The 24-Hour Economy Programme: Challenges and the Way Forward

Introduction

The Ghanaian government’s 24-Hour Economy and Accelerated Export Development Programme (24H+) has positioned itself as a bold economic reset aimed at revitalizing growth, creating 5 million jobs by 2034, and achieving a 6% annual GDP growth rate. However, a critical review by the Centre for Policy Scrutiny (CPS) has raised serious concerns about the programme’s financial viability and implementation framework. This article unpacks the findings, risks, and recommendations from the CPS report, exploring whether this ambitious initiative can withstand scrutiny or risks becoming another hollow promise.

Analysis

Deficient Monetary Realism and Costing

Ankyewa Tawia, lead researcher, stated that the $4 billion estimated budget for the 24H+ initiative fails to account for auxiliary expenses such as tax incentives, infrastructure subsidies, and indirect administrative costs. This underestimation creates a risk of “fiscal mismanagement,” where the initiative could exceed its financial limits, straining the national budget already constrained by low private sector wage growth (2.8% between 2015–2025).

The CPS analysis highlights a lack of granular cost breakdowns per sector—agro-processing, manufacturing, tourism—and no phased implementation roadmap. Without these details, stakeholders cannot assess the program’s feasibility or track progress effectively.

Institutional Fragmentation and Governance Gaps

The 24H+ lacks integration into the National Development Planning Commission’s (NDPC) medium-term framework, leading to cross-ministerial duplication and resource misallocation. Dr. Adu Owusu Sarkodie, lead author of the CPS report, emphasized that without centralized oversight, implementation risks “inefficiency and policy overlap.” For instance, agricultural subsidies managed by the Ministry of Food and Agriculture might conflict with infrastructure projects under the Transport Ministry, compounding bureaucratic inefficiencies.

Additionally, the program’s reliance on private-sector participation is problematic. Without credible incentives—such as clear tax breaks or infrastructure guarantees—private investors may hesitate, leaving the government to bear the full financial burden.

Weak Implementation Metrics

The absence of measurable targets and accountability mechanisms for the 24H+ is a critical flaw. While the program outlines sectors like agro-processing and tourism, it does not specify timelines, key performance indicators (KPIs), or monitoring tools. This vagueness mirrors past failed initiatives, such as Ghana’s 2018 “Lighttown” project, which collapsed due to poor tracking.

CPS advocates for SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) objectives, such as quarterly export growth benchmarks or job creation metrics per region.

Questionable Fiscal Incentives

The proposal to reward businesses for “multi-shift operations” is criticized as misguided. The report argues that extended operating hours alone do not guarantee productivity or job creation. Instead, incentives should be tied to outcomes like export volume, local content production, or wage increases for low-income workers.

For example, Australia’s “Future Skills” program links subsidies to verifiable skill development metrics—a model that could inform Ghana’s approach.

Summary

The CPS report underscores that the 24H+ program’s success hinges on addressing systemic fiscal, governance, and accountability gaps. While the vision—to position Ghana as an agro-industrial hub linked to the Volta Basin—is compelling, implementation risks include budget overruns, institutional fragmentation, and weak performance tracking. Without immediate reforms, the program risks mirroring previous stall-outs, squandering resources and public trust.

Key Points

Practical Advice

To revitalize the 24H+, the government should:

1. Conduct a comprehensive cost audit, including hidden expenses and phased funding allocations;
2. Align the program with the NDPC’s medium-term plan to centralize oversight;
3. Adopt outcome-based incentives, such as tax rebates tied to export growth or job creation;
4. Develop SMART KPIs for each sector, with quarterly progress reviews;
5. Establish an independent monitoring body to track implementation;
6. Prioritize high-impact projects with clear feasibility assessments, such as rural agro-processing hubs;

Points of Caution

CPS warns that

• Over-optimistic GDP growth assumptions ignore historical volatility;
• Failure to address youth unemployment (currently 4.5%) could limit job creation;
• Infrastructure gaps in rural areas may hinder export development;
• Geopolitical tensions and currency volatility could exacerbate funding shortfalls;

Comparison

24H+ vs. Kenya’s Industrial Development Corporation (IDC)

Kenya’s IDC mandates cost-sharing between public and private sectors for industrial projects, ensuring accountability. The 24H+ could adopt a similar model, requiring private partners to cover 30% of project costs.

24H+ vs. Rwanda’s Export-Driven Strategy

Rwanda’s focus on high-value-added exports, supported by state-owned enterprises, contrasts with Ghana’s reliance on smallholder farmers. The CPS report suggests Ghana could integrate public-private partnerships (PPPs) to bridge this gap.

Legal Implications

Under Ghana’s Public Financial Management Act (2003), mandatory audits of public expenditure could expose funding shortfalls. However, penalties for non-compliance are weak, creating loopholes. Transparency International rankings (2024) list Ghana as 80/180 in public financial accountability, signaling systemic risks for unmonitored programs.

The lack of clear dispute resolution mechanisms for private partners could also invite litigation, delaying implementation.

Conclusion

The 24-Hour Economy Programme offers a transformative vision for Ghana, but its implementation is fraught with financial, institutional, and governance challenges. To avoid becoming another “visionary but stalled” project, the government must prioritize fiscal transparency, strengthen oversight mechanisms, and align incentives with measurable outcomes. Only then can the 24H+ fulfill its promise as a sustainable economic reset. policymakers, economists, and civil society.

FAQ