Ethiopia’s urban population reached 24% by 2024, one of the fastest urbanization rates globally. Yet, there is no corresponding increase in manufacturing or high-productivity industrial sectors to absorb urban labor.
. . .
Urbanization in Ethiopia has proceeded at a pace that is difficult to reconcile with the structure of its economy. Over the past two decades, the country has experienced one of the fastest rates of urban growth in the world. The urban share of the population rose to 24 percent by 2024. This expansion has not been matched by a commensurate transformation of the productive base. The result is a pattern that development economists increasingly describe as urbanization without industrialization.
Historically, industrialization in Ethiopia has been shallow and uneven. Manufacturing, which plays a central role in absorbing labor during early development in countries that industrialized successfully, has long remained marginal. Even during periods of relative growth, such as the late imperial and early Derg eras, manufacturing accounted for less than 5 percent of GDP and employed a very small share of the workforce. More recent data show little structural break from this pattern. Manufacturing contributed around 7.3 percent of GDP at its peak in the 1990s and has since declined to roughly 4 percent in recent years. In employment terms, the sector remains even smaller, accounting for about 5 percent of total employment as of 2020.
Aggregate industry figures can give a misleading impression of progress. Industry as a whole accounts for about 25 percent of GDP today, a significant rise from historical averages. Yet much of this increase reflects growth in construction rather than manufacturing. OECD analysis shows that the rise in industry’s share since the 2000s has been driven largely by construction activity, not by the expansion of factory-based production. This distinction is critical. Since construction is capital intensive and cyclical, and it does not generate the same broad-based, scalable employment opportunities as manufacturing.
At the same time, the structure of the economy has shifted decisively toward services. Since the early 2000s, the service sector has accounted for around 40 percent of GDP. This transition has occurred at relatively low levels of income, a pattern often described in the literature as premature tertiarization. In Ethiopia’s case, this shift is closely tied to urbanization. As people move to cities in search of opportunity, they encounter an economy in which entry barriers are lowest in informal service activities.
The consequence is that urban labor has been absorbed not by factories, but by small-scale, low-productivity services. Empirical work on Ethiopia’s structural transformation notes that the informal sector has absorbed much of the expanding urban workforce, reflecting the limited capacity of manufacturing to generate employment. These activities include petty trade, transport services, food vending, and other forms of self-employment. They require little capital and minimal formal skills, which makes them accessible but also constrains their productivity and scalability.
Urbanization is typically associated with rising productivity, as labor shifts from low-productivity agriculture to higher-productivity industry and services. In Ethiopia, however, much of the shift has been from agriculture to informal services with only modest productivity gains. The absence of a strong industrial sector limits both wage growth and the formation of formal employment. It also weakens linkages across the economy, as manufacturing typically stimulates demand for inputs, logistics, and technological upgrading.
The historical roots of this trajectory are not difficult to trace. Ethiopia entered the modern era with a very limited industrial base, constrained by infrastructure deficits, low levels of human capital, and inconsistent industrial policy. Later efforts to promote industrialization, including state-led development strategies and the expansion of industrial parks, have produced measurable gains in output and exports. Yet these gains have not been sufficient to alter the overall structure of employment. Even when manufacturing attracted a large share of foreign investment, its capacity to absorb labor remained limited relative to the scale of urban population growth.
Urban growth has therefore outpaced structural transformation. Cities have expanded rapidly, but their economic base has not deepened at the same rate. This imbalance is visible in the composition of urban livelihoods. A large share of urban households depend on informal, necessity-driven activities rather than formal employment. These activities provide income, but they rarely scale, and they contribute little to productivity growth at the national level.
None of this implies that urbanization has been without benefits. Cities have supported improvements in access to education, services, and markets. They have also facilitated the expansion of the service sector, which now plays a central role in the economy. Yet without a stronger industrial foundation, the long-term gains from urbanization remain constrained. The experience of countries that industrialized earlier suggests that manufacturing serves as a bridge between rural labor surplus and modern economic structures. In its absence, urbanization risks becoming a demographic rather than a productive transformation.
Ethiopia’s development strategy continues to recognize this constraint. Policy targets aim to raise manufacturing’s share of GDP and employment significantly over the coming decade. The underlying logic is clear. A more robust industrial sector would not only absorb urban labor but also increase productivity, generate exports, and create linkages across the economy. Whether these ambitions can be realized will depend on factors that have historically limited industrial growth, including infrastructure, skills, access to finance, and macroeconomic stability.
What is evident from the data is that Ethiopia’s urbanization has advanced faster than its industrialization. This sequencing has shaped the structure of urban employment in ways that are difficult to reverse. The challenge now is not to slow urban growth, which is likely to continue, but to deepen the productive capacity of cities so that they can sustain it.
