Zimbabwe vendor crackdown exposes deep economic wounds

By Lawrence Makamanzi | Mar. 18, 2025

The current crackdown also raises questions about government's commitment to addressing unemployment and economic development

The government's sudden directive to clear vendors from cities' streets has laid bare the contradictions between maintaining urban order and addressing the nation's deep-rooted economic challenges.

This latest attempt to regulate the informal sector, announced by Local Government minister Daniel Garwe on March 12, 2025, has ignited fierce debate about governance priorities and economic survival in a nation grappling with widespread unemployment and poverty.

The government's justification for the crackdown centres on public health and security concerns, with Garwe emphasising that "the influx of night vendors has created serious health, safety and security concerns." The minister's statement paints a picture of urban decay, citing unsanitary conditions, waste accumulation and the flourishing of criminal activities in these unregulated spaces. Yet this narrative overlooks the complex socioeconomic factors that have driven thousands of Zimbabweans into informal trading.

Former opposition legislator Fadzayi Mahere's critique cuts to the heart of the matter, pointing to the stark contrast with Zimbabwe's more prosperous past. "In the 80s, you did not have vendors on every street corner and in every road of Zimbabwe's cities because the economy worked," she notes, adding that the country then possessed "an extremely productive agricultural sector, a robust manufacturing sector and a decent service industry." This historical perspective underscores how the current vendor crisis represents not just a law enforcement challenge, but a manifestation of broader economic collapse.

The implementation of the directive has already begun generating tension in major cities. In Mutare, where town clerk Blessing Chafesuka has committed to "restore sanity on our streets", the enforcement has led to confrontations between vendors and council police. These clashes highlight the potential for social unrest when policy decisions fail to account for the desperate circumstances driving citizens into informal trading.

Particularly telling is the government's approach to night vendors, with Garwe declaring that "Zimbabwe is an economy which operates during the day." This statement reveals a disconnect between policymakers and the economic reality, where many citizens work multiple jobs or unusual hours to make ends meet. The nocturnal economy has emerged as a survival strategy in response to limited formal employment opportunities, not as a preferred choice.

The directive's timing is especially problematic given Zimbabwe's current economic context. With 49% of the population living in extreme poverty and annual losses of US$2,2 billion to corruption and illicit financial flows, as noted by Mahere, the focus on vendor removal appears misplaced. "You cannot forcibly drive vendors off the street when you pushed them there with your incompetence, insatiable greed and destruction of the economy," she argues, highlighting the contradiction in punishing citizens for adapting to economic circumstances they did not create.

The response from vendor organisations reveals the complexity of the situation. Mutare Informal Traders Association president Itai Kariparire welcomed the move, stating: "This is the political will that we have been waiting for all along." This position primarily reflects the interests of formally registered traders rather than the broader vendor community. The divergence in perspectives demonstrates the stratification within the informal sector itself, where different groups compete for limited economic opportunities.

Keep Reading

Garwe's assertion that "illegal vending perpetuates unsanitary conditions" and poses "a significant risk for disease outbreaks such as typhoid, dysentery and cholera" carries some validity. However, this public health argument ignores how the lack of government investment in basic infrastructure and services has contributed to these very conditions. The solution lies not in removing vendors but in providing adequate facilities and regulatory frameworks that enable safe, dignified trading.

The current crackdown also raises questions about government's commitment to addressing unemployment and economic development. Rather than investing in job creation or supporting the formalisation of informal businesses, the authorities have opted for a punitive approach that threatens to push already marginalised citizens further into poverty. This strategy appears short-sighted given Zimbabwe's historical experience with similar crackdowns, which have repeatedly failed to produce lasting solutions.

Moreover, the timing of this crackdown raises questions about priorities. Coming shortly after the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe's announcement about new exchange rate policies, it suggests a government more focused on controlling symptoms rather than addressing underlying economic challenges.

The experience of other African cities offers potential alternative approaches. Cities like Accra and Nairobi have demonstrated that formalising and regulating street vending, rather than attempting to eliminate it, can lead to more sustainable outcomes. These cities have invested in designated market spaces with proper sanitation facilities while implementing clear regulatory frameworks that protect both vendors and consumers.

To this end, the fundamental question remains unaddressed: how can Zimbabwe balance the legitimate need for urban order with the economic imperatives driving citizens into informal trading? The answer likely lies not in enforcement actions but in comprehensive economic reforms that create genuine opportunities for formal employment and business development. Until such reforms are implemented, attempts to clear the streets of vendors will continue to treat symptoms while ignoring the underlying disease of economic dysfunction.