Category: Business Daily

Africa’s startup and innovation ecosystem is one of the world’s most promising frontiers for investment.

Across the continent, entrepreneurs are building solutions that address real economic and social challenges from digital payments and agri-tech to logistics and clean energy.

Yet, despite this dynamism, investors continue to approach African markets with caution. The question is no longer whether Africa has potential, but how to make that potential investable.

The challenge lies in perception and structure. Investors often see African markets as high-risk due to regulatory fragmentation, weak compliance systems and limited transparency in business operations.

This creates a trust deficit that hinders the flow of capital, particularly at early and growth stages, where the risk appetite is already low. But these challenges are not hopeless.

The conversation on de-risking investment in Africa must evolve from one of caution to one of strategy.

De-risking begins with structure. Businesses seeking investment must build internal systems that align with global standards of governance and accountability.

Sound financial management, legal compliance, and transparent reporting are not bureaucratic hurdles-they are growth enablers. A well-structured company signals seriousness to investors and reduces the friction that often comes with cross-border due diligence.

However, de-risking cannot be achieved by founders alone. It requires coordination across the entire ecosystem. Governments and regulators play a critical role in harmonising policy frameworks to make compliance predictable across markets.

When investors can trust that rules are consistent and enforcement is fair, they are more likely to commit long-term capital.

Likewise, ecosystem enablers such as accelerators and incubators must embed compliance and governance support into their growth programmes, ensuring startups are investment-ready before they seek funding.

Investors, too, have a part to play. The most impactful investors are those who move beyond writing cheques to building capacity.

By working closely with founders to strengthen internal structures and governance, investors safeguard their own capital while improving the sustainability of the ventures they support.

The future of African investment depends not only on access to funding but on the maturity of the systems that guide how that funding is deployed.

In this sense, de-risking becomes a shared responsibility, one that links profitability with accountability.

A resilient, trusted ecosystem can only emerge when all players from policymakers to investors to founders prioritize structure and compliance as much as innovation and scale.

Slyvester Omondi is the Business Development Manager at Velex Advisory Kenya, an investment advisory firm offering tailored financial, legal and business advisory services with offices across Africa.

Electricity producer KenGen has been permitted to proceed with a Sh2.5 billion tender for the sale of 6.38 million carbon credits after the procurement watchdog dismissed an application by a losing bidder.

The Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB) dismissed an application for review filed by Sintmond Group Ltd, saying that given the magnitude of the subject tender and the substantial financial value involved, the firm bore the obligation to demonstrate its capacity to undertake a contract of such a scale.

Carbon credits, also known as carbon offsets, are permits that allow owners to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases.

Sintmond’s bid for the sale of Certified Emissions Reductions was disqualified after failing to provide independent evidence of successful performance in previous contracts of comparable value and complexity, despite being allowed to do so.

‘Accordingly, we find that under this ground, the Respondent (KenGen) was justified in concluding that the Applicant (Sintmond Group Ltd) lacked the requisite experience and capacity to handle the present tender.

Sintmond Group had submitted the highest bid offering $23,207,359 (about Sh2.99 billion).

The board said the omission contravened the requirements of Clause 14 of the bid data sheet, which obligated tenderers to demonstrate capacity and reliability through verifiable past performance.

The review board said the absence of such references reasonably made KenGen conclude that the company lacked the demonstrated capability to execute a contract of the magnitude contemplated under the tender.

The electricity-generating firm said Sintmond Group Ltd did not demonstrate any prior experience or capacity to manage a contract of similar magnitude, and when considered against the backdrop of the earlier terminated tender, the firm’s performance history did not inspire confidence in its ability to deliver.

‘Accordingly, we are persuaded that a reasonable and prudent procuring entity, faced with the same set of facts, would have reached a similar conclusion that the Applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient ability/capability to perform the tender,’ the board said.

KenGen advertised the bids in May, asking bidders to demonstrate previous successful participation in emission reduction trading or transactions of CERs or Voluntary Emission Reductions, which would form part of the evaluation criteria.

Three tenders were received- Munja Trading Limited in a Joint Venture with Marwil Energy Holding AS, Kyoto Network Limited, and Sintmond Group Limited.

Upon conclusion of the evaluation stage, the tender committee found the joint venture responsive.

The evaluation committee determined that Munja Trading Limited, in a joint venture with Marwil Energy Holding AS, had submitted the highest evaluated tender price, cumulatively amounting to $19,637,758 (2.53 billion), and was therefore ranked as the best evaluated bidder.

Sintmond Group challenged the decision, arguing that the procuring entity improperly relied on extraneous and undisclosed due diligence criteria to disqualify it from the tender.

Last month, the board had directed KenGen to do the bidding process afresh, citing irregularities in the earlier process.

The electricity-generating firm did as directed and settled on the same company, forcing Sintmond Group to file another application for review.

The firm complained that it was condemned unheard, and KenGen relied on matters that were never part of the tender process, in breach of the Fair Administrative Action Act.

And after hearing the case, the board still dismissed the application, stating that despite being aware of the importance of demonstrating past experience, the firm still failed to furnish the evidence.

‘The only reasonable inference to draw from this omission is that the Applicant did not possess credible proof of past performance to support its capability to execute the tender,’ said the board.

The High Court has sided with a German multinational engineering firm caught in a Sh1.9billion fight with Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) over a delayed tax relief document.

The court said it was improper for the taxman to punish HP Gauff Ingenieure GmbH and Co. KG for administrative lapses in processing a tax exemption certificate.

While setting aside KRA’s decision to deny HP Gauff VAT relief of Sh526,022,967-a decision previously upheld by the Tax Appeals Tribunal-the High Court found that the Treasury Cabinet Secretary had failed to act on the firm’s request for a tax exemption certificate. It was, therefore, unjust to penalise the company for a government administrative omission.

‘It is my finding that the tribunal erred in allowing the administrative failure of the relevant ministries and the respondent (KRA) to prejudice the appellant’s (HP Gauff’s) established right to remission, effectively punishing the appellant for the government’s failure to finalise internal procedures,’ said the High Court in a ruling handed on October 23, 2025.

HP Gauff Ingenieure GmbH and Co. KG, which provides consultancy and engineering services mainly in the infrastructure sector, moved to the Tax Appeals Tribunal on August 21, 2020, after the KRA declined to grant it tax relief on projects funded by official donors.

The four main projects that are subject to the audit include the Kisumu-Kakamega Road, Merille-Marsabit Road, MRTS Jogoo corridor, and Nakuru Loruk-Marich road.

Under Kenya’s framework, Official Aid-Funded Programmes (OAFPs) may be approved by the Treasury Cabinet Secretary to exempt such projects from the 16 percent VAT, as a sweetener to attract cheaper loans from development finance institutions such as the World Bank and the African Development Bank.

Sufficient time

The KRA argued it rejected HP Gauff’s request for VAT relief-amounting to Sh526,022,967-because the firm failed to produce the requisite tax exemption certificates despite being given sufficient time.

The taxman also demanded corporate income tax of Sh1.24 billion, noting that the income earned from the projects was not exempt. It also demanded that the German firm pay-as-you-earn (PAYE) of Sh189,339,257, bringing the total tax claim to about Sh1.9 billion.

On corporate income tax and PAYE, the court faulted the tribunal for not addressing the issues that the German firm had raised, including challenging KRA’s decision to tax income from a water supply project located in South Sudan.

The firm also disputed KRA’s benchmarking of expatriate pay as well as its decision to reject its tax-free subsistence allowances.

The taxman said benchmarking was warranted because the reported salaries seemed low and the company failed to provide contracts for the foreign employees.

The taxman added that the firm did not qualify as a ‘regional office’ under the Income Tax Act, so the rule allowing regional directors and expatriates to exclude one-third of their pay from taxation did not apply.

However, the court noted that the tribunal ‘made no findings on these material questions’.

‘It did not refer to the evidence presented, such as the Shared Services Agreement or the Transfer Pricing Policy. It did not interpret the relevant sections of the Income Tax Act,’ the court said, while setting aside the decision to uphold the assessment on corporate income tax and Paye, sending it back for a fresh hearing.

‘Instead, it upheld the entirety of the Sh1.9 billion assessment based on a rationale that could, at best, only apply to the VAT portion of the dispute. This is a manifest error of law.’

Earnings from tea exports to India surged by nearly three quarters in the first half of 2025, overtaking industrial carbonates, or soda ash, to become the country’s top export to Asia’s third-largest economy.

India bought tea valued Sh1.97 billion between January and June 2025, data collated by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) shows, a 73.4 percent jump over Sh1.14 billion in the same period of 2024.

Shipments of Kenyan tea to India increased by 65.89 percent in volume to 7.83 million kilogrammes in the review period from 4.72 million kilogrammes a year earlier

The jump saw tea dethrone carbonates and percarbonates, or simply soda ash, whose exports to India fell by 24.4 percent to Sh916.98 million from Sh1.21 billion a year earlier.

Volumes of the chemical exports, mainly disodium carbonate used in glass and detergents manufacturing, dropped to 31.17 million kilogrammes from 34.21 million kilogrammes.

India is one of the markets which has in the past been listed by Kenya Export Promotion and Branding Agency (Keproba) as difficult to penetrate.

‘We realise the Indian market has risen in terms of sophistication and even the demand must correspond to needs of the niches in the market. We are marketing key products into the market by developing a targeted IMC (Integrated marketing communications) plan,’ Keproba told the Business Daily in a past emailed response.

Besides tea and soda ash, Kenya’s exports to India include pigeon peas and coffee.

The bump in exports to India comes against the backdrop of a sector-wide downturn amid global tea prices slump which eroded earnings for farmers.

KNBS data show that total tea export earnings fell by 13.41 percent in the first half of 2025 to Sh176.76 billion from a record Sh204.14 billion the previous year – the first decline since the 2017/18 fiscal year.

The setback has rippled through the value chain, dealing a heavy blow to hundreds of thousands of smallholder farmers who rely on the crop as their main source of income.

Farmers affiliated with the Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA), for instance, earned between Sh0.80 and Sh19.10 less per kilogramme of green leaf in second payments – the annual bonus – during the year to June 2025 compared with the previous cycle.

KTDA blamed the reduced payouts on the strengthening of the shilling, which averaged Sh129 to the US dollar, compared with Sh144 the year before, wiping out an estimated Sh15 for every dollar earned.

‘The drop in tea prices was largely driven by huge tea stocks that had built up during the reserve price window, which was only removed in October 2024,’ KTDA said via email mid-October.

‘Geopolitical challenges and instability in key markets such as Pakistan, Russia, Sudan and Iran also affected demand, though the situation has now slightly stabilised.’

The pain for smallholder farmers was compounded by a drop in demand from Pakistan, Kenya’s largest tea market. KNBS data show that Pakistan – which accounts for about 40 percent of total exports – slashed its imports by 12.96 percent, with earnings from the destination falling to Sh74.01 billion in the first half from Sh85.03 billion the year before.

This marked the first drop in tea exports to Pakistan since the 2018/19 financial year when earnings from the South Asian nation fell by nearly 25 percent.

KTDA data show that average prices per kilogramme of made tea fell across all major producing regions – from Sh385 in 2023/24 to Sh322 in 2024/25. In Central Kenya, farmers in Kiambu earned Sh371, down Sh46, while those in Murang’a and Nyeri fetched Sh376 and Sh388, down Sh42 each.

The steepest declines were in the Rift Valley and Western regions: Kericho farmers earned Sh245, down Sh101, Bomet Sh209 (down Sh85), and Nyamira Sh266 (down Sh106).

With the rising popularity of crypto transactions and recent legislative developments in Kenya, a recognised leader in mobile money, the question of tax treatment of digital assets has become increasingly relevant. Should digital assets be subject to both Excise and Value Added Tax (vat)? The answer is far from clear.

Kenya has not had specific regulations for crypto assets for a while, with regulatory issues and related activities being addressed based on existing frameworks and in line with the mandates of the Capital Markets Authority (CMA) and the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK).

However, the CMA and the CBK’s rulemaking in crypto-assets or digital assets has thus far remained limited, and no formal instruments that specifically or expressly cover digital assets had been issued by either institution.

That said, the government recently introduced the Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASP) Act, 2025, establishing a regulatory framework for VASPs and addressing risks linked to the misuse of virtual asset services

According to Chainalysis, a US-based firm, Kenyans carried out transactions valued Sh426.4 billion ($3.3 billion) in stablecoins in the year up to June 2024, highlighting the increasing integration of virtual assets into economic activities.

Against this backdrop, understanding the tax and regulatory implications requires examining the key categories of virtual asset services operating in Kenya.

These include peer-to-peer exchanges, which enable fiat-to-crypto conversions; custodial services which help users safeguard private keys; and NFT marketplaces, which facilitate the creation and exchange of digital collectibles and art. These roles demand tailored regulation and taxation that reflect the distinct functions of digital assets.

Accordingly, Kenya’s legislative response signals a pivotal shift in the regulatory and fiscal landscape. Through the Finance Act 2025, the government repealed the 3 percent Digital Asset Tax (DAT) on gross transaction value and introduced a 10 percent Excise Duty (Excise) on fees charged by VASPs.

Under the Excise Duty Act (EDA), fees charged by VASPs on virtual asset transactions are subject to Excise at a rate of 10 percent of the excisable value.

This shift from the repealed DAT to Excise reflects a more targeted and administratively efficient approach, focusing on transaction fees rather than the gross value of digital asset transactions.

By taxing the fees instead of the entire transaction amount, the government preserves revenue while reducing economic distortions associated with taxing gross transaction values.

While the imposition of Excise on virtual asset transactions is explicit under the EDA, the same certainty does not apply to VAT. Under the Value Added Tax Act (VAT Act), VAT is chargeable on any taxable supply unless it is specifically listed as exempt under the First Schedule or zero-rated under the Second Schedule.

Virtual asset services are not included in these exemptions, raising a critical question: Are fees charged by Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) subject to VAT?

This ambiguity is compounded by the similarity between VASP services and traditional financial services. The First Schedule to the Virtual Asset Act outlines the types of virtual asset services and their functions, including custodial wallet services, transfer and conversion services, trading, settlement platforms, payment gateways, and brokerage functions.

From the foregoing, the services offered by VASPs are akin to those provided by traditional financial institutions. Notably, Part II of the First Schedule to the VAT Act exempts certain financial services from VAT.

However, it does not specifically include services offered by VASPs, creating uncertainty around their VAT treatment despite their functional alignment with conventional financial services.

The current lack of clarity on how to tax virtual asset transactions is bound to give rise to tax disputes between VASPs and the tax authority.

Applying both Excise and VAT on these services creates an unfair tax environment, as cryptocurrencies are increasingly used as a medium of payment similar to other financial services exempt from VAT.

Best international practice offers useful guidance and provides clarity on where ambiguity exists. For instance, the European Union, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Singapore treat virtual assets activities, including bitcoin, akin to financial services and means of payment, thus exempting them from VAT.

This not only reduces compliance complexity but also lowers incidences of tax disputes and reduces transaction costs in the digital economy.

Building on these lessons, a clear and forward-looking policy framework is essential for Kenya. As such, policymakers should work closely with industry stakeholders to develop legislation that encourages innovation while safeguarding revenue.

Finally, the taxation regime for virtual assets must be clear and well-defined to reflect the country’s approach to fostering innovation, position Kenya as a competitive digital hub, and enhance compliance with tax regulations.

Travel and trade are crucial change agents in society, government and technology. The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) is fundamentally altering how we travel and trade.

By utilising AI’s capabilities, the aviation sector is on the verge of massive disruptive changes that will present new opportunities and risks.

Using machine learning, predictive analytics and natural language processing, AI has the potential to revolutionise how institutions operate generally, but specifically by opening new avenues for customer service, risk management, business and travel advice.

For example, AI chatbots (computer programs designed to simulate conversations with human users, either through text or voice) and virtual helpers help with customer service around the clock, simplifying user interfaces and making it easier to answer questions quickly.

Consequently, they enhance consumer experience and reduce expenses. For instance, in risk management and credit scoring, AI algorithms can examine enormous amounts of data to identify patterns and assess risk levels. This makes trade data and travel information accessible to a broader audience.

Kenya Airways (KQ) recently signed a partnership with RoamBuddy to launch KQSafari Data, a solution developed at the Fahari Innovation Hub through the airline’s Open Innovation Challenge.

The service, offering more than 2,250 affordable roaming plans in 180 countries, aims to provide travellers with seamless, reliable, and cost-effective global data connectivity, addressing one of the key challenges for international passengers.

The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), a deal aimed at significantly increasing trade within Africa, presents unique opportunities for AI. This also applies to the Single African Air Transport Market (SAATM), which potentially links 1.3 billion people in 54 countries with a combined gross domestic product of circa $3.4 trillion.

Ethiopia has started trading under the AfCTA. AI can hence make the bloc’s work better and reach its goals in both trade and travel.

For example, AI can help improve trade logistics by making delivery systems, customs processes, and tracking and tracing more effective and efficient. It can create and find the best travel routes and multi-modal options to move goods, predict delays and give both travellers and traders real-time information.

AI can analyse trade data to identify patterns, trends and connections. This is strategic for policymakers in making better choices, predicting and responding better to future trends.

AI-powered systems can make cross-border e-commerce more efficient, a sector that is highly anticipated to grow exponentially under the AfCFTA. This is because AI can create personalised product recommendations and automate customer service.

However, for AI to achieve the goals for AfCFTA and SAATM, it is essential to have good AI governance and regulation.

More investments must be made in digital infrastructure and education. With education and training, AI can help people acquire the skills they need for an African economy that works better together.

AI systems can cross-link passenger data and baggage/cargo manifests to detect inconsistencies.

Using AI plus blockchain, border management agencies could track every cargo item and passenger bag through secure, time-stamped digital records -> making it almost impossible to insert illicit material unnoticed. The outcome is improved accountability and transparency from check-in to aircraft loading.

Kenya Bureau of Standards (Kebs) has been directed to undertake a fresh due diligence on pre-qualified firms in a multi-billion shilling tender for inspection of goods before leaving the country of origin.

The Public Procurement Administrative Review Board found that Kebs was unfair to World Standardisation Certification Testing Group (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd when it disqualified the Chinese firm without giving it a hearing.

The company, which won Pre-export Verification of Conformity for inspection of motor vehicles, spare parts and other equipment for conformity to Kenyan standards on May 9, 2022, was disqualified for the 2025-2028 tender.

The firm said that despite meeting all eligibility and mandatory requirements, it was disqualified through a letter September 23, 2025, which alleged that the company had ‘on several occasions breached its contract with Kebs thereby compromising the safety of the population’.

But the procurement watchdog said the firm was not afforded an opportunity to be heard on some of the issues which the tender evaluation committee relied upon in reaching the decision to disqualify it.

‘The Evaluation Committee, in exercising an administrative function, was under an obligation to accord the Applicant a fair hearing before making a decision that adversely affected its interests,’ said the board.

The Chinese firm’s current contract was extended for six months, on May 7 to November 8, but it was served with the termination notice, two months to the end of the contract. The firm then rushed to court and obtained orders, blocking Kebs from terminating the deal.

In the decision on October 27, the board directed Kebs to re-convene the evaluation committee and undertake a fresh due diligence exercise on the firm, ‘in strict compliance with the provisions of the Tender Document, the Act and the Regulations’.

Further, the board directed the procurement process to be concluded within 30 days from the date of the decision.

Kebs invited the bids early this year and 19 firms, including the Chinese firm, expressed interest. After the preliminary evaluation, nine tenders were found to be non-responsive and were disqualified.

The remaining 10 satisfied all the mandatory requirements and were accordingly declared responsive and subsequently admitted to the technical evaluation stage for further assessment. All the firms were recommended for pre-qualification, subject to the outcome of a due diligence exercise.

The board was informed that the head of procurement at Kebs reviewed the entire procurement process, including the evaluation of tenders, and concurred with the evaluation committee’s recommendation not to prequalify the Chinese company.

The firm said it would be exposed to financial loss and reputational harm, having legitimately expected to be pre-qualified after meeting all technical, eligibility, and financial requirements.

Some lower-tier healthcare facilities in Kenya, especially the private ones, are providing services beyond their resource capacity, the latest national survey has revealed, highlighting weaknesses in health regulation and raising concerns about patient safety and the quality of healthcare delivery.

The Kenya Health Facility Assessment, which surveyed 3,605 facilities across all 47 counties, found that many Level 2 and 3 facilities, which are designed to provide only basic outpatient and preventive services, have expanded their operations to include major surgeries, caesarean sections, and inpatient care.

Such procedures are usually the remit of Level 4 and 5 hospitals, which have the necessary surgical theatres, blood transfusion units, anaesthesia capabilities, and emergency response teams.

‘The facilities are misclassified by the Kenya Essential Package for Health (KEPH) level, or they are offering services beyond their capacity/scope. Most of the misaligned facilities are private,’ read the report.

Under the Kenya Essential Package for Health classification system, healthcare facilities are categorised from Level 1 (community services) to Level 6 (national referral hospitals), with each level expected to deliver specific services.

The report, which assessed the quality of care, service availability, and readiness, further highlighted gaps in maternal and newborn services, which are crucial indicators of the performance of the healthcare system.

Of the 6,132 facilities providing delivery services nationwide, only 37 percent had all seven Basic Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care (BEmONC) functions.

Among the 949 Level 4 and 5 facilities offering delivery services, only 46 percent had all nine Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care (CEmONC) functions.

While all Level 5 hospitals met the standard, less than half of Level 4 hospitals did, revealing significant disparities in readiness.

This means that many women are giving birth in facilities that lack the full emergency capacity to manage complications such as postpartum haemorrhage or birth asphyxia, which are among the leading causes of maternal and neonatal deaths in Kenya, accounting for nearly 60 percent of these fatalities.

The Ministry of Health attributed these trends to several related factors. In rural and peri-urban areas, patients often seek treatment at the nearest facility, even if it lacks advanced care capabilities. Additionally, weak regulatory enforcement and gaps in licensing mean that facilities can operate without routine reassessment.

The survey also revealed significant shortages in healthcare infrastructure. Only 17 percent of health facilities have on-site oxygen generation plants, which are a critical lifesaving resource during obstetric emergencies or surgeries. Many facilities also lack essential delivery devices, such as flowmeters and cannulas.

Kenya has fewer than 1,000 adult ICU beds nationwide, and only around four percent of facilities provide inpatient oncology or psychiatric services.

This forces many patients to travel long distances or to forgo treatment altogether.

While emergency response systems remain fragile, only 64 percent of facilities have Basic Life Support ambulances, and just 31 percent are equipped with Advanced Life Support units, severely limiting referral and emergency response capabilities.

South African retailer Woolworths Holdings has launched beauty products in the Kenyan market, marking an expansion from its traditional business of selling clothes as it looks to capitalise on the growing middle class.

The retailer has stocked a range of global beauty brands including Fenty Beauty, Chanel fragrances, Estée Lauder creams and W Beauty in Nairobi’s Sarit Centre store and plans to replicate a similar model in other outlets in the country.

Group CEO and executive director at Woolworths Roy Bagattini said the entry into beauty products is motivated by the growing middle class in the country and the trend in South Africa, where revenue from the beauty division has more than doubled in the past two years.

‘We think beauty, cosmetics, skin, fragrance and colour is a big opportunity in the market. A lot of customers are investing and spending more on their family, themselves and that way they shore up [demand] for such products,’ said Mr Bagattini.

Branching into beauty products positions Woolworths alongside other outlets like Linton’s Beauty World, Health and Glow and Goodlife Pharmacy. Other firms such as LC Waikiki, Miniso and Carrefour have been expanding their beauty shelves to capture the cosmetics market.

Woolworths beauty line features items such as lipsticks, foundations, toners, serums and body care essentials that targets the rising demand for premium beauty products among urban consumers.

Kenya becomes the third market outside South Africa for Woolworths to launch beauty products. It has taken a similar move in Namibia and Botswana, motivated by the doubling of beauty sales in South Africa over the past two years.

‘We’ve seen our business double in size in the last few years… we think it will double again. But we feel that the markets in Africa are underserved and under-supported, particularly from some of the bigger brands,’ said Mr Bagattini.

Woolworths currently operates 11 stores in Kenya, most of them in Nairobi, and is considering further expansion based on their commercial viability and catchment potential. Mr Bagattini said he sees room to diversify further into the food business.

‘There’s more opportunity for us to put more stores, which we will look at doing. There are possibilities and we are looking at further store openings in Nairobi specifically,’ said Mr Bagattini.

Kenya’s beauty industry has attracted an increased interest from international and regional brands, driven by the rising disposable incomes and shifting consumer lifestyles.

The skincare, fragrance and make-ups business is now one of the fastest-expanding areas in retail that has been largely supported by mall development, digital influence and the growing demand for skincare, fragrance and cosmetic products.

Pharmacy chains like Goodlife have widened access to mid-range skincare and dermo cosmetic labels as part of their wellness strategy.

The lifestyle retailers such as Healthy U continue to push for natural and clean-beauty alternatives.

Why do some drivers come to a virtual standstill when they cross the rumble strips that warn of an approaching speed bump or other hazard? Many readers

Rumble strips are a hazard warning and are not intended to be hazards in themselves. They are supposed to be designed and placed so they can be crossed with zero ill-effect on the comfort or control of the vehicles that cross them – at any speed!

Other road markings and signposts (for speed bumps or anything else) are purely visual warnings. You have to see them to take the advised action. But there are circumstances when they might not be visible, in heavy rain or when blocked by other traffic, or when the driver is not concentrating, or when the signs have been obliterated or are missing altogether.

So, if the hazard is dangerous enough, or possibly invisible and unexpected (and speed bumps certainly qualify on those counts) a signal that is not dependent on eyesight is warranted. Rumble strips step in with signals to two other senses – your ears, the seat of your pants and your hands on the steering wheel. You can feel and hear the mild vibration they cause. They should be positioned so they do not require or recommend any action ‘before’ you cross them and leave plenty of time for reaction even if the vibration is your first clue to a looming hazard.

If rumble strips interfere with the car’s handling in any way, either the strips are not properly designed or your suspension is faulty or your steering joints are excessively worn or your tyres are severely over-inflated.

In Kenya, rumble strips should be legally compulsory adjuncts to every speed bump (because their shapes and sizes are so much more severe than international practice or the stipulated Kenya Standard), but it is equally important that the warning strips are properly designed and built in accordance with the foregoing principles and intended purpose. Few hazards (especially bumps) even have the visual warning signs and locator posts which the law already specifies.

And to the greatest extent possible, rumble strips should always be positioned at a regular and regulated distance from any hazard, so the driver who feels their buzz can estimate exactly where the hazard is, even if he still cannot see it.

He knows where to look and he knows how hard to brake. If there are simple and logical ingredients as far away as possible from rocket science, these specifications would be among them.