Quick facts

MAPS icon for country

Countries: Mozambique

Year of assessment: 2018-2019
Procurement value: 1,4 billion EURO (2018)

Principal organisation: Mozambique Ministry of Economy and Finance

Main partners:

The World Bank (WB), UK Department for International Development (DFID), German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH (GIZ)



The current institutional government architecture for public procurement in Mozambique consists of two key areas for public procurement: Core government procurement and State-owned enterprise (SOE) procurement. At the policy level, the main institution for both areas of procurement is the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF). CEDSIF (Center for Development of the Finance Information System) is an autonomous agency supporting the MEF technology agenda, including e-procurement.

While on a sharp decline after a debt crisis in 2016, public procurement still accounts for a significant share of the economy: 33 percent of public expenditures and about 10 percent of the GDP in 2018 (versus 54 percent and 22 percent, respectively, in 2014). Even a relatively small increase in efficiency can easily translate to more timely, higher quality public services to its citizens. In addition, public procurement is an important source of revenue for the local private sector, contributing to job creation, which is a high GOM priority, at a time when about 500,000 young people enter the job market every year.

Against this backdrop, the Government of Mozambique (GOM) decided to undertake a MAPS assessment to get more visibility into existing public procurement challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.



The assessment was carried out from September 2018 to June 2019, at the initiative of the Government of Mozambique (GOM) through the Functional Unit for Supervision of Procurement (UFSA). It was accomplished with the direct financial support from the World Bank and the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and substantial contribution from the German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH (GIZ) and benefited from the advice and guidance of other international partners including the European Union (EU), International Monetary Fund (IMF), African Development Bank (AfDB), Global Affairs Canada (GAC), United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Swiss Embassy, Belgian Development Agency (ENABEL), and General Directorate for Cooperation and Development (DGCS).


Key results and impacts

Despite significant progress made over the past years, the assessment identified several challenges, including:

  • Enforcement of regulations by procuring entities is weak, and budget constraints hinder contract allocations.
  • Inefficiencies in contracting including fragmented contracts, high direct contracting rates, and disproportionate advertising costs all constitute an obstacle to achieving value for money.
  • Weak procurement planning and contract management contribute to payment arrears and poor outcomes.
  • Capacity in procuring entities is limited, exacerbated by high turnover rates and inadequate training structures.
  • Stakeholder engagement, particularly with the private sector, remains modest, hindering effective participation and dialogue.
  • The absence of e-procurement and incomplete information submission affect performance monitoring and is a significant obstacle to improving the system.
  • Corruption perception in public procurement remains high, impacting business operations. The relevant institutions lack resources to meet evolving responsibilities.

These challenges, and others, were addressed through a series of recommendations consolidated in a strategic action plan with four overarching objectives:

  1. Strengthen the authority and capacity of the lead procurement agency UFSA to effectively carry out its functions. Continue to improve the legal public procurement framework.
  2. Adopt a more strategic and value for money approach to procurement and contract management to increase the efficiency in the use of public funds and delivery of public services.
  3. Build a critical mass of procurement officials through certification, professionalization, sustained training, and technical support.
  4. Improve private sector access to the public procurement market and promote its effective participation.

Each objective has a number of associated initiatives, complete with timeline and responsible institutions, all detailed in the executive summary to the report.