The recent regulation 194/2017 by the Addis Ababa City Administration to regulate private school tuition fees has reignited a familiar debate. While the intention of protecting parents from abrupt and often unjustified school fee increases is valid and timely. But the deeper issue remains: can such short-term interventions resolve the long-standing structural challenges in Ethiopia’s private education sector?

More than 1,200 private schools in Addis Ababa were reportedly planning to raise fees this academic year alone. It’s a recurring cycle every few years, tuition spikes, triggering public outrage and emergency regulatory action. Yet, beneath this surface lie deeper, systemic problems. From regulatory agency and Addis Ababa private schools Employers association data shows that close to 72% of private schools in Addis Ababa operate in rented buildings, which is the building construct not for schools firsthand and not much comfortable to meet standard for school and constantly exposed to escalating rental costs. Despite these challenges, private schools still serve nearly 70% of the city’s student population coverage. This shows both the massive contribution of private schools and the vulnerability of the system.

At the heart of the matter is the fact that Education is not a commodity, it’s a public good and a human right. Ethiopia’s Constitution (Article 41) and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 28) affirm every child’s right to quality education, not just for those who can afford it. In a country where many still lack basic literacy, education must be seen as a public mission with private support, not a business venture. Private schools are not just service providers; they are nation-builders. They shape minds, values, and futures. Their work has to be transformational, not transactional and the policy must reflect that.

The current model, however, does not reflect this social responsibility. Ethiopia’s legal and policy framework treats private education largely as a commercial activity. From tax office to ministry of trade, from land management to custom authority the eco system define the sector purely as trade. As a result, private schools operate with a business mindset, driven by short-term returns rather than long-term investment in quality, equity, and impact. It is no surprise then, that whenever cost pressures arise, due to inflation, currency volatility, or real estate hikes schools react by raising tuition fees. And in the absence of a clearly defined legal identity for mission-driven educational institutions, regulators have no tool other than temporary fee caps.

But fee caps, while helpful in the short term, can also produce unintended consequences. Quality may decline. School infrastructure may suffer. Staff wages may stagnate. Some schools may even exit the sector entirely, making the problem worse. This is not sustainable.

In addition, the government’s new regulation does more than simply impose a tuition ceiling, it promotes a negotiation-based model where parents and school administrators are encouraged to reach mutual agreement, potentially even below the set cap. The intention is to strike a fair balance between affordability for families and financial sustainability for schools and quality of education. However, in practice, these parent-school negotiation meetings often devolve into chaotic and unproductive debates. Several factors make it difficult to reach constructive agreements: the definition of “quality education” remains highly subjective, parents vary widely in economic capacity, and profit expectations from school owners lack clear limits. Moreover, the regulation freezes tuition fees for a three-year period, prompting some school owners to overestimate future costs to hedge against economic instability, especially given Ethiopia’s unpredictable inflation and currency conditions. This leads to inflated fee proposals and mistrust between stakeholders.

While the regulation introduces tuition level categories that aim to balance price and service quality, it does so without offering adequate legal or structural support. Simply assigning schools into tiers and imposing high standards without providing corresponding subsidies, land access, or tax relief in the legal umbrella of social enterprise structure ,can actually increase operational costs. In response, schools may tighten budgets, cut corners, or compromise on educational quality.

Achieving a true balance between affordability and quality remains deeply challenging. For this model to succeed, negotiation must be supported by clear policy frameworks and mutual accountability. Only then can schools and families find common ground, align on long-term goals, and maintain high standards without sacrificing sustainability.

How the New School Tier Framework Works And Where It Falls Short

The regulation introduces a tiers system, categorizing schools from 1 to 4 based on performance, infrastructure, and service standards:

Tier 1: Underperforming schools at risk of closure

Tier 2: Average-performing schools (majority of institutions)

Tier 3: Above average in both academic and infrastructural performance

Tier 4: High-standard institutions (only one school currently qualifies)

Depending on their rank and grade levels, schools can raise tuition within a regulated range of 40% to 65%. However, once a tuition increase is approved, the new rate is locked in for three years, limiting future adjustments, even in the face of rising costs.

Herein lies a major contradiction: Schools ranked 1 or 2 are under pressure to improve performance, but the financial tools they need to make improvements like upgrading facilities or hiring better teachers are restricted by the same policy. This creates what development economists call a “resource constraint trap”: the inability to invest reinforces underperformance and prevents progress. It’s like asking a small business to transform into a world-class operation, while capping its revenue, even when its customers are willing to pay more.

What Structural Reforms Are Needed for Sustainable Private Education in Ethiopia?

We need a new framework that recognizes education as a social enterprise. This means creating a legal category and support system for schools that balance financial sustainability with a public service mission without compromise quality education. Schools that commit to reinvesting profits, maintaining fee affordability, and delivering quality education should be supported through bold and courageous government policy decisions such as tax incentives, land access, and regulatory flexibility. Those seeking only commercial gain without community value can be held to stricter standards.

Unfortunately, this kind of reform has not yet taken root. For instance, In the last year and a half, Addis Ababa City Administration Land Development and Management Bureau allocated for lease over 2,000 land plots for development, yet only one plot was allocated for educational use. That’s a signal that the private education sector is not being prioritized in urban planning or city investment strategies. If we want schools to be stable and affordable, they need to be treated as critical social infrastructure, not afterthoughts.

Ethiopia can also look beyond its borders for inspiration. Kenya has successfully supported low-cost private schools through a social enterprise model. Chile has built a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) framework that subsidizes private education while holding providers accountable for outcomes. In countries like Bangladesh, South Korea, and the UK, blended models of education delivery have ensured that access, quality, and sustainability are not left at the mercy of market forces alone.

The Addis Ababa City Administration’s recent regulation is a welcome step toward reform, but it must be seen as the beginning—not the end—of systemic change. If we are serious about building a resilient, inclusive, and high-quality education system, we must shift from control to collaboration, and from short-term solutions to long-term frameworks that empower all stakeholders.

To summarize, in order to balance quality education with affordability and to make sustainable private education sector, the stakeholders need to address and make Policy led decisions  on the following  points:

• Establish a new legal and policy framework that recognizes education as a social enterprise, balancing financial sustainability with a commitment to public service.
• Incentivize socially responsible schools through tax benefits, preferential land access, and regulatory flexibility rewarding those that reinvest profits, maintain affordable fees, and uphold quality standards.
• Hold profit-driven schools accountable by imposing higher standards if they fail to deliver tangible community value.
• Integrate private schools into urban planning by treating them as vital social infrastructure, with access to long-term land leases at reduced or socially adjusted rates.
• Promote innovative models like Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) and cooperative schools that broaden access and improve service delivery.
• Facilitate access to low-interest infrastructure loans to help schools invest in quality facilities and long-term growth.
• Provide shared public facilities: such as science labs, libraries, and sports grounds—for clusters of private schools to reduce costs and improve educational resources.
• Mobilize private sector support, especially from multinational companies, to invest in physical infrastructure, digital tools, and teacher training through structured collaboration.

To truly redefine the role of private education in Ethiopia, we must encourage responsible investment that prioritizes students, community benefit, and long-term impact. This requires a supportive and bold policy environment where private education is not only regulated, but recognized and strengthened as a cornerstone of national development. It’s time to break the vicious cycle in private education by putting in place smart incentives that not only attract investors, but keep the right ones committed for the long journey .By embracing this vision, Ethiopia can build a sustainable and equitable education system that prepares every child for a better future.

Desalegn Mekuria is Dean of Kibur College and can be reached via Desalegn@kibur.edu.et

Across the continent, a staggering 600 million people remain without access to electricity, a number that translates into significant energy poverty, particularly in rural Africa, where 70-

80 million need to gain access yearly to be on track to meet the 2030 universal access to electricity target.

While our continent accounts for 17% of the world’s population, we generate less than 3% of global electricity. This ‘power poverty’ stifles industrialization, limits healthcare outcomes, and constrains economic transformation even as Africa exports uranium and other critical minerals to power many parts of the world. Although there is remarkable progress across countries on the continent, the overall pace of progress is slow, requiring an ambitious shift towards nuclear energy, tailored to Africa’s unique needs and opportunities.

Confronting our fears – examples from around the world

Critics are right to debate questions of safety, malice, accidents, cost and potential harmful effects on the environment. Many argue that investing in renewables is sufficient. Furthermore, the public is unlikely to forget Chernobyl and Fukushima and the constant threat of nuclear war. Yet, South Africa’s Koeberg plant has operated safely for 40 years, proving nuclear energy works on the continent. In addition, experts note that nuclear energy has the lowest death rate per kWh of any major energy source, safer than wind and solar when accounting for manufacturing risks. Modern reactors such as Westinghouse’s AP1000 have passive safety systems that shut down automatically.

With its 25 reactors, South Korea has gone from energy importer to nuclear energy exporter, and has a target of providing 30% of its electricity while cutting emissions by 2030. Similarly, France generates 70% of its electricity from nuclear, achieving Europe’s lowest electricity prices and a clean grid. Bangladesh, with GDP per capita similar to Kenya’s, is building its first reactor with Russian support, proving nuclear energy can be accessible to developing countries.

And there are more encouraging developments closer home. Egypt is constructing four 1,200

MW reactors at El Dabaa—a $30 billion bet on nuclear as an industrial catalyst. Ghana has partnered with NuScale Power to explore Small Modular Reactors – SMRs that could power mines and cities simultaneously. Furthermore, countries that fall under the Tier 1 category – Egypt, Rwanda, Ghana, Uganda, South Africa, Nigeria and Zambia – are firmly committed to starting or expanding their nuclear energy programs. Governments in Niger, Kenya, Tunisia, Morocco, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Namibia, D.R. Congo, Senegal, Algeria and Zimbabwe are working towards the role of nuclear energy in their future electricity supply systems.

Powering industrialisation and the AfCFTA

The International Energy Agency estimates that growth in Africa’s industry, commerce and agriculture will require electricity demand to grow by 40% by 2030. ECA assesses that the African Continental Free Trade Area electricity needs will account for 8% of the total continental electricity capacity by 2035, and 14% by 2040, requiring additional investment of

$22.4 billion between 2025 and 2040. Furthermore, by 2040, due to rapid population and economic growth in Africa, the electricity supply must expand by more than 4 times. Furthermore, Africa is facing sectoral transformations due to frontier technologies. Data centres to store big data and power frontier technologies require a significant energy supply. The gradual transition of Africa’s transport system to electric vehicles will also increase the demand for electricity generation on the continent.

Africa can no longer risk crawling its way out of energy insecurity.  As we say in Africa, we can sing and dance at the same time. As we invest in renewable energy resources, we can also advance nuclear energy development. Egypt’s El Dabaa will deliver 4,800 MW for $6.25 billion. With an over 40-year lifespan, Nuclear makes it cost-competitive.

But what about the nagging question of nuclear waste? Current innovations are proving that new reactor designs consume nuclear waste as fuel. Waste management systems have also developed to offer safer options for disposal. Countries such as Niger with large deposits of uranium could power reactors for centuries while solving waste challenges. Namibia could achieve energy independence and power the rest of Africa for decades to come– after all, Africa controls 20% of global uranium reserves.

Government Commitment and Tangible Benefits

The path ahead is clear. We must harness nuclear energy’s potential and adopt a bold political commitment backed by a clear national roadmap, including target dates for operational plants and long-term capacity-building initiatives. The potential is enormous and could result in creating thousands of skilled jobs and transforming Africa’s energy system towards greater energy security.

Governments need to tap into the reliability of nuclear power. With a 90% capacity factor, plants enjoy up to 45 years of economic life. While large-scale reactors provide stable baseload power, low-hanging fruit should focus on deploying SMRs first (20-300 MW) to power mines and industries, before scaling up to gigawatt plants.

To address the financing hurdle, which requires high upfront costs (70–85% fixed), countries can draw lessons from Africa’s 6.4 GW renewable energy projects, such as South Africa’s procurement program and global nuclear public-private partnership financing models.

Africa’s regional power pools, such as the Southern African Power Pool and the upcoming launch of a regional electricity market in the East African Power Pool, could amplify investment by pooling demand. The African Single Electricity Market (2040 vision) aims to integrate continental grids, boosting nuclear power’s viability.

Creating an African Nuclear Alliance can pool resources, negotiate better technology transfer deals and training programs and reform energy financing in partnership with Africa’s financial institutions to de-risk projects. The African Union and regional blocs must lead this charge to secure Africa’s energy future.

The time is now to move from potential to action. If done right, Africa could be a leader in this sector. Nuclear energy offers a bright future. But we must act deliberately and have the courage to embrace it.

Claver Gatete is the Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa.

When Awazi Angbalaga Joshua launched Shaaré in Nigeria, her goal was to connect skilled workers to people who needed their services.

Using no-code tools and support from her community, she built a home services platform that made connection easier, faster, and more consistent.

“Shaaré is a business I built with some of the smartest people I know, often through the hardest nights,” she explained.

Shaaré is part of a growing wave of ventures across Africa using jobtech to expand access to work, especially for women navigating informal economies.

“There were times I doubted, not the vision or relevance of the product, but my ability to carry it forward in the long run,” she reflected.

“But today, Shaaré is helping hundreds of people earn income every week… The impact has grown beyond our immediate market and is now being recognized internationally.”

Women’s participation in Africa’s labour market still lags behind that of men. As of 2020, only 52 percent of women across the continent were active in the labour force compared to 72 percent of men, according to 2021 data by the International Labour Organization.

In North Africa, the rate drops to 25 percent.

Yet in Africa’s digital labour platforms, a more complex picture is emerging, one where women, often overlooked in traditional labour systems, are getting more involved.

According to a 2025 study by Jobtech Alliance, based on data from 78,000 users, women on digital work platforms earn 24 percent more on average than men, and they stay longer, with a 19 percent higher retention rate.

Although only 45% of income earners on these platforms are women, they make up 48% of those earning what the report calls “quality income.”

According to Janet Wandia, a gender lead at Jobtech Alliance, the trend stems from how the platforms are built and who they are built for.

“When digital work systems are intentionally designed with women’s needs in mind, the outcomes speak volumes, not just in terms of gender equity, but also business performance.”

Jobtech platforms often operate on commission-based models where user success directly correlates to platform revenue. Women users, with their higher retention and performance, present a strong business case. They cost less to acquire and onboard, stay active longer, and complete more consistent work.

According to Wandia, these trends reinforce what microfinance once proved: when women are given equitable access, they often deliver more dependable returns.

Several dynamics explain this performance gap. Jobtech’s flexibility is especially beneficial to women, who spend nearly three times more time on unpaid care work than men, according to UN Women.

Across Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa, more than 78% of women in a 2022 World Bank study cited the ability to set their own hours as the primary benefit of digital work.

In South Africa, nearly three-quarters of women on digital platforms said they could better balance work and family responsibilities. Moreover, jobtech helps circumvent the “who-you-know” dynamics of offline labour markets, which typically reward older men with established networks.

Digital platforms often rely on algorithmic matching and measurable performance, opening up access to women who might otherwise be excluded.

Microtask platforms like Rwazi show that nearly 58% of their workforce is female.

On Wowzi, a creator-matching platform, women represent only a third of influencers but account for more than half of those accessing quality jobs. They earn 23% more than men and exhibit a 23% higher retention rate. In agent models, women outperform again.

Marianne Mwaniki, founder of Avunja, a Kenyan jobtech, notes that while more men initially download the app, women consistently deliver better results and stay longer.

Most team leads on the platform are women, a trend supported by broader evidence. A 2020 World Bank study in the Democratic Republic of Congo found that female customers are not only more likely to engage with female agents, but their transaction volumes with them are also 66% higher.

It is not just as users that women are thriving. They are now designing and leading the very platforms enabling this shift.

In Nigeria, Chinwe Udo-Davis, founder of Installer, left a corporate job to build a cleantech platform connecting solar installers to clean energy firms. Her platform has trained over 500 technicians and completed more than 1,800 projects.

Through the InstallHer initiative, she is specifically training women in solar installation, with the goal of skilling 10,000 female technicians across Africa by 2030.

For Chinwe, energy access is not just about powering homes—it’s about powering livelihoods. Installer is more than a tech solution; it’s a tool for economic transformation led by women, for women.

Awazi and Chinwe are part of a growing ecosystem of women-led innovation pushing the jobtech frontier across Africa. In Kenya, platforms like Avunja and Africa AI Labs are developing targeted onboarding and financial tools for female workers.

In Rwanda and Uganda, experiments with inclusive freelance models are beginning to create more accessible pipelines into digital labour for women.

Many of these platforms receive support from gender-intentional accelerators such as TECA and Catalyst Fund, which have ensured that at least a third of their startup cohorts are women-led and actively prioritize female user inclusion.

Yet none of this happens by chance. Wandia emphasizes that high female participation is the result of thoughtful platform architecture, from accessible interfaces to algorithmic fairness, from safety protocols to referral incentives.