SA Services Firms Making Inroads into the Kenyan Market

South African firms have in the last 2 years increased investments into Kenya, hoping to be second time lucky in a market that previously proved difficult to penetrate and effectively buried a number of corporate SA giants.  The major difference this time round is that SA investors have changed their strategy, in favour of mergers and acquisitions while doing away with the setting up of new establishments. 

Previously South African firms appeared to concentrate their investments in the retail distribution services sector- mostly consumer goods through home grown giants such as MetroCash and Carry, Shoprite, Wool Worths etc. Recently however, investments have cut across nearly all sectors including banking, capital markets and ICT.

In the ICT sector, SA service providers entering the Kenyan market include MTN Business, which acquired UUNet Kenya (to become MTN Business Kenya) and Telkom South Africa (with a SA Government shareholding of 39.8%) and which has gained a strong local presence through a series of direct and indirect acquisitions of local firms such as a local satellite data transmission services company, Afsat Communications and Internet Service Provider Africa Online in a series of complex transactions that also involved other companies.

In financial services, Nedbank one of South Africa’s largest banks, entered Kenya through the Eco bank-Ned bank alliance where their customers can use any or both of the banks’ services without any changes in shareholding structure. The alliance is the largest banking network in Africa, with more than 1000 branches in 33 countries since Ecobank, has a presence in more African countries than any other bank in the world.  The alliance offers clients a 'One Bank' experience across Africa and the arrangement enables Nedbank, which had operations in only five African countries, to extend its footprint to the 29 countries where Ecobank has operations without moving in directly. ingenious.

Interestingly Ecobank Transnational International (ETI), is a public limited liability company which was established as a bank holding company in 1985 under a private sector initiative spearheaded by the Federation of West African Chambers of Commerce and Industry with the support of ECOWAS. In the early 1980’s the banking industry in West Africa was dominated by foreign and state-owned banks as there were hardly any commercial banks in West Africa owned and managed by the African private sector. Ecobank was founded with the objective of filling this vacuum and today its the leading African bank with offices in 29 countries and consisting of 746 branches. 

Economics and Politics of Electricity- The Case of SA

Today, 25 African countries face an energy crisis and the World Bank has recently stated that only 26 per cent of the Sub-Saharan Africa population has access to electricity, in spite of various interventions by international agencies to address the continents' energy power crisis. In fact the number of African households without electricity access is projected to rise from 590 million in 2008 to 700 million in 2030, following the growing population in the continent against the background of inefficient power systems.

The irony is that the African continent is well endowed with energy resources but most remain untapped. To combat the energy crisis, many countries have had to contract expensive diesel-fuelled emergency generation plants – in some cases, the estimated annual costs are equivalent to more than one percentage point of growth domestic product (GDP). 


Some solutions to this problem include: boosting cross-border power trade, improving existing utility companies, improving access to electricity on a large scale, while helping countries chart low-carbon growth paths. A major portion of the challenges require massive infrastructure investments, however there are some opportunities for distribution and supply companies.  However for the private sector to participate, the economics and politics of electricity need to be understood- as shown in this piece on South Africa. 

----------------------------------------------------------

World Bank decision is crucial for South Africa's economic future

ENERGY FORECAST 2010

The World Bank’s decision, due on Thursday this week, whether to give Eskom a $3.75-billion loan - the bulk of which will be used to complete its 4 800MW Medupi coal-fired power station in Limpopo, with the balance to be invested in wind and concentrated solar power projects - could have a telling influence on the country’s economic development in the immediate years to come. If activist environmental groups have their way, disputed global long-term environmental benefits will get preference over domestic short- to medium-term economic necessity.

The background facts are that the present-day South African economy is two-thirds larger than it was a decade and a half ago on the back of substantially increased electricity needs, to which supply has not kept up. To achieve the growth rates going forward, which are required to ensure social stability, sustained job creation and poverty alleviation, increased generating capacity is needed urgently.

With the development of alternative renewable electricity still some years away from affordability and sustainability, coal seems to be South Africa’s only hope to keep the economy going during the bridging period until alternatives come on stream in any meaningful way. Fact is that for now, coal remains South Africa’s most abundant and affordable energy source.

The Medupi plant is a first of its kind which will be using the most efficient and lowest emission coal-fired technology available.

Minister of Finance Pravin Gordhan, in a recent article, wrote: “If there were any other way to meet our power needs as quickly or as affordably as our present circumstances demand, or on the required scale, we would prefer technologies that leave little or no carbon footprint. But we do not have that luxury if we are to meet our obligations to our people and to our broader region. South Africa generates more than 60% of electricity produced in sub-Saharan Africa.”

Activists still say “no”

To the environmental lobby groups, these arguments are not good enough. Staging a protest in front of the World Bank’s Pretoria offices 10 days ago, environmental watchdog Earthlife said the loan would be unhealthy for people in the vicinity of the proposed Medupi power station. It also would impact negatively on the country’s carbon footprint.

Earthlife organiser Makoma Lekalakala said that for environmental and social reasons, the World Bank must not grant the loan to Eskom.

“If the World Bank grants the loan, that means greenhouse [gas] emissions are going to increase and at the moment, South Africa is the highest greenhouse emitter in Africa. In that way, we will be doubling our emissions,” said Lekalakala.

Coal is not the future of generating energy in South Africa, which has abundant renewable power resources. Demonstrators also sarcastically awarded Eskom the Fossil Fool Award for even having considered the loan.

The narrow focus of activist groups, however, does not always achieve the most desired results in the long run. In the Untied States, today the world’s largest economy, still relies for more than 50% of its power needs on coal-generated electricity, with a massive negative impact on the global environment.

This picture, however, could have been dramatically different if it were not for the 'successes' of the activist lobby against nuclear power in the 1970s, which stunted the development to its full potential of that much 'cleaner' electricity option.

The fact that South Africa has plans in place to reduce the expansion of its carbon footprint over time and start reducing it before the middle of this century, again brings to the fore the question of why it should be expected now of developing countries effectively to pick up the tab of the past carbon overindulgence of the developed world.

Political complications

In the interim, Eskom’s loan application further is politically complicated by the involvement of the ANC as a player in the electricity sector.

Opposition leader Helen Zille of the Democratic Alliance (DA) has chosen the fact that the ANC’s investment arm has a 25% stake in Hitachi Power Africa - a main supplier to the Medupi power station - as a front to do political battle with the government.

She has written to the World Bank, asking whether a finding by the public protector, that former Eskom chairperson Vallie Moosa acted improperly in awarding a R38.5-billion Medupi contract to the Hitachi consortium, would influence the loan application.

Referring to calculations that the ANC is set to gain at least R1bn from the contract, she wrote in her weekly newsletter to supporters that “it is no exaggeration to say that if the loan is granted and the deal goes through, no opposition party may ever be in a postion to compete fairly with the ANC again. The ANC will entrench its single-party dominance and, in doing so, gravely weaken our democracy."

She also indicated that the DA would be meeting with the World Bank’s local chief Ruth Kagia and would lobby board members ahead of Thursday’s decision. She wanted Eskom to get the loan, but only on condition: that Chancellor House (the ANC’s investment arm) pulls out of the consortium which is building the power station.

Why Export Bans Fail to Spur Local Value Addition

Exports of raw cashews nuts by Kenyan farmers were banned last year in a bid to revive the local cashew nut industry. The ban provided that only Government and the National Cereals and Produce Board would be authorized to buy raw nuts from farmers. The purpose of the ban was to attract investors to set up cashew nut processing units in the country, however, the low volumes of nuts produced meant that a year later, no factory of viable capacity has been established.

There could have been some implementation weaknesses. The national task force that recommended the ban, also proposed that the National Cereals and Produce Board (NCBP) should become the buyer of last resort and market regulator, as is the case with maize and wheat. However since  no funds were channeled to NCPB for the task, this gave middlemen a field day as they bought the nuts at about a third of the price prevailing before the ban. As a result, farmers are now bracing themselves for substantial losses following cashew nut harvests and government delays in providing alternative marketing channels. 

If I may think out loud- I wonder if the authorities made specific efforts to increase production of local cashew nuts, identify investors, provide incentives and jointly venture with them, to help establish cashew processing plants in the country. 

See recent article here.