As the debate over the proposal to rename Kotoka International Airport (KIA) as Accra International Airport continues to gather momentum, the Volta Regional Commissioner of the National Development Planning Commission (NDPC), Dr. Elikplim Kwabla Apetorgbor, believes the move is a misplaced objective.
Dr. Elikplim Kwabla Apetorgbor says the decision to rename KIA raises more questions than answers, especially at a time of economic strain.
In a strongly worded press statement, Dr. Apetorgbor described the proposed renaming, reportedly being pursued through the Ministry of Transport and the Majority Leader in Parliament, as a misplaced policy priority that offers no clear national benefit.
Drawing on his international travel experience, he pointed out that across the world, international airports are routinely named after statesmen, reformers, and national heroes. This practice, he says, has never diminished efficiency, global recognition, or competitiveness of airports.
From his perspective, the naming of airports is not a casual exercise but a reflection of history, identity, and national purpose.
More fundamentally, he argued that airports are strategic economic assets, not symbolic projects. Their true value, he stressed, lies in operational efficiency, safety, route connectivity, cost competitiveness, cargo handling capacity, and their ability to attract airlines, trade, tourism, and investment.
Dr. Apetorgbor questioned how renaming KIA would reduce airline operating costs, expand flight routes, improve passenger experience, or increase cargo volumes. Without tangible economic or operational gains, he warned, the proposal risks becoming an exercise in symbolism rather than substance.
“A change in name does not improve operational performance, reduce costs, expand routes, or increase passenger or cargo volumes. It delivers no measurable economic benefit,” he stressed.
The NDPC Commissioner also raised concerns about timing. With public finances under pressure, marked by rising debt levels and competing demands on limited resources, he argued that policy focus should remain firmly on reforms and investments that deliver measurable economic returns.
He said, “At a time of fiscal strain, rising public debt, and intense pressure on public investment, the absence of any clearly defined economic, operational, or financial justification makes this proposal deeply concerning.”
The central question, he said, remains unanswered: what national problem does this renaming solve?
Until that question is convincingly addressed with clear economic, financial, or operational justification, Dr. Apetorgbor insists the proposal should be reconsidered in the broader national interest.
