Political Context & The Debate

Political commentator Idrisa Kwekweta, in his article "The Illusion of Public-Private Partnerships in Tanzania's Water Sector", published on the Sauti ya Ujamaa platform, described Tanzania's PPP model in the water sector as "privatisation in disguise." He argued that the model systematically weakens state capacity while allowing profit-driven companies to take control of infrastructure built using taxpayers' money.

The article emerged at a politically sensitive moment — shortly after the PPP Centre launched the PPPC CentreStage initiative linked to the implementation of the Fourth Five-Year Development Plan (FYDP IV 2026–2031). Its publication immediately triggered fierce debate across policy institutions, universities, and development circles over the future of Tanzania's water governance model.

Photo: A RUWASA (Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Agency) 100,000-litre water storage tank constructed in September 2025 at Buhinbu Ngalula, Tanzania — part of the United Republic of Tanzania's Ministry of Water clean and safe water supply scheme. Solar-powered pumping facility visible on the left.

Kwekweta's critique carries undeniable political weight. His article correctly identifies real governance weaknesses inside the water sector, including institutional inefficiency, weak accountability systems, and declining public trust in state-managed service delivery. Its emotional appeal resonates because millions of Tanzanians continue facing daily water insecurity despite decades of public investment.

The Financing Crisis: Data Speaks

Data from Tanzania's national Water Sector Report for 2015–2020 directly expose the structural crisis. During that period, only 11 per cent of financing in the water sector came from government resources, while the remaining 89 per cent relied on development partners and external donors. The crisis in Tanzania's water sector is therefore fundamentally a crisis of capital and infrastructure financing, not merely an ideological invasion of private interests.

PPP vs. Privatisation: A Critical Distinction

Under Tanzania's PPP framework, the state retains ownership of strategic assets and maintains regulatory authority over the sector. "PPP is not privatisation," policymakers repeatedly argue, because the framework operates within Tanzania's established legal and institutional structure, where government preserves powers over tariffs, service obligations, investment conditions, and contract enforcement.

Critics of PPPs often commit what analysts describe as a dangerous policy error: demanding the complete abandonment of the PPP model whenever a contract or project experiences failure. Governance experts argue that failed contracts reflect weak public oversight and poor regulation, not proof that PPPs themselves are inherently defective.

What Tanzanians Already Pay for Water

Photo: Women and children in rural Tanzania carry water containers across a dry landscape — a daily reality for millions of households who spend hours and thousands of shillings securing water from unsafe or distant sources. The informal water economy imposes severe costs on the poor.

Critics say PPPs will raise prices for poor households, but analysts argue Tanzanians are already paying heavily through unreliable informal systems. The data reveals a troubling paradox: informal water costs often exceed what a well-regulated utility would charge.

Experts argue the debate should move beyond "market versus public service" and focus instead on building systems that combine investment with social protection, including subsidies, lifeline tariffs, and mandatory rural service obligations.

The Cost of Inaction: Leakage & Infrastructure Loss

The pressure for reform continues to grow as Tanzania loses about 43 per cent of treated water through leaks and illegal connections. Over the past seven years, water inefficiencies have cost nearly 2 trillion Tanzanian Shillings, while poor water access drains an estimated 2.4 billion US dollars annually — roughly 3.2 per cent of GDP.

Water, Agriculture & Food Security

Agriculture accounts for nearly 85 per cent of national water use, making water infrastructure central to food security, irrigation, industrialisation, and economic growth. Although Tanzania has 29.4 million hectares suitable for irrigation, only 727,280 hectares had been developed by 2022 — far below the government's target of 1.6 million hectares by 2028.

Governance & Institutional Capacity

Another criticism raised by Kwekweta is that Tanzania lacks the institutional capacity to effectively regulate sophisticated PPP arrangements. Analysts acknowledge the concern is legitimate, but argue that weak institutional capacity is not a reason to abandon partnerships altogether.

Tanzania has already accumulated significant regulatory experience in highly technical, capital-intensive sectors — including mining, telecommunications, energy, banking, and natural gas. Institutions such as EWURA and the Bank of Tanzania have expanded their oversight capacity through reforms, digital monitoring systems, and specialised technical training.

Global Lessons & Tanzania's Path Forward

For years, critics have accused Tanzania of unthinkingly importing neoliberal water reforms associated with the 1990s. They argue that private-sector efficiency inevitably leads to tariff increases, cost-cutting, and exclusion of poor households. Kwekweta also cites cases such as the "Water Wars" in Bolivia and unrest in Argentina as evidence that PPP models are structurally doomed to fail.

Policy experts argue that Tanzania's current PPP reforms are designed specifically to avoid the failures seen in countries like Bolivia and Argentina, where weak regulation, flawed contracts, and political instability — not private participation alone — triggered crises. They point out that regulated PPP systems across Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America have expanded access, reduced water loss, and improved service reliability.

Conclusion: PPP Is Not a Free Lunch — But It Is Indispensable

Economists argue that private capital already plays a major role across Tanzania's economy through banks, telecommunications, mining, energy, and industrial investment. The real question, as one analyst noted, is whether Tanzania can build strong institutions capable of ensuring that capital serves national development rather than narrow private interests.

At a recent policy forum, David Kafulila bluntly captured the debate: "PPP is not a free lunch." Policymakers say the challenge now is to build a transparent and accountable system capable of turning investment into long-term public value instead of prolonged national stagnation.