Ghana’s Presidential Special Envoy for Reparations, Ambassador Dr Ekwow Spio-Garbrah, told delegates at the Africa at the Centre conference in Accra that Africa cannot claim genuine control over its development agenda without first overhauling how that agenda is financed.
“Economic sovereignty requires serious attention to how Africa finances its development,” Spio-Garbrah said in a keynote address delivered under the conference theme “Why Africa at the Centre, Why Now?”
The remarks go to the center of a debate the conference convened by the West Africa Civil Society Institute (WACSI) and bringing together civil society leaders, funders, policymakers, researchers, social innovators, youth leaders and diaspora actors is attempting to force into the open: not how much money flows into Africa, but who controls the terms on which it arrives.
The core argument
Spio-Garbrah’s central claim is that development finance is not a neutral, technical exercise. The conditions attached to funding, he argued, shape which problems get addressed, how programs are designed, and ultimately whose priorities drive outcomes on the continent.
To change that dynamic, he called for deeper exploration of four mechanisms:
- African-led financing institutions
- Restitution frameworks
- Diaspora investment vehicles
- Locally led development models
Not a call for isolation
Spio-Garbrah was explicit that his argument is not a case for African self-sufficiency at the expense of international ties. He said Africa’s goal should be partnerships built on mutual respect, investment that generates value retained on the continent, and a form of multilateralism in which African voices carry real weight not simply representation without influence.
That framing positions his argument as a call for renegotiated leverage within existing global financial relationships, rather than withdrawal from them.
Diaspora as financing infrastructure, not sentiment
A significant portion of the keynote reframed the African diaspora’s role. Rather than treating diaspora ties primarily as cultural or historical connections, Spio-Garbrah described the diaspora as a source of capital, technical expertise, innovation, professional networks, advocacy capacity and international political influence.
He called for practical mechanisms potentially including diaspora investment structures and knowledge-exchange programs to convert those assets into sustained development financing, rather than one-off remittances or symbolic gestures.
Institutions, not just money
Spio-Garbrah cautioned that new financing sources alone will not fix the underlying problem if African institutions themselves remain weak. He argued that institutions need stronger technical capacity, transparency, accountability, and resilience otherwise alternative financing arrangements risk reproducing the same power imbalances found in current donor-driven systems.
“Our generation will not be judged by the declarations we adopt,” he said, “but by the measurable outcomes those declarations produce.”
Why it matters
The speech reflects a broader shift at the conference, which includes a dedicated session titled “Financing Africa’s Future” alongside panels on power, partnerships, global governance and institution-building. Organizers, led by WACSI, have framed the gathering around a single question: how power over development priorities, resources, partnerships and systems can shift toward African actors themselves.
Spio-Garbrah’s intervention gives that abstract framing a concrete policy target financing architecture and a test for measuring success: not the declarations conferences produce, but whether the financing mechanisms discussed actually get built.
