The Institute of Economic Research and Public Policy (IERPP) has raised concerns over the scale of Ghana’s foreign exchange interventions, questioning whether the resources being used to support the cedi could be better channelled into productive sectors of the economy.
The think tank said there appeared to be a disconnect between the reported resources deployed by the Bank of Ghana to support the cedi and the relatively modest financing requirement attached to the government’s flagship 24-Hour Economy policy.
According to IERPP, available figures indicate that the Bank of Ghana injected approximately US$10 billion into the foreign exchange market in 2025 to support the cedi.
It said a further US$8 billion had reportedly been deployed from January 2026 to date, bringing cumulative foreign exchange intervention to approximately US$18 billion.
At the same time, the government has indicated that about US$4 billion would be required to implement the 24-Hour Economy policy, with the potential to create approximately 1.7 million jobs.
IERPP said the figures raised an important question about Ghana’s economic priorities.
“Why should Ghana deploy approximately US$18 billion to shore up the Cedi while a fraction of that amount could potentially finance a major productive-sector intervention capable of creating millions of jobs?” the institute asked.
A question of priorities
IERPP acknowledged that maintaining exchange-rate stability is an important responsibility of the Bank of Ghana, noting that excessive volatility in the foreign exchange market can fuel inflation, increase import costs and undermine business confidence.
However, the institute argued that foreign exchange intervention should not become an end in itself.
“When a central bank repeatedly commits substantial amounts of foreign exchange to support a currency, policymakers must also examine the underlying structural causes of exchange-rate pressure,” IERPP said.
It argued that if the economy continued to require large-scale interventions to stabilise the currency, policymakers needed to focus more closely on strengthening the country’s productive capacity.
“Ghana cannot sustainably spend scarce foreign exchange reserves defending the Cedi while businesses struggle to access capital, industries operate below capacity and young people continue to search for employment,” the institute said.
The opportunity cost
IERPP stressed that the issue was not whether the cedi should be supported, but whether the scale, sustainability and opportunity cost of the interventions were receiving sufficient public scrutiny.
It said the reported US$18 billion in interventions would be equivalent to roughly 4.5 times the US$4 billion reportedly required for the 24-Hour Economy programme.
According to the think tank, the comparison should prompt policymakers and economic managers to assess whether scarce resources are being deployed in ways that maximise long-term economic returns.
IERPP said a properly designed and adequately financed 24-Hour Economy could support manufacturing, agro-processing, logistics, transport, warehousing, tourism, technology and other productive sectors.
It argued that such investments could generate employment, expand the tax base, increase exports and strengthen Ghana’s capacity to earn foreign exchange.
“In other words, productive investment can help address the very structural weaknesses that create persistent pressure on the Cedi,” it said.
From defending the cedi to strengthening the economy
IERPP said Ghana’s exchange-rate policy should form part of a broader strategy for economic transformation.
The institute believes Ghana must transition from an economy that continually requires foreign exchange interventions to one that increasingly generates its own foreign exchange.
“That requires investment in productive capacity. It requires increasing exports. It requires reducing excessive dependence on imported goods that can be produced locally. It requires supporting businesses to expand production. Critically, it requires creating sustainable employment for Ghana’s growing working-age population,” it said.
The think tank therefore called on the government to demonstrate how its foreign exchange interventions are contributing to these broader economic objectives.
IERPP demands transparency
IERPP has called on the Bank of Ghana and the government to provide the public with a comprehensive account of the reported US$18 billion in foreign exchange interventions.
It wants authorities to disclose:
- The precise amounts deployed in each year and period;
- The sources of the foreign exchange used for the interventions;
- The specific mechanisms through which the interventions were undertaken;
- The measurable impact of the interventions on exchange-rate stability;
- The implications of the interventions for Ghana’s gross international reserves; and
- The government’s assessment of the long-term sustainability of the approach.
The institute also called for greater clarity regarding the reported US$4 billion financing requirement for the 24-Hour Economy.
It said the public needed to know what the funds would finance, how many jobs would be created, the timeframe for implementation, which sectors and regions would benefit and what safeguards would be put in place to prevent inefficient public expenditure.
‘The bigger economic question’
IERPP said Ghana’s economic challenge goes beyond periodic depreciation of the cedi.
According to the institute, the deeper problem is that the country does not generate sufficient foreign exchange through productive economic activity to sustainably meet its external obligations and import requirements.
It argued that the long-term solution should therefore not be continued reliance on foreign exchange reserves to strengthen the cedi, but the development of an economy capable of generating more foreign exchange through production and exports.
“The sustainable solution is to build an economy that earns more dollars than it needs to spend,” it said.
IERPP said that if US$4 billion could genuinely unlock investments capable of creating approximately 1.7 million jobs, increasing domestic production and expanding Ghana’s export capacity, policymakers should seriously consider whether more resources should be directed towards productive economic activity.
The institute, however, stressed that it was not advocating the reckless depletion of Ghana’s reserves or the abandonment of exchange-rate management.
Rather, it called for a better balance between short-term currency stabilisation and long-term economic transformation.
“Ghana needs a policy framework that does not merely defend the Cedi today but builds an economy capable of supporting the Cedi tomorrow,” IERPP said.
“The central question is therefore not whether the Cedi should be supported. It is whether Ghana can continue spending billions defending the currency without investing enough in the productive economy that ultimately gives the currency sustainable strength.”
