ZIMBABWE'S FERTILISER IMPORT BILL: WHY ARE LOCAL PLANTS STILL IDLE?

By Percy Nhara SBT | Business Commentary

Zimbabwe spent US$333.47 million importing fertilisers between January and August 2026, an 81.6 percent increase from the US$183.59 million recorded during the same period last year.

Yet the country has domestic fertiliser manufacturing facilities with an estimated combined installed capacity of about two million tonnes annually, more than twice its reported national requirement of approximately 780,000 tonnes. The contradiction is difficult to ignore. Why is Zimbabwe spending hundreds of millions of United States dollars importing agricultural nutrients while critical domestic producers remain underutilised or out of production?

And why has it proved so difficult to restore the country's fertiliser value chain when the raw materials, industrial facilities and technical capacity are already present? The latest figures raise serious questions about the country's industrial rehabilitation priorities, foreign currency allocation and commitment to import substitution.

Omnia's earnings rise as imports increase

South African fertiliser and chemicals group Omnia Holdings is among the companies operating in Zimbabwe's fertiliser market. Its latest interim results, released on Monday, 9 November, show operating profit increasing by 26 percent to R1.135 billion for the six months ended September 2026. Earnings per share rose by 31 percent to 428 cents, while headline earnings per share increased by 25 percent to 399 cents.

The company's Agriculture segment recorded a 13 percent increase in operating profit, although revenue declined by four percent. These results demonstrate improved profitability across the group, but Omnia does not separately disclose Zimbabwe's contribution to its regional earnings. It would therefore be misleading to attribute the group's overall performance directly to Zimbabwe's fertiliser imports.

The bigger issue is the market structure that allows finished fertiliser and essential chemical inputs to continue flowing into Zimbabwe while domestic manufacturing capacity remains constrained. Equity Axis analysis of customs data shows that nitrogenous fertilisers accounted for US$214.22 million of the US$333.47 million import bill recorded during the first eight months of 2026.

That represented 64.2 percent of total fertiliser imports. Mixed and compound fertilisers accounted for another US$70.32 million, while potassic fertilisers contributed US$43.38 million. These figures reflect import expenditure, not necessarily an equivalent increase in fertiliser consumption. Nevertheless, they demonstrate the substantial foreign currency commitment required to keep the agricultural supply chain operating.

A manufacturing industry operating below potential

The Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Industry and Commerce has already exposed the structural weaknesses behind Zimbabwe's fertiliser import dependence. Its investigation established that the country has approximately two million tonnes of installed fertiliser production capacity against annual requirements of about 780,000 tonnes.

However, much of that capacity is concentrated in blending operations, which still depend heavily on imported nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium inputs. The more critical problem lies further upstream. Dorowa Minerals, Zimbabwe's principal phosphate concentrate producer, has an installed annual capacity of approximately 150,000 tonnes. Its operations were suspended in April 2025 after years of poor utilisation and equipment challenges.

The consequences extend to Zimbabwe Phosphate Industries (ZimPhos), which relies on phosphate inputs from Dorowa for downstream chemical production. Parliament's findings placed ZimPhos' utilisation at approximately five percent, while important sulphuric acid production facilities had remained out of operation for years.

Sable Chemicals, the country's established ammonium nitrate producer, has also faced prolonged production difficulties. Its plant, with an installed design capacity of approximately 240,000 tonnes annually, had been idle since 2022 at the time of Parliament's inquiry. The investigation indicated that an Afreximbank financing facility of about US$11 million had supported rehabilitation, with technical refurbishment approximately 80 percent complete.

Management estimated that around US$3 million in additional working capital would be needed to support a restart, with potential initial output of up to 140,000 tonnes annually. These figures underline a troubling reality: Zimbabwe has industrial assets capable of contributing significantly to national fertiliser supply, but rehabilitation, financing and operational challenges continue to prevent them from reaching their potential.

The money question

The question is no longer whether Zimbabwe needs to revive its fertiliser industry. That case has been made repeatedly. The question is how quickly the country can turn rehabilitation commitments into actual production.

In April 2026, Mutapa Investment Fund chief executive John Mangudya told Parliament that approximately US$153.1 million had been committed to reviving fertiliser value-chain companies within the fund's portfolio. The reported allocations included US$5.3 million for the first phase of Dorowa's rehabilitation, US$13.3 million for Sable Chemicals and funding for other companies in the value chain.

The funding was being released in phases against project milestones and verified expenditure. Dorowa's full recovery has been estimated to require a phased investment of approximately US$20 million, while Sable's immediate working-capital requirement was put at around US$3 million following its technical rehabilitation.

These are not interchangeable figures: one relates to a broader mine rehabilitation programme, while the other concerns working capital for a proposed production restart. Nevertheless, they raise a legitimate question about the pace of implementation. If the country can mobilise hundreds of millions of dollars for fertiliser imports, why should the rehabilitation of strategically important domestic production facilities remain such a prolonged exercise?

The answer must go beyond announcing allocations. Zimbabwe needs transparent project timelines, verified expenditure, clear production targets and public reporting on whether the plants are actually operating.

The coal-to-fertiliser opportunity

There is another opportunity that deserves serious consideration. Verify Engineering, a government-owned engineering company, has previously announced that it developed technology to produce ammonium-based fertilisers from coal through gasification.

In 2023, the company's board chairperson, Edgar Kamusoko, said the technology had been developed and that the company was awaiting government funding to implement a pilot project. The concept could potentially add another source of nitrogenous fertiliser production and reduce reliance on imported feedstocks.

Government's National Development Strategy 2 also identifies a coal-to-fertiliser project in Mkwasine involving Verify Engineering and Rusununguko-Nkululeko Holdings, with proposed production capacity of 270,000 tonnes of ammonium nitrate and 250,000 tonnes of urea annually.

However, the project remains a major investment undertaking. Publicly available information does not establish that it can be implemented for less than US$20 million, and the reported investment estimates for larger coal-to-fertiliser projects are substantially higher. The technology and the investment proposal therefore require clear disclosure of feasibility studies, financing requirements, implementation timelines and expected production costs.

From announcements to production

Zimbabwe's fertiliser import bill is not simply a trade statistic. It is a reflection of the country's industrial capacity, foreign currency requirements and agricultural vulnerability. Local blending alone cannot deliver full import substitution when the essential chemical inputs still have to be purchased abroad.

The country must restore the upstream production of phosphate concentrate, ammonium nitrate and other critical inputs, while addressing working-capital shortages, energy reliability, transport costs, procurement weaknesses and corporate governance.

The rehabilitation of Dorowa, Sable Chemicals and ZimPhos must therefore be treated as a connected industrial priority rather than a collection of isolated projects. Omnia's latest results demonstrate that companies operating in the wider regional agricultural market can improve profitability. Zimbabwe, meanwhile, is still spending heavily on imports while struggling to get its own manufacturing facilities back to full production. That is the anomaly that demands interrogation.

The country cannot sustainably pursue agricultural self-sufficiency while remaining structurally dependent on imported fertiliser and the foreign currency needed to pay for it. Zimbabwe has the resources, industrial history and technical expertise to build a stronger domestic fertiliser industry. What is now required is execution, accountability and the political will to turn existing capacity into actual production.

The real measure of success will not be how much money is announced for rehabilitation, but how much fertiliser Zimbabwean factories are producing and how much foreign currency the country is finally saving.

Zimbabwe fertiliser imports 2026