Economist urges structural reforms to end Ghana’s recurring IMF programmes

Professor Godfred Alufar Bokpin, an economist, has called for structural reforms to Ghana’s public finances and productive sectors to end recurring IMF programmes. He argued that Ghana’s economic disruptions stem from fiscal management weaknesses, inadequate public investment, weak institutions, and inconsistent policy implementation, which cannot be resolved solely through fiscal consolidation. "Ghana has had to move beyond traditional measures like expenditure controls and revenue enhancement and resort to debt restructuring because recurring economic disruptions impose enormous costs on the economy," he said during a public lecture in Accra during the 2026 Civil Service Week activities. Prof. Bokpin, a lecturer at the University of Ghana Business School, emphasized that macroeconomic stability alone is insufficient for sustained economic transformation. He noted that Ghana’s history of IMF programmes has led to significant external influence on policy design, implementation, and monitoring. Despite completing its 17th IMF programme, he cautioned against assuming it would be the last, stating, "I am more comfortable this morning using the word ‘when’ regarding Ghana’s potential return to the Fund." To break the cycle of IMF programmes, Bokpin proposed a more resilient economic model, policy consistency, and long-term policy implementation. He identified policy inconsistency and weak public-sector institutions as key constraints on economic performance and investor confidence. Predictable policies are necessary to encourage investment and help indigenous businesses compete internationally. He also highlighted inefficiencies in public investment, such as road projects taking over a decade to complete with final costs exceeding original budgets. Bokpin argued that weak domestic revenue mobilization, partly due to limited expansion of the formal, productive, and taxable sectors, limits the government’s revenue capacity. Increasing tax rates alone would not solve this challenge; instead, he urged creating conditions for more businesses and workers to operate formally and generate taxable income. He called for stronger support for indigenous businesses and better coordination between fiscal, monetary policy, and the real economy to strengthen domestic productive capacity, broaden the tax base, and improve economic resilience to future shocks.