pcl-rer, but its l!lar.ufacturinr cutJ:.U1. is stafna,tinf a;;o tas not ad­ vancec sienifican"tly since ir.cerencence. J.n 1981, ~~anufacturing production (eYcluein( cetals) was 20 rer cent lc~er th~n in 1976, an~ only 0.6 rer cent hifher than in 1980. However, this was an imprcvemeL: considerinf the ccntinucus decline e~rerie~ced in tue period 1976-198L. In the United Republic of Ca~erocn, where manufaoturinr represent~ ~round a fiftt ~f GDP, prceress has con­ tinued at a hifh rate, anc tt.e e.:·css current va~ue cf :r.anufactur­ ing in 1980/81 was n;cre than double the value in 1 ~-76/77. The incustry is supportea by booming e~ports to the neifhbo~rirf markets within UDEAC. 63 E;.LCA/CI:.9/5 108. L, Kenya, manu:·actu rint: production grew in 1981 &<. a rate of only 5 f"' r cent, sli t;htly less than in 1980 an o well bel ow the 7.6 per cent <.:..C;~ieved in 1979. The industry was affected by balance-of~payments difficulties, which reduced supplies of im­ ported inputs, and by lower 68~anc. In the United Republic of Tanzania, manufacturinf suffered a large reduction in output (28.2 rer cent) on top of the fall experienced in 1980, and capacity utilization fell to 10 per cent in some cases, ~ith some firms clcsinf. Production continued to suffer from shorta€es of raw mateials, ~pare parts ana other intermediate inputs caused by foreirn eYchanee d::..iculties. In Zirnbabv1e, in contrast, the growth of manufacturinr l'i::li.ainec' viforous in 1981 (10 per cent after 15 per cent in 1980), tLcurh in 1982 there were ominous si ens of flae£inr output; the volu.!'le of uutput in June 1982 l-IaS 3 per cent lower than the June 1921 level. This was due mainly to t11e lar["e cuts n:ade in fcreirn e>chanre allowances fer the private sector, and in ad6ition the devaluation of the ran6 hurt Zimbabwean eYJ~urts to neirhbourinr countries •. 