News & Media

A comparison with Botswana suggests Ghana could have generated billions more from its mining sector in 2025. The findings are reigniting debate about government participation, mining partnerships and how resource-rich African countries can secure greater economic returns from their mineral wealth.

Ghana’s mining sector generated an estimated US$13.40 billion in value added in 2025, yet the government collected just US$1.60 billion in mining revenue. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), the difference highlights a significant gap between the economic value generated by the country's mineral resources and the revenue captured by the state.

In a comparison with Botswana, the institute estimates that Ghana could have collected an additional US$6.56 billion in 2025 had it achieved the same government revenue-to-mining-value-added ratio as its southern African counterpart. The findings, presented by IFS Executive Director Dr Said Boakye in Accra, form part of a wider examination of Ghana's domestic revenue mobilisation and the country's ability to translate natural resource wealth into public income.

The comparison is particularly significant for Africa's mining industry, where governments are increasingly examining how to balance attracting private investment with securing a greater share of the economic benefits generated by mineral extraction.

Botswana's model offers a different approach

At the centre of the IFS analysis is the difference between Ghana's concession-based mining framework and Botswana's more active government participation in the sector. Between 2019 and 2023, government mining revenue in Ghana averaged approximately 15% of mining value added, compared with 60.9% in Botswana, according to the institute.

Applying Botswana's average ratio to Ghana's 2025 mining value added of US$13.40 billion would have generated approximately US$8.16 billion in government revenue, compared with the US$1.60 billion collected. The IFS attributes Botswana's stronger revenue performance partly to its partnerships with private mining companies, which allow the government to participate directly in the financial returns from mineral extraction.

A prominent example is Debswana, the 50:50 diamond mining joint venture between the Government of Botswana and De Beers. Through this arrangement, the government benefits not only from taxes and royalties but also from dividends generated by its ownership stake.

Greater participation can also give governments better insight into mining operations, production performance and commercial profitability, strengthening their ability to understand and negotiate the value generated by their mineral assets. For the IFS, this approach offers lessons for Ghana, where private companies undertake much of the extraction under concession arrangements and the government relies more heavily on conventional taxation and royalties.

The institute has therefore called for greater direct state investment in the extractive sector, alongside private partners, to improve the country's financial returns from its mineral resources.

Rethinking the relationship between governments and mining companies

The findings raise a broader question for African mining jurisdictions: is taxation alone sufficient to ensure that resource-rich countries capture an appropriate share of the value generated by their mineral wealth? Royalties, corporate income taxes and other fiscal instruments remain essential components of mining revenue. However, equity participation and joint ventures offer governments another route to benefit from the commercial success of mining operations.

For countries seeking to develop their mineral industries, the challenge is determining which arrangements deliver sustainable returns while maintaining the conditions necessary to attract capital, expertise and technology. Direct state participation can offer exposure to dividends and greater involvement in strategic decisions, but it also brings financial and operational responsibilities. Governments must consider the capital required, the risks associated with commodity price fluctuations and their capacity to participate effectively in complex mining ventures.

Partnership structures therefore need to be carefully designed, with clear governance arrangements, transparent financial reporting and an appropriate allocation of risk between public and private partners. Botswana's experience provides an example of one approach, but its model cannot simply be transferred to every African mining jurisdiction. Differences in mineral endowment, project economics, institutional capacity and investment requirements all influence which partnerships are commercially viable.

Ghana's revenue debate extends beyond ownership

The IFS findings also come amid wider scrutiny of Ghana's mining fiscal framework and its ability to collect revenue from the sector. The institute identified three major constraints to domestic revenue mobilisation: low extractive-sector revenue generation, revenue leakages and the extensive use of tax exemptions to attract investment. Its recommendations include stronger enforcement against tax evasion and under-reporting, a review of existing tax incentives and increased government participation in extractive industries.

However, the debate over how much mining revenue governments should capture is not without competing perspectives.

Ghana's mining industry has previously raised concerns about the cumulative impact of fiscal changes on investment. The Ghana Chamber of Mines, for example, has argued that the country's effective mining tax burden is already substantial and that further increases could affect the industry's competitiveness.

This highlights the delicate balance facing governments across the continent: maximising public revenue without creating uncertainty or making projects less attractive to investors. Ghana has also introduced changes to its gold royalty framework, replacing the previous flat 5% rate with a sliding scale of 5% to 12% in 2026. These developments underline the government's efforts to increase the returns generated by its mineral resources.

The IFS proposals go further, however, by questioning the underlying structure through which the state participates in mining rather than focusing exclusively on the rates of taxation.

A wider question for African mining

Ghana's revenue comparison with Botswana has implications beyond the two countries. Across Africa, governments are under pressure to translate growing global demand for critical and strategic minerals into broader economic benefits.

As investment flows into commodities such as copper, lithium, manganese, graphite and other minerals essential to energy transition technologies, the question of who captures the value generated along the supply chain is becoming increasingly important. For African countries, this means looking beyond mineral extraction to consider ownership structures, local processing, industrial development, skills transfer and the creation of competitive downstream industries.

It also requires governments and mining companies to establish partnerships that deliver benefits beyond the life of individual mining projects. The debate is not necessarily about choosing between private investment and greater state participation. Rather, it is about finding workable arrangements through which governments, investors, mining companies and local economies can share in the opportunities created by mineral development.

For Ghana, the IFS's US$6.56 billion estimate provides a compelling starting point for reconsidering how the country captures value from its mining industry. For the wider African mining sector, it reinforces a fundamental question: how can the continent move from being a significant source of the world's mineral resources to capturing a greater share of the economic value those resources create?

As African mining investment and industrialisation ambitions gather momentum, answering that question will be central to building partnerships that deliver sustainable returns for both investors and host countries.