Even as Ghana’s cement market, under the current government, shifts toward liberalisation, policy think tank IMANI Center for Policy and Education is warning that remnants of past state control laws will still draw the industry back.
In its latest criticality analysis, IMANI argues that interventionist laws such as L.I. 2491, passed under the previous regime, though no longer aggressively enforced, remain legally active and continue to cast a shadow over the industry.
The think tank says the implications of the lingering “high-handed” laws, though not active, have far-reaching consequences on the industry.
IMANI reveals that these laws still require companies to file monthly price data and cost breakdowns with the Ghana Standards Authority. This process is described as an unnecessary administrative burden in today’s policy environment. While enforcement may be lax, the obligation itself creates uncertainty and adds friction to business operations.
This is an indication that it is not enough for the government to ignore the outdated laws that sit in the books of the country, insisting they must be formally repealed.
IMANI’s argument is rooted in a broader concern that leaving dormant, but restrictive laws on the books undermines investor confidence and slows down decision-making within the sector.
Businesses, it says, operate best under clear, predictable rules, not under the lingering threat of policies that could be reactivated at any time.
“While the current administration has taken a more hands-off approach and effectively de-prioritized strict price controls, the legislative ghosts of the past still haunt the sector. Laws like L.I. 2491 are currently loosely enforced, but they remain active,” IMANI’s analysis indicated.
It continued that, “There is an urgent need to completely review and repeal these interventionist laws. Retaining them serves no purpose other than forcing manufacturers to undergo the needless administrative hurdle of monthly filing for price validation by the GSA. Total repeal will remove bureaucratic friction, allowing businesses to operate freely without the constant overhang of arbitrary state interference.”
Repealing such laws, IMANI argues, would do more than reduce paperwork, as it would signal a firm commitment to a market-driven framework where prices are determined competitively, not administratively.
This, in turn, could encourage efficiency, attract investment, and foster healthier competition among producers.
However, IMANI is equally clear on what the state’s role should be moving forward. Rather than fixing prices or controlling market entry, government intervention should focus on improving the fundamentals.
The think tank calls on the government to ensure efficient port operations, enforce technical standards, and maintain a level playing field for all participants.
Lower bureaucratic costs and improved efficiency across the value chain can ultimately translate into more stable and potentially lower cement prices over time. The analysis also cautions against the temptation to protect specific players through restrictive policies, warning that such approaches often distort the market and limit innovation.
As Ghana continues to refine its economic strategy, IMANI maintains that true liberalisation is not just about stepping back; it is about clearing the path entirely. And that begins with repealing the laws that no longer serve the market they were designed to protect.
