Explainer: New mineral value chain framework, what it really means

Business Reporter

This week, Cabinet approved a sweeping new framework titled Minerals Value Chain: From Mining to Beneficiation, Industrialisation and Exportation. The policy aims to transform Zimbabwe from a raw resource exporter into a minerals-based industrial manufacturing hub.

But what does this actually mean for miners, investors, and the broader economy?

What is the new move?

Currently, Zimbabwe exports most of its minerals in raw or semi-processed form – lithium, platinum, chrome, gold, diamonds, and others. The new framework requires that minerals undergo minimum processing inside Zimbabwe before they can be exported. No Value-Added Compliance Certificate, no export permit.

The policy rests on four pillars:

1. Mandatory processing standards – Legally binding minimum requirements for each mineral type for a Value-Added Compliance Certificate for any export permit to be issued.
2. Decentralised university labs – Mineral testing and certification moved from foreign labs to a network of Zimbabwean universities (UZ, NUST, Midlands State, etc.).
3. Mine-to-market tracking – A real-time electronic system tracking every consignment from extraction to final port of exit.
4. Eight regional SEZs – Specialised industrial hubs (e.g., Northern Battery Minerals Zone, Midlands Metallurgical Zone) where investors share infrastructure.

Key enablers include reliable power supplies, self-generation incentives for beneficiation projects, and a new consolidated legal framework.

What it means for miners

For large-scale miners: They will need to invest in local processing facilities – crushers, concentrators, smelters, or refineries – or partner with existing ones. Exporting raw ore will no longer be allowed without a compliance certificate. This raises upfront capital costs but could increase long-term profitability if global mineral prices remain strong.

For small-scale and artisanal miners: Gwanda State University has been designated as an analytical hub. The goal is to bring small-scale and artisanal miners into the formal value chain, reducing leakages and helping you get fair prices. However, compliance costs and bureaucratic requirements could be a barrier if not implemented with care.

For new investors: They will be directed to specific regional SEZs depending on mineral type. For example, battery minerals investors go to the Northern zone; metallurgical investors to the Midlands. The promise is shared infrastructure and efficient scaling – but only if power, roads, and water are actually delivered.

What it means for the national economy

Potential benefits (pros):

1. Captures lost revenue – Closing leakages from smuggling and under-pricing could bring billions of dollars currently lost into formal channels.
2. Industrialisation and jobs – Local beneficiation creates manufacturing, not just mining. This means higher-value products, more employment, and skills transfer.
3. Reduces foreign dependency – Ending reliance on foreign labs for mineral certification builds domestic scientific capacity and saves foreign currency.
4. Transparency – The mine-to-market tracking system provides an end-to-end audit trail, reducing fraud and improving governance.
5. Targeted investment – Eight regional SEZs with shared infrastructure could attract specialised investors looking for scale and efficiency.
6. Formalises artisanal miners – Bringing small-scale miners into a regulated framework increases government revenues and improves miner livelihoods.
7. Aligns with IMF goals – The framework supports fiscal discipline, debt control, and reserve accumulation – key targets under the current Staff-Monitored Programme.

Risks and challenges (cons):

1. Power is the elephant in the room – Beneficiation is energy-intensive. Zimbabwe needs to invest in more power supply. Without reliable and affordable electricity, processing plants cannot operate. The framework acknowledges this but does not solve it overnight.
2. High upfront costs – Building labs, SEZs, tracking systems, and processing infrastructure requires significant capital. The Government is under fiscal constraints and an IMF programme that limits new borrowing.
3. Implementation and enforcement – Closing leakages means confronting entrenched smuggling networks and corruption.
4. Investor resistance – Mandatory local processing and compliance certificates may deter some foreign investors, especially those who prefer exporting raw minerals.
5. Technical capacity gaps – Universities may lack sufficient equipment, trained personnel, or international accreditation to serve as national referee labs in the short term. This could cause delays and disputes.
6. Risk of over-regulation – Complex certification requirements could create bureaucratic bottlenecks, delaying exports and increasing the cost of doing business.

The bottom line

For miners: The rules are changing. Miners will need to process more locally, comply with new certification and tracking requirements, and likely relocate to designated SEZs. Those who adapt early could gain first-mover advantages. Those who resist may find themselves unable to export.

For the national economy: The framework is ambitious and, if implemented well, could be transformative – capturing lost revenue, creating industrial jobs, and improving transparency. But the risks are significant: power shortages, high costs, enforcement challenges, and potential investor pushback.