evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

M-Pesa Mozambique – Vodacom/IFC Financial Inclusion Partnership

Mozambique · Maputo · See the Mozambique profile · See the Maputo profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 23% 92/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Vodacom's M-Pesa mobile money platform, revitalised through a 2018–2022 IFC partnership that tripled active users from 1.9 to 6 million, now serves roughly 10 million Mozambicans — while a 2024 follow-on agreement targets rural smallholder farmers still left out.

1.9M → 6M
Active registered users (2018-2022)
~US$142 million (9bn meticais)
Agent commissions earned (2018-2022)
~10 million
Users (self-reported) (mid-2024)
~40% (vs 64% SSA average)
Adults with a mobile-money account
M-Pesa Mozambique – Vodacom/IFC Financial Inclusion Partnership

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Vodacom Mozambique (M-Pesa), with International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group)
Period
2013–present
Keywords
mobile money, financial inclusion, fintech, digital payments, agent banking, rural smallholder inclusion

Context

Vodacom launched M-Pesa in Mozambique in 2013 to let unbanked and underbanked citizens send money, pay bills, receive salaries and save via a mobile wallet and cash-in/cash-out agents, in a country with low fixed-broadband and bank-branch penetration. From 2018 to 2022 the IFC partnered with Vodacom to revitalise the agent network and expand merchant acquisition; a February 2024 follow-on agreement targets rural smallholder farmers, who account for 93% of agricultural production.

Results

IFC reports active registered users tripled from 1.9 to 6 million (2018-2022), with agents earning roughly 9 billion meticais (~US$142 million) in commissions; the 'Xitique' group-savings product is used more by women than men. By mid-2024 Vodacom's CEO reported about 10 million users and annual transaction volume near US$15 billion. Still, only about 40% of Mozambican adults hold a mobile money account versus a 64% Sub-Saharan Africa average - the inclusion gap is real, not closed.

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Commonly funded by

Own resources / municipal budget

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful