Time for sanitation regulator
Ghana’s sanitation debate has matured beyond the familiar arguments about overflowing drains and uncollected refuse.
What emerged from the high-level forum organised by the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) of the University of Ghana last week is a sobering truth that sanitation is not just an environmental concern but a crucial driver of economic growth.
In spite of the presence of waste management companies operating in the country over the years, Ghana still faces persistent sanitation challenges — from indiscriminate dumping and choked gutters to recurrent outbreaks of cholera and other preventable diseases.
That is why the emerging consensus among policy thinkers, researchers, private sector actors, parliamentary select committees and development partners has come at an opportune time.
The data presented at the forum revealed a worrying reality.
Ghana reportedly loses more than GH¢6.2 billion annually to the health and productivity consequences of poor waste management, while assemblies spend only a fraction of that amount on prevention.
Millions of work and school days are lost to sanitation-related diseases such as malaria, cholera and typhoid.
Premature deaths, rising healthcare costs and declining productivity collectively sap national output (see page 13 of yesterday’s edition).
Poor sanitation erodes household incomes, burdens the health system and discourages tourism and investment.
Flooding worsened by choked drains destroys property and infrastructure.
Environmental degradation diminishes urban liveability. In short, weak sanitation systems undermine economic growth, social equity and public health.
The argument for a sanitation regulatory authority is therefore compelling.
However, for such an authority to be viable and effective, certain principles must guide its establishment.
The Daily Graphic thinks it must be legally grounded in a clear Act of Parliament, with a well-defined mandate covering policy coordination, licensing, tariff regulation, performance monitoring and enforcement.
Parliament must ensure that the authority is insulated from partisan interference while remaining accountable through transparent reporting requirements.
Amendments to the Environmental Protection Agency Act (Act 490) or new regulations should explicitly include sanitation oversight.
This would give the EPA authority to set sanitation standards, monitor compliance and enforce penalties for breaches.
A clear division of responsibilities between the EPA, local assemblies, and any future sanitation regulatory authority must be maintained to avoid overlap and confusion.
Funding must also be predictable and transparent.
A dedicated sanitation fund, supported by budgetary allocations, levies, service fees and performance-based grants, would reduce dependence on ad hoc government disbursements.
The authority should also be empowered to generate revenue through licensing and regulatory fees, while ensuring that such charges do not stifle private sector participation.
Waste management companies must embrace regulation not as a threat, but as a framework that enhances credibility and sustainability.
Clear standards will create a level playing field, reward efficiency, and attract long-term investment.
Companies should commit to data transparency, service quality benchmarks, and environmental compliance.
Equally important, a regulator without effective local structures will be ineffective.
Metropolitan, municipal and district assemblies must therefore strengthen local implementation capacity.
Integrating sanitation data into budgeting systems and prioritising high-risk urban and peri-urban communities will ensure that policy translates into tangible impact.
Government, for its part, must demonstrate political will. Establishing the authority should not become another reform proposal that stalls in bureaucracy.
It requires decisive leadership, stakeholder consultation and phased implementation.
Fortunately, Ghana already has the EPA, which can play a central role in collaborating with local assemblies to ensure proper sanitation in homes and communities.
Ghana need not reinvent the wheel. While our socio-economic context differs, the principles of coordination, accountability, and sustained funding are transferable.
Best practices — particularly in data management, licensing frameworks, enforcement mechanisms, and public education campaigns — can be adopted and adapted to suit our decentralised governance structure.
Ultimately, sanitation must be reframed as a frontline economic and public health investment, not residual environmental spending.
A vibrant, effective and efficient sanitation regulatory authority would reduce disease burdens, enhance urban resilience, boost investor confidence and improve quality of life.
The gains cannot be overestimated.
There will be higher productivity, lower health expenditure, safer communities and stronger economic growth.
The cost of inaction, as the evidence shows, is far greater.
