By: Johannes Jafo Akunatu [0247019099; akjafo@gmail.com]
Development must add value. It should build on what works, fix what doesn’t and see to it that public resources are used judiciously. When a working public investment is torn down for another which in any case has a related function, citizens aren’t being obstructionist when they question. They are being responsible.
The West Gonja Municipal Assembly’s decision to do away with the Damongo Daily Market in favor of a 24 Hour Market has thus brought up valid concerns. This isn’t resistance to modernization. It is a call for transparency, logic, and return on investment.
The Damongo Daily Market was put up as part of the Fufulso – Sawla Road Project which was a large scale public investment to stimulate economic activity. Infrastructure of this scale is typically built with a projected service life spanning decades. The market is still very much in use daily. It is a base for traders, a service to consumers, and a contributor to the local economy.
Before going ahead with the demolition these basic question require to be answered.
What was its expected life span at the time of construction?
If the structure is to be demolished before the end of its intended life span, the public deserves to know why. Has a structural or any engineering assessment declared the facility unsafe or unfit for use? If such a technical report exists, then the assembly should make it public.
Also of great importance are the financial implications.
What is the full scale of the demolition are we looking at? What is the total price tag of the new 24 Hour Market? Does that include move out costs, compensation for traders, and transition losses? Has a formal cost-benefit analysis been conducted comparing demolition and reconstruction with upgrading or expanding the existing market?
Public finance principles require that public funds be spent economically, efficiently, and effectively. To demolish a working public facility before the end of its life span raises value for money questions unless we see that replacement will produce greatly improved long term results.
The issue of 24 hour markets within the government’s larger economic plan is not in itself a bad thing. Expanding trade hours and modernizing infrastructure go hand in hand with growth. At the same time it is important to note that modernization does not mean total replacement. In many growing towns what we see is the development of new markets which complement the old, thus creating multiple commercial centers as opposed to having all activities in one location.
This brings us to another strategic question. What was the reason behind the decision to put the new 24 hour market in the same location as the present daily market as opposed to developing a new commercial area in another part of Damongo? Did they consider other plots of land? Specifically, is the vacant and flexible land surrounding the weekly market evaluated as a potential site for phased development?
Development of a new commercial cluster near the weekly market will allow both markets to run at the same time, which in turn will enable for a gradual expansion without disrupting current livelihoods. Did this option get a full look over? If it was looked at and dismissed what were the reasons for that?
Also beyond the economic and planning issues, there is the human element. Markets are not just physical structures. They are networks of livelihoods and long term customer relationships. Did traders play a role in the decision making process before the go ahead was given for demolition? Are there records of that stakeholder engagement? Is there any relocation plan? What compensation framework, if any, has been approved?
These are not hostile questions; they are put forth as issues of good governance.
This article does not go after individuals; it looks at a very large scale decision which has financial and social implications. In the case of the demolition of public infrastructure what we see is that, there is a need for evidence based results. If there are land issues, technical problems, or long-term urban planning considerations that justify this course of action, those details should be clearly presented to the people of Damongo.
Transpareny does not tie development down. It fuels it. As citizens digest the data, see the cost projections and the long term economic picture, public trust goes up. When information is held back, suspicion grows. If the 24 Hour Market is to greatly increase job capacity, expand revenue generation and in the end produce more economic benefit at the same location of the daily market, that case should be made public. If not, demolition risks being seen as replacement without necessity.
Development must leave people better off; if a public asset is to be destroy the case must be made clear, documented and economically sound.
Until that is done we would see concern over the demolition of the Damongo Daily Market as not only reasonable but responsible.
Disclaimer
This article reflects the writer’s view based on public information available at the time of writing. It does not allege misconduct or illegality by the West Gonja Municipal Assembly or any individual. The purpose of this publication is to promote transparency and accountability and informed public discussions about public resources. If further verified information or any official documents supporting the Assembly’s decision be made available, the writer is ready to review and include such details in future publications.
