Airport competitiveness in Africa is built on strategy, connectivity, affordability, leadership and partnerships

In discussions about airport development, competitiveness is often treated as an outcome. Build the infrastructure. Expand capacity. Improve facilities. Attract airlines. Grow passenger numbers. And competitiveness will follow.

The reality is rarely that straightforward.

Over the years, one observation that has stayed with me is that the airports that perform well consistently, rarely rely on a single advantage. More often, they are getting several things right at the same time. That may sound obvious, but it has important implications, because in aviation there is no single lever that guarantees success.

The more closely one looks at airports that have successfully expanded connectivity, improved financial performance, or strengthened their market position, the clearer it becomes that competitiveness is rarely the result of one project, one policy, or one investment. It is usually the outcome of many interconnected decisions made consistently over time.

The myth of the silver bullet

Airport development discussions are often framed around finding the one thing that will transform an airport. Different stakeholders often point to different solutions. Some focus on charges. Others focus on incentives, infrastructure, tourism, policy reform, or airline engagement. Each of these factors matters. The challenge is that none of them operates in isolation.

In reality, airport development rarely hinges on a single decision. Some of the most successful airports are not necessarily the ones that excel in one area. They are often the ones that perform reasonably well across multiple areas. Competitiveness is usually cumulative. It is built through the interaction of many decisions over time.

Some airports facing significant constraints have nevertheless continued to make progress because leadership teams were willing to adapt

In many respects, airport competitiveness can be viewed through what I would describe as the SCALE framework, which brings together the key factors that consistently shape long-term airport performance.

S – Strategy: a clear long-term vision aligned with market realities, including passenger demand, airline economics, tourism potential, competition, regulatory conditions and long-term national development objectives.

C – Connectivity: the ability to attract, retain and develop sustainable air services.

A – Affordability: balancing cost recovery with airline competitiveness and passenger accessibility.

L – Leadership: institutions capable of adapting to changing market conditions and making informed strategic decisions.

E – Ecosystem partnerships: strong collaboration between airports, governments, tourism authorities, businesses, investors and other stakeholders.

No single element guarantees success on its own. However, airports that consistently perform well tend to demonstrate strength across most, if not all, of these areas.

That is one reason why copying another airport’s strategy rarely works. What succeeds in one market may fail completely in another. Every airport operates within a unique combination of geography, regulation, economics, tourism dynamics, airline networks, and national priorities. The objective is not to replicate another airport; it is to understand your own market better than anyone else.

That does not mean airports cannot learn from one another. Studying airports of similar size, geography or market context can provide valuable lessons on what has worked, what has failed and what can realistically be adapted. The objective is not replication but informed adaptation.

Data is no longer a luxury

Airports can no longer afford to make strategic decisions based primarily on intuition or assumptions unsupported by credible evidence. For many years, route development was often driven by intuition. People believed a route should exist. A community wanted connectivity. An airport wanted growth. Sometimes those assumptions were correct. Sometimes they were not.

Today, airlines are making decisions based on increasingly sophisticated data. Airports must do the same. Well-designed, transparent and performance-based incentives remain an important route development tool, provided they are applied fairly and consistently. Their greatest value, however, comes when they form part of a broader strategy that includes tourism promotion, policy alignment and strong stakeholder collaboration. The airports making the strongest progress in route development are the ones arriving at discussions with credible market intelligence. They understand passenger flows. They understand traffic leakage. They understand fares. They understand demand patterns. Most importantly, they understand the story behind the numbers.

Data does not replace judgement. But it makes judgement better.

Connectivity is a team sport

Another lesson emerging across African aviation is that airports rarely create connectivity on their own. For years, airport development discussions sometimes treated connectivity as primarily an airport responsibility. The reality is far more complex. Airlines need viable markets. Tourism organisations need visitors. Governments need economic growth. Businesses need access to markets. Investors need confidence.

The most successful connectivity stories are usually those where these stakeholders are aligned. When they are not, airports often find themselves trying to solve challenges they cannot solve alone.

Across the industry, airports have often devoted considerable financial resources, staff effort and marketing activity to route development while broader barriers to connectivity remained unresolved. Visa challenges. Tourism marketing gaps. Policy inconsistencies. Weak destination awareness. Limited market coordination. The lesson is not that airports should do less – it is that airports must build stronger partnerships.

Competitiveness is not the same as growth

Growth and sustainability are not the same thing, as I have argued before. Growth and competitiveness are not the same thing either. They are related, but not identical. Traffic can grow because of favourable market conditions, economic cycles, or temporary airline decisions. Competitiveness, however, is more durable. It is reflected in an airport’s ability to attract investment, adapt to market changes, recover from shocks, manage costs, and continue creating value over time.

This distinction matters. Many airports can achieve growth. Far fewer can sustain it. Ultimately, competitiveness is not measured by a single year’s passenger numbers. It is measured by an airport’s ability to remain relevant and resilient over the long term.

Commercial thinking matters

One observation that has become increasingly difficult to ignore is that airports today are expected to operate in a far more commercial environment than they did a decade ago. This does not mean abandoning public service responsibilities, nor does it mean airports should behave exactly like private businesses. However, it does mean that airports must increasingly understand markets, customers, revenue opportunities, and competitive positioning.

The airports that appear most resilient are often those that think beyond traditional infrastructure management. They are asking broader questions. How can we diversify revenues? How can we strengthen commercial partnerships? How can we improve the passenger experience? How can we create value for airlines? How can we support regional economic development? These are no longer simply commercial questions. They are competitiveness questions. By connecting people, markets, investment and trade, airports increasingly contribute directly to regional economic development.

The leadership factor

Perhaps the most overlooked element of airport competitiveness is leadership. Not leadership in the traditional sense, but strategic leadership: the ability to make decisions that balance today’s realities with tomorrow’s opportunities.

Some airports facing significant constraints have nevertheless continued to make progress because leadership teams were willing to adapt, collaborate and think differently. Conversely, airports with considerable advantages have sometimes struggled because strategy did not evolve as quickly as the environment around them.

Infrastructure matters. Economics matter. Data matters. Partnerships matter. But ultimately, institutions succeed or fail through the decisions people make.

Conclusion

If there is one conclusion that emerges from the experiences of airports across Africa, it is that competitiveness is rarely the result of a single project, policy, or investment. It is the outcome of many interconnected decisions made consistently over time.

The most competitive airports are not necessarily the largest. They are not always the newest. And they are not always the busiest. More often, they are the airports that understand their markets, manage their economics, build strong partnerships, use data effectively, and make deliberate long-term decisions.

In the first article of this series, I argued that Africa’s airport challenge is increasingly becoming a strategy challenge. In the second, I explored why economics and competitiveness are inseparable. The lesson from both is ultimately the same. Infrastructure creates possibility. Economics creates sustainability. But competitiveness is what turns both into long-term growth. And that may be the most important equation of all.