Dr. Elikplim Apetorgbor
1. Strategic Economic Planning
| Feature | China | Ghana |
| Vision & Planning | Anchored in Five-Year Plans with long-term economic, energy, and industrial goals; highly centralized execution. | Anchored in medium-term development frameworks (e.g., Coordinated Programme, Ghana Beyond Aid); implementation often hampered by policy discontinuity and political cycles. |
| Development Focus | Industrialization, infrastructure-led growth, regional integration, innovation. | Industrialization and value addition in agriculture and extractives, though power constraints often limit competitiveness. |
Key Insight:
China’s ability to implement coordinated plans over long horizons contrasts with Ghana’s episodic and often politicized planning process.
2. Power Sector Investment and Infrastructure
| Category | China | Ghana |
| Electricity Access | >99% national access | ~88.7% access (as of 2023), with rural-urban disparity |
| Grid Infrastructure | World’s largest and most advanced grid; national UHV transmission backbone connects regions. | Fragmented grid expansion; dependent on donor-funded projects and public sector budgets; limited regional interconnectivity. |
| Generation Capacity | Over 2,800 GW (2023); diversified mix (coal, hydro, renewables, nuclear, gas). | ~5,400 MW installed (2023); dominated by thermal (mainly gas), with intermittent renewables and hydro. |
| Reserve Margins | Often excessive due to overbuilding. | Persistent excess capacity (50-60%) from take-or-pay IPPs, driving high costs. |
Key Insight:
While both countries face overcapacity risks, China manages it through industrial demand and grid exports, while Ghana’s overcapacity stems from procurement inefficiencies and weak demand growth.
3. Cost of Electricity and Affordability
| Indicator | China | Ghana |
| Tariff for Industry | ~$0.07–$0.09/kWh | ~$0.15–$0.18/kWh (among the highest in sub-Saharan Africa) |
| Tariff Structure | Tiered, time-of-use pricing; cost-reflective reforms underway. | Cross-subsidized, politicized tariff setting; non-cost-reflective; heavy subsidy burden. |
| Losses (technical + commercial) | <8% nationwide | ~30–35% (due to poor metering, illegal connections, weak collections) |
Key Insight:
China achieves low tariffs through scale, domestic manufacturing, and grid efficiency. Ghana’s high tariffs result from inefficient distribution services managment, high distribution technical and commercial loses expensive IPPs tariff, and weak financial management.
4. Power Sector Reform and Market Design
| Dimension | China | Ghana |
| Reforms | Unbundled generation; competitive trading pilots; state-guided liberalization. | Partially unbundled; IPPs dominate generation; weak regulatory enforcement. |
| Utilities | Dominated by SGCC/CSG with strong capital backing. | ECG/NEDCo/GRIDCo/VRA reliant on government bailouts; frequent revenue shortfalls. |
| Metering and Revenue Collection | Extensive use of smart meters, digital payments, and load control. | Prepaid meters growing; many still on postpaid/SHEP meters; limited data analytics for revenue enhancement. |
Key Insight:
China’s managed competition model outperforms Ghana’s fragmented and politically influenced electricity sector, despite both pursuing unbundling.
5. Renewable Energy and Green Transition
| Area | China | Ghana |
| Renewables Share | >35% of capacity; global leader in solar and wind deployment. | <5% of generation; few utility-scale solar plants; small hydro and mini-grids in pilot phases. |
| Technology Leadership | Global manufacturer and exporter of clean tech (panels, turbines, batteries). | Relies on imports; limited local capacity in RE tech manufacturing or services. |
| Climate Commitments | Carbon peak by 2030, neutrality by 2060; strong green industrial push. | Net-zero aspiration by 2070; limited domestic financing and institutional capacity for green transition. |
Key Insight:
Ghana’s green energy potential remains underutilized, while China has integrated clean energy into its economic and geopolitical strategy.
6. Institutional and Governance Capacity
| Dimension | China | Ghana |
| Utility Governance | High alignment between national strategy and utility behavior. | Frequent political interference in utilities management, procurement and PPA negotiations. |
| Investment Coordination | Centrally coordinated across ministries and SOEs. | Fragmented institutional roles (MoEn, ECG, PURC, Energy Commission, VRA); weak PFM linkages. |
| Debt Sustainability | High, but managed through domestic banks and local currency finance. | Rising energy sector debts (~$2–$3 billion); IPP obligations and forex exposure weigh heavily. |
Key Insight:
Ghana’s power sector governance suffers from weak institutional discipline, while China benefits from unified strategic direction—even within a controlled state-capitalist model.
7. Lessons for Ghana from China’s Experience
| Strategic Insight | Relevance to Ghana |
| Long-term, apolitical planning | Institutionalize planning beyond electoral cycles—build energy strategies aligned with industrial and spatial plans. |
| Scale and local content in RE | Foster domestic manufacturing of solar/wind components; create demand aggregation to drive costs down. |
| Smart grid investment | Prioritize nationwide smart meter rollout; invest in grid automation for loss reduction. |
| Power market efficiency | Develop true cost-reflective tariffs with social protection; enhance power purchase contract renegotiation frameworks. |
| State coordination and reform discipline | Depoliticize power utility operations; empower regulatory bodies to enforce rules. |
While China and Ghana operate in vastly different geopolitical and economic contexts, the comparative analysis shows that the design and execution of energy strategy plays a decisive role in shaping industrial competitiveness and economic resilience.
Ghana can draw from China’s deliberate, coordinated, and scalable approach to power sector development—particularly in investing in grid infrastructure, prioritizing domestic solutions, and aligning energy pricing with long-term development goals.
Ultimately, affordable and reliable power is not just an engineering problem but a governance and strategic policy challenge.
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.
