In Zimbabwe, financial preparation for death prevents hardship more reliably than preparation for illness. Funeral insurance has overtaken medical cover as the most widely held financial product in the country, shaped by affordability, predictability, and cultural expectations.
Formal employment remains limited, leaving most people without employer-linked medical aid. Around 90% of the population lacks health insurance and pays medical costs directly.
By contrast, funeral insurance reaches far deeper across income groups.
Data show that among insured Zimbabweans, funeral policies far outnumber health insurance. Analysts say funeral cover resonates because it guarantees immediate support at a moment when costs and social expectations peak.
Public healthcare, while nominally low-cost, suffers from chronic underfunding, medicine shortages, staff migration, and deteriorating infrastructure.
Private medical insurance in Zimbabwe ranges from modest to prohibitively expensive, placing many plans beyond reach in a country where most people live on very low daily incomes.
Funeral insurance sits at the opposite end of the spectrum. Entry-level plans cost less than a dollar per month. Industry representatives say funerals are unavoidable events with communal obligations, making certainty of service more valuable than uncertain access to healthcare.
Medical professionals point to cultural norms that emphasize dignity in death and discourage planning for illness, which some view as inviting misfortune.
Others note a legacy of reliance on state-funded healthcare after independence, which delayed the uptake of private medical insurance until the public system began collapsing in the 2000s.
Even basic care at public hospitals often requires private funds. Emergencies, chronic disease, and long-term treatment strain household finances beyond capacity.
Low prioritisation of medical insurance persists in a country where many lack consistent access to food, education, and healthcare.
The government plans to launch a national health insurance scheme later this year, aiming to expand access to care. Public health advocates welcome the initiative but question whether it can be sustained amid high public debt, currency instability, and persistent inflation.
They argue that success depends on broader economic and social reform. The contrast between health and funeral financing remains stark.
Funeral policies now account for the majority of life assurance revenue, while the public health system struggles with bed shortages and mortality rates well above global averages.
Some critics describe the trend as a commercialisation of life, arguing society now prepares more carefully for death than for living.
Informal burial societies fill gaps for those unable to afford formal cover, pooling small monthly contributions to preserve dignity at burial.
For many households, illness brings uncertainty and financial exposure. Death, by contrast, is planned for.
The public health system has slipped into collapse after years of chronic underfunding. Capacity remains thin, with only 1.7 hospital beds per 1,000 people.
Maternal mortality stands at 462 deaths per 100,000 live births, more than double the global average of 197. Access to essential care remains out of reach for thousands.
Funeral insurance tells a different story. The segment continues to expand, accounting for 66% of total life assurance revenue in 2024. Coverage remains widely available and predictable, which helps explain its dominance.
Funerals typically cost between $800 and $3,000 depending on location, attendance, and service type. For many households, those figures justify regular premium payments, even when medical cover remains unaffordable.
Some cultural commentators describe the shift as a commercialisation of life. Traditional practice placed burial responsibility on the community, with minimal material cost.
Modern arrangements now require coffins, transport, and formal services, all priced and packaged, forcing families to plan for death more carefully than for health.
Those unable to afford formal funeral insurance increasingly rely on informal, community-based burial schemes. These grassroots groups pool small monthly contributions to ensure families avoid public hardship and preserve dignity during funerals.
One such family turned to traditional healers and spiritual advisers during a long illness because those services cost far less than hospital treatment or medical insurance.
When death came, two burial savings groups stepped in to support the funeral, covering transport and contributing toward a coffin. Monthly contributions ranged from $1 to $2, while fixed payouts ensured basic burial needs were met.
In some cases, informal burial societies extend support beyond funeral costs. Groups often provide staple food, vegetables, and cooking utensils to assist grieving families during mourning periods.
In rural areas, these schemes have grown out of necessity. One village formed a burial society after an elderly resident died without funds for a coffin or food for mourners.
What began as a response to hardship became a structured system. Members now contribute a fixed amount upon a death, ensuring immediate support when needed.
The model works. Membership has grown steadily, and several families have already received assistance. Yet even supporters of burial societies acknowledge the limits of focusing solely on death.
Community leaders and health professionals stress the need to pair burial planning with medical protection. Awareness around health insurance remains low, even as out-of-pocket healthcare costs continue to rise.
Medical advocates argue education remains critical in a system where care is no longer free. They also call on citizens working abroad to contribute, noting that exposure to functioning health insurance systems elsewhere often clarifies the value of coverage long before illness strikes.
