“We write the ‘stop work and produce permit’ ourselves”: Clientelism, hybridity, and the limits of collaborative planning in Ghana

This paper interrogates the dynamics of urban development control in Ghana through the lens of collaborative planning, reframing it as a contested and politically mediated process rather than a consensus-driven ideal. Drawing on a qualitative case study of the Weija–Gbawe Municipality, the study combines 15 in-depth interviews with planners, traditional leaders, private developers, assembly members, and civil society actors, alongside two focus group discussions with residents. Findings reveal that development control is shaped by structural conditions of legal pluralism, institutional fragmentation, and political settlements, which systematically undermine statutory planning frameworks. Contrary to assumptions in collaborative planning theory, power does not primarily reside with state planners but is unevenly distributed across customary authorities, political elites, and well-connected developers, often to the detriment of poorer residents. Chiefs and family landowners allocate land outside zoning schemes, creating parallel land markets, while statutory institutions are routinely sidelined and weakened by limited capacity and political interference. Enforcement is structurally weak but selectively activated, enabling elite actors to regularise violations while exposing vulnerable communities to demolition and environmental risks. Although participatory mechanisms formally exist, community engagement remains largely tokenistic. However, residents and civil society actors informally perform watchdog roles, revealing a gap between procedural inclusion and substantive empowerment. The findings suggest that the limitations of collaborative planning in Ghana are not only operational but structural, reflecting inherited planning frameworks misaligned with hybrid governance realities. The paper argues for reconceptualising collaborative planning as an asymmetrical, negotiated practice embedded in clientelism, informality and competing normative orders, and calls for effective reforms that rebalances power by strengthening statutory institutions while meaningfully integrating customary authorities within accountable governance arrangements.