Making Ghana's 24-Hour Economy more than a construction project

The debates raging about our economic future often resemble a marketplace loud, crowded, and occasionally chaotic. Amidst this noise, one idea has risen to prominence thus the 24-Hour Economy. Having followed our nation's economic trajectory closely, our duty extends beyond simply cheering or jeering from the sidelines. If we are serious about national development, we must ask not just "Why?" but "What kind?" and "How?"

This commentary is offered in the spirit of constructive contribution to the policy conversation that will shape our collective future. It draws on evidence, observation, and a genuine commitment to seeing Ghana prosper.

Ghana unquestionably needs an economy that performs harder and smarter. However, if we are not careful, the vision of a 24-hour economy could become a mirage, more about flashy construction than foundational productivity.

Beyond the neon lights

There is a danger in reducing this grand policy to the construction of modern markets. Yes, a market is a physical symbol of trade, but a genuine 24-hour economy is a complex ecosystem. It is not about people haggling under floodlights at midnight simply because we told them to.

It is about our factories running additional shifts. It is about our farmers seeing their produce move swiftly from farm to processing centre, rather than rotting in the sun. It requires cold storage, dependable electricity, robust digital infrastructure, and security. Most importantly, it requires a reason for businesses to stay open: demand and incentives. The government's policy documents have identified agro-processing, pharmaceuticals, textiles, air cargo logistics, and ICT/BPO as sectors with latent 24-hour potential. If we build a market but fail to build the supply chains that feed it or to align with these identified opportunities—we risk building a monument to inefficiency, not a hub of productivity.

If we build a market but fail to build the supply chains that feed it, we have built a monument to inefficiency, not a hub of productivity. The government's own policy documents acknowledge this broader vision, but implementation has consistently fallen short of ambition. For instance, while the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission is developing time-of-use tariffs with lower rates for night operations (11 pm–4 am) to make extended hours viable, these are yet to be fully implemented. From my perspective, there remains a persistent disconnect between grand vision and ground-level execution.

The bulldozer debate

The June 2026 demolition of Wa's 70-year-old Tendamba Primary School, alongside the razing of a Sekyedumase Rural Bank branch in Kumasi's Aboabo district widely reported in the Ghanaian press at the time has displaced pupils and disrupted essential banking services. While the government cites progress, the sequence demolition first, relocation second, consequences last exposes troubling governance standards. A nation that destroys existing assets in the name of modernisation undermines its own developmental foundations.

Prudent planning demands a different order: comprehensive studies, meaningful community consultation, adequate alternative arrangements, careful transition, and only then, execution. Before the wrecking ball swings, we must ask: What is the current value of these structures? What livelihoods depend on them? Do the proposed developments generate greater economic benefit than what they replace? The National Development Planning Commission has identified investment opportunities in targeted 24-hour sectors requiring GH¢12–95 million each, but no cost-benefit analysis has been published to demonstrate that new projects justify displacing existing productive assets.

The public has seen no cost-benefit analysis justifying these demolitions. Government claims of consultation ring hollow when pupils are abruptly displaced, and bank operations are disrupted without proper alternative arrangements. This is not partisanship. It is a test of governance standards that should bind any administration. Ghana cannot sacrifice productive assets for political optics.

Learning from the world

The concept of a 24-hour economy is far from theoretical; several countries have successfully implemented variants of this model with demonstrable results. Singapore operates a round-the-clock port and financial centre, underpinned by world-class logistics and robust digital infrastructure. Rwanda has made significant investments in 24-hour e-commerce and cargo handling at Kigali International Airport, substantially driving its export growth. South Africa has piloted 24-hour manufacturing zones within its special economic zones, recording measurable gains in both output and employment.

These diverse examples share common foundational elements: reliable energy supply, efficient port operations, active private sector participation, and a regulatory framework that rewards productivity. Ghana may study these international models with care not with the intention of replicating them wholesale, but to extract and adapt relevant lessons to its unique local context. The success of smaller and comparable economies demonstrates that Ghana, too, is capable of achieving such feats. However, this ambition can only materialize if the nation first secures the fundamentals of infrastructure, governance, investment climate, and security.

The Private sector, let the engine run

Research consistently shows that sustainable economic growth arises from enabling private enterprise, not state control of production. Successful transitions share common foundations: stable regulation, strategic infrastructure investment (energy, transport, digital networks), accessible finance, and streamlined trade procedures. These are the pillars of lasting transformation.

Ghana has made measurable headway. Programmes like One District, One Factory have expanded industrial capacity through public-private collaboration; port digitalisation has cut clearance times and boosted trade efficiency; and agricultural interventions have raised productivity and reduced losses. None are flawless, but they reflect a consistent orientation toward productivity, value addition, and accountable resource use.

However, the current administration’s 24-hour economy push risks prioritizing optics over substance. Ambitious announcements lack credible detail on funding, implementation, or sustainability. If the government assumes it can build its way to a 24-hour economy, it misreads the challenge. The initiative’s own Secretariat characterizes it as private-sector-led, acknowledging the state cannot and should not—drive production directly.

The state’s role is to enable, not to execute. Its task is to ensure reliable energy, efficient logistics, security, affordable finance, and sound regulation. With these in place, private capital will gravitate toward opportunity, and extended operating hours will follow naturally when profitability and export potential justify the cost. Without them, we are merely incentivising businesses to stay open late—incurring expenses without economic return. This distinction separates genuine transformation from costly performance. Evidence affirms that growth accelerates when governments enable rather than produce; that principle must anchor the 24-hour economy agenda.

The human dimension

A 24-hour economy does not run on infrastructure alone; it runs on people, and people have needs that must be protected. If Ghanaians are to be asked to work night shifts, critical questions must be addressed: Will there be safe and affordable transport for workers returning home at midnight or dawn? Will night shift workers receive fair compensation and shift allowances? What provisions exist for childcare and family support for parents working unconventional hours? What health and safety regulations will protect workers in night-time industries? These are not rhetorical questions; they are policy gaps that must be filled before implementation proceeds.

A people-centred 24-hour economy must guarantee fair wages for night shifts, reliable transport, and social protections that recognize the toll of non-standard working hours. Without these safeguards, the policy risks exploiting the very workers it claims to empower. This dimension is rarely discussed in the current debate, yet it is our collective responsibility to raise these questions not to obstruct progress, but to ensure that progress is inclusive and just.

A framework for responsible implementation

Critique unaccompanied by constructive alternatives risks devolving into mere polemic. Drawing upon evidence and observed best practices from successful economic transitions, the following framework is proposed for a productive and responsible 24-hour economy.

The objective is enhanced economic output, not the mere extension of operating hours. Every policy measure must be evaluated according to its marginal contribution to national productivity.

The state's role is that of facilitator, while wealth creation remains the preserve of enterprise. Public resources ought to be channeled toward enabling infrastructure rather than deployed in competition with private actors.

Rehabilitation and expansion must constitute the default approach. Any demolition must be justified by a rigorous cost-benefit analysis, subject to full community consultation.

Communities, traders, traditional authorities, and affected institutions are entitled to substantive engagement prior to the finalization of decisions.

Citizens have a right to know who bears responsibility for decisions, implementation, and outcomes. Transparency is not merely desirable but fundamental to democratic governance.

Projects should be assessed against concrete economic and social indicators—employment generation, export growth, private investment mobilization, and household income improvements—rather than merely the number of structures completed.

These principles are not abstract normative ideals; they constitute the foundational elements of a governance culture that honours public resources and delivers demonstrable results, embodying the responsible stewardship that Ghana's developmental trajectory imperatively demands.

The choice before us

The question is not whether Ghana should pursue a 24-hour economy, but how—in a way that strengthens, not undermines, what we already have. Success must mean more production, not just more construction; better jobs, no longer hours; more exports, not more domestic trading private investment, not public largesse; and stronger communities, not displacement. This ambition deserves support, but only if it is grounded in rigorous planning, accountability, genuine private-sector participation, and measurable results. Ghana does not need this policy for its political appeal; it needs it because its citizens deserve an economy that works harder, produces more, and transforms our human and natural wealth into lasting prosperity.

The 2028 election offers a stark choice: continue with grand gestures that waste resources and displace communities, or embrace private-sector-led, accountable growth. The data exists on sectoral capacity, night-time energy costs, and investment requirements—to build a serious policy. What is missing is the political will to ground the conversation in evidence rather than spectacle. Ghana has the intellect and the values to get this right. The real question is whether we dare to govern honestly and have the humility to learn from our past. That should be the conversation. And that should be the standard by which this policy—and every government—is judged.

By Abubakari Najimu/Ing. Prof. Zakaria Issaka