Orbiting sovereignty: why Africa must adopt and domesticate a continental standard for satellite connectivity 

For centuries, sovereignty was defended on land and at sea. In the 20th century, it extended to airspace and, in principle, outer space; setting rules for how nations operate in space. With satellite connectivity now within reach, the 21st century must decide what sovereignty means in orbit.

Satellites are no longer the preserve of defence ministries and space agencies. Globally, they are becoming the backbone of civilian infrastructure, powering commerce, governance, education, and health. Yet,  in sub-Saharan Africa, 78% of the population are still not connected. As we’ve come to learn: without connectivity, Africans are locked out of opportunities to learn, trade, innovate and prosper. There is a clear positive correlation between digital connectivity and GDP per capita: those who are digitally unconnected are significantly more likely to be poor. 

By providing backhaul where fibre is uneconomic or impractical, satellites can connect the unconnected. But just as with ports, airports, and telecoms networks, the rules governing who can operate in African skies could come to shape who holds leverage over our economies. Africa faces a critical choice: either adapt and domesticate a set of common satellite rules to secure its digital future, or risk competing against itself for the same investment, with smaller, slower, and more expensive results.

Licensing as leverage

Given current trends, it is reasonable to believe that satellite internet is likely to become more affordable. Today however, Africa’s fragmented licensing environment risks shifting leverage and future benefits away from the continent. Non-terrestrial network (NTN) approvals can take months in one jurisdiction and may be denied elsewhere altogether. Fees diverge, rules for user terminals are inconsistent, and requirements vary. The result is a patchwork of rules that invites operators to respond rationally: to establish a presence where terms are favourable, and avoid where they are not.  

This is not necessarily bad faith, it is simply the logical response to an uneven playing field. Africa operates as 54 disjointed markets rather than a unified bloc, missing the leverage that comes with coordination and scale. The result is structural disadvantage: our access to connectivity can become shaped more by external timelines than by African priorities. The cost of such fragmentation is already stark: in 2020, seven West Africa countries lost USD 18.4 billion due to the digital gender gap. So, connectivity rules are not abstract: they directly determine who participates in the economy, and who is left behind. Without harmonised satellite licensing, Africa risks reproducing the same exclusions in the next wave of infrastructure. To change this, Africa must do what it has done before: change the rules, reimagine its market, and ensure global systems adapt to African priorities.

Licensing as a sovereignty instrument 

Over and above being a compliance form, licensing is a statement of strategic intent. NTN rules determine who may operate, but also demand that we consider what I see as four interlinked layers where sovereignty plays out:

• The data layer: Satellites can be conduits for vast amounts of African data across borders. The absence of regional rules on Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites risks fragmenting Africa’s data leverage. Licensing conditions that embed clear rules on data flows, whether as public interest assets or regulated under national frameworks, offer practical tools to manage this effectively, more so than attempting to compel satellite operators without physical presence. 
• The physical layer: Satellite access is infrastructure, and orbital slots and ground stations are strategic assets. Licensing and landing rights decide who controls them, where ground stations are sited, and how resilient those connections will be. 
• The code layer: Equally, the rules governing how satellites communicate and interoperate will encode long-term power in the region. Interoperability, encryption, interference, spectrum management and lawful interception standards are often written into licensing conditions. These choices shape whether Africa builds open, regional systems or is locked into proprietary silos. South Africa’s ongoing satellite licensing reform, for example illustrates this tension in practice; seeking to balance national priorities like local ownership, with steps towards mutual recognition of equipment approvals and spectrum rules more suitable for high-bandwidth LEO systems (which operate differently from older geostationary satellites).
• The governance layer: Licensing decisions are made nationally, but their consequences are regional. Despite the progressive vision laid out by the African Telecommunications Union (ATU) and in the AU’s Space Policy, which calls for a unified approach to space technology for continental development, the African Space Agency (tasked with coordinating a continent-wide framework for space activities) lacks the regulatory authority to mandate action from national governments. This creates a governance gap between a continent-wide strategic vision and the national licensing decisions often driven by domestic concerns such as national security, revenue and local ownership. 

Partnership and inclusivity, not protectionism

We have precedent for aligning regionally. The African Continental Free Trade Area rests on the same logic: individually, we are small markets; collectively, we could be a force. The African Union, through the ATU has designed a model NTN licensing model framework that other African nations can domesticate.

A pan-African satellite connectivity regime is not about shutting the rest of the world out. On the contrary, it makes Africa a more attractive market on several fronts. A predictable, transparent licensing framework — one based on the cost of regulation and not revenue generation, lowers transaction costs for providers and encourages long-term investment. For governments, it ensures that terms reflect continental priorities rather than ad hoc deals. For most everyday users, it means faster, cheaper connectivity, and for the unconnected, it means access. For development partners who may still  view satellites as too fragmented or commercially driven to back directly, a regional regime opens an entirely new frontier, by creating the policy certainty needed for partners to see satellites as viable vehicles for inclusive connectivity investment. 

With harmonised rules, donors and multilaterals can channel funds into programmes that leverage satellites to reach schools, clinics, and remote communities; confident that their support will scale across borders rather than stall at national frontiers. A Nigeria IPP project extended the reach of basic medical services into off-grid communities, using Inmarsat BGAN satellite technology to tackle the ‘last mile’ challenge. Inmarsat reported that just midway through the project, state Ministries of Health were empowered with richer, more reliable data to guide policy; disease surveillance shifted from reactive reporting to early detection and frontline workers demonstrated higher competencies and delivered better care; notably including cases where they were able to resuscitate a newborn baby, and stop a new mother from bleeding to death. In Ghana, the SAT4farming programme is helping 240,000 smallholder cocoa farmers increase their yields by up to 300%. Realising such potential will require coordinated partner action to pilot the domestication of harmonised satellite rules in a few countries, and create the momentum needed to scale pan-African adoption.

The stakes

There are certainly many competing priorities, but the impending era of LEO constellations is a rare moment when a new infrastructure market is still being shaped. Africa’s space technology market for example, was valued at GBP 16.16 billion in 2021 and is projected to grow to GBP 18.77 billion by 2026. The competition for satellite investment is already fierce. Asia-Pacific and Latin America are streamlining their licensing systems to attract operators. Even within Africa, a handful of forward-leaning regulators are moving to modernise their rules; but in isolation, they cannot create the scale needed to transform the market. 

Space could indeed be our next sovereignty frontier. Licensing could be how we claim it — not to exclude, but to negotiate from strength; gaining leverage to advance continental priorities: affordability, inclusion, sustainable investment and solve for cable breaks. Domesticating a pan-continental standard turns fragmentation into strength, letting Africa compete on its own terms and in doing so extend digital opportunity to those who’ve waited longest.

This is the second in a series exploring the technical and political levers for a truly pan-African NTN licensing policy.