African Champions Accelerating Digital Public Infrastructure
A recent paper—African Champions Accelerating Digital Public Infrastructure—explored the perspectives and needs of African DPI (Digital Public Infrastructure) champions across thirteen African countries and WAEMU to understand the priorities, challenges, and successes of DPI ecosystems in each local context.
The paper, written on a multi-country rapid landscaping of domestic DPI Champions, concluded that:
Progress varies significantly: Adoption rates differ for digital identity (ID), instant payments and data exchange. Some countries have advanced significantly, while others face structural and legislative roadblocks. Similarly, needs in local contexts vary. Domestic DPI Champions must augment global DPI frameworks (architectures, use cases, implementation guides and policy guidelines, etc.) with deep local contextualisation, strategies, and implementation support.
Policy and Regulatory Enablers: The formal adoption of data protection, e-signature laws, and national digital strategies helps anchor DPI efforts and secure buy-in from both public and private stakeholders. Similarly, implementations of these in their local contexts are thin and often irrelevant to the most vulnerable beneficiaries. This leads us to conclude that global best practices in DPI-enabling policy need to be augmented with the inclusive realities of local market contexts.
Trust and Capacity: Building trust—through anti-corruption measures, transparent governance, and robust cybersecurity—must go hand in hand with investments in technical and institutional capacity building. The technical capacity to design, implement and manage DPIs was absent in all countries landscaped, and must go beyond the initial road-map work in stimulating DPI commitments.
Local Champions Matter: In each of the above, sustained DPI momentum depends on the effective engagement of local champions who understand the technologies, local culture, and adoption dynamics. Each country will continue to be different in its DPI approach and the relevance of DPIs to its citizens.
This leads to the conclusion that domestic DPI Champions should be given a voice and a platform to share, learn, solve, and accelerate DPI as an integrated part of the global DPI movement.
African DPI Champions Contributing to Global Literature
What can we learn from a domestic DPI Champion network?
Below is an analysis highlighting points of connection and contrast between the Domestic DPI Champions’ perspectives and three external publications (written by Individual Global DPI Champions or Champion Organisations)—Digital Public Infrastructure: A Practical Approach for Africa; The World Bank’s Digital Public Infrastructure and Development, and the Economics of Shared Digital Infrastructures.
Summary of Key Tensions
- Resource Constraints vs. Ideal Frameworks: The external publications generally promote sophisticated models (e.g., advanced metrics, comprehensive legal frameworks). Yet domestic champions in fragile or fiscally constrained environments see these as aspirational rather than immediately implementable.
- Top-Down Governance vs. Community-Led Buy-In: While the external papers stress political buy-in and multi-agency committees, on-the-ground champions emphasise local trust-building, suggesting a gap between high-level designs and community (Fintech, Civic and Health, etc.) realities, such as those faced by rural populations in adoption.
- Monopoly Concerns vs. Rapid Scale: In “The Economics of Shared Digital Infrastructures”, David Eaves, Diana Coyle, Beatriz Vasconcellos and Sumedha Deshmukh caution against dominant private-sector players, whereas domestic champion insights suggest that, in some cases, a major player can jump-start adoption when smaller providers, and even government, lack capacity.
Although the external papers broadly reinforce the champions’ perspectives on the critical role of governance, trust, and capacity-building, the domestic champions highlight more granular realities. These can contradict or at least complicate the external frameworks’ assumptions about resources, readiness, and stakeholder inclusion. Addressing such nuances, particularly in smaller economies, rural contexts, and politically complex environments, remains a central challenge for future DPI rollouts.
Analysis of Connections and Contrasts
1.1. Digital Public Infrastructure: A Practical Approach for Africa by Diana Sang, Jane Munga and Nanjira Sambuli
Connections
The Carnegie Endowment paper emphasises that any push for Digital Public Infrastructure in Africa must be grounded in a careful understanding of local political economies, infrastructure constraints, and community-level dynamics. Their work underlines the need for strong privacy and data protection laws to build trust, a point echoed in the domestic DPI Champions’ perspectives on the importance of transparent governance and secure digital ID systems. They also highlight that local champions—spanning government, private sector, and civil society—are essential to bridging policy gaps and forging consensus in high-stakes initiatives such as instant payment networks or interoperable data hubs.
These insights dovetail with the landscape findings on varying adoption levels, capacity gaps, and the uneven regulatory environments across multiple African countries. Both sources stress the importance of contextualised strategies rather than one-size-fits-all solutions. In particular, Sang, Munga and Sambuli’s Carnegie Endowment paper strengthens the call for capacity-building measures and inclusive governance structures, corroborating the DPI Champions’ recommendation that any DPI rollout involve a cross-sector task force and consistent engagement with local communities.
Contrasts
Scale and Sovereignty: Sang et al. emphasise the importance of national sovereignty in DPI initiatives, advocating for robust local control over data and infrastructure. While similarly underscoring sovereignty, the local champions in smaller nations like Guinea and Madagascar cautioned that adopting wholly in-country control can strain limited resources. Some interviewees suggested that partial reliance on regional or international partners might be more realistic, even if it compromises a degree of sovereign control. Champion interviews highlight the extreme resource constraints faced by fragile states, where local budgets cannot support advanced data protection frameworks.
Citizen Trust vs. Political Will: The Carnegie report stresses that citizen trust is vital for DPI adoption and underscores political buy-in at the highest levels. Champion insights from Kenya and Nigeria indicate that while high-level political endorsement is essential, repeated data misuse breaches or rumours can nullify top-down mandates. Champions counter that trusting relationships with local chiefs or community gatekeepers can be more decisive than high-level endorsements.
1.2. Digital Public Infrastructure and Development: A World Bank Approach by Julia Michal Clark; Georgina Marin; Oya Pinar Ardic Alper and Guillermo Alfonso Galicia Rabadan.
Connections
The World Bank paper highlights a structured approach for governments to systematically build core DPI pillars—digital identity, instant payments, and data exchange—in a way that promotes service integration, transparency, and equitable access. It underscores the importance of robust legal frameworks and interoperable technical standards, echoing the champion’s emphasis on trust-based design and scalable infrastructure. By stressing the need for human-centred approaches—such as privacy-by-design and stakeholder engagement at all stages—the World Bank’s report converges with this paper’s perspectives on the crucial role of local champions, cross-agency task forces, and sustained public-private partnerships.
Moreover, the World Bank publication aligns with Champions’ recommendations for prioritising rural connectivity, local capacity-building, and policy coordination. Both agree that well-designed DPIs can accelerate socio-economic development, provided governance structures are inclusive, and security risks are carefully mitigated. The World Bank’s framework effectively reinforces the Champions’ call for Africa-specific strategies that balance international standards with local realities and champion seamless integration of technology, policy, and people.
Contrasts
Human-Centred Approaches: The World Bank underscores privacy-by-design and stakeholder engagement, implying that these are feasible once regulatory frameworks are set. Several champions in Tanzania and Zambia cautioned that community-level literacy remains a barrier; even well-crafted frameworks fail without continuous, on-the-ground user training. Our interviews suggest that the “once frameworks are set, adoption will follow” approach is overly simplistic, especially where non-digital alternatives remain popular.
Inclusive Governance: The World Bank highlights inclusive governance—particularly multi-agency committees. Contradictory examples emerge from the champions in Ghana, who praised a well-integrated interoperability committee, but also flagged that local NGO voices often remain excluded. This directly challenges the World Bank’s assumption that establishing such committees automatically ensures representation. Champions suggest that “broad committees” can still replicate power imbalances if civil society groups are not truly empowered to shape agendas.
1.3. The Economics of Shared Digital Infrastructures: David Eaves, Diana Coyle, Beatriz Vasconcellos, and Sumedha Deshmukh
Connections
This publication emphasises the need for robust measurement frameworks that go beyond conventional cost-benefit analyses, highlighting how digital infrastructures—when treated as long-term public goods—yield both direct and spillover benefits across economies. Aligned with the Champions perspectives, they note that governance and oversight are paramount to ensuring that such infrastructures do not entrench monopolies or exclude vulnerable communities. Rather, a well-structured DPI can channel economies of scale, spur innovation, and drive equitable growth when carefully designed. The report’s framework for assessing societal value resonates with the champions’ call for contextualised strategies, robust policy coordination, and consistent engagement with local champions. Ultimately, both converge on the idea that harnessing shared digital infrastructures can accelerate national development, but only when guided by inclusive, transparent governance mechanisms that tailor to each country’s realities.
Contrasts
Measurement Complexity: In the policy report by David Eaves, Diana Coyle, Beatriz Vasconcellos and Sumedha Deshmukh, they propose advanced metrics that go beyond cost-benefit analyses, looking at direct and spillover effects of digital infrastructures. While the Champions echo the need for robust evaluation, champions’ experiences in DRC and Senegal reveal that under-resourced agencies hamper real-world data collection. The local champions often rely on anecdotal or incomplete data, making advanced measurement frameworks unrealistic in the short term. These local perspectives underscore that simpler, more context-specific indicators (like user complaints or agent-network coverage) may be more actionable than the sophisticated frameworks championed in the report.
Avoiding Monopolies vs. Achieving Scale: Eaves et al. warn about entrenching monopolies when scaling up shared digital infrastructure. Some champions in Ghana argue that partnering with a single dominant fintech or telecom can expedite adoption in remote areas more efficiently. They cite Mobile Money Interoperability as evidence that a strong private player can “kick-start” scale, which smaller competitors eventually leverage. This partially contradicts Eaves and Coyle’s emphasis on the dangers of concentrating power at the onset.
Conclusion and Recommendations
This brief analysis of global thinking against deep local perspectives reinforces the emerging common finding that sustained DPI momentum depends on the effective engagement of local champions who understand the technologies, local culture, and adoption dynamics. And that we collectively need to establish mechanisms to support, train, and convene local communities of DPI professionals such that domestic DPI Champions are given a voice and platform to share, learn, solve, and accelerate DPI as an integrated part of the global DPI movement.
Thanks to Lisa Forte, Digital Frontiers, for her contributions to the multi-country rapid landscaping of domestic DPI Champions research.
Written by Gavin Krugel (Executive Director, Digital Frontiers)
Article originally shared on Medium.com on 19 May 2025