ECA backs circular value chains at Harare COMESA forum

The UN Economic Commission for Africa’s original release dated 19 October 2026 reports that the second COMESA Green Industry Connect meeting in Harare examined circular production as an industrial-development strategy. The account brings together the positions of officials, businesses, financiers and development partners; it is not independent confirmation of their economic projections or proposed investments. The meeting, held within the 19th COMESA Business Forum and Exhibition, focused on leather, textiles, plastics and electronic waste. Participants discussed retaining more resource value through processing, recycling, repair and recovery, rather than relying principally on exports of unprocessed materials. Battery recovery and mineral beneficiation also featured among the opportunities identified. ECA economic affairs officer Oliver Maponga advocated coordination between COMESA’s EU-funded SWITCH circular-economy programme and the regional UN Development Account project on climate action and green industrialisation. The source describes the SWITCH programme as supporting policy, finance, technology adoption and capacity development, particularly for plastics, packaging, electronics and electronic waste. Officials also linked competitiveness to regional integration. Panellists called for action on tariff and non-tariff barriers and for implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area. Expected meeting outputs included recommendations on enterprise finance, technology transfer, common regional standards and extended producer responsibility. ECA said recommendations would go to the COMESA heads-of-state summit on 22 October; the saved release does not establish their subsequent adoption. Nexus analysis The practical significance is the proposed connection between industrial policy and material recovery across several countries. Harmonised rules and better financing could help enterprises build regional supply relationships, but this account records discussion and intended recommendations, not funded plants, signed commercial contracts or measured employment gains. Those distinctions matter when assessing whether circular-economy ambitions are becoming productive capacity.