Stakeholder perceptions on causes and effects of public project failures in Ghana

Factors responsible for the failure of most development projects are multifaceted. This study focused on unearthing the causes and effects of public project failure from the perspective of project stakeholders. Sixty stakeholders working on different public projects in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana completed a questionnaire. This study found that major causes of project failure were related to corruption, payment delays, procurement processes, planning, monitoring, bureaucracy, communication, and supervision. The perceived effects of project failure included revenue loss, discouraged investment, and unemployment. Project failure increased the initial cost of projects, impacted economic growth, led to the provision of substandard infrastructure and service relocation. Other effects of project failure were loss of capacity for public projects and emotional stress experienced by project stakeholders. The government of Ghana should adopt strategies to overcome corruption, bureaucracy, and unnecessary political influence. Finally, the government should cooperate with relevant stakeholders to implement measures geared towards improving the current system for procurement, supervision, monitoring, planning, and management practices.

Introduction P rojects are vital to the success of every individual, organization and nation. Individuals, organizations, and nations often execute various projects to meet different set goals. Despite their importance, projects executed by individuals, organizations, and nations sometimes tend to fail. A project fails when it falls short of meeting the requirements and expectations of its stakeholders with respect to cost, quality, and time (Ahonen and Savolianen, 2010). Pinto and Kharbanda (1996), Murray (2000), Carlos (2014), Lawrence and Scanlan (2007), and Boakye (2015) attribute the causes of project failure to poor project leadership, insufficient resources, poor project design, and unrealistic time frames and budget estimates. The authors also identify poor risk analysis, political expediency, poor communication, and institutional weakness as notable causes. Again, cost deviation (Aziz, 2013), abandonment (Kumar and Best, 2006), schedule deviation (Fallahnejad 2013;Marzouk and El-Rasas, 2014;Sweis et al., 2008), stakeholders' dissatisfaction (Ahonen and Savolianen, 2010), and scope deviation (Liu et al., 2011) are very common factors.
In their efforts to strengthen the debates on project failure, Ahonen and Savolianen (2010) opine that a failed project is one that does not meet stakeholders' expectations. These expectations are related to time, quality, cost, and benefits to all stakeholders. Davis (2014) admits that these factors are perceived differently by project stakeholders due to different professional and educational backgrounds, which influence their assessment of project failure. This poses a challenge in measuring project failure since there is no generally accepted yardstick. A study of this nature, which assesses projects' failure from the perspective of different project stakeholders, provides insight into understanding the complexities of assessing and measuring project failure.
The perceptions of stakeholders about project failure have become the focus of this study for several reasons. For example, Farinde and Sillars (2012) argue that the complex nature of public projects makes it important to bring on board many professionals with different academic backgrounds and expertise. These professionals, who are part of the broader project stakeholders, have different expertise that needs to be gathered and invested in to avoid public project failure. This makes understanding stakeholders' perceptions of development projects an important factor when considering the success or failure of public projects. The traditional measurement of project failure using indicators such as time, quality, and budget (Aminu et al., 2014) is moving toward meeting project stakeholders' expectations. Furthermore, Roxanne et al. (2012) argued that projects perform best when all stakeholders have a similar understanding of end-users requirements and needs.
Projects require huge capital outlays, and this necessitates good project management practices to ensure value for money (Panayides et al., 2015). Good project management practice is important because it increases shareholders' value and conveys soft and hard benefits to several stakeholders (Ahsan and Gunawan, 2010;Ngacho and Das, 2014;Yang, 2014). However, existing literature suggests that projects are failing (Venugopal and Rao, 2011;KPMG, 2013), and this is a major concern to companies and governments as huge sums of money go down the drain (McManus and Wood-Harper, 2008). Nketia (2016) observes that a lack of attention to the perceptions of project stakeholders has been the major cause of the failure of most development projects in Ghana. Studies identify a link between the attention given to projects' stakeholders' expectations and the failure or success of projects. These studies conclude that greater attention to project stakeholders' expectations results in higher project success and vice versa (Legris and Collerette, 2006). For example, Olander and Landin (2005) observe that negative stakeholders' expectations of development projects lead to difficulty in the implementation of project design. Once project design faces implementation challenges, project delays set in, and the cost of production also increases, resulting in project failure. On the other hand, dissatisfaction among the project's stakeholders also results in project failure. This is because the traditional way of assessing projects has given way to a more comprehensive and collaborative assessment of cost, quality, and time through active stakeholder involvement. Without this collaboration and active participation, it will be difficult for a project to meet all the expectations of its stakeholders. Furthermore, academics and practitioners struggle to come to a common understanding of what project success and failure are (Jari and Bhangale, 2013), practically due to the complexities associated with the measurement of project failure among stakeholders and inconsistencies in the literature on the measurement of project failure.
The issue of project failure is a major issue confronting the Ghanaian economy (Bawumia, 2014). Several factors are perceived to be responsible for this occurrence. Notable among them are poor stakeholder engagement, high costs, and poor communication among stakeholders (Odoom et al., 2021), the inappropriate location of projects (Damian, 2012), and corruption. Addo (2015) and Bawumia (2014Bawumia ( , 2015 identify factors such as political leadership, planning, finance, human errors, and culture as being responsible for the failures of most public projects in Ghana. Indeed, the prevailing situation in the country has undermined donor support for development projects and services for the government of Ghana (World Bank, 2007). There is, therefore, an urgent need for some measures to deal with the situation. However, a full understanding of the causes of public project failure in Ghana and the effects the situation poses in the country is needed. This study aims to explore stakeholders' perceptions of the causes and effects of public project failure in Accra, Ghana. The choice of Accra as a study location is premised on the fact that it is the capital city where successive governments embark on several development projects, many of which are not completed by the government.
Overview of literature Defining project failure. Failure can be defined as a cost or schedule overrun or not meeting the customer's specification (Mar). According to this definition, a project that is delayed by one day in its completion time but otherwise meets its specifications is considered a failed project, the same as a project that overruns and never achieves good productivity. Mar (2012) states five criteria to define project failure: 1. Judgement call: A project's failure is determined by the project stakeholders. This is the common definition of project failure. 2. Delivery to plan: A project that fails to meet its budget, timeline, and quality expectations. However, the use of these criteria will tempt project managers to blot their contingency component and blot project time. 3. On-time delivery: Once the time to deliver the project is past, it is considered a failure. 4. Financial results: A project that costs more than the amount budgeted in the financial forecast. 5. Minimum return: In this case, a project does not meet the minimum return criteria, e.g., a minimum return on investment target.
Lyytinen and Hirschheim (1988) consider a failed project to fall under these four items: 1. Correspondence failure: the project design objectives (specifications) were not met. 2. Process failure: the project cannot be completed with the budgeted funds and/or schedule. 3. Interaction failure: users' satisfaction, attitude, and frequency of use of project deliverables do not correspond to usage levels. 4. Expectation failure: stakeholders' expectations, requirements, and values were not met.
With several definitions of project success and failure, it is practically impossible to have a one-size-fits-all definition of project failure. Pinto and Mantel (1990) carved out common features of failed projects to aid in the study of project failure. Their aspects include the perceived value of the project, the implementation process, and client satisfaction with the project. These become the benchmarks for determining project failure.
Causes of project failure. Project failure features include poorquality products, high costs, failure to meet project objectives, and schedule overruns (Avots, 1986). In addition, lack of project planning is the leading factor for project failure, and other factors are technological or design problems, or a lack of an adequate understanding of basic project management skills. These factors result in the violation of management principles like control and planning. Further, project failure is caused by a lack of communication goals and the incorrect application of basic managerial principles. Avots (1986) attributes the failure of a project to a lack of support from top management, an unqualified project manager, unplanned project termination, undefined tasks, and management techniques being misused. According to Stewart (2012), the most prominent project failure factors are scope creep, overallocation of resources, and poor communication. The rest are bad stakeholder management, unreliable estimates, no risk management, an unsupported project culture, and a lack of team planning sessions, monitoring, and control.
Environmental factors that cause project failure include the development of a superior technical alternative, unforeseen economic downturns, and governmental regulations (Pinto and Mantel, 1990). The following are also common contributing factors for project failure: • Political interference and infighting to make project decisions • Weak and inexperienced project manager Kharbanda and Pinto (1996) document the following eight causes of project failure: risk failures, quality failures, market and strategy failures, skill, knowledge, and competency failures, underestimation and analysis failures, engagement, teamwork, and communication failures, organizational and planning failures, and leadership and governance failures. These classes were used to develop the questionnaires for this study.

Causes of project failure in Ghana
Several factors account for the failure of construction projects in Ghana. Cultural factors were perceived to be one of the factors. Ghanaians have a poor approach to government work due to cultural orientation (Damoah and Akwei, 2017; Amponsah, 2010; Damoah et al., 2015;Damoah, 2015). This approach has affected the performance of projects, especially those that are sponsored by the government of Ghana. Partisan politics also influence the performance of projects in Ghana. The multi-party democratic nature of Ghana's political landscape has resulted in the infiltration of partisan politics into government projects. Citizens who are politically attached demand less accountability from political leaders on how projects' funds are spent and the actions that were taken on government projects. This is what the standardized political agency models argue for. In this case, officials of a political party manipulate the system to meet their personal gains (Besley, 2007). This is evidently present in studies that relate partisan politics to political party officials' accountability (Hellwig and Samuels, 2008;Kayser and Wlezien, 2011). Further evidence, as advanced by Asunka (2016), found that local government officials' compliance with rules and procedures is significantly lower when citizens have a strong commitment to partisan politics. This makes a commitment to rules and procedures weak in government-sponsored projects and ultimately affects the performance of those projects.
Institutional challenges and bottlenecks also affect the performance of projects. Amoako and Lyon (2014) observe that such bottlenecks within government institutions are due to culture and the political system. Government appointments are made on the basis of political affiliations and not on merit. This affects the leadership of project management (Damoah and Akwei, 2017), as ethical issues that need to be followed in project management are never considered. Damoah and Akwei (2017) consider the low knowledge of project management in Ghana as a key factor because of the lack of project management in Ghana's educational curriculum. They also claim that until 2006, there were no project management courses in Ghana's tertiary education. This will affect the availability of qualified project managers to handle projects.
Furthermore, overreliance on external sources of funding for project investment makes available resources to execute projects a challenge. Any delay from external funding sources affects projects' implementation and is likely to result in a failed project. Corruption also presents itself as a contributor to project failure. Transparency International indicates the high prevalence of corruption in Ghana in 2008 and 2015, supporting Bawumia's (2015) and Addo's (2015) claims.
In an investigation of a project to construct an underground water project in Ghana, Frimpong et al. (2003) identified 26 factors as the cause of project failure, which was further categorized into four main problems: material supply, economic conditions, natural conditions, and project financing. Similarly, Fugar and Agyakwah-Baah (2010), identified 32 factors that were classified under contractual relations, material, manpower, environmental changes, equipment financing, government action, scheduling and controlling skills, and contractual relations. In 2015, Amoatey et al. studied project delays in the construction industry and identified the following causes of project failures: payment delays to contractors and suppliers, inflation, material price increases, lack of adequate funds from the client (sponsor), variations in orders and poor financial markets.
The role of impact assessments An impact assessment serves to offer information on the anticipated impacts of development projects to stakeholders who decide whether the project should be carried out or not. Its objective is to evaluate the potential social, health, and environmental repercussions of a proposed project. This fully informs project stakeholders about the potential consequences of their actions before they take them, making them more accountable.
This promotes informed and transparent decision-making while attempting to avoid project failure. This particular project requires an impact assessment since it dealt with public projects that made use of public resources and were meant to be used by the general public.
An impact assessment precedes the final project implementation and brings together the views of all project stakeholders on the project deliverables (scope). These project deliverables become the basis for determining successful and failed projects. Thus, proper stakeholder participation, which is key to the proper definition of project scope, should be encouraged to avoid project failure. The reason is that project failures are determined by the deliverables outlined in the project scope document. The study identified key project deliverable challenges such as the timely release of project funds, the wrong project specification, and a change in the scope of the project as the causes of project failure, signalling the need for an in-depth impact assessment. It is therefore advised that detailed impact assessments should be carried out with the full participation of all project stakeholders to agree on common deliverables for development projects to avoid project failure.

Empirical literature
Several studies have been conducted to better understand the issue of project failure and stakeholders' perceptions of project failure. For example, Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006) identified 73 causes of project delays and estimated time overruns in Saudi Arabia. Odeh and Battaineh (2002) came up with 28 causes of construction project delays, including unrealistic contract duration, improper planning, owner interference, slow decisionmaking, inadequate contractor experience, financing and payments, labour productivity, subcontractors, and contractor management shortages in materials. The most important factor was client-related issues, followed by contractors and consultants. Other factors are related to material, labour and equipment, contracts, contractual relations, and external force-related factors. Sweis et al. (2008) found that shortage of manpower, poor planning and scheduling of the projects by the contractors, and financial difficulties by the contractors were the causes of project failures. Similarly, Alkharashi and Skimore (2009) attributed the delays to a lack of qualified and experienced personnel. Faridi and El-Sayegh (2005) identified the causes of project delays, including shortage of skilled manpower, lack of communication, slow decision-making on the owner's side, late project planning, contractors' and consultants' conflict, and coordination among the contractor-subcontractor-consultant-owner.
Moreover, Sambasivan and Soon (2007) classified 28 causes of project delays into eight categories, namely: client-related, contract relationship-related, consultant-related, material-related, external forces, contract-related, contractor-related, and labour and equipment-related. Furthermore, delays in project identification and start-up, inappropriate time phasing in the activities of the project, and delays in the implementation of the project have been identified in the literature (Efenudu, 2010).

Contributions to existing studies
This section of the study reviewed the contributions of this study to the following existing studies relevant to this study. These studies are Damoah and Kumi (2017), Damoah and Akwei (2017), Damoah (2015), and Damoah et al. (2015). Damoah and Kumi's (2017) study on the topic "causes of government construction failure in an emerging economy: evidence from Ghana," Damoah (2015), and Damoah et al. (2015) are similar to this particular study. Damoah et al. (2015) is the conference presentation of Damoah (2015), which is the Ph.D. thesis from which the conference paper (Damoah et al., 2015) was extracted. Thus, the two papers are identical in analysis and presentation. In this case, these two papers will be treated as one since they share the same points.
The works of Damoah (2015) and Damoah et al. (2015) are similar to this study in that government projects were the focus of these studies. This study is different from that of Damoah and Kumi (2017) because this study focused on all government projects, while Damoah and Kumi's (2017) studies focused on construction projects only. On the other hand, Damoah and Kumi (2017) and Damoah (2015) studies are older than 5 years and require an update to verify the validity of the findings. Besides, this study introduces the effects of government project failures on stakeholders, which were not addressed in Damoah and Kumi's (2017) study.
To what extent factors under each category (leadership, administration/management, resources, and external factors) contribute to project failure and which ones are the relevant ones that need to be addressed makes this study different from the existing studies. Furthermore, this is the identified knowledge gap that this study fills. In the cases of Damoah (2015) and Damoah and Kumi (2017), this study included other project stakeholders, such as project suppliers and clients. The final results were similar to those of Damoah (2015), implying fair agreement on the causes of project failure among the project stakeholders.
In another paper by Damoah and Akwei (2017) on the topic "government project failure in Ghana: a multidimensional approach," the authors were interested in analysing project failure from the perspectives of national development, the iron triangle, contributions to the sector where the project is implemented, and benefit to stakeholders. This current study does the same analysis of project failure within the framework of leadership skills, administrative/management skills, resources, and the external environment. Thus, this current study analyses project failure from both internal (leadership, management/administration, resources) and external (external factors) perspectives. Further, the current study adds to existing knowledge on the need to consider the perspectives of project stakeholders in analysing project failure. Therefore, this study provides the opportunity for the research community as well as practitioners of project management to understand project failure from the perspective of project stakeholders.

Methods
Study design. This study used a survey to assess the causes and effects of public project failure (Bryman, 2012;Baiden, 2006). A list of registered practitioners who have taken part in public projects within the past 2 years in the Greater Accra region of Ghana was compiled, and a selection was made from the compiled list. This was carefully done using the records of the various local government offices in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana. Using a purposive sampling technique, 63 practitioners were identified and recruited, including contractors and subcontractors (n = 20), consultants (n = 30), suppliers (n = 7), and clients (n = 6). However, a total of three practitioners gave no response, making 60 the final number of practitioners participating in this study.
Sampling techniques. Based on the purpose of this study, the diverse nature of the study population, and the technicalities involved in the study, a purposive sampling technique and a census survey were employed. Purposive sampling is a type of sampling technique in which the researcher selects the sample on the basis of his own judgements about which population will be the most representative. The underlying assumption behind the ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01497-7 use of this technique is that with good judgement and an appropriate strategy, the researcher could handpick the cases to be included in the sample and thus develop sample units that are relevant and satisfactory for the study (Odoom et al., 2015).

Data collection instrument.
A set of structured questionnaires was used for data collection. The first section of the questionnaire collected background information on the respondents, while the rest of the chapters delved into the specific issues based on the research aim. The questionnaire consists of closed-ended items. Factors that contribute to project failure are assessed using a fivepoint Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5, where 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree. Informed consent was obtained from all participants and ethical approval was obtained from the ethics committee of the institution.
Data analysis. The responses collected from the field were first screened and cleansed from possible errors. The data collected was further coded and entered into the Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS) and Microsoft Excel for processing and analysis. Descriptive statistics were presented, including the Relative Importance Index (RII) and means. RII helps establish the significance levels of the factors of project failure. The weightings from the RII analysis provided a summation of respondents' average view on a particular variable.
Ethical considerations. The study was conducted based on ethically sound principles and guidelines. First, informed consent was obtained from respondents after explaining the purpose of the study to them. Secondly, ethical clearance was obtained from the Ghana Communication Technology University (formerly known as the Ghana Technology University College). Lastly, issues of privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity were given due consideration because of the relatively sensitive nature of the topic, especially in a developing country like Ghana.

Results and discussion
The background information of the respondents (Table 1) indicates that males account for 82% of the respondents. The age group of 31-40 years was the most dominant, accounting for 68% of the respondents. The majority of respondents attain a bachelor's degree (62%), followed by a master's degree (25%). In terms of work experience, half of the respondents had worked between 6 and 10 years, while most of the respondents were subordinates (40%) and supervisors (35%).
Causes of public project failure: leadership, administration, resources, and external forces. The causes of project failure were categorized into four main categories, including leadership, administration/management, resources, and external forces ( Table 2). Leadership has 10 items on the scale of measurement, which assess factors like changes in project scope, project leadership changes, and lack of continuity. The administration/ management practice has 15 items that capture project failure factors such as payment delays and procurement of project equipment issues. Resources have three items, including project funding, capacity, and labour. Environmental factors such as natural disasters, as well as price fluctuations and media influence, are examples of external forces.
In this case, this study identified resources as the top factor causing project failure, followed by administrative/management issues, then leadership, and lastly, external factors. This is slightly different from what Damoah and Kumi (2017) observed in their study. For them, leadership was the leading factor, followed by administrative and management issues, then resources, and finally external factors.
The leading causes of project failure from a leadership point of view are presented in Table 3. In order of importance, the causes of public project failure from leadership were: late release of funds (mean = 4.05), lack of continuity (mean = 4.02), political interference (mean = 4.00), political changes (mean = 3.67), the definition of specifications (mean = 3.65), and project leadership changes (mean = 3.50). The findings show that delay in the release of project funds is an important factor in project failure, as it affects the agreed-upon time for the completion of the project. Further, the delay in the release of project funds could be compounded by the influence of inflation that affects the initial cost estimate made for the project and thus the likelihood of cost escalation.
In a similar study, Damoah (2015) observes the following causes of project failure from a leadership point of view, they are political interference (mean = 3.71), changes in government (mean = 3.70), lack of continuity (mean = 3.57) and release of funds (mean = 3.55). The rest are changes in project leadership (mean = 3.54) and, lastly, commitment to the project (mean = 3.50). When comparing Damoah's findings to this study, the prominent factors which occupied the top 6 factors contributing to the causes of failure from the leadership  dimension from both studies were lack of continuity, changes in government, and changes in project leadership. Likewise, a similar study by Damoah and Kumi (2017) proves that changes in government are one of the contributing factors to project failure, as has been identified in this study. Table 4 shows the causes of project failure based on administration and management practices. Corruption, bureaucracy, payment delays, communication, and procurement processes were identified by the respondents as the major causes of project failure. The respondents also identified other relevant factors, including supervision, project planning, project monitoring, project management techniques, management practices, the formation of a project team, regulation, and the selection of project managers.
An analytic view of the causes of project failure identified in this study reveals that corruption is the major cause. Corruption raises the initial cost of a project, and bureaucracy causes the delay of the project and thus an increase in cost. Payment delays contribute to delays in project time. Communication causes both time delays and cost increases, whereas procurement processes are a major contributor to project time delays and cost increases. Therefore, all these factors cause projects to fail, using time and cost as the definition of project failure. Comparing these findings with previous studies (Damoah, 2015), it was found that corruption, payment delays, poor procurement processes, complex project planning, and poor monitoring were the top 5 factors causing project failure in the country. The results further concur with those of Damoah and Kumi (2017), who identified poor planning, poor monitoring and evaluation, procurement challenges, poor supervision, bureaucracy, and payment delays as the main causes of government project failure in Ghana. Table 5 shows that project funding, the capacity of the team, and labour were identified as the major causes of project failure. Funding is very likely to affect project completion time and cost of completion, a very important variable when dealing with project failure, according to the definition of project failure. When comparing the findings with those of Damoah (2015), project funding was the single factor that was identified in both   studies. This underscores the importance of project funding as a component of resources, supporting the findings in Bekr's (2015) study. The findings of this study strengthen those of previous studies. For example, a similar study by Damoah and Kumi (2017) identified factors such as the late release of funds and a lack of human resources (capacity) as the causes of government project failure in Ghana. The last component of project failure is the external environment surrounding the project, though this was identified as the least likely to contribute to project failure by the respondents. Table 6 shows that natural disasters and fluctuations in prices were the two main causes of project failure. In contrast, pressure from the media and other political activities was considered relatively neutral by the respondents. Natural disasters can cause projects to be delayed and cause the estimated project time to escalate. Price fluctuations as a result of high inflation in Ghana are also a factor that causes estimated project costs to escalate. When comparing the findings to those of Damoah (2015), price fluctuations were identified as the cause of project failure in both studies. Similar to this study, Damoah and Kumi (2017) also identified pressure groups such as the media as the major cause of government project failure in their study.
Perceived effects of public project failure are shown in Table 7. Revenue loss to project stakeholders discourages investment, and unemployment was the leading perceived effect of project failure. Project failure causes the initial cost of projects to escalate, affects economic growth, results in the provision of sub-standard infrastructure, and results in the relocation of services, as unsatisfied stakeholders tend to relocate their services for other work. The relocation of unsatisfied stakeholders causes a loss of capacity for the project and dissatisfaction among the project stakeholders is also a major cause of emotional stress. Other effects are the collapse of local businesses, reduced property values, loss of property, accidents and deaths, and strict donor regulation. The value of these findings finds expression in the work of Damoah's (2015) and Bekr (2015) who observed similar perceived effects of public project failure.

Conclusions and policy recommendations
This study provides insight into public project failures in Ghana. Using relevant data from key stakeholders in public projects in Ghana, including project contractors and subcontractors, project suppliers, and project clients, this research offers important findings to guide policy decisions. It is observed in this study that 93% of the respondents are between 20 and 40 years old and mostly male (82%). Also, about 62% of them are bachelor's degree holders, while 25% are master's degree holders. The study also reveals that 93% of the respondents have work experience ranging from 1 to 15 years. This study has identified factors in relation to resources, administrative/management, leadership, and external (environmental) forces as critical to project success. Specifically, the study indicates that public project failure from administrative/ management components manifests in corruption, payment delays, supervision, procurement processes, project planning, and project monitoring. Furthermore, ineffective communication, bureaucracy, a lack of adequate management practices, the formation of the project team, government regulations, the definition of the project task, and finally the involvement of project users are the main administrative and management causes of project failure.
In the context of leadership, public project failure manifests in challenges associated with changes in government, political interference, the late release of funds, and the abandonment of projects by successive governments. Other prominent causes are changes in project leadership, poor definition of project specifications, improper feasibility studies, constant changes in project scope, low commitment levels to the project, and inadequately qualified project managers. Project failure is also due to delays in project funding, price fluctuations, and natural disasters.  This study also identifies the perceived effects of public project failure, including revenue loss to project stakeholders, discouragement of investment, unemployment, cost escalation of the initial project cost, sub-standard infrastructure, loss of capacity, emotional stress to stakeholders, and reduced property values. Other perceived effects identified by the stakeholders are impediments to economic growth, relocation of services, the collapse of local businesses that are meant to benefit from such projects, loss of property, and strict donor regulations for further project funding.
On the basis of the findings, it is recommended that public project stakeholders adopt strategies that are strong enough to prevent corruption and bureaucracy. Strategies to reduce delays in project payment, improve communication, and develop procurement strategies that focus more on fast and swift administration processes should be discussed. Project supervision, monitoring, and evaluation, procurement processes, project planning, and project management skills should all be top priorities for public project stakeholders.
It is recommended that all avenues that give rise to all forms of political manipulation and interference in public projects be avoided, including problems related to changes in government. With effective and timely monitoring and evaluation systems in place, public project stakeholders will foresee the possibility and likelihood of procurement-related challenges, a lack of continuity, and funding challenges, as identified in this study. Lastly, the government of Ghana should reduce all forms of political influence and control over public projects in Ghana. The reason is that the effects of these controls and changes in government on public projects come at a huge cost to the public project stakeholders and the citizens.
Since corruption constitutes a critical factor in public project failure, it is suggested that an intervention study with an attempt to reduce corruption is warranted. Further studies that seek to unearth the influence of political manipulations and changes in governments as causes of project failure are needed. These further studies will help raise policy-related debates and improve the interface between public policies and project management in Ghana.

Data availability
Data are available from the first author upon reasonable request. Received: 26 May 2022;Accepted: 22 December 2022;