Zimbabwe's GDP rebasing raises questions

Zimbabwe's repeated gross domestic product (GDP) rebasing exercises have sparked debate over whether the country's expanding economic figures reflect genuine growth or largely result from statistical adjustments.

Since 2017, Zimbabwe has undertaken major changes to its national accounts, including a 2018 rebasing that shifted the base year to 2012. The adjustment increased the reported size of the economy from about US$18 billion to US$25.8 billion.

In 2025, the Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency (ZimStat) updated the country's GDP baseline again, with estimates reportedly rising from US$35.2 billion to US$44.4 billion. Subsequent revisions in 2026 pushed the figure towards US$59.7 billion, while official statements placed it as high as approximately US$65.92 billion.

Although GDP rebasing is a standard statistical process intended to capture changes in economic activity and improve the accuracy of national accounts, critics argue that Zimbabwe's latest revisions require greater transparency and independent scrutiny.

Finance Minister Mthuli Ncube has cited the inclusion of the country's extensive informal economy as a major reason for the increase. ZimStat figures indicate that informal economic activity accounts for a substantial share of national production and employment, reflecting how years of economic instability, hyperinflation and currency volatility have pushed many people into informal trading and small businesses.

Economists generally agree that measuring informal activity is necessary to obtain a more accurate picture of an economy. However, critics warn that estimating production in a sector where transactions are often undocumented can introduce uncertainty if the methodology, assumptions and underlying data are not clearly explained.

They also argue that a larger GDP figure does not automatically translate into improved living standards. Millions of Zimbabweans continue to face financial pressure, while high unemployment and limited opportunities in the formal sector have made informal trading a crucial source of survival.

The implications extend beyond economic measurement. An increase in nominal GDP can reduce a country's debt-to-GDP ratio without any corresponding reduction in the amount of debt owed. This may make public finances appear stronger and improve selected economic indicators, even when government revenue remains constrained and debt-servicing obligations remain substantial.

Critics are particularly concerned that favourable GDP revisions could support the government's ambition to achieve upper-middle-income status by 2030 under Vision 2030. They argue that changes to statistical baselines should not be confused with improvements in productivity, household incomes, public services or the country's capacity to generate foreign currency.

Currency instability and the use of different exchange rates also complicate comparisons of Zimbabwe's economic performance in US dollar terms. For this reason, changes in nominal GDP should be assessed alongside real GDP growth, inflation, exchange-rate movements, employment, poverty levels and other measures of household welfare.

GDP rebasing is not inherently deceptive, and a larger estimate does not by itself prove that figures have been manipulated. Its credibility depends on transparent methods, reliable source data and independent scrutiny. National censuses and other statistical surveys can help improve the quality of estimates, although rebasing does not necessarily require a new census every time.

Ultimately, the central question is whether the revised figures provide a more accurate picture of Zimbabwe's productive capacity and whether that economic activity is translating into better living conditions.

For ordinary citizens, a bigger economy on paper offers little reassurance if incomes remain stagnant, prices continue to rise and access to decent jobs remains limited.