- Account for 24-Hour Economy Before Launching New US$10 Billion Plan – IERPP
The Institute of Economic Research and Public Policy has called on the government to publish a comprehensive account of financing, expenditure and employment outcomes under the 24-Hour Economy programme before proceeding with its proposed US$10 billion New Economy initiative.
The Institute argues that the credibility of the larger investment programme will depend on the government demonstrating what has been mobilised and achieved under the earlier US$4 billion plan.
Its intervention raises a fundamental public-finance question: when does an investment announcement become an actual investment, and when does a projected job become employment that can be independently verified?
The US$4 billion associated with the 24-Hour Economy and Accelerated Export Development Programme was announced as a four-year mobilisation target. It was not presented as US$4 billion already deposited in a government account or immediately available for expenditure.
The government was expected to provide seed funding while mobilising additional resources from development finance institutions, private investors and other partners. IERPP says the public has not been given sufficient information showing how much of the target has been secured, disbursed or converted into projects.
“We welcome any genuine initiative that creates sustainable jobs. But public policy is judged by the credibility of its financing, the quality of its implementation and the results it delivers, not by the size of the number read out at the launch,” the Institute said.
President John Dramani Mahama launched the 24-Hour Economy programme in July 2025 with objectives that included expanding production, supporting exports, stimulating private investment and creating employment.
Before the launch, officials announced that the programme would seek to mobilise US$4 billion over four years and create at least 1.7 million jobs within the same period.
In July 2026, the programme’s Secretariat reportedly said project agreements worth approximately US$5.5 billion had been signed, with four projects expected to generate more than 160,000 direct jobs.
IERPP, however, maintained that the value of signed agreements should not be treated as money disbursed or investments already executed.
“A signed agreement is not a disbursement. A disbursement is not a completed project. A completed project is not a job on the ground,” it said.
This distinction is essential to any serious assessment of the programme. A memorandum of understanding may demonstrate investor interest, while a binding financial agreement can establish an enforceable commitment. Neither automatically means that funds have been transferred, construction has begun or workers have been employed.
The Institute consequently wants the government to state how much of the US$5.5 billion represents binding financing commitments, how many projects have commenced and what proportion of the original US$4 billion mobilisation target has been secured.
Its accountability demand also focuses on employment. Abdul-Nasser Suglo Alidu, who announced the programme’s initial employment target, recently said the Secretariat could not provide a total figure for jobs created and was working with the Ghana Statistical Service to establish an appropriate measurement system.
“I won’t be able to give you a number in terms of the total number of jobs the 24-hour economy created. We don’t want to throw numbers around,” he was quoted as saying.
The decision to build a reliable monitoring system is necessary, particularly because employment claims can easily combine existing jobs, temporary construction work, indirect employment and positions that have only been projected.
However, the inability to provide a verified figure more than a year after the programme’s launch creates a measurement gap. A policy built principally around job creation requires a baseline, common definitions and regular reporting if the public is to assess its effectiveness.
IERPP has therefore asked for independently verifiable employment data separating permanent, temporary and indirect jobs from positions that remain projected.
It has also raised questions about conflicting allocations for the programme in the 2026 fiscal documents. According to the Institute, the detailed expenditure estimates provide GH¢90 million—comprising GH¢70 million for goods and services and GH¢20 million for capital expenditure—while the Budget Statement cites GH¢110 million.
The difference of GH¢20 million may appear small compared with the programme’s multibillion-dollar ambition, but reconciling it matters for fiscal credibility. An allocation does not necessarily mean the money was released, and a release does not prove that the amount was spent or produced the intended outcome.
IERPP wants the Ministry of Finance to reconcile the figures and disclose actual releases, expenditure and measurable outputs.
The debate has intensified following President Mahama’s announcement of a proposed US$10 billion New Economy programme. The initiative is expected to invest US$2.5 billion annually over four years across seven priority sectors, with US$5 billion earmarked for agriculture and agro-processing.
Finance Minister Dr Cassiel Ato Forson has indicated that consultations are continuing and that fuller details will be presented in the 2027 Budget.
IERPP nevertheless argues that the government must disclose the financing structure, investment criteria, sector allocations, implementation timetable and accountability arrangements before presenting the amount as a settled investment programme.
“Where will the money come from? How much will the government carry, and how much will private investors, development partners and financial institutions provide?” the Institute asked.
Those questions are important because a US$10 billion programme can describe several different arrangements. It may refer to direct public expenditure, private investment facilitated by government, concessional development financing, commercial lending, guarantees or a combination of these.
Each source carries different consequences for public debt, fiscal risk and project selection. Government guarantees, for example, may not immediately appear as expenditure but can become contingent liabilities if supported projects fail to meet their obligations.
IERPP has proposed a publicly accessible dashboard tracking financial commitments, disbursements, project milestones and jobs. It also wants periodic independent audits of programme outcomes.
Such a mechanism would help separate government expenditure from private capital, signed intentions from binding commitments and projected employment from jobs already created.
The Institute’s criticism does not establish that the 24-Hour Economy has failed or that the New Economy programme cannot succeed. It does, however, expose an accountability gap that the government should address before significantly expanding the scale of its economic intervention.
Ghana needs productive investment capable of creating sustainable employment, strengthening exports and transforming agriculture and manufacturing. But ambitious numbers will inspire public confidence only when they are linked to clearly identified financing, transparent project-selection standards and independently verified results.
As IERPP put it: “The era of announcing numbers must end. The era of accounting for results must begin.”
