BK

Dr. Bravious Kahyoza

Economist & World Bank Certified PPP Expert (CP3P)

Dr. Bravious Kahyoza is a Senior Economist and World Bank Certified Public-Private Partnership Professional (CP3P) with extensive expertise in infrastructure finance, development economics, and investment policy across East Africa. He leads analytical and advisory mandates at the Tanzania Economic Research Institute (TERI), the research division of Tanzania Investment and Consultant Group Ltd (TICGL), He specialises in PPP project structuring and blended finance at the PPP Centre, and fiscal policy analysis. Dr. Kahyoza has contributed to national development planning processes, engaged with multilateral development banks including the World Bank and AfDB, and advises both public-sector contracting authorities and private investors on bankable PPP project development in Tanzania's rapidly evolving infrastructure landscape. His work bridges rigorous quantitative research and practical policy advocacy, with a focus on making Tanzania's infrastructure ambitions financeable and deliverable.

Executive Summary

Tanzania's FYDP IV ambition of mobilising TZS 170 trillion through PPP over five years is arithmetically impossible unless the government immediately and substantially increases the budget allocated to PPP project preparation.

This research paper develops a scientific, data-driven argument for why the Government of Tanzania must allocate adequate resources to Public-Private Partnership (PPP) project preparation under FYDP IV (2026/27–2030/31). The analysis is grounded in three converging bodies of evidence: the quantitative record of FYDP III PPP performance, the fiscal architecture of FYDP IV as articulated by the PPP Centre (PPPC), and the project finance structural framework developed by TICGL's Economic Research & Advisory Division (TERI).

History is unambiguous — FYDP III set a PPP target of TZS 21 trillion but delivered only TZS 9 trillion (43%) because PPPC was given TZS 5 billion over five years — just TZS 1 billion per year — against a World Bank benchmark preparation cost of TZS 420 billion. Tanzania under-invested in preparation by a factor of 84:1.

⚡ Core Scientific Argument

If preparation cost is benchmarked at 2% of total project value (World Bank standard), and the FYDP IV PPP target is TZS 170 trillion, then the minimum scientifically-justified preparation budget is TZS 3.4 trillion (≈TZS 680 billion/year). Every shilling withheld from this preparation budget reduces by at least 50 shillings the PPP capital that can be mobilised. The opportunity cost of under-preparing is catastrophically high.

FYDP IV now sets a PPP target eight times larger than FYDP III. Investing TZS 680 billion per year to unlock TZS 34 trillion in annual PPP investment yields a 50:1 return — one of the most defensible public expenditure ratios in any infrastructure financing system anywhere in the world.

8.1× FYDP IV vs FYDP III PPP Ambition Scale
84:1 FYDP III Under-Investment Ratio (Actual vs WB Benchmark)
43% FYDP III PPP Delivery Rate (TZS 9T of TZS 21T target)
50:1 Annual Return Ratio on Preparation Investment

1. The FYDP IV Financing Architecture: A Mathematical Framework

1.1 The Numbers at a Glance

The FYDP IV financing framework, as confirmed by PPPC and the Ministry of Finance, is structured around the following primary parameters. These figures are not aspirational — they are the official planning baseline against which PPP delivery must be measured.

TZS 477T Total FYDP IV Budget
TZS 334T Private Sector Share (70%)
TZS 170T PPP Target (51% of Private)
TZS 34T/yr Annual PPP Delivery Required

These parameters derive from a clear analytical chain: the FYDP IV total programme budget of TZS 477 trillion, of which 70% (TZS 334 trillion) is assigned to the private sector, and 51% of that (using FYDP III trend) is targeted as PPP — giving TZS 170 trillion over five years, or TZS 34 trillion annually.

FYDP IV Budget Composition

Distribution of TZS 477 Trillion total budget by financing source

FYDP III vs FYDP IV — Scale of Ambition

Total budget, private sector share, and PPP target comparison (TZS Trillions)

1.2 The FYDP III Baseline: What Actually Happened

Before projecting forward, it is essential to establish the evidential baseline from FYDP III. The table below synthesises the available data on PPP performance during the previous plan period.

IndicatorFYDP III TargetFYDP III ActualDelivery Rate
Total Plan BudgetTZS 114.9T
Private Sector Share~TZS 40T (35%)~TZS 40T~100%
PPP Target (51% of private)TZS 21.0TTZS 9.0T43%
PPPC Budget (5 years)TZS 420B (WB benchmark)TZS 5B allocated1.2% of benchmark
PPPC Annual BudgetTZS 84B/year (WB benchmark)TZS 1B/year (actual)1.2% of benchmark
PPP Gap (undelivered)TZS 12T undelivered

Source: PPPC Annual Report 2024; TERI/TICGL analysis. WB = World Bank benchmark preparation cost at 2% of project value.

FYDP III PPP: Target vs. Actual Delivery

Illustrating the TZS 12 trillion delivery gap and the catastrophic under-resourcing of PPPC (TZS Billions)

⚠ The Preparation Budget Diagnosis

PPPC was given TZS 1 billion per year. The World Bank benchmark for project preparation is 2% of total project value. To prepare TZS 21 trillion in FYDP III PPP projects, PPPC required TZS 420 billion. It received TZS 5 billion. The shortfall is not a management failure — it is a resource starvation that made the PPP target arithmetically unreachable from Day 1.

PPPC Budget: TZS 5B Allocated vs TZS 420B Required1.2% funded
FYDP III PPP Delivery: TZS 9T Delivered vs TZS 21T Target43% delivered

2. The Scientific Calculation: What FYDP IV PPP Requires

2.1 Applying the World Bank 2% Benchmark

The World Bank's Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) research consistently establishes that successful PPP project preparation — encompassing feasibility studies, technical assessments, environmental and social impact studies, legal documentation, procurement support, and financial modelling — requires a minimum of 2% of total project capital value. This benchmark is validated across Africa, Asia, and Latin America and is the standard applied by AfDB, IFC, and JICA in their infrastructure advisory mandates.

Step / VariableCalculationResult
FYDP IV Total BudgetGivenTZS 477 Trillion
Private Sector Share (70%)477T × 70%TZS 334 Trillion
PPP Share of Private (51% — FYDP III trend)334T × 51%TZS 170 Trillion
Annual PPP Delivery Target170T ÷ 5 yearsTZS 34 Trillion/year
World Bank Preparation BenchmarkStandard2% of project value
Total Preparation Budget Required (5 years)170T × 2%TZS 3.4 Trillion
Annual Preparation Budget Required3.4T ÷ 5 yearsTZS 680 Billion/year
FYDP III: Actual Annual Budget AllocatedHistoricalTZS 1 Billion/year
FYDP IV Preparation Return Ratio34T ÷ 680B50:1 per year
5-Year ROI of Preparation Investment170T ÷ 3.4T50:1 cumulative

Source: TERI/TICGL calculation applying World Bank PPI 2% benchmark to FYDP IV official parameters.

Annual Preparation Budget: Required vs FYDP III Actual

TZS Billions — the 680× preparation funding gap

50:1 Return — Preparation Investment vs PPP Capital Unlocked

Annual figures (TZS Billions) showing leverage effect

2.2 The Investment Thesis: Why TZS 680 Billion per Year is Not Expensive

The fiscal argument for the TZS 680 billion annual preparation budget is overwhelmingly positive. The analytical logic proceeds as follows:

  • To deliver TZS 170 trillion in PPP over five years, Tanzania must deliver TZS 34 trillion every year.
  • The World Bank benchmark requires investing 2% of project value in preparation: 2% × TZS 34T = TZS 680 billion per year.
  • The preparation investment unlocks TZS 34 trillion in private capital per year.
  • The return ratio is 50:1 annually — for every TZS 1 billion in preparation, TZS 50 billion in PPP investment is mobilised.
  • Over five years: TZS 3.4 trillion in cumulative preparation expenditure unlocks TZS 170 trillion in private infrastructure investment.
✅ The Fiscal Mathematics of Preparation Investment

Investing TZS 680 billion/year to unlock TZS 34 trillion/year in PPP capital yields a return ratio of 50:1. Over five years, a TZS 3.4 trillion preparation budget unlocks TZS 170 trillion in private investment. No other category of government expenditure delivers a 50:1 catalytic return. This is not generosity towards PPPC — it is the minimum rational investment to protect the entire FYDP IV private sector mobilisation strategy.

Required Prep Budget: TZS 680B/yr (Year 1)Year 1 of 5
PPP Capital Unlocked: TZS 34T/yr50× leverage
5-Year Cumulative Prep: TZS 3.4Tvs TZS 170T PPP unlock

2.3 The Cost of Not Investing: Repeating FYDP III

If the government replicates the FYDP III funding pattern — allocating TZS 1 billion per year to PPPC — the scientific projection of FYDP IV PPP performance is straightforward. Applying the FYDP III delivery ratio of 43% to the FYDP IV target:

TZS 170T FYDP IV PPP Target
TZS 73T Expected at 43% rate (status quo)
TZS 97T PPP Gap if Under-Investment Continues
20%+ Of GDP lost in undelivered private investment

FYDP IV PPP Delivery Scenarios: Adequately Funded vs. Status Quo Under-Investment

TZS Trillions — Projected annual PPP delivery under two preparation budget scenarios (2026/27–2030/31)

⚠ The FYDP III Failure Was Structural, Not Managerial

The 43% delivery rate under FYDP III was not primarily a consequence of investor disinterest or regulatory barriers. As PPPC's own presentation to the April 2026 National Capacity Building Workshop makes clear, the leading structural cause was the inadequate preparation budget that prevented contracting authorities from developing bankable project documentation. The problem is known, diagnosed, and solvable.

3. The Policy Argument: Science-Based Recommendations

3.1 The Structural Root Causes

Tanzania's PPP underperformance during FYDP III is multi-causal, but the dominant structural driver is clear and consistent across PPPC's institutional diagnosis and TICGL's project finance research.

#Root CauseConsequence
1PPPC budget too small to fund feasibility studiesProjects remain undocumented; no bankable prospectus for investors
2Contracting Authorities lack PPP Desks (required by PPP Act)No institutional champion to develop projects at ministry level
3Government funds projects that should be PPP via budgetPPP pipeline dries up; private capital is crowded out
4Investors cannot access 10–25 year local currency debtEven willing investors cannot achieve financial close
5TANESCO off-taker risk unresolvedEnergy PPPs stall; majority of pipeline remains unbankable
6Capital markets too shallow to absorb infrastructure bondsDSE at 11% GDP vs 20% SSA average; pension funds locked in govt securities
7PPP targets set as political aspiration, not costed programmingResource allocation divorced from delivery mathematics

Root Cause Impact Assessment

Relative severity of structural PPP delivery barriers in Tanzania (expert assessment, 0–10 scale)

Tanzania Capital Market Depth

DSE market cap, pension fund AUM & infrastructure allocation vs. SSA benchmarks (% of GDP)

3.2 Science-Based Policy Recommendations

The following recommendations are grounded in quantitative evidence, World Bank and AfDB benchmarks, and the institutional analysis provided by PPPC and TICGL. They are presented in order of priority and feasibility.

1

Allocate TZS 3.4 Trillion to PPP Project Preparation over FYDP IV

The government must allocate a minimum of TZS 680 billion per year — TZS 3.4 trillion over the FYDP IV period — to PPPC and contracting authorities for PPP project preparation. This is not discretionary. It is the scientifically-determined minimum required to produce a pipeline of bankable projects sufficient to meet the TZS 170 trillion target. The budget should be ring-fenced in the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and protected from across-the-board budget compression.

2

Establish a Tanzania Infrastructure Viability Gap Fund (TIVF)

For social sector PPPs — education, health, water, food security, rural development — commercial returns are inherently insufficient to attract private capital without government support. The government must establish a TIVF capitalised at a minimum of TZS 5–8 trillion, providing 20–40% capex grants to make social sector PPPs bankable. India's National Infrastructure Pipeline model, which has used Viability Gap Funding to mobilise USD 50+ billion in social infrastructure PPPs, is the most applicable precedent.

3

Mandate All Contracting Authorities to Establish PPP Desks by FY2026/27

Section 4(3) of the PPP Act (Cap. 103) and the PPP Regulations 2020 already require contracting authorities to establish PPP Desks. Compliance is demonstrably low. The government should condition sector development budget allocations on evidence of a functional PPP Desk — creating a direct fiscal incentive for compliance. PPPC should be mandated to certify PPP Desk functionality before sector ministries can access the TIVF.

4

Reform SSRA Investment Guidelines — Unlock Pension Fund Capital

Tanzania's pension funds hold TZS 21.4 trillion in AUM. More than 85% is locked in government securities. Amending SSRA investment guidelines to allow 10–15% infrastructure allocation would unlock TZS 2.1–3.2 trillion in long-tenor domestic capital immediately — without any additional sovereign borrowing. Kenya's RBA, South Africa's FSCA, and India's PFRDA have all done this. Tanzania is behind the regional curve on a reform that requires only a statutory instrument, no fiscal expenditure.

5

Integrate PPP Delivery KPIs into Ministerial Performance Contracts

The government should embed PPP project development and delivery KPIs into the performance contracts of all Permanent Secretaries in ministries with significant infrastructure mandates (Energy, Transport, Water, Education, Health, Agriculture). Annual performance reviews should include a mandatory assessment of PPP pipeline development progress. This aligns PPPC's institutional mandate with individual ministerial accountability — creating a distributed PPP development culture rather than centralising all responsibility in one institution.

Tanzania Pension Fund AUM — Current Allocation vs. Infrastructure Unlock Potential

TZS Trillions — if SSRA guidelines allow 10–15% infrastructure allocation

📌 FYDP III vs FYDP IV: The Scale of the Ambition Gap

FYDP III total budget was TZS 114.9 trillion. FYDP IV is TZS 477 trillion — 4.2× larger. The PPP target under FYDP III was TZS 21 trillion. The PPP target under FYDP IV is TZS 170 trillion — 8.1× larger. Tanzania is setting an eight-fold increase in PPP ambition while still operating under the same under-resourced PPPC institutional framework that delivered only 43% of the lower target.