There are 26 administrative regions in mainland Tanzania. A quick analysis reveals stark economic disparities between them in terms of income per capita, poverty rates and human development indicators. According to the Bank of Tanzania’s Consolidated Zonal Economic Performance Report, released in July 2026, the regions can be classified into five groups: Top Performing, Strong Upper, Middle, Lower Middle and Developing Laggards.
Top-performing regions include Dar es Salaam, Iringa, Kilimanjaro, Mbeya and Njombe while the development laggards include Singida, Simiyu and Kagera. GDP per capita in Dar es Salaam stands at TZS 6,069,275, compared with TZS 1,571,049 in Simiyu.
Several factors contribute to these disparities, including location and access to markets, infrastructure, natural resource endowment, and industrialisation and manufacturing. Large regional economic disparities are not necessarily bad in themselves, as some regions will naturally be more productive than others.
The problem arises when the gap becomes persistent and is associated with unequal opportunities. This may lead, among other things, to poorer regions losing some of their most energetic and educated young people to economically stronger regions through migration.
It is therefore imperative to develop strategies to minimise these disparities by supporting regions in the Developing Laggards and Lower Middle categories. “We need to find an economic growth model that’s inclusive, that lifts up the poorest citizens,” said Jim Yong Kim, former President of the World Bank.
The first priority should be to raise productivity and incomes in poorer regions. The government should ensure that these regions move beyond subsistence farming towards commercial, irrigated and value-added agriculture. Sunflower production in Singida, livestock in Simiyu, coffee in Kagera and grapes in Dodoma, for example, can all support agro-industrial clusters. Such transformation would create jobs, increase regional GDP per capita and reduce rural poverty.
Second, Tanzania should deliberately direct infrastructure investment towards unlocking economic potential in less developed regions. Roads, electricity, irrigation, water, telecommunications, railways, markets and cold-storage facilities can connect producers to domestic and export markets.
Consider, for example, opening up regions such as Rukwa and Ruvuma through state-of-the-art infrastructure. In these regions, prices for agricultural produce at harvest time can be only a small fraction of those obtainable in other parts of the country. Better connectivity to markets could significantly increase farmers’ incomes.
The allocation of the infrastructure development budget should not be based solely on population or political considerations, but also on the potential of infrastructure investment to generate productive activity and employment.
Third, Tanzania should develop regional vocational and technical skills based on local industries. Mtwara, for example, should develop expertise in welding, petrochemicals and electrical engineering; Simiyu in dairy technology, meat processing and leather production; and Geita in mining engineering and mineral processing.
Fourth, the government should introduce a performance-based regional equalisation fund. Poorer regions should receive additional resources for infrastructure and human development, but funding should be linked to measurable improvements in poverty reduction, school completion, health outcomes and local revenue mobilisation.
Finally, regional equality should not mean making every region economically identical. Instead, Tanzania should seek to equalise opportunities while allowing each region to exploit its comparative advantages.
