The Institute of Economic Research and Public Policy (IERPP) has questioned Ghana’s foreign exchange intervention strategy, arguing that the reported US$18 billion spent supporting the Cedi deserves closer scrutiny, particularly when the Government has indicated that about US$4 billion is needed to implement the 24-Hour Economy policy.
According to figures cited by IERPP, the Bank of Ghana injected approximately US$10 billion into the foreign exchange market in 2025 to support the Cedi. A further US$8 billion has reportedly been deployed since January 2026, bringing the cumulative intervention to about US$18 billion.
By comparison, the Government has estimated that approximately US$4 billion would be required to implement its 24-Hour Economy programme, which has been projected to create about 1.7 million jobs.
The figures, IERPP argues, raise an important question about Ghana’s economic priorities: Should scarce resources continue to be used primarily to stabilise the currency, or should more resources be directed towards productive sectors that can generate jobs, exports and foreign exchange?
IERPP Questions the Scale of Cedi Intervention
IERPP acknowledges that exchange-rate stability is an important responsibility of the Bank of Ghana.
Sharp movements in the Cedi can increase inflationary pressures, raise the cost of imported goods and services, and create uncertainty for businesses and investors.
However, the institute argues that foreign exchange intervention should not be viewed as an end in itself.
According to IERPP, repeated and substantial interventions should prompt policymakers to examine the structural factors creating pressure on the Cedi in the first place.
“If the economy continues to require massive interventions to stabilise the currency, then the focus must move beyond defending the exchange rate to strengthening the productive capacity of the economy,” the institute said.
IERPP maintains that Ghana cannot sustainably rely on foreign exchange reserves to defend the Cedi while businesses face financing constraints, industries operate below capacity and young people struggle to find employment.
The $18bn Versus $4bn Opportunity Cost
The central issue raised by IERPP is the opportunity cost of the reported foreign exchange interventions.
If the US$18 billion figure is accurate, it represents approximately 4.5 times the US$4 billion reportedly required for the 24-Hour Economy.
IERPP says this comparison should encourage a broader discussion about how Ghana allocates its limited financial resources.
The institute argues that investment in productive sectors could help strengthen the economy’s capacity to generate foreign exchange rather than repeatedly using reserves to manage exchange-rate pressures.
A properly designed and effectively implemented 24-Hour Economy, it says, could support sectors including:
Manufacturing
Agro-processing
Logistics and transport
Warehousing
Tourism
Technology
Export-oriented businesses
These sectors have the potential to increase domestic production, create employment, expand the tax base and generate additional foreign exchange.
From Defending the Cedi to Strengthening the Economy
IERPP believes Ghana needs to move towards an economic model that generates more of its own foreign exchange.
That would require increased investment in productive capacity, stronger export performance and reduced dependence on imported goods that can be produced competitively within Ghana.
It would also require greater support for businesses seeking to expand production and create sustainable jobs.
The institute argues that these measures could address some of the underlying structural weaknesses that contribute to recurring pressure on the Cedi.
Rather than focusing exclusively on the symptoms of exchange-rate weakness, IERPP wants economic policy to address the causes.
IERPP Demands Transparency on the $18bn
The institute is calling on the Bank of Ghana and the Government to provide the public with a detailed account of the reported US$18 billion in foreign exchange interventions.
IERPP wants information on:
The precise amounts deployed during each year and period;
The sources of the foreign exchange used;
The mechanisms through which the interventions were conducted;
The measurable impact on exchange-rate stability;The effect on Ghana’s gross international reserves; and
The Government’s assessment of the long-term sustainability of the intervention strategy.
The institute is also calling for greater clarity on the US$4 billion financing requirement for the 24-Hour Economy.
Ghana’s Bigger Economic Challenge
For IERPP, Ghana’s economic challenge goes beyond periods of Cedi depreciation.
The institute argues that the deeper issue is the country’s limited capacity to generate sufficient foreign exchange through productive economic activity to meet external obligations and import requirements.
In that context, the institute says, exchange-rate intervention can provide short-term relief but cannot be the permanent solution.
The longer-term objective should be to build an economy that earns more foreign exchange through production, exports and investment.
IERPP says that if US$4 billion can genuinely unlock investment capable of creating approximately 1.7 million jobs, increasing domestic production and expanding Ghana’s export capacity, policymakers should seriously examine whether greater resources should be channelled into productive economic activity.
The institute stressed that it is not calling for the reckless depletion of Ghana’s foreign exchange reserves or the abandonment of exchange-rate management.
A Stronger Economy Could Strengthen the Cedi
Ghana needs policies that do more than defend the Cedi in the short term. It needs policies that strengthen the productive economy that supports the currency over the long term.
