Ghana is losing more than GH¢6.2 billion annually through healthcare expenses and lost productivity resulting from poor waste management and sanitation, a new policy brief by the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) has revealed.
The researchers are consequently urging the government to urgently increase investment in sanitation and drainage infrastructure, warning that the economic cost of inaction far exceeds current spending on waste management.
The February 2026 ISSER policy brief estimates that Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies (MMDAs) collectively spent about GH¢180.2 million on waste management and sanitation.
This compares with more than GH¢6.2 billion in estimated annual health and productivity losses associated with inadequate waste management.
Of the losses, approximately GH¢5.58 billion represents direct medical expenses, while another GH¢650 million is attributed to lost productivity.
According to the researchers, the burden is driven partly by preventable diseases such as malaria, cholera and typhoid.
ISSER estimates that sanitation-related illnesses result in approximately 31.9 million lost work and school days every year, while contributing to an estimated 107,222 premature deaths annually.
Sanitation as an economic investment
The report argues that sanitation must no longer be viewed primarily as a social or environmental responsibility.
Instead, ISSER says it should be treated as a strategic economic investment, given the significant financial losses associated with inadequate sanitation systems.
The researchers attribute the growing challenge partly to rapid urbanisation, population growth and changing consumption patterns, which are generating increasing volumes of solid and liquid waste.
Many MMDAs, they note, lack the capacity and resources required to effectively manage the growing waste burden.
The impact goes beyond overflowing waste sites and unclean surroundings, with consequences for public health, worker productivity and economic development.
ISSER calls for targeted investment
To address the challenge, ISSER recommends a substantial increase in public spending on sanitation, drainage and environmental health.
The institute wants government to prioritise interventions capable of delivering the greatest health benefits, including safe faecal sludge management and the removal of open refuse dumps that facilitate the spread of disease.
It also recommends directing capital investment towards high-risk urban and peri-urban communities.
These include densely populated informal settlements, flood-prone neighbourhoods and communities with inadequate access to sanitation services.
ISSER believes such targeted investment could help reduce disease incidence and mortality while easing the disproportionate burden experienced by vulnerable communities.
Wide financing gap
The policy brief highlights what it describes as a significant financing gap in Ghana’s waste-management system.
Current average investment in waste management is estimated at just GH¢38.78 per tonne of waste, according to the study.
ISSER’s benchmark for lower-middle-income countries in its best-case scenario is GH¢1,028 per tonne, highlighting the scale of the gap between current spending and the level of investment considered necessary.
The researchers argue that sanitation should therefore be integrated more firmly into national economic planning rather than treated as a discretionary expenditure.
They recommend that government incorporate the health and economic benefits of improved sanitation into its budgeting processes and medium-term expenditure frameworks.
Billions lost to inadequate sanitation
For ISSER, the economic figures demonstrate the need for a fundamental change in how Ghana approaches sanitation.
While MMDAs spend hundreds of millions of cedis on waste management, the country is estimated to lose more than GH¢6.2 billion each year through medical expenses and productivity losses associated with poor sanitation.
The institute is consequently calling for increased investment in sanitation and drainage systems, targeted interventions in high-risk communities and stronger waste-management infrastructure.
The report’s central message is that sanitation spending should be regarded not merely as a cost to government but as an investment capable of protecting public health, preserving productivity and reducing significant economic losses.
