Ghana loses over GHS6.2billion annually to poor sanitation — ISSER

Ghana forfeits more than GHS 6.2 billion every year to diseases linked to inadequate waste management and poor sanitation, according to a new study by the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research at the University of Ghana.

The findings were unveiled at a high-level stakeholder forum in Accra on Thursday, 26 February 2026. The event brought together policymakers, Members of Parliament, local government authorities, development partners and private sector representatives to interrogate the economic rationale for scaling up investment in sanitation.

The study, led by Prof. Peter Quartey and Dr Kwame Adjei-Mantey and titled “An Economic Analysis of the Benefits of Adequate Investment in Waste Management and Sanitation in Ghana,” examined both the financial and social costs of current sanitation challenges and projected the potential returns from improved funding.

Researchers identified five major diseases associated with poor sanitation: malaria, cholera, pneumonia, typhoid fever and diarrhoea, which together account for nearly 31.9 million lost workdays annually and an estimated 177,222 deaths.

They estimated that direct medical expenses linked to these illnesses amount to about GHS 5.8 billion each year, while productivity losses add another GHS 650 million, pushing the total annual burden beyond GHS 6.2 billion.

Despite these staggering losses, Ghana’s average expenditure on waste management stands at roughly GHS 38 per tonne of waste generated. The researchers described this as disproportionately low compared to the scale of the health and economic consequences.

Using cost-benefit analysis, the team found that under the current approach, every GHS 1 invested in waste management yields approximately GHS 180 in economic returns. Under an improved investment model aligned with lower-middle-income country benchmarks, where spending could rise to about GHS 1,028 per tonne, returns could increase to GHS 556 for every GHS 1 invested.

In monetary terms, national benefits under the enhanced scenario are projected to reach around GHS 58 billion in 2025 and grow to GHS 67.2 billion by 2032, largely driven by reductions in disease, deaths and productivity losses.

Presenting the report, Prof. Quartey urged authorities to abandon the view of sanitation as a peripheral budget item. He argued that waste management should be treated as a strategic, high-return investment capable of safeguarding public health and accelerating economic growth.

During discussions, participants questioned the proportion of disease burden directly attributable to waste. The research team explained that their model relied on global health data and assumed that 45 percent of selected disease cases were linked to waste exposure, adding that sensitivity tests were conducted to assess different scenarios.

Concerns were also raised about the practicality of the best-case investment projections, particularly in slum and rural areas where waste collection is irregular. Prof. Quartey acknowledged the higher operational costs in such communities, noting that tailored and smaller-scale collection systems may be more effective than a uniform national approach.

Other issues discussed included uncollected refuse and indiscriminate dumping into drains and water bodies. The researchers indicated that their projections accounted for infrastructure deficits and inefficiencies typical of lower-middle-income countries.

Some Members of Parliament called for stronger inter-agency coordination, with proposals ranging from establishing a National Sanitation Authority to reinforcing existing institutions without creating additional bureaucracy.

The forum also spotlighted opportunities for job creation. Prof. Quartey referenced earlier regional research on green jobs and recycling, stressing that investment in skills training and public education could unlock employment potential within the waste sector.

The study concluded that Ghana’s sanitation-related losses significantly outstrip current spending levels and called for sustained investment, targeted interventions in vulnerable communities and improved data and budgeting systems within Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies to elevate sanitation as a core development priority.