Qualitative study finds traditional chieftaincies critical for climate action in Ghana, highlighting their role in resource mobilization.
Despite government and civil society funding, climate finance remains erratic and limited. Amid development activists’ longstanding quest for sustainable solutions, alternative mechanisms have gained traction, yet traditional chieftaincy institutions remain under-researched. In Ghana, where climate impacts are devastating, sustainable financing is very critical. Using agency and brokerage theories as a conceptual lens, this qualitative study, drawing on four focus group discussions and 45 in-depth interviews, examines chieftaincies’ salience for climate change actions across Ghana’s four climate zones. Despite the notable knowledge gaps in accessing climate funding, this research revealed chieftaincy institutions to have made the most visibly audacious broadcast of their agency and brokerage in climate change initiatives, leveraging their social capital to mobilize resources through partnerships in activities including afforestation, infrastructural resilience, agricultural and water management, and settlement planning. In light of these findings, the research recommends that government and development partners recognize traditional chieftaincies as critical partners in climate advocacy, given their demonstrated utility in adaptation, mitigation, and financing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vincent Ekow Arkorful (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: