Hundreds of millions of Africans live within reach of mobile broadband but still do not use it. The gap exposes the limits of measuring digital progress by network coverage alone, reports Jon Offei-Ansah
- GSMA–PDAA analysis estimates that 906 million Africans live within mobile broadband coverage but do not use mobile internet
- Rwanda’s extensive 4G coverage illustrates how network availability can outpace individual adoption
- Affordable devices, reliable electricity, practical skills and useful services are essential to widening participation
AFRICA’S mobile networks reach millions of people who still do not use mobile internet. The obstacles vary: a suitable phone may cost too much, electricity may be unreliable, or people may lack the skills and confidence to use online services.
That gap is now central to the continent’s digital ambitions. Analysis accompanying a roadmap launched by the GSMA and the Partnership for Digital Access in Africa (PDAA) on September 21 estimates that around 906 million Africans live within mobile broadband coverage but do not use mobile internet. A further 122 million live beyond network reach.
The distinction is specifically about mobile internet use. It does not establish that everyone counted is entirely disconnected: some may access the internet through shared devices, Wi-Fi or other connections. Nevertheless, it reveals how far network availability remains from widespread individual adoption.
For governments deciding where to spend scarce money, that matters. Communities without coverage need infrastructure. Where networks already exist, another tower may leave the main obstacles untouched.
“Africa cannot build its digital future on connectivity alone,” said PDAA chief executive Ibrahima Guimba-Saïdou. The partnership’s ambition is to help bring the continent to one billion connected people by 2030.
What Rwanda’s numbers reveal
Rwanda provides a striking example. A GSMA report published on September 17 puts 4G population coverage at approximately 96 percent. Yet only 21 percent of the population were unique mobile internet subscribers in 2025.
These indicators measure different things: coverage describes potential availability, while unique subscriber estimates count individuals rather than SIM connections. Together, they show how far network reach can outpace adoption. Counting individuals avoids treating someone carrying several SIM cards as several people gaining access.
The GSMA estimates that policy reforms could bring more than one million additional Rwandans onto mobile internet by 2031. That projection depends on making smartphones more affordable, improving skills and offering services people have reason to use. It is conditional on change, rather than a guaranteed dividend from existing networks.
Rwanda’s experience raises a question for every government announcing progress towards universal coverage: how many people can regularly use what has been built?
Coverage maps cannot answer that on their own. They say little about a household’s ability to buy a phone and data, or whether the connection works reliably where someone lives and earns a living.
The phone comes before the data
For someone with an irregular income, a smartphone is a substantial purchase. It competes with food, rent, transport and school expenses. A handset marketed as affordable may still require money the buyer cannot spare.
The GSMA’s latest global connectivity findings identify handset affordability as the leading barrier to adoption across the low- and middle-income countries it surveyed, followed by digital skills. Device costs therefore deserve attention alongside the more familiar debates about spectrum and network investment.
Paying in instalments can help, but a small deposit is only part of the price. Interest, fees, compulsory data purchases and the consequences of missed payments determine whether an offer remains affordable.
Governments considering handset tax relief should ask how much of the saving will reach buyers. Operators and lenders should make the full repayment cost clear. Refurbished devices could widen access too, provided they come with usable batteries, security support and warranties that mean something.
These are less visible interventions than a tower opening or a 5G launch. But they address the purchase a customer must make before any of that infrastructure becomes useful.
Competition can lower the barrier
Ethiopia offers evidence that changes to the market can improve access. In a June 2025 assessment, the World Bank reported a sharp fall in mobile data costs alongside sector reforms that opened the market to competition, including Safaricom’s entry.
Between 2020 and 2024, the country gained seven million unique mobile subscribers, according to the assessment. The bank nevertheless noted that access to broadband did not mean every new subscriber used data.
Lower prices help, but households still need devices, useful services and confidence that buying data is worth the expense. Competition can remove part of the barrier without resolving all of it.
Regulators also need to follow savings through the market. Cheaper international bandwidth will do little for customers if domestic bottlenecks, weak competition or opaque packages prevent those savings from reaching them.
There is a balance to strike. Providers must earn enough to maintain networks and expand service. Demanding lower prices without addressing operating costs risks leaving customers with a cheaper connection that works badly.
The cost beyond the tariff
Electricity is part of the calculation, even when it does not appear on a mobile bill.
Where power is unreliable, households may have to travel and pay to charge a phone. Operators may need backup systems and fuel to keep sites running. Both expenses affect the cost of staying connected.
Planning rural electrification and connectivity together makes practical sense. A reliably powered school or clinic could support public services while providing a regular customer for a local connection.
But the questions that follow the installation are often the most important. Who pays the monthly bill? Who repairs the equipment? What happens when the initial grant runs out?
A functioning service needs an operating budget and someone responsible for keeping it working. Counting installations without checking whether they remain usable gives an incomplete account of progress.
Giving people a reason to connect
Cost is not the only obstacle. A World Bank analysis published in May 2026 identifies limited digital literacy and insufficient relevant content among the barriers to use. It also highlights how unequal resources, safety concerns and social norms can restrict women’s access.
Practical training should start with something a person wants to do: send a document, check a payment, find reliable information or recognise a fraudulent message. The test is whether they can repeat the task independently afterwards.
Governments have responsibilities here as service providers. Moving an application online may save an agency money while imposing new costs on the applicant, who must buy data or pay someone for assistance.
For people without suitable devices or sufficient literacy, an online-only process can create another dependency. Assisted access and functioning alternatives remain necessary while participation expands.
Services also need to work in languages people understand, accommodate disabilities and provide a clear way to correct mistakes. A difficult or unsuccessful first experience gives a new user little reason to spend money trying again.
Measuring what changes
Some governments have already adopted targets that go beyond network reach. The November 2025 Cotonou Declaration for Western and Central Africa included ambitions to halve average data costs and reduce the usage gap by one-quarter by 2028. Those commitments provide a basis for checking delivery.
The new GSMA–PDAA roadmap adds to that agenda. Its launch announcement sets out priorities, but does not provide a costed delivery plan with country-level funding commitments and deadlines.
Governments should show how much spending goes towards extending coverage, how much helps people use existing networks and what each programme achieves.
The GSMA represents the mobile industry, and its recommendations deserve scrutiny alongside those of any other interested party. Tax relief should be judged against public revenue needs and demonstrable benefits for consumers. Subsidies need clear eligibility rules and published results.
Investors face a related challenge. People living within network coverage are potential customers, but their presence does not establish that they can immediately afford a commercially viable service.
Progress should therefore be measured through regular use, total costs and reliable access. National averages should be accompanied by evidence showing who remains excluded, particularly across rural and urban communities and between women and men.