US President Barack Obama arrives in the land of his father, Kenya, this month in a confident and optimistic mood after a series of political victories at home and the American economy showing increasing strength.

President Obama, whose term ends in 18 months, will also be focused on his legacy, which includes three Africa-focused endeavours: Feed the Future (FtF), Trade Africa and Power Africa.

The president is likely to tout these initiatives as major achievements though sceptics suggest that it is premature to declare at least the trade and energy programmes successful.

They say it remains to be seen whether the first African-American US president will leave as concretely beneficial a legacy in Africa as did his predecessor.

George W Bush’s Aids relief effort and the conditioned development-assistance grants known as the Millennium Challenge Account are widely seen as far-reaching and enduring accomplishments. President Obama may therefore also be feeling defensive as he extols his Africa trade, electricity and food programmes, each of which includes Kenya and Tanzania as targeted beneficiaries.

Critics charge that President Obama has been slow in setting an agenda that may have the potential to help Africa as much as Mr Bush’s programmes already have.

FtF, however, is not a newly minted innovation. Launched in 2010, it is the most established of the three initiatives by President Obama. It thus has a record and at least some analysts regard it as positive.

A recent appraisal by the British NGO Oxfam said, “There is no doubt FtF has demonstrated substantial, real and important improvements in the way the US Agency for International Development (USAid), delivers assistance.”

Oxfam cited some ways in which the programme can be made more effective. But, overall, the anti-poverty group found that FtF is “helping to ensure greater country ownership of US investments” while seeking to empower female farmers.

Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda are among the 20 countries targeted for agricultural sector enhancements through FtF. In addition to promoting better inputs — such as fertilisers, seeds and animal vaccines — the programme seeks to facilitate greater efficiencies in storage and transport of crops while also helping more farmers qualify for loans. FtF further aims at improving nutrition, especially for women and children.

Power Africa ranks as the most ambitious of President Obama’s attempts at spurring transformational change in the sub-Saharan region.

The president pledged in a speech two years ago in Cape Town that this initiative will produce a doubling of access to electricity in Africa within five years. That’s an enormously ambitious goal, and it was established in the context of numerous failed attempts by African leaders to bring electricity to millions of homes and businesses.

If Power Africa does hit its target, it is likely to be seen by history as having had a revolutionary effect. Seven out of 10 Africans — eight out of 10 in both Kenya and Tanzania — lack electricity that could be used to study for exams after nightfall, keep food safe, refrigerate vaccines and power small enterprises.

Tom Hart, director of the US chapter of the global anti-poverty campaign initiated by rock star Bono, sees Power Africa as a complement to the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa). That trade preference programme — a Bill Clinton legacy — cannot succeed in vastly increasing African exports to the US unless the continent has energy resources sufficient to allow factories to produce more goods, Mr Hart observes.

Power Africa, which is initially focused on Kenya, Tanzania and four other sub-Saharan countries, involves what its architects say is a $36 billion commitment on the part of Washington, US private businesses, the World Bank, African Development Bank and Sweden.

Only a small portion of the funding takes the form of grants or direct aid to energy projects. Power Africa instead relies on US government loan guarantees and multilateral financial institutions’ related inducements to spur massive private investment in electricity generation in Africa.

It is centred on removing barriers to the expansion of energy sources, its top official has said, and works with governments to reform policies and regulatory protocols with the objective of cutting red tape that delays progress in building power facilities and transmission lines.

Its administrators say 80 US businesses have committed $20 billion in financing for Power Africa. That has led some critics to suggest that Power Africa is as much an effort to create opportunities for US corporations as it is to light homes on the continent.

It is also unclear how much of that promised capital has been provided and it remains to be seen whether Power Africa’s $7 billion US government financing component will remain post-Obama.

A researcher at a Washington think tank is also raising questions about the types of energy envisioned as the underpinnings of Power Africa.

“The persistent truth is that the United States’ energy policies towards poor countries have been hypocritical,” Todd Moss, a senior fellow at the Centre for Global Development, wrote in a recent blog post pointing to potential problems in Power Africa.

The dark side of help

While noting that natural gas accounts for about a quarter of electricity generation in the US, Centre for Global Development’s Todd Moss told The EastAfrican that there is a debate within the Obama administration over the degree to which Power Africa should seek to promote development of the huge natural gas reserves in countries such as Tanzania.

Being a fossil fuel, natural gas contributes to climate change, which the Obama regime is striving to mitigate by reducing carbon emissions.

But while “Africa is going to be hit worst by the effects of climate change,” Mr Moss noted, “Africa contributes almost nothing to carbon emissions.” He said Africans can best adapt to climate change by becoming wealthier “and access to electricity will be a key component in achieving that.”