Demystifying perceptions in acquisition of building permits (3) - Perceptions, misconceptions, public attitudes

The first part of this article was published on Monday, May 4, 2026; the second on May 18, 2026

Despite the existence of a clear regulatory framework and well-defined procedures for acquiring building permits in Ghana, several systemic challenges continue to impede the effective functioning of the process.

These challenges influence how applicants experience the system, contribute to delays and reinforce the negative perceptions commonly associated with the permit regime.

Understanding these challenges is essential for designing reforms that strengthen development control, enhance public confidence and promote compliance.

Bureaucratic inefficiencies

One of the most prominent challenges facing the permit system is bureaucratic inefficiency.

Many metropolitan, municipal and district assemblies operate with administrative structures that are not well coordinated, resulting in prolonged processing periods for applications. 

The absence of clearly defined timelines, combined with overlapping departmental responsibilities often leads to situations where applications are moved from one desk to another without progress.

In some cases, files are misplaced, poorly tracked or returned to applicants without proper explanations, creating frustration and uncertainty.

These bottlenecks prolong the approval process and discourage applicants from engaging with the formal system.

The persistence of manual, paper-based workflows further exacerbates these delays, making the system slow and vulnerable to human errors.

Unlike digital systems that can track applications automatically and flag delays, manual processes depend heavily on the diligence of individual officers and the physical movement of documents between departments.

Corruption, unofficial practices

Corruption and unofficial practices, although not formally institutionalised, pose a significant threat to the effectiveness and integrity of the permit acquisition system.

Applicants frequently report being asked for facilitation fees or informal contributions to expedite processing. 

This creates the perception that approval depends on an applicant's ability to pay extra money rather than adherence to planning standards.

Such practices erode public trust in planning authorities and undermine the credibility of the system.

For some applicants, the expectation or fear of encountering corruption encourages them to bypass the formal process altogether, resulting in unauthorised developments. 

The normalisation of these practices further weakens transparency and damages the reputation of regulatory institutions.

Addressing corruption requires not only disciplinary action against errant officials but also systemic reforms that reduce opportunities for discretion and increase accountability through automation and clear service standards.

Another major challenge is the presence of overlapping mandates among institutions involved in land administration and spatial planning.

Different actors, including traditional authorities, the Lands Commission, utility providers and planning departments, often operate independently without effective coordination. 

A developer may legally acquire land from a traditional authority, only to discover later that the site conflicts with zoning regulations or planned infrastructure.

The absence of integrated land information systems leads to conflicting data, disputes over land boundaries and delays in obtaining the required clearances.

These institutional inconsistencies make the permit process complicated and unpredictable for applicants.

Furthermore, when institutions provide contradictory information or assert competing authorities, developers are left uncertain about which requirements to follow, leading 
to further delays and potential legal complications.

Lack public awareness

Limited public awareness remains a persistent barrier to effective permit acquisition.

Many citizens are not adequately informed about the purpose of building permits, the documents required or the steps involved in the process.

As a result, applicants frequently submit incomplete or inaccurate information, which leads to repeated corrections and prolonged delays.

In some cases, individuals deliberately avoid the process due to perceptions that it is too complex or irrelevant to small-scale projects.

Assemblies rarely organise large-scale sensitisation campaigns or community engagement programmes to educate the public, which further widens the knowledge gap and contributes to widespread non-compliance.

The technical language used in planning regulations and application forms can also be intimidating for ordinary citizens, creating an additional barrier to understanding and compliance.

The writers are with the Faculty of Built Environment,

Accra Technical University.