The Africa Policy Lens (APL) has said that FUND24, the financial backbone of Mahama’s 24H+ economy policy, is built on a shaky framework in its current form and predicts less impact.
The FUND24, as part of Mahama’s 24H+ economy, promises affordable capital for SMEs, massive infrastructure, and job creation.
In an extensive review of the policy, the APL casts doubt on the policy to meet its revenue, stating that its reliance on external financial support makes it incompatible with the objectives of the 24-hour economy.
“The FUND24 was sold to Ghanaians as a bold transformation strategy, promising affordable capital for SMEs, massive infrastructure, and job creation. But behind the grand design lies a shaky Framework,” the APL said in its review.
It continued: “Operating across three tracks, enterprise financing (via DBG and VCTF), infrastructure development (through GIIF’s SPVs), and technical assistance (offered by the 24H+ Secretariat), FUND24 aims to raise $4 billion by 2030 through blended finance and foreign institutional capital. On paper, it sounds promising. It’s structurally flawed and fundamentally incompatible with Ghana’s 24-hour economic ambitions.”
‘First, let’s confront the elephant in the room: Ghana’s debt crisis. With public debt ballooning to $ 49.5 billion, 55% of GDP in March 2025, international development finance institutions (DFIs) are understandably cautious. In fact, in 2022, Ghana received absolutely nothing out of the $3.59 billion in infrastructure funding allocated to Sub-Saharan Africa. This is not a system that DFIs trust, and without them, FUND24’s capital flow collapses.”
”Add to that the cedi’s devastating 40% depreciation in 2022, and suddenly any foreign loan becomes a ticking time bomb. If DBG borrows in dollars and lends in cedis, a wave of defaults could drown the entire program.”
”.Even worse, the proposal to channel Ghana’s GHS 42 billion pension fund into risky SME equity is reckless. Pension funds exist to protect retiree livelihoods, not to bankroll fragile startups. One wrong bet and the retirement security of an entire generation could vanish.”
The APL also doubted the infrastructure track, describing it as ”equally shaky,” as well as the digital loan solution under FUND24.
”The touted Agbledu parks may never rise from the ground thanks to Ghana’s chaotic land tenure system, where over 80% of land is informally owned and legally untraceable.”
”And what of the digital loan revolution FUND24 promises? It assumes a tech-savvy population, yet only 58% of Ghanaians are even online. That’s not a digital revolution; it’s a digital delusion. You can’t run a loan portal on dreams when nearly half the population is offline or digitally excluded,” the APL noted.
”If the government truly wants a 24-hour economy, it needs a homegrown financing model, one not held hostage by foreign lenders or fictional SPVs. Ghana must unlock its own capital markets. Pension funds can play a role, yes, but through mandated low-risk allocations like South Africa’s Regulation 28.”
The APL also urged the government to “issue diaspora bonds to capture part of the $4.7 billion in annual remittances.”
“And instead of chasing phantom foreign investors, it should incentivise real domestic giants, MTN, Dangote, Ghana Oil, to co-invest in SPVs. Most importantly, land reform and a push for local-currency lending must be urgent priorities if financial inclusion is to be real.”
“FUND24 is not just flawed, it is dangerous in its current form. Built on weak assumptions, overdependent on DFIs, and blind to Ghana’s on-the-ground realities, it is the most brittle pillar of the entire 24H+ economy.”
“Without urgent course correction, it will join the growing list of failed Ghanaian economic fantasies?”
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.
