Street vending is not merely a nuisance, as it is often portrayed by authorities and formal business owners — it is a complex socio-economic survival strategy for the poor. Across cities in the Global South, including Harare, Johannesburg, Lilongwe, Gabarone, Maputo and Bulawayo, the sight of vendors lining pavements, selling everything from vegetables to cellphone accessories, is both a sign of economic desperation and entrepreneurial resilience.
The Problem Is Deeper Than Pavement Clutter
Researchers Tonda and Kepe (2016) argue that street vending has become a source of tension in many cities, affecting residents, formal traders, and local authorities alike. These tensions can sometimes escalate into violent confrontations, particularly when crackdowns occur.
In Zimbabwe, poverty has blurred the line between childhood and adulthood, drawing children into family vending enterprises as a survival tactic. As elsewhere, vending becomes a family affair — a livelihood option in a country where jobs are scarce.
According to Macrotrends, as of 2019, Zimbabwe’s poverty rate stood at a staggering 86.2%. Unemployment hovers around 90%, and recurring natural disasters such as droughts and cyclones — exacerbated by climate change — have wiped out many traditional sources of rural livelihoods. Rural-to-urban migration has only added to the numbers of the unemployed, who often turn to vending as a last resort.
Street Vending: A Global Survival Strategy
In Baghdad, Iraq, the number of street vendors has multiplied rapidly due to a combination of high unemployment, migration from unsafe areas, deepening poverty, and increasing school dropouts. Zimbabwe is following a similar trajectory.
The structural theory explains this rise in street vending as a response to systemic economic exclusion — a form of economic survival for those who are locked out of formal employment. From this lens, vending is not lawlessness, but a rational choice made in the absence of alternatives.
On the other hand, modernisation theory dismisses vending as a residue of pre-modern economies — a practice that will supposedly disappear with urban development and industrialisation. This theory fails to account for the enduring nature of poverty even in modernised societies.
Neo-liberal theory offers another angle: vending is a rational economic decision in response to state failure. Attempts to remove or relocate vendors often ignore the depth of the socio-economic problems driving people to the streets.
Formalising the Informal: Lessons from Elsewhere
In Delhi, India, policy approaches have aimed to “formalise the informal.” Some vending activities are criminalised, while others are regularised, creating a selective and often unjust system. Street vending has been criticised for contributing to urban congestion, sanitation challenges, tax evasion, and the sale of substandard products. Yet its potential to reduce poverty and unemployment — especially in poor countries — is rarely acknowledged in policy-making.
Zimbabwe’s Heavy-Handed Approach
Zimbabwe’s current approach is largely punitive. At a recent meeting with city councillors, Local Government Minister Daniel Garwe declared a blanket ban on street and night vending, citing threats to health, urban order, and national security.
“Night vending has brought with it illicit drug and substance dealing, which is a threat to health, economy and national security,” Garwe said.
“The importation and selling of second-hand clothing is banned, and consequently street and night vending activities are equally banned.”
Such statements have sparked legal and public outcry. Prominent lawyer and activist Fadzayi Mahere responded with a scathing critique:
“Minister, as a matter of law, you have no power to ban trade or any other activity by press statement. Section 68 of the Constitution requires all actions by the government to carry the force of law. Unless there is a valid enactment underlying your ban, it is invalid and of no force or effect. This is a constitutional democracy, not an unwieldy jungle. Let’s adhere to the rule of law.”
Banning Is Not a Solution — Policy Innovation Is
Rather than imposing blanket bans that criminalise the poor, Zimbabwe’s government should adopt inclusive policies that address the root causes of vending: unemployment, poverty, and lack of opportunity. Some suggestions include:
- Creating designated vending zones with proper infrastructure like shelters, toilets, and waste bins.
- Issuing affordable licences and permits, especially to women and youth who dominate the informal sector.
- Offering business training, financial literacy, and access to microloans to help vendors grow beyond subsistence-level trade.
- Involving vendors in urban planning processes, ensuring that laws are people-centered and not simply punitive.
- Integrating informal trade into the formal economy through social protection programs, simplified taxation models, and formal recognition of their economic contributions.
If properly harnessed, street vending can serve as a launchpad for small-scale enterprises that contribute to local economic development and reduce dependency on state support.
The Bigger Picture
Criminalising street vending without addressing Zimbabwe’s high unemployment and poverty rates is akin to cutting a weed at the stem without removing the roots.
A more holistic approach is needed — one that balances urban order with economic justice, and rule of law with compassion.
Street vending is not a crime. It is a cry for inclusion.