全球智库信息集成服务系统

We find that, despite its potential to bring important structural benefits and financial flows to Africa, the overall scope of the CWA investment concept is rather limited. Most notably, investments in education and, in particular, vocational training might limit the CWA’s success when it comes, for example, to tackling youth unemployment. Furthermore, judged against its recognition of the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the CWA too narrowly focusses on achieving economic growth in Africa. To bring the CWA more closely in line with the 2030 Agenda, it should at least be ensured that the likely poverty impacts of the investment programmes are systematically assessed so as to render them as pro-poor as possible. Since African livelihoods critically depend on environmental conditions such as clean water and a stable climate, the possible negative externalities of investments should also explicitly be taken into account when implementing the CWA. Another problem relates to the criteria that countries have to meet in order to qualify for participation in the CWA. As shown for the example of Nigeria, it is hard to assess what it takes to enter an agreement.

Finally, the CWA can only be successful if both the G20 members and the African partners take responsibility for it. It is reasonable to be sceptical of whether the commitment to support the CWA goes beyond the German G20 Presidency. While being interested in fostering private investments and infrastructure in Africa, major players within the G20 appear to have their own interests and approaches that might compete with the CWA. It should be acknowledged that the G20 countries emphasise African ownership. Yet, a thorough approach to strengthen African ownership would have built more widely on local initiatives such as the Agenda 2063, rather than setting up a new scheme exogenously. However, as the CWA will not be reversed, it is crucial to ensure that it goes together with local interests and priorities.