Editorial: Mogadishu Is Growing, But Is It Developing?

Few symbols of Somalia’s recovery are more visible than the transformation of Mogadishu’s skyline.

Across the capital, multi-storey buildings continue to rise. New residential districts are expanding, land values are increasing, and private investment is flowing into the real estate sector at a pace unimaginable only a decade ago. To many observers, these developments represent proof that Mogadishu is moving forward.

Yet the crucial question is not whether the city is growing. It clearly is. The real question is whether Mogadishu’s expansion amounts to genuine urban development or whether it reflects a form of growth that is outpacing the systems needed to sustain it.

The distinction matters.

Cities do not become functional merely because more buildings are constructed. Sustainable urban development requires planning, infrastructure, regulation, and institutions capable of managing growth. Without these elements, expansion can create new problems even as it generates new opportunities.

In Mogadishu, construction often leads while planning follows. Buildings appear before roads are properly developed. New neighborhoods emerge before water, sewage, transport, and electricity systems are adequately prepared to support them. Instead of infrastructure guiding growth, growth frequently proceeds ahead of infrastructure.

The consequences are increasingly visible.

Electricity remains fragmented among multiple private providers. Water access depends heavily on localized systems. Sewage networks remain limited across large parts of the city. Traffic congestion continues to worsen as commercial and residential districts expand faster than transport networks can accommodate them.

These challenges are not unique to Mogadishu. Similar patterns can be observed in other Somali cities, where private investment drives construction while public planning struggles to keep pace. The result is a development model that produces visible expansion but often lacks the institutional foundations necessary for long-term functionality.

At the heart of the problem is governance.

Urban development requires more than capital. It requires institutions capable of defining land use, enforcing building standards, coordinating infrastructure investments, and ensuring that public services grow alongside the city itself. Where those institutions are weak or under-resourced, development becomes fragmented and increasingly difficult to manage.

The longer these gaps persist, the more expensive they become to correct. Retrofitting roads, utility networks, drainage systems, and public services into already developed areas is significantly more costly than planning for them from the outset.

This does not mean Mogadishu’s growth should be viewed negatively. On the contrary, the city’s expansion reflects confidence, investment, and resilience. The challenge is to ensure that growth is transformed into development rather than allowed to continue without direction.

That requires a different sequence of priorities. Planning must come before construction, not after it. Infrastructure must accompany expansion, not chase it. Regulatory institutions must be strengthened, and urban development must be treated as a coordinated public policy objective rather than the by-product of private investment alone.

Mogadishu stands at an important moment in its history. The city is attracting investment, expanding rapidly, and rebuilding after decades of conflict. These are achievements worth recognizing.

But the future of the capital will not be determined by the number of buildings added to its skyline. It will be determined by whether those buildings become part of a city that is planned, connected, functional, and sustainable.

Growth alone builds structures. Development builds cities.