Two simultaneous signals illuminate the complexity of Madagascar's business climate in the summer of 2026. On one hand, the government is stepping up openings to foreign investors, particularly Egyptians, through a mission by Gafi (Egypt's General Authority for Investment). On the other, the Groupement des entreprises de Madagascar (GEM) suspended its participation in public-private dialogue mechanisms in June 2026 — an alarm signal on economic governance.
Egypt's Economic Mission to Antananarivo
A delegation from Gafi and Egyptian private operators met with Colonel Michaël Randrianirina to explore infrastructure investment opportunities. The Egaad consortium stood out in these discussions, with stated ambitions in major development projects: transport, public buildings, and energy. Around ten Malagasy entrepreneurs accompanied the head of state during this prospecting mission.
Madagascar's Requirements: Technology Transfer and Joint Ventures
The Malagasy government set clear conditions for any foreign partnership: « complete, well-structured and sustainable projects » with technology transfer, local staff training, and joint investment with Malagasy companies. This requirement explicitly targets avoiding arrangements where economic benefits are captured entirely by external actors, with no trickle-down effect on the local business fabric.
Tension with GEM: A Worrying Signal
Alongside this international opening, GEM's suspension from public-private dialogue frameworks is a serious warning. The Malagasy private sector is expressing its frustration with decisions taken without sufficient consultation of local entrepreneurs. This breakdown comes precisely as the government seeks to accelerate public investment execution — with a 24.84% rate in H1 — and attract foreign capital into infrastructure.
Why It Matters
Madagascar stands at a strategic crossroads. The opportunities are real — the AfDB projects 6% growth in 2026 — but they will only fully materialise if the government reconciles international openness with inclusion of the national private sector. Without this restored dialogue, major infrastructure projects risk generating resistance that will slow their execution — and reproduce the pattern of well-funded but poorly delivered projects.