Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia, Zimbabwe Central Africa, Southern Africa 2020
The Port of Beira is Mozambique’s principal maritime gateway for the central region and an important outlet for landlocked markets in Southern Africa. It is connected by road and rail to Zimbabwe and Zambia, by the Sena corridor towards Tete and Malawi, and by pipeline to Zimbabwe. The original PIDA PAP II submission identifies the regional beneficiaries as Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe and parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo. The project responds to the need for additional cargo-handling capacity and more reliable port infrastructure along a corridor that carries containers, general cargo, fertilizer, agricultural commodities, minerals and petroleum products.
The approved Phase I package is broader than a single terminal expansion. It includes construction of a multipurpose terminal; expansion of the container terminal; construction of wharves 11A and 11B and paving of more than 20 hectares; construction of a fertilizer terminal and its supporting infrastructure; and rehabilitation and expansion of the fuel terminal. The submitted technical target is to increase annual handling capacity from 13.6 million tonnes to 24 million tonnes. The historical Phase I cost is USD 88.6 million. The submission also refers to a possible Phase II minerals terminal estimated at USD 509.1 million, but that amount is separate and must not be added to the Phase I project cost unless the database is formally re-scoped.
Current port information helps explain the operating base on which the PAP II project is being implemented, but it must not be confused with completed project outputs. The 2026/2027 operator directory records a 645-metre multipurpose container terminal with a design capacity of approximately 500,000 TEU per year, a 300,000 square metre container yard, four ship-to-shore cranes and associated yard equipment. It records a general cargo terminal with 670 metres of quay and a design capacity of 4.5 million tonnes per year, as well as an oil terminal with an annual capacity of 2.5 million tonnes. These are current port facilities and capacities; they are not, by themselves, evidence that the full PAP II investment package has been completed.
Physical implementation is clearest in the container and general-cargo components. The operator reported that the container terminal handled 469,664 TEU in 2025 and was adding two new ship-to-shore cranes to its equipment fleet. The stated development direction is to expand container handling towards 700,000 TEU per year. Earlier operator reporting also described expansion of general-cargo capacity from 3.5 million to 5 million tonnes per year and a dedicated fertilizer-handling facility with a conveyor from ship to warehouse and a dedicated mobile harbour crane. These activities relate directly to the approved container-terminal and fertilizer-terminal components and support a portfolio-level classification of S4B – Construction. They do not establish that wharves 11A and 11B, the multipurpose terminal and every supporting facility have all been completed.
The fuel-terminal component remains less advanced. In 2025, CFM issued an expression of interest for consultancy services to develop a multi-user floating fuel pier, technically described as a single buoy or single point mooring. The consultancy covers assessment of regional fuel demand and storage requirements; collection of technical, environmental, legal and financial information; risk assessment; selection of a public-private partnership model; preparation and evaluation of partner-procurement documents; contract negotiation; and later supervision of works. This evidence shows active project preparation and procurement for the fuel component, not completed construction or operation.
For database reporting, the project should therefore be treated as a mixed-maturity portfolio. S4B is justified because material components of the approved scope are under physical implementation, but the narrative must state that other components remain in preparation or have not been independently verified. The project must not be advanced to S4C until official evidence confirms commissioning and operation of the complete approved phase, or until the project is formally divided into separately reportable components. The USD 88.6 million value should continue to be described as the original Phase I baseline rather than a verified current cost estimate.