“Harmonising licensing at the regional level should be the highest priority”: Omdia’s Thecla Mbongue on regulating satellite internet in Africa
While 87% of Africans are covered by mobile broadband, just over a quarter use the internet. As low Earth orbit constellations such as Starlink and OneWeb expand across the continent, Thecla Mbongue, Principal Analyst for ICT and the digital economy in the Middle East and Africa at Omdia, discusses the barriers to meaningful usage, the levers governments hold over “offshore” operators, and the priorities set out in the Telecoms Offshored report.
Why coverage hasn’t translated into internet usage
87% of Africans are covered by mobile broadband, yet just over a quarter actually use the internet. In your view, what explains the fact that so much has been invested in expanding coverage while the issue of meaningful internet usage has received far less attention?
The disparity between mobile broadband coverage and actual internet in Africa reflects various fundamental misalignment between infrastructure investment priorities and the socioeconomic realities on the ground. Factors impacting negatively mobile broadband uptake include:
Affordability. Coverage alone doesn’t guarantee affordability. Data costs remain expensive relative to average incomes across much of the continent. Many Africans cannot afford regular internet access, even where networks exist.
Smartphones accessibility. Again prices remain expensive for most of the population. Brand new entry level 4G smartphones are sold from US$20. In many African countries the average monthly income does not reach US$100 a month.
Digital Literacy. Infrastructure investment has outpaced efforts to build digital skills. Without training and education on how to use internet services effectively, coverage remains underutilized.
Relevant Content. There’s often a shortage of locally relevant content, services, and applications in local languages that would drive meaningful usage and justify the cost of connectivity.
What levers African governments have over LEO operators
LEO constellations operate from low Earth orbit with very limited ground infrastructure. The report describes them as “offshore” telecom operators that partially escape traditional regulatory frameworks, including licensing, data localisation and taxation. Faced with operators that have little or no physical presence on the ground, what levers do African governments realistically have to regulate them?
The “offshore” nature of LEO satellite operators presents unprecedented regulatory challenges, but African governments are not without leverage. Several realistic regulatory mechanisms exist and include spectrum control, gateway and ground station requirements or setting specific market access conditions.
Spectrum Control. Governments retain sovereign authority over radio frequency spectrum within their borders. LEO operators must coordinate spectrum use with national regulators, providing a critical point of leverage for imposing conditions on market access.
Gateway and Ground Station Requirements: Mandating local ground infrastructure (gateways, earth stations) creates physical presence that can be regulated. This also ensures some level of local investment and creates enforcement points for regulatory compliance.
Market Access Conditions. Governments can make operating licenses conditional on meeting specific requirements—data localization, local partnerships, technology transfer, or universal service obligations. The attractiveness of African markets gives regulators negotiating power.
How Africa can build greater space sovereignty
Europe has chosen to strengthen its own satellite capabilities through IRIS² and Eutelsat. The report argues that, over the medium term, Africa will also need to develop its own satellite infrastructure. In your view, how can the continent achieve greater space sovereignty?
Achieving greater space sovereignty is essential for Africa’s long-term strategic interests, but it requires a pragmatic, multi-layered approach that balances ambition with current capabilities. This includes:
Regional Collaboration Over National Competition. Rather than each country pursuing independent satellite programs, Africa should prioritize regional initiatives. Pooling resources through the African Union or regional economic communities can achieve economies of scale and avoid duplication. The African Space Agency, established in 2019, provides an institutional framework for this coordination.
Phased Capability Development. African governments should start with achievable goals—earth observation satellites, communications satellites for specific applications—before pursuing more complex systems. Countries like Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, and Algeria have already demonstrated that African nations can develop and operate satellite systems.
Public-Private Partnerships. Stakeholders must leverage private sector expertise and capital while maintaining strategic control. Joint ventures with established space companies can accelerate technology transfer and capability building.
Manufacturing and Launch Capabilities. Stakeholders should develop regional satellite manufacturing facilities and, over time, launch capabilities. This creates jobs, builds industrial capacity, and reduces dependence on foreign providers.
Regulatory and Policy Frameworks. Clear, supportive national and regional space policies will encourage investment while protecting strategic interests.
Strategic Partnerships: Engaging with diverse international partners (not just traditional space powers) will prevent over-dependence on any single country or bloc.
The top priority in the Telecoms Offshored roadmap
The Telecoms Offshored report proposes a roadmap: treating satellite providers as fully-fledged telecom operators, requiring local gateways, harmonising licensing at the regional level, and making market access conditional on technology transfer. In your view, which of these actions should be the highest priority?
While all the proposed actions in the Telecoms Offshored roadmap are important, Harmonizing licensing at the regional level should be the highest priority for strategic reasons such as:
Foundation for Other Measures. Regional harmonization creates the framework within which other regulatory actions become more effective. Without coordinated approaches, satellite operators can exploit regulatory arbitrage, playing countries against each other or simply choosing the most permissive jurisdictions.
Enhanced Negotiating Power. A unified regional licensing framework dramatically increases Africa’s leverage with global LEO operators. Companies like Starlink or OneWeb must negotiate with a bloc representing hundreds of millions of potential users rather than individual countries, fundamentally shifting the power dynamic.
Efficiency and Reduced Costs. Harmonized licensing reduces administrative burden for both regulators and operators, making compliance more straightforward while ensuring consistent standards. This efficiency makes enforcement more realistic given limited regulatory resources in many African countries.
