By Aldridge Dzvene
The City of Harare’s proposed US$818.3 million budget for 2027 places the capital’s long-standing service delivery crisis at the centre of an ambitious infrastructure and investment agenda, but the financial performance recorded during 2026 raises a fundamental question: can Council turn its spending plans into tangible improvements when its ability to collect revenue and execute capital projects remains constrained?
Presented to Council on 29 October by Finance and Development Committee Chairperson Councillor Jubilation C. Shoko, the budget, themed “Restoring Services, Renewing Infrastructure and Building a Resilient, Inclusive Harare”, outlines a programme that reaches beyond routine municipal operations. It seeks to reposition Harare through investment in water and sanitation, road rehabilitation, public health, markets, energy resilience and the modernisation of municipal infrastructure. Its significance extends beyond the city’s residents because Harare’s functionality has a direct bearing on Zimbabwe’s business environment, investment confidence and national economic competitiveness.
However, the budget’s own review of the first nine months of 2026 exposes the scale of the implementation challenge. Between January and September, Council recorded ZiG5.199 billion in receipts against billings of ZiG8.925 billion, translating to a collection efficiency of approximately 58 percent. The resulting ZiG3.726 billion gap represents revenue that had been billed but had not been converted into cash available to finance municipal operations and development programmes.
The difficulty is not confined to revenue collection. Capital expenditure during the same period reached ZiG1.517 billion against a proportionate budget of ZiG4.932 billion, representing an implementation rate of 30.75 percent. This is particularly significant for a budget whose central promise is infrastructure renewal. A city cannot rehabilitate its roads, modernise its water network or expand public facilities through allocations alone. It requires the financial capacity, procurement systems and institutional efficiency to move projects from budget documents to completed infrastructure.
Council’s financial position is further complicated by rising outstanding debts. The budget statement records that debtors increased by 41 percent between January and September 2026, reaching ZiG11.898 billion. At the same time, creditors stood at ZiG2.511 billion, with ZiG1.454 billion owed to ZESA. These figures illustrate the pressure facing the municipality, where limited cash flows must sustain electricity-intensive water and wastewater operations while meeting other service delivery obligations.
Water remains the most consequential test of the proposed recovery programme. The City estimates that it requires between US$2.3 million and US$2.7 million every month to procure water treatment chemicals, against a revenue structure in which approximately 80 percent of collections are received in local currency and only 20 percent in United States dollars. This exposes a structural financing challenge in a service that depends on consistent access to foreign currency for essential inputs.
The proposed US$342 million WASH modernisation agreement, covering 320,000 prepaid meters, water pipe replacements and rehabilitation of Morton Jaffray Water Treatment Plant, therefore carries considerable importance. It represents an attempt to address the infrastructure and operational weaknesses that have affected water delivery across the capital. The proposed targets, including production of 520 megalitres per day, a 60 percent reduction in sewer blockages and a 50 percent reduction in non-revenue water, provide measurable benchmarks against which residents should be able to assess progress.
The wider investment agenda is equally significant. Council is pursuing a proposed US$750 million public-private partnership for wastewater treatment and conveyance rehabilitation, alongside plans for a 100-megawatt solar plant at Crowborough Farm. If successfully structured and implemented, these projects could help address two of the city’s most persistent infrastructure constraints: inadequate wastewater management and the cost of electricity required to sustain municipal services. However, the distinction between proposed projects, agreements and completed investments will remain important. Their development will depend on financing arrangements, approvals, transparent procurement and the capacity to deliver infrastructure that produces lasting public value.
Road rehabilitation presents another major test. The budget acknowledges that more than 40 percent of Harare’s road network, representing over 2,000 kilometres, is in poor condition. The proposed Roads Programme is allocated US$110.34 million, with US$82.8 million directed towards road maintenance and rehabilitation, US$10.2 million towards drainage and stormwater management, and US$17.2 million towards traffic management. These interventions are important not only for motorists but also for commerce, public transport, logistics and the movement of goods across the metropolitan economy.
The social dimension of the budget also deserves attention. The proposed US$146.75 million Social Services Programme covers health, housing, education facilities, parks, markets, welfare and other community services. Planned interventions include improvements to clinics and maternity facilities, the upgrading of Harare Gardens, Mbare urban renewal and the modernisation of municipal markets. The commitment to reserve at least 50 percent of newly developed market stalls and small-business workspaces for women-led enterprises and persons with disabilities further introduces an inclusion dimension to the city’s development programme.
For the private sector, the proposed investment framework could open opportunities in infrastructure financing, construction, energy, property development, technology and municipal service management. Council says it has developed an investment prospectus valued at US$4.2 billion, while its Business Development Unit is expected to strengthen the commercial performance of strategic business units and expand viable public-private partnerships. This signals an effort to treat municipal assets and infrastructure not merely as administrative responsibilities, but as potential platforms for investment and economic activity.
Yet the success of this approach will depend on the credibility of the municipality as a financial and institutional partner. Investors will look beyond the size of the prospectus to examine project preparation, revenue models, governance, regulatory approvals and the ability to meet contractual obligations. Equally, residents will judge the budget by whether water becomes more reliable, roads improve, refuse is collected consistently and public facilities become more functional.
The 2027 budget therefore presents Harare with an opportunity to move from recurring service delivery commitments towards measurable municipal transformation. Its proposals are substantial, and the recognition of existing financial weaknesses gives the programme a more realistic starting point. But the figures from 2026 make it clear that the challenge is not simply identifying what needs to be built or repaired. It is strengthening the systems that finance, execute and sustain those interventions.
For Zimbabwe, a functional capital city is an economic necessity. Harare must be capable of supporting businesses, attracting investment, facilitating trade and providing reliable services to the people who sustain its economy. The real measure of the 2027 budget will consequently not be the size of its estimates or the ambition of its projects, but how much of that ambition is converted into visible improvements in the daily life and productive capacity of the city.
