The theme for the 2026 Invest in Africa Mining Indaba held in Cape Town this week “Stronger together: Progress through Partnership” was appropriate and timely. By focusing on collaboration, it highlighted the importance of all actors and stakeholders in the mining industry and beyond the industry. The theme resonated with interests of investors in the mining sector, countries on the continent, workers, as well as communities linked to mining activity. It set the right tone for discussions about investment by all these stakeholders and made all interested parties feel that they were part of the same cause.
Despite contention on definition of critical minerals, the Indaba discussions had a strong focus on attracting investing in critical minerals, and on how the increase in their demand may be leveraged for continental development. Various speakers emphasized the importance of collaboration among African countries if the continent was to benefit, meaningfully, from critical minerals it had in its backyard.
One element that was not given enough time and whose criticality was underplayed was the issue of competing interests, among African countries, among investors and workers, and among investors and communities. Yet being silent on these different interests diminishes possibilities of harmonious, practical, sustainable and mutually beneficial investment in mining on the continent.
South Africa’s minister Minerals and Petroleum, in his welcome remarks, did suggest that African countries should come together and find ways to influence market conditions of the mineral resources they own. The countries could, for example, control the amount of mineral resources they put on the market at any time so as not to push the resource price too low as a result of flooding the market. He added that countries ought to coordinate their national efforts to attract investment to avoid a race to the bottom scenario in the process.
From a practical point of view, the suggestion to collaborate on influencing the market of Africa’s resources and in attracting investment therein raises a number of questions. First, how will buyers of and investors of Africa’s mineral resources react in face of this continental collaboration. They will definitely respond based on their specific interests and changed circumstances. As Isaac Newton put it a long time ago, “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”.
With the anticipation of reactions to Africa collaboration efforts, the next logical question would be how then African countries will respond, and whether a mutually beneficial a middle ground is possible. The Indaba discussions did not explicitly reflect how these practical questions that come with the continental collaboration proposals. Yet, answers to these questions are key in determining winners and losers of mining endeavor.
Another complication linked to the theme of the Indaba and relevant to the continental collaboration as a means of getting the best dividend out of its mineral resources relates to ownership of mines. Most mines on the continent are privately owned; hence their business decisions are made in boardrooms. So, even if Africa governments were to cooperate to influence mineral resource market and investment, they have to deal with the constraint of influencing boardroom decisions of private actors from outside. It is not inconceivable that governments may be willing to collaborate, but the private mining companies have a different view.
Strategic cooperation on leveraging benefits of mining, at country-to-country level, is easier when national governments are active participants in mining ventures. Without this active government participation, cooperation agreements between countries on the continent will be hard to implement.
The issue of competing interest has another dimension – national interests versus regional or continental interests. There was an undertone among some country representatives to the effect that their countries were better than others in terms of investment climate and regulatory certainty. Other country representatives expressed the view that their national interests were more important than the regional or continental interests and they are prioritizing them as such. The issue of national versus regional interests was another area of contention evident in some of the discussions.
The Mining Indaba needs to go a little deeper to discuss the issue of competing interests and how to balance them – between governments and the mining industry, between industry and labour, or between countries and countries. Such discussions are critical in coming up with practical pathways for the continent to get the best out of its mineral resources, including the critical minerals.
Beyond the speeches and investment deals, the Indaba should create forums where candid discussions on competing interests, tradeoffs and possible middle grounds among relevant stakeholders can take place.
Such initiative will amplify and bring to the table voices of those that are likely to be left behind when investment deals are finally signed, and mining commences.
About Dr Martin Kaggwa
Dr Kaggwa is the Executive Research Director of the Sam Tambani Research Institute (SATRI). The Sam Tambani Research Institute is a Public Benefit Non-profit Company registered in 2012. The idea of establishing the institute was perceived jointly by the National Union of Mine Workers (NUM) and Mineworkers Investment Trust (MIT) to support promotion of workers’ interest through objective research. Nonetheless, the views expressed in this piece are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views the NUM and MIT.