On October 7, the African Union officially launched the Africa Credit Rating Agency (AfCRA) in Mauritius, giving the continent its own institution for assessing African sovereigns, companies, and financial institutions. AfCRA is not intended to replace Moody’s, S&P, or Fitch, but to introduce an African source of authority into a system that has long helped determine the price at which African countries can borrow.

On the surface, this is a technical event about ratings and capital markets. But the questions underneath it are political. Who decides whether an African country is a safe place to lend money? Who decides what interest that country should pay? And why should judgements made by institutions far outside the continent carry such enormous weight over the price of African development?

The AU says AfCRA will rate African sovereigns, sub-sovereigns, companies, and institutions. It is designed as a private-sector-driven, self-funded body, with governments barred from owning shares, and is meant to complement rather than simply replace the established global agencies. That may sound modest. In fact, it touches one of the unfinished questions of African independence.

The price of a rating

A sovereign credit rating impacts directly the price of money. A government borrowing to build a railway or refinance debt enters a market in which investors judge the possibility of repayment, and ratings shape that perception. A lower rating can mean a higher yield demanded by investors and can influence the borrowing conditions facing banks and state-owned companies. An apparently technical judgement can therefore become a very material question: How much of the wealth produced by a country must be transferred to creditors simply to obtain capital?

The AU says Africa’s external debt-service payments rose from $61 billion in 2010 to $163 billion in 2024. UNDP research published in 2023 estimated that African countries could save up to $74.5 billion in excess interest and foregone financing if sovereign ratings were based on less subjective assessments. One does not have to accept every estimate, or conclude that every downgrade of an African country is unfair, to recognize the scale of the issue.

African states have real weaknesses: unsustainable debt, commodity dependence, narrow tax bases, incomplete statistics, corruption, and vulnerable currencies. An African agency that concealed these realities would destroy its credibility. But that does not make the existing system neutral. Ratings combine measurable indicators with........

© RT.com