poverty and Inequality

I
Coverage of infrastructure services is lower in Africa than in other parts of the world and is
skewed in favor of affluent households. Millions of poor households in Africa lack access to
even the most basic infrastructure services, and universal access to modern services is 50 years
away in most countries. AICD examined the extent to which African households can afford to
pay for modern infrastructure services and whether African governments can afford to

N
subsidize services for those who cannot afford them.
The extent of coverage of modern infrastructure services in Africa is very low by global
standards—and it has not expanded since 1990

The extent of coverage of modern infrastructure services in Africa is very low by global
standards—and it has not expanded since 1990 (see figure). Two divergent trends contribute
to this picture: service coverage in rural areas has seen modest improvements, while in urban
EE
areas it has actually declined. Overall, less than half a percent of the continent’s population is
being newly covered each year by piped water and flush toilets, but around 1.5 percent are
gaining new access to electricity and cellular telephony. These rates are well below the
demographic growth rate of 2.5 percent per year for the region. As a result, universal access to
modern infrastructure services is at least 50 years away for most countries.

Stagnating coverage of network infrastructure services in Africa, 1990 to 2005


______________________________________________________________________________
The coverage of modern infrastructure services is almost entirely confined to more affluent
households (see figure). In urban areas, a significant share of the unserved are those who fail,
often but not always because of inability to pay, to hook up to nearby networks, suggesting
that raising coverage is not only a matter of rolling out infrastructure networks, but also of
addressing demand‐side barriers that prevent take‐up of services. These include high and
unaffordable connection charges, as well as legal impediments such as tenure status that
prevent households from investing in home improvements.

For the poorest 60 percent of households, coverage of most modern infrastructure services is
below 10 percent
I

N
EE
Although nonpayment is rampant, the costs of utility services do appear to be affordable for
the relatively affluent households who enjoy access

Some 40 percent of people connected to infrastructure services do not pay for them, including
20 percent of the most affluent customers. Does this simply reflect a culture of nonpayment,
or are there genuine problems of affordability? The real cost of providing subsistence
consumption of water or electricity typically ranges from $2 to $8 a month. The vast majority
of people in Africa’s middle‐income countries should fully be able to afford bills at this level. So
should the relatively affluent minority that today enjoys access to infrastructure services in
Africa’s low‐income countries. But a large share of the population in Africa’s low‐income
countries would struggle to afford such bills.

The average African household of five persons has a monthly budget of less than $180 (falling
to $60 for the poorest quintile). At least half of this modest budget is spent on food, but a
significant portion of the remainder—$15 to $30 per month—is spent on infrastructure
services (see figure).

______________________________________________________________________________
Infrastructure services absorb more of household budgets as incomes rise
I

Tariffs for power and water services are heavily subsidized in most African countries, yet
these subsidies largely bypass the poor, who are not even connected to services
N
On average, power tariffs recover only 75 percent of full costs, and water tariffs only 64
percent. The resulting implicit service subsidies amount to as much as $3.9 billion a year, or 0.6
percent of Africa’s gross domestic product, divided evenly between power and water. These
subsidies, which benefit only the small group of affluent customers with access to service, are
less equitable than other types of social expenditures (see figure). Expanding the same levels
of subsidy to the entire population as access was expanded would be fiscally unsustainable for
most countries.
EE

One‐time capital subsidies to overcome barriers to service connection would be less costly in
fiscal terms and potentially more equitable than consumption subsidies. Connection subsidies
would also improve social welfare. Households without access to utility services pay prices that
are much higher than utility charges for inferior substitutes. As a result, their consumption is
severely rationed.

Electricity and water subsidies do not reach the poor

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
Those without access to infrastructure services rely largely on traditional solutions that are
cheap but often risky or inferior. The adoption of intermediate options is surprisingly low

With networked infrastructure services unavailable or unaffordable, millions of African

EE
households continue to resort to alternatives. These traditional solutions—wells, unimproved
latrines, kerosene lamps—are not only the most widespread forms of infrastructure service in
Africa, they are also the fastest growing (see figure).

Intermediate (or second‐best) options—such as public standposts for water supply, improved
latrines for sanitation, and street lighting to provide basic neighborhood illumination—can
provide significantly higher levels of service than traditional solutions but at a substantially
lower cost than the more modern services. But the prevalence of these second‐best solutions
is surprisingly low in Africa. Even where they exist they tend to cater more to the higher‐
income groups than to other segments of the income distribution. There are significant
challenges in increasing the coverage of second‐best alternatives, particularly those that have
the characteristics of public goods, making them less commercially attractive to provide and
more complicated to operate and administer.

Distributional incidence of alternative water and sanitation services

______________________________________________________________________________

The business‐as‐usual approach to expanding service coverage in Africa does not seem to be
I
working—a major rethinking is needed

Most African countries have pursued universal access by providing heavily subsidized first‐best
options such as piped water and electricity. This approach has tended to bankrupt and
N
debilitate sector institutions without bringing about any significant acceleration of coverage.
And the associated public subsidies have largely bypassed the needy. Few services and
countries are expanding coverage at rates high enough to outstrip urbanization and
demographic growth.

Turning this situation around will require four changes to service expansion. First, expanding
coverage is not the same as expanding the network. Demand‐side barriers such as high
connection charges and legal tenure must also be addressed. Second, unnecessary subsidies
EE
for household services should be removed to improve utilities’ cost recovery and to ensure
that they become or remain able to invest in service expansion. Third, utility subsidies must
become much better targeted to avoid waste and accelerate service expansion. Fourth, there
is a need for realism about the level of service that households can afford to pay and that
governments can afford to subsidize. Greater emphasis should be placed on second‐best
solutions.

Institutional Reform

New roads, power plants, and irrigation systems will not yield lasting results without the right
institutions and regulations. Sound sector policies, effective regulation, and greater
competition are needed to ease Africa’s infrastructure constraints. Access, service quality, and
operational efficiency—all are easier to achieve when relevant institutions function as they
should. AICD examined various institutional models in use in Africa, efforts to strengthen
institutions that affect infrastructure, and the effect of those efforts on the performance of
providers of infrastructure services.

Africa’s institutional framework for infrastructure is no more than halfway along the path to
best practice

While almost all African countries have embarked on institutional reforms, on average no
more than 50 percent of good institutional practices have been adopted. The variation in
performance across countries is great, with the most advanced countries (such as Kenya)
scoring around 70 percent and those farthest behind (such as Benin) scoring 30 percent.

______________________________________________________________________________

There is a reasonably strong correlation within countries between the quality of infrastructure
institutions and the quality of institutions as a whole. Nevertheless, some countries do well on
infrastructure despite broader governance limitations, and vice versa. Within countries,
progress with institutional reform in one infrastructure sector is no guarantee of progress in
another. This suggests that sector‐specific constraints may be as important as country‐specific
constraints. It also points to the potential for greater cross‐fertilization of experiences across
sectors within a country.

Overall, institutional development in the utilities sector is well ahead of that in the transport
sector, with the telecom sector besting them both (see figure). Across all countries and
sectors, the greatest progress has been in reforms that can be accomplished with the stroke of
a pen—that is, through legislation. By contrast, regulation in Africa is still rudimentary, with
government interference continuing to undermine regulatory independence in many
countries. Governance of state‐owned enterprises lags behind other areas of institutional
I
reform, and the limited progress that has been made shows up primarily in improvements to
internal managerial practices as opposed to the strengthening of external market disciplines.

Private sector participation in infrastructure has had a difficult history in Africa, but in some
sectors it has led to significant investment and performance improvements
N
The extent of private sector participation varies significantly across sectors, and the lessons
learned must be nuanced accordingly (see table). Whereas some sectors display a significant
degree of private sector participation leading to positive outcomes (mobile telephony, power
generation, airports and ports), results in other sectors have been mixed (roads, power, and
water supply). A relatively high percentage of private sector contracts have been prematurely
cancelled, particularly for power and water. In all infrastructure sectors, contract negotiation,
monitoring, and enforcement have proven more time‐consuming and difficult than expected.
EE

Despite difficulties, there have been considerable gains from private participation. A higher
degree of private sector involvement is associated with higher labor productivity, though the
link is statistically significant only in the case of electricity and ports, and somewhat higher
cost‐recovery ratios. In telecommunications, the countries with above‐average private
involvement display higher access both in the fixed and mobile segments of the market. And
more extensive private involvement in ports is associated with above‐average technical
efficiency.

Overview of African experience with private sector participation in infrastructure

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
Reforming governance of dominant state‐owned enterprises is a high priority, and incentive‐
based performance contracts and external audits appear to be effective measures

State ownership of utilities is more prevalent in Africa than in any other world region—hence

the importance of institutional reforms that focus on improving governance of state‐owned
enterprises. The track record so far has been modest, with only limited success in achieving full
EE
corporatization (which would include establishing limited liability and introducing rate of
return and dividend policies). Only the telecom sector can be reported as a success story, with
electricity and water lagging behind.

The most prevalent corporate governance reforms have been the introduction of boards of
directors (even if the size tends to be either too small or too large compared to international
standards), selection of board members through a competitive process rather than direct
appointments by line ministries, and the introduction of independent directors. Among the
most effective governance reforms—in terms of their impact on enterprise performance—
have been performance contracts with managerial incentives and independent external audits.

Links between selected governance reforms and performance indicators

______________________________________________________________________________

I
Developing independent regulatory agencies in Africa has been challenging, and to date
there is little evidence of a positive impact on performance

The countries of the region rank low on regulatory independence across all sectors, confirming
that the standard international models of infrastructure regulation have not fit well in Africa.
N
Most Sub‐Saharan regulatory agencies are embryonic, short on funding and, in many cases,
lacking in qualified personnel. Budgets vary considerably but tend to be modest, ranging from
less than $300,000 to about $3,000,000 for electricity. Staffing also varies widely, from one or
two people to a couple of dozen.

Evidence on the links between the introduction of an independent regulator and
improvements in sector performance is weak overall (see table). A significant positive impact is
discernible only in telecommunications. In water, where state‐owned enterprises still
EE
predominate, countries with an independent regulator perform no better than those without.

Links between performance indicators and the presence or absence of regulation

The infrastructure reforms undertaken across the continent in the 1990s yielded generally
positive results

The reform package implemented in the 1990s included market restructuring, private
involvement (up to and including privatization), independent regulation, and enhanced
competition. Beneficial outcomes from these reforms often have gone unacknowledged and
underappreciated. But this set of reforms proved more difficult to apply in Africa than in other
regions. One finds in Africa numerous failures to implement, or implement fully, the policy
package, renegotiations or cancellations of contracts with private providers, outcomes below
expectations, and a high degree of official and public skepticism that the application of the
standard package was producing (or even could produce) the desired results. It is widely
believed that a good part of the explanation for this situation lies in the relative weakness of

______________________________________________________________________________
the African institutions that guide and oversee infrastructure sectors and firms, public and
private.

Urbanization

The urbanization of Africa promises great economic benefits, but so far the pace of
urbanization has outstripped the delivery of infrastructure services. Roads are choked, power
is unreliable, and sanitation is poor. Significant investments are needed to make cities more
productive and to ensure decent living conditions for growing urban populations. Poorly
functioning land markets, inadequate land‐use planning, and the weak financial base of most
African cities are big parts of the problem.

Africa is urbanizing fast, a change that can benefit rural and urban areas alike

Africa is urbanizing fast, a change that is beneficial for rural and urban areas alike. Today, 66
I
percent of Africa’s population lives in rural areas, the vast majority several hours travel time
from a mid‐sized city (see table). But with urban growth rates of 3.9 percent per year, this
situation is changing rapidly. By 2020, some 60 percent of Africa’s population will be
urbanized.

N
Urban centers contribute to national economic growth by increasing individual, firm, and
industry productivity through agglomeration economies, by increasing household welfare
through social mobility and access to health services and education, and by promoting positive
institutional change. Proximity to cities is critical to making the transition from subsistence to
commercial agriculture, for increasing rural incomes, and for achieving convergence in living
standards.

As is typical in the early phases of urbanization, urban household incomes are almost twice as
EE
high as rural incomes. This differential mainly reflects the higher productivity of urban areas,
which, though home to just one‐third of Africa’s population, account for 80 percent of its gross
domestic product.

Spatial distribution of Africa’s population by type of country and settlement

Significant investments are needed to make cities productive and to ensure decent living
conditions for growing urban populations


______________________________________________________________________________
Restrictive zoning policies and a shortage of affordable plots serviced by infrastructure
networks have excluded the poor from urban development in many of Africa’s cities, leaving
them in underserviced slums. According to UN‐Habitat, as much as 70 percent of Africa’s urban
population resides in slums, and from 1990 to 2001 the slum population grew at 4.4 percent a
year, faster than the urban population. That growth has caused coverage rates for all urban
services to decline.

African cities are growing quickly but at relatively low levels of density (less than 5,000 people
per square kilometer) compared to many large cities in Asia (more than 20,000 people per
square kilometer), which places them at a cost disadvantage when it comes to infrastructure
development. With the cost of expanding infrastructure networks highly sensitive to
population density, the cost of a decent package of urban household infrastructure services
can range from $300 to $1,000 per capita in large cities (see table).

Inadequate transport networks prevent the development of rural‐urban linkages that stand to
I
benefit both urban and rural residents.

The capital costs of rolling out infrastructure networks are highly sensitive to population
density
N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
I
N
EE

Local jurisdictions lack the fiscal and financial base needed to fund the required
infrastructure investments

Decentralization has increased the responsibilities of cities, but not their powers and
incentives to raise revenues. While trunk infrastructure remains the responsibility of the
central government, cities are responsible for solid waste, sewerage, drainage, and lighting.
But municipal budgets remain pitifully small in most African cities. Transfers from central
governments or direct financing have become the most important source of funding for local
infrastructure, but their unpredictability hinders long‐term projects and planning.

On the revenue side, local governments have limited tax authority, and most of the collected
revenues are transferred to the national treasury. In rural areas, investments are increasingly
financed by centralized funds that channel earmarked central government and donor
resources to rural infrastructure. These include rural water funds (90 percent of countries),
rural electrification funds (76 percent), and rural telecommunication funds (29 percent).


______________________________________________________________________________
Municipal budgets are minimal in most African cities
I

Malfunctioning land markets and inadequate land‐use planning at the local level further
constrain the development of urban infrastructure

N
In many African countries, land institutions are still incipient. Land ownership is made difficult
by the extreme centralization of procedures, the costs of titling, and the rapid depletion of the
central government’s land reserves. Limited land supply and high prices affect location
decisions and exclude low‐income households from the official land market. The difficulty (or
impossibility) of obtaining a secure title to land hinders business development and the
installation of new firms. The resistance of land owners and the lack of registries also make it
difficult for cities to raise revenues on urban land.

EE
Because of their top‐down approach and poor implementation, urban planning and master
plans have lost their meaning in many African cities. Urban dynamics are seldom correctly
foreseen, and in most cases politics determines the location of infrastructure and other major
developments. To be efficient and useful, planning should be flexible, participatory, and
indicative (rather than overly specific). Its horizon should be 10 to 15 years. Urban reference
maps should lay out major roads and city services, the areas for urban expansion, and the
reserves for amenities. Planning should check sprawl, enhance densification, prevent
development in precarious environmental zones, and enhance the delivery of affordable
serviced land. Ideally, planning should be rooted in participatory strategies and linked to local
and central budgets.

Regional Integration

Regional integration can help Africa meet its infrastructure challenges. Presently, Africa’s
fragmentary infrastructure networks isolate smaller countries and prevent them from
harnessing efficient large‐scale technologies and participating more successfully in the global
economy. The integration of physical infrastructure is a precondition for deeper integration
of the continent, a development that would allow countries to realize economies of scale.
Reaping the benefits of integration will require Africans to solve some daunting institutional
problems.

With many small, isolated economies, Africa’s economic geography poses particular
challenges for the development of infrastructure


______________________________________________________________________________
Africa’s fragmentary infrastructure networks isolate smaller countries and prevent them from
harnessing efficient large‐scale technologies. Regional integration is essential to reducing
Africa’s high infrastructure costs.

Africa’s economic geography, with its many small isolated economies, presents its own unique
challenges. The best way to overcome these challenges is through regional integration,
allowing the region to participate more fully in the global economy.

For regional integration to be a success, countries must start small. This allows them to build
upon their successes, which in turn will make it possible to think globally and link Africa to
more external markets. One other factor that must be appreciated is that the benefits may
not always be evenly distributed. To counteract this, countries must be prepared to
compensate the least fortunate, allowing the region as a whole to develop.

The benefits of regional integration can be seen across all aspects of infrastructure networks.
I
For example, in ICT and power, integrated regional infrastructures provide economies of
scale, which results in substantial reductions in production costs.
• Continental fibre‐optic submarine cables could reduce internet and international call
charges by up to 50%;
• Regional power pools, where countries are able to share the most cost effective

N
energy resources, would mean a potential reduction in energy costs of around US$2
billion a year.
Regional collaboration in transport and water would allow for the optimal management and
development of cross‐border public goods. Examples of such public goods are road and rail
corridors for landlocked countries, and regional airports and seaports.

There are institutional challenges to be met in order to achieve these benefits. One of the key
EE
issues is building a political consensus. It is often the case that the political obstacles can
usurp the economic benefits. This is down to the high level of trust required to achieve
regional infrastructure – especially when it comes to dependence on ones neighbors for key
resources.

Sub‐Saharan Africa has 48 countries, most with small populations. More than 20 countries
have a population of fewer than five million. Economies are also very small: 20 countries have
a gross domestic product of less than $5 billion. Small scale makes it difficult for governments
to fund the large fixed costs associated with infrastructure development. In addition, borders
further complicate infrastructure development: Africa’s 15 landlocked countries depend on
their neighbors for access to global markets; 60 African river basins are shared by more than
one country, and half of these cross three or more national jurisdictions.

Infrastructure sharing addresses the problems of small scale and adverse location, increasing
the scale of infrastructure construction, operation, and maintenance—particularly important
in the information and communication technology (ICT) and power sectors. Joint provision
reduces costs, pools scarce technical and managerial capacity, and creates a larger market.
Airports and seaports that are organized as regional hubs can become large enough to attract
airline and shipping services from beyond the continent.

Some regional infrastructure investments, such as many types of transport investments,
provide public goods or facilitate access to a common pooled resource, as with water resource

______________________________________________________________________________
management for irrigation and other uses. Coordinated management and investment allows
countries to get the most out of such multi‐country infrastructure systems.

Completing the network of submarine cables linked to a regional fiber‐optic network is
essential to bring down the costs of international voice and Internet connectivity in Africa.

Africa’s national telecommunication networks are still poorly integrated with each other and
with the rest of the world (see figure). The average cost of an international fixed‐line
telephone call within Sub‐Saharan Africa is $1.23 a minute, almost twice the cost of a call to
the United States ($0.73 a minute). Intraregional call traffic is barely 113 million minutes,
compared with intercontinental call traffic of 250 million minutes.

Almost two‐thirds of the countries in Africa remain unconnected to the global network of
submarine cables and continue to rely on satellites for international telecommunications,
including Internet access. As a result, they face high prices for international telephone calls,
I
and charges for dial‐up and broadband Internet are at least twice as high as they are for those
with access to submarine cables. Moreover, transmission capacities are low, at only 3 bits of
bandwidth per capita, versus 24 bits for countries with access to submarine cables.

Securing access is not enough, however. Unless there is competition on the international
N
gateway that serves any particular country, the full benefits of the technology will not be
captured by consumers.

Several projects are already under way to complete the loop of submarine cables around
Africa, at an estimated value of $1.8 billion. Most are commercially sponsored and privately
financed. The cost of completing the nascent fiber‐optic network connecting the capital cities
of Sub‐Saharan Africa and the main submarine cables is modest at $316 million, based on a
cost of around $27,000 per kilometer. Rapid progress is already being made.
EE

Missing links in the regional ICT backbone network

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
EE
Regional power trading would yield energy cost savings of about $2 billion per year

Twenty‐one of 48 Sub‐Saharan countries have less than 200 megawatts of generation capacity,
well below the minimum efficient scale. So they pay a heavy penalty: costs reach $0.25 per
kilowatt‐hour, compared with $0.13 per kilowatt‐hour in the region’s larger power systems.

Although Africa is well endowed with hydropower and thermal energy resources, only a small
fraction of its potential has been developed. Some of the region’s most cost‐effective energy
resources are far from major centers of demand in countries too poor to raise the billions of
dollars needed to develop them.

The goal of pooling energy resources to achieve scale economies in power sector development
led to the formation of regional power pools in Southern, West, East, and Central Africa. If
pursued to its full economic potential, this system of regional power trading could save the
region around $2 billion a year in energy costs. The saving would be achieved by increasing the
share of hydropower in the continent’s power portfolio from 36 percent to 48 percent,
displacing 20,000 megawatts of thermal generation in the process and eliminating 70 million
tons each year in carbon emissions (8 percent of Sub‐Saharan Africa’s anticipated emissions
through 2015).

If regional trade is fully pursued, some 16 African countries (mainly small countries that now
rely on thermal energy) would end up importing more than half their power, thereby saving
between $0.02 and $0.07 per kilowatt‐hour. Their power needs would be met largely by
exports from major hydro‐based producers: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia,

______________________________________________________________________________
Guinea, and Sudan. However, to fully develop their power export potential, each of these
countries would have to make massive investments on the order of $1 billion per year over the
coming decade. In addition, some 22,000 megawatts of cross‐border transmission capacity
would be needed to underpin regional exchanges (see figure).

Missing links in the regional power transmission network
I
N
EE

Africa’s international road network has missing links, while administrative and regulatory
barriers block existing connections

A number of critical sea corridors connect the continent’s 15 landlocked countries to major
seaports via a combination of roads and railways. Some $200 billion a year in imports and
exports move along these corridors, barely 10,000 kilometers long. Although 70 percent of the
roads in these corridors are in good or fair condition, regulatory and administrative hurdles
continue to inflate costs and prolong delays for freight movements through these strategic
arteries. In addition, road freight tariffs in Africa can be several times those found elsewhere,
because restrictive regulation and cartelization have led to very high profit margins in the
trucking industry.

Despite the reasonably good condition of roads, freight moves at the speed of a horse and
buggy, owing to long delays (10–30 hours) at border crossings and ports. Member countries
have begun to organize corridor associations to lower nonphysical barriers to transit by
establishing one‐stop integrated border posts and improving ports and custom administration.
Looking beyond export corridors, intra‐African trade—which currently stands at around $10
billion a year—depends on having well‐functioning road links within Africa. The Trans‐African
Highway system comprises nine main corridors extending just over 50,000 kilometers. In mid‐

______________________________________________________________________________
2008, almost half of the network was in poor condition. Fully a quarter of the network had
either an earth surface or no formed road at all. Most of these missing links are in Central
Africa (see figure).

Missing links in the regional road network
I
N
EE

The development benefits of Africa’s numerous transboundary river basins can be fully
harnessed only through regional cooperation, which has proved challenging to achieve

Africa has more than 60 transboundary river basins, almost half of which are shared by three
or more countries (see figure). Under the circumstances, regional coordination in water
management is essential, for the simple reason that what happens upstream can benefit or
harm neighbors downstream. Hydropower and water storage infrastructure can provide
cheaper electricity and balanced water flows, but excessive extraction or pollution upstream
can damage agriculture and contaminate drinking water.

Regional coordination on the basis of established international public law governing water
sharing can ensure equitable distribution of the benefits of common pool water resources. For
upstream neighbors, apart from greater regional stability, the benefits include sharing the
large investments in hydropower or irrigation infrastructure.

But transboundary water resource management requires strong institutional commitment.
Between the 1960s and 1980s, many countries created river basin arrangements, such as the
Senegal River Development Organization in 1972, the Gambia River Development Organization
in 1978, and the Niger River Commission in 1964, later transformed into the Niger Basin
Authority. But nearly three decades later, with few exceptions, the transboundary

______________________________________________________________________________
organizations are still in the emergent stages. Some of their challenges have been waning
political commitment, poor cooperation, management and technical difficulties, armed conflict
and political instability, and poorly defined goals or insufficient capacity for proposed plans. As
donor support dwindled, basin organizations also lacked the financial backing to carry out their
programs.

Africa’s many transboundary river basins
I
N
EE

Reaping the benefits of regional integration poses major political and institutional
challenges.

Building a political consensus. Political obstacles can trump the best economic case. Regional
infrastructure involves a high level of trust between countries, not least because of the implied
dependence on neighbors for key resources such as water and energy.

Establishing effective regional institutions. Regional institutions must facilitate agreements and
compensation. Africa has an extensive and overlapping architecture of regional political and
technical bodies; however, their efficacy is constrained by limited technical capacity and
powers of enforcement.

Setting priorities for regional investments. Effective sequencing and priority‐setting for
regional projects has been elusive. Political, economic, and spatial approaches to priority‐
setting have all been widely discussed.


______________________________________________________________________________
Developing regional regulatory frameworks. Physical integration of infrastructure networks

will be effective only with harmonized regulatory frameworks and administrative procedures
that allow the free flow of services across national borders.

Facilitating project preparation and cross‐border finance. The complexity of regional
infrastructure projects makes them costly and time‐consuming to prepare. This is particularly
true when projects are large in relation to the size of the host economy and essentially depend
on financing from downstream beneficiaries.

I

N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
Sanitation

At current rates of progress, Africa is unlikely to meet the Millennium Development Goal
(MDG) to cut in half the share of the population that lives without improved sanitation.

Encouraging advances have been made in some areas, notably in expanding access to
improved latrines. But more than 60 percent of Africa’s population still lacks access to modern
sanitation. To meet the international sanitation goal, the region would have to allot an
estimated 0.9 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) annually to the sector—more than
two‐thirds for new investments and the rest for maintenance. Explored different policy options
for widening access to improved sanitation and determined that solutions must be closely
tailored to each country’s circumstances.

Today, a third of Africans still practice open defecation, and half rely on traditional latrines,
the health effects of which are largely unknown
I

Nearly 540 million people, more than 60 percent of Africa’s population, currently do not have
access to safe sanitation, defined as an improved latrine or septic tank. Meeting the MDG for
sanitation—which calls for halving by 2015 the percentage of the population that did not have

N
improved sanitation in 1990—appears a daunting task.
Traditional latrines—a heterogeneous collection of facilities with poorly understood health
impacts—are the most prevalent sanitation option in Africa, used by half of the population—
urban and rural, rich and poor alike. Traditional latrines are also the fastest growing form of
sanitation in Africa, reaching an additional 2 to 3 percent of the population each year.

Improved sanitation, on the other hand, is mainly the prerogative of wealthier urban residents.
EE
Flush toilets, most connected to septic tanks rather than to sewers, remain a luxury, as do
improved latrines, which have made headway in just a handful of countries. The prevalence of
open defecation has finally started to fall, but coverage of traditional latrines is growing much
faster than any of the improved alternatives.

Patterns of access to sanitation in Africa

The sanitation challenge takes a variety of forms in different countries, as well as across
urban and rural settings—these differences call for different policy responses

Three main patterns of access can be observed (see figure).
a) The first case is prevalence of open defecation, which is the situation in rural areas of
countries such as Côte d’Ivoire and Ethiopia, where more than half of the population follows
this insanitary practice.

______________________________________________________________________________
b) The second case is prevalence of traditional latrines, the situation in both urban and rural
areas in many countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Nigeria.
c) The third case is prevalence of improved sanitation in urban areas—whether latrines or
septic tanks—though usually with a sizable minority continuing to rely on traditional latrines.
This pattern is typically found in higher‐income countries such as Gabon and South Africa.
Each of these situations is distinct and demands a very different policy response.

Patterns of access to sanitation in Africa across different countries and settings

I
N
EE

Where open defecation remains prevalent, the policy focus needs to be on education to
encourage people to build and use a latrine

Populations accustomed to open defecation may require a substantial change in cultural
values and behavior to use a fixed‐point facility. Without such change, people may not use
latrines at all or may use them in a way that undermines the potential health benefits.
Therefore, behavior change through hygiene education programs must be the central policy
focus in these settings.


Infrasstructures en
al Business School
S 77
7/90
________________ __________________________________ ___________
___________
____________
__
It is important to understan nd what stimmulates peo ople’s interesst in hygien
ne and sanittation.
Healtth is one faactor, but convenience, dignity, an nd social staatus may prrovide a strronger
motivvation. Oncee behaviors are recognizzed by a commmunity, theere is a presssure to con
nform,
and ssocial structuures and lead ders begin to
o contribute.

A succcessful exam mple is the R Regional Health Bureau’ss Sanitation A Advocacy Campaign, laun nched
in 2003 in southeern Ethiopia. That campaaign increase ed latrine covverage from 13 percent of the
population to 78 percent in jjust two yeaars (see figure). This exp perience sho ows that relaatively
modeest governm ment expend diture to pro
omote hygie ene education can raise awareness and
leverage significant household investmen nt in tradition
nal latrines.

Ethio opia’s successsful experien nce of getting people ontto the first ru ung of the saanitation ladder
I
N
EE

Wherre traditionaal latrines arre already prrevalent, the e central pollicy challengge is to encourage
peop ple to upgrad de to improvved models

Wherre unimprovved latrines are alreadyy prevalent, upgrading to t improved d models req quires
addreessing both d demand and d supply consstraints. The limited affordability of improved faccilities
suggeests a demaand‐side problem and th he need for subsidies. In n urban areas, slum dw wellers
often n do not own n their land oor house and d so have po oor incentivees to invest in improvingg their
livingg conditions.

Lack of capacity to build impproved latrin
nes suggestss a supply‐sid de problem in the houssehold
consttruction secttor and the n need for trainning and pro omotional wo ork. Buildingg latrines dem mands
skills not widely available, an
nd small entterprises ofteen do not have the resoources to deevelop
new sskills or adop pt new techn nologies. Botth supply and demand faactors likely play a role, b but by
startiing on the supply side, policy‐make
p rs can minim
mize the neeed for a subssidy and pro
omote
cost‐reducing inn novations.

A good examplee is the Natiional Sanitattion Program m in Lesoth ho, established 20 yearss ago.
Households direcctly employ private latrrine builderss trained un nder the pro ogram, whicch has
increased nation nal sanitationn coverage from 20 pe ercent of thhe populatio on to 53 percent.
Madaagascar and Rwanda haave also en njoyed consiiderable succcess at swiitching peop ple to
impro oved latriness (see figure)).
Interrnational Bu
______________________________________________________________________________

Countries with successful experience in getting people to switch to improved latrines

Where improved sanitation is already prevalent, the policy issue is how to extend it to the
lower‐income population and move toward network sewerage in high‐density areas
I

The prevalence of improved sanitation among higher‐income groups suggests that the
necessary technologies are already supplied in the local market but that affordability remains
an issue. There may be a need to work further on the development of lower‐cost technologies

N
or to consider the possibility of capital subsidies.
But on‐site sanitation also has its limits. As urban population grows, water consumption also
increases, creating the challenge of handling large volumes of wastewater. Also, with
population densities rising in urban areas, the availability of land now constrains the use of
latrines (particularly the simpler types) that require rotation of sites.

Sooner or later, Africa’s burgeoning cities will need to develop more extensive sewerage
EE
networks; however, conventional waterborne sewerage, at a per capita cost of $400, is far
beyond the reach of all but the most affluent neighborhoods, and the public subsidies that
would be required to support such sewerage networks in poorer areas are equally
unaffordable.

The cost of sewer networks will have to be reduced through technological innovation. One
lower‐cost alternative developed in Latin America is condominial sewerage systems, which
promise cost savings of up to 65 percent. Senegal—one of the most successful African
countries at expanding high‐end on‐site sanitation (see figure)—has piloted condominial
sewerage in the periurban areas of the capital, Dakar. By 2009, the Dakar system was to
furnish 60,000 households (270,000 people) with on‐site sanitation and to support 160
condominial schemes serving 130,000.

Senegal’s successful experience in expanding use of improved forms of sanitation


______________________________________________________________________________

Household budgets will likely remain the main source of funding for sanitation investments
I
in the foreseeable future

There is very little reliable data on the extent to which governments devote budgetary
resources to sanitation, but the limited evidence suggests that public finance is relatively small.
N
Given the fact that Africa’s sanitation facilities are almost overwhelmingly on‐site, households
appear to be the main protagonists in financing sanitation infrastructure.

On average, about 0.5 percent of GDP is currently being invested in new sanitation facilities by
all parties. Some countries, particularly Madagascar and Rwanda, appear to have made rapid
progress, investing as much as 1 percent of GDP. Half of the countries of the region appear to
invest less than 0.7 percent of GDP (the level recommended to meet the MDG for sanitation),
with Namibia, Lesotho, Kenya, and Zambia spending less than 0.2 percent of GDP.
EE


______________________________________________________________________________
Water Resources

Africa’s complex hydrological variability complicates water resource management. Even
though the continent’s ample water resources are underutilized, conflicts among water uses
abound. Because rainfall is exceptionally variable, storing rainwater is critical—yet storage
facilities remain inadequate. Similarly, because most of Africa’s major rivers span national
borders, international cooperation is essential to resolving conflicts and removing
inefficiencies in water use. There is a need to invest heavily in both transboundary river‐basin
organizations and in water‐storage facilities to ensure that water is available when and where
it is needed. Africa’s already difficult hydrology will likely become even more challenging with
climate change.

Africa’s economic development is held back by episodes of extreme drought and flooding
that hydro‐climatic variability will only get worse with climate change.

I
Rainfall across much of the continent is variable and unpredictable, both between and within
years. High seasonal variability compounds these effects, causing droughts and floods. Some
220 million people are annually exposed to drought in Africa. And more than 1.5 million were
affected by floods in 2007. Runoff is extraordinarily low—only half of that in Australia, North

N
America, Europe, and Asia, despite similar levels of average precipitation.
This pronounced hydrological variability is expected to increase with climate change. The
greatest impact is anticipated in the semiarid margins of the Sahara and the central part of
southern Africa.

The macroeconomic impacts of hydrological variability are considerable. For example, water‐
related shocks depress Mozambique’s gross domestic product growth by more than one
EE
percentage point each year. In Zambia, variability of rainfall lowers the country’s agricultural
growth by one percentage point each year and will cost the country $4.3 billion in lost GDP
over 10 years. Because rain‐fed subsistence agriculture is the dominant livelihood, droughts
and floods significantly affect food security across the region.

Hydroclimatic variability in Africa (percent change)


______________________________________________________________________________
I
N
EE

Additional water storage infrastructure is needed to manage the subcontinent’s hydrological
variability and to fully harness water resources in support of development

Artificial water storage of adequate capacity is needed to ensure reliable water supply during
droughts and to retain water during periods of flooding. Storage capacity in Africa remains
underdeveloped, with average per capita storage standing at about 200 cubic meters per year,
a full order of magnitude below countries in other developing regions (see figure).

Water can be put to a wide range of competing economic and environmental uses, and the
development of a storage capacity must reflect an awareness of those uses. In the past,
irrigation and hydropower were the main drivers for dam construction in Africa, but the trend
today is toward multipurpose water storage systems that will result in more‐efficient water
usage and generate larger economic returns on investments.

Water storage infrastructure need not be large in scale. Small‐scale options are also relevant to
the achievement of water security and can help the rural poor to cope with water‐related
shocks to agricultural production. These include off‐stream reservoirs, on‐farm ponds,
networks of small reservoirs, groundwater storage, and storage through a root zone with a
variety of water‐harvesting techniques.

______________________________________________________________________________

Water reservoir storage per capita, selected countries, 2003
I

Water resources are underutilized in Africa across the board, yet conflicts between water
uses are common

N
Underdevelopment of water resources leads to underutilization of economic potential.The
continent has the lowest water withdrawal per capita in the world (about 170 cubic meters)—
owing to hydrological variability, underdeveloped water infrastructure, and inefficient water
resources management. East Asia and the Pacific use about three times the water per person;
North America, Europe, and even the water‐scarce Middle East withdraw more than four times
as much (see table).
EE

Low usage is the rule in all the major water‐using sectors. Africa’s agriculture remains almost
entirely rain fed, with less than 10 percent of cultivated land equipped for irrigation. Despite
chronic shortages and the high costs of power across Africa, less than 10 percent of the
region’s low‐cost hydropower potential has been exploited. Notwithstanding the Millennium
Development Goals, less than 60 percent of Africa’s population has access to drinking water.

Even though water is underutilized, conflicts between water uses are a problem. This is
particularly true where different water uses demand alternative management regimes, such as
hydropower versus irrigation, or irrigation versus environmental uses.

Water availability and withdrawal across regions

______________________________________________________________________________

The prevalence of large, transboundary river basins complicates the task of developing large‐
I
scale infrastructure and managing water‐related conflicts

More than 60 rivers flow across national boundaries in Africa, and many countries share the
same basin. In fact, international river basins cover more than 60 percent of the continent, and
N
virtually all of the region’s rivers cross several borders: the Nile has 10 riparians, the Niger
nine, the Senegal four, and the Zambezi eight.

Competing claims for economic and environmental uses of water have been asserted over
many of the region’s lakes (for example, lakes Victoria and Tana) and river basins. Yet greater
cooperation could easily generate more resources to share. The system‐wide yield of water in
the Nile could likely be increased by several percentage points a year if cooperation led to
water storage upstream and coordinated reservoir operation in the arid plains downstream. To
EE
optimize economic productivity and environmental sustainability, rivers are best managed at
the basin level. This situation poses major management challenges, however, as noted in the
next section.

Africa’s international river basins

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
EE
Sound water‐management institutions are needed at the national and basin levels to
optimize water use and develop hydraulic infrastructure

Growing demands for water generate competition over water use. But water management
institutions across the continent are weak and fragmented. Agencies with authority over a
particular economic sector often make uncoordinated decisions about water allocation and
use, which leads to inefficiency and degradation of the resource.

Full realization of Africa’s water potential and the optimal allocation of water among various
sectors require the right institutional arrangements at the national level, including capable
water management organizations, provisions for public participation in water management
decisions, water rights regimes, and tailored incentive systems for efficient water allocation
and conservation.

Many African countries are beginning to develop national institutions for water management,
but robust institutions capable of discharging the full range of tasks posed by water resources
management have yet to be developed, except in a few countries. Without sound national
water resource institutions, moreover, it is hard to see how the even greater challenge of
transboundary water resource management can be met at the basin level.

With only a few exceptions—notably the Niger and the Senegal rivers—transboundary river
basin organizations are still in their emerging stages and remain relatively weak. They suffer
from a host of problems, including waning political commitment, poor cooperation,
management and technical difficulties, armed conflict and political instability in member

______________________________________________________________________________
states, poorly defined goals, weak incentives for regional cooperation, and insufficient capacity
to carry out plans.

I
N
EE

______________________________________________________________________________
Water Supply

Universal access to safe water remains elusive in Africa, and the continent is unlikely to meet
the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) for access to improved sources of water.

What is the price tag for moving closer to universal access?

To meet the MDGs, Africa would have to spend $15 billion annually, far more than the current
spending of $3.6 billion. Underpricing of water and the operating inefficiencies of utilities
deprive the region of about $3.7 billion in revenues each year and prevent water from being
made available to the poor. But even with improvements in efficiency and cost recovery, the
water sector will still confront a sizable funding gap. That gap could be narrowed through the
use of simpler forms of water supply and by reallocating subsidies so that they benefit only the
neediest households.

I
The population covered by improved water supply has not expanded in recent years. Indeed,
it has declined in urban areas.

Only 58 percent of Africa’s population enjoys access to safe drinking water, well below the
N
target rate of 75 percent spelled out in the MDGs. In both urban and rural areas, the absolute
number of people depending on unsafe surface water continues to grow.

Overall, wells and boreholes are by far the fastest growing source of improved water. In urban
areas, coverage of piped water delivered through household connections has fallen markedly
over the last 15 years because of rapid population growth (see table). But at close to 40
percent, it is still the single largest source of water supply. Overall, about two‐thirds of the
urban populace depends on water provided by utilities.
EE

The lower coverage of standposts, compared with water piped directly into households, is
particularly striking, given the relatively low cost of standposts and the pressure to expand
services rapidly. But coverage of boreholes has risen, reaching about 24 percent of the urban
population, while reliance on surface water, at 7 percent, has hardly changed.

Rural populations continue to rely on surface water (the practice of 40 percent of rural
dwellers), while boreholes are the principal improved source, accounting for an additional 40
percent. Access to piped water and standposts is very low. In many countries, less than 1
percent of the rural population receives piped water.

Evolution of water supply coverage in Africa, by source


______________________________________________________________________________
Because it would cost $15 billion a year to meet the Millennium Development Goal for
water, and because only half that much is plausibly available, some countries may need to
take a closer look at lower‐cost technologies.

Capital investment needs for new infrastructure and rehabilitation of existing assets are
estimated at $9.7 billion a year, 1.5 percent of the region’s gross domestic product.
Maintenance requirements stand at $5.3 billion a year, 0.8 percent of the region’s GDP. For a
handful of countries—including Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Madagascar, Benin, and
Niger—the cost of meeting the MDGs would be in excess of 7 percent of GDP, well beyond
what could be feasibly attained. If these countries are to make any headway in meeting the
MDGs, they may need to consider adoption of lower‐cost technologies, such as standposts and
boreholes, which would substantially reduce the cost of meeting the target.

African countries already devote $3.6 billion a year to meeting the MDG targets; 60 percent of
this is domestically funded (see table). Recovery of the $2.7 billion lost each year to
I
operational inefficiencies and poorly targeted subsidies would add to the public investment
pool. With regard to capital investment, donors have a big role to play, particularly in low‐
income countries. Financiers from outside the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and
Development also play a role in the low‐income countries, while private finance for water
supply infrastructure is negligible.
N
Even taking existing financing and recovery of inefficiencies into account, about half of the
financing needed to meet the MDG for water is lacking.

Existing financial flows to water supply and sanitation
EE

Underpricing of water costs $1.8 billion a year in subsidies that do not seem to be reaching
the poor, yet cost‐recovery prices appear affordable for most existing customers

Underpricing can cause utilities to capture less than 40 percent of the revenues they need to
operate, imposing an economic burden of 0.9 percent of GDP in the worst cases (see figure).
The associated deficit debilitates the financial position of the utility, deferring investment and
thus delaying expansion of the service area.

Average water tariffs stand at around $0.67 per cubic meter, two‐thirds of the cost‐recovery
threshold. Tariffs are already relatively high by developing‐country standards, but they cover
only operating costs, which can be as high as $0.60 per cubic meter in Africa, owing to
inadequate selection of technologies, low population density, country risk premiums, and the
high cost of inputs.

______________________________________________________________________________
Capital costs have been almost entirely subsidized by the state or by donors, but subsidies are
highly regressive, especially in urban areas. Since most poorer households are not connected
to the water‐supply network, they cannot benefit from subsidies embedded in prices for piped
water.

Tariffs representing full capital‐cost recovery (equivalent to a monthly utility bill of around
$10) should be affordable for half of the population in Africa—and about 40 percent in the
low‐income countries. Most of the remaining 60 percent would be able to afford bills of
around $6 a month.

The economic burden of underpricing water can run to 0.9 percent of GDP
I

N
EE
The operational inefficiencies of water utilities cost the region $0.9 billion a year, holding
back service expansion and maintenance.

Inefficiencies are divided between distribution losses and revenue undercollection. Average
distribution losses stand at 35 percent, far above the world norm of 20 percent, with all
countries affected to some degree. Average collection ratios at 90 percent still fall short of
best practice. In the worst cases—such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, and
Zambia—these combined inefficiencies can create an economic burden of 0.7 to 1.0 percent of
GDP (see figure).

An additional burden comes from overemployment. African utilities report an average of five
employees per 1,000 connections, more than twice the developing‐country benchmark.
Utilities with high levels of operating efficiency tend to be more solvent and are able to expand
connections to new customers twice as fast as those that do not.

There is mixed evidence as to whether the institutional reforms of recent years have
significantly improved operational efficiency. Overall, private sector contracts have led to
noticeable improvements in some aspects of efficiency and have accounted for almost 20
percent of the increase of household connections in the region—twice the amount that would
be expected given their market share of only 9 percent. However, introducing reform is easier
said than done. The rate of cancellation of private sector contracts in Africa, at 29 percent, has
been much higher than elsewhere.

The economic burden of water utility inefficiencies can reach 1 percent of GDP

______________________________________________________________________________

I
In rural areas, the central challenge is to reduce reliance on surface water through a network
of sustainable water access points. Here, recent institutional reforms seem to be working.

About half of the region’s countries are reducing the share of the rural population that relies

N
on surface water. (The best cases—Lesotho, Mozambique, and Uganda—are managing to shift
2 to 3 percent of the rural population away from this option each year.) But in the other
countries, the share of the rural population reliant on surface water is actually increasing.
Even in countries that have succeeded in expanding rural access to improved water sources,

concerns about sustainability persist. On average, one in three rural water points needs
rehabilitation. Factors contributing to the prevailing situation of undermaintenance are
institutional weaknesses in the wake of decentralization, inadequate attention to technology
EE
choice, low pump density, restrictive maintenance systems, and the lack of a supply chain to
adequately maintain complex machinery.

Key measures taken by the countries that have been most successful in switching rural
populations from surface water include an explicit rural water policy to guide interventions in
the sector, a map of rural water points to enable monitoring of functionality, cost‐recovery
policies to improve the financial sustainability of systems, a dedicated central budget funding
source for rural water, and a water agency to spearhead the implementation of rural water
projects.

Relationship between Rural Reform Index and success in expanding rural service coverage

______________________________________________________________________________
I

N
EE

EViews 7 Users Guide I

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

EViews 7 Users Guide I

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Infrastructures en Afrique EENI The Global Business School 1/90

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

Technologies de l'information et de la communication

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

Sub‐SSaharan Africa is the seccond‐largest mobile tech hnology marrket after Asia and the fastest

least one phone in their hou

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

execution, improving revenue collection, reducing overstaffing, increasing cost recovery,

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com

International Business EENI www.reingex.com