Export bans do not equate to industrial policy; this is the strong message of Economist and Political Risk Analyst, Dr. Theo Acheampong, to African governments.
This strong advice is coming at a time when global powers race for Africa’s lithium, cobalt, manganese, and rare earths. Amid the conversation, there is a gradual shift in direction to ban raw exports of these minerals and force value addition at home.
Dr. Theo Acheampong says this logic is dangerously simplistic and will not automatically achieve the intended purpose.
Speaking during a panel discussion at Mining Indaba Conference 2026 in Cape Town on who truly benefits from the geopolitical scramble for Africa’s critical minerals, Dr. Theo Acheampong cautioned that export bans are often mistaken for industrial policy. However, in reality, they are not the same thing.
He makes the strong case that prohibiting the export of raw minerals does not automatically create factories, jobs, or technology transfer. Industrial policy, he explains, is about building ecosystems, not closing borders.
For value addition to happen sustainably, a country must have reliable and affordable power. In addition, there should be efficient transport and port logistics, including skilled labour and technical expertise.
Access to affordable capital, he adds, must be in place while market access must also be guaranteed.
Without these fundamentals, an export ban may simply choke supply chains rather than deepen them.
“African governments should stop confusing export bans with industrial policy. Bans do not automatically translate into value addition without power, logistics, skills, and investable market access; they simply shift trade routes or delay investments,” Dr. Theo Acheampong advised.
For Dr. Theo Acheampong, African governments’ leverage must be negotiated strategically, through structured partnerships, technology transfer agreements, and phased localisation targets, rather than imposed through blanket export prohibitions.
