Mitigating the Korle Lagoon Ecological Pollution Problem in Accra, Ghana, Through a Framework for Urban Management of the Environment

  • Jeffrey Squire
Part of the International Political Economy Series book series (IPES)


This chapter examines the Korle Lagoon ecological pollution problem in the Accra Metropolitan Area, the capital city of Ghana, with a view toward putting forward feasible policy recommendations that might be used to mitigate the problem, using a Framework for Urban Management of the Environment (FUME). Located in the Ghanaian capital city of Accra, the Korle Lagoon overlooks the Gulf of Guinea and covers a total surface area of 0.6 km2 (Karikari et al. 2006). The Korle Lagoon used to be a freshwater ecosystem that once boasted an abundance of fish, crab and other forms of aquatic biota that contributed to food security and also provided a means of livelihood for residents around its vicinity. In the past few decades, however, the lagoon has become heavily polluted and an environmental disaster due to the combined effects of uncontrolled urbanization, politics and mismanagement. The banks of the Korle Lagoon have been transformed into human habitats by migrants, mainly from the northern parts of the country, whose activities largely contribute to the problem. These migrants engage in commercial and other activities that contribute to the generation of massive amounts of waste including dangerous pollutants that end up in the lagoon.


  1. Ali, M., A. Coad, and A. Cotton. 1996. Education in Municipal and Informal Systems of Solid Waste Management. In Educating for Real: The Training of Professionals for Development Practice, ed. N. Hamdi, 149–162. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armitage, D., N. Doubleday, and F. Berkes. 2007. Adaptive Co-management: Collaboration, Learning, and Multi-Level Governance. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bengtsson, J., P. Angelston, and T. Elmquist. 2003. Reserves, Resilience and Dynamic Landscapes. Ambio 32: 389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boadi, K.O., and M. Kuitunen. 2003. Municipal Solid Waste Management in the Accra Metropolitan Area, Ghana. The Environmentalist 23 (3): 211–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borrini-Feyerabend, G., M. Pimbert, M.T. Farvar, A. Kothari, and Y. Renard. 2007. Sharing Power: A Global Guide to Collaborative Management of Natural Resources. Sterling: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  6. Bowonder, B. 1984. Multiple Perspective Analysis in Environmental Management. The Environmental Professional 6: 216–222.Google Scholar
  7. Briassoulis, H. 1989. Theoretical Orientations in Environmental Planning: An Inquiry into Alternative Approaches. Environmental Management l3 (4): 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buchy, M., and D. Race. 2001. The Twists and Turns of Community Participation in Natural Resource Management in Australia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 44 (3): 293–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caldwell, L.K. 1994. Disharmony in the Great Lakes Basin: Institutional Jurisdictions Frustrate the Ecosystem Approach. Alternatives 20 (3): 26.Google Scholar
  10. Canadian Standards Association. 1997. CAN/CSA-Q850-97: Risk Management: A Guideline for Decision-Makers. Etobicoke: CSA.Google Scholar
  11. Carlsson, L., and F. Berkes. 2005. Co-management: Concepts and Methodological Implications. Journal of Environmental Management 75 (1): 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castro, A.P., and E. Nielsen. 2001. Indigenous People and Co-management: Implications for Conflict Management. Environmental Science and Policy 4 (4–5): 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). 2000. The Ecosystem Approach. Available at Accessed 13 Oct 2008.
  14. Checkoway, B. 1994. Paul Davidoff and Advocacy Planning in Retrospect. Journal of the American Planning Association 60 (2): 139–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clavel, P. 1994. The Evolution of Advocacy Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 60 (2): 146–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Colchester, M. 2003. Salvaging Nature: Indigenous Peoples, Protected Areas and Biodiversity Conservation. Discussion Document of the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development with the World Rainforest Movement and World Wide Fund for Nature. Maldonado/Montevideo: World Rainforest Movement.Google Scholar
  17. Cooperrider, A. 1996. Science as a Model for Ecosystem Management – Panacea or Problem? Ecological Applications 6 (3): 736–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Covello, V.T. 1989. Informing People about Risks from Chemicals, Radiation, and Other Toxic Substances: A Review of Obstacles to Public Understanding and Effective Risk Communication. In Prospects and Problems in Risk Communication, ed. W. Leiss, 1–49. Waterloo: University of Waterloo Press.Google Scholar
  19. Davidhoff, P. 1965. Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 31 (4): 277–295.Google Scholar
  20. DeFur, P.L., and M. Kaszuba. 2000. Implementing the Precautionary Principle. The Science of the Total Environment 288: 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dobson, S. 1993. Why Different Regulatory Decisions When the Scientific Base Is Similar? – Environmental Risk Assessment. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 17: 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Essumang, D.K., G.K. Togoh, and L. Chokky. 2009. Pesticide Residues in the Water and Fish (Lagoon Tilapia) Samples from Lagoons in Ghana. Bulletin of the Chemical Society of Ethiopia 23 (1): 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fisher, R.J., and W.J. Jackson. 1998. Action Research for Collaborative Management of Protected Areas. In Workshop on Collaborative Management of Protected Areas in the Asian Region, Sauraha, Nepal. Gland: IUCN.Google Scholar
  24. Forget, G., and J. Lebel. 2001. An Ecosystem Approach to Human Health. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 7 (2 Suppl): S3–38.Google Scholar
  25. Friedmann, 1993. Towards a Non-Euclidian Mode of Planning. The Journal of the American Planning Association 59 (4): 482–485.Google Scholar
  26. Government of Canada. 2008. A Framework for the Application of Precaution in Science-Based Decision Making about Risk (No. ISBN 0-662-67486-3, Cat. No. CP22-70/2003).Google Scholar
  27. Guidotti, T.L., and P. Gosselin. 1999. The Canadian Guide to Health and the Environment. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press.Google Scholar
  28. Grayson, R.B., J.M. Doolan, and T. Blake. 1994. Application of AEAM (Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management) to Water Quality in the Latrobe River Catchment. Journal of Environmental Management 41: 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gunderson, L.H., C.S. Holling, and S.S. Light 1995. Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and Institutions. Edited by L.H. Gunderson, C.S. Holling, and S.S. Light. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hance, B.J., C. Chess, and P.M. Sandman. 1989. Setting a Context for Explaining Risk. Risk Analysis 9 (1): 113–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harremoes, P., D. Gee, M. MacGarvin, A. Stirling, J. Keys, and B. Wynne. 2002. Twelve Late Lessons. In The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century, ed. P. Harremoes, D. Gee, M. Macgarvin, A. Stirling, J. Keys, B. Wynne, and S. Guedes Vaz. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  32. Harwood, S. 2003. Environmental Justice on the Streets: Advocacy Planning as a Tool to Contest Environmental Racism. Journal of Planning Education and Research 23: 24–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Healey, P. 1996. The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and Its Implications or Special Strategy Formation. Planning and Design 23: 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. ———. 1997. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Heissenbuttel, A.E. 1996. Ecosystem Management – Principles for Practical Application. Ecological Applications 6 (3): 730–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hempel, L.C. 1996. Environmental Governance: The Global Challenge. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  37. Holling, C.S., ed. 1978. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  38. Innes, J., and D. Booher. 1999. Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems: A Framework for Evaluating Collaborative Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 65: 412–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jordan, A., and T. O’Riordan. 1999. The Precautionary Principle in Contemporary Environmental Policy and Politics. In Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle, ed. C. Raffensperger and J.A. Tickner, 15–35. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  40. Karikari, A.Y., K.A. Asante, and C.A. Biney. 2006. Water Quality Characteristics at the Estuary of Korle Lagoon in Ghana. West African Journal of Applied Ecology 10 (1): 1–12.Google Scholar
  41. Kriebel, D., J. Tickner, P. Epstein, J. Lemons, R. Levins, and E.L. Loechler. 2001. The Precautionary Principle in Environmental Science. Environmental Health Perspectives 109 (9): 871–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kavlock, R.J., G.P. Daston, C. DeRosa, P. Fenner-Crisp, L.E. Gray, S. Kaathari, G. Lucier, M. Luster, M.J. Mac, C. Maczka, R. Miller, J. Moore, R. Rolland, G. Scott, D.M. Sheehan, T. Sinks, and H.A. Tilson. 1996. Research Needs for the Risk Assessment of Health and Environmental Effects of Endocrine Disruptors: A Report of the U.S. EPA-Sponsored Workshop. Environmental Health Perspectives 104 (Suppl 4): 715–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lave, L.B. 1987. Health and Safety Risk Analyses: Information for Better Decisions. Science 236 (4799): 291–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leiss, W., and D. Krewski. 1989. Risk Communication: Theory and Practice. In Problems and Prospects in Risk Communication, ed. W. Leiss, 89–112. Waterloo: Institute for Risk Research.Google Scholar
  45. Lessard, G. 1998. An Adaptive Approach to Planning and Decision-Making. Landscape and Urban Planning 40: 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marttunen, M., and T. Vehanen. 2004. Toward Adaptive Management: The Impacts of Different Management Strategies on Fish Stocks and Fisheries in a Large Regulated Lake. Environmental Management 33 (6): 840–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Masaki, K. 1997. Power, Participation and Policy. The Emancipatory Evolution of the ‘Elite Controlled’ Policy Process. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  48. McColl, S. 2000. Environmental Health Risk Management: A Primer for Canadians. Waterloo: Network for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management.Google Scholar
  49. Mitchell, N. 1997. Resource and Environmental Management. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  50. Nyarko, E., and S.M. Evans. 1998. Heavy Metal Pollution in Marine Molluscs from the Coastal Waters of Accra, Ghana. Journal of the Ghana Science Association 1 (1): 105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Paine, R.T., M.J. Tegner, and E.A. Johnson. 1998. Compounded Perturbations Yield Ecosystem Surprises. Ecosystems 1: 535–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peattie, L. 1968. Reflections on Advocacy Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 34 (2): 80–88.Google Scholar
  53. Patton, C.V., and D.S. Sawicki. 1993. Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  54. Persoon, G., and D.M.E. van Est. 2003. Co-management of Natural Resources: The Concept and Aspects of Implementation. In Comanagement of Natural Resources in Asia: A Comparative Perspective, ed. G. Persoon, D.M.E. van Est, and P.E. Sajise, 1–24. Copenhagen: NIAS Press.Google Scholar
  55. Pinkerton, E. 1989. Co-operative Management of Local Fisheries: New Directions for Improved Management and Community Development. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  56. Plummer, R., and J. Fitzgibbon. 2004. Co-Management of Natural Resources: A Proposed Framework. Environmental Management 33 (6): 876–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Quijano, R.F. 2000. Risk Assessment in a Third-World Reality: An Endosulfan Case History. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 6 (4): 312–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Quijano, R.F. 2003. Elements of the Precautionary Principle. In Precaution, Environmental Science and Preventive Public Policy, ed. J.A. Tickner, 21–27. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  59. Rogers, M.D. 2001. Scientific and Technological Uncertainty, the Precautionary Principle, Scenarios and Risk Management. Journal of Risk Research 4 (1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Russell, M., and M. Gruber. 1987. Risk Assessment in Environmental Policy. Science 236 (4799): 280–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sager, T. 1994. Communicative Planning Theory. Aldershot: Avebury.Google Scholar
  62. Slovic, P. 1993. Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy. Risk Analysis 13 (6): 675–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. ———. 2001. The Risk Game. Journal of Hazardous Materials 86: 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Swilling, M. 1997. Introduction. In Governing Africa’s Cities, ed. M. Swilling, 1–12. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Szaro, R.C. 1998. The Ecosystem Approach: Science and Information Management: Issues, Gaps and Needs. Landscape and Urban Planning 40: 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Taylor, N. 1998. Urban Planning Theory Since 1945. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  67. Tchobanoglous, G., H. Theisen, and S. Vigil. 1993. Integrated Solid Waste Management: Engineering Principles and Management Issues. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  68. Timko, J., and T. Satterfield. 2008. Criteria and Indicators for Evaluating Socio-Cultural and Ecological Effectiveness in National Parks and Protected Areas. Natural Areas Journal 28 (3): 307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Waltner-Toews, D., J.J. Kay, and N.-M.E. Lister. 2005. The Ecosystem Approach: Complexity, Uncertainty and Managing for Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Weterings, R.A.P.M., and J.C.M. Van Eijndhoven. 1989. Informing the Public about Uncertain Risks. Risk Analysis 9 (4): 473–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wilson, R., and E.A. Crouch. 1987. Risk Assessment and Comparisons: An Introduction. Science 236 (4799): 267–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle. 1998. Wingspread Statement. Available at: Accessed 1 June 2017.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey Squire
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Social ScienceYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations