Mamadou Kwidjim Toure leads Ubuntu Tribe and co-founded Africa House, a platform that’s pushing “From Extraction to Exchange” – this year’s Davos conversation toward a clearer idea of partnership.
In this interview, Mamadou responds to questions on what exchange looks like in practice, where Africa’s next leap may come from, and how data, compute, and tokenized assets can become instruments of sovereignty instead of the next chapter of extraction.
1. Africa House’s theme this year is “From Extraction to Exchange.”What does that shift mean in practical terms for Africa’s role in the global economy?
“Extraction to exchange” is a move from being price-takers in someone else’s value chain to being co-designers of how value is produced, verified, financed, and traded. That means Africa showing up in global markets as the place where standards, processing capacity, and digital rails are built, so more of the margin stays on the continent.
It also means changing the terms of the partnership. Exchange implies reciprocity in shared infrastructure, shared rules, shared upside. If Africa is negotiating energy transition minerals, data partnerships, or AI deployment, the baseline should be “build the architecture together, locally, and transparently.”
2. Africa leapfrogged with mobile money and GSM. Where do you see the next leap — AI, blockchain, or data infrastructure — and why?
If I have to pick the enabler that makes the other two real, it’s data infrastructure. Africa’s previous leap worked because distribution was there, GSM gave reach, mobile money gave a transactional layer. In the next leap, AI will only compound value if the continent has strong data governance and interoperable rails – as well as the ability to decide what data is used, where it is processed, and who benefits.
If AI is the visible wave, then governance is the surfboard. Without shared rules for consent, portability, and cross-border digital trade, you just don’t get compounding returns. You get a new kind of extraction, with value leaving quietly through cloud bills and model rents.
Blockchain, to me, is most powerful when it’s used as a verification layer. That’s exactly why you keep seeing it resurface in conversations about commodity traceability and trust.
3. Many countries adopt technology reactively. How can African nations move from adoption to architecture: designing systems, not importing them?
Architecture starts with choosing what must be sovereign and what can be leased. Not every country needs to build its own chips, but every country should know which services, layers, rails, and datasets cannot be dependent on a single external gatekeeper. And that’s where policy becomes hostage to infrastructure.
Then you make interoperability a political project. The continent already has an integration blueprint; what’s missing is treating digital public infrastructure as part of trade strategy. Moving data, money, and credentials across borders becomes as “normal” as moving goods is meant to be under AfCFTA.
4. What lessons from Africa’s informal innovation economy are still underestimated by global policymakers?
The informal economy is often framed as a gap to “formalize.” Yet, it’s also a living lab for what works under low trust, high volatility, and thin margins constraints. People innovate with social trust, hyper-practical UX, and resilience – mechanisms formal systems rarely copy well.
Mobile money is the cleanest example. It scaled because it respected daily reality. It didn’t require perfect documentation, perfect connectivity, or perfect banking habits. It built on what existed and made the system legible to ordinary users.
5. Is the biggest opportunity today technological or narrative? Does Africa first need to change how it is perceived before capital truly flows?
It’s both, but I’d argue narrative becomes durable only when it’s backed by architecture. Perception can open doors, and systems keep them open. If Africa can demonstrate investable and repeatable frameworks, capital won’t need persuasion, but a pathway.
That said, Africa House exists precisely because global forums still shape how risk is priced. Thus, changing the story from “recipient” to “co-designer” is negotiating power.
6. We often speak about data as the “new oil.” But oil led to extraction economies. How do we ensure data doesn’t repeat the same mistake?
Well, first, by refusing the oil metaphor at the policy level. Oil is depleted when you use it, and data compounds when you govern it well. So, how do we create rules that keep value creation, accountability, and learning loops anchored locally?
Practically, that means harmonized standards of consent, portability, security baselines, and clear rules for cross-border flows. All this lets African firms build regionally and compete globally without handing over their most valuable inputs for free. The AU Data Policy Framework is a serious step in that direction because it explicitly pushes toward a shared data space and common standards.
7. Strategic power is moving upstream into compute, data, and infrastructure. What does sovereignty mean in an AI-driven world?
Sovereignty is the ability to set terms. In an AI world, that means having real choices about where compute runs, how public data is used, and what accountability exists when systems fail. Mostly, in healthcare, finance, and public services.
It also means being honest about concentration. When cloud compute is dominated by a small set of hyperscalers, sovereignty becomes a pricing and resilience question as much as a geopolitical one. Countries need strategies that blend regulation, regional capacity building, and smart procurement, so they don’t wake up to find their AI future depends on a single external switch.
8. Gold has historically anchored trust in financial systems. Can data and digital assets play a similar role for the next generation of economies?
Yes, they can, but only if they inherit what made gold trustworthy via verifiability, scarcity (or at least integrity), and clear custody rules. Gold works because you can audit it, you can hold it, and you don’t need to trust a narrative every day for it to remain real.
Data and digital assets can play a comparable role when they are structured around proof. That’s why the conversation keeps circling back to provenance, proof-of-reserves, and transparent reporting. “Digital” without audit just recreates the same old confidence games at a higher speed.
9. What lessons can Africa take from centuries of commodity trade to avoid repeating extractive models in the digital era?
One lesson is that being “resource-rich” doesn’t automatically translate into bargaining power. The leverage comes from controlling chokepoints like standards, processing, financing, and market access. Historically, Africa exported raw value and imported pricing power. Digitally, the equivalent mistake is exporting raw data and importing the models, platforms, and governance.
Another lesson is that opacity is expensive. Where trade is hard to verify, the premium goes to intermediaries and the discount hits producers.
No matter minerals or data – building transparent, auditable systems doesn’t just reduce corruption risk; it increases how much value can be financed locally.
10. Can tokenized gold help rebuild confidence in monetary systems, particularly in emerging markets?
It can help restore access to a form of trust that institutions themselves are rediscovering. Central banks have been net buyers of gold at unusually high levels for three consecutive years, including 1,045 tonnes in 2024 – a signal of renewed preference for tangible reserves when uncertainty is rising.
Tokenization becomes meaningful when it doesn’t turn gold into a story, but into a more accessible claim on audited, allocated metal. If gold remains a “trust asset,” then fractional, verifiable ownership can widen participation. This especially touches those who need protection from currency instability but can’t meet traditional minimums.
Tokenized gold won’t fix weak governance or poor monetary policy. But it can offer a savings instrument with clearer auditability. If regulation, custody standards, and redemption rules are genuinely enforced, for sure.
11. If Davos 2026 is remembered for one shift in thinking about Africa, what do you hope that shift will be?
I’d want the shift to be from “A destination for projects” to “A co-author of the rules.” Davos gathers leaders under the theme “A Spirit of Dialogue,” but dialogue only matters if it works, if it changes who sets standards.
If Africa House’s “From Extraction to Exchange” lands, the memory should be that partners started treating African capacity-building, local custody, and digital sovereignty as deal terms.
12. Ten years from now, what decision made today will matter most for Africa’s economic sovereignty?
The most consequential decision is whether Africa builds shared continental standards for data, identity, and AI governance, or lets the market fragment into incompatible, externally-dependent islands. Standards sound boring, but they determine who can build, who can compete, and where value accrues.
Right behind that is confronting the value leakage that comes from opacity in high-value sectors. If Africa can reduce illicit outflows and improve traceability, then there's more fiscal space, more investable local industry, and less dependence on imported trust.
