|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
As June draws to a close, there’s a noticeable shift in how development conversations are unfolding – quiet, but unmistakable. Climate finance partnerships are gaining shape. Multilateral development banks are stretching beyond traditional loan models. Digital governance, once a nice-to-have, is now treated as critical infrastructure. Taken together, it feels like we’re not merely adjusting to new priorities but being invited, perhaps even gently urged, to reimagine what development architecture can become.
“If we’re serious about embedding climate resilience, then it must shape how we build and govern, not simply how we respond.”
What matters most now isn’t how much money is moving. It’s how we use what’s available to build systems that don’t collapse the moment attention moves elsewhere.
Where finance meets ownership
Blended finance has gained serious traction over the past year. Recent efforts like Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG)’s €7 billion platform, which combines donor-backed “first loss” capital with private investment, are helping derisk African infrastructure in meaningful ways. The Climate Investment Fund’s $12.5 billion industrial decarbonisation programme is another signal that new models are here and moving.
But what’s promising isn’t the size of these numbers. It’s the shift in structure.
When funding is framed to unlock shared governance rather than focusing solely on delivery, it becomes easier to build programmes that are not just responsive but truly resilient. And when local institutions, private sector actors, and municipal teams are at the table from the start, not merely as implementers, it strengthens accountability in ways technical reporting never can.
If blended finance is going to work for African systems, it has to be more than catalytic. It has to be co-owned.
Infrastructure isn’t only physical
One of the more encouraging shifts this year has been the growing consensus that digital infrastructure is not an accessory. It is essential. Devex recently called this the “age of digital governance”, and I believe they’re right.
But for digital tools to be resilient, they must be treated as public goods, not pilot projects. The most effective platforms I’ve seen are the ones owned by ministries, maintained through local universities or agencies, and refined by people actually working in the systems they serve.
At eHealth Africa, we’ve seen this play out clearly through our renewable energy work. When we began solarising primary healthcare centres in Nigeria, the breakthrough wasn’t in the panels themselves; it was in the process. We co-developed training modules with local technicians, integrated remote energy monitoring tools, and ensured that the health facilities could maintain the systems long after installation. Because the project was built around local ownership and capacity, it’s working, and it will last.
And that’s the lesson; impact doesn’t hinge on sophistication. It hinges on fit, and fit requires listening.
Climate work as infrastructure, not intervention
There’s growing energy around climate finance, and rightly so. Africa’s adaptation and mitigation needs are enormous, and the current funding pipeline, while growing, is still only a fraction of what’s required.
But what’s encouraging is the direction of travel. From Kenya’s solar financing efforts to South Africa’s Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement (REIPPP) programme, we’re seeing models that go beyond project-based thinking. These are systemic efforts that link policy, funding, and delivery in coherent ways.
Still, we need more of that. More coordination. More local anchoring. More systems, fewer side projects.
If we’re serious about embedding climate resilience, then it must shape how we build and govern, not simply how we respond.
What this moment offers
All of this points to a clear opportunity: to design development systems not only to perform but also to last. And if we’re going to get there, a few things need to happen.
First, we need to link finance more directly with governance. That means setting up funding instruments that require, and reward, strong local institutional structures from the outset.
Second, we need to treat digital tools the way we treat bridges or ports: as assets that require national ownership, maintenance, and stewardship.
Third, we need to rethink what climate investment actually funds. Yes, the tech matters. But so do the systems behind it, the data infrastructure, the community networks, and the local labs.
And lastly, we need to co-invest in knowledge. African researchers, think tanks, and evaluation partners should be at the table shaping programmes, not merely reviewing them.
A final word
In development, it’s easy to default to what’s urgent. Deadlines, reporting cycles, disbursement windows. But this moment, if we use it well, allows us to step back and ask what’s foundational.
Are we funding programmes or frameworks? Are we scaling pilots or building systems? Are we focused on outcomes that last beyond our presence?
There’s no single blueprint. But we do have signals and partners pointing us in the right direction.
For Africa and its development allies, this is a season of possibility. Not because the work is easier. But because the clarity is sharper. The stakes are higher. And the chance to build something durable, something sovereign, is right in front of us.
Let’s not miss it.
Ota Akhigbe is Director of Partnerships & Programmes at eHealth Africa. She writes at the intersection of health systems, digital innovation, and equitable development partnerships shaping Africa’s future.
