By Joyce Gyekye
Plans for offshore gold exploration in Ghana have triggered renewed concerns over the environmental, fisheries and governance implications of extracting mineral resources from the country’s marine environment.
The concerns were raised separately by a coalition of 51 civil society organisations and maritime expert Dr. Samuel Dotse, who both called for greater scrutiny before any major offshore gold activity was allowed to proceed.
The 51 organisations, in a statement signed by the Executive Director of HELP Foundation Africa, Kwadwo Kyei Yamoah, urged the government to subject the proposed activity to rigorous environmental, fisheries and socio-economic assessment.
They cautioned against allowing commercial extraction or intrusive seabed activities to proceed before the potential impacts on Ghana’s marine ecosystem and fishing communities had been properly established.
The organisations said the country’s marine resources were already under pressure from a combination of human activities and environmental degradation, making it necessary to exercise caution over a new extractive activity in the offshore environment.
They therefore called for credible safeguards covering environmental protection, fisheries, socio-economic conditions and the livelihoods of coastal communities before any commercial offshore gold extraction was undertaken.
Their position came against the backdrop of an earlier statement by another group of civil society organisations, which had also raised concerns about the proposed offshore mineral activity and called for greater transparency and scrutiny.
Adding a legal and ocean-governance perspective, maritime expert Dr. Samuel Dotse said the controversy should not be viewed simply as a disagreement between state institutions.
Dr. Dotse argued that the proposed offshore gold activity raised a broader question about whether a regulatory framework designed largely around terrestrial mining was adequate for major extractive activities in the marine environment.
He acknowledged Ghana’s sovereign right to explore and exploit offshore mineral resources, but stressed that the right existed alongside obligations to protect fisheries, marine biodiversity and the marine environment.
According to him, offshore activities required marine-specific information on seabed characteristics, oceanography, water quality, fish resources, benthic habitats, spawning and nursery grounds, pollution risks and fishing-dependent livelihoods.
Dr. Dotse also pointed to Section 50 of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Act, 2025, saying it provided for Fisheries Commission involvement and fisheries impact assessment where non-fishing activities were likely to substantially affect fisheries or aquatic resources.
He consequently proposed an Inter-Agency Marine Environmental Assessment and Ocean Governance Mechanism involving the relevant regulatory institutions.
The mechanism, he said, should coordinate marine baseline studies, cumulative-impact assessments, stakeholder consultation, monitoring and mitigation.
Dr. Dotse maintained that Ghana had the sovereign right to explore its offshore mineral resources, but that right had to be exercised alongside the country’s environmental responsibilities.
He summed up his position with the principle: “assessment before authorization, coordination before conflict, and prevention before remediation.”
The 51 organisations similarly urged the government to ensure that no intrusive seabed activity or commercial offshore gold extraction proceeded without credible environmental, fisheries, socio-economic and livelihood safeguards.
Their concerns have consequently shifted the debate beyond whether Ghana could exploit offshore mineral resources to a broader question of how such resources could be exploited without undermining the marine ecosystem, fisheries and the livelihoods that depend on them.
