Ghana’s transition to a circular economy (CE) depends on legal rules that decide when waste becomes a resource, who is responsible for products at end of life, and which institutions may authorise material recovery. This study examines these conditions in three industrial supply chains (electronic waste, construction and packaging) using a qualitative multiple-case design informed by the multi-level perspective on sociotechnical transitions. We analysed legislation, policy documents, legal commentary and the peer-reviewed and grey literature of 2015 to 2026, coding the rules of the waste regime against three legal gateways (material status, producer responsibility and institutional authority) and the legal inclusion of informal recovery actors. The Environmental Protection Act, 2025 (Act 1124) repealed the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1994 (Act 490) and the Hazardous and Electronic Waste Control and Management Act, 2016 (Act 917) and mandated the new Environmental Protection Authority to promote extended producer responsibility (EPR) and the CE. Even so, the sources reviewed point to four persistent barriers: no operational route for materials to cease being waste; EPR confined to electronic waste while plastics legislation remains in draft; fragmented mandates across environment, trade, sanitation, construction and procurement institutions; and the exclusion of informal actors from formal supply chains. Together they create regulatory uncertainty that raises the risk of circular investment. We propose a sequenced reform agenda built on regulations under Act 1124, a framework EPR law, statutory coordination, circular public procurement and formalisation pathways. The findings are analytical, not statistical, and should be tested through stakeholder research.