We must treat aviation as strategic economic infrastructure

Kenya Airways should not be treated merely as one operator among many at its home base, but as the anchor carrier around which JKIA’s connectivity strategy is organised.

Kenya has spent years debating the future of its national carrier through a narrow lens of whether Kenya Airways should simply make a profit.

While financial self-sufficiency remains a non-negotiable priority, our laser focus on the airline’s income statement has crowded out a far more vital debate. What does Kenya lose when its aviation capacity shrinks, routes disappear, and Nairobi’s status as East Africa’s premier aviation hub erodes?

The profitability of one carrier is not the same as the health of a national aviation network. An airline is a business, but aviation is strategic economic infrastructure.

It is the connective tissue moving tourists to our coast, fresh horticulture to foreign markets, and investors between regional capitals. When that system falters, the damage extends far beyond a single balance sheet. It is borne by exporters who lose cargo capacity, hotels that lose visitors, conference organisers who lose delegates, and local businesses that lose connections. The ledger of a single airline records none of this wider economic damage.

Data from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) reveals that aviation generates roughly Sh425 billion annually for Kenya (accounting for 3.1 per cent of our gross domestic product) while sustaining over 460,000 jobs across trade, tourism, and logistics.

Treating aviation as critical infrastructure does not dilute fiscal accountability at Kenya Airways. Rather, it acknowledges a fundamental truth: When our national transport network is compromised, the entire economy pays the price.

When an aviation network operates efficiently, trade accelerates and transaction costs fall. Conversely, every grounded aircraft translates into lost export capacity and forfeited enterprise. When foreign transit passengers and air cargo are redirected through competing hubs, those regional gateways capture the revenue, investment, and employment Kenya surrenders.

This challenge spans our borders. Across Africa, aviation supports Sh9.7 trillion ($75 billion) in GDP and 8.1 million jobs, yet regional taxes and statutory fees remain 15 per cent above the global average.

For Kenya, the policy response must adopt a structured hub-carrier policy at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA). Kenya Airways should not be treated merely as one operator among many at its home base, but as the anchor carrier around which JKIA’s connectivity strategy is organised.

This does not mean shutting out foreign airlines or weakening competition. It means coordinating airport slots, gates, transfer facilities, baggage systems, immigration processes and airline schedules around efficient connection banks that allow passengers and cargo to move through Nairobi seamlessly.

Many countries have aligned their airports with the growth of their home carriers. Kenya must do the same if Nairobi is to retain transit traffic, grow cargo volumes and capture the jobs, foreign exchange and commercial activity generated by a functioning African hub.

Recent industry figures illustrate both immense opportunity and structural vulnerability. Passenger traffic across Africa is projected to expand by 6 per cent in 2026, outpacing the global average of 4.9 per cent and making Africa the second fastest-growing market globally after Asia-Pacific.

However, the cumulative effect of taxes, charges and fragmented regulation continues to constrain operating margins. Net profits across African airlines have been reforecast down to a razor-thin Sh52 ($0.40) per passenger in 2026.

By contrast, North American carriers generate Sh1,048 ($8.10) per passenger, while European operators secure Sh971 ($7.50). Without structural reform, high traffic growth will never translate into long-term commercial vitality.

Some argue that public resource allocation should prioritise immediate social needs over air transport support. Yet this reflects a false choice.

A thriving aviation hub directly funds public priorities by driving export revenues, foreign exchange inflows, and tax collections. We must align national policies to preserve Nairobi’s hub status, reduce `aviation levies, modernise cargo facilities, and build regional technical capacity.

The planned Special Economic Zone at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, coupled with Kenya Airways’ plan to establish a 14-bay Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) facility, demonstrates this potential. Servicing regional fleets domestically will retain high-value engineering expenditure within Africa, attracting specialised capital and generating thousands of technical jobs.

However, physical infrastructure alone is not enough to secure this future; our regulatory framework must match our ambition. By breaking aviation policy out of its traditional silo, decisions across transport, treasury, and trade can finally be evaluated against their true, collective impact on national exports and tourism."

Ultimately, the debate extends far beyond the financial recovery of a single airline. It is a strategic choice to cement Kenya’s position as East Africa’s definitive economic gateway to capture our trade and influence. Defending our aviation infrastructure is defending Kenya’s right to compete, connect, and lead on the global stage.