Ghana’s public sector is central to national development. It delivers essential services, drives major infrastructure projects, and oversees vast fiscal responsibilities. Yet, year after year, reports from the Auditor-General and the Public Accounts Committee highlight recurring issues: procurement irregularities, underperformance of SOEs, lapses in project delivery, and financial leakages. At the heart of these issues is a governance gap.
As Ghana strives toward inclusive development, macroeconomic stability, and improved public service delivery, one foundational pillar remains underdeveloped in many public and state-owned institutions: a structured and proactive approach to risk management.
While risk management is embedded in private sector governance—particularly within financial institutions—it remains largely informal or absent in much of the public sector; this is a missed opportunity. Risk events are often managed reactively after damage has occurred. In contrast, institutions with structured risk management frameworks anticipate risks and implement controls to avoid them altogether.
What is Risk Management in Public Services?
Risk management in a public institution involves systematic identification, evaluation, and treatment of threats that could affect the achievement of service delivery, policy implementation, or institutional reputation. These threats may be:
It is a myth that risk management is only relevant to corporate boardrooms or financial institutions. In truth, governments face even more complex risks, especially in this era of climate uncertainty, rapid technological change, geopolitical shifts, and increasing public scrutiny.
Public Institutions need Risk Management functions to effectively achieve the following:
Lessons from the Private Sector:
The banking sector offers a useful blueprint. A well-documented risk governance framework is a standard in every Ghanaian bank, driven by both regulation and business need. The appointment of Chief Risk Officers (CROs), the use of enterprise risk management (ERM) systems, and risk appetite statements have become critical to ensuring financial stability.
Public institutions can adopt similar frameworks—with necessary adaptations. For instance, ministries can establish Risk Oversight Committees under their Chief Directors, supported by internal risk units that develop and monitor risk registers, compliance dashboards, and project-specific risk assessments.
Global Best Practices
International models show the benefits of embedding risk management in government operations:
Ghana can draw lessons from these frameworks while designing a context-specific approach that fits our governance structures.
Whose Responsibility is it Anyway?
One common challenge is defining the boundary between organizational and individual responsibility in managing risks. In the context of public institutions:
This dual responsibility fosters a culture of risk ownership, where every officer sees risk management as part of their role, not just a compliance checklist.
Policy Recommendations: A roadmap forward
To institutionalize risk management in Ghana’s public service, the following actions are recommended:
To conclude, Ghana’s journey toward sustainable development will depend not just on bold policies, but on resilient institutions. Risk management is the invisible guardrail that ensures policies translate into impact.
By embedding risk management into public services, Ghana will reduce inefficiencies, strengthen governance, and restore public trust. It is time to move beyond reactive crisis management and toward a future where our public institutions are proactive, prepared, and performance driven.
Let us invest in the systems that protect our investments—and secure the future of our nation.