A policy think tank has urged the government to fundamentally rethink its approach to flood management, proposing that a greater share of the GH¢350 million flood response fund be invested in prevention rather than post-disaster relief.
The Centre for Social Innovation and Democratic Thought (CSIDT) said Ghana must shift from a reactive approach to one focused on resilience, warning that continued reliance on emergency response will lead to more deaths and escalating economic losses.
The proposal follows the devastating June 2026 floods, during which 169.2mm of rainfall fell within 24 hours, leaving at least 12 people dead, displacing thousands and causing an estimated GH¢5 billion in damage.
According to the think tank, the government’s current plan allocates GH¢200 million for emergency humanitarian relief and GH¢150 million for flood mitigation measures.
While acknowledging that the package is “better structured than previous plans” and reflects greater concern for victims, CSIDT argued that it remains “weighted toward reaction, not prevention.”
The organisation is proposing that the allocation be revised from the current 57% relief and 43% mitigation to 20% relief and 80% prevention.
CSIDT Executive Director Eugene Boadu said prevention offers greater long-term value than repeated emergency spending.
“Relief spending is reactive; resilience spending is preventive,” he said, adding that the goal should be to generate US$7 in avoided flood losses for every US$1 invested in resilience measures.
The think tank outlined a five-point agenda aimed at strengthening Accra’s flood resilience over the next 18 months.
The proposals include establishing a nationally adopted flood preparedness standard, creating an Accra Flood Operations Centre, improving coordination among drainage and sanitation agencies, and strengthening enforcement against illegal developments on waterways.
CSIDT also called for sustained public education campaigns, more frequent nationwide clean-up exercises, the use of digital flood alerts, and the designation of schools and churches as evacuation centres.
On technology, it recommended deploying artificial intelligence-based flood prediction tools, developing dynamic flood maps, and partnering with universities to develop engineering solutions tailored to Ghana’s flooding challenges.
The think tank further urged the government to collaborate with countries that have advanced flood management systems, including Mauritius, South Africa and the Seychelles, while encouraging private-sector investment in flood resilience initiatives.
Under CSIDT’s proposal, GH¢70 million would be reserved for emergency relief, GH¢130 million allocated to desilting and restoring major drains, GH¢100 million invested in technology and engineering interventions, and GH¢50 million dedicated to sustained public education and behavioural change campaigns.
The think tank also proposed expanding the government’s planned ban on styrofoam products to cover selected plastic bags and suspending approvals for new developments in mapped flood-prone areas until comprehensive flood-risk assessments are conducted.
CSIDT argued that Ghana’s experience demonstrates the need to move beyond emergency responses.
It noted that between 2017 and 2022, approximately GH¢1 billion was spent on flood response, largely on relief efforts, yet flooding has continued to worsen.
“By investing in drainage restoration, targeted engineering, maintenance, waste management and modern monitoring—while preserving a substantial emergency relief reserve—the Government can achieve measurable improvements in flood resilience within one year,” the think tank said.
It added that the proposed approach would deliver visible improvements, maximise the impact of the GH¢350 million investment and lay the foundation for a long-term flood resilience strategy for Accra.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source link
