COMESA Circular Economy Jobs and Investment Gap

The scale of the opportunity is large, but so is the gap. El-Gebly cited a global circularity rate of only 7.2%, implying most materials still move through linear take-make-dispose systems. He said the circular economy already represents about $4.3 trillion in potential economic value, yet Africa captured just 0.2% of announced private-sector investment in circular industries such as textiles, packaging, electronics and appliances between 2018 and 2024, or roughly $370 million over seven years.

For investors, that mismatch is the story. If the transition accelerates, capital is likely to flow toward firms that can aggregate fragmented projects, formalize informal activity and build bankable platforms around recycling, refurbishment and materials recovery. If it stalls, small operators and export-dependent manufacturers risk being squeezed by rising customer expectations and tighter rules in developed markets.

The immediate focus in COMESA is on three value chains: electronics and e-waste, plastics and packaging, and leather and textiles. Each highlights both the commercial upside and the infrastructure shortfall. Africa generated about 3.5 million tons of e-waste in 2022, but less than 1% was formally collected and recycled, underscoring how much economic value still leaks into informal channels.

That matters because the region’s growth model is increasingly colliding with labor-market pressure and industrial weakness elsewhere. While German textile makers are cutting jobs amid a prolonged sector downturn, COMESA is arguing that circular production can absorb workers instead of shedding them, especially in repair, remanufacturing, sorting and recycling. The challenge is financing: El-Gebly said many circular businesses are too small to attract investors on their own, making project aggregation essential.

The policy implication is clear. Governments and development financiers need to treat circularity as an industrial strategy, not just an ESG theme, and design rules that include women and young workers already active in the informal economy. For markets, the winners are likely to be recyclers, waste processors, logistics providers and manufacturers that can prove lower-carbon, traceable supply chains; the losers are laggards that continue to rely on linear production and imported inputs.