Photo caption: Sola Adebawo
By Sola Adebawo
The launch of the African Energy Security Policy Framework in Addis Ababa on 3 November was an important moment. Developed by the African Union Commission, UNECA, AUDA-NEPAD and the African Energy Commission, it offers a common continental approach to strengthening the security of electricity, oil and gas, and bioenergy supplies.
At its centre is a persuasive idea: African countries can improve energy security by integrating markets, connecting infrastructure and cooperating across borders.
That proposition is broadly right. A country with surplus electricity can support a neighbour facing shortages. Regional pipelines can give more markets access to gas. Larger, interconnected markets can attract investments that might not be viable within one national system.
But the launch also raises a harder question, one that will ultimately determine the framework’s practical value.
Photo caption: Africa Energy Bank logo
Regional integration is easiest to support when supply is plentiful. What happens when it is not?
When drought reduces hydropower output, a pipeline fails, gas production falls or an exporting country suddenly needs more energy at home, who receives the available supply? Who is curtailed? Who bears the financial loss? And which institution has the authority to make and enforce those decisions across national borders?
The framework was approved by African Union energy ministers in April before its public launch. Its stated objectives include improving resilience, infrastructure, regional integration, regulatory cooperation and energy-security monitoring.
This is a useful continental reference point. But it is a policy framework, not a binding regional regulation. AU ministers have asked continental institutions and regional economic communities to support member states in implementing it. That places the decisive work at national and regional levels.
The central issue, therefore, is not whether Africa needs greater energy integration. It does. The real question is whether the continent can build rules strong enough to preserve cooperation when energy becomes scarce.
Integration changes the location of risk
Regional energy trade can reduce the risk of depending entirely on domestic production. It can also create another vulnerability: dependence on decisions made in a neighbouring country.
An importing country may sign a long-term supply agreement, invest in transmission or pipeline connections, and structure industries around imported energy. Yet the exporting government may face intense pressure to redirect supply towards its own households and businesses during a shortage.
That pressure is understandable. No government will find it easy to explain why electricity or gas is leaving the country while hospitals, factories or households face severe disruption.
But arbitrary intervention has consequences. If governments can suspend cross-border commitments without predetermined rules, investors will treat regional revenues as less dependable. Lenders will demand stronger guarantees, higher returns or political-risk cover. Some projects may not secure financing at all.
Protecting contractual credibility does not mean placing exports above essential domestic needs. It means defining how exceptional intervention will work, so that protecting consumers during a genuine emergency does not destroy the investment required to prevent the next shortage.
Not every shortage is an emergency
The rules must distinguish routine operational curtailment from politically directed reallocation.
Electricity systems already balance supply and demand continuously. Gas networks manage maintenance, production interruptions and capacity constraints. These events are ordinarily governed by grid codes, transportation agreements and supply contracts.
Existing contracts and regional market arrangements address some forms of curtailment, but the protections remain fragmented and may not provide a coordinated response when scarcity affects several countries.
An energy-security emergency is different. It may require a government to change established priorities because the normal market and operational rules are no longer sufficient.
Such intervention should not rest on an undefined claim of “national interest”. Countries need published thresholds for declaring an emergency, identifying essential services, establishing the order of curtailment and determining when normal arrangements must resume.
Cross-border agreements should specify whether compensation is payable under different forms of curtailment, how any payment will be calculated, who is responsible and how disputes will be settled. Otherwise, affected parties could be left with little more than a claim against an uncertain sovereign or commercial counterparty.
Nigeria illustrates the tension
Nigeria is already a regional gas supplier through the West African Gas Pipeline and participates in the developing West African electricity market. It also has wider ambitions as an LNG exporter, industrial-gas market and regional energy hub.
These destinations can compete for molecules when supply is constrained.
NMDPRA’s September 2026 factsheet recorded average gas-to-power utilisation of 0.518 billion cubic feet per day, 4 percent below August. Pipeline exports through the West African Gas Pipeline averaged 0.134 billion cubic feet per day, down 12 percent, while LNG exports also declined by 5 percent.
These figures do not show that gas was deliberately diverted from one destination to another. The markets involve different fields, infrastructure and contracts. But they illustrate the difficulty of treating national supply, regional exports and LNG as though additional gas automatically serves every objective.
Each destination has a different commercial structure. LNG projects generally benefit from long-term contracts, stronger payment security and hard-currency revenues. Domestic power plants may face tariff, liquidity and payment risks. Regional pipeline customers introduce cross-border credit and enforcement questions.
The policy challenge is not simply to rank exports against domestic consumption. It is to make every destination commercially credible while creating transparent safeguards for genuine emergencies.
Enforcement must come from elsewhere
Continental institutions can establish principles, indicators and model approaches. They cannot, through a non-binding framework alone, compel a government to continue supplying electricity or gas during a domestic crisis.
Enforcement must ultimately come from national legislation, treaties, regional market codes, supply contracts, credit guarantees and credible dispute-resolution arrangements.
The framework’s published materials recognise supply disruptions, resilience, monitoring and coordinated implementation. What they do not yet demonstrate is an operational continental rulebook specifying who declares an emergency, which customers receive priority, how interrupted parties are treated and what happens when a country disregards agreed rules.
That is not necessarily a failure of a high-level framework. It identifies the work that must now follow.
Africa’s energy-security ambitions will not be tested principally by the amount of electricity or gas traded on an ordinary day. The real test will come during scarcity.
When there is not enough energy to go around, will national governments, regional institutions, investors and customers still trust the system?
Sola Adebawo is an energy industry executive, strategic adviser and thought leader with 30 years of experience across Nigeria’s petroleum industry. He is the Chief Executive Officer of Hyphen Partners Limited, a specialist advisory firm focused on policy and regulatory intelligence, market entry, stakeholder strategy, and executive and institutional positioning in complex and highly regulated industries. A former executive at Chevron and Heritage Energy, he is also an author, scholar and ordained minister. His writing explores energy policy, political economy, corporate governance, strategic communication, leadership and the institutional forces shaping Africa’s development.
