Gold prices are at all-time highs. Ghana exports $10 to $15 billion worth of gold annually, a figure that has soared with record commodity prices. Yet the nation keeps only an estimated $800 million to $1.2 billion each year—roughly 5 to 10 percent of the total value.
If a system fails to deliver benefits during the best possible market conditions, does it work at all?
"We are sitting on a gold boom and watching the profits leave," says Dr. Kwame Mensah, an economist at the University of Ghana in Accra. "The costs stay—polluted rivers, destroyed farmland, health risks, displacement. The revenue goes to foreign shareholders."
Ghana receives its share through taxes on profits, payroll taxes, small state equity stakes that rarely pay dividends, and approximately 5 percent in royalties. The model prioritizes private investment over state control, bringing capital and expertise but sharply limiting national returns—especially when gold prices spike.
Other resource-rich nations made different choices. Norway used oil revenues to build a sovereign wealth fund now worth over $1.4 trillion, ensuring future generations benefit from finite resources. Botswana negotiated strong equity stakes in diamond mining, using proceeds to fund education, healthcare, and infrastructure that transformed the country into one of Africa's most stable democracies. Chile maintained significant state involvement in copper while allowing private firms to operate, channeling revenue into long-term development.
Ghana chose a low-risk, private-sector-led model. The state mines very little directly, instead licensing foreign companies and collecting taxes. It brought investment and avoided the inefficiencies that plague many state-owned enterprises. But it also capped how much the nation could ever gain, even during extraordinary price surges.
A Boom That Doesn't Reach Home
"When gold was $1,200 an ounce, we got 5 percent," says Akua Asante, a community organizer in Obuasi, a mining town in Ghana's Ashanti Region. "Now it's over $2,000 an ounce, and we still get 5 percent. The river is still poisoned. The jobs still go to foreigners or machines. What changed?"
Local communities bear the immediate costs: water contamination from cyanide and mercury used in gold extraction, respiratory illnesses from dust and chemical exposure, land that can no longer support farming, and the disruption of traditional livelihoods. Meanwhile, the majority of mining profits flow to multinational corporations headquartered in Canada, Australia, and South Africa.
The question facing Ghana is not whether mining should continue—it will. Gold remains the country's largest export and a critical source of foreign exchange. The question is whether the current terms reflect the true value of a finite, non-renewable resource extracted during a historic price boom.
What Could Change?
Several reform options exist. Ghana could establish a serious national mining company to operate alongside private firms, retaining a larger share of profits. Royalties could automatically adjust when prices exceed certain thresholds, ensuring the state benefits proportionally during boom periods. Revenue could be legally earmarked for a sovereign wealth fund, infrastructure, healthcare, or education, rather than disappearing into general budget flows.
Some economists argue for partial nationalization of future projects, or at minimum, requiring majority Ghanaian ownership in all new mining licenses. Others suggest Ghana follow Zimbabwe and Nigeria by banning raw mineral exports, forcing companies to process gold domestically and capture more value from refining and manufacturing.
"We have the leverage," says Dr. Mensah. "Gold doesn't move. The deposits are here. If companies want access, they can accept better terms. Botswana did it with diamonds. Chile did it with copper. Why not us?"
The Urgency of Now
Gold prices may not stay at record highs forever. Commodity booms are cyclical. If Ghana cannot secure meaningful benefits during peak prices, when margins are highest and companies most profitable, then the model fundamentally fails the nation.
The political obstacles are real. Mining companies have legal contracts, investment treaties, and the ability to threaten capital flight. Renegotiating terms risks scaring off future investors. But the status quo—exporting billions in gold while retaining single-digit percentages—is equally risky. It fuels public anger, undermines faith in governance, and squanders a historic opportunity to build long-term prosperity from finite resources.
Akua Asante puts it plainly: "Our children will inherit land that can't grow food, rivers that can't provide water, and no savings from the gold that was taken. If that's the deal, then the deal is broken."
54 countries, 2,000 languages, 1.4 billion people. And in Ghana, a question that won't wait: if the system fails during boom times, does it work at all?
