Africa’s leaders are governing in the present tense
Listen to this article
Africa’s demographic windows differ sharply by region, demanding leadership that prepares economies and institutions for the decades ahead.
Africa is often described as a young continent, as though youth alone were a strategy. But a young population is a fact, not a plan, and what a country makes of it depends entirely on choices made long before the demographic moment arrives. The more pressing question is whether those in power are governing with any sense of time, because much of the continent’s leadership appears caught in the present tense, neither learning from what came before nor preparing for what is plainly coming.
The age gap alone is telling. The median age of Africa's population is about 19, while the median age of its leaders is about 63. This is not merely a generational distance but a distance in lived experiences and in the shape of the future each side is planning for, with the gap widening rather than closing. Governments in more than 20 countries across the continent have amended constitutions to lengthen presidential terms or remove limits altogether. For instance, in 2026, Zimbabwe's parliament advanced amendments to postpone elections and extend the president's term, and in 2024, Togo abolished presidential term limits through a constitutional change that shifted power to a newly created executive office. This is not the whole picture—18 African states uphold a constitutional two-term limit—and signs of political change are breaking through. In Senegal, a genuinely new generation arrived with the 2024 election of Bassirou Diomaye Faye, one of the continent's youngest heads of state. That appetite for change has been echoed in recent opposition victories in Botswana, Ghana, Liberia and Mauritius, where voters unseated long-entrenched ruling parties.
One visible symptom of this disconnect is a wave of youth-led protest in recent years, and the pattern repeats across the continent’s regions. In West Africa, Nigeria’s 2020 #EndSARS movement against police brutality was organised largely online by young people, and ended when security forces killed at least 56 people over two weeks of demonstrations. Notably, the government had already promised to reform the same police unit in 2017 and had not done so. Four years later, in East Africa, Kenya’s 2024 protests against the Finance Bill followed almost the same script: youth-led and decentralised, and again met with lethal force; two years later, at least 41 people linked to the protests remain missing. In Southern Africa, Mozambique's contested 2024 election triggered youth-driven protests in which more than 300 people were reported killed, the vast majority by security forces. Data compiled by the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) points to a rising baseline of civil unrest across the continent, with demonstrations over the cost of living, corruption and unemployment recurring at increasing frequency.
Beneath the different triggers lies a common grievance: an economy that cannot absorb the young people entering it and a politics that will not make room for them. This is where governing in the present tense becomes not merely short-sighted but avoidable, because for once the future carries a timetable.
Every society passes through a demographic transition, during which its working-age population grows large enough relative to the number of people it supports to boost rapid income growth. This can create an opportunity for faster growth, but that opportunity can also pass unused. The ISS African Futures forecasts can already estimate when each region is likely to reach this point, and the timing differs starkly. On the Current Path (or business-as-usual forecast), Southern Africa reaches its window in the mid-2040s, East and West Africa in the decades after, and Central Africa not until the 2060s, a span of roughly a generation. A single continental conversation cannot serve timelines that far apart. A country nearing its window must be building jobs and institutions now; a country whose window is decades away faces an earlier task centred on the health and schooling of children, who are not yet in the labour force.
A single continental conversation on youth cannot serve demographic timelines that differ across Africa by roughly a generation
However, a favourable age structure is not a result but an opening, and the historical warning sits within the forecasts themselves. North Africa reached its favourable moment around 2005, yet a closed, state-led economy left little room for new entrants or opportunity for its increasingly well-educated young people. The AFI analysis links that failure to adapt, among other factors, to the upheavals of the Arab Spring soon after. It was less a crisis that struck than the consequence of inaction. A demographic window creates an opportunity, but does not, by itself, close the gap between a large working-age population and an economy’s capacity to provide employment. Without sufficient opportunity, the potential dividend may be forfeited. The World Bank estimates that up to 12 million young Africans enter the labour market each year, while roughly three million new formal wage jobs are created. The Mastercard Foundation finds that most young Africans are already working, some 304 million, but that around 90% are in informal jobs and that one in three of those workers lives in extreme poverty. None of this is fixed, which is what present-tense politics misses. AFI forecasts show that with faster progress in health, education and family planning, the demographic dividend strengthens materially, with the largest gains in the youngest regions of Central and West Africa. The forecasts ground this not in theory but in real gains already achieved in countries such as Ethiopia, Malawi, Ghana and Kenya.
A key part of the response is that power must be handed on and political leadership renewed. Yet the handover itself is not the answer, because a change of leaders is not by itself a change of policy. Succession can be planned and still fail. In South Africa, the post-apartheid presidency has changed hands less through preparation than internal party contest: Thabo Mbeki was recalled before his term ended, and Jacob Zuma left in 2018 only after prolonged pressure and the entrenchment of state capture. In Mozambique, the long-governing FRELIMO, in power for almost five decades, passed the presidency to a designated successor. Managing succession to protect a party or anoint an heir is not foresight. These examples show in-party succession, in which a governing party replaces its leader but retains power, preserving continuity without genuine renewal. That is different from political change at the ballot box, where voters remove a governing party. The latter has become more common: between 2020 and 2024, opposition parties won power in eleven democratic alternations across the continent, and in Botswana, the ruling party lost office after 58 years. But a change of government, like a change of leader, settles only who holds power, not whether they use the years before the window to prepare for it. The demographic challenge is the same whoever wins.
Succession matters, particularly where incumbents extend their tenure, close political entry points or leave institutions dependent on individual leaders. It matters because it can disrupt established patron-client relationships with at least the promise of change. Preparing future leaders achieves little if incumbents refuse to step down; changing leaders achieves little if the institutions around them remain weak. The real task is broader: preparing societies and economies for the demographic shift, and what that requires is specific. It begins with expanding girls' education and empowering women, which can lower fertility and raise female labour-force participation, the most durable driver of a faster demographic transition and a more productive workforce. Yet human capital pays off only if the economy can absorb it, which means integrating population policy with economic planning so that health and schooling do not run in a separate lane from jobs and industrial strategy. For the countries entering their window now, the immediate work is to expand labour-intensive manufacturing, raise agricultural productivity and strengthen skills systems. These can create formal jobs at the scale a young workforce needs and illustrate the difference between a young population that works and one that waits. What ties these measures together is something present-tense politics cannot supply: the ability to sustain policies across electoral cycles and maintain continuity over decades. Demographic transitions take longer than any single government’s term.
New leadership must arrive not merely younger but equipped to serve, through institutions that can outlast those currently in power
The demographic transition will unfold on its own schedule regardless of who holds office, and much of the frustration driving today's unrest is not really a youth grievance but the ordinary demand of citizens for work and fairness. What leadership decides is what the transition delivers when it comes. Because the windows open at different times, the years before each one are precisely when the difference is made. The tragedy is not that the future is uncertain. It is that the future is, for once, largely foreseeable, yet those with the power to prepare for it still look only to the present.
Image: OrnaW/Pixabay
Republication of our Africa Tomorrow articles only with permission. Contact us for any enquiries.
