By Philip Mataranyika, Nyaradzo Group CEO
As we prepare for the 2025/26 national budget, a familiar debate will undoubtedly
resurface—one that centres on the perennial challenges of resource allocation across
government ministries.
While I am no prophet, I would bet my last dollar that discussions
will focus heavily on the insufficiency of funds, not due to any stinginess on the part of the Minister of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion, Professor Mthuli Ncube and his team, but simply because the fiscal pie is not big enough to meet all the pressing needs.
That is the elephant in the room.
Yet, recognising this reality must not breed resignation. Instead, it should galvanise us to
exert extraordinary effort—blood, sweat and tears—to extricate ourselves from this fiscal
tight spot.
Currently, there is considerable and commendable focus on expanding productive
sectors such as manufacturing, agriculture and mining to grow the formal economy, increase
business formation, create jobs and broaden the tax base.
The government’s drive to formalise small businesses and promote exports is equally commendable.
Simultaneously, Zimbabwe has witnessed progressive reforms in modernising the tax system. Measures to broaden VAT coverage, reduce unwarranted exemptions, improve resource taxation and enhance tax administration through digitalisation are crucial steps forward.
It would be remiss of me if I didn’t give a thumbs up to Regina Chinamasa and her team at ZIMRA for their innovation and
commitment.
Civil society loudly insists on plugging revenue leakages caused by corruption and illicit financial flows—especially in natural resources—a matter that cannot be overstated.
While these fiscal and governance reforms are vital to building a stronger foundation for
Zimbabwe’s development goals, it goes without saying that the government must accelerate its commitment to promoting local production. Indeed, supporting local enterprises and production is an indispensable pillar of economic development, resilience and growth.
It is heartening to observe current efforts. The government’s formal Local Content Strategy, which seeks to raise minimum local content thresholds in priority sectors from 25% to 80%, aims to deepen value addition and strengthen domestic linkages.
In the manufacturing and
industrial sectors, the Ministry of Industry and Commerce has established a steering
committee to implement, monitor and review local content requirements across the
pharmaceuticals, cement, steel, leather and other sectors.
Minister Dr Mangaliso Ndlovu has been a vocal champion in supporting local content, building on the
solid foundation laid by his predecessor, Doctor Mike Bimha. Both have played
pivotal roles in fostering a culture of local production, aligning public policy and private sector initiatives to promote Zimbabwean industrial growth and economic self-reliance.
In mining, discussions on responsible sourcing and local procurement have been gaining traction.
Companies such as Zimplats have pioneered this approach, commissioning state-of-the-art
smelters that process concentrates from third parties, while Unki, Mimosa as well as
Zimplats, itself lead the charge in preferential procurement favouring local suppliers. Their efforts have not gone unnoticed, with all of them winning awards from Munyaradzi Hwengwere’s Buy
Zimbabwe campaign, which advocates for a minimum 50% local content requirement in both private and public sector procurement—a critical demand-side lever for local production.
The media and creative sectors also merit special mention. A proposed 75% local content quota for broadcasters in the new media policy by Information Minister Doctor Jenfan Muswere, echoes the successes achieved during Professor Jonathan Moyo’s tenure as Minister of Information in the early 2000s. Artists like Jah Prayzah, ExQ, Plaxedes Wenyika and Winky D can vouch that their inroads into the arts and creative space is attributable to that defining period. Today these artists represent local brands as ambassadors and continue to push national aspirations through song and dance.
Whether loved or lothed, Professor Moyo was instrumental in embedding local content standards in
broadcasting, requiring commercial-quality local productions and establishing support funds. This policy was seminal in fostering Zimbabwe’s vibrant “Urban Grooves” music genre by giving young local artists the much-needed airtime and exposure. The quota reduced dependence on foreign content and catalysed infrastructure and industry growth in the creative sector.
Sustaining such policies nationally and expanding their scope would yield substantial benefits. However, the national budget remains the key instrument for turning these aspirations into reality. It can reduce cost burdens for local producers through duty-free importation of critical inputs, tax incentives, and rebates linked to local content utilisation.
Public investment in infrastructure, manufacturing plants, research and development will
provide the backbone for local industries to thrive. Budget allocations for institutional mechanisms—steering committees, monitoring bodies and capacity-building—will underpin the Local Content Strategy’s effective implementation.
The government can earmark funds for priority sectors with high local content potential,
including pharmaceuticals, agro-processing, and creative industries, embedding them firmly
within the national development agenda.
Public procurement policy, shaped by the budget, is a powerful tool to guarantee demand for
local goods and services. Buy Zimbabwe’s call for 50% local content in
procurement rightly emphasises this. Moreover, recognising that local content spans
manufacturing, culture and media, budgetary provisions for grants, subsidised loans and tax incentives to these sectors will multiply economic impact and output.
Support for skills development, digital infrastructure and research will enable local industries
to move up the value chain and compete internationally.
Zimbabwe is not alone on this journey. History offers inspiring lessons from global luminaries
who championed local production as a foundation for national prosperity.
In the United States, after independence in 1776, the economy was largely agrarian and
reliant on British imports. Alexander Hamilton, the first U.S. Secretary of the Treasury
(1789–1795), was the chief architect of an industrial policy that envisaged a self-sufficient,
robust manufacturing base. His 1791 “Report on Manufacturers” advocated for protective
tariffs, subsidies for domestic industries, infrastructure investments, and national credit
institutions to foster industrial financing. Although clearly protectionist, his developmental vision laid the groundwork for America’s transformation into an industrial powerhouse.
Germany, inspired by Hamilton’s ideas through economist Friedrich List, pursued protective
tariffs and state-supported industrialisation programs in the 19th century, investing in technical
education and industrial banking. This propelled Germany to become a formidable industrial
rival to Britain.
Japan’s Meiji Era 1868 to 1912 and post-World War II industrial policies were characterised by
government-led technology imports, education and nurturing national champions,
coordinated by the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI). Companies like
Toyota and Sony thrived under protective policies until they became globally competitive.
South Korea’s export-oriented industrialisation from the 1960s to the 1990s, led by Park
Chung-hee, relied on subsidies, loans and import controls to build global powerhouses such as
Samsung and Hyundai.
China’s reform era, starting in 1978, combined state planning with market mechanisms,
enforcing local content requirements and technology transfer while investing heavily in infrastructure and education. This strategy turned China into the world’s manufacturing hub and emerging tech leader that it is today. Brazil and India also charted paths through state-led industrialisation programs, import substitution and
later liberalisation, with initiatives like India’s “Make in India” positioning them as
manufacturing and service powerhouses.
Singapore’s Lee Quan Yew managed to transform his nation from a struggling British Port City to a thriving global metropolis through inward looking policies. His Economic Development Board played a crucial role in attracting foreign investments and developing local industries by offering clear incentives and support for local companies and industries.
Zimbabwe stands at a crossroads.
By committing fully to local content promotion through coherent policy and budgetary support, we can unlock value, create jobs, enhance economic
independence and drive sustainable economic growth.
It is time to accelerate these efforts. As history shows, nations that protect, nurture and
promote local industries before embracing full global competition create enduring prosperity. The upcoming national budget should reflect this strategic imperative.
