The country should stop measuring investment at the signing table and start measuring what reaches factories, farms, workers and public revenue.
For years, Tanzania has become very good at announcing investment. The ceremonies are impressive: officials shake hands, cameras flash, projected capital is quoted in billions of dollars, and thousands of promised jobs enter the headlines. What is much harder to find is a public account of what happens after the guests leave.
The Tanzania Investment Centre reported that it approved 901 projects in 2024, up from 526 in 2023. Their declared value rose from US$5.72 billion to US$9.31 billion, while projected employment increased from 137,010 to 212,293 jobs. Those are encouraging figures. They show strong investor interest and a government that is actively promoting the country.
But approved investment is not the same thing as money invested, a factory opened or a worker employed. TIC’s figures describe registered projects and their proposals.
By comparison, World Bank data record Tanzania’s actual net foreign-direct-investment inflows in 2024 at about US$1.72 billion, equal to 2.2 per cent of GDP. The two sets of figures measure different things, so they should not be treated as a direct contradiction.
Yet the large distance between proposed capital and recorded annual inflows exposes the question Tanzania rarely asks loudly enough: how much of what we announce is actually delivered?
That question matters because an investment can exist beautifully on paper while land remains idle, licences move from one desk to another, promised infrastructure is delayed and communities continue waiting for compensation, jobs or local business opportunities. A memorandum of understanding can produce a headline without producing a single bag of cement.
The problem is not limited to private investment. The Controller and Auditor General’s report on development projects for the year ending June 2025 offers a warning about the wider national delivery culture.
Although all 331 audited development projects received clean financial-statement opinions, the CAG stressed that clean accounts do not prove that projects are efficient, economical or effective. Of 320 projects assessed for procurement compliance, 107 – about one third—had exceptions requiring improvement.
Of 319 assessed for budget compliance, 54 had exceptions. Weaknesses remained in procurement planning, contract awards, budget execution, disbursement and supervision.
This is the heart of Tanzania’s investment crisis. We count approvals more carefully than outcomes. We reward the announcement, but rarely identify who is responsible when implementation stalls. A ministry blames an agency; the agency blames a local authority; the local authority blames land disputes; and the investor blames permits, taxes or infrastructure. In the end, everybody has an explanation and nobody carries responsibility.
Tanzania needs a public National Investment Delivery Scorecard. Every major project should be tracked from approval to operation. The public should be able to see the capital promised and the capital actually deployed; jobs projected and jobs created; land allocated and land developed; licences pending and the office holding them; tax incentives granted and public revenue produced; local suppliers promised and contracts awarded; environmental duties agreed and fulfilled.
The scorecard must hold both sides accountable. An official who deliberately delays a lawful investment, demands an unofficial payment or repeatedly misses statutory deadlines should face disciplinary action. An investor who lacks the promised financing, holds strategic land for speculation, violates labour standards or fails to meet an agreed implementation timetable should lose incentives – and, where the law permits, the land or licence.
Parliament should receive an annual investment-delivery report, not merely a list of registrations. The report should name delayed projects, explain the causes, identify the responsible institutions and state the corrective action taken.
The CAG, Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau, competition authorities, environmental regulators and local communities must be treated as part of the investment system, not as obstacles to it.
Accountability does not frighten serious investors. It protects them from arbitrary decisions and protects Tanzania from speculators and politically connected failures.
Predictable rules, published deadlines and traceable decisions are more valuable than speeches promising that every investor will be personally assisted.
Tanzania has land, minerals, energy potential, a large labour force, access to regional markets and a strategic Indian Ocean coastline. It does not need to beg for attention. It needs to prove that its institutions can turn interest into production.
Investment should therefore no longer be celebrated at the moment of registration. It should be celebrated when machinery begins running, farmers enter reliable markets, young people receive decent jobs, taxes reach the Treasury and surrounding communities see measurable benefits. Until then, the billions announced remain promises – not development.
