Guyana’s Liquid Gold Rush
Guyana’s oil reserves have turned it into one of the world’s fastest growing economies, but what are the implications for investors in its other sectors?
In recent years, the discovery and exploitation of large oil reserves in Guyana has transformed the nation into the world’s newest petrostate, with explosive growth rates to boot – its GDP grew by 43.6% in 2024. Interest in the country’s reserves has further evolved following the US intervention in Venezuela, as Guyanese crude is easier to process – while the political environmental is considerably more predictable than in Venezuela.
While the Guyanese oil & gas industry has naturally captured vast attention from investors and the media, the country will also require major investments in other sectors to support its growth, including in hospitality, healthcare, infrastructure, and agriculture. Despite the attractive prospects, corruption and nepotism should be significant considerations due to the influx of funds that have flowed into a small and close-knit business and government community. With the regulatory landscape of oil & gas well established, what risks and opportunities remain for investors and companies interested in supporting the growth of these adjacent sectors?
Investment Chain Reaction
Historically, Guyana has faced significant underdevelopment, with particularly stark disparities in critical areas such as infrastructure and healthcare: according to the World Economic Forum’s 2019 Global Competitiveness Index, Guyana ranked 134 out of 141 countries for available infrastructure. From this low base, sectors such as healthcare, hospitality, and real estate have grown rapidly in tandem with foreign investment. Notably, in August 2025, Guyanese President Ali Irfaan urged local investors to form consortia as he announced that the government would begin seeking international partners to collaborate with Guyanese businesses to further its hospitality and tourism strategies. The government is seeking to raise its profile as a destination for both leisure and business, such as through the planned establishment of all-inclusive resorts across the country.
The Political Context
In September 2025, Ali won re-election, representing the center-left People's Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), earning a second five-year term and a new majority in Guyana’s unicameral legislature. His party’s political platform remains centered on positioning the country as a stable, investor-friendly nation, and channeling the country’s newfound oil revenue into steady economic development, bolstered social programs, and infrastructure projects.
Despite his success, opposition groups have alleged that Ali and the PPP/C engage in nepotism, and that the country’s newfound oil money disproportionately benefits elites with ties to the party. This is an accusation complicated by ethnic tensions in Guyana: PPP/C supporters are predominantly Indo-Guyanese, while opposition parties are composed of Afro-Guyanese populations.
Guyana experiences political corruption that favors businesses with ties to prominent power brokers in government. A key node between politics and business is Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo, who has held senior roles in federal government since the 1990s and therefore has become a focal point for allegations of cronyism. In July 2024, Jagdeo purportedly acknowledged in a public meeting that most government contracts were going to a small set of families and friends, sparking backlash from opposition groups that perceived it as a direct admission of corruption within the PPP/C. Other large scale corruption issues have come out under the PPP/C: in 2024, the US sanctioned two members of Guyana’s wealthy Mohamed family and several of their companies, as well as PPP/C politician Mae Thomas. Businessman Nazar Mohamed and his son Azruddin were subsequently charged by the US in a USD 50 million tax evasion and money laundering scheme, as part of which they bribed Thomas to facilitate their gold smuggling enterprise.
The Regulatory Environment
These accusations have also come in the context of government regulation that seeks to prioritize and benefit Guyanese in the provision of services to the oil and gas industry. In December 2021, the government passed the Local Content Act (LCA), mandating priority procurement for Guyanese companies that provide services to the oil and gas industry, including areas such as office rental, accountancy, insurance, and food supply. The LCA currently outlines 40 different service areas that oil and gas companies and their subcontractors must procure from Guyanese companies. The government is planning to expand this requirement to new sectors such as medical services in 2026.
While the implementation and oversight of the LCA has broadly functioned well, certain groups have alleged that the Guyanese government uses it to favor certain business groups over others, including preferential treatment for companies owned by Indo-Guyanese over those owned by its Afro-Guyanese population.
Implications for Investors
Investors and companies active in Guyana are therefore walking a tightrope. How can they ensure compliance with the LCA by working with Guyanese providers, while staying true to their anti-corruption commitments by working with counterparties who do not improperly use political connections for personal gain? This will be a key consideration for those interested in Guyana going forward, particularly companies outside of the oil & gas industry who do not have significant operational experience in the country.
Part of the answer to this question lies in conducting thorough due diligence on local counterparties. This will help to not only understand their local reputation and track record (particularly with regard to political connections and corruption), but also to provide nuance and sector-wide context on business practices in Guyana. After all, a degree of political-business overlap is to be expected in a smaller country like Guyana. Here, then, the key will be to understand how local counterparties have grown their businesses, and how they might have made use of their political ties – either legitimately or illegitimately.
