- NRGI, ACEP Press for Tighter Oversight of Mineral and Petroleum Revenues in 2027 Budget
Ghana must strengthen the governance of its expanding mineral wealth and subject petroleum and energy-sector spending to greater scrutiny if rising resource revenues are to translate into durable fiscal gains, the Natural Resource Governance Institute and Africa Centre for Energy Policy have said.
Presenting joint proposals at the Civil Society Organisations’ 2027 Budget Inputs event, Daniel Ayei, Economic Analyst at NRGI Ghana, outlined a reform agenda spanning mining, petroleum, electricity and public infrastructure financing.
The central argument is that Ghana’s resource revenues are growing in scale and strategic importance, but the institutions and disclosure rules governing those flows must evolve just as quickly.
One of the most consequential proposals is the creation of a comprehensive Mineral Revenue Management Act modelled broadly on the framework already used for petroleum revenues.
NRGI and ACEP argue that mining now generates larger resource rents than petroleum, yet Ghana lacks an equivalent legal architecture governing how mineral revenues should be saved, invested, spent and independently scrutinised.
Their proposed framework would include benchmark mineral revenues, a stabilisation mechanism, strategic investment windows and independent oversight arrangements. Such rules could become increasingly important as Ghana’s exposure to commodity-price cycles deepens, because exceptionally high gold prices can generate windfalls that are difficult to sustain once market conditions reverse.
The organisations also want government to clarify the role of the Minerals Income Investment Fund. “Government should clarify whether MIIF’s primary role is a sovereign wealth fund, fiscal stabilisation mechanism or strategic investment vehicle, and align its funding and governance arrangements accordingly,” the presentation said.
The concern is that those functions involve different risk profiles and policy objectives. A fund designed primarily to preserve wealth for future generations should not necessarily be governed in the same way as an institution expected to take direct commercial stakes in mining ventures or help smooth short-term fiscal volatility.
GoldBod’s expanding mandate also attracted scrutiny. NRGI and ACEP said government should publish the rules governing trading surpluses, reinvestment decisions, reserve accumulation and how gains are distributed between fiscal authorities and reserve-management functions.
“Government should publish the rules governing trading surpluses, reinvestment decisions, reserve accumulation and the distribution of gains between fiscal authorities and reserve management functions,” the organisations said.
The recommendation reflects concern that an institution simultaneously involved in gold purchasing, trading, reserve accumulation and development-related interventions requires especially clear rules on how profits, losses and public assets are treated.
The organisations also called for tighter disclosure requirements around transfers of critical-mineral assets, including lithium projects. They want “mandatory disclosure of beneficial ownership, transaction terms and valuation benchmarks for all transfers of critical minerals assets”, arguing that ownership changes before production begins can materially alter how the economic benefits of future projects are distributed.
Artisanal and small-scale mining is another priority. NRGI and ACEP said the rapid growth of the subsector’s contribution to national gold output has not been matched by equivalent fiscal receipts, creating a case for a simplified royalty and licensing regime better suited to smaller operators and integrated with GoldBod’s aggregation and reporting systems.
The objective, they argue, should not be higher taxation for its own sake. A simpler and more transparent regime could instead improve compliance, traceability and formalisation while reducing the risk that complex obligations drive operators further outside the regulated system.
The proposals extend into petroleum revenue management, where NRGI and ACEP raised concerns about US$561.65 million in petroleum revenues reportedly held by JOHL/Explorco outside the reporting and accountability mechanisms of the Petroleum Revenue Management Act. “Government should reverse this practice and ensure all petroleum revenues are brought within the PRMA’s governance, reporting and accountability framework,” the presentation said.
They also want greater transparency around extractive revenues being channelled into the government’s Big Push infrastructure programme. According to the presentation, approximately US$1 billion, or GH¢11 billion, of mineral and petroleum revenues was spent on the programme in 2025, while another US$708.59 million, or GH¢7.83 billion, was spent in the first half of 2026.
NRGI and ACEP are therefore calling for quarterly reporting that identifies the extractive revenues allocated to the programme, the projects financed, actual disbursements and value-for-money assessments. Such disclosure would allow citizens and oversight bodies to follow resource revenues beyond the point of collection and assess whether they are creating productive public assets.
The organisations separately cited the 2026 Mid-Year Budget Review as reporting US$319.87 million, or GH¢3.5 billion, in Annual Budget Funding Amount expenditure on the Big Push during the first half of 2026.
They also referenced PIAC reporting indicating that US$434.55 million in ABFA resources remained unutilised in a suspense account, highlighting the need to reconcile allocations, releases and actual project execution.
Power-sector liabilities formed another major area of concern. NRGI and ACEP said the proposed 1,200MW thermal power plant, combined with contracted projects including the 900MW AKSA plant, 330MW CENIT project and 350MW AKSA Kumasi plant, could add about 2,780MW of generation capacity.
Without publicly available demand and fuel-supply analysis, they warned that Ghana risks recreating the excess-capacity and take-or-pay pressures that have previously imposed heavy costs on the energy sector.
“Government should provide an update on the commitment and clarify the financing mechanism for the plant, and publish a demand and fuel-supply analysis that justifies the total capacity being contracted, to guard against costly excess capacity,” they said.
The organisations also want greater clarity around private-sector participation in the Electricity Company of Ghana, delays affecting the Energy Sector Recovery Programme and the financing and feedstock arrangements for a proposed second gas processing train.
Taken together, the recommendations place resource governance at the centre of the 2027 fiscal debate.
Ghana is handling increasingly large flows through gold, petroleum and energy-sector institutions, and the central question is whether the governance architecture surrounding those flows is strong enough to protect the public balance sheet.
For policymakers, the test will therefore go beyond raising more revenue from extractive industries. The more consequential challenge is to ensure that mineral and petroleum windfalls are transparently managed, fiscal risks are contained and today’s commodity revenues are converted into productive assets capable of delivering value long after the current boom has passed.
