Category: Business Daily

Kiru, Michi and Chinga tea factories netted the highest prices at the maiden orthodox tea held about a fortnight ago, disclosures show.

Records from the regional auction in Mombasa showed that tea from Kiru, which is located in Mathioya, Murang’a County, fetched the highest price at $3.87 (Sh500.15) a kilo during the sale, followed by Michi $3.77 (Sh487.23), Chinga $3.76 (Sh485.94), and Kagwe $3.70 (Sh478.18).

Africa’s urban centres are expanding at an unprecedented pace. By 2050, they’re projected to welcome nearly a billion new residents. This explosive growth presents tremendous opportunities and significant challenges.

While cities serve as engines of economic progress, they often develop in ways that exclude large segments of their populations through rising costs and poor planning. Designing urban expansion with inclusivity in mind can help solve this problem.

The foundation for inclusive cities begins with thoughtful land management. When cities treat land purely as a commodity, prices inevitably rise beyond what most residents can afford. Kigali, for example, offers a compelling alternative through its leasehold system, where the government maintains ownership while issuing long-term usage rights.

This approach stabilises land values, prevents speculative bubbles, and ensures development benefits the entire community rather than just wealthy investors.

Housing policy represents another critical lever for inclusion.

The traditional model-or default-of isolated luxury developments alongside neglected slums serves no one’s long-term interests and is, at best, lacking strategy.

In fast developing economies, we have seen new developments that demonstrate the power of mixed-income communities, where affordable units are integrated into market-rate developments. Such projects create vibrant, diverse neighbourhoods while giving lower-income residents access to better services and opportunities.

Transportation systems also often reveal a city’s true priorities. While, for instance, Lagos’ BRT network initially focused on wealthier corridors, Addis Ababa’s light rail system was designed from the outset to serve all residents with flat, affordable fares.

Well-planned public transit helps bridge economic divides by connecting people to jobs, education, and services regardless of their neighbourhood or income level.

The ‘informal economy’ still employs the majority of urban Africans, yet many cities treat street vendors and market traders as problems rather than assets.

Upgrading rather than removing informal commercial spaces can preserve livelihoods while improving safety and sanitation. Smart cities recognise that informality often represents rational adaptation to economic realities, not something to be eradicated.

When allocating limited municipal resources, basic infrastructure in underserved areas delivers more value than showcase projects. A good example is Dar es Salaam’s decision to prioritise water and sanitation in informal settlements which dramatically improved living conditions for thousands. This approach demonstrates how targeted investments in fundamentals can uplift entire communities.

The time for incremental change has passed. African cities need bold, comprehensive approaches to urban development that place inclusion and affordability at the centre.

The solutions-and successful examples-exist. What’s needed now is the collective will to implement them at scale across the continent’s rapidly growing urban landscapes.

Community engagement also produces better outcomes than top-down decision making. In Zambia, when residents of informal settlements mapped their own neighborhoods and guided upgrade plans, the results reflected actual needs rather than bureaucratic assumptions.

Although technology implementations often bypass the urban poor, they don’t have to.

Simple modernisation tools – like prepaid utility meters – bring reliable service to previously excluded neighborhoods, proving that innovation can expand rather than restrict access.

True smart city initiatives should be judged by their ability to serve marginalized communities, not just technological sophistication.

The costs of exclusion manifests in strained social systems and reduced economic potential. For example, Johannesburg’s stark inequalities have resulted in creating massive expenditures on private security and lost productivity. In contrast, cities that prioritize inclusion benefit from greater social stability and shared prosperity.

Creating inclusive cities isn’t easy – it requires thoughtfulness, innovation, and coordinated action across multiple fronts. The approaches I have mentioned are being tested and proven across African cities.

The challenge now lies in scaling them systematically. Municipal leaders have both the tools and successful examples to guide action.

The coming decade of urban growth presents an opportunity to build differently; more intentionally, with technology and governance integrated into master plans, and focused on creating cities that work for all their residents.

After nearly three decades as an employee-more than half of them as chief executive of Crown Paints-Rakesh Rao longed for the day he could start a business of his own.

Entrepreneurship, he believed, would finally give him ‘peace of mind.” In an April 2021 interview, he said he had given himself about three years-around now, as his two sons settled into their paths-to actualise the dream.

Kenya’s hospitality story is built on warmth, resilience, and world-class talent. But here’s a question for all of us: will the next generation of global hotel brands carry Kenyan names, or will we forever host under someone else’s flag?

For decades, local hotel owners and investors have carried the spirit of Karibu Kenya, welcoming the world with unmatched professionalism.

Our hotels, lodges, and camps have been the heartbeat of tourism, shaping experiences that bring millions to our country. Yet as more international hotel chains set up in Kenya, we must ask: are we building our industry’s future on borrowed names, or nurturing our own to become tomorrow’s global leaders?

International chains undoubtedly bring value-global visibility, expertise, and jobs. But the profits flow abroad, decisions are made elsewhere, and our pioneers risk being overshadowed in their own home market.

Kenyan hotel brands deserve the same incentives, financing, and global exposure offered to foreign players. With a disciplined, highly skilled workforce already sought after worldwide, why shouldn’t Kenyan brands dominate regionally and globally?

In fact, Kenyan hospitality professionals have long been our greatest export. From Dubai to Doha, from Mauritius to southern Africa, our chefs, managers, and staff are in high demand and are well-trained, polished, and trusted to deliver excellence.

Even in Europe, Kenyan graduates are finding opportunities, valued for their professionalism and service culture. If our people can power the success of other countries’ hotel industries, why can’t our own brands be given the tools to succeed at home and abroad?

Other countries have shown us what is possible. In South Africa, Protea Hotels grew from a modest local chain in the 1980s to more than 100 properties across Africa, proving that African hospitality brands can achieve continental scale.

Yet its eventual acquisition by Marriott in 2014 is a double-edged lesson: without strong national and regional support, even successful African brands risk being absorbed by global giants rather than standing as independent players.

In contrast, India’s Taj Hotels began with a single property in Mumbai in 1903 and, with deliberate government and private sector backing, evolved into one of the most respected hospitality names worldwide.

Kenya requires approximately Sh30.4 billion ($235 million) to equip around 3,800 health facilities across the country that currently lack electricity, and to stabilise backup power for existing connections.

An analysis by Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL) reveals that of this total amount needed-inclusive of Sh17.2 billion ($133 million) for private facilities and Sh13.1 billion ($102 million) for public facilities-only about Sh1.3 billion ($10 million) has been provided by donors, resulting in a funding gap of Sh29.1 billion ($225 million).

The Ministry of Energy has been lobbying the National Assembly to lift the seven-year ban on new power purchase deals. While there was an indication of the ban being lifted in June of this year, this is yet to be realised.

For years, Kenya Power, the country’s main electricity offtaker, has been tied into contracts with independent power producers (IPP). These agreements were signed quietly, away from public scrutiny, and were meant to secure additional electricity for the grid.

On the surface, they seemed like a way to expand supply and meet rising demand. But in reality, many of these contracts tilted heavily in favour of the private producers and left the public carrying the cost.

In the year ending June 2024, Kenya Power bought 59 percent of its electricity from KenGen, the State generator. Yet KenGen only received 40 percent of the total payments, about Sh49.4 billion.

By contrast, IPPs supplied just 41 percent of the electricity but collected 60 percent of the money. Put simply, KenGen supplied most of the power, while IPPs took most of the cash.

The latest half-year results up to December 2024 show that this imbalance is still weighing on the company. Kenya Power spent Sh71.4 billion on buying electricity in just six months.

The stronger shilling reduced some costs, and renewable energy purchases rose to 6,603 gigawatt hours (GWh) from 6,199 GWh a year earlier, but the basic problem remains. The share of money paid out is still far higher than the share of electricity delivered by IPPs.

A unit from a private producer averaged Sh21, while KenGen charged less than half that, at about Sh10. Even in geothermal power, which is considered one of the cheapest and most reliable renewable sources, IPPs were charging more than double what KenGen billed.

The pattern continued in thermal generation, whese producers charged almost Sh44 per unit against KenGen’s Sh29. Unfortunately, the contracts include what is known as a take or pay clause, which means Kenya Power is required to pay, even when the electricity is not consumed. These are rigid contracts that load risk onto the public.

For ordinary citizens, all this translates into one simple outcome: high electricity bills. But the story is bigger than bills. It is a story about governance.

When power purchase contracts are signed behind closed doors and when governments lack the technical expertise or bargaining strength to negotiate on equal footing with private companies, the outcome is almost always the same: the public carries the burden.

Kenya’s electricity story shows just how costly weak governance can be. When we talk about Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) principles, the spotlight almost always falls on the environment or social concerns. We speak about climate change, carbon emissions, job creation, and diversity. Governance is usually mentioned last, like a supporting act.

Yet governance is the foundation stone that holds everything together. Without it, environmental promises and social pledges are a weak foundation. Governance is about trust, fairness, accountability, and the ability of institutions to deliver in the public interest. Without good governance, everything else begins to crack.

Governance is not about paperwork or ticking compliance boxes. It is about the ability to safeguard the public interest. It is about ensuring that contracts, policies, and decisions are fair, transparent, and accountable. Kenya’s electricity contracts demonstrate what happens when governance is treated as an afterthought.

This is not a uniquely Kenyan problem. Across Africa, governments often find themselves at the negotiating table with multinational corporations that bring entire teams of lawyers, financial analysts, and consultants.

Governments, by contrast, are sometimes represented by overstretched officials with little specialist support. The imbalance is obvious, and the results are predictable: contracts that lock countries into expensive obligations, expose them to hidden risks, and leave them with little flexibility when circumstances change.

The good news is that African governments are not without options. There are institutions created precisely to help them navigate these complex negotiations. One of the strongest is the Africa Legal Support Facility, hosted by the African Development Bank.

The Facility provides governments with access to world-class legal and financial experts, helps them identify risks in contracts, and builds their capacity to negotiate better deals in the future. It is not the only option available. Governments can also draw on regional development banks, international partnerships, or even strengthen their use of local legal and technical expertise.

The problem is that many governments do not use these resources as much as they should. Deals are rushed through in the name of urgency or expediency, and the result is decades-long obligations that weigh down public finances and burden citizens. Kenya’s experience with its power purchase agreements shows why this approach is unsustainable.

As the country prepares to lift the freeze and negotiate new power deals, there is a chance to reset. This is the moment to insist on transparency, to involve stakeholders, to publish the terms, and to use every tool available to strengthen the hand of the state. Governance cannot be an afterthought tucked at the end of ESG.

Citizens pay the price when governance is weak, but they also reap the rewards when governance is strong. Africa has the tools to make sure contracts are fairer and better balanced. The challenge is simple: use them.

For many organisations today, a significant portion of their value resides outside the balance sheet.

This off-balance sheet value is usually attributed to intangible assets, which represent an expectation that there will be future economic benefits flowing to an organisation from these assets. It is no coincidence that financial reporting takes them into account during mergers and acquisitions (M and A).

It is well established that the value of a business is a combination of the net assets reflected on the balance sheet plus any identifiable intangible assets that meet the contractual/legal or separability criterion.

Therefore, anyone acquiring a business would consider these intangible assets in the pricing negotiations. Some common intangible assets include brand value, customer relationships and contracts, patented technology, and employment contracts.

These intangible assets have a close relationship to some of the material sustainability risks and opportunities that organisations identify during the materiality process required for sustainability reporting. For example, patented technology could be related to a digitisation topic, while an employee contract could relate to a talent topic.

The relationship between an organisation’s sustainability material topic and its intangible assets presents a compelling business case for organisations to embrace sustainability.

The ability to manage and capitalise on opportunities within sustainability can help organisations increase the value of their intangible assets. It implies that how well an organisation performs in achieving its sustainability targets will have an impact on an organisation’s financial fortunes and long-term viability.

Organisations will often find that their material sustainability topics are matters that affect their long-term competitiveness and enable their business growth strategy.

Therefore, the value of intangibles is not just in the present. Still, in the long-term implications they have on an organisation, which is why they are valued and included during M and A transactions.

Sustainability enables organisations to place equal focus on both the short-term and long-term priorities of an organisation when defining time horizons for managing sustainability risks and opportunities. It also requires organisations to understand the financial effects of sustainability on the organisation.

Therefore, organisations should view sustainability as a catalyst for growing the value of the business while ensuring that long-term priorities and performance are not compromised in favour of short-term gains and focus only.

The writer a is a Partner at PwC Kenya. He is an author who writes and speaks widely on corporate reporting topics

Some 175,760 companies dropped off the compliance radar of the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) in the year to June 2025, reflecting tax cheating and opportunistic business registration for one-off ventures such as government supply contracts.

Data obtained from the KRA shows 442,441 of 618,201 firms in the taxman’s register filed annual corporate income tax (CIT) returns, leaving more than a quarter (28.43 percent) of firms in the tax net as non-filers.

A house construction firm has received court approval to recover Sh29.7 million from a plumbing company as compensation for flood-linked damages to a house in Nairobi’s Muthaiga area.

In the judgment delivered by Justice Janet Mulwa on Friday, Devshibhai and Sons Limited was awarded the amount for damage caused by the negligence of Allied Plumbers Limited agents in March 2015 at a residential house.

At his Nairobi clinic, Dr Daniel Nduiga sees between 100 and 150 patients with heart conditions each month, with at least two of those being newly diagnosed cases of atrial fibrillation (AFib).

AFib is a condition characterised by fast, irregular, and uncoordinated heartbeats.

A decade ago, such cases were rare and primarily seen in elderly patients. Today, however, AFib is appearing more frequently in younger and middle-aged patients, a trend that Dr Nduiga attributes to lifestyle changes.