Established in 2009, AgDevCo’s vision is a thriving commercial African agriculture sector that benefits people, economies, and the environment. The organisation contributes to this goal by providing investment capital and technical assistance to grow sustainable and impactful businesses across the agricultural value chain. In doing so, it aims to promote resilience, gender equality and the production of better-quality, more nutritious food.

This new funding builds on the original endowment funding provided by the UK government which helped establish AgDevCo over the past decade. This endowment has provided capital to agribusinesses that have directly created or sustained more than 15,000 jobs and to work with 750,000 smallholder farmers to help increase their income and improve their resilience to climate change. It has also allowed AgDevCo to build a capability and track record to the point where it can secure external investment capital.

In welcoming the investment, Keith Palmer, AgDevCo’s founder and Chairman, said: “Securing investment from CDC, Norfund and DFC is a major milestone in AgDevCo’s history. It is a strong endorsement of AgDevCo’s team and our strategy. We are excited that our vision is shared by our new funders, who recognise the important contribution that AgDevCo investments can make to productivity, sustainability, and inclusivity in Africa. Their funding marks the beginning of a partnership in which AgDevCo will use its sector specialism, drawing on our new funders’ networks and resources, to increase the number of impactful investments in African agriculture.”

UK Minister for Africa, Vicky Ford, said: “I am proud to see how AgDevCo’s investing has boosted sustainable agriculture across Sub-Saharan Africa over the past 10 years, including deepening impact on smallholder farmers and SMEs. This new investment will bring continued growth, by enabling agribusiness SMEs to expand, improve farmer incomes, create new jobs and strengthen climate resilience across Africa.”

Tenbite Ermias, CDC’s Managing Director for Africa, said: “This investment reinforces our long-term commitment to investing in key sectors in Africa including agriculture, which is critical for creating jobs, promoting gender equality and supporting people to build a better life for themselves and their families. Furthermore, it reflects our continued focus on climate finance which is central to our new strategy over the next five-year period, to support emerging economies that are most vulnerable to the impacts of the climate emergency.”

Ellen Cathrine Rasmussen, Executive Vice President of Scalable Enterprises in Norfund, said: “Norfund is very pleased to partner with AgDevCo to deliver on our joint mission: to create jobs and improve lives by investing in businesses that drive sustainable development. A thriving commercial African agriculture sector is vital for economic growth and job creation. More than half of Sub-Saharan Africa’s population work in agriculture, yet Africa does not produce enough food to feed the continent. The investment in AgDevCo will create jobs, increase food production, improve climate change resilience, and promote gender equality. The AgDevCo team’s skills, networks and achievements are impressive – and we look forward to working with them.”

Algene Sajery, DFC’s Vice President of External Affairs and Head of Global Gender Equity Initiatives, said: “DFC is thrilled to support AgDevCo with a $20 million loan to bring additional capital to smallholder farmers and agricultural businesses in Africa, promoting food security for lower-income communities across the continent. DFC’s loan, alongside financing from our partner DFIs, will enable AgDevCo to link more farmers to markets and create jobs for underserved populations, with a focus on women farmers.”

Pay-As-You-Go solar power

In her thesis, Moncayo notes that harnessing solar energy and converting it to off-grid battery power is not a new idea in Africa. She reports that the United Nations Environment Program claims that off-grid lighting solutions are “a multi-billion-dollar market”. At present, reliable and cost-effective Solar Home Systems (SHS) with 20-50 W solar panels that can power LED bulbs and charge a battery are widely available in the region. How are these affordable to the poor Sub-Saharan African population? Moncayo notes that off-grid energy enterprises have adapted their business models to suit their customers. These include Pay-As-You-Go (PAYG) or rent-to-own schemes that allow flexible access to solar energy for as little as 50 US cents per day. Moncayo reports that one of the best-known providers is BBOXX, a start-up founded in 2010 that has now sold over 85,000 systems, reaching 425,000 people, in over 35 countries. Such access to Solar Home Systems has been welcomed as they enable the poorest to save both time and money. Moncayo states in her paper that before they had access to these systems, the typical customer had to spend more money on kerosene for less lighting quality and travel nearly twice a week to charge their phone.

Lack of initial finance

The problem with the schemes currently in place is that they need initial finance.  Moncayo reports payback periods of about 18 months for each system. For a company to achieve financial stability, they need to sell fast and grow fast. However, even when they are able to expand quickly, they have difficulties to pay back short-term loans with their business proceeds. According to Moncayo, philanthropy, public financing, banks, private equity and venture capital have proven unable or unwilling to match Sub-Saharan Africa’s demands to finance off-grid energy. She investigates how impact investments are stepping up to contribute to fill the gap and help to get off-grid power to the masses. Impact investments are investments made in companies, organizations or funds that intend to create positive social and/or environmental impacts, while also attaining a financial return. Moncayo reports that in 2015, from the $16.1 billion supplied by impact investors in West and East Africa, $4.2 billion were dedicated to energy. She notes that most of these did not invest in off-grid options, but those that did are largely multilateral development banks, Development Financial Institutions (DFIs), impact investing funds and corporate impact investors. The support offered by these actors is now also getting ordinary investors interested in off-grid opportunities.

Impact investments are more than finance

Moncayo is also keen to highlight the main non-monetary contributions of impact investors. The first is their obvious contribution to the development and availability of off-grid energy systems. They attract new investors and connect them with providers, including those that are social-neutral. As impact investing is a cooperative, rather than a competitive sector, capital can be aggregated for co-investment, cutting transaction costs. In addition, impact investors can provide off-grid companies with technical assistance and help them grow their networks. Investors get involved in the governance of companies to help preserve their social objectives. Through the impact assessment of their investments, they have the information at hand to further improve the value proposition of enterprises. Overall, the introduction of impact investor capital and management practices strengthens and endorses the entire off-grid sector.

Energy for all by 2030

To attain access to clean energy for all, globally, by 2030, the OECD and the EIA, Energy For All- Financing Access For The Poor report (2011) stated that $48 billion needs to be invested each year. Moncayo notes that, if Sub-Saharan Africa requires 80% of all off-grid electrification, it would need investments of $5.6 billion a year. Based on figures supplied by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, Moncayo estimated that $188 million in impact investments were made in the Sub-Saharan African off-grid energy sector in 2015. This is just 3.3% of that required by the OECD Energy for All Case for that year. Based on projections for the increase in impact investments in the coming years, she predicts that by 2030, the impact investments dedicated to the off-grid energy sector in Sub-Saharan Africa will have the potential to finance 44% of the OECD Energy For All Case annual budget. Moncayo concludes that this is likely to be less than 1% of the estimated multi trillion-dollar impact investments predicted for 2025 by the Global Impact Investing Network. However, she notes that her analysis highlights the power of impact investors, who are emerging as engine for the global economy and key players in tackling the challenges that the world faces today.

By Mónica Moncayo Escobar – “Role of impact investing in financing access to energy for off-grid populations in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Join His Excellency Dr. Bashir Ifo, President, ECOWAS Bank for Investment & Development, Ben Good, Chief Executive Officer, Energy4Impact and other impact investors to discuss how to deliver affordable, reliable and clean energy to over 600 million Africans, faster, at the 3rd Africa Impact Investing Leaders Forum taking place on 25th – 26th October, 2018 in London. Register interest here

The funds will be used to finance 13 large-scale PV projects being developed from both public and private companies.

Mouayed Makhlouf, IFC Director for the Middle East and North Africa said: “This landmark investment demonstrates that when you have the right reform policies, and a government willing to allow greater involvement by the private sector, you can attract investors in every sector, including infrastructure” adding “Investments like these are the nucleus for economic growth, which is needed in Egypt”.

The projects will be part of the 2GW national goal through Egypt’s landmark solar Feed-in Tariff (FiT) programme, aiming to harvest the country’s rich solar potential and develop the largest solar photovoltaic generation park in the world.

The 2 GW goal will be achieved through the development of 40 individual solar projects of approximately 50 MW each and help Egypt meet its target to source 20% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020.

Egypt’s solar FiT programme, will include projects financed by several development institutions like the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and Proparco and is expected to be one of the largest foreign direct investments in years.

Last June, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) approved a $500m package for 13 large-scale PV projects, as part of a 16-projects plant of 750MW total capacity.

Harry Boyd- Carpenter, Head of Power and Energy at the EBRD “We have been working with the Egyptian authorities since 2014 to help them fulfil their ambitious goals in this area. We are delighted now to be in a position to commit very significant financing to projects, which we expect to start construction before the end of 2017”.

The trust of Development Institutions to Egypt is expected to catalyse a further debt and equity inflow of $2 billion, highlighting Egypt’s re-emergence as an attractive investment destination.

The news came along despite Egypt’s announcement last December to reduce the FiT rate for PV projects to US$0.084 and US$0.078/kWh.

At the time, several power project developers claimed that the new rates would put in question the viability of several projects, although the new FiT price level is in line to rates seen in other regional markets.

These foreign investors, foundations and trust managers are through their investment addressing significant challenges that Africa faces in respect of poverty, infrastructure development, healthcare, education and transport by supporting companies dealing with these issues on the continent. Initiatives in these sectors are considered to be viable impact investment opportunities, and investors are seeking them out. Impact investments are those investments that provide a measurable social or environmental impact, as well as a financial return.

Much of the work in impact investing markets is starting to look at how money invested in social and environmental good could be allocated in a way that uses data to determine the effectiveness of programmes and institutions. One of the innovative financing mechanisms to emerge from this process is the Social Impact Bond.

A Social Impact Bond (SIB) is a financing contract designed to drive commercially sustainable social outcomes. The bonds work by attracting socially motivated investors to fund social services up front. Repayments to investors are then made by government and/or private funders if pre-agreed outcome targets are achieved. SIBs enable governments and donors to allocate resources more effectively to address societal challenges particularly in the face of fiscal austerity, by way of public-private collaboration.

The use of SIBs stands poised for considerable growth in Africa. The magnitude and speed of this growth depends on the extent to which African governments create an enabling environment through policy. In this regard, South Africa has a relatively established social investment market, albeit small by international standards, facilitated to some extent by Regulation 28 of the Pension Funds Act, an example of how policy can be used to leverage institutional investment towards social outcomes.

Regulation 28 is the prudential investment regulation that governs how and where South African pension funds can invest, and it obliges pension fund trustees to consider environmental, social and governance factors in pursuit of a sustainable returns policy. It expressly incentivises institutional investment into the rest of Africa. Similarly, there are regulations in several African jurisdictions that allow, even compel, domestic pension funds to invest in other African countries.

Larger African institutional investors are quite familiar with other initiatives to strengthen awareness and implementation around ESG and responsible investing, for example, the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI), the closely aligned Code for Responsible Investment in South Africa (CRISA) the Responsible Investment Ownership Guide for Pension Funds in Southern Africa published by the Sustainable Returns for Pensions and Society initiative in 2013. Zimbabwe also introduced responsible investment codes recently and Kenya implemented its stewardship codes last year.  The King Code IV has also placed emphasis on corporate social responsibility and has referred to CRISA.

The regulatory environment in South Africa has arguably led to the increased interest from foreign foundations, looking to invest or create investment opportunities in projects in South Africa and to expand them into Africa. These projects involve many industries, (although we have seen particular enthusiasm in the healthcare and agriculture sectors), with the need for legal advice on all levels.  Exchange control rules often have to be adhered to, when the funding initially enters South Africa, and for any subsequent investment abroad. These constraints dictate the structure of the deal and the flow of funds and make legislative advice a pre-requisite.

Foreign investors also frequently look for partnerships with local companies that have the expertise, the location and the know-how to address socioeconomic issues. In South Africa, the obstacles faced by load shedding as a result of energy capacity issues, for example, have given rise to many businesses offering renewable energy and solar energy solutions – which in turn offers more ESG friendly investment opportunities for local institutional investors.

In the alternative energy market, measuring the return on investment is becoming relatively straightforward. However, it is less easy to put a price on investing in human dignity or cognitive development in children, for example. One of the sticking points in the impact investing movement has been how to gauge if funds invested in social good are having any measurable impact.

Earlier this year the Western Cape Departments of Health and Social Development in South Africa allocated up to R 24 million to trial three Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) aimed at improving the health, nutrition and developmental status of pregnant women and children, up to five years who live in low income communities. Two corporate donors have committed another R 24 million rand to bring the total amount of the bonds to R48 million.  The Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the University of Cape Town’s (UCT) Graduate School of Business, facilitated their development and Bowmans advised on the legal and tax structuring of these SIBSs.

These SIBs are the first to be initiated in an emerging market, and they will provide useful guidance and lessons on how these bonds can be implemented in other countries in Africa going forward. This innovative financing mechanism could be a powerful tool providing a practical and workable solution for Africa’s most pressing challenges, while at the same time offering worthwhile returns for socially motivated investors.

By David Geral and Kim Goss, of Bowmans South Africa, and Aunnie Patton of Bertha Centre

However, if your focus is emerging markets enterprises that can have an impact on people living in poverty, a recent blog by Ceniarth Capital said it best: “Those of us actively allocating capital to fragile enterprises in developing markets recognize that those people who promise comfortable market rate returns while solving global poverty are the equivalent of diet gurus promising that one can lose weight while eating limitless amounts of chocolate cake.”

In a report launched by Oxfam and Sumerian Partners today, we argue that it’s time to look at impact investing differently; to start with a focus on the needs of the businesses working to make a meaningful impact on poverty reduction, rather than on the investors who stand to benefit from their work. Enterprises working in this space are in new territory – continually adapting their business models, earning low and slow returns and operating in markets that are subject to considerable exogenous shocks (e.g., economic instability, weak infrastructure, extreme weather events and poorly developed value chains). These firms will make decisions that can seem irrational if your focus is market return. They may seek out “at risk” populations, such as single moms balancing the demands of work and family, as employees. They may share ownership and decision-making with their workers. They may pay their suppliers not the price that is commonly expected in the market, but a higher price the firm sees as “fair.” The businesses themselves, and the funds that put their money into these firms, organize around the intention to generate a measurable, beneficial social or environmental impact alongside a financial return – and that prioritization is reflected in their structures, processes and activities.

However, to meet the return expectations that have been established by the sector’s push toward the larger mainstream market, we increasingly see conventional emerging markets investments being reclassified as “impact investing.” Arguably, it’s this trend that has transformed TPG’s investment in Apollo Tower, a cellphone tower company in Myanmar, from a standard emerging market foreign direct investment into an impact investment. The impact statement claimed by supporters is that cellphone access has “helped to increase transparency in a country known for tight control of its information, helping the nation take steps toward democracy.” Hmmm. Really? A cell phone company is actually a democracy and governance project in disguise? Seems a bit of a stretch.

As we write in our report, it should not be assumed that an investment in a cell tower, or a wind farm, or any other enterprise in the global south, is inherently socially positive. Rather, it should be incumbent upon the fund to demonstrate how these enterprises are intentionally structured to optimize impact and benefit poor and marginalized groups – rather than only providing implied, incidental or indirect benefits. They should be able to show what difference the fund’s provision of capital and support and engagement has made. Any self-identifying impact investor should be able to demonstrate a clear intentionality to achieve impact.

Furthermore, the research that has set the prevailing “have your cake and eat it too”-sized return expectations has its limitations. Take, for example, the very same GIIN/Cambridge associates “benchmark” report, which included no commentary on the associated impacts achieved and instead used a self-reported intention to generate social impact as the only impact-related criteria for inclusion in the benchmark. The data included a high proportion of funds focused on the theme of financial inclusion, an industry that has depended on decades of subsidies. Finally, the “benchmark” setting was drawn from a small pool of funds, all of which were targeting market rate returns.

Why does any of this matter anyway? Big tent, right? It matters because the rush to the mainstream can pull impact investing away from its original intent and undermine the meaningful role it can and should play in poverty reduction. It matters because high-profile investments such as Apollo Towers shift the goal posts for everyone. It makes philanthropists doing the critical work of providing smart subsidy to funds and enterprises operating in the toughest places ask, as they have of Root Capital, “Am I the dumbest money in the room?” – If everyone else is making tons of money, am I a sucker if I’m giving it away? And it can divert social entrepreneurs from their mission when they are challenged with the trade-off between purpose and profit. As one social entrepreneur told me recently, “Do we really need this money? Is it going to disorganize us from our original idea? The motivating factor will be to meet the profit targets, not looking at the social part. … Maybe the pressure we will feel from the investors will move us to abandon our women’s empowerment mission. We don’t want that to happen.”

We propose six recommendations that we think can provide a more balanced understanding of what is possible in impact investing, letting the sector begin to use money more creatively:

1. We call for a shift of approach in the market; from one in which we tailor funds around the needs of investors to one focused on developing products that serve the needs of enterprises seeking to combat poverty. Specifically, we need wider adoption of alternative fund structures – such as permanent capital vehicles and evergreen funds – and new financial tools that reflect the predominantly “low and slow returns” of most enterprises prioritizing social impact.
2. The sector needs greater transparency around reporting both the impact and financial returns(gross and net) achieved by impact investors.
3. Donors and philanthropists need to deploy smart subsidy and patient capital (return of capital, rather than return on capital) to support enterprises capable of making a meaningful contribution to poverty reduction, and to support hybrid financing models alongside impact investors seeking a net return on capital. Grants, philanthropy and smart subsidy should be seen as part of the impact investing continuum, not its enemy.
4. The industry needs more independent research to understand the enterprise-level experience, and to analyze which structures, approaches and incentives best help businesses to maintain an intentionality to optimize impact.
5. We call on impact investors to agree to a voluntary code of practice that enshrines the intentionality to behave and take decisions in ways that have a primary focus on achieving impact.
6. Impact investors should adopt incentives for optimizing, measuring and reporting impact as well as achieving financial return targets.

We have no problem with financial returns, but let’s not pretend that investors seeking a pure market return can tackle the most complex global challenges in high-risk markets. They cannot. Not in education. Not in health. Not in reducing child labor and forced marriage. Not in water and sanitation. Not even in banking for small enterprises, which continue to be significantly underserved today by markets everywhere, despite SMEs being the biggest generators of jobs and incomes globally. One just needs to look at the history of Silicon Valley or the microfinance industry ­– both completely commercial today – to justify smart subsidy and venture philanthropy. Our memories are simply too short. It’s not about distorting the market – often, there is not much there to distort – it is about catalyzing it.

By Mara Bolis, Oxfam

“To prosper, Africa needs a massive, concerted, ambitious effort to transform our economies,” Akinwumi Adesina, President of the African Development Bank Group, said. “We need growth that benefits everyone. The High 5 priorities will get us there more quickly.”

The High 5s and the Bank’s recent progress are highlighted in the Annual Development Effectiveness Review 2016 — the latest edition of the Bank’s key monitoring and tracking tool — which was released Monday, June 27, 2016.

This year, the Bank has revamped the review to give greater attention to Africa’s fundamental challenges and how the Bank is addressing them.

The Bank is also reorganising itself to become more agile and responsive to the continent’s needs. A new business model has been adopted and three new vice presidencies established: on power, energy and green growth; on agriculture, human and social development; and on the private sector, infrastructure and industrialisation.

To increase its efficiency and carry out its work more quickly, the Bank is moving closer to its clients by establishing five regional integration and business delivery offices.

All these changes will help achieve the structural transformation outlined in the Bank’s Ten Year Strategy. The High 5 priorities are an integral part of that effort:

Light up and power Africa — About 635 million Africans still live without electricity and demand for energy is rising rapidly. Through the New Deal on Energy for Africa, the AfDB is working to unify efforts to achieve universal access to energy. Its new Energy Strategy aims to increase energy production and access, and improve affordability, reliability and energy efficiency.

Feed Africa — More than 70% of Africans depend for their livelihoods on agriculture. If its full potential were unlocked, agriculture could vastly improve the lives of millions. The Bank is framing its agricultural operations within a business-oriented approach, based on a deeper understanding of the obstacles, potential and investment opportunities.

Industrialise Africa — A persistent lack of industrialisation is holding back Africa’s economies. Over the next 10 years, the Bank will invest US $3.5 billion per year through direct financing and leveraging to implement six flagship industrialisation programmes in areas where the AfDB can best leverage its experience, capabilities and finances.

Integrate Africa — Through its Regional Integration Policy and Strategy, the Bank is focusing its integration efforts not just on movement of goods and services but also on mobility of people and investment.

Improve the quality of life for the people of Africa — Africa’s economic growth has not been rapid or inclusive enough to create enough jobs and improve quality of life. The Bank is committed to building up the availability of technical skills so that African economies can realise their full potential in high-technology sectors. Acknowledging the urgent need to address climate change, the Bank will nearly triple its annual climate financing to reach $5 billion a year by 2020.

By AfDB

The importance of supporting women was one of the main leitmotivs of the Africa Impact Investing Leaders Forum, held in London on 27 Oct, 2016. Delegates asserted that this historically disempowered group plays a pivotal and well-documented role in augmenting positive social, economic and environmental outcomes – particularly when impact investments find their way into microfinance, agriculture, renewable energy and infrastructure sectors.

Women are integral to social impact investing

Speaking from the podium, Suzanne Biegel, founder of Women Effect, urged all investors to use a “gender lens” when considering impact ventures. And to ask some salient, due diligence questions, such as: “Where are the women in this investment? Are they on the product design team if the product concept is for women? Do they have a formal leadership or decision-making role where the project in question is targeting women”?

Caroline Mulwa, Kenya country manager of social impact investor, Oikocredit, agrees wholeheartedly with this view. Referencing the smallholder agriculture sector, she says: “88% of Africa’s female population live in rural areas; 70% of agricultural labour is provided by women; 90% of all food is produced by women, but women own less than 2% of the land. Yet women have a significant, measurable, positive impact on small business ventures, local communities and families. And they have been proven to reduce investment risks”.

Mulwa highlights one of Oikocredit’s microfinance partners as “exemplary when it comes to considering the roles and needs of Kenyan women from every angle”. She continues: “KWFT – Banking on Women focus single-mindedly on the unapologetic financial support of women” – a phrase which Caroline says inspires her.

Led by women for women, KWFT has provided financial services to unbanked women in Kenya for over 30 years. With 800,000 clients now on their books, KWFT offer a unique product range spanning microloans, savings accounts, insurance loans and financial literacy training. Products are designed around the specific needs of women, such as planning for healthcare during pregnancy and childbirth; saving to ensure their own financial independence, and setting up small businesses. In-branch, KWFT provide footstools for teenage girls so that they can be on an “equal level” with bank tellers, as well as baby-changing and breast-feeding facilities for young mothers.

Across Africa, Asia, Latin America and central and eastern Europe, 86% of the end customers of Oikocredit’s microfinance partners are women, meaning that vital access to finance and other support is offered to around 39.5 million women worldwide. Scott Brown, president & CEO of VisionFund International likewise emphasises the importance of women in the impact investing space, highlighting that over 70% of the end clients of VisionFund’s microfinance partners are women.

Client Protection Principles (CPP) are critical to the due diligence strategies of both Oikocredit and VisionFund, and partners are required to demonstrate an ongoing commitment to eliminating any potential exploitation of end clients.

The impact investing potential within African agriculture

Agriculture, a sector in Africa which some say may be worth $1tn (£816m) by 2020, was also a lively theme during the forum. A panel, comprising leaders from Africa Agricultural Development Company, Alpha Mundi Group, ScopeInsight and Oikocredit, all highlighted how impact investing in smallholder supply chains can create one of the biggest impacts on reducing poverty – the UN’s sustainable development goal one.

Agriculture, however, is often characterised by extraneous economic, financial and other challenges such as the impact of extreme weather; changes in global commodity markets, particularly price and currency volatility; shifts in government policies and weaknesses in local infrastructure. In order for the sector to mature, panellists discussed the need for higher levels of professionalism (including stronger due diligence and governance) and more innovative, public-private partnerships for impact investments.

Applying her own experience of managing risks, Mulwa says, “It takes experience: taking risks, making mistakes, but learning from those mistakes”. She adds: “It also requires us to look beyond the obvious and take a long-term view. So, we first consider the social mission within our investment decision-making, thereafter weighing up the risks in the context of the longer-term potential. I’m referring here to “patient capital” and a willingness to consider a project that may not look promising in the short term, but might bear significant financial and social returns in the longer term”. Patient capital is an investing attitude which all panellists agreed is vital for successful impact investing.

Showcasing this approach in the context of Oikocredit partner, Githunguri Dairy Farmers’ Co-operative in Kenya, Mulwa explains how, at first glance, their request for €1.5m (£1.3m) investment – to set up a processing plant for 31 dairy farmers and 200 employees; producing 15,000 litres of milk and generating a €0 return – looked risky. Other investors backed off, but Oikocredit saw the long-term financial and social potential and went ahead. As with many so-called risky ventures which Oikocredit supports, Githunguri paid off. Today, the co-operative has 15,000 members and employs 8,000 people across their entire value chain. They produce 220,000 litres of milk each year and, in 2015, reported a turnover of €52m (£46m).

If you are interested in investing in the Oikocredit International Share Foundation*, please contact our UK office. Alternatively, if you are a mid-stage inclusive finance, agriculture, renewable energy or infrastructure venture looking for equity or debt financing in Africa, please contact our east Africa or west Africa teams.

*Capital at risk. Terms and conditions apply. 

By

Monica Middleton

national director, Oikocredit UK & Ireland

Join these organisations to scale impact and discover new opportunities at the next edition of the Africa Impact Investing Leaders Forum in 2017 by Registering your interest as a partner, delegate or speaker. >> http://aiilf.com/register-your-interest/ 

Trickle-down has no effect

There was a time when ‘trickle down’ was the favourite word in the lexicon of economists worldwide. According to this theory, as long as an economy is growing, the benefits will eventually make their way through the system.

For the proponents of trickle-down economics, the belief was that rising incomes at the top end of the spectrum would lead to more jobs, less poverty and higher incomes at the lower end – much like a rising tide lifts all boats. However, over time, it has proven to be a fallacy, just like any other belief in equitable wealth distribution as a natural course of events.

The Global Experience: The Rich get Richer

Indeed, a research study published by the IMF in June 2015 has decisively debunked the theory at a global level. The report titled ‘Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality’ in fact goes on to prove that a rise in incomes at the top can actually adversely impact overall growth, poverty and employment.

Looking at data from 159 countries from 1980 to 2012, researchers found that when the wealthiest 20% see their share of income rise by one per cent, the economy grows 0.1 percentage points slower over the next five years. Conversely, raising the income of the poorest 20% by a single percentage point raises annual growth by 0.4% over the same period.

While it lasted, the misplaced faith in the trickle-down theory appears to have exacerbated inequalities globally. A 2016 report by Oxfam has revealed that the richest 1% have now accumulated more wealth than the rest of the world put together. Meanwhile, the World Economic Forum notes in a 2016 article that the wealth owned by the bottom half of humanity has fallen by a trillion dollars in the past five years.

The African Experience: The Poor stay Poor

In Africa, this woeful absence of a trickle-down effect is borne out by the successive experiences of individual economies that have experienced stellar economic growth, such as Nigeria and Kenya.

Even as Nigeria recently became Africa’s largest economy with growth averaging over 6% each year from 2005 to 2014, the reality remains that most Nigerians still live on less than US$ 2 a day, while the country lags behind in key development indicators such as health.

On the eve of the country rebasing its GDP to factor in the contribution of new sectors to the economy, the then Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, a former World Bank managing director, confirmed to the country’s business leaders that:

“It is clear that the top five to 10% is capturing most of whatever growth there is and people at the bottom are being left behind.”

Similarly, Kenya woke up to economic disparities with the government publishing a ‘Socio-Economic Atlas of Kenya’ at the close of 2014. The report exposed significant disparities in poverty levels across the country. Just before the government survey of income inequalities was released in November 2014, in autumn came news from theWorld Bank that Kenya had seen its economy grow 25% after statistical revision and is now officially a “middle-income country”.

As Nigeria and Kenya, the pin-up economies for Western and Eastern Africa respectively, wake up to trickle down woes, it is clear that the experiences of other African economies that are emulating their wealthier neighbours is likely to be no different.

Development Infrastructure to bridge the divide

Lately, a survey by Afrobarometer of 35 African countries released in January 2016, struggled to find any correlation between the reduction in poverty seen in 22 countries in the survey and the recent rates of economic growth.

Instead, it found that there was a high correlation between creation of development infrastructure and improvement in the lives of the people at large.

“ While growing economies are undoubtedly important, what appears to be more important in improving the lives of ordinary people is the extent to which national governments and their donor partners put in place the type of development infrastructure that enables people to build better lives,” the report noted.

Then, rather than pushing ahead with a blinkered focus on high GDP growth that is clearly not translating into employment security, poverty reduction or inclusive growth, the solution lies in concertedly creating a conducive environment for businesses that create jobs and empower persons at the base-of-the-pyramid.

Impact Investing to build the infrastructure

It is here that impact investing, with a focussed agenda to grow businesses that have significant socio-economic impact, can make a real difference to the lives of those at the base-of-the-pyramid, instead of trusting to trickle-down economics that has so far only seen the top 5-10% push their economic agendas through at the expense of the majority.

Impact investors seek to start at the roots and build a strong foundation for those pioneering entrepreneurs that are seeking to provide basic amenities such as shelter, food, water and education in a sustainable and viable manner, rather than simply choosing an investment that boosts their financial returns and is regarded as a conventionally ‘bankable’ business.

As a specialist SME financier in Sub-Saharan Africa and MENA, GroFin is one such impact investor that is making a difference to the lives of entire communities in its locations of operation. With a concerted focus on investing in small and growing businesses in priority sectors such as Education, Health, Food Security, Energy, Manufacturing and Water/ Sanitation, GroFin is helping local entrepreneurs tackle key community issues such as health, nutrition, education, electricity, water and sanitation.

So far, over 16 years of applying its SME finance and business support solution, GroFin has made a difference to 7,000 entrepreneurs, sustained over 62,450 jobs and changed the lives of more than 312,270 family beneficiaries through its investments.

Support impact investors such as GroFin and others in Africa with your efforts as an entrepreneur or funding partner. Remember, the fate of an entire continent could rest in your hands.

 This article was originally published by GroFin. 

Social Entrepreneurship
The essence of entrepreneurship is the burning desire to create an organization that focuses in helping humanity by solving societal problems, providing needs, and in the process, the entrepreneur can make money. Social entrepreneurship is about applying practical, innovative and sustainable approaches to benefit society in general, with an emphasis on those who are marginalized and poor.

Characteristics of Social Entrepreneurs
1.Social entrepreneurs don’t do well in bureaucracies. They cannot sit back and wait for change to happen – they are the drivers of change.

2.A social entrepreneur is a pragmatic visionary who achieves large scale, systemic and sustainable social change through a new invention, a different approach, a more rigorous application of known technologies or strategies, or a combination of these.

3.A social entrepreneur has a practical but innovative stance to a social problem, often using market principles and forces, coupled with dogged determination, that allows them to break away from constraints imposed by ideology or field of discipline, and pushes them to take risks that others wouldn’t dare.

4.Social entrepreneurs are innovative, resourceful, and results oriented. They draw upon the best thinking in both the business and nonprofit worlds to develop strategies that maximize their social impact. These entrepreneurial leaders operate in all kinds of organizations: large and small; new and old; religious and secular; nonprofit, for-profit, and hybrid.

5.What business entrepreneurs are to the economy, social entrepreneurs are to social change. They are the driven, creative individuals who question the status quo, exploit new opportunities, refuse to give up, and remake the world for the better.

Key To Success
For every entrepreneur or hopefuls, the key to success is to first think of the social benefits of your venture, even if yours in for profit, then go ahead to satisfy those needs, and the money will sure come. If the goal is money, one may sure make the money, but may lack in fulfillment. Entrepreneurs must have eyes that are more than profits to be fulfilled and retire happily.

Social Objective
Earned income ventures are socially entrepreneurial only when they have a social purpose beyond simply making money. If social entrepreneurship is to be distinctive in any way, it must be because social objectives matter in how the venture is organized and managed. If the only way a venture serves your mission is by generating funds, it may be business entrepreneurship, but it is not social entrepreneurship.

Benefits
Running a socially responsible business can be good for the bottom line.Businesses cannot exist in isolation with the community, hence every business, whether non-profits or for profits must be socially conscious of its environment.

In the developed worlds, citizens start or increase their business with a company that is dedicated to the social good. According to a survey by Golin/Harris International, researchers found that about 70% of Americans would start or increase their business with a company that is dedicated to the social good. There’s some value one can place on good will and the relationship with the community.

Improving Society
Any form of social entrepreneurship that is worth promoting broadly must be about establishing new and better ways to improve a society. Social entrepreneurs implement innovative programs, organizational structures, or resource strategies that increase their chances of achieving deep, broad, lasting, and cost-effective social impact.

New Social Enterprises
A new breed of social enterprises which crosses all boundaries and cultural divide has now emerged. Young and innovative Internet companies such as Early Planet, Trade Planets, Paul Hata and World Christian Pages which has banded together to provide online jobs for anyone on the planet with a broadband access.Job opportunities available includes affiliate marketers,article writers,editors, designers and programmers.

1. Trust: Rentier economics in our countries is well-documented and as such, investors are likely to touch down in Accra and drive to the project site accompanied by concerns about self-interested officialdom. However, local stakeholders will often have a similarly low opinion of the ‘outsiders’ – informed by their experience of programmes or investments quoted in the millions, high living standards of expatriate staff and the slow pace of progress. ‘Out of the total committed, more is going to personnel pretending to work than anything else’ is a typical refrain. The result is a ‘them and us’ culture which, if not addressed properly, can harm the quality of communication, warp relations and working practices.
2. Expectations: And yet, and yet. Prevailing incentives in major impact-oriented sectors such as agriculture, healthcare and social housing can be an impediment to productivity. For example, as stated by a policy adviser at a recent Savannah Development Authority (SADA) dialogue, business pipelines are distorted by government waivers. There can also be an expectation of ‘handouts’, which, if denied, might create a constituency that will work to frustrate the proposed intervention or at the very least, not assist.
3. Disjointed Strategies: There is no shortage of individuals launching businesses in Ghana with an implicit and real commitment to creating social goods such as healthcare or jobs for communities that need them. They are motivated by profit certainly but alongside that are goals for society at large. However, at times, fear of alienating categories of investor or customer will create distortions or contradictions in business plans or marketing strategies.
4. How to Say No: Generally-speaking, there is an aversion in our community to delivering the word, ‘no’. Points one, two and three above notwithstanding, local partners are often reluctant to display their disagreement directly. With everyone bending over backward to be polite, clients may miss opportunities to get on the same page as their stakeholders. Instead, things just will not happen as expected or seemingly agreed.

In this context, it is important that clients prioritise culture and that they adopt a listening posture concerning internal and external stakeholders. Learning how others have made it work, or failed, taking time to build trust and understand the terrain – in other words ‘local intelligence’ – are equally key. Finally, in deciding how to engage, bear a Songhai maxim in mind, ‘you will spend money or you will spend time’. In setting strategy, it is safer to keep that expectation in mind than to seek short-cuts to making a profit and doing good.

By Songhai Managing Partner Nana Adu Ampofo (London) and Lord-Gustav Togobo Director of Healthcare and Social Impact (Accra)