Tanzania loses $1.8b at Dar es Salaam port in 2012 – Report
Tanzania lost about $1.8 billion at its Dar es Salaam port in 2012, a World Bank report has revealed.
Released May 21, 2013 by the World Bank, the report which gave an update on the Tanzanian economy said the losses were equivalent to approximately 7% of the country’s annual GDP.
“In 2012, the total global welfare loss resulting from inefficiencies at the port was estimated to reach a value of $1.8 billion for the Tanzanian economy,” the report said.
The inefficiencies at the Dar es Salaam port also cost Tanzania’s neigbouring countries $830 million, the World Bank added.
The port provides vital access to Tanzania’s six landlocked neighbours namely Malawi, Zambia, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, and Eastern DR Congo.
According to the report by the World Bank, Tanzania and its East African neighbours could boost their annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by up to $1.8 billion and $830 million respectively by taking measures to improve the efficiency of Dar es Salaam port.
The report was authored by Jacques Morisset, the Bank’s lead economist for Tanzania, Uganda and Burundi and titled “Opening the Gates: How the Port of Dar es Salaam Can Transform Tanzania”.
“So far, Tanzania and six neighbouring countries have missed this opportunity,” the report stated. It adds that “With its strategic location, the Dar es Salaam Port is the gateway for 90% of Tanzania’s trade, clearing $15 billion of merchandise annually (a sum equivalent to 60% cent of Tanzania’s GDP in 2012).”
The report highlighted that the port losses affected a wide range of local consumers, businesses and government agencies in the region as Tanzanians and other East Africans must pay more for imported goods, including basic products such as crude oil, cement, fertilizers and medicines.
These losses are attributed to several factors, not least, the long delays affecting ships that arrive in Dar es Salaam.
It cited that in mid-2012, ships were waiting up to ten days on average just to berth and an additional ten days to be able to unload and move their merchandise. “The excessive delays in anchorage alone translated into an additional cost of 22% on container imports and about 5% of bulk imports,” the report adds.
The report identified corruption as another key factor contributing to the poor performance of the port, as “both a source of inefficiency and a direct result of inefficiency.”
By Dorcas Appiah