Financing Urban Social Housing In Zimbabwe

Financing Urban Social Housing In Zimbabwe

Bukhosibenkosi H Moyo moyobh@munrev.com

Editor, TMR eJournal

Central to the requirements of SDG 11 is the provision of social housing, but housing remains an elusive basic commodity for many Zimbabweans. Each economic blueprint adopted by the Zimbabwean government, as well as each political manifesto makes impressive promises to deliver on the social housing front but as the years continue to roll, there is minimal progress there. With a combined population of 2,2 million in Zimbabwe’s two main urban cities, Harare and Bulawayo (February 2019), combined applicants on official waiting lists sits at over 500,000. Statistics from Bulawayo City Council reveal that in the past 15 years, the council has only managed to service 20,000 stands. At an average cost of USD15,000 to build a basic low cost house, the local authorities  require USD4,5 billion, that is almost the entire national budget, to clear this list. As a result, the local authorities have prioritised selling residential stands for the owners to build for themselves.

But whose responsibility is it to fund the provision of social housing in Zimbabwe? Realising its own shortcomings, central government has over the years designed and redesigned a National Housing Policy that eventually paved way for private sector entrance in the housing delivery market. The private players have worked hand in hand with local authorities by acquiring land from council and developing it into serviced residential stands. Chief among these private players have been real estate companies as well as financial institutions that have come on strongly onto the market with mortgages. More recently however, these mortgages have been scaled down in light of the currency and economic crisis in Zimbabwe. It has become increasingly clear that private funds made up mostly of diaspora remittances are what can guarantee one a house or a stand. Traditional housing co-operatives that were popular in the early 1990s seem to have lost steam too, probably as a result of our economic downturn.

These Public-Private Partnerships have helped local authorities to scratch the surface with regards to housing provision.  In the 2019 budget, the government allocated $19 million (in our surrogate currency) towards the National Housing Delivery programme. This was against the backdrop of a projected delivery of 40,000 stands and house units country wide. At a cost of $475 per unit, this is virtually impossible, and it gives a picture of a budget that is out of touch with reality in terms of unit cost as well as in addressing the housing backlog alluded to earlier. A further analysis of the budget reveals that these planned housing units are set aside for the civil service. No provision has been made for the ordinary Zimbabwean. In the same budget, the construction of public buildings was allocated $30 million. This makes it clear that government has prioritised its administrative work spaces over national housing.

Local authorities were allocated a combined total of $45 million, with Harare and Bulawayo receiving $4 million each, it remains to be seen how much of it will go towards social housing. With service delivery being a contentious issue, we foreseen these local authorities prioritising road repairs, refuse collection and the provision of portable water over the provision of housing.

Clearly, we can conclude that while government has a mandate and will to finance the provision of social housing, the currency crisis among other economic ills, has made it difficult to achieve this feat. It is now up to individual developers, financial institutions and individuals with free funds to meet and do business. Those without such funds will continue to grace the waiting lists for years to come. Local authorities should adopt viable PPP models and provide land for these developers and financiers so that they can assist, albeit in a very small way, to provide housing to the masses.