Ghana’s efforts at modernising its cities, improving sanitation and expanding public infrastructure are exposing a difficult economic question: how can government deliver necessary reforms without disrupting the livelihoods of the people expected to benefit from development?
The answer matters beyond individual projects. When redevelopment displaces traders, sanitation enforcement threatens informal incomes or public infrastructure plans encounter resistance, the consequences can extend to business activity, household earnings, project implementation and confidence in government decisions.
The Accra Metropolitan Assembly’s proposed redevelopment of the Agbogbloshie 24-Hour Economy Market illustrates the challenge. On September 23, 2026, the government placed the project on hold to allow further consultations with market leadership, the Assembly and other stakeholders. The decision followed concerns about how the redevelopment would accommodate existing commercial operators.
The Local Government Minister, Mahama Ayariga, said the objective was to improve market infrastructure without simply displacing existing businesses. According to the Assembly’s account of the engagement, he indicated that the project’s design, scope, cost and funding could be reconsidered to accommodate the circumstances on the ground.
The development highlights a fundamental weakness in public project implementation. A project may promise better infrastructure, improved sanitation or greater commercial activity, yet struggle if its design does not adequately account for the businesses and communities already operating in the affected area.
For traders, relocation is not merely a change of address. Their income often depends on customer access, established trading relationships, transport connections and the movement of goods. Disrupting these relationships can reduce sales, affect working capital and make it harder to pay employees, suppliers and household expenses.
The effects can spread through local economies. When a trader loses income, purchases from suppliers may fall, workers may lose earnings and families may cut spending. If many businesses experience similar disruption, the consequences can reach beyond the immediate redevelopment site.
Accra’s experience with demolitions offers further evidence of the tensions between urban redevelopment and livelihoods. In June 2015, following the devastating June 3 flood and fire disaster, the Accra Metropolitan Assembly demolished structures at Old Fadama, popularly known as Sodom and Gomorrah, as part of efforts to clear development along the Odaw River and improve drainage. The exercise triggered strong resistance, with hundreds of affected residents staging demonstrations in Accra to protest the destruction of their homes. Some residents said they had nowhere else to go, while others had lost their structures and sources of livelihood. The authorities, however, maintained that clearing the area was necessary to reduce flooding risks and protect lives and property.
These concerns are not unique to Agbogbloshie. In February 2026, the Ghana News Agency reported opposition from traders at the Ashaiman Market to a proposed demolition to make way for a new facility under the government’s 24-hour economy initiative.
Market queenmother Leticia Yaba called for a “fair, transparent, and inclusive process,” particularly concerning the allocation of stalls and shops. Yam Sellers Committee leader Paulina Kwashie warned that demolition could displace traders and deprive families of their sources of income. She also said the market had approximately 1,750 stalls and argued that redevelopment should provide adequate accommodation for existing operators.
Yaba’s appeal underscores a central question for policymakers: how can government deliver modern infrastructure while protecting the economic interests of people whose livelihoods depend on existing markets? Her call for a “fair, transparent, and inclusive process” points to the need for consultation that gives affected traders a meaningful opportunity to raise concerns before decisions are implemented.
Such concerns demonstrate why public engagement must extend beyond announcing a project or informing people of an impending clearance. Authorities need to understand how proposed changes will affect livelihoods, identify practical alternatives and explain how affected businesses will be accommodated.
The problem is not that every public objection should stop development. Unregulated trading, poor sanitation, congestion and unsafe urban conditions can impose substantial costs on residents, commuters, businesses and public authorities. Government has a responsibility to enforce regulations and protect the public interest.
However, enforcement without credible transition arrangements can replace one problem with another. Traders may lose their livelihoods, relocation sites may lack adequate customer traffic, and redevelopment may face delays as authorities negotiate solutions after implementation has begun.
Such delays can create additional administrative demands and postpone the benefits expected from public investment. The actual financial cost varies by project and must be established through evidence rather than assumed. Nevertheless, the possibility of avoidable disruption makes early engagement an important part of economic planning.
Ghana’s own policy direction recognises the need for more inclusive urban development. In July 2026, the government launched the National Urban Policy and National Slum Upgrading and Prevention Strategy for 2026 to 2035, with objectives including improved urban governance, sustainable financing and coordinated interventions in informal settlements.
The challenge is translating these ambitions into practice. Assemblies should engage affected communities before finalising project designs, publish clear relocation arrangements and establish accessible channels for resolving grievances. Where displacement is unavoidable, authorities should assess the likely effects on income and business continuity and provide feasible transition support.
Businesses and traders also have a responsibility to comply with legitimate regulations and participate constructively in consultations. Public engagement cannot mean granting every group a veto over development. It should create a process through which authorities explain decisions, hear competing interests and adjust plans where evidence supports doing so.
In the short term, meaningful engagement can help identify problems before they disrupt implementation. Over time, it can strengthen public confidence, improve project design and make necessary reforms easier to sustain across political administrations.
Ghana’s development challenge is therefore not simply about building better markets, clearing unauthorised structures or improving sanitation. It is about ensuring that the economic benefits of these interventions are not undermined by avoidable disruption to existing livelihoods.
Development should be judged not only by what government builds or clears, but also by whether its decisions produce lasting public benefits without unnecessarily weakening the economic foundations of the people they affect.
