A Vindicated Zoomlion? Concerns Grow Over AMA and YEA’s “Costly Populist” Sanitation Initiatives

The Accra Metropolitan Assembly’s (AMA) new street-sweeping initiative, which offers GH₵100 daily to young sweepers, has sparked intense debate among sanitation experts, policy analysts, and industry observers. Many question whether the programme—introduced to create jobs and improve cleanliness—can survive the financial and logistical pressures that come with such a wage-heavy model.

The concerns come on the heels of the Youth Employment Authority’s (YEA) earlier proposal to increase allowances for its Sanitation Module beneficiaries from GH₵258 to more than GH₵750, shortly after suspending its long-standing contract with private waste management giant Zoomlion Ghana Limited.

Critics Say Government Sanitation Plans Are Driven by Optics, Not Sustainability

For Joseph, a young man at UTC in Accra who recently joined the AMA’s initiative, the GH₵100-a-day income is a lifeline. But his situation reflects a deeper question: how long can AMA afford this?

Policy analysts argue that the initiative may be less about long-term sanitation planning and more about political visibility.

“Videos of sweepers in white vests along ceremonial roads may look good online, but it does not replace the need for mechanised sweepers, transfer stations, recycling plants, and predictable funding,” an urban development analyst told this publication.

The AMA’s plan would cost GH₵3,000 per worker per month. Deploying just 1,000 workers would require GH₵3 million monthly—and Accra needs several thousand to maintain citywide cleanliness. Critics fear this will evolve into a recurring payroll burden without any corresponding investment in infrastructure.

YEA’s Allowance Increase Quietly Admits a Bigger Problem

YEA’s abrupt decision to suspend Zoomlion—citing concerns about the GH₵258 allowance to beneficiaries—has raised eyebrows, especially after the same YEA proposed a 300% increase in the very allowance it claimed was unsustainable.

According to sanitation sector observers, the development exposes a contradiction: the state itself could not reliably pay GH₵258, yet it now attempts to pay triple or even ten times that amount under different programmes.

“It unintentionally vindicates Zoomlion,” one policy researcher noted. “The company was managing operational costs the state could never absorb.”

Zoomlion’s Role Re-examined Amid Controversy

Zoomlion has long faced criticism over alleged political connections and transparency concerns. But many analysts insist that the company provided something the AMA and YEA initiatives lack: fully built operational systems.

For years, Zoomlion managed fleets of mechanised sweepers, thousands of waste trucks, regional depots, and recycling facilities. Their service contract included fuel, maintenance, medical support, uniforms, supervision, and waste disposal—not just wages.

“People focused only on the GH₵258 allowance, ignoring the heavy logistics Zoomlion absorbed,” an industry expert explained. “The state never had that capacity.”

Experts Warn of “Dangerous Economics” in Replacing Mechanisation with Mass Labour

Replacing mechanised systems with large groups of manual sweepers is seen by some as economically risky. Instead of investing in assets and technology, both AMA and YEA appear to be channelling funds into short-term wages.

Analysts warn that this approach creates permanent costs without building long-term capacity.

“Sanitation can’t be measured by the size of the payroll,” a municipal planning consultant remarked. “It must be measured by cleanliness outcomes and system efficiency.”

Politics Over Policy?

Observers describe the ongoing changes as a “political theatre”—moves driven by the desire to appear different from previous administrations rather than by technical or financial logic.

Ending Zoomlion’s contract may satisfy political narratives, but analysts caution that removing a long-standing mechanised sanitation structure without a replacement system could worsen urban waste conditions.

A Risky Gamble for Accra’s Sanitation Future

If AMA’s GH₵100-per-day programme fails—as critics predict—it could leave Accra with increased waste, a larger financial burden, and a severe political backlash.

The bigger lesson, analysts say, is that sustainable sanitation requires infrastructure, not applause.

“Urban sanitation is not a popularity contest,” one expert concluded. “Accra needs systems, not symbolism.”