Following the devastating floods on Tuesday, June 30, in Accra, President John Dramani Mahama directed the Minister for Finance to release GH¢300 million from the Contingency Fund: GH¢150 million for emergency relief and GH¢150 million for mitigation works. Hours later, on the floor of Parliament, the Minister for the Interior announced a different figure: GH¢350 million, comprising GH¢200 million for relief and GH¢150 million for flood control.
The difference in figures may eventually be clarified. However, it raises broader public financial management questions. Were these allocations drawn from an already established financing framework, or were they determined as the scale of the disaster became evident? More importantly, what informed the decision on the amount required? Was it based on preliminary damage assessments, historical expenditure, estimated recovery needs or an existing financing model? Beyond the amount itself, what strategy will guide the use of these resources to ensure they achieve both immediate relief and longer-term resilience?
These questions should not diminish the speed of the government’s response. The President visited affected communities, expressed sympathy for families who lost homes and livelihoods, and directed immediate support. NADMO, together with the military and police, mobilised quickly to rescue residents trapped by floodwaters. These interventions undoubtedly saved lives and deserve recognition.
At the same time, this moment presents an opportunity to ask a broader question: Why, in 2026, does Ghana continue to finance one of its most predictable disasters primarily through emergency contingency releases?
This Was Not Unforeseen
Section 36(1) of Ghana’s Public Financial Management Act, 2016 (Act 921), allows advances from the Contingency Fund only where Parliament’s Finance Committee is satisfied that an urgent or unforeseen need for expenditure has arisen, for which no other budget provision exists.
That distinction is becoming increasingly important. June 2026 recorded the highest monthly rainfall in Ghana’s history, surpassing previous records set in 2002 and later in 2015. Severe flooding has become a recurring feature of Ghana’s rainy season, particularly in Accra, where drainage constraints, rapid urbanisation and changing climate patterns continue to increase vulnerability.
The fiscal response has also become familiar. Following major flooding events, the government mobilises emergency financing, relief items are distributed, mitigation works are announced and renewed commitments are made to pursue permanent solutions. While these interventions remain necessary, their recurring nature suggests that flooding is no longer an unforeseen event but an increasingly predictable fiscal risk.
The 2026 Budget Statement itself illustrates this reality. NADMO supported 173,800 disaster victims in 2025, more than four times its original planning target. It also undertook the dredging of 255 drains as part of flood mitigation efforts. These are not the activities of an institution responding to isolated disasters; they reflect an agency managing a recurring national risk.
The budget composition tells a similar story. NADMO’s approved allocation for 2026 amounts to GH¢409.4 million, of which approximately 96.6 per cent is allocated to compensation for employees. Only GH¢14 million is linked directly to strengthening resilience to climate-related hazards and disasters, with GH¢8.3 million allocated specifically for emergency works.
When compared with the GH¢300 million or GH¢350 million released this week through the Contingency Fund, an important policy question emerges: Should predictable flood risks continue to rely primarily on emergency financing, or should operational preparedness and resilience receive greater attention during the annual budget process?
The President recently reminded Ghanaians of the proverb about the vulture that waits for the rains to end before repairing its roof. The message was directed at the importance of preparedness. It is equally relevant to public financial management. As flooding becomes increasingly predictable, our budgeting systems must also evolve from reacting to disasters towards preparing for them.
A Different Conversation at COP28
During COP28 in Dubai, I participated in discussions where this exact issue featured prominently: the shift from ex post humanitarian response towards ex ante climate risk financing.
The establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund reflected growing recognition that climate-vulnerable countries should not always have to mobilise resources after disasters occur. Increasingly, countries are adopting forecast-based financing, parametric insurance and regional risk financing mechanisms that release funds once agreed climate thresholds are triggered. Ghana has already begun moving in this direction.
The 2026 Budget Statement confirms that the government has secured sovereign drought insurance through the African Risk Capacity to protect vulnerable farmers during the 2025/2026 farming season. It also announces plans to introduce a Parametric Flood Insurance Scheme for the Greater Accra Metropolitan Area to provide rapid support to approximately 1.2 million vulnerable residents. These are encouraging developments because they represent the very type of anticipatory financing that climate adaptation increasingly requires.
The recent floods, however, also highlight the importance of implementation. If the flood insurance mechanism was not yet operational when the rains fell, the Contingency Fund inevitably remained the primary financing instrument.
This should not be viewed as a failure of policy direction but rather as a reminder that designing financing instruments and making them operational are two different stages of public financial management. Closing that implementation gap will be essential if Ghana is to move progressively from reactive financing towards anticipatory climate resilience.
Rethinking How We Forecast and Allocate, Not Just How We Respond
The broader issue, therefore, is not whether the Contingency Fund was appropriate in responding to this emergency. In the circumstances, rapid financing was necessary.
The larger question is whether contingency financing should continue to be the principal instrument for managing a risk that has become increasingly predictable.
Encouragingly, NADMO’s own 2026 plans include expanding early warning systems across all sixteen regions and finalising its long-awaited Legislative Instrument. Together with the proposed Parametric Flood Insurance Scheme, these initiatives point towards a stronger institutional framework for disaster risk management. The priority now is ensuring these reforms move from policy commitments to implementation.
This could include accelerating the operationalisation of the Parametric Flood Insurance Scheme for Greater Accra, strengthening NADMO’s operational financing in line with the scale of its actual disaster caseload, finalising the outstanding Legislative Instrument to reinforce institutional effectiveness, and improving transparency around contingency releases through clear and consistent public reporting. Together, these measures would strengthen Ghana’s disaster preparedness and financing framework.
None of these suggestions diminish the importance of providing immediate relief to affected communities. Rather, they recognise that every emergency also offers an opportunity to strengthen the systems that prepare the country for the next one.
The COVID-19 pandemic reinforced an important lesson for Ghana’s public financial management system. Having been involved in aspects of the fiscal policy and public financial management discussions during that period, one lesson remains clear: emergency financing mechanisms work best when governance arrangements, reporting frameworks and institutional responsibilities have already been established before the crisis occurs. Flood management presents a different challenge, but the institutional lesson remains the same.
Ghana has already begun putting many of the right building blocks in place. The challenge now is ensuring they are implemented with the urgency that climate risks demand. As flooding becomes increasingly predictable, our budgeting systems should increasingly reflect that reality, not only by responding quickly after disasters occur but also by financing preparedness before the rains begin.
Rachel Gyabaah is a Public Financial Management expert at TrustAfrica.
By Rachel Gyabaah
([email protected])
