Poverty Reduction in Rural Eastern Uganda: Case study of the National Agricultural Advisory Services
(NAADS)
Samuel Bernard Ariong
BA Social Sciences (Hons) (Makerere University Kampala), MA Public
Administration and Management (Makerere University Kampala)
Thesis submitted for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy (Sociology and Anthropology) at the University of
Newcastle, Australia
May 2018 STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
The thesis contains no material which has been accepted, or is being examined, for the
award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution and,
to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or
written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. I give
consent to thefinal version of my thesis being made available worldwide when deposited
in the University's Digital Repository, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act
1968 and any approved embargo.
Signature:
Samuel Bernard Ariong
Date: 22 May 2018
i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I’m extremely grateful to Professor Mel Gray, my principal supervisor, for her support and
guidance throughout my candidature. She read and re-read the various versions of the
dissertation from the proposal stage to thesis submission and encouraged me to work hard.
Many thanks Professor, to you I owe a lot. I would also like to thank my former co-supervisors,
Dr Kate Davies, for her valuable feedback, and Dr Jennifer Waterhouse for introducing me to the theory of policy analysis. Special thanks go to Dr Frank Agbola, who introduced me to development economics, which sparked my interest in this PhD. Thanks, too, to Dr Allyson
Holbrook for introducing me to advanced research methodologies and Dr Rosalind Smith for her guidance on the confirmation and PhD process. This research would not have been possible without the scholarship from the University of Newcastle and the financial support from the
Faculty of Education and Arts and School of Humanities and Social Science. I would like to thank the academic and non-academic staff members, who assisted me along the way, and my fellow PhD students, who accompanied me on my PhD journey, including Jacob Mugumbate,
Raj Kumar Yadav, Justin Nicholas, Bill Robertson, Debbie Amas, Lucy Holland, Hassan Idi,
Japhace Poncian, Rob Elliot, Meredian Alam, Patrick Kakwezi, and many others, for their support and inspiration throughout my candidature.
I am extremely indebted to the 15 model farmers, who provided valuable information for this study. My hope is that someday I will reciprocate for your time and generosity. Your willingness to share your experiences and perspectives, and sense of humour and patience, ensured that the data collection process went successfully. Thanks are also due to the staff at the NAADS secretariat in Uganda, the National Planning Authority of Uganda, Makerere
University Library, the Economic Policy Research Centre, Uganda, and the local government district authorities of Kumi, Ngora, and Soroti for supporting this study.
ii Thank you, too, to my colleagues from church, who nourished me with the word of
God: Pastor Robert Kayanja of Rubaga Miracle Centre Kampala, Bridget and Warwick Allen,
Andrew Kiwi, and Isaac Shumack of the Hunter Bible Church Newcastle. I would also want to thank my primary and high school teachers, particularly Mr Eriaku Thomas, for his belief ‘that my academic determination would take me wherever I wanted to go’, and Mr Okipi Okai, who encouraged me to put poverty challenges aside and strive to be the best I could be.
Lastly, thanks to my loved ones ‒ Angella, Placid, Bradline, Ashline, Ashvine, Alice,
Sylvia, Lilian, Tracy (RIP), Robert, Moritz, Ambrose, Ivan, Dick, Aunt Ajete (RIP), Grandma
Asio (RIP), and Papa Ariong ‒ for staying in touch with me throughout my academic journey abroad. To my parents, John Stephen Okello and Anna Grace Akurut (RIP), I am extremely grateful that you chose to take me to school, despite the eight-kilometre walk from the early age of six years. Thanks for teaching me to work hard and stand on my own. I am humbled by your efforts and determination. May the Almighty God, the creator of Heaven and Earth, bless you. By God’s Grace, I have reached the end of my highly rewarding PhD journey.
Finally, the views expressed in this dissertation are entirely my own and do not, in any way, represent those of the institution to which I’m affiliated. I take full responsibility for any errors made in this dissertation.
iii PUBLICATIONS AND CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS FROM THIS
RESEARCH
Ariong S.B., Gray, M., & Davies, K. (2016). Impact of international development aid policy
on local development: Findings from the National Agricultural Advisory Services
program in Uganda. Paper presented at the Australasia Aid Conference (9-10 Feb
2016), Australia National University, Canberra.
Ariong, S.B., Gray, M., & Davies, K. (2017). Sociocultural context and the success of
international development aid on National Agricultural Advisory Services program in
eastern Uganda. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 31(2), 165-195.
Gray, M., & Ariong, S. B. (2017). Discourses shaping development, foreign aid, and
poverty reduction policies in Africa: Implications for social work. In M. Gray (Ed.),
The handbook of social work and social development in Africa (pp. 15-25). London:
Routledge.
iv CONTENTS
Statement of originality ...... i
Acknowledgements ...... ii
Publications and conference presentations from this research ...... iv
Contents ...... v
List of Tables ...... xiii
Abstract ...... xiv
Abbreviations ...... xvi
Chapter 1 ...... 1
Introduction to the study ...... 1 Background to the study ...... 2 Rationale for the study ...... 3 Agriculture and poverty reduction ...... 6 Theory informing the study ...... 7 Methodology ...... 9 Scope and significance of the study ...... 11 Key concepts ...... 13 Structure of the thesis...... 23 Conclusion ...... 26
Chapter 2 ...... 27
Theories on development, foreign aid, and poverty alleviation ...... 27 Theory informing the study ...... 29 Modernisation theory ...... 29 Structuralist economic theory ...... 31 Dependency theory ...... 32 Market fundamentalism ...... 34 Institutional theory ...... 35 Core focus of the discourse on poverty alleviation ...... 38 Poverty and development ...... 38
v Role of aid and development in poverty alleviation ...... 43 Development discourses shaping foreign aid and poverty reduction policies ...... 44 Modernisation (1954-1979) ...... 44 Marshall Plan (1948) ...... 46 Pearson Commission Report and social redistribution decade (1970s) ...... 49 Structural adjustment era ...... 51 Brandt Commission Report (1980) ...... 51 Washington Consensus (1980–1997) ...... 52 Post-Washington Consensus ...... 53 Comprehensive Development Framework ...... 54 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (2000-2015) ...... 57 Monterrey Consensus (2002) ...... 62 Paris Declaration (2005) ...... 63 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) ...... 65 Conclusion ...... 72
Chapter 3 ...... 73
Uganda’s national priorities on poverty reduction ...... 73 Factors shaping Uganda’s national policy priorities ...... 76 Uganda’s modernisation program (1960s) ...... 77 Social redistribution and Africanisation (1970s) ...... 80 Structural adjustment: Reform decade (1980s) ...... 81 Poverty reduction (1990s) ...... 84 Uganda’s poverty reduction policies ...... 84 Program for Alleviation of Poverty and the Social Costs of Adjustment (PAPSCA).85 Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) ...... 86 Participatory Poverty Assessments (1998-2004) ...... 87 Poverty Eradication Action Plans (PEAP) (1997-2008) ...... 90 Poverty Status Reports ...... 95 National Development Plans ...... 98 Progress in poverty reduction...... 103 Poverty in Eastern Uganda ...... 109 Communities included in the study ...... 111 Conclusion ...... 112
vi
Chapter 4 ...... 114
Agricultural development in Uganda and the NAADS framework ...... 114 Development discourse placing agriculture at the centre of economic growth ...... 115 Phases of agricultural development ...... 119 Post-independence: Modernising agriculture (1962-1985) ...... 119 Reform: Structural adjustment (1986-1994) ...... 121 Post-reform (1995-1999) ...... 122 Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA) ...... 123 Modernisation and commercialisation accelerated (2000-2015) ...... 126 Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP) ...... 127 Agriculture Technology and Agribusiness Advisory Services (ATAAS) ...... 128 National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO) ...... 130 Renewed focus on agricultural development (2016-2020) ...... 132 Conclusion ...... 135
Chapter 5 ...... 136
Agricultural Extension in Uganda and National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) Framework ...... 136 Evolution of agricultural extension services ...... 136 NAADS ...... 143 Situating NAADS in neoliberal economic principles ...... 145 NAADS’ core objectives ...... 148 Local government structure ...... 150 NAADS’ structure...... 153 Key components of NAADS’ intervention ...... 160 Changes in the implementation of NAADS ...... 167 Progress in NAADS’ implementation ...... 171 Conclusion ...... 176
Chapter 6 ...... 178
Methodology ...... 178 Research process ...... 178 Statement of the problem ...... 179 Aims of the study ...... 179
vii
Research questions ...... 180 Research design ...... 181 Qualitative approach ...... 181 Literature review ...... 183 Case study approach ...... 185 Recruitment of participants ...... 186 Target group ...... 186 Sampling and recruitment ...... 188 Demographic characteristics of the participants ...... 191 Data collection ...... 193 In-depth interviews ...... 193 Documentary analysis ...... 194 Data analysis ...... 195 Ethical considerations ...... 196 Voluntary participation and informed consent ...... 198 Privacy, confidentiality, and risk minimisation ...... 199 Data storage ...... 199 Research integrity ...... 200 Limitations of the study ...... 202 Conclusion ...... 204
Chapter 7 ...... 205
Findings relating to NAADS ...... 205 Macrolevel factors shaping NAADS’ implementation ...... 207 Social networks and local partnerships ...... 207 Gender issues ...... 209 Agricultural technology ...... 211 Information and communication ...... 212 Access to microfinance ...... 214 Benefitting from allied mezzolevel structures ...... 216 Agricultural research and development ...... 216 Demonstration and technology development sites (TDS) ...... 217 Agricultural markets ...... 218 Local road network ...... 220
viii
Water and irrigation facilities ...... 221 Understanding the machinations of NAADS ...... 222 Rites of passage...... 222 Asset ownership ...... 223 Participation in NAADS’ structures and processes ...... 227 Focus on education and training ...... 233 Farmer Institutional Development ...... 233 Experimentation and non-formal training ...... 235 Farmers’ field schools ...... 236 Enterprise selection and diversification ...... 237 Post-harvest handling and storage facilities ...... 242 Family involvement at the household or microlevel ...... 243 Conclusion ...... 244
Chapter 8 ...... 246
Factors contributing to participants’ success ...... 246 Sociocultural factors ...... 246 Reduction of alcohol consumption ...... 247 Religion ...... 248 Faith-based and other local and international NGOs ...... 249 Traditional rural leadership institutions ...... 250 Monogamous family advantage ...... 251 Use of local languages ...... 253 Economic factors shaping the success of NAADS ...... 254 Land ...... 255 Livestock ...... 257 Storage facilities and post-harvest handling ...... 258 Family labour and community involvement ...... 259 Political factors ...... 260 Local governance ...... 261 Accountability ...... 262 Political stability ...... 264 Inclusion ...... 264 Physical environmental and geographical factors...... 265
ix
Climate change...... 265 Land management ...... 270 Pest control...... 274 Conclusion ...... 275
Chapter 9 ...... 276
Discussion ...... 276 Macrolevel ...... 278 Social networks and local partnerships ...... 278 Gender issues: Inclusion and equality of women ...... 279 Agricultural technology ...... 280 Information and communication ...... 280 Access to microfinance ...... 281 Mezzolevel ...... 283 Agricultural research and development ...... 283 Demonstration and technology development sites (TDS) ...... 283 Agricultural markets ...... 284 Infrastructure development ...... 284 Microlevel ...... 285 Understanding the machinations of NAADS ...... 285 Sociocultural factors ...... 289 Alcohol consumption and influence of Christian values ...... 289 Use of local languages for naming new technologies ...... 291 Engagement in local structures ...... 292 Engagement with NGOs and FBOs ...... 292 Traditional institutions ...... 294 Extended family network ...... 294 Family involvement ...... 295 Education and training ...... 296 Involvement in NAADS ...... 297 Economic factors ...... 299 Asset ownership ...... 299 Diversification...... 301 Political factors ...... 302
x
Local governance and accountability structures ...... 302 Political stability ...... 304 Inclusion and equity ...... 304 Physical factors and environmental ...... 305 Climate change...... 305 Soil and land management ...... 305 Pest control...... 307 Conclusion ...... 308
Chapter 10 ...... 309
Conclusions and recommendations ...... 309 Conclusions ...... 311 1. External influences affected policy construction and implementation ...... 311 2. Non-economic considerations were vitally important to NAADS’ success ...... 311 3. NAADS changed over the course of implementation ...... 312 3.1 Though privatised at the outset, the government reclaimed extension ...... 313 3.2 NAADS floundered due to the local governments’ lack of capacity to deliver advisory services ...... 315 4. NAADS’ key objectives related to productive agriculture ...... 316 5. NAADS’ focus was local farmers in local contexts ...... 318 6. NAADS benefited targeted groups unequally ...... 319 7. Model farmers benefited because they fit NAADS’ eligibility criteria ...... 320 8. NAADS facilitated the model farmers’ success ...... 321 Implications of the study ...... 322 Suggestions for further research ...... 326 Conclusion ...... 328
References ...... 329
Appendix A: Ethics approval ...... 380
Appendix B: Interview guide ...... 383
Appendix C: Coding summary ...... 386
Appendix D: Information statement for local authorities...... 387
Appendix E: Information statement for participants ...... 392
xi
Appendix F: Consent form for local authorities ...... 396
Appendix G: Participant consent form ...... 397
Appendix H: Description of model farmers ...... 398
xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Historical trajectory of dominant development discourses ...... 45
Table 2.2 Sustainable Development Goals ...... 67
Table 3.1 Summary of poverty alleviation expenditure ...... 75
Table 3.2 Summary of total budget and donor contribution ...... 75
Table 3.3 Phases of development in Uganda ...... 78
Table 3.4 Uganda’s poverty reduction policies during the 1990s ...... 85
Table 3.5 Uganda’s poverty reduction policies from 2000 ...... 93
Table 4.1 Phases of agricultural development in Uganda ...... 120
Table 5.1 Evolution of agricultural extension services in Uganda ...... 138
Table 5.2 NAADS positioned in successive policies ...... 144
Table 5.3 Local government levels and NAADS’ administrative structure ...... 150
Table 5.4 NAADS’ hierarchy ...... 154
Table 5.5 Positions and responsibilities at the sub-county level ...... 157
Table 5.6 NAADS budgetary allocation (USD millions) ...... 162
Table 5.7 Summary of changes in the implementation of NAADS (2001-2016) ...... 168
Table 6.1 Characteristics of participants ...... 192
Table 8.1 Factor contributing to participants’ success ...... 247
Table 9.1 Findings relating to NAADS ...... 277
Table 9.2 Contextual factors influencing success ...... 290
xiii ABSTRACT
Informed by global development discourse, sub-Saharan African (SSA) governments
developed and implemented successive interventions to reduce extreme poverty and food
insecurity, with variable success. The Ugandan government constructed its poverty-reduction
plan to align with international development aid policy. It had achieved some success in recent years. However, rural poverty levels remained high. This study examined the initially donor-
driven National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) to expand understanding of
effective engagement with Uganda’s premier agricultural development program. Studies on the role of agricultural development in poverty reduction and food security in SSA concentrated largely on program evaluation and outcomes measurement to support the construction of evidence-based policy. Many failed to acknowledge the importance of context in the design
and implementation of development policy. Most poverty-reduction and development policies, including the PRSPs, MDGs, and SDGs, formulated through international agencies, presumed universal applicability and failed to take account of local exigencies, including widely varying political, social, cultural, economic, and natural environments. This qualitative study sought to examine the machinations of NAADS in rural Eastern Uganda from the perspective and experience of successful ‘model farmers’ (n=15), who had reaped the rewards of agricultural development. This enabled a ‘rich description’ of farmers’ individual subjective experiences and interpretations of their success. A thematic analysis of the findings revealed the complex interaction between sociocultural, economic, political, and physical environmental factors in shaping the farmers’ progress. The study found that NAADS targeted farmers that fit their eligibility criteria and created the context for their success. Though framed as a poverty- alleviation program, its key objectives related to productive agriculture and, though policies were externally driven, NAADS focused on local farmers in local contexts. The findings
xiv suggested their success related to their familiarity with, and participation in, the structures and operations of NAADS, joining local farmers’ associations, attending meetings and training sessions, contributing assets (land, transport, and farm machinery) for training development sites, having storage facilities to stockpile grain for sale when the price was right, engaging in farmer institutional development initiatives, visiting experimentation and technical development sites and farmers’ field schools, and involving family members.
xv ABBREVIATIONS
ADB African Development Bank
ALREP Agricultural Livelihoods Recovery Program
ARDC Agricultural Research and Development Centres
ATAAS Agriculture Technology and Agribusiness Advisory Services
AU African Union
AWPB Annual Work Plans and Budgets
BOU Bank of Uganda
BRIC Brazil, Russia, India, and China
CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program
CBF Community-based facilitator
CBO Community-based organisation
CERUDEB Centenary Rural Development Bank
CFF County Farmers’ Forum
CIDI Community Integrated Development Initiative
CSO Civil society organisation
DAC Development Assistance Countries
DAS Development Assistance
DFF District Farmers’ Forum
DFID Department for International Development
DSIP Development Strategy and Investment Plan
EAC East African Community
ERP Economic Recovery Program
FFS Farmer Field School
xvi GDP Gross Domestic Product
HDI Human Development Index
HIPC Heavily-Indebted Poor Countries
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IFI International Financial Institution
IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute
IMF International Monetary Fund
INGO International nongovernment organisation
ISFG Integrated Support to Farmer Groups
IHS Integrated Household Survey
JRM Joint Review Mission
KALIP Karamoja Livelihoods program
LC Local Council
LGDP Local Government Development Programme
MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MFPED Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development
MIS Management Information System
MOLG Ministry of Local Government
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MSC Microfinance Support Centre
MVP Millennium Villages Project
NAADS National Agricultural Advisory Services
NARO National Agricultural Research Organisation
NaSSRI National Semi-Arid Resources Research Institute
xvii NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NFF National Farmers’ Forum
NDP National Development Plan
NGO Nongovernment organisation
NUSAF Northern Uganda Social Action Fund
ODA Overseas development assistance/aid
PAF Poverty Action Fund
PAPSCA Program for Alleviation of Poverty and the Social Costs of Adjustment
PCCs Parish Coordinating Committees
PC Procurement Committee
PEAP Poverty Eradication Action Plan
PMA Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
PSPs Private Service Providers
ROU Republic of Uganda
SAARI Serere Agricultural and Animal Research Institute
SACCO Savings and credit cooperative organisation
SCA Savings and credit associations
SCDC Sub-County Development Committee
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SFF Sub-county Farmers’ Forum
SOCADIDO Soroti Catholic Diocese Integrated Development Organisation
SSA Sub-Saharan Africa
TEDDO Teso Diocese Development Organisation
xviii TERUDO Teso Rural Development Organisation
TDS Technology Development Site
UBOS Uganda Bureau of Statistics
UCSCU Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union
UDHS Uganda Demographic and Health Survey
UGX Ugandan shilling
UJAS Uganda Joint Assistance Strategy
UN United Nations
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNHS Uganda National Household Survey
UPPAP Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Project
UNPS Uganda National Panel Survey
USD United States Dollars
VFF Village Farmers’ Forum
WB World Bank
xix CHAPTER 1
Introduction to the study
This opening chapter introduces the study on the National Agricultural Advisory Services
(NAADS), the main platform of poverty alleviation and premier agricultural development
program in Uganda’s major economic sector. The study presents an in-depth examination of
the initially donor-driven NAADS to expand understanding of effective engagement with its structures and programs. Prior studies on the role of agricultural advisory services in poverty reduction and food security in Uganda concentrated largely on program evaluation and outcomes measurement to support evidence-based policy. Many failed to acknowledge the importance of context in the design and implementation of development policy. Most poverty- reduction and development policies, including the PRSPs, MDGs, and SDGs, formulated through international agencies, presumed universal applicability and failed to take account of local exigencies and widely varying political, social, cultural, economic, and natural environments. This qualitative study sought to examine the machinations of NAADS in rural
Eastern Uganda from the perspective and experience of successful ‘model farmers’ (n=15), who had reaped the rewards of agricultural development. It sought a ‘rich description’ of farmers’ individual subjective experiences and interpretations of their success. A thematic analysis of the findings revealed the complex interaction between sociocultural, economic, political, and physical environmental factors in shaping the farmers’ progress. The study found that NAADS targeted farmers that fit their eligibility criteria and created the context for their success. The chapter begins with an outline of the background to, and rationale for, the study before outlining its methodology and the scope and significance. It ends with an outline of the structure of the thesis and the central themes of its 10 chapters.
1 Background to the study
Given the dominance of agriculture in Uganda’s economy and global recognition of the
centrality of agricultural development in enhancing economic growth, reducing poverty, and
fostering food security, it was fitting to examine the flagship program seeking to maximise
Uganda’s agricultural potential. NAADS formed part of Uganda’s premier policy for poverty
alleviation, the Plan for the Eradication of Poverty (PEAP), and agricultural development, the
Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA). Of interest was the influence of international development policy on Uganda’s poverty alleviation and agricultural development programs, discussed in Chapters 3, 4, and 5 respectively. International development policy and aid agencies have retained a persistent focus on modernisation in post-independence Uganda and have invested heavily in infrastructure and technology development to increase productivity and attract foreign investment (Benin, 2011, 2012; Easterly, 2001, 2006; Collier, 2007; Sachs,
2005, 2008). Despite the language and goals of poverty reduction, development policy has continued to focus on economic transformation, a consistent theme since World War II (Ilcan
& Lacey, 2015). With poor countries trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty, global financial institutions and Northern governments have continued to push the poverty reduction envelope, while formulating policies for modernising economic development (Easterly, 2006; Erixon,
2005, Sachs, 2005, 2008). This study examined these external influences on national agricultural development policy and questioned the universal applicability of global solutions to poverty and development embodied in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs),
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Most importantly, it directed attention to the importance of local cultures and contexts that were often overlooked in research (Andrews, 2013; Dijkstra, 2005; Fraser, 2005; Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Lie,
2015; Morgan, 2009; Whitfield, 2010).
2 While poverty in Uganda had been studied extensively, there were few studies on the impact of internationally influenced national policies on local communities, where agriculture had always been the backbone of people’s livelihoods (Benin, 2011, 2012; James, 2010). Since agriculture was the main employment sector for rural households and agricultural exports were a key source of foreign exchange earnings, agricultural development was crucial to the local and national economy. Sustainable food production and food security brought social cohesion, community stability, and quality livelihoods for rural communities.
The Ugandan government’s programs to modernise agriculture with support from foreign donor partners had a huge impact on rural communities that had long been sustained by subsistence farming (Ekou, 2013). Transforming smallholder farms to modern, productive agribusinesses was, therefore, a major undertaking with many devastating impacts. The greatest challenge was to equip smallholder farmers with the wherewithal to adopt modern farming methods, given most were uneducated and extremely poor. One way in which the government sought to do this, following their success in other countries, discussed in Chapter
5, was through agricultural extension services (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Kjær & Joughin, 2012,
2017).
Rationale for the study
The rationale for the study came from my personal experience in community development
overseeing poverty reduction programs at the local government and community levels. Prior to
joining the Ministry, I had worked with civil society and the lower levels of local government
overseeing programs, such as the Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF), agricultural advisory
services, rural water supply, roll back Malaria, rural electrification, and universal primary
education, examining how they engaged intended beneficiaries. At the Ministry, I oversaw the social aspects of rural water programs in the Teso and Karamoja sub-regions of Eastern
3 Uganda, comprising 15 districts, serving a population of over six million people. While in those regions, I participated ‘in’ assisting districts and town councils in developing realistic annual work plans and budgets for community development in line with national plans and sector guidelines; promoting participatory monitoring and evaluation in water and sanitation committees at all levels; supporting the operation and maintenance of water and sanitation activities; ensuring that women assumed key responsibilities and precedence in water-user and district water coordination committees; identifying topics requiring commissioned research, policy and budget analysis; and producing discussion papers for government on key policy issues. A common message that emerged from these activities was a general disappointment with government efforts in these regions, especially its provision of services to improve socioeconomic conditions through poverty reduction programs. In the Global South, external influences remained significant, especially from Northern donor agencies and International
Financial Institutions (IFIs). For example, boreholes and other water sources constructed under the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) initiative were branded PAF boreholes, rather than naming them after the areas in which they were constructed. These foreign names alienated citizens from ownership of these water sources and raised my curiosity about why poverty reduction efforts were not generating positive changes, despite Uganda being one of the largest aid recipients in SSA, as well as the first country to benefit from debt cancellation through the HIPC initiative. I wondered whether these failures were linked to external guidelines. As I visited water resources, especially non-functional sources, I could hear voices of discontent and disappointment from the water committees in the district, sub-county, and local water sources. This stimulated my interest in better understanding poverty reduction in
Uganda through an examination of NAADS within the PEAP and PMA.
There had been numerous studies of development and poverty reduction in Uganda, though fewer on NAADS itself (Adong, 2014; Barungi, Guloba, & Adong, 2016; Benin, 2011,
4 2012; Benin et al., 2007; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010: Kjaer & Joughin, 2012, 2017; Okoboi,
Kuteesa, & Barungi, 2013; Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b). However, these studies did not focus specifically on local communities or consider the impact of international and national policies on local cultures and livelihoods. They took their universal applicability as a given and applied universal methods to measure success. As Fraser (2005) observed, they considered that all problems could be solved by over-simplified technological solutions even though they had to be implemented in widely varying contexts. Thus, due to its focus on measurable impacts without concern for the theoretical basis of these programs and ongoing failures to consult local people at the receiving end of development policies and programs, existing research failed to capture context-specific factors (Andrew, 2013). This study aimed to address this gap by drawing on the perspectives and experiences of successful model farmers, who were program beneficiaries and had been able to reap the rewards of NAADS in Eastern Uganda. The study involved an in-depth examination of the factors contributing to the success of these model farmers. It was premised on the idea that, by studying factors leading to success, mechanisms to support less successful farmers might be developed. It was hoped that this qualitative study would offer new knowledge about how a government extension program was received, how it was accessed and assessed by farmers, and the extent to which it achieved its aims to reach poor rural smallholder farmers and bring them into NAADS.
Most prior studies on NAADS had been, and continued to be, sponsored by foreign donors and international research institutions, such as the International Food Policy Research
Institute (IFPRI) based in Washington DC (Benin, 2011, 2012; Benin et al., 2007). Though useful and insightful, the findings of these studies served the interests of their funders.
Independent studies, such as this, were few and far between, despite the strong need for local empirical research examining the effectiveness of programs like NAADS.
5 An important aspect of the policy analysis conducted for this study was the examination of the role of foreign donors in policy making and social development, and the meta-level
‘development industry’ that had little to do with grassroots beneficiaries ostensibly at the end of the development pipeline. Several studies had examined the fluctuations in NAADS due to policy and political changes at the national level (Barungi et al., 2016; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010;
Kjaer & Joughin, 2012, 2017; Okoboi et al., 2013; Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b). In a complete departure, this in-depth case study focused on a specific local context, while situating NAADS in wider global development priorities. Though several qualitative studies analysing agricultural extension services had been instructive in poverty reduction and development debates, they tended to concentrate on the primacy of domestic politics in keeping with conventional explanations of how policies in young democracies, such as Uganda’s were derived, consolidated, and reproduced (Hoeffler, 2011; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Kjaer &
Joughin, 2012, 2017).
Agriculture and poverty reduction
Studies on the political economy of development drew attention to bidirectional and
competitive interactions between economics and politics (Hoeffler, 2011). Of critical
importance to Uganda’s development policy and, by extension, poverty reduction were the
competing objectives of government and international agencies (Canagarajah & van Diesen,
2006; 2011; Lie, 2015). Studies on Uganda made cursory reference to the need to reconcile
these contradictions as a precondition for addressing persistent poverty and food insecurity.
The World Development Report (WDR) (2008) on agricultural development highlighted the
need for better understanding of the political economy to address the continuing policy neglect, underinvestment, and misdirected investment in the agricultural sector (World Bank, 2007).
Hickey (2013) underlined the continuous disagreements between the Ugandan government and
6 international development institutions on policy prescriptions, observing that resolving these differences was critical for successful poverty reduction programs. Hickey (2005, 2013) noted that the Ugandan government, international donors, and Northern NGOs had acknowledged the complexity of poverty affecting a huge proportion of the rural population. The heavy investment in agricultural development disproved the idea that aid and development led to poverty reduction or that effective and efficient agricultural extension programs to increase productivity would reduce poverty and food insecurity (Adongo et al 2014; Barungi et al.,
2016; Benin, 2011, 2012; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Kjaer & Joughin, 2017; Okoboi et al., 2013).
There was no consensus on how to increase productivity, or that agricultural extension services were the best way to do this (Parkinson, 2009b), or on how the sector should be configured in relation to markets, employment, productivity, and the role of the state (van Waeyenberg &
Bargawi, 2015). Policies were formulated against a backdrop of divergent interests, conflicting conceptions of poverty reduction, and disagreements on the best approach for addressing poverty.
Theory informing the study
Several theories on poverty reduction and development had shaped social policy in SSA and
Uganda, including modernisation, institutional, dependency, market fundamentalism, and institutional theories. These theories also shaped my perspective on development as an externally imposed phenomenon that continued to frame national priorities in Uganda firmly embedded in neoliberal capitalism and committed to modernisation. Global development policy had a huge influence on the Ugandan government’s poverty reduction priorities as outlined in its Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF) and Poverty Eradication
Action Plan (PEAP), which followed the post-Washington consensus on post-conditionality
7 (Booth, 2003; Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Dijkstra, 2005; Dijkstra & van Donge,
2001; Harrison, 2001; Lie, 2015).
In taking a critical perspective on development, I began with a historical analysis of the global discourses that had led to shifts in international development policy and foreign aid to developing countries. This led, in turn, to a broad understanding of the factors influencing
Uganda’s national priorities. It drew my attention to critiques highlighting the limitations of development paradigms over the decades and of universal perspectives that hampered contextualised development initiatives (Andrews, 2013; Fischer, 2010; Fraser, 2005; Lie,
2015). Critical scholars’ analyses of broad international development policy and processes, foreign aid, the role of global financial institutions (IFIs), international nongovernment organisations (INGOs), and of Northern governments’ framing of universal development policy and its implementation, shaped my perspective on development in Uganda (Fukuda-
Parr, 2016; Manning, 2009; Sumner & Melamed, 2010). I sought to build on this critical literature on policy development in SSA, and particularly Uganda, as the backdrop to my study on model farmers’ perspectives and experiences of NAADS. Through a qualitative case study of this initially donor-driven agricultural development program, I hoped to add to the quantitative evaluations of NAADS by providing a contextual analysis based on the direct experiences of program beneficiaries, and how they connected to wider development goals promoted by international development institutions and Northern governments.
Most countries in SSA emerged as independent states between the 1940s and 1960s and coincided with Harry Truman’s designation of two-thirds of the world as poor. Truman’s belief that the so-called ‘developing nations’ required accelerated growth created a new discourse in which poverty became an organising concept for development (McKnight, 2013). This problematisation led to the identification of poor countries and legitimation of external intervention in the interests of world development (Escobar, 1995). Simultaneously, social
8 science disciplines, including sociology, economics, and political science, attempted to understand and explain the factors impacting on development in the Third World. They thus provided a diverse range of development theories (Herath, 2009; McKnight, 2013; Preston,
2012). I was drawn to Contreras’ (2001) analysis of the schools of thought on economic development since World War II: modernisation theory, neo-Marxist dependency theory, structural economic theory, neoclassical market fundamentalism, and institutional theory.
‘Development economics’ had shown the failure of classical, neoclassical, and Marxist economic theories in addressing global poverty and underdevelopment (Engerman &
Unger, 2009; Herath, 2009). A constant thread in these development theories was that of modernisation. Even today, NAADS formed part of Uganda’s Plan for the Modernisation of
Agriculture (Republic of Uganda, 2001c). The extent to which a combination of these theories and global development efforts have influenced Uganda’s poverty reduction priorities are broadly discussed in Chapters 2, 3, and 4.
Methodology
As shown in the chapters that follow, in contemporary theory and policy, poverty is a complex social problem affected by diverse factors embedded in specific contexts. Hence, a case study design was chosen as the best form of systematic ‘empirical enquiry’ for exploring the multidimensional factors contributing to an enduring problem, where ‘the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident’ (Yin, 2009, p. 13). Case study research draws on multiple sources of evidence to understand and explain complex phenomena in the context in which they are embedded (Tharenou, 2007). A case study might be an object and product of systematic inquiry exploring a real-life, contemporary, bounded system at a given time, through in-depth analysis of multiple sources of information. It constitutes a unit of analysis comprising
9 a single case or multiple cases (Creswell, 2003, 2013). It seeks exhaustive knowledge about a single ‘case’ or a small number of related ‘cases’ or ‘units’ (Yin, 2014).
This research studied a single case, namely, NAADS, which was bounded within the broader frame of agricultural development and poverty reduction in Uganda. NAADS was selected as an appropriate case for this context-based study given agriculture’s central role in
Uganda’s development framework, discussed in Chapters 3 and 4. Secondly, NAADS elaborated the dual aspects of decentralised governance ― ownership and participation through farmers’ associations and forums, brought together under the rubric of empowerment, the overarching theme of poverty reduction (Friis Hansen, 2008; Hickey, 2005, James, 2010).
Thirdly, NAADS captured three key dimensions: the institutional channel through which policy formulation and implementation could be accessed, controlled, or contested by the beneficiaries; the political discourses in which poverty and poverty reduction manifested, not only within policy processes and debates, but also more broadly within popular government discourse; and socioeconomic and political practices of the beneficiaries that might be a basis for influencing success or failures, producing losers and winners (Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003). It was thought that the experiences of model farmer participants could offer clues for other possible beneficiaries as to how to engage successfully with NAADS to reap its potential benefits. Given the understanding that poverty defied straightforward links between problems and solutions, the researcher believed that studying Uganda’s NAADS program as an agricultural development initiative and poverty reduction intervention would reveal complex interceding factors that were hampering or promoting its success. Therefore, the key research question asked in relation to this case was:
What factors affected the implementation of advisory service reforms in rural Eastern
Uganda?
To address this central research question, several subsidiary questions were:
10 1. What policy factors shaped this poverty reduction measure and NAADS’ central
role in agricultural transformation?
2. What were the structures and processes of NAADS and how did they enable
participation, partnership, and ownership in agricultural development?
3. What were the experiences of successful beneficiaries and how had they engaged
in the structures and processes of NAADS?
4. What were the characteristics of ‘successful’ model farmers in NAADS?
5. What factors shaped ‘model farmers’ experiences of success within NAADS in
rural Eastern Uganda?
Scope and significance of the study
In the context of re-emergent social development discourse in SSA, there was a strong need for empirical research to inform evidence-based policy. Therefore, the focus of the study was to obtain an in-depth understanding of the impact of a major platform of Uganda’s agricultural transformation and poverty reduction – NAADS – from the perspective of farmers who had benefitted from this program and were able to access the resources it offered. NAADS constituted the case for the study not only from the perspective of its grassroots impact, but also through an analysis of the broader policy context in which the program was situated and international influences on its development at a local, regional, and national level. It was anticipated that this study would add to existing evaluations of NAADS’ contributions to agricultural development and poverty reduction in Uganda (Adong, 2014; Benin, 2011, 2012;
Benin, Nkonya, Okecho, Pender, Nahdy, Mugarura, Kato, & Kayobyo, 2007; Ellis &
Bahiigwa, 2003; James, 2010). To do this, the researcher began with an examination of theoretical and practical considerations relating to international development policy and, by extension, poverty reduction in SSA and, most importantly, in Uganda.
11 At the theoretical level, then, the thesis engaged in an incisive analysis of the dominant development discourses shaping foreign aid and development, and its ostensible poverty- alleviation goals. It offered a perspective on the impact of these international development discourses on policy shifts in Uganda’s poverty-reduction priorities and successive development policies. It presented a uniquely Ugandan perspective as a role model for decentralised, demand-driven, market-oriented agricultural extension in SSA (Benin, 2011,
2012; Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011; Hickey, 2013; Kjaer & Joughin, 2017), and contributed to practice by highlighting milestones and drawbacks from experience that might influence future policy and practice. By examining the influence of international development policy shifts on Uganda’s national agricultural development and poverty-reduction priorities, and its flagship program NAADS, the study provided a context-sensitive analysis to inform policy development and local practice in rural Eastern Uganda. The study thus went beyond prior national quantitative program evaluation studies to offer a contextual qualitative examination of the lived experience of successful model farmers at the local level. It was hoped this context-specific analysis might contribute to the improvement of agricultural development policy and practice in Uganda and other developing countries still entrenched in poverty,
Secondly, it refocused attention on poverty reduction as an imposed idea, and how this influenced policy processes, especially relating to agricultural extension services as embedded in the national development policy and international development framework. In the main, the poverty reduction process continued to ignore contextual and local realities at the household and community levels, which left people liable to repeat past errors. Further, through exploration of existing and prevailing explanations of policy drivers in Uganda, the study challenged the static nature of conventional explanations that pandered to the logic of dominant narratives which still held currency in African states.
12 Thirdly, by underscoring less discussed, emerging policy drivers within local contexts, the study sought to make a significant contribution to the theorisation of the political economy of agricultural policies as a platform for development and poverty reduction (Hoeffler, 2011;
Poulton, Dorward & Kydd, 2010). There was limited attention to the relevance of local, community, and household contextual considerations in the progress of NAADS. Kjaer and
Joughin (2017) highlighted the political factors that led to a shift of emphasis in NAADS at the national level, though excluded individual household and community considerations. As such, it became important to explore how political priorities and national policies filtered down to individual households and local communities and to identify factors making some better placed than others to take advantage of programs on offer (Parkinson, 2009b).
Lastly, the study sought to improve understanding of the history of agricultural extension and poverty reduction in Uganda over the past 100 years and the interface between donor institutions and local actors in the context of vast power asymmetries. The study contributed to an understanding of how a poor nation, like Uganda, negotiated complex policy processes promoted by international development institutions to modernise agriculture.
Key concepts
Key terms used in this research requiring operational definition in the context of this study are
discussed below.
Advisory services
Advisory services, also referred to as agricultural extension services, were designed to transfer cutting-edge research-based knowledge on agricultural production to farmers and support them in using this knowledge to increase their agricultural productivity, enhance household incomes, and achieve food security (Anderson & Feder, 2003; Kjaer & Joughin, 2017; Semana, 2004).
Advisory services were designed to bridge the knowledge gap by providing information and
13 technical training and development (Rivera, 1997). NAADS relied on research institutions and universities to generate up-to-date knowledge, conduct feasibility studies, and develop advanced technologies to maximise agricultural production (Semana, 1999). In this study, advisory services supported rural farmers with extension information on agricultural production and post-harvest handling to ensure enhanced production and sustainable and quality outputs. They aimed to deliver socioeconomic benefits and food security through farmer economic empowerment and development, which they believed would reduce poverty
(Kidd, 2001; James, Smart, Smith, Beed, & Luwandaga, n.d.).Advisory services also provided access to agro-processing services, seed inputs, agricultural equipment and machinery, finance, and training for capacity development. NAADS worked through public-private partnerships to increase market penetration, provide fair-trade and organic certification, and set standards.
Though effectiveness in application of appropriate technologies and techniques had an impact on farm production, these were not the sole factors in improved agricultural productivity. The presence and availability of these innovations required farmers to be aware of, and know how to, apply them to realise their inherent potential (Davidson & Ahmad, 2003). This is what this study is about.
Agricultural development
The explicit goal of agricultural development is economic growth and thereby poverty eradication. The Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (ROU, 2000c, 2000d), which came into effect in 2001 as one of the key components of PEAP, was Uganda’s agricultural development plan. It was an integral strategy within PEAP aimed at rapid and sustainable economic growth and structural transformation, and increased ability of the poor to raise their incomes. The PMA’s central focus was on rural agricultural development with the aim of shifting the livelihoods of subsistence farmers through increased agricultural productivity, improved household incomes, and enhanced food security (Benin, 2011, 2012). A World Bank
14 (2005) study linked agricultural development, particularly the traditional crop sector, to pro- poor growth, stating the challenge rested inter alia in improving market access and lowering transactions costs; strengthening land rights; creating an incentive framework that benefited all farmers; expanding technology for smallholder producers; and helping poor and small producers deal with risk. The PMA attempted to address several constraints for poor families:
Natural environment aspects [including access to land]; access to finance to address
both food security issues and the financing of improved technological approaches;
physical infrastructure [to access markets]; human capital; and weak social capital in
the aspects of accountability and transparency, though strong in community elements
(Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2017, p. 2).
This example showed the implication of broader non-agricultural considerations for agricultural development. More directly, the modernisation of agriculture involved inter alia increasing yields in food crops and access to land, inputs, and technologies, especially among marginalised groups, such as women and people with disabilities (Doss, 2001, 2002; Doss,
Nabanoga, & Namaalwa, 2012; Prosterman, 2013). It did not mean the purchase of combine harvesters and integration of mechanised food sorting. It meant access to ox-ploughs rather than manual tilling with hoes, accessible roads between markets and farms, and ox and donkey carts for transport, grain storage facilities, and access to communication media, such as phones and radios. Uganda was starting from a low base. Part of agricultural transformation involved education about physical environments and the diversification of crops to suit local physical conditions and adapt to drought, floods, and pest infestations. The key to education was participation and empowerment. Hence, NAADS worked pivotally through the involvement of local farmers as a captive audience for agricultural transformation through participation, education, and empowerment. The core hoped-for outcomes were increased agricultural productivity and pro-poor growth. The World Bank (2005) study saw pro-poor growth as:
15 helping poor farmers to increase their output through: access to appropriate improved
and more modern agricultural practices; improved access to markets and greater
‘commercialisation’; and enabling them to build up capital, either for reinvestment in
agriculture, or for funding their move out of the sector (Royal Danish Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, 2017, p. 1).
In the context of this study, the government anticipated that a revitalised agricultural sector would act as an engine of economic growth and development and thereby poverty reduction broadly situated within the country’s PEAP and the National Development Plan’s (NDP) overall vision of socioeconomic transformation and prosperity for all (Benin, 2012).
Co-funding
In NAADS I, farmers’ groups and associations, funded from membership fees, were required to pay part of their income to finance extension services (approximate of 2-3% of the total cost of the enterprise) (Benin, 2011, 2012; Parkinson, 2009b). The practice was known as co- funding and it was built on the idea that it promoted project ownership (Anderson & Feder,
2003). The model farmers in this study reported a contribution of between two to five percent towards the overall project budget, as well donating demonstration gardens for Technology
Development Sites (TDSs). The long-term goal of co-funding was to displace central government transfers with farmer contributions. This entitled farmers to determine the services they required (see demand-driven development) and to be part of the process of selecting and monitoring private contractors (PSPs). The co-fund manifested market-based provision; those that could not afford membership fees and could not contribute were not eligible for NAADS.
Co-funding was, however, abandoned in NAADS II with changes to financing arrangements, discussed in Chapter 5.
16 Decentralisation
Comprehensive development policy promoted decentralisation to institute democratic, participatory systems at all levels of governance (Parkinson, 2009b; Pender, 2001; Steiner,
2007; 2010; Stiglitz, 2002b). Hence, decentralisation was a central platform of Uganda’s development and poverty-eradication programs (Steiner, 2007). Rivera (1997) reported that participatory processes in agricultural extension, with its emphasis on advisory services, would get closer to service users through strong information channels that engendered equity, improved resource management, and shared decision making. In the context of this study, participatory decision-making processes emphasised two-way communication between the technical arm of NAADS in the sub-county and the rural farmers, individually or through their farmer associations. The function of extension moved beyond technology transfer to empowering farmers with knowledge through the effective flow of information (Parkinson,
2009b). NAADS typified this policy in that it operated through local government councils elected to office. These local government councils were responsible for service delivery and authorised to collect revenue and manage budgets (Ojambo, 2012; Olum, 2014; Parkinson,
2009b). Local governments played an important role in reducing poverty by empowering local small-holder farmers to demand advisory services and holding Private Service Providers
(PSPs) accountable for their delivery (Barret, 2008; Ellis & Bahigwa, 2003; Evenson &
Mwabu, 2001). However, some studies suggested that participatory approaches to agricultural development in Uganda had been tyrannical and hijacked by power and politics, and had not delivered the inclusivity they promised (Hickey, 2005; Parkinson, 2009a). Participation in farmer group activities did not necessarily enhance farmers’ power to demand advisory services, which limited their potential in achieving the anticipated outcomes of the NAADS program (Benin, 2011).
17 Demand-driven extension
Parkinson (2009b) reported that demand-driven extension referred to a system dependent on an actual or simulated market in which farmers, individually or collectively, purchased advisory services to support their farming practices. It aimed to increase financial gains so agricultural markets would eventually drive advisory services to which farmers, participating as suppliers, would respond (Hanson & Just, 2001). These pro-poor services supported the commercialisation of farming to improve the incomes of rural smallholder farmers (Anderson
& Feder, 2003). In the context of this study, demand-driven extension involved promoting and investing in modernised farming activities aimed at generating profitability and reducing risk in farming ventures. Accordingly, enterprise selection provided a platform for farmers to demand and receive advice and information to make farming more profitable. Thus, NAADS worked on a demand-driven development model in which farmers exercised their voice through membership of farmers’ associations and participation in NAADS’ activities (Joughin & Kjaer,
2010). Hanson and Just (2001) highlighted that, in the early stages of transitioning from subsistence to commercial farming, smallholder farmers required assistance in the provision of demand-extension services. This assistance could be achieved through incentivising farmers to form or join farmer associations, which would, in turn, help them to cooperate in selling their agricultural products (Parkinson, 2009b). The NAADS participating associations entitled their members to demand the services they required and to participate in the process of identifying, commissioning, and monitoring private contractors (PSPs). Rather than passive recipients of services, they were active, contributing members of demand-driven services. The program was designed to simultaneously make farmers clients and users of extension services to improve their responsiveness, accountability, and impact (James et al., n.d.). It was anticipated that, by taking ownership of the processes in which they were engaged, farmers would ensure program effectiveness (Anderson & Feder, 2003; Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Kjaer & James, 2017). The
18 overarching aim of demand-driven extension was that farmers would be increasingly willing to pay for agricultural services, which, in turn, would reduce the burden of public provision
(Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006; Parkinson, 2009b).
Economic liberalism
Economic liberalism is a broad term that usually refers to limited government regulation in exchange for greater private participation. The philosophy is associated with classical liberalism or market fundamentalism and the forces of demand and supply (Stiglitz, 2010). The underlying argument in support of this doctrine is that it leads to economic efficiency and effectiveness and a bigger slice of the pie for everyone in society. Proposals to support economic liberalisation in SSA included the removal of price controls, privatisation of state assets and services, liberalisation of foreign investment regulations, elimination of social institutions that restricted competition, such as trade unions and professions, government subsidies, and employment regulations (Kay, 2008; Preston, 2012). Economic liberalism sought to open the economy and create economic freedom, so the forces of demand and supply could operate free from regulatory restrictions.
Enterprise selection and development
Enterprise selection and development referred to the identification and promotion of farming enterprises of various sizes to enhance farmer productivity, income generation, and profitability. Several considerations influenced this process, including the potential for value chain development, wide coverage, market prospects, strategic planning, use of raw materials, and regularity and size of income. NAADS enabled its beneficiaries to choose enterprises best suited to their investment potential and needs (Benin, 2011, 2012).
19 Farmers’ associations and forums
In principle, the NAADS program required that beneficiaries form new farmer associations or join existing ones, as these were the vehicles through which agricultural benefits were channeled to group members (ROU, 2006a). These associations and forums created a platform for smallholder farmers to participate in NAADS and overcome diseconomies associated with smallholder production and marketing (Ampaire, Machete, & Birachi, 2013). Individual farmers joined farmers’ groups and associations to further their shared goals. These groups were the medium through which members accessed agricultural advisory services, which included training, agricultural inputs, and market information (Benin, 2011, 2012). The groups aligned farmers’ investment interests and priorities at the village level, including access to capital, to enhance the viability of their enterprises (Adong, 2014). Group activities included meeting attendance and participation in training programs and site visits to TDSs. Each farmer’s association at the village level, which was registered with NAADS, nominated one or two members to represent it at the sub-county farmers’ forum. Representatives of farmers’ groups and associations formed farmers’ forums at the sub-county level following structured guidelines to ensure inclusive participation in NAADS’ decision-making processes and voting procedures to elect office bearers and representatives at the county and district levels. These included guidelines on the inclusion of women, young people, and persons with a disability.
Governance
Strong democratic governance was a key platform of effective development (Kaufmann,
Kraay, & Mastruzzi, 2011). It rested on legal processes to ensure the efficient use of resources and stamp out corruption, a longstanding problem in Uganda (Craig, 2006; Golooba-Mutebi,
2005; Robinson, 2007). These legal parameters provided channels through which citizens and groups articulated their interests, exercised their legal rights, met their obligations, and mediated their differences (Hickey, 2012; Kaufman et al., 2011). Good governance required a
20 strong state working in partnership with the private and nongovernment sectors to create a harmonious sociopolitical and economic environment for effective development. The notions of strong and good governance gained traction in the development domain in the wake of an increasingly globalised world, which promoted representative democracies to undermine authoritarianism and allow for the fair allocation of benefits and resources (Sen, 2000, 1999;
Öniş & Şenses, 2005). A strong government ensured political stability, enforced the rule of law, eliminated corruption, and ran effective institutions (Kaufman et al., 2011). Good governance would galvanise grassroots participation in political decision-making processes within a decentralised institutional framework (Bahiigwa et al., 2005; King, 2015; Olum, 2014;
Ssonko, 2013; Steiner, 2007). This required that participants understood the local government structure and its relationship to NAADS. These structures were a means of access rather than extensions of marketised services. Local partnership policy had far-reaching implications in
Uganda, especially in rural settings, where local government was still in its infancy. With a limited educated citizenry, these partnerships could be distorted by dominant partners thus eroding local confidence in them (Craig & Porter, 2003).
Nongovernment sector
The nongovernment sector was a primary stakeholder in agricultural development. It comprised not-for-profit, voluntary NGOs that were organised on a local, national, and international levels. They were positioned between the private and government sectors with many reliant on international donors. NGOs offered a wide range of services and played a key role in bringing citizens’ concerns to the government’s attention. They monitored policy implementation, offered programs, and encouraged political participation through information provision. In this study, the NGOs were enlisted as service providers and contractors and many beneficiaries had enjoyed the long-term support of local NGOs. It was anticipated that the engagement of NGOs working with local communities would enhance service provision and
21 increase partnerships between service providers and local rural farmers (Muhumuza, 2005;
Omona & Mukuye, 2013).
Private Service Providers (PSPs)
Advisory services were provided by private providers until 2008 (AfranaaKwapong & Nkonya,
2015). The NAADS I program contracted PSPs to deliver services. This was a change from traditional public service extension (Benin, 2010). At the time, the government believed that private sector involvement in the delivery and provision of services would lead to greater efficiency and sustainability, effectively impacting on poverty reduction efforts (James et al., n.d.). A PSP could be an individual business owner, a private company, or an NGO. PSPs reported to the farmers’ groups, who had to confirm that they had received the contracted services. Along the vertical structure, PSPs also reported to the sub-county authorities, which, in turn, reported to the district authorities and eventually to the NAADS secretariat (ROU,
2006a). However, there were problems in procuring PSPs able to deliver the required services, despite NAADS’ attempts at capacity building (AfranaaKwapong & Nkonya, 2015; Joughin
& Kjaer, 2010; Parkinson, 2009b). Though ostensibly aimed at poverty reduction through popular participation and active involvement, for-profit PSP contractors created a third sector of privatised development agents (Béland & Howlett, 2016; Desai & Joshi, 2014; Fraser, 2005).
These could be agents of exclusion for those unable to pay for the services they offered (Ilukor et al., 2015; Parkinson, 2009b). Further, the contracting process was slow leading to delays in delivery and corruption. The farmers interpreted the PSPs’ inability to deliver services as a lack of responsiveness to their priorities. Due to the problems with PSPs, they were abandoned following NAADS revision I in 2008.
22 Public-private partnership
International development agencies and financing institutions had long promoted the value of public-private partnerships to reduce corruption and enhance service efficiency (Poulton &
Macartney, 2012). Hence, NAADS enlisted PSPs to deliver agricultural services to rural famer groups. It was anticipated that this would facilitate better farmer access to productivity- enhancing agricultural technologies, knowledge, and advice for increased productivity and profitability, value addition, and enhanced market linkages (ROU, 2008b). Public-private partnerships included collaborations between local government structures, NGOs, churches, and communities (Bebbington & Farrington, 1993; Birner & Resnick, 2010; Birner & Wittmer,
2003).
Structure of the thesis
This thesis comprises 10 chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the study. Chapter 2 reviews the
literature on international development policy that informs Uganda’s priorities on poverty
reduction. It discusses the dominant development discourses shaping foreign aid and poverty
alleviation beginning with the Marshall Plan and ending with the SDGs. The chapter traces the policy shifts from modernisation in postcolonial nations across the world following the success of the Marshal Plan in reconstructing post-war Europe and successive development frameworks that have proved inadequate in lifting millions out of poverty in SSA.
Chapter 3 examines the impact of these international development discourses and policy shifts on Uganda’s poverty-reduction priorities and successive development policies aimed at poverty reduction. It discusses the generic set of externally driven policy initiatives that were uniformly adopted across SSA countries by IFIs that failed to generate universal positive changes for the masses.
23 Chapter 4 discusses the dominance of the agricultural sector through four significant phases of agricultural development in Uganda and the central platform for poverty reduction, ending with a focus on contemporary sustainable development. The chapter presents the philosophy underpinning agricultural development in Uganda as a backdrop to NAADS.
Chapter 5, the centre piece of this study, examines the evolution of advisory services in
Uganda up to 2014, clearly highlighting various shifts from a colonial to an independent state.
The chapter shows how NAADS represented a market orientation bent on extending global neoliberal discourse to rural communities. It describes the institutional context within which
NAADS arose to conform with donor-driven demands to transform agriculture into a productive economic sector, not only for local markets but also for national and international export markets. The chapter outlines the administrative structures through which NAADS was constructed and its core components and reinforces the primacy of institutional and structural factors in the implementation of donor-driven poverty alleviation frameworks. The chapter also highlights budgetary allocations to NAADS underlining donor, government and farmer contributions. Initially, the donors funded 80% of the program. However, along the way, the government assumed greater control of NAADS. The chapter clearly demonstrates the fundamental shifts in the program from its inception in 2001, until 2014, when some of its core activities were taken back by the Ministry of Agriculture. The chapter ends by highlighting
NAADS’ progress − positive achievements, negative aspects experienced, and changes in the distribution of benefits within the program.
Chapter 6 discusses the research methodology and the qualitative research case study approach used. Semi-structured interviews were used as the principal data collection method.
Procedures on how data was gathered and analysed are discussed, along with the ethical implications of the study.
24 Chapter 7 presents the findings on, and the farmers’ perceptions of, their success in the implementation of the NAADS program. It views these successes considering sociocultural, economic, political, environmental, and physical geographical factors. The findings show a relationship between the implementation of NAADS and success as reported by the participants. It begins with a discussion of the participants’ perceptions of their success.
Chapter 8 presents the findings relating to the sociocultural, economic, political, physical and environmental factors, which were at work in the implementation of NAADS and shaped the participants’ success. Chapter 9 discusses these findings in relation to prior studies reviewed in earlier chapters and the theoretical framework guiding the study. The chapter argues that, rather than a program for poverty reduction, despite the policies undergirding it,
NAADS was an agricultural development project to create wealth and economic growth. Its supportive structures and processes introduced sociocultural changes that altered the structure and composition of rural households and the farming enterprises in which they were engaged.
Despite the stated aims of poverty reduction, food security, and sustainable livelihoods, demand-driven development was the key turn (James et al., n.d.). As Rowden (2010) observed, development does not necessarily equal poverty reduction. Uganda’s agricultural development program is a clear indication of this with the aim being economic growth and wealth creation through productive export-led agriculture.
Finally, Chapter 10 presents the conclusions of the study and examines their implications for policy development and future research. It ends with several recommendations for policy development to enhance the effectiveness of poverty reduction measures through agricultural development.
25 Conclusion
This introductory chapter outlined the background to, and rationale for, the study and key
theoretical frameworks informing its conceptualisation. It provided an overview of the
methodology and the key questions it sought to address, and the scope and significance of the
study. The chapter defined key concepts used in the study and ended with an outline of the
structure of the thesis. The following chapter discusses the development discourses influencing poverty reduction programs with a focus on NAADS, the case under study.
26 CHAPTER 2
Theories on development, foreign aid, and poverty alleviation
Chapter 2 provides an overview of the literature on contemporary theories and multidimensional discourses informing international development, foreign aid, and poverty reduction. Following a discussion of the main theories, it presents an overview of development discourses to show how shifts in global policy at different historical junctures have influenced
Uganda’s national priorities on poverty reduction, discussed in Chapter 3.
Development theories and discourses have influenced global initiatives aimed at reducing extreme poverty. Since World War II, the major international organisations have been dispensing aid to developing countries, influenced initially by modernisation spanning several decades. This was replaced by a new approach during the 1970s building on a partnership model following the Pearson Commission Report (1969). As market fundamentalism came to dominate economic policy in the 1980s, known as the decade of Reaganism and Thatcherism, conditional aid became entrenched through structural adjustment reforms. As with previous approaches, structural adjustment was a dismal failure in reducing poverty in African countries, like Uganda, which, post-independence, were heavily dependent on foreign aid to restructure their economies. Structural adjustment further entrenched the neoliberal economic model and removed restrictions on foreign trade and government intervention in African markets whose
Africanisation programs had failed to lift the majority out of poverty. Foreign aid and debt increased as national governments became heavily dependent on external IFIs, such as the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. Consequently, ‘the image of Africa as a continent is in the grip of powerful external forces, with most of what happens in countries
27 being directly attributable to external factors, has proven extraordinarily resistant to contrary evidence’ (Booth, 2003, p. 868).
There is abundant literature exploring shifts in international development policy and foreign aid and their impact on the construction of national priorities in SSA. The international development literature on poverty reduction is rife with debates on concepts, theories, models, and approaches to development and critiques or outright rejection of international development policy frameworks like the PRSPs, MDGs, and, most recently, the SDGs to guide national policy priorities on poverty reduction (Easterly, 2009; Gabizon, 2016; Gore, 2004; Moyo,
2009; Saith, 2006; Solberg, 2015). For example, the failure of the MDG goals have been attributed to their narrow focus on poverty alleviation rather than comprehensive development as envisaged by the World Summit on Social Development held in Copenhagen in 1995
(Correll, 2008). Thus, in SSA, there have been critiques of donors, and development agencies which have failed to recognise the multidimensionality of poverty (Cecchini & Notti, 2011) and the complexities involved in achieving targets relating to gender equality in patriarchal
African cultures (Fukuda-Parr, 2016).
Others have been more concerned with practicalities and how international development frameworks enable or obstruct national development priorities (Collier, 2007;
Collier & Dollar, 2004; Stephen, 2014). Still, others have focused on the role of global financial institutions, INGOs, and Northern governments in framing universal development policy and its frameworks for its implementation (Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Manning, 2009; Sumner &
Melamed, 2010). Few, however, grapple with the ‘transfer gap’, instead focusing on; technical aspects, such as measurable impacts, stakeholder engagement, consultation to agree on goals and targets set, and the importance of partnerships in development. There are abundant critiques of global neoliberalism, but less attention is devoted to robust research in local contexts and the views of local people at the receiving end of development policies and
28 programs. This failure undermines effective implementation (Hoffberg, 2007; Orlove, Roncoli,
Kabugo, & Majugu, 2010; Sophie, 2015). The study examined the transfer of agricultural policy to local farming communities by: (i) engaging in an analysis of post-war international development policy to set the context of Uganda’s priorities on poverty reduction discussed in
Chapter 3; and (ii) exploring the perspectives and experiences of successful ‘model farmers’ as program beneficiaries at the receiving end of the agricultural development policy, who have been able to reap the rewards of the donor-driven NAADS program, which is discussed in
Chapter 4.
Theory informing the study
Several theories have emerged through the various development discourses to explain poverty, foremost among them, the ‘basic needs’ approach, based on Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy of needs. At the base of this hierarchy was the biological need for physical survival, essential to which was the need for food, shelter, and clothing. As Thirlwall (2006) explained, poverty in terms of the basic needs approach was ‘a condition of life so degraded by disease, illiteracy, malnutrition and squalor as to deny its victims basic human necessities’ (p. 481). Nevertheless, economic explanations of poverty predominated (Konkel, 2014). In SSA, and Uganda, Several theories on poverty reduction and development have shaped social policy. They include modernisation, structuralist, dependency, market fundamentalism, and institutional theories, as discussed below.
Modernisation theory
Development and modernisation became synonyms in SSA. The dominant belief was that
modernising development was the only way to bring African countries into the developed
world. The implication was that Africa was backward, non-progressive, and steeped in
traditionalism that hampered scientific development (Easterly, 2001; Engerman & Unger,
29 2009; Erixon, 2003). The solution was to apply the strategies that had so effectively restored post-War Europe in colonial Africa. Part of the modernisation plan involved the development of independent nation states in Africa, freeing them from the chains of traditionalism and colonial domination (Engerman & Unger, 2009). Postcolonial Africa was thus set on a path to economic development that involved the adoption of Western capitalism and democratic governance. Modernisation theory held that ‘economic development and democracy were complementary and mutually reinforcing’ (Oneal, 1994, p. 565).
Walter Whiteman Rostow’s (1990) seminal The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-
Communist Manifesto outlined the progress of economic modernisation from traditional systems of patronage to market-based capitalist societies based on production and consumption. Traditional systems were largely agrarian, authoritarian, hierarchical, and paternalistic and offered little scope for social mobility (Rostow, 1990). Their backwardness was due to their focus on subsistence agriculture and lack of modern economic structures
(Easterly, 2001, 2006; Herath, 2009; Obeng-Odoom, 2013; Sachs, 2005, 2008). Modernisation involved the diffusion of Western values and the development of bureaucratic structures of governance to facilitate economic growth and development (Rostow, 1990). Its purpose was to overcome underdevelopment, stagnation, and poverty. To prosper economically, developing countries had to follow the development patterns of the industrialised countries based on financial and technical assistance modelled on the Marshall Plan that had proved so successful in the reconstruction of Europe (Alacevich, 2012; Easterly, 2006; Engerman & Unger, 2009).
The plan involved a massive injection of capital for infrastructure development and economic transformation to boost productivity, stimulate investment, and achieve sustained economic growth (Easterly, 2001; Herath, 2009; Kay, 2000; Nixson, 2006; Peet & Hartwick, 2009;
Rostow, 1990). Modernisation meant transformation into an industrial society through large- scale industrial investment and private sector development. Governments were required to
30 provide supportive infrastructure and education and training to foster large-scale industrialisation. Modernisation emphasised the predominant role of capital in stimulating economic growth and development (Fukuda-Parr, 2011; Herath, 2009; Todaro, 2011). Thus, the development as growth mantra came to be synonymous with modernisation.
Max Weber’s contribution to modernisation theory was The Protestant Ethic and the
Spirit of Capitalism. Weber observed a correlation between ascetic Protestantism and capitalism. Protestant ethics promoted values of hard work, frugality, proper use of money, especially investment for profit and saving, and individual achievement. Hence, modernisation came to be associated with wealth accumulation and consumerism, with scientific and technological advancement to replace religious superstition and traditionalism (Escobar, 1995).
Modernising development promoted Western knowledge and undermined traditional and indigenous knowledge systems (Frank, 1967, 1991). Modernisation produced a two worlds paradigm of developed and undeveloped countries, with the latter home to two thirds of the world’s population, most of whom were poor. Modernisation problematised underdevelopment which called for external intervention (Easterly, 2001). External intervention in form of
Western capital and technical know-how would provide all underdeveloped countries with an opportunity to attain the same level of prosperity and political freedoms enjoyed by the West
(Engerman & Unger, 2009).
Structuralist economic theory
The key point of departure of structuralist economic theory spearheaded in the 1950s by
Argentinian economist and executive director of the Economic Commission for Latin America
(ECLAC), Raul Prebisch (1950, 1962), was its bifurcation of the world into the industrialised core comprising Europe and the USA; the source of foreign investment, and the non- industrialised core, the developing countries existing at the periphery. Its focus was the relationship between the core producing secondary products and the periphery producing
31 primary products, such as agricultural goods for export to the Western centre (Kay, 2008;
Prebisch, 1950, 1962; Preston, 2012; Todaro, 2011). Under Prebisch’s influence, the Economic
Commission for Latin America became the centre of Third World activism in the United
Nations (UN) and gave birth to the Latin American school of structuralist economics.
Contreras (2001) rejected the dual modern-traditional binary and stages of development modernisation theory. He noted that developing countries were brought into the international economy to supply cheap labour and raw material and became consumers of finished manufactured goods from industrialised economies. Hence, to be competitive with core economies, industrialisation was needed to transform traditional smallholder farming into productive agriculture (Kay, 2008; Todaro, 2011). Underdevelopment, stagnation, and poverty arose from the interplay between domestic and international factors. Structural transformation comprised domestic; natural resources, population size, government policies, rule of law, democratic rights, strong bureaucracy and governance, and democratic accountability, and international; access to external capital, technology, and trade ‒ considerations (Sun Young &
Smith, 2007; Thirlwall, 2006) for integration into the world economic system (Todaro, 2011).
Dependency theory
During the 1960s, economists at the Economic Commission for Latin America extended
Prebisch’s structuralist economics into dependency theory, in which the economic development of the periphery was an impossibility. Dependency theorists noted that persistent poverty was indicative of the failure of modernising development (Frank, 1967, 1991; Herath,
2009; Kay & Gwynne, 2000). It held that underdevelopment, stagnation, and poverty were externally generated through the core’s exploitation of the periphery (Kay & Gwynne, 2000;
Preston, 2012). Hence, any attempts at self-reliance by poor countries were doomed; capitalism preserved the status quo and, rather than a trait of traditionalism, underdevelopment was an attendant process and outcome of economic development (Epure, 2015; Herath, 2008; Preston,
32 1999) resulting from a periphery country’s insertion into the world economic system and subsequent development trajectory dependent on foreign investment (Preston, 2012).
International dependency theory thus rejected the notion that poverty was a function of a nation state’s underdevelopment. It held that the underdevelopment of the periphery was not due to a
‘lack of capitalist development but to prevailing international relations of capitalist exploitation and subordination’ (Alauddin, 2013, n.p.). To progress, developing countries had to uncouple themselves from manipulative global capitalism, raise the competitiveness of domestic markets, and provide robust employment (Kay, 2008; Prebisch, 1950, 1962; Preston, 1999;
Todaro, 2011). The redistribution of wealth from the centre to the periphery required reforms in the global system to address protectionism, economic rationalism, and import-substitution industrialism. Oneal (1994) summarised the argument of critical theorists who held that:
Economic dependency distorted and retarded development, which encouraged the rise
of authoritarianism, a process in which comprador military regimes played a special
role. They were, as Magdoff (1970: 241) put it, ‘the skeletal framework of the
imperialist system in the absence of colonies’ (p. 586).
Thus, radical theorists argued that modernisation had created a new imperialism; rather than promote the spread of progressive Indigenous capitalism, it led to an affinity of foreign investors and ‘comprador regimes’ (Oneal, 1994, p. 568) because ‘the bureaucratic authoritarian state was … guarantor of the interests of the multi-national corporations’ (Oneal,
1994, p. 586). He argued that:
It is important to clarify the role foreign investors may play, because it is direct
investment, rather than debt or aid, that is most likely to effect large transfers of capital
to the periphery in the 1990s … For neo-classical economists, the question is simply
whether this flow of funds will be sufficient to stimulate economic progress; but many
33 in the periphery remain uneasy … that foreign investment leads to a loss of control over
one's economy (p. 586).
Arguing that foreign investment had benefited from authoritarian regimes, radical critics of capitalism argued that:
imperialism did not end with the demise of the colonial empires after World War II.
Instead, domination and exploitation are said to be carried out now by more subtle
means, especially the economic power of multinational corporations and repression by
comprador regimes (Oneal, 1994, p. 581).
Oneal (1994), however, disproved this radical thesis with his empirical analysis of United
States of America (USA) foreign investment. Instead, he found that returns on investment were
‘strongly associated with economic growth in the host country’ (p. 583).
Market fundamentalism
Adam Smith’s (1776) Wealth of Nations marked the beginning of classical economic theory
(Preston, 2012) that experienced a resurgence in the late 1970s and again in the 1990s following the collapse of communism (Alacevich, 201; Stiglitz, 2002b, 2010). Neoliberal economic elites believed the policy shift to market fundamentalism would benefit the developed and developing world alike. Supported and reinforced by of the Chicago School, led by Milton Friedman, they highlighted sweeping structural adjustment programs (SAPs), coined as ‘reforms’, which gave developing countries limited options in pursuing neoliberal economic reforms (Stiglitz, 2010).
Neoclassical economic theory dismissed neo-Marxist theory and rejected structuralism
(Stiglitz, 2010; Todaro, 2011). It argued that economic stagnation, underdevelopment, and poverty in developing countries was a by-product of poorly designed economic policies, poor resource allocation, excessive state interference in the economy, corruption, inefficiency, and
34 inadequate economic incentives (Chang & Grabel, 2005; Contreras, 2001). Neoclassical theory emphasised that development strategies that relied on government interventions were bound to create inefficiencies and lead to economic stagnation, since governments were driven by self- interest and the desire to maintain power (Chang & Grabel, 2005; Fukuda-Parr, 2011; Stiglitz,
2010). The solution to under development lay in stimulating the domestic economy by creating an efficient market and laissez-faire policies for resource allocation (Chang & Grabel, 2005).
To promote sustainable economic growth, developing countries had to implement the
Washington Consensus, including; promotion of limited government intervention, the privatisation of state-owned enterprises, liberalisation of trade and foreign exchange markets, and elimination of market restrictions through deregulation (Ruckert, 2006; Stiglitz, 2010;
Todaro, 2011). Only then would market forces bring about development in stagnant economies
(Fukuda-Parr, 2011; Preston, 2012). However, rather than a theory of development,
Neoclassical economics mainly sought to explain efficient resource allocation in developed economies (Easterly, 2005; John & Storr, 2009). These observations were then extrapolated to developing economies. Market fundamentalism has dominated development since the 1980s, spawning structural adjustment across SSA (Chang & Grabel, 2005; Contreras, 2001; Easterly,
2005; Kayizzi-Mugerwa & Levin, 1994). This lost decade of development focused on economic restructuring (Easterly, 2002; Stiglitz, 2002a) but the forced marriage of global liberalism – liberalising markets and privatisation, and methodological nationalism – internationalisation of domestic policy was unsustainable (Stiglitz, 2002a), as shown by the
Asian financial crisis of late 1990s, Argentina’s meltdown in 2001, and the economic downturn of 2008 (Kay, 2000, 2008; Stiglitz, 2010).
Institutional theory
Institutional economics focuses on the role of institutions in shaping economic behaviour
drawing on historical analyses. In this way, it analyses the influence of institutional 35 frameworks on inter alia economic performance, wealth distribution, allocation of power, and new opportunities for development (Acemoglu, Johnson, & Robinson, 2002). Sen (2001) typifies this approach in his analysis of the crisis of capitalism, observing that:
Some detect the roots of capitalism’s success in the superior efficiency of the markets
… yet the experience of successful capitalism has always been based not just on the
market mechanism alone, but also on the development of an institutional combination
of which the market institution is but one part (p. 181).
Comparative studies have provided overwhelming evidence of consensus that the quality of a country’s institutions play a decisive role in economic growth, countering earlier emphases on variables, such as geographical location and the level of a country’s engagement with global trade partners (Booth, 2011b; Rodrik, 2014; Rodrik, Subramanian, & Trebbi, 2004; Sachs,
2005). The early development of Europe was attributed largely to the role institutions played in placing checks on monarchies, strengthening the voice of merchants, and protecting property rights (Acemoglu et al., 2002, 2005). Rodrik et al. (2004) defined institutions as humanly devised constraints that structured human interaction. They determined the rules of the game, that is, the norms governing socially sanctioned behaviour. Though what constituted institutions was often unclear, they played a role in regulating society through legitimising acceptable practices, such as enforcing human rights. Some institutions were homegrown, emerging from, and legitimating traditional sociocultural norms and practices, such as traditional healing in SSA (Luiz, 2009). Others were from other nations, where they had been successful or to enforce social control, such as colonial structures in
SSA (Driscoll & Evans, 2005; Nanda, 2006). The nature and structure of effective institutions, or how to develop them, has been a major focus of international development based on the belief that good governance and strong institutions was essential to
sustainable economic growth (Collier, 2007; Collier & Dollar, 2002; Mwangi & Markelova, 36 2009). It was generally agreed that cross-national differences in the performance of economies was shaped largely by the presence or absence of strong institutions in Eastern
Asia, Latin America, and Africa (Acemoglu, Johnson, & Robinson, 2006; Booth, 2011a;
Chang & Grabel, 2005; Collier, 2007; Collier & Dollar, 2004; Easterly & Levin, 2003; Luiz,
2009; Rodrik et al., 2004; Shamsul, 1997). Successful countries in Africa, like Botswana and
Mauritius, had strong institutions and were relatively free from corruption. Analyses of successful economic development in East Asia identified several contributory factors, including a focus on public education, broadening opportunities to access the benefits of the market economy, such as access to credit and land reform, and ‘a deliberate combination of state action and use of the market economy’ (Sen, 2001, p. 183). Most importantly, they focused on non- economic institutions to foster participation in the market economy (Pradhan, 2012;
Subramanian, 2007). The World Bank Policy Research Bureau (1993) attributed the East Asia miracle to a combination of sound development policies, tailored interventions, and an unusually rapid accumulation of physical and human capital. Though many factors contributed to the success of Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand, developmental institutions played a prominent role (Subramanian, 2007). In
Africa, the Economic Processing Zone (EPZ) in Mauritius created a convergence of developmental policies, practices, and players that led to phenomenal development (Shamsul,
1997; Subramanian, 2007). Prior to the EPZ, Mauritius was a candidate for failure, with its heavy reliance on sugar as its single export crop, but structural transformation in the 1970s and 1980s, and diversification into the textile trade, transformed the Mauritian economy into one of the healthiest in Africa (Kiiza, 2006). Likewise, the New Economic Policy set Malaysia on a path of expanding the public sector and developing public enterprises that were key to its economic success, development, and eradication of poverty (Shamsul, 1997). Naysayers like Narayan
(2000) argued that formal institutions were largely ineffective and irrelevant in the lives of the
37 poor, as most did not help them to escape poverty. Others like Sachs (2005, 2008) continued to
pinpoint geography and disease as fundamental causes of differences in national wealth and
income patterns.
Core focus of the discourse on poverty alleviation
Poverty and development
Conceptualisations and understandings of poverty have shifted over time, as strategies to deal
with economic and social inequalities have been debated at the national and global levels (Foli
& Béland, 2014; Ilcan & Lacey, 2015; Misturelli & Heffernan, 2010). Contemporary understandings of poverty arose in the 1950s with the culmination of Western imperialism, the emergence of postcolonial nation-states, and the founding of the Bretton Woods system of monetary management- the creation of the World Bank and IMF. Coined as the New
International Economic Order, the Bretton Woods system became pivotal to the development and reconstruction of Europe following World War II (Alacevich, 2012, 2009; Andrews, 2013).
During this time, the definition of poverty shifted. No longer seen as an effect of underdevelopment, it became a widespread and dangerous problem for liberal, market-based societies. As Andrews (2013) observed:
Development as an ‘inspiration’, ‘ideology’ and ‘field of study’ gained priority after
the end of World War II … with this post 1945-preoccupation with development arose
the need to deal with poverty, which was considered one of the major affronts to this
aspiration ... and the UN declarations of 1960s and 1970s as development decades,
solidified the ambition of economic growth (p. 23).
38 From this standpoint, poverty became linked to aspects of social policy reform, unemployment, global markets, and international development more broadly (Ilcan & Lacey, 2015). As Hickey
(2013) observed:
The politics of development has shifted significantly … with largely negative
implications for the poverty agenda. This is particularly apparent in countries like
Uganda where ‘poverty reduction papers’ have been displaced by national development
plans aimed at ‘structural transformation,’ driven by the discovery of oil, the growing
influence of rising powers vis-a`-vis traditional donors and domestic political shifts.
Although this heralds the possibility of deeper national ownership over development
policy, international financial institutions have adopted strategies to maintain their
influence. Moreover, Uganda currently lacks the underlying political capacities and
relationships required to roll out this ambitious new agenda [of structural
transformation] (p. 194).
Early definitions of poverty emphasised its social aspects, but by the end of the 1960s, economic growth and other economic criteria, such as income and employment levels, predominated. The central guiding principle of liberal economics was that the benefits of economic growth would ‘trickle down’ from the rich to the poor (Foli & Béland, 2014; Konkel,
2014). With the rising appeal of Amartya Sen’s (1999) human capabilities approach, multidimensional definitions of human development were adopted. This led to the Human
Development Index (HDI) and the MDGs, given the tide had turned towards good governance and accountability as a major policy focus. The HDI enabled the measurement of poverty
(Fukuda-Parr, 2003; Sen, 2000, 1999). Sustainable livelihoods became the goal of poverty reduction and other broad aspects of development (Andrews, 2013) though minimum income levels remained a persistent measure of standards of living and human well-being (Misturelli
& Heffernan, 2012; World Bank, 2001). Thus, poverty was still measured in terms of
39 household income and expenditure per capita along with other indices. These included food security; literacy and education levels; physical, mental, emotional, and social well-being; quality of life – happiness and hopefulness for the future; economic, social, and political participation – social inclusion and exclusion; and access to the benefits of economic, social, and cultural development. The World Bank’s conception of poverty at the time the MDGs were introduced was based primarily on the human poverty approach, as Pender (2001) explained:
As Kanbur & Squire note, ‘this represents a marked difference from conventional
definitions in that it does not mention income or expenditure but focuses on well-being
as revealed by nutritional status, educational attainment, and health status’ … The
Human Development Index, which measures these three outcomes, has replaced per
capita GDP as the measurement regarded as the most appropriate to indicate progress
in achieving development (p. 406).
Definitions of poverty linked to aid, poverty, and development have had a major impact on the poverty reduction debate. According to Sen (1999), mainstream poverty discourse took the following as self-evident truths:
. Poverty is measurable.
. It is a complex phenomenon and a multidimensional problem that is related to the
economy and therefore can be fixed by technical solutions.
. This removes space for political bargaining and assures the participation of those
defined as subjects of intervention.
Contemporary conceptualisation of poverty embedded a Eurocentric moral imperative to intervene based on ethical considerations to improve the life others (the poor). This, coupled with the perception of poverty as a lack of means or unmet basic needs, created an opportunity
40 for policy intervention and the expansion of productive and remunerative opportunities for the poor (Bardhan, 1996).
In post-colonial Uganda and most of SSA, development ideas were derived from the
19th Century views on European ‘progress and civilisation’, with all humans having an obligation to be productive. The modernisation doctrine held that the black race would achieve progress and civilisation through the development of capitalism as the system that best enabled humans to fulfil their productivity obligations (Escobar, 1995; McKnight, 2013). Historically, development had been defined in two strands: immanent and intentional. Immanent development, exemplified in capitalist development, referred to the interaction of sociopolitical and economic factors in human society in a historical period that included constructive and deconstructive forces. Intentional development referred to deliberative policies to manage the socioeconomic disruptions of immanent development, that is, of early industrial capitalism
(McKnight, 2013). Intentional development aimed to alleviate unemployment, poverty, and homelessness, among other social ills (McKnight, 2013). Modern definitions of development thus emphasised courses of action and policy to achieve desired ends, such as poverty reduction, democratisation, and sustained economic growth. Post-development theorists claimed that modernising development was part of the neocolonial project of the North to maintain its influence over the South (Escobar, 1995; McKnight, 2013). Hence, they saw development discourse as a power structure mapping the production of Third world societies as an ‘other’ requiring interventive development. In most cases, these interventions reinforced authoritarianism in the South and the historical hold of the North over the South (McKnight,
2013). As foreign intervention through aid increased, dependency theory became popular among critics of development in terms of which foreign aid and policy made underdeveloped countries dependent on their Northern benefactors (Erixon, 2003, 2005). They drew attention to the ‘two worlds’ economy with the capitalist industrialised nations at the economic centre
41 and the non-industrialised developing nations at the periphery. The capitalist industrial core was said to undermine the nations at the periphery, which were exploited as a source of cheap primary commodities and labour (Chang, 2003; Preston, 1999, 2012). The solution to underdevelopment, stagnation, and poverty reduction for the developing nations at the periphery was seen to reside in their disengagement from the industrialised core (Kay, 2008;
Kay & Gwynne, 2000). This could be achieved through protectionism, import substitution, and competitive domestic markets (Chang, 2003; Fukuda-Parr, 2011). Meanwhile, neoliberal theories perpetuated the idea that poverty was a product of poorly designed economic policies, poor governance, and systemic inefficiencies, such as corruption and mismanagement (Chang,
2005; Chang & Grabel, 2005). The solution was seen to rest in economic liberalisation, deregulation, and privatisation (Chang & Grabel, 2005; Pender, 2001).
Stiglitz (2002b) aptly described the transition from immanent to intentional development:
Development represents a transformation of society, a movement from traditional
relations, traditional ways of thinking, traditional ways of dealing with health,
education, traditional methods of production to modern ways. For example, a
characteristic of traditional societies is acceptance of the world as it is; the modern
perspectives recognizes change, it recognises that we, as individuals and societies can
take actions that, for instance, reduce infant mortality, increases lifespan, and increase
production (p. 164).
This understanding of development was consistent with the comprehensive development framework (CDF) discussed in the next sections of this chapter, which saw earlier conceptualisation of development as narrowly focused on economic resource allocation. The idea that increasing the supply of capital and improving efficiency in resource allocation would generate development, on its own, was insufficient (Stiglitz, 2002). It overlooked noneconomic
42 factors, such as the actions of target populations in shaping development (McKnight, 2013).
The comprehensive development paradigm operationalised a vision of development that elevated non-economic objectives across every aspect of society (Pender, 2001). According to
Pender (2001), as reported in the World Development Report 1999/2000:
the idea that development has multiple goals and that the policies and processes for
meeting them are complex and intertwined has provoked an intense debate on the
wisdom of traditional development thinking … this report emphasises the need to reach
beyond economics to address social issues in a holistic fashion (pp. 407-408).
Thus development broadened its ambit to inter alia poverty reduction, gender inequality, knowledge and information gaps, and overpopulation (Pender, 2001; Stiglitz, 2002b). This represented an improvement in development thinking, as economic development might raise productivity and incomes and even alter the mindsets of certain enclaves of the economy (those that achieved economic success), while not necessarily transforming society as whole (Stiglitz,
2002b).
Role of aid and development in poverty alleviation
Constructions of aid and development, and their role in poverty alleviation hinged on these
changing conceptualisations of poverty within different development discourses. There has
been much deal of discussion and debate on the relationship between aid, poverty, and
development (Erikson, 2003, 2005): first, whether there were clear links between foreign aid
and development in Africa and, secondly, whether aid had succeeded in making Africa better
place or undermined progress (Andrews, 2013; Apodaca, 2010; Hussain, Berg, & Aiyar, 2009).
Rowden (2010) contentiously argued that poverty reduction was not development and critics have ‘blamed development failures explicitly on aid’ (Sjöstedt, 2013, p. 143).
43 A retrospective analysis of the discourses shaping development aid and the policies designed to reduce poverty through aid-driven development, reveals several major policy shifts, over time, as shown in Table 2.1:
1. Modernisation (1945-1979) comprised key policies focused on ‘national economic
development’, including the Marshall Plan (1948) and the Pearson Commission
Report (1969) Partners in Development.
2. Structural adjustment, euphemistically promoted as ‘integration with the global
economy’, began with the Brandt Commission (1980) and was followed by the
Washington Consensus (1980-1990).
3. Post-Washington Consensus (1990-1997) moved policy toward the partnership era
involving international cooperation and country ownership of development within
the CDF.
4. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (2000-2015) were formulated to end
poverty by 2015.
Development discourses shaping foreign aid and poverty reduction policies
Modernisation (1954-1979)
In the 1950s, the development discourse of modernisation – or progress – focused on economic growth through increased economic production and consumption. Policies were set in place to ensure the social infrastructure could support these outcomes. National governments played a central role in aid-funded economic development in the modernisation era. Modernisation engendered a new discourse on development. The organising premise for this discourse was belief in the doctrine of modernisation as the only force capable of destroying archaic superstitious relations, notwithstanding the social, cultural, and political costs.
44 Table 2.1 Historical trajectory of dominant development discourses
Dominant discourse Period Meaning Basic tenets and key policies Modernisation 1945-1969
Marshall Plan (1948) Markets were a central Focus on economic development problem as development with strategies to enhance economic financial and technical growth and industrial assistance to industrial production became the focus production sectors Pearson Commission 1969- Aid-led development Social redistribution Report (1969) 1980 focused on vulnerable groups Structural adjustment 1980s-1990s
Brandt Commission 1980- Call for minimal government Aid-recipient countries Report (1980) 1990 intervention and maximum were required to restore Washington market freedom led to property rights, and Consensus (1980- structural adjustment tied to introduce tax reform and 1997) strong conditions, including fiscal discipline, and trade liberalisation, market restructure public deregulation, service spending priorities privatisation, financial (reduce dependency on liberalisation, and debt state welfare benefits and management social services) Post-Washington 1990- The ‘partnership era’ Based on country Consensus 2000 developed in the mid-1990s ownership of World Bank Study (Sjöstedt, 2013) and the World development policies and Assessing Aid (1998) Bank and IMF introduced cooperation between IFIs, PRSPs in 1999 - ‘structural national governments, adjustment under a new name’ and civil society (Booth, 2003, p. 869) organisations Comprehensive Development Framework 2000s onwards
Millennium 2000-2015 CDF integrating the Poverty eradication Development Goals multidimensional aspects of through increased donor (2000) human development and support to developing Monterrey Consensus making ‘public policy and countries targeted at (2002) public expenditure more country-specific needs poverty focused’ (Ahmed, and making aid effective 2005, p.766) through ownership, Development policy reforms to alignment, harmonisation, Paris Declaration make aid more effective and results-based (2005) accountability (Sjöstedt, 2013)
45 Escobar (1995) suggested that modernising development discourses effectively created an efficient apparatus for producing knowledge about, and the exercise of power over, the developing world. Dominant modern Western knowledge systems became accepted as absolute truth and marginalised non-Western frames of reference (Ilcan & Lacey, 2015; Kay, 2008).
The professionalisation of development gave experts the power to construct frameworks of truth and norms about the Third World, which they promulgated and distributed through global institutions and their power networks (Engerman & Unger, 2009; Escobar, 1995; Kay, 2008).
Global international development institutions framed these theories and practices through their central role in development programs, while modernising development discourses led to concrete practices through which the Third World was produced (Escobar, 1995; Ilcan &
Lacey, 2015; Peet & Hartwick, 2009). Africa’s development was thus premised on capitalist ideologies and technologies that had proven effective in the post-war reconstruction of Europe
(Ilcan & Anita, 2015). Framed as poverty reduction interventions, they focused on economic development and failed to take account of the historical, geographical, sociocultural, economic, and political realities of, and variations within, African societies (Ilcan & Lacey, 2015; Peet &
Hartwick, 2009; Stiglitz, 2002b, 2010). However, as Rostow (1990) envisaged, countries at different stages of economic transition will be faced with unique opportunities and constraints as defined or dictated by prevailing conditions influenced by historical events and an evolving world order promoting the modernisation doctrine. Beginning with the post-war Marshall Plan
(1948), subsequent development policies sought to modernise African countries like Uganda under the umbrella of economic development aimed at poverty reduction, while embedding and protecting the capitalist social order.
Marshall Plan (1948)
The Marshall Plan (1948) ‒ known formally as the European Recovery Plan ‒ aimed to rebuild
Europe after the World War II by removing trade barriers and modernising industry. This
46 provided the model for the approach based on the ‘view that aid effectiveness [was] influenced by the recipient country’s institutions and policies … [and] specific country cases in which foreign assistance combined with sound institutions and policies produced positive results’
(Dollar & Levin, 2006, p. 2034). The Marshall Plan’s goal was to build the recipient country’s institutions and policies to produce improvements in the living conditions of those in extreme poverty (Dollar & Levin, 2006, p. 2034). Since the dominant view was that ‘projects in all sectors tend to fail in countries with weak institutions and policies’ (Dollar & Levin, 2006, p.
2034), it was thought that sound institutions and policies were essential if the injection of foreign capital were going to stimulate economic growth in developing countries. The liberal economic ideology behind this modernising approach was that capital investment would stimulate growth based on the ‘trickle down’ effect. United States of America foreign aid had the added impetus to make developing countries less receptive to Communism and Socialism
(Alacevich, 2012; Grünbacher, 2012; Konkel, 2014).
The World Bank closely followed and stressed the importance of helping developing countries to achieve socioeconomic and political stability so as to create an environment in which the market could function better, given that under-development and poorly functioning markets were seen as a central development problem at the time: ‘Growth at whatever cost … was reinforced by academics like Kuzanets insisting that that countries undergoing growth would first experience inequalities, but would be corrected in the long-run’ (Konkel, 2014, p.
286). This opportunism was fueled in the 1950s and 1960s by a growing world economy with booming markets for exports of primary commodities and low energy prices. Investment was the main platform of the economic framework though, in the absence of high savings rates, foreign aid was deemed the most efficient way of providing developing countries with the necessary capital to kick-start their economies:
47 The development community supplied foreign aid for different purposes … donors
designed foreign aid to transfer resources from taxpayers in rich countries to
governments in poor countries with a goal of filling the investment gap ‒ the difference
between the level of investment ostensibly needed to propel economic growth in the
recipient country and the level of savings it had domestically to devote this purpose
(Leeson, 2008, p. 41).
Developing countries on their own had no capacity to raise savings to finance large investments; besides, they were less attractive to foreign investors who would inject private capital. Therefore, it became pertinent to support developing countries through foreign aid:
The International Development Association … provided concessional resources;
countries agreed to follow reform programs through Country Assistance Strategies, and
assistance under IDA programs was interest free … based on the recognition that the
poor countries were too poor to borrow at commercial rates (Blackmon, 2008, p. 186).
International cooperation between the developed and developing countries was precisely defined and shaped along this modernisation tendency. Multilateral and bilateral aid programs were established, providing financial and technical assistance, and focusing strongly on the productive sectors (de Haan, 2009; Degnbol-Martinussen, 2003; Dibua, 2006, 2008; Herath,
2009; Riddell, 2007).
As the 1950s and 1960s progressed, it became increasingly clear that capital transfers failed to deliver quick positive results as anticipated and capital investment was gradually relinquished. Donors promptly opted for long-term, broad aid efforts to support developing countries in their quest for development, though economic growth still occupied the central position for most donors until early 1970s (O’Brien, 2010). Various scholarly findings continued to show support for the argument that economic growth did not automatically
48 translate into benefits to everyone in society (Erixon, 2005). The modernisation doctrine had failed miserably to resolve the problems of vulnerable groups, such as women, children, youth, the disabled, uneducated and those without economic assets (Hulme, 2003; Midgley, 2014).
This prompted a consensus among international donor institutions and bilateral donor agencies to consider special development goals to include growth, redistribution with growth, with a key component for the inclusion of the poor and women in developing countries. Prominent amongst them was the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and United Nation
International Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (Degnbol-Martinussen, 2003; Misturelli &
Heffernan, 2012, 2010; Quibria, 2005).
Pearson Commission Report and social redistribution decade (1970s)
The failure of market-led growth to reduce poverty led to a shift in development policy
preferences during the 1970s. These focused on the role of the state in promoting equitable and balanced development and development planning. It followed a realisation that national governments had a key role to play in developing countries. This new approach to policy formulation focused on balancing the imperatives of economic growth with those of social development, thus supporting a broad-based socioeconomic policy framework, to guarantee long-term prosperity (Gray, 2006; Midgley, 2014).
On August 19, 1968, newly appointed President of the World Bank Robert McNamara, asked the former Prime Minister of Canada and Noble Peace laureate, Lester Pearson, to chair a commission investigating the root sources of, and potential solutions to, world poverty.
Pearson accepted the challenge and spent 11 months leading a team of experts in reviewing and assessing the two prior decades of international development policy. After visits to more than 70 countries to examine the effects of past development policies, including ‘the volume and the terms of aid, the debt burden of developing countries, technical assistance, trade, private investment, population, the structure of aid giving’ (Commission on International
49 Development, 1969, p. 7), the Pearson Commission on International Development released its
Partners in Development Report (also known as the Pearson Report) in 1969 (World Bank,
1969). The report called for donor nations to increase their official development assistance
(ODA) to ‘reach 0.70% of GNP by 1975 or shortly, thereafter, but in no case later than 1980’
(UN Millennium Project, 2005, p. 252). Consequently, in 1972, the World Bank adjusted its formulation to include redistribution with growth. McNamara introduced the newly formulated goals to give special priority to meeting the basic needs of the large groups of poor people in developing countries (Konkel, 2014). The ILO, UNICEF and other UN aid organisations embraced this new development. The ILO’s World Employment Program represented a shift away from the growth model in recognition of the scale of world poverty to focus on the creation of productive employment and provision of public services. This new focus was an answer to the ‘authoritarian turn the process of modernisation had taken in many postcolonial contexts. It emphasised that strategies and national development plans and policies should prioritise employment’ (Degnbol-Martinussen, 2003, p. 26).
McNamara explicitly committed the World Bank to focus on poverty reduction. In his famous speech in Nairobi at the World Bank-IMF meeting in 1973, he emphasised the extent and persistence of rural poverty, and pledged to increase aid and transform developing societies
(Alacevich, 2012; Konkel, 2014). Within the same period, Britain’s development policy was shifting to include social development concerns, largely drawing support from British chief economist and scholar at IDS- Sussex, Dudley Seers, who continued to question the
Neoclassical approach to development and stressed the urgency of normative concerns to capture basic needs and just social distribution:
To him, economic growth not only fails to solve social and political problems, but
certain types of growth can cause them … Seers extends broad definitions of
development which looks at aspects of poverty, unemployment and inequality …
50 fulfilment of human potential requires education, freedom of speech, and citizen of a
country that is truly independent (Herath, 2009, p. 1456).
However, in his opening remarks to his report, Pearson acknowledged that the time frame of eleven months given to the commission by the World Bank was too limited for in- depth, situated analysis. He went further to say the report was based on desk-study analysis and meetings with various government representatives, who presented their views based on their experiences, wishes and interests, rather than data from intensive empirical studies
(Commission on International Development, 1969).
Structural adjustment era
Brandt Commission Report (1980)
The most comprehensive and broad-based analysis of the various issues of international development to date was the report by the Independent Commission on International
Development, chaired by Willy Brandt, former German Chancellor and member of the
European Parliament (Henderson, 1980). The Commission’s aim was to change the attitude of the international community towards development in Third World countries. The Brandt
Commission Report (1980) highlighted growing economic inequality and income disparities between the industrialised North and developing South and called for international cooperation to stimulate economic growth and social development through inter alia the transfer of resources from the developed North to the developing South through improved trade relations, debt waivers, the stabilisation of world currencies, and emergency assistance programs
(Henderson, 1980; Quilligan, 2010). Creating partnerships with developing countries in the
South, it was thought, would unlock their productive potential, all the while simultaneously benefitting the wealthy North (Fike, 2009; Riddell, 2011; Tribe, 1982).
51 Washington Consensus (1980–1997)
The Washington consensus referred to a range of policy measures stemming from classical economic theory: they emphasised the need for fiscal discipline, market-determined exchange and interest rates, protection of property rights, the liberalisation of the economy, privatisation, and the removal of trade barriers to attract foreign direct investment (Pender, 2001; Stiglitz,
2000a, 2000b, 2010; Williamson, 2004). Washington-based institutions adopted these policy measures in response to the economic crisis of the 1970s, discussed previously, expecting developing countries to follow suit in return for donor support (Stiglitz, 2002b; Verschoor,
2007). A political shift in political power to the extreme Right in the large industrial countries of the United States of America, Great Britain, and the Federal Republic of Germany with
Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and Helmut Kohl at the helm, respectively, created the environment in which these conservative economic policy measures promoting reduced state intervention in the economy and increased reliance on market fundamentalism flourished and had a profound effect on international cooperation (Alacevich, 2012; Broad, 2004; Herath,
2009; Konkel, 2014). The focus of foreign aid moved back to national economic growth, but with a clear connection to the ‘structural transformation’ of developing countries’ political economies through structural adjustment reforms: ‘Major international institutions such as the
World Bank and IMF forced doses of neoliberal advice into developing countries through structural adjustment policies’ (Herath, 2009, p. 1454).
Pender (2001) noted that structural adjustment embedded the conditionality policy framework proposed by World Bank President Robert McNamara in 1979 which made donor financial support contingent on the adoption of a set of policies contained in the Brandt
Commission Report (1980) that the economic crisis had derailed. The World Bank and Right- wing politicians alike promoted market fundamentalism, that is, ‘free and unfettered markets’ with a deregulated financial sector, privatised services, and trade and fiscal liberalisation
52 (Stiglitz, 2000b; Williamson, 2004). They believed that market fundamentalism would benefit the developed and developing world alike.
Bilateral donor aid operations embraced this so-called neoliberal policy shift through structural adjustment policies. Aid recipient countries were required to fulfill ‘specifically formulated demands’ or meet ‘key reform targets’ to qualify for foreign aid. Recipient governments received financial support on a clear and elaborate promise to reform their policies and institutions (Hyden, 1993; Stiglitz, 2002a, 2000b). The emerging dominant discourse, together with priority goals and strategies characterising these new international cooperation protocols, came to be described as the ‘Washington Consensus’.
Post-Washington Consensus
By 1990, it was clear that structural adjustment was yielding negative results; conditionality was producing disappointing outcomes among the beneficiaries: ‘since the mid-1980s,
important mainstream economists associated with market failure approach, such as Joseph
Stiglitz, had proposed that the market left to itself would not always result in the most efficient and effective outcome’ (Pender, 2001, p. 400). Left out by the adjustment reform policies,
‘little attention was paid to the effects on the poor’ (Blackmon, 2008a, p. 185). The World
Bank and IMF had come under increasing criticism from the UN and other bilateral agencies for the failures of its structural adjustment policy (Byekwaso, 2010; Hickey, 2009; Kasekende,
2007; Kuteesa, Magona, Wanyera, & Wokadala, 2006; Midgley, 2003; Mijumbi, 2001;
Noorbakhsh, 1999; Verschoor, 2007). The World Bank had to address the problem which shifted the policy direction prioritising specific measures for the poorest. New policy proposals emphasised recipient-country ownership of development policies and programs (Pender, 2001;
Whitfield, 2010). The cornerstone of this policy shift was the CDF, touted as an inclusive, multidimensional framework for development focused on human development, recipient- country ownership and local participation.
53 These new policy proposals found support from those who favoured the human development and capabilities approach highlighting the importance of health, education, freedom, and meaningful work and leisure to peoples’ quality of life (Sen, 1999). Structural adjustment thus gave way to partnership and collaboration between IFIs, national governments, and civil society organisations. The IFIs became policy advisors, while borrowing governments took ownership of development policies and programs (Clark & Hulme, 2010; Shilliam, 2012).
As Rowden (2010) noted, these advisors sought ways to integrate the developing economies into the world economy, on a new policy dimension as they sought to abandon and improve the adjustment policies.
Comprehensive Development Framework
The World Bank’s CDF encouraged decentralised policy making in the belief that the transfer
of authority from central to local governments and nongovernment stakeholders would
benefit the poor (Fraser, 2005, 2014; Pender, 2001). Local participation and ownership, it was
believed, would improve efficiency, effectiveness, and equity in the allocation of public
resources (Craig & Porter, 2003; Latyniskiy & Berger, 2016; Pender, 2001; Stevens, 2005). The
underlying idea was that the country’s poverty reduction strategy would be an outcome of a
participatory process reflecting the country’s priorities. This would simplify coordination
between donors and decentralised local governments, translating into effective poverty
reduction in decentralised local council units, while improving institutional environment within which the mass poor could construct their own pathways out of poverty (Ellis & Mdoe, 2003,
Gruber, 2011; Hyden, 2007). In terms of ownership, the ultimate agreement was that the countries agree on, decide on, and implement policies they prefer premised on domestic political and administrative process and aspirations (Fukuda-Parr & Hulme, 2011).
54 The first initiative within this new policy thrust introduced in 1996 involved debt relief for Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) to make money available for social expenditure
(Mijumbi, 2001; Pender, 2001). Following the success of this initiative, the second thrust required national governments to develop their own CDF or PRSPs (IMF & World Bank,
1999). The redirection of funds previously set aside to service debt to poverty reduction rested on ‘country ownership and participation’ in the development of the PRSPs (Blackmon, 2008;
Krugman, 1995). First coined as concessional assistance for lower-income countries, the
PRSPs focused initially on debt relief as a response to the failure of the structural adjustment reforms (Mijumbi, 2001). They envisaged national ownership of policy transformation and reduction of transaction costs among donor agencies. Given the lack of coordination among donors, the PRSPs’ partnership development paradigm became a comprehensive prerequisite for all countries in receipt of World Bank concessions and IMF loans, and this massive shift in international development cooperation attracted political support from recipient countries
(Booth, 2003; Gore, 2004; Marcus, Wilkinson, & Marshali, 2002). As Canagarajah and van
Diesen (2011) explain:
In December 1999, the World Bank and the IMF introduced the idea that low-income countries applying for debt relief under the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)
Initiative should develop and implement a Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) as a precondition.
Five principles underpinning the PRS approach were articulated (IMF/World Bank, 1999):
. Country ownership: A PRS should be a country-driven development strategy, based
on broad-based participation of a wide range of stakeholders.
. Results orientation: A PRS should be based on a sound understanding of the nature
and determinants of poverty and should specify indicators and targets to facilitate
implementation and monitoring.
55 . Comprehensive approach: Considering the multidimensional nature of poverty, a
PRS should be comprehensive and integrate institutional, structural, and sectoral
interventions into a consistent macroeconomic framework.
. Partnership framework: A PRS should involve a diversity of development partners
under the coordination of a government.
. Long-term outlook: A PRS should recognise that poverty reduction was a long-term
process that needed a medium- and long-term perspective, backed up by medium-
to long-term commitments of support by development partners (pp. 135-136).
The PRSPs’ initiative firmly ensured that developing countries were brought back into the fold with minimal space to pursue their own policy priorities to support contextualised economic growth. They were a:
means of linking enhanced Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) debt relief to more
focused poverty-reduction efforts in … eligible countries … [and] made governments
across sub-Saharan Africa … organise national consultations to generate [their] Poverty
Reduction Strategy Papers (Booth, 2003, p. 836).
Many criticised the PRSPs because they were externally designed and developed and not based on in-depth empirical studies of what was needed in local and national contexts
(Ahmed, 2005; Craig, 2006; Golooba-Mutebi & Hickey, 2010; Hickey, 2013; Morgan, 2009).
Though they were coined as ‘advice’, essentially PRSPs became international economic plans and guidelines that focused on poverty reduction as a condition for debt cancellation and foreign aid (Apodaca, 2010; Broad, 2004; Booth, 2003, Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006 2011;
Dijkstra, 2002; 2005) and were reviewed periodically to establish whether conditions for debt cancellation and further aid were being met (Fraser, 2005). Ruckert (2006) referred to them as the product of an ‘inclusive neoliberal regime that has been in the making since the
56 articulation of [the] PWC’ (p. 47). However, they were aimed at softening neoliberal fundamentalism through a renewed focus on human development and local participation but did not remove principles of conditionality. Apodaca (2010) observed that:
In 1999, the HIPC initiative was enhanced … to provide ‘faster, broader and deeper
debt relief’ and to allow more countries to qualify for this debt relief program … once
qualified, the country had to remain committed to ‘sound macro-economic policies with
a focus on poverty reduction’ … Debt relief would free up resources the country could
use for poverty alleviation measures, infrastructure construction and human
development projects (p. 110).
Nevertheless, the PRSPs achieved widespread consensus among international development institutions, Northern governments, and bilateral donor agencies. They laid the ground for poverty intervention and long-term development based on neoliberal premises that continued with the MDGs (Ilcan & Lacey, 2015).
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (2000-2015)
The emergence of the MDGs reflected a change in focus from development to poverty
alleviation. They followed growing consensus that emerged in the mid-1990s and culminated
in a set of proposals that gained widespread acceptance (Fukuda-Parr, 2011; Pender, 2001).
Following the 2000 Millennium Summit, most bilateral and multilateral donors committed to
making substantial increases in the volume of development assistance to developing countries.
The MDGs were predicated on the premise of rich countries had a responsibility to help developing countries to achieve economic growth through fair trade, increased foreign aid, debt forgiveness and transfer of medicine (Haines & Cassels, 2004; Mishra, 2004). The Millennium
Project (2005) called for aid flows to be increased from USD69 billion in 2003 to USD135
57 billion in 2006 rising to USD196bn by 2015 (Sachs & McArthur, 2005). Political leaders from around the world agreed on the MDGs to end poverty by 2015. These goals aimed to:
1. Eradicate extreme poverty.
2. Achieve universal primary school enrolment.
3. Promote gender equality and empower women.
4. Reduce child mortality.
5. Improve maternal health.
6. Combat HIV and AIDS, malaria, and other diseases.
7. Ensure environmental sustainability.
8. Develop a global partnership for development (Chibba, 2011).
The MDGs represented global efforts to address poverty and deprivation through measurable and concrete targets. They were predominantly influenced by a series of patterns that framed international development discourse in the 1990s emphasising human development and results-based management (Hulme, 2012; Ziai, 2011). The evolution of these ideas was occasioned by a diversity of political and civil society considerations. The Development
Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) had a major impact on the design and development of the agenda culminating in the
MDGs. Significant was its pledge to increase donor aid flow to developing countries to help them reach the international development goals (MDGs) by 2015. They stressed:
. Economic wellbeing and sought to halve the proportion of people living in extreme
poverty.
. Social development through universal primary education; increased gender
equality, women’s empowerment, and provision of reproductive health services;
and a reduction in infant mortality rates through improved primary healthcare.
58 . Environmental sustainability and regeneration through sustainable development.
The UNDP Human Development Reports (HDRs) of the 1990s and the United Nations
Summit on Human Development in 1999 had drawn heavily on the work of Amartya Sen
(1999, 2000), who saw poverty not merely as a lack of income but also as a multidimensional phenomenon that required systematic and coordinated policy responses giving people increased access to education, health, nutrition, and economic opportunities (Fukuda-Parr,
2003; UN Millennium, 2005). In contrast to the focus on infrastructure, human capital, and industrial expansion in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, the economic liberalisation of the 1980s, and the institutional and governance reforms of the 1990s, the MDGs shifted the policy focus to poverty alleviation (Greig, Hulme, & Turner, 2007). Global consensus on poverty reduction spurred the UN General Assembly to use the approaching millennium as an opportunity to introduce these new poverty alleviation measures. On September 8, 2000, the UN Secretary
General and 189 Member Countries agreed on the Millennium Development Agenda with its
MDGs. The goals were subsequently updated in 2005 by the Inter-agency and Expert Group on the MDG Indicators. The Agenda comprised eight goals, 21 targets; originally 18, and 60 indicators, originally 48 (Poku & Whitman, 2011). It was argued, extreme global poverty could be halved by the 2015 based on careful planning and enhanced aid assistance to the Global
South. To the framers of this international development architecture, poverty and economic stagnation in developing countries was attributed to killer diseases: malaria and AIDS, geographical factors such as physical isolation, climate stress, environmental degradation, and distance from coastlines, governance failures, and above all, absence of financial capital to pursue crucial investments together with other factors (Manning, 2008; Sumner & Melamed,
2010).
The MDG agenda required global cooperation and increased external financial assistance for developing countries, as promised by the Monterrey Consensus on Financing for
59 Development (Fosu, 2010; Poku & Whitman, 2011; Sachs & McArthur, 2005; Saith, 2006). It promoted ‘the idea that foreign aid [was] more effective when targeted to countries with sound institutions’ (Dollar & Levin, 2006). However, while the targets were championed in public speeches, many believed there was little hope of developing countries achieving them (Sachs,
2008). Though they were couched in the language of partnership, ownership, and participation, the MDGs were technocratic, top-down measures to ensure accountability to funders with little attention paid to country-specific needs, the structural causes of socioeconomic deprivation, or the voices of aid recipients (Hulme & Scott, 2010; Sumner, 2006; Stein & Horns, 2012).
Ultimately, they were neoliberal devices to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of development programs in recipient countries (Hulme, 2010).
Progress varied from one region to another, and from one country to other (Fischer,
2010). On a positive note, enhanced accessibility to primary education, reduction of deaths due to malaria, and improved access to clean water were widely achieved (Stein & Horn, 2012;
Poku & Whitman, 2011). However, some targets, for example those related to child and maternal mortality and reproductive health were not achieved nor were goals relating to environmental improvement (Gray, Coates, & Davies, 2017).
Some scholars and policy makers believed that the failure to achieve some MDG targets was due to difficulties in framing national development targets within an internationally developed universal framework (Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Lemanski, 2016; Stuart & Woodroffe,
2016). Others saw top-down exercises enacted by international development agencies through national governments as an obstacle by failing to acknowledge sociocultural and local issues
(Fischer, 2010; Hulme & Scott, 2010; Slack, 2015). Some scholars believed the MDGs distorted the bottom-up, grassroots participation the PRSPs had aimed to achieve (Gore, 2004;
Siath, 2006) and continued to focus on economic development as a route to poverty alleviation
(Fosu, 2010; Lemanski, 2016; Poku & Whitman, 2011). The PRSPs had been couched in the
60 language of participation, ownership, and partnership, which entailed national governments
including diverse stakeholders in the construction of national priorities on poverty reduction
(Driscoll & Evans, 2005; Pender, 2001). The MDG framework differed as it drew a list of goals
and objectives that developing countries, national governments, donor agencies, the United
Nations and its multilateral organisations and major stakeholders were expected to follow,
irrespective of the differing contexts in which they were expected to be implemented, let alone
national priorities (Fukuda-Parr & Hulme, 2011; Manning, 2009; Sumner & Melamed, 2010).
At the broadest level, the MDGs attracted two prominent arguments: the neoliberal growth
perspective contended that MDGs shifted attention to social policy dimension, with less
focus on growth and private sector engagement in the poverty reduction agenda. As such,
they overstated the role and capacity of the state, with no attention to the role of private actors,
local institutional and sociocultural networks that are so significant in shaping success and
failures of any policy, especially in rural and local settings in SSA (Bandiera & Rasul, 2006;
Gore, 2010; Saith, 2006). This was bound to raise implementation challenges at the local and
institutional levels (Cecchini & Notti, 2011; Chibba, 2011). While critics of the economic
growth model noted that MDGs were less progressive, they tended to remain in the middle,
amid repositioned neoliberal policies (Fukuda-Parr, Yamin, & Greenstein, 2014; Ilcan &
Lacey, 2015).
The MDGs signified a modest shift in development policy that left global capitalism as the main driving force in poverty reduction (Gore, 2004; Imai, Gaiha, & Thapa, 2010). They failed to diminish social and economic inequalities or redistribute resources; conceptualised poverty as an absence of income, goods, services, and resources; and were not embedded in a human rights framework (Fukuda-Parr & Hulme, 2011; Lemanski, 2016; McGregor & Sumner,
2010). Gore (2010) argued that the MDG framework carried with it a possibility of perverting informed intellectual and research agendas that could function as a catalyst for balanced
61 development at the global, national, and local levels. Nevertheless, the MDGs marked an extraordinary period in the history of international development as they garnered widespread commitment to poverty reduction worldwide (Fukuda-Parr, 2011; Gore, 2010; Mironenko,
Lucas, Tarasova, & Zlinszky, 2015; Solberg, 2015). As Solberg (2015) noted:
The eight goals broke the new ground not only by being the first set goals of its kind,
but also by catching the attention of millions of policy makers at the national and
international level. They became the engine for effective public-private partnership …
the lasting impact of new ways of working together to reach common global
development goals is a great extent a result of the MDGs (p. 58).
Monterrey Consensus (2002)
The Monterrey Consensus emerged from the UN Conference on Financing for Development held in Monterrey, Mexico in March 2002. It included the idea that developing countries’ institutions and policies were keys to sustainable development and, furthermore, sound policies and good governance were necessary to ensure the success of Official of Development
Assistance (Dollar & Levin, 2006). This consensus was viewed as a breakthrough in terms of increased financing as a pledge was made to increase donor support to developing countries, and the issue of collaboration among stakeholders to address the long-term challenges of financing for development was raised. The main tenets were captured as: good governance to fight corruption, only achievable with the support of the recipient country institutions and polices; increasing official aid; debt relief; aid trade, the focus here was institutional building and aid support trade services; the introduction of innovative instruments; and the coordination of international cooperation through the adoption of common standards and procedures
(Nunnenkamp & Thiele, 2013).
62 Following the Monterrey Consensus, there was a massive increase in official development assistance to SSA. By 2005, the aid disbursed by all Development Assistance
Countries (DAC) donors had increased by 0.3% (Nunnenkamp & Thiele, 2013). It was coupled with a temporary increase in debt cancellation following the HIPC initiative mentioned previously, as well as the multilateral debt relief of 2005. Following Monterrey, the subsequent
Gleneagles summit saw European Union DAC member states committing to an increase in their collective aid share from 0.35% in 2004 to 0.56% in 2010, with the aim of reaching 0.7% by 2015. However, the increase of 0.3% came much later than envisaged at Monterrey and was below the UN target of 0.7%. The promise of Monterrey was short-lived as major donors maintained their economic self-interests. Nunnenkamp and Thiele (2013) observed that remarkable achievements, like debt cancellation, had in any way predated Monterrey. Strategic considerations beyond economic growth and poverty reduction continued to sideline poor countries, while another global financial crisis derailed poverty reduction programs. Increased aid and debt cancellation had not translated into higher growth rates and had not reduced poverty in the Global South (Easterly, 2001, 2006; Moyo, 2009; Rajan & Subramanian, 2008).
Nevertheless, international development institutions continued to promote good governance to stem the corruption that was making aid ineffective in poverty reduction (Collier, 2007).
Paris Declaration (2005)
From 1990 onwards, there was growing evidence of the ineffectiveness of externally generated development aid policy and conditional international aid assistance in reducing poverty in beneficiary countries. Following general acceptance of this mounting evidence, over 100 donors and developing countries met in Paris in 2005 to undertake major reforms. Their goal was to make international development aid more effective in furthering the developing countries’ efforts to achieve the MDGs by 2015 (Gruber, 2011; Sjöstedt, 2013). It was agreed this could be done by ensuring international development cooperation to make donor support
63 more responsive to the needs and priorities of beneficiaries. Thus, the Paris Declaration on Aid
Effectiveness (OECD, 2005) was built around five pillars: ownership, alignment, harmonisation, managing for development results, and mutual accountability (Manning, 2008).
It called on donor countries to streamline their development support programs to meet country- specific needs. Sjöstedt (2013) observed two new trends in international development aid:
The first is an emphasis on partner country ownership of the development strategy,
around which donors are to align themselves and harmonize their efforts. The Paris
Declaration … proposes a clear shift away from donor fragmentation and externally
imposed conditionality. Development aid should instead be coordinated and, for
example, channeled directly into the central budget of the recipient government in line
with its priorities … The second feature – also codified in the Paris Declaration – is that
results-based management increasingly is being applied to international development
policy, that is, aid is to be allocated on … performance as measured by the strength of
country policies and memorable results (pp. 143‒144).
The Paris Declaration was followed by the third High-Level Forum (HLF) on Aid Effectiveness in Accra, Ghana, in 2008 (Manning, 2008). The Accra Declaration again sought ways to make aid more effective in achieving the MDGs by 2015.
Critics argued that the implementation of the new aid framework captured in Paris put more pressure on development partners and donor recipients alike (Gruber, 2011; Manning,
2008). The Paris agreement required donors to promote partner country ownership, harmonise their efforts with other donors, and broadly align with recipient country policy priorities.
However, donor institutions and recipient governments prioritised measurable outcomes to meet reporting requirements. Both had vested interests in demonstrating progress (Sjöstedt,
2013). Aid disbursement and collaboration on project implementation did not necessarily
64 equate to poverty alleviation. Also, tensions arose on who took credit for success or was accountable for the failure of joint projects.
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
With the timeframe for the MDGs coming to an end, a new set of guidelines was needed to guide the international development agenda on poverty alleviation. Broad consultations on what was to follow the MDGs began in 2012 at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable
Development, known as Rio+20. It included national and international institutions committed to the global development agenda (Hill, Buse, Brolan, & Ooms, 2014). The formulation of new goals involved an elaborate process of discussion and negotiation among member states.
Frustrated with the failures of the MDGs relating inter alia to reproductive health, partnership development, and structural and policy reform (Barrett & Carter, 2013), stakeholders saw the need for a broadened international development program to meet the challenges of the 21st century (Fukuda-Parr, 2016). As with the MDGs, the universally applicable goals had to address the three pillars of sustainable development: the economic, social, and environmental dimensions (van Vuren, 2015). The proposed goals went through a protracted process of consultation and negotiation among national governments, UN agencies, civil society organisations, academics, and business groups worldwide (Esquivel, 2016; Fukuda-Parr, 2016;
Solberg, 2015). This culminated in the adoption of the SDGs in September 2015 (Esquivel,
2016; Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Rosche, 2016). The SDGs provided new global policy priorities on development to be achieved by 2030. They comprised 17 goals and 169 targets, acknowledged the complexity of sustainable development and its multidimensional focus on social inclusion, institutional reform, resource allocation, good governance, policy reforms, and mobilisation of support for effective implementation (Esquivel, 2016; Solberg, 2015). These ‘people-centered, universal, [and] transformative’ (Zapatrina, 2016, p. 39) goals became the centre-piece of mass mobilisation to improve in areas where the MDGs had failed. They allowed for national
65 governments, NGOs, private sector organisations, and other interest groups to incorporate
targets relating to local and national concerns, and advocated strong, innovative development partnerships (Zapatrina, 2016; Zdavovskis & Pilvere, 2015). The SDGs are listed in Table 2.2.
Though extreme poverty had been reduced by more than a half since 1990, a fifth of the world’s population still lived on less than USD1.25 a day. The SDGs broadened the conceptualisation of poverty and inequality, within a framework of human rights and social justice (Eyben, 2015). They acknowledged that poverty was more than a lack of income and included an absence of basic services and resources. Also contributing to poverty and food insecurity were inter alia:
1. Social discrimination and exclusion, resulting in a lack of civic participation in
decision making.
2. Gender inequality with women facing life-threatening risks from early pregnancy,
gender-based violence, and reduced opportunities for education and work.
3. Vulnerable groups, such as female-headed households, people with disabilities,
indigenous people, and young people excluded from decision making (Fabusoro,
Sokoya, Ayorinde, Alarima & Oduguwa, 2012; Quaye et al., 2016; Scott & Lucci,
2015).
Special mention was made of future generations affected by poverty and its social and environmental impacts. The SDG agenda aimed to create a platform for social, political, and economic inclusion, regardless of gender, age, race, disability, ethnicity, origin, religion, or socioeconomic status, and to improve engagement to create structural change (Fukuda-Parr,
2016).
66 Table 2.2 Sustainable Development Goals
Goal Aim Goal 1 End poverty in all its forms everywhere Goal 2 End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture Goal 3 Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages Goal 4 Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all Goal 5 Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls Goal 6 Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all Goal 7 Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all Goal 8 Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all Goal 9 Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation Goal 10 Reduce inequality within and among countries Goal 11 Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable Goal 12 Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns Goal 13 Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts Goal 14 Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development Goal 15 Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss Goal 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels Goal 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development Source: Giovannini et al., 2015, p. 11.
The second MDG to end hunger sought food security and improved nutrition through sustainable agriculture. Globally, one in nine people were undernourished, with the majority living in the Global South. Poor nutrition caused 45% of deaths in children under the age of
67 five years, that is, 3.1 million children annually. Agriculture was the single largest employer in the world providing livelihoods for 40% of the global population; it was the largest source of income and employment for poor rural households. On average, women comprised 43% of the agricultural labour force in the Global South, and over 50% in parts of Asia and Africa, yet they only owned 20% of arable land (Esquivel, 2016; Eyben, 2015).
Significant strides had been made in increasing life expectancy and reducing some of the common killers associated with child and maternal mortality, and major progress had been made on increasing access to clean water and sanitation, reducing malaria, tuberculosis, poliomyelitis, and HIV and AIDS. However, only 50% of women in the Global South had access to healthcare and 225 million women required reproductive healthcare and contraception.
Major progress had been made in enhancing access to education at the primary level, but questions remained about its quality, as 103 million young people worldwide, of whom more than 60% were women, lacked basic literacy skills. Hence SDG 4 sought to ensure that all children had access to free, equitable, and quality primary and secondary level education by
2030.
Women’s issues, including gender-based violence and reproductive health, were high on the SDG agenda (Rosche, 2016). SDG 5 aimed to address violence against women and women’s unpaid care work, and achieve equal participation in decision making for women, the fulfilment of women’s economic and sexual and reproductive health rights and ensure access to education for women and girls (Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Rosche, 2016). It highlighted that gender equality and women’s empowerment required multidimensional interventions (Eyben, 2015;
Gabizon, 2016; Rosche, 2016). Providing women and girls with equal access to education, healthcare, decent work, and representation in political and economic decision-making processes would fuel sustainable economies and benefit society and humanity at large. While
68 143 countries guaranteed equality for women in their constitutions by 2014, another 52 had not taken this step. In many nations, gender discrimination was still woven through legal and social norms (Esquivel, 2016). The SDGs could only be successful if women were completely integrated into every goal. Women constituted the bulk of the working poor, were concentrated in poorly paid employment or part-time jobs, were paid less than men in similar jobs, and were subject to discriminatory inheritance and property ownership laws (Esquivel, 2016; Rosche,
2016). Household care work fell to women and girls, while in rural areas and ethnic minorities, poorer women, girls, and those with disabilities, continued to face less progress in education and health (Stuart & Woodroffe, 2016). SDG 5 sought to correct these gender imbalances.
The sustainable management of water and sanitation for all not only would have health and nutritional impacts but was also essential for sustainable agriculture. This included the control of pollution, access to potable water, and sound farming practices. Like access to water and sanitation, access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and clean energy was not only important for sustainable livelihoods but also for the creation of a sustainable environment.
Pollution control and reusable energy sources were needed to protect the environment.
The promotion of sustainable and inclusive economic growth rested on full and productive employment and decent work for all. SDG 8 aimed to address pressing issues relating to unemployment arising from changes in financial markets and the inequalities engendered by neoliberal capitalism (Esquivel, 2016). To achieve this goal, emphasis was placed on responsible productivity and technological change, and resource efficiency. Other dimensions of generating employment growth included corporate social responsibility, social protection safety nets, and education and training. Along with SDG 5 on women’s economic empowerment, SDG 3 on girls’ and women’s education and training, SDG 8 sought to make women full participants in productive employment (Esquivel, 2016).
69 Modernising development had long recognised the importance of a resilient infrastructure. SDG 9 added the proviso of inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and the fostering of innovation, while SDG 10 acknowledged that sustainable development rested on reducing income inequality within and among countries to redress imbalances between the
Global North and South.
SDG 11 claimed that sustainable cities and human settlements needed to be inclusive and safe, with resilient communities free from pollution, congestion, and overcrowding that led to health problems and prevented people from contributing productively to the local economy (Fukuda-Parr, 2016). Environmental groups had called for sustainable consumption and production patterns in response to the need to protect Earth’s finite resources, which were threatened by overconsumption and overproduction. Environmental groups had also long sought to reduce human behaviours and lifestyles that had negative environmental impacts and led to soil degradation, environmental destruction, and natural disasters, such as landslides
(Fukuda-Parr, 2016). Droughts and floods caused by human-induced climate change mainly affected poor and vulnerable communities. Thus, SDG 13 sought urgent action to combat human-induced climate change through controlling carbon dioxide emissions, using clean and renewable energy, and sustainable farming methods. SDG 14 called for humans to conserve the oceans, seas, and marine resources through sustainable practices, such as responsible fishing, quotas, and safe effluent and industrial waste disposal, while SDG 15 sought to protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
Given the huge impact of war and conflict on local communities, SDG 16 linked sustainable development to the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies with adequate justice systems and citizens’ access to them (Gabizon, 2016). Social justice rested on effective, accountable, and inclusive legal institutions at all levels. As with prior development policies,
70 the SDGs emphasised the importance of multisectoral partnerships in strengthening communities and achieving SDG 17.
There have been several critiques of this new development agenda with Fukuda-Parr
(2016) critiquing the same old narrative of global neoliberalism and dominant development orthodoxy pontificating economic growth, technological transfer, and the market as key to global development. Several commentators viewed the emphasis on gender, female-headed households, and single and divorced mothers, inheritance and property ownership laws, and patriarchal social and cultural structures as a step forward (Kabeer, 2016; Koehler, 2016;
Rosche, 2016; Stuart & Woodroffe, 2016; Zapatrina, 2016). The goals had a much greater focus on the environment and climate action, than the MDGs (Esquivel, 2016; Gray et al., 2017;
Stuart & Woodroffe, 2016). In summary, the central focus of the new global goals and framework for international development was multidimensional sustainable development. This included lifting people out of poverty (SDG1), zero hunger (SDG2), health and wellbeing
(SDG3), quality education (SDG4), gender equality (SDG5), clean water and sanitation
(SDG6), affordable and clean energy (SDG7), decent work (SDG8), industrial innovation
(SDG9), reduced inequalities (SDG10), sustainable communities (SDG11), responsible consumption and production (SDG12), climate action (SDG13), conservation (SDG14 & 15), and peace and justice (SDG16).
In summary, the adoption of the SDGs highlighted the importance of continuity in global development spanning decades. They set ambitions targets in keeping with the multidimensional nature of development (Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Rosche, 2016). They once again universalised development. This was problematic given the complexity of achieving goals and targets in the diverse contexts where development takes place, where actors serve diverse interests that do not necessarily accord with global agendas (Fukuda-Parr, 2016; Rosche, 2016).
71 Conclusion
This chapter discussed the dominant development discourses shaping foreign aid and poverty alleviation beginning with the Marshall Plan and ending with the SDGs. It traced the policy shifts to modernisation in postcolonial nations following the success of the Marshall Plan in reconstructing post-war Europe. It showed the failure of successive development frameworks to lift millions out of poverty in SSA, and the role of structural adjustment in entrenching neoliberal market fundamentalism. It traced the movement to debt relief to intensify poverty reduction, which culminated in the CDFs and their continuation in the MDGs and SDGs.
Chapter 3 examines the impact of these international development discourses and policy shifts in relation to Uganda’s poverty-reduction priorities and successive development policies.
72 CHAPTER 3
Uganda’s national priorities on poverty reduction
This chapter links the broader global poverty agenda to Uganda’s priorities on poverty reduction. It shows how the international development discourse presented in Chapter 2 has influenced these priorities. It outlines various shifts in policy post-independence and shows how externally driven initiatives uniformly adopted by the IFIs have failed to generate positive changes for the masses. The chapter traces the historical developments leading to the formulation of the first National Development Plan in 2010 (ROU, 2010a) and reviews the broader social, economic, and political factors shaping development. The chapter further highlights the progress made in Uganda’s poverty reduction efforts, before turning attention to a description of the communities where the study was conducted. This provides a backdrop to the study’s focus on agricultural development and the main platform for poverty reduction,
NAADS, an outcome of the World Bank PRSPs and HIPC initiative discussed in Chapter 2.
In Uganda, as elsewhere in SSA, despite half a century of development aid interventions, poverty remains a major problem. Global estimates were that poverty was affecting over one billion people worldwide, of whom 70% were in SSA (Collier, 2007; Collier
& Dollar, 2002; Ravallion, 2013). Ravallion (2013) summed up the situation claiming it would take 50 years to lift 1.1 billion people worldwide out of poverty at the current rate of development, according to the Borgen Project (2013), there were 637 million of the 910 million people living in SSA below the poverty line. With poverty levels still higher than other regions, this painted a picture of poverty reduction across SSA as an overall failure (Apodaca, 2010;
Booth, 2011a; Chen & Ravallion, 2004, 2010; Craig & Porter, 2003; Harrison, 2001; Hoffberg,
2007; Ravallion & Chen, 2011). This is not only a political, economic, and social problem but
73 also a humanitarian issue (Apodaca, 2010). After 50 years of development assistance, in which
Africa had received more than a trillion US dollars in donor aid, that is six times the USD13 billion, valued today at USD160 billion, dispensed following the Marshall Plan (1948) ‒ the region remains an enigma to the international development community (Erixon, 2005;
Hoffberg, 2007) . As Andrews (2013) observed:
While other regions in the global south (BRIC [Brazil, Russia, India, and China] nations
generally) are making headway in socio-economic growth, Africa seems to remain
caught up in a development quagmire. On the economic front, most African countries
are marred in inept economic policies exacerbated by unfavorable IMF/World Bank
lending programs. Politically, the excesses of authoritarian regimes have resulted in
protracted civil and ethnic wars, institutional collapse and destruction of civil society
and democratic accountability. Human security is at its record low with most African
countries at the bottom of the UNDP human development index; and other aspects of
this index such as nutrition and food security are yet to reach appreciable levels (p. 1).
This has been largely, though not wholly, attributed to the policy preferences the region has been forced to pursue through conditional aid and foreign investment policies. Uganda falls within the category of African countries that continues to rely heavily on international aid for its overall policy objective of poverty eradication. In the 1990s, strongly influenced by structural adjustment, Uganda implemented policy reforms, including: decentralisation that is devolution of power to local authorities; trade liberalisation which is relaxation of government regulation of the economy; and the privatisation of services that is transfer of government responsibility for welfare to the private nongovernment sector (Canagarajah & van Diesen,
2006; Golooba-Mutebi, 2004; Harrison, 2001). As shown in Table 3.1, in 1999, the Ugandan
Government increased direct expenditure for poverty alleviation through its Poverty Action
Fund (PAF) from UGX200 billion (USD100 million) to UGX1.3 trillion (USD650 million) in
74 2007-2008 to UGX5 trillion (USD2.5 billion) in 2013/2014 to UGX5.8 trillion (USD2.9 billion) (ROU, 2014a).
Table 3.1 Summary of poverty alleviation expenditure
Year Ugandan Shillings US Dollars Prior to 1999 200 billion 100 million 1999 1.3 trillion 650 million 2008 5 trillion 2.5 billion 2014 5.8 trillion 2.9 billion Source: ROU (2014)
Uganda’s budget grew from UGX1.4 trillion (USD700 million) in 1998-1999, of which
UGX490 billion (USD245 million) came from donor funding, to UGX5.4 trillion (USD2.7 billion) in 2005, of which donors contributed UGX 2.7 trillion (USD1.35 billion), towards national development activities (Kuteesa et al., 2006). Donor contribution to Uganda’s 2014-
2015 budget stood at just over 18% (ROU, 2014a), as shown in Table 3.2. Still issues relating to income poverty, low productivity, poor health services, high levels of unemployment, and a non-effective welfare system persisted, despite targeted poverty alleviation measures and government reports of declining poverty rates (Hickey, 2005; Lwanga-Ntale, 2014; ROU,
2015).
Table 3.2 Summary of total budget and donor contribution
Year Amount in UGX Amount in USD Donor contribution (%) 1998 1.4 trillion 700 million 40 2005 5.4 trillion 2.2 billion 50 2015 19 trillion 9.8 billion 18 Source: ROU (2015)
75 Factors shaping Uganda’s national policy priorities
The political, economic, social, and cultural structures of SSA countries like Uganda have
proved an unfavourable environment for the implementation of Western policies (Bastiaensen,
Herdt, & D’Exelle, 2005). There have been several structural limitations that undermine the successful implementation of externally driven poverty reduction initiatives. Post- independence, with millions of people living in dire poverty, Uganda aligned itself with modernisation policies promoted by international development institutions (Brett, 1998; Fan &
Zhang, 2008; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006). The state management of social redistribution policies and programs under Idi Amin’s (1971-1981) regime and Milton Obote’s (1981-1985) second term of presidency soon gave way to neoliberal policies of liberalisation, privatisation, and deregulation with the advent of structural adjustment in the 1980s and continued when Yoweri
Museveni came to power in January 1986 (Byekwaso, 2010; Dijkstra & van Donge, 2001;
Kuteesa et al., 2006).
Poverty intensified under the structural adjustment framework (Belshaw & Lawrence,
1999; Daniels & Minot, 2015; Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; UNDP, 1996). The government responded with the Program for Alleviation of Poverty and the Social Costs of Adjustment
(PAPSCA) funded by the World Bank (Mugambe, 2009). Following growing criticism and increasing reports on the failures of structural adjustment, a new CDF was introduced requiring direct participation and ownership of the development process by national governments, as discussed in Chapter 2. Uganda’s answer was the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP)
(Blair, 2000; Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006; Craig & Porter, 2003; Dijkstra, 2005; Forster
& Mijumbi, 2002; Mijumbi, 2001). With the advent of the MDGs at the turn of the century, the emphasis shifted to partnership, national ownership of development, and poverty alleviation, later reinforced by the Paris Declaration in 2005 (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011;
Hickey, 2012). Influenced by donor institutions and the shortcomings of PEAP, despite
76 successive revisions, the government introduced the National Development Plan (NDP) to realign itself with international development policy again calling for structural transformation and national ownership of development (Hickey, 2013; Lie, 2015; van Waeyenberge &
Bargawi, 2015).
Uganda’s modernisation program (1960s)
As shown in Table 3.3, development in Uganda has gone through several phases since independence in 1962, largely shaped by the global development discourse at the time. The newly independent Uganda, like other African countries emerging from Colonialism, was stuck in underdevelopment, unemployment, and poverty, with a large proportion of the predominantly rural population engaged in the smallholder agricultural sector. The modernisation paradigm of Western-style progress Uganda pursued during the first decade of independence focused on economic growth through increased industrialisation, employment, production, and capital accumulation.
Modernisation emphasised the central role of international trade, import substitution, human capital formation, and infrastructure development. The immediate impact was seen in a vibrant economy. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew at an average rate of 4.8% and
GDP per capita grew at 3% per annum. The national savings rate averaged 13.4% of GDP, sufficient to finance a moderate level of capital accumulation. Expanding the manufacturing sector became a key in defining and shaping economic growth, and, in 1971, industrial output accounted for 14% of GDP (Brett, 1998; Kuteesa, Tumusiime-Mutebile, Whitworth, &
Williamson, 2010).
Colonial and postcolonial governments developed welfare programs to support the rapid industrialisation and urbanisation engendered by modernisation programs. The newly independent government expected to move Uganda towards a capitalist economic system based on the ideology of ‘trickle down’ (Fan & Zhang, 2008).
77
Table 3.3 Phases of development in Uganda
Period Policies Key elements Program/Activities
1960s Modernisation (1962-1971) . Urbanisation . Construction of infrastructure to support [Ugandan independence transitioning from traditional . Industrialisation modernisation processes 1962] ways to a capitalist system . Import substitution 1970s Economic Independence . Economic empowerment . Social transfers [Idi Amin came to power Program (EIP) - social . Expulsion of Asians and appropriation of . Property redistribution, including land and in 1971] redistribution in decolonising Asian property houses Africanisation programs . Nationalisation 1980s Structural adjustment began . Privatisation . Monetary and fiscal policy [Amin unseated by Obote in 1987 with Museveni’s . Liberalisation . Moderate-sized government in 1981 and Museveni Economic Recovery Program . Deregulation . International trade comes to power in 1986] (ERP) . Fiscal discipline 1990s Poverty Alleviation Strategy . Macroeconomic stability . Social action projects [Crucial role played by (1995) (mitigation phase) . Market liberalisation . Social transfers Ministry of Finance and Poverty Action Plan for . Increased productivity . Microfinance loans and strengthening rural Economic Planning Social Costs and Adjustment . Good governance through decentralisation, credit and financial services: Entandikwa – beginning in 1991] (PAPSCA) transparency, accountability, popular start-up capital program WB/IMF PRSPs (1999) participation, and security. . Construction of village hospitals and PEAP (1997-2000) . Modernising agriculture schools . Increasing incomes . Improved rural market infrastructure - . Improving quality of life telecommunication and electrification . Achieving universal primary education . Abolition of cost sharing in hospitals, rural water, and sanitation 2000-2003 PEAP Revision I . Rapid and sustainable economic growth . Agricultural advisory services (NAADS) Plan for the Modernisation of . Good governance, accountability, . Access to information and services Agriculture (PMA) transparency, security, and popular . Abolition of cost-sharing in health services participation . Development of village health centres
78
. Ability of the poor to raise income . Universal education . Enhanced quality of life
2004-2006 PEAP Revision II . Economic management . Enhanced production and competitiveness Northern Uganda Social . Commercialisation of agriculture in world markets Action Fund (NUSAF) . Poverty reduction . Democratisation, justice, law, and public- . Good governance and security sector management . Human development . Conflict resolution, peace, and stability . Disaster management . Gender equality 2007-2008 PEAP III . State intervention in the economic growth . Agricultural emphasis (NAADS), through agenda and structural transformation provision of inputs and extension advise . Partnership 2010-2015 NDP I (2010-2015) . Consolidation of peace, stability, and . Bona Bagaggawale (let all be rich) Peace Recovery and development ‘Prosperity for All’ (PFA) – ruling party’s Development Program . Social transfers election manifesto in 2006 (and title later (PRDP) . Wealth creation and economic growth and given to NDP I) Agricultural Development transformation . Rural feeder roads Strategy and Investment Plan . Microfinance (DSIP) 2016-2020 National Development Plan . Growth, employment, and economic . Increased sustainable production and (NDP II) transformation productivity . Improved infrastructure . Quality, effective, and efficient service delivery
79 In Uganda, as in other countries in the Global South, capitalism did not reach its fullest expression, notwithstanding the growth of capitalism and focus on economic growth that had a major impact on Ugandan society, notwithstanding the breakdown of traditional cultural systems seen as ‘backward’ in the modernisation paradigm (Sanderson, 2005). Progress meant economic development. However, many rural people in Uganda remained engaged in subsistence small-scale agriculture and few felt the benefits of the industrialisation focused on the urban centres (Brett, 1998; Fan & Zhang, 2008; Reinikka & Mackinnon, 1999; Robinson,
2006). Further, the promises of the trickle-down effect failed to materialise and, as inequalities grew, rural people became deeply mired in poverty (Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006; Robinson, 2006).
Hence, Uganda’s poverty reduction policies mainly targeted the majority rural population, away from the centres of paid work (ROU, 2014c).
Social redistribution and Africanisation (1970s)
The 1970s was the decade when Idi Amin, who came into power in 1971 coincided with
Uganda’s pursuit of socialism. Modernisation programs had excluded large sections of the
population, especially the rural poor, for whom poverty, deprivation, inequality, illiteracy, and
sub-standard housing had expanded. In line with the statist theory of development implemented in several developing countries at the time as a reaction against Western imperialism (Midgley,
1981), the government pursued interventionist policies aimed at social redistribution. The
Economic Independence Program (EIP), based on the ideology of African socialism (Wuyts &
Kilama, 2016), protected infant industries from mounting international competition, through stringent tariffs, limited quotas, and subsidies (Brett, 1998; Kasfir, 1985; Opolot & Kuteesa,
2006; Robinson, 2006). Africanisation encouraged centralised planning and policy development, and nationalisation of key private assets and property, state-owned enterprises, stricter regulation of economic activities, the deliberate expulsion of people of Asian descent, who controlled commerce and industry, and the expropriation and redistribution of their assets
80 and property (Fan & Zhang, 2008; Kasfir, 1985). The Ugandan citizenry acquired property as
poor people became property owners and landlords overnight ‒ mafuta mingi or bonabagawale
(rich) ‒ though they lacked the skills, knowledge, and experience to run and manage the assets
(factories, plantations, sugar estates, and shops) they acquired. The government nationalised banks, adopted domestic regulatory measures for financial activities, and curtailed direct cash inflows (Chang, 2005; Robinson, 2006).
However, the economy collapsed following the exodus of the business class and the skilled and experienced workforce. Economic mismanagement, civil unrest, the breakdown of the East African Community, the war between Uganda and Tanzania over ownership of the
Kagera region, a surge in global oil prices, and ‘the political and economic crisis of 1972’
(Brett, 1998, p. 317) ensued. Education and health infrastructure collapsed as the price of essential commodities skyrocketed, raising poverty levels. The Amin government responded to the ensuing crisis of high inflation rates and balance of payment deficits, by printing money, thus fuelling higher inflation and the rising cost of living, which hit the poorest the hardest
(Devarajan, Easterly, & Pack, 2003; Kasekende & Atingi-Ego, 1999; Kuteesa et al., 2010)
Structural adjustment: Reform decade (1980s)
Amin’s social redistribution program was a dismal failure (Brett, 1998; Fan & Zhang 2008).
State-owned enterprises performed poorly, despite a policy of subsidisation and protection to
shield them from international competition, and economic growth stagnated (Brett, 1998,
Opolot & Kteesa, 2006). Milton Obote’s second regime came into power in 1980, and initiated rehabilitation measures through the first phase of structural adjustment reforms (Bertt, 1998;
Kuteesa et al., 2006). This comprised the removal of price controls, provision of incentives, raising of interest rates, and improvement of economic management, all aimed at stimulating the economy (Kuteesa et al., 2010; Mugambe, 2009). National production began to recover due
81 to the positive impacts of these adjustment policies and the GDP rose from minus 2.7-1.7%
(Kuteesa at al., 2006).
However, the agricultural sector, which formed the core of Uganda’s economy and was the largest employer, was performing poorly, due to political conflict and the Civil war of liberation fought by the Tanzanian army and Ugandan guerrilla forces to unseat Idi Amin from
1979 to 1980. This created a difficult context within which to pursue economic development
(Brett, 1998). In the ensuing five years, the National Resistance Movement fought against the
Unity government under Milton Obote (1981-1986) bringing Yoweri Museveni into power and almost establishing an oligarchy in Uganda. This period of internal conflict destroyed the already poor infrastructure. Industrial and agricultural production declined, along with the quality of basic services, and negative economic growth ensued (Brett, 1998; Kempe, 1999;
Kuteesa et al., 2010; Morgan, 2009; Stokke, 2013).
The coming of Museveni’s regime in January 1986, during the structural adjustment era, continued Uganda’s path of privatisation, deregulation, and market liberalisation, in which growth was short-lived (Brett, 1998; Robinson, 2006). Following widespread political conflict to unseat first Amin and then Obote, Museveni had inherited an inefficient government bureaucracy in which financial mismanagement had left him little option but to turn to IFIs for assistance (Brett, 1998; Robinson, 2006). This inevitably meant once again embracing the conditions of structural adjustment that had failed to deal with the mismanagement, corruption, bureaucratic red tape, poor distribution of resources, and misallocation of funds under Obote and had left Uganda dependant for its survival on international loans and aid in the first place
(Chang, 2005).
Despite Museveni’s Economic Recovery Program (ERP) introduced in 1987, Uganda’s economic problems were exacerbated as structural adjustment policies created budget deficits, and increased inflation and foreign debt (Forster & Mijumbi, 2002; Harrison, 2001). The failure
82 of social redistribution, nationalisation, Africanisation, and Ugandanisation policies, coupled
with internal political conflict and global events at the time. These included; the economic
recession in the industrialised nations, decreases in prices for primary commodities, rising oil
prices, and the debt crisis, along with structural adjustment, exacerbated poverty in Uganda. At the same time, a shift to neoliberalism in the Global North precipitated the search for a new policy direction. Museveni’s government had no option but to embrace the World Bank’s borrowing conditions to advance economic reform (Broad, 2004). Thus, beginning in 1987, the
World Bank, IMF, and other bilateral donor agencies, in collaboration with the Museveni government, embarked on a second phase of economic recovery to stabilise the economy. The first recovery program of 1983, under Milton Obote, had failed due to widespread political conflict.
With the subsequent adoption of neoliberal reforms, there followed the implementation of reform policy prescriptions to: restore monetary and fiscal discipline; liberalise foreign exchange markets, and consumer and producer goods; open pathways to international trade; streamline the balance of payment position; and privatise and rationalise state-owned enterprises (Broad, 2004; Kuteesa et al., 2010; Driscoll & Evans, 2005). As the economy recovered, economic growth brought inflation under control, stabilised consumer prices, and reduced poverty from 55.5% in 1992 to 35.2% by 1999 (Kuteesa et al., 2010). Uganda was hailed by the IFIs as a model of structural adjustment (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006;
Dijkstra & van Donge, 2001).
However, the private sector now in control of basic services − education and health, imposed fees that were unaffordable to most of the population, especially the poor. This led to a decline in human development indicators which were set by United Nations Development
Program (Broad, 2004; Robinson, 2007; Robinson & Friedman, 2007; van Waeyenberge &
Bargawi, 2015). Structural adjustment had diluted and eroded government autonomy over
83 policy formulation and neglected strategic national priorities, while further entrenching the
neoliberal doctrine of the World Bank (Booth, 2003a; Hickey, 2005). The beneficiaries of its
reform policies were mostly large corporations, the wealthy, and subsets of workers in export-
oriented sectors, while the majority losers were workers, smallholder farmers, and poor and
unskilled women and indigenous people (Broad, 2004).
Poverty reduction (1990s)
At the global level, the UNDP, together with other bilateral donor agencies, had pressured the
World Bank to admit the failure of trickle-down development policy in the face of declining levels of human development in Uganda and elsewhere in SSA (Belshaw & Lawrence, 1999;
Daniels & Minot, 2015; Pender, 2001; UNDP, 1996). Structural adjustment had neglected human development was shown by falling indicators of health, literacy, food security, access to clean water, and gender equity (Byekwaso, 2010; Kuteesa et al., 2010; Mugambe, 2009;
Perranton, 2004; Rowden, 2010). The new policy direction introduced by the World Bank and
IMF was based on bolder, novel methods of dealing with poverty. It involved an elaborate and
CDF that obliged beneficiary governments to focus their energies on poverty reduction
(Ahmed, 2005; Byekwaso, 2010; Craig, 2006; Golooba-Mutebi & Hickey, 2010; Mijumbi,
2001; Morgan, 2009; Noorbakhsh, 1999; Verschoor, 2007).
Uganda’s poverty reduction policies
Since independence in 1962, successive governments in Uganda have implemented a series of poverty reduction policies and programs influenced by dominant development discourses and foreign-aid policies as discussed in Chapter 2. These far-reaching public policy reforms have been the subject of much interest among development scholars and practitioners (Dijkstra & van Donge, 2001). They have been of special interest to those who have followed the country’s poverty reduction performance over the past 30 years, especially since Uganda has been
84 described as an outstanding example of the implementation of neoliberal economic development policy in SSA (Lawson, McKay, & Okidi, 2006; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi,
2015). Commentators have highlighted the significant role played by international development institutions and agencies in Uganda, in partnership with the Ministry of Finance,
Planning and Economic Development (MFPED) (Deininger & Okidi, 2003; Harrison, 2005;
Hickey, 2013; Nyamugasira, 1998). There was, however, an emerging debate on the quality of the country’s policy development processes concerning grassroots participation and multistakeholder inclusion in poverty reduction initiatives (Harrison, 2001; Hickey, 2012;
Hulme, 2012). Table 3.4 shows a summary of Uganda’s poverty reduction policies developed during the 1990s, each of which will be discussed in turn.
Table 3.4 Uganda’s poverty reduction policies during the 1990s
Date Policy
1995 Program for Alleviation of Poverty and the Social Costs of Adjustment (PAPSCA) 1997 Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) 1999 Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) 1998-1999 Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPAI)
Program for Alleviation of Poverty and the Social Costs of Adjustment
(PAPSCA)
PAPSCA was a broad policy framework adopted by the World Bank in the early 1990s for
countries that had implemented neoliberal policy reforms. It aimed to mitigate the negative
effects of structural adjustment. Having fully implemented these structural adjustment policies,
Uganda was one of its beneficiaries (Kuteesa et al., 2010; Mugambe, 2009). Locally coined as
Entandikwa/Egeunes, referring to the microfinance or start-up capital offered by PAPSCA, its
85 aim was to engage the poor in income-generating activities to recover from the adverse effects of structural adjustment and become self-supporting (Kuteesa et al., 2010; Muhumuza, 2005).
Though PAPSCA was well-intentioned, it was poorly managed and became highly politicised.
Despite Uganda’s widely praised economic accomplishments, PAPSCA was not enough to
alleviate poverty among the millions that had been bypassed by the reforms (Mugambe, 2009).
The presidential and parliamentary elections of 1996 provided a rich platform for the masses to express their concerns and frustrations about increasing poverty levels – poverty became a
main theme in the election campaigns (Bates & Blocks, 2013; Canagarajah & van Diesen,
2011; Harrison, 2001, Mugambe, 2009). This led to the PRSPs.
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs)
First coined as concessional assistance for lower-income countries, the PRSPs’ focus on debt relief attracted political support from recipient countries in SSA (Booth, 2003; Gore, 2004;
Mijumbi, 2001). Its externally designed framework required national governments across SSA to take ownership of development policy and ‘organise national consultations to generate
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers’ (Booth, 2003, p. 836). The PRSPs aimed to soften neoliberal fundamentalism through a focus on human development and local participation, as national governments engaged in widespread consultation with diverse stakeholders from government, civil society, academia, and foreign donors (Booth, 2011a; Canagarajah & van
Diesen, 2011; Kjær & Joughin, 2012; Mugambe, 2009; Tarabini & Jacovkis, 2012; Yong,
2013). Spearheaded by MFPED and facilitated by technical working groups, the lengthy consultation process led to Uganda’s PRSPs – Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) − in
1997. It was followed by the government’s first Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA) in
1998-1999, in which Oxfam played a major role, in partnership with the nongovernment sector
(Ahmed, 2005; ROU, 2002a; Yates & Okello, 2002).
86 Because of these consultative initiatives and its political commitment to pro-poor policy, in April 1999, Uganda was the first Heavily Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) to benefit from debt relief, which took effect in 2000 (Hickey, 2005; Kempe, 1999; McGee, 2004; Forster
& Mijumbi, 2002; Mijumbi, 2001). PEAP cohered with the World Bank/IMF PRSP framework on poverty reduction. As Hickey (2013) noted:
The convergence of transnational and domestic political imperatives around a pro-poor
policy agenda was particularly apparent during the late 1990s with the earlier adoption
of PRSPs, an agenda that was taken up enthusiastically by both the Ministry of Finance
Planning and Economic Development, and civil society organisations as well as
promoted by donors (p. 195).
Participatory Poverty Assessments (1998-2004)
The Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Project (UPPAP) produced several
Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs) over three periods: 1998 to 1999, 2000-2001, and
2002 to 2004 to coincide with successive revisions of PEAP (ROU, 2002a). The UPPAP’s
goals were to: (i) construct poverty profiles; (ii) determine the causes of poverty; and (iii)
recommend poverty alleviation strategies in line with PEAP (Hanmer, Pyatt, & White, 1999;
ROU, 2002a). The PPAs drew on available statistics and used a participatory research
methodology to increase the participation of the poor, and women, to develop an understanding of poor people’s perspectives on poverty (Hanmer et al., 1999; James, 2010; McGee, 2004).
As Lawson et al. (2006) noted, successive PPAs allowed ‘different communities across Uganda to express their local understanding of poverty and their perception of policy priorities’ (p.
1227). They provided valuable insights on factors contributing to persistent poverty and the
‘substantial mobility into and out of poverty’ (Lawson et al., 2006, p. 1225).
87 The first PPA, launched with donor support in 1998, sought to establish what had gone
wrong in the prior decade of structural adjustment (Hanmer et al., 1999; McGee, 2004). Of
concern was those who had failed to benefit from the country’s macroeconomic growth
(Lawson et al., 2006; Norton, Bird, Kakande, Brock, & Turk, 2001). Using participatory
research, PPA I was undertaken in nine of Uganda’s 45 districts and covered 36 rural
communities (ROU, 2000b). It generated contextual information on local perceptions of
poverty, vulnerability, and wellbeing; the causes of poverty and livelihood and coping
strategies; access to, and the quality and relevance of, government services; and areas for direct action to effectively reduce poverty (McGee, 2004; Super & Harkness, 2008; Yates & Okello,
2002). PPA I described poverty as ‘a perpetual need for daily necessities of life and a feeling of powerlessness’ (ROU, 2000b, p. 11). Following PPA I, the management and financing of the PPA process shifted from the Department for International Development (DFID) and
Oxfam (Great Britain) to the MFPED.
PPA II, which began in 2000, sought opinions on government structures and accountability, suggestions for improvement, awareness of government policies, and the relevance of those policies (Lawson et al., 2006). It disseminated information and research findings drawn from detailed fieldwork in nine districts during PPA I. This was extended to 12 districts in PPA II (ROU, 2002a).
As well as informing MFPED on successive revisions of PEAP, the PPAs assisted the
Ministry of Local Government to strengthen district capacity to engage in participatory planning and budgeting, and develop Community Action Plans (McGee, 2004; Yates & Okello,
2002). At the national level, the PPAs built consensus between the government, CSOs, and donors on the implementation of poverty reduction policies (Lawson et al., 2006; Yates &
Okello, 2002).
88 The PPA process, which was ongoing, continued to generate, disseminate, and use
available research findings to feed into policy processes. It has led to enhanced understanding
of multidimensional poverty and the non-economic factors that have contributed to poverty;
significant among them were alcohol consumption, food insecurity, and gender issues (Lawson
et al., 2006; ROU, 2002a).
Alcohol production was a principal source of income in some households, enabling
women to take greater control of household earnings than they could through other sources of
income. Brewing beer was far more lucrative than farming. However, alcohol, which was
largely brewed by women and consumed by men, was also found to be a major item of
household expenditure (Lawson et al., 2006; Lwanga-Ntale & McClean, 2004).
Overconsumption placed pressure on household resources, together with other associated
problems, such as the heightened risk of domestic violence, reduced household earnings
resulting from labour lost through drunkenness or associated health decline, and women’s
exposure to sexually transmitted diseases, especially HIV and AIDS, as a product of men’s
irresponsible sexual behaviour when inebriated (Lawson et al., 2006; Scurrah-Ehrhart, 2007).
Food insecurity was also found to be related to excessive alcohol consumption. Already
threatened by environmental changes leading to worsening yields, the failure to store food also
exacerbated food insecurity. Less food was being produced and there were not enough secure
and safe food-storage facilities (Coulter & Onumah, 2002; Lawson et al., 2006; Ricker-Gilbert
& Jones, 2015; Smith, Gordon, Meadows, & Zwick, 2001).
The PPAs captured the experiences of women, who faced social, economic, legal, and cultural constraints, and experienced discrimination, and other forms of barriers like limited access to productive resources such as land and livestock that contributed to high levels of poverty among women (Yates & Okello, 2002). Key cultural factors, included unequal gender relations perpetuated by the practice of bride price payment, domestic violence linked to
89 alcohol abuse, and conservative, patriarchal attitudes (Lawson et al., 2006). The PPAs also
showed that poor women, most of whom had not completed primary education and faced
difficulties in acquiring productive assets, such as land and credit, or wage employment, found it difficult to escape from poverty (Hickey, 2005; Lawson et al., 2006; van Waeyenberge &
Bargawi, 2015). Lawson et al. (2006) highlighted the factors associated with movements into and out of poverty in the PPAs as follows:
Alcoholism was identified as one key factor underlying descents into poverty. Other
important factors included being in a large (or polygamous) family; insecurity
(especially in the north); loss of assets, a job, or remittances; loss of a spouse or marital
breakup; and unfair taxation or lack of government support. The PPA results provided
less information on how households were able to move out of poverty, but key factors
identified were working hard and having access to assets (p. 1229).
Poverty Eradication Action Plans (PEAP) (1997-2008)
As mentioned in Chapter 2, the IFIs shifted their focus from structural adjustment to poverty
reduction with the CDF and, later, PRSPs (Pender, 2001). An outcome of Uganda’s first PPA,
Uganda’s CDF – the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) – was the government’s national anti-poverty framework (Driscoll & Evans, 2005; Lie, 2015; ROU, 2000d). Though aimed at poverty alleviation, it retained a focus on economic development through global competitiveness, privatisation, liberalisation, and export promotion (Bahiigwa et al, 2005;
ROU, 2000d). PEAP’s goals were:
1. Sustainable economic growth and structural transformation.
2. Good governance and security.
3. Increased ability of the poor to raise their own incomes.
90 4. Improved quality of life for the poor (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006; Hickey,
2013; Mosley, 2012; ROU, 2000c).
The government’s long-term aim was to reduce poverty to less than 10% by 2017 (Canagarajah
& van Diesen, 2011; McGee; 200; Mosley, 2012). Its mid-term progress was reviewed every three years resulting in revisions in 2000, 2004, and 2008, as shown in Table 3.3, when adjustments were made to reflect changes in the larger socioeconomic and political environment
(Hickey, 2005; Mugambe, 2009; ROU, 2010a).
PEAP sought to address the multidimensional − political, economic, and social −
aspects of poverty through a better understanding of its causes and increased budgetary
allocations to primary healthcare; rural feeder roads; education; water and sanitation; and the
commercialisation of agriculture. Poverty reduction became the focus of all government
departments as the government realigned donor contributions to national objectives
(Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011; McGee, 2004; ROU, 2000d; Woodhouse, 2003). The
World Bank, the African Development Bank, major bilateral donor countries, including the
United Kingdom, Austria, and the Netherlands, and bilateral aid agencies engaged in a joint
assistance strategy with the Ugandan government, to streamline PEAP’s implementation
(Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011). Subsequently, PEAP was reinforced by the creation of the
Poverty Action Fund (PAF), with funds received from the HIPC initiative, reaffirming the
government’s commitment to social and infrastructural development (Calderon & Serven,
2010; Mijumbi, 2001; ROU, 2001a; Williamson & Canagarajah, 2003). Multilateral and
bilateral donors supported the PAF (William & Canagarajah, 2003), through Uganda Joint
Assistance Strategy (UJAS) by raising substantial resources and strengthening the
governments’ ability to meet the MDGs by 2015. UJAS highlighted a strategy through which
the development partners were to support the implementation of PEAP (Canagarajah & van
Diesen, 2011; Go & Quijada, 2012).
91 At face value, PEAP reflected a major shift in policy making in Uganda, based on
lessons from the structural adjustment reforms of the 1980s (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011).
However, the market-friendly, structural adjustment policy framework continued, with strong adherence to conditionalities to access foreign aid, grants, loans, and debt relief (Harrison,
2001; Hickey, 2013).
PEAP Revision I (2000)
The first revision of PEAP in 1999-2000 included the findings of the first PPA (1998-1999)
(McGee, 2004). Strategic areas for poverty reduction were improved governance and security, water and sanitation, health, primary education, and housing. Importantly for this study, since most of the poor earned their livelihoods through commercially unproductive subsistence farming, PEAP Revision I identified the agricultural sector as the best platform for poverty reduction, earmarking more resources for the sector (Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003). Thus, NAADS was born in 2001 as part of the government’s Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (ROU,
2001c; Norton et al., 2001; Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Hickey, 2005; McGee, 2000; ROU, 2000c,
2003a). Table 3.5 shows Uganda’s poverty reduction policies from 2000 onwards. Reminiscent of neoliberal welfare-to-work policies being pursued in the Global North, self-employment for the poor became a strategic livelihood strategy, especially for disadvantaged groups, such as people with disabilities, widows, and orphans (ROU, 2003b). The government had been convinced that maximising economic growth required the economic participation of people experiencing poverty, who, in turn, required access to services and information to develop their skills and increase returns on their assets (Lwanga-Ntale & McClean, 2004).
92 Table 3.5 Uganda’s poverty reduction policies from 2000
Date Policy
2000 Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP Revision I) 2004 Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP Revision II) 2008 Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP Revision III) 2010 National Development Plan (NDPI) 2015 National Development Plan (NDPII)
With international policy encouraging national governments to recognise poor people
as agents of change, through participation in local governance, Poverty Eradication Action Plan provided an institutional framework for local consultation and participation and improved governance and partnership between government and donor agencies to increase accountability and responsiveness (Addison, Hulme, & Kanbur, 2009; Booth & Mosley, 2003; Hickey, 2005;
Kanbur, 2001).
PEAP Revision II (2004)
The second revision of PEAP started in mid-2003, with consultation with public, local
government, private, and civil society representatives (Hickey, 2005; Lie, 2015; Woodhouse,
2003). Increasing poverty in the early 2000s had led to a marked decline in consumption to less than one percent by 2003, with the poverty level rising to 38% by 2003 (Bahiigwa et al., 2005;
Lwanga-Ntale & McClean, 2004). The first Poverty Status Report (PSR) in 2000 had indicated that agriculture’s contribution to the GDP had fallen. It reported that an overwhelming majority of the population which was estimated as 85.8% lived in rural areas, with 96% considered poor, highlighting that poverty was predominantly a rural phenomenon, especially among subsistence farmers (Bahiigwa et al., 2005).
93 The PPA and demographic and health household surveys reported similar findings
(Bahiigwa et al., 2005). The PPA included consultation with 14 civil society groups. It was
coordinated by the NGO Forum and Private Sector Foundation with technical assistance from
the donors of PEAP revision I (Lawson et al., 2006). PEAP Revision II added a fifth pillar ‒
good governance ‒ asserting the government’s responsibility to implement its poverty
reduction policies in line with the IFIs’ position on aid effectiveness (Ahmed, 2005; Collier,
2007; Dollar & Levin, 2006; Harrison, 2005; Hyden, 2007; Lie, 2015). This was a significant
shift from the reform decade, where neoliberal global orthodoxy had universally rejected statist
planning and Keynesian public policy (Hyden, 2007; Stiglitz, 2002a, 2002b; Williams, 1996).
Good governance in the agricultural sector meant: (i) greater interaction between rural
populations through agricultural farmers’ associations and government agencies − extension
services and the Ministry of Agriculture (Irz, Lin, Thirtle, & Wiggins, 2001); and (ii) the
provision of public goods and services, and the necessary infrastructure to support agricultural
development, including agricultural research programs (Alene & Coulibaly, 2009;
Mandemaker, Bakker, & Stoorvogel, 2011; Thirtle, Lin, & Piesse, 2003). To increase Uganda’s
global competitiveness, innovative modern agricultural techniques, backed by scientific
research, were needed, along with the development of roads and energy supplies (Bahiigwa et
al., 2005; Davis, Nkonya, Kato, Mekonnen, Odendo, Miiro & Nkuba, 2012; James, 2010; van
den Berg & Jiggins, 2007).
PEAP Revision II underlined the importance of good governance by linking public
expenditure to poverty reduction priorities. This required more balanced and prioritised
spending between the social and productive sectors (Hickey; 2013; Sjöstedt, 2013). Enhanced
production, competitiveness, and incomes were to be achieved through improved agricultural
production and productivity, and micro-enterprise development (Dijkstra & van Donge, 2001).
Hence agricultural extension services, livestock disease control, and enhanced rural access to
94 financial services were priority action areas, alongside the NAADS structures, which will be
discussed in Chapter 4. The aim was to increase responsiveness to farmers’ needs and enhance accountability in the provision of agricultural services and eradicate poverty through transformation of subsistence farming to commercial agriculture (Friis-Hansen, 2008; Friis-
Hansen & Duveskog, 2012; Smith et al., 2001).
PEAP Revision III (2008)
Aid had declined from over half the budget to just one third, alongside the discovery of oil
resources, the rising influence of Southern donors, most significantly China, and Uganda’s
graduation from HIPC status (Hickey, 2013). The return to multiparty politics in 2006 favoured policies with wide popular appeal (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010) but PEAP Revision III began the government’s interventionist approach to policy development
(Hickey, 2012), instituted in 2007. National politicians were dissatisfied with the PEAP process, perceiving that the government had been bypassed as donors, technocrats, and CSOs assumed control over the process. They were unhappy with inclusion of social spending in
PEAP Revision II, which detracted from investment in key productive areas of the economy
(Hickey, 2005; Lie, 2015; Morgan, 2009; Sjöstedt, 2013; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015).
Thus, the focus in PEAP Revision III was modernisation and wealth creation (Hickey, 2013), while keeping the overall pro-market framework for achieving structural transformation
(Feltenstein & Sarangi, 2005). Also on the agenda was infrastructural development, including roads and energy provision, as well as microfinance through the newly created Micro Finance
Centre.
Poverty Status Reports
PPA findings were included in a series of high-profile Poverty Status Reports, first introduced in 1999. The PSRs captured data from several sources, including the Uganda Bureau of
95 Statistics (UBOS) Surveys, specifically the Demographic and Health and Household Surveys,
which allowed the monitoring of national progress against many poverty indicators, and
management information systems in the line ministries (Mugambe, 2009; ROU, 2014c).
Poverty Status Report (2010)
The PSR (ROU, 2010a, 2010b) noted that, in the past two decades, monetary poverty had
halved from 56.4% in 1992/1993 to 24.5% in 2009/2010. Both urban and rural areas had
experienced a significant decline from 28.8% to 9.1% and 60.2% to 29.1% respectively. This
marked a significant achievement towards MDG I as measured against the international
poverty line of USD1.25 per person per day. Per capita household consumption grew in all
sections of the population at an annual rate of three percent between 1992 to 1993 and 2009 to
2010 (ROU, 2010a, 2010b). However, these statistics hid substantial spatial differences in outcomes, regional disparities in terms of access and quality of services, and rising inequality.
The central region and south-western regions had fared substantially better than the northern and Eastern regions. Even though there was equal access to primary education across the country, the north stood at 9%, east at 14%, and central at 44%. About 62% of people in
Kampala and the central region had access to electricity, while only one percent had access in the north, and two percent in the east (ROU, 2010a). The PSR (ROU 2010a, 2010b) reported that the key drivers to poverty reduction were:
1. Changes in employment structures, including the diversification of household
portfolios through increased agricultural productivity, private sector growth, and
expansion of non-farm household enterprises supported by expanded education
opportunities (Reardon, 1997; Reardon, Berdegue, & Escobar, 2001; ROU, 2010a).
Increased productivity and a strong impetus for local development was supported
96 by infrastructure investment, especially road networks connecting rural areas to
markets for agricultural produce in urban centres.
2. Income diversification away from subsistence agriculture was achieved. Rural
households relying solely on farming fell from 53% in 1992-1993 to 28% in 2005-
2006, while the national population relying on farming declined from 54% in 1992-
1993 to 36% in 2005-2006 (ROU, 2006b). Agriculture provided 75% of household
income in Uganda by 2010, supplemented by informal trading and other activities
(ROU, 2010a).
Poverty Status Report (2014)
The PSR (ROU, 2014c) drew on statistical data from national household surveys conducted by
UBOS, including the Integrated Household Survey (IHS); the Uganda National Household
Survey (UNHS) (1999-2013); Uganda National Panel Survey (UNPS) (2005-2012); the
Uganda Demographic and Health Survey (UDHS) (2006-2011), and the National Household
Census of 2014 (ROU, 2014b). The PSR reported on poverty trends for over a decade and the impact of policy interventions and household factors (ROU, 2014c). It also reported on the participatory poverty assessments conducted by MFPED in 2014. The first was conducted in
April in seven purposively selected districts across Uganda’s four regions: Bushenyi,
Kalangala, Kaliro, Kampala, Lira, Nakapiripirit, and Nebbi. The second was conducted in June and July in Kampala, the capital city, to cast light on increasing urbanisation, and Kalangala district, an island in Lake Victoria, a riparian community which is an island community deriving its livelihood from the water with high rates of HIV and AIDS. These areas were selected to investigate the impact of a high-profile, government-funded livelihoods and agricultural poverty reduction program focused on the production of vegetable oil. The government hoped to gain a detailed understanding to inform planning and budgeting and possible expansion of the programs to other communities (ROU, 2014c).
97 National Development Plans
The National Development Plan was Uganda’s strategic development framework for economic
development. Growing dissatisfaction and frustration with PEAP’s failure to consolidate
poverty reduction efforts, together with slow economic growth around the mid-2000s and several global events, called for a shift towards structural transformation (Hickey, 2012, 2013;
Hulme & Scott, 2010). The dramatic effects of the global financial crisis of 2008 had raised
critical questions about the model of development policy promoted by the IFIs and its focus on minimal government intervention (Hickey, 2013; Stiglitz, 2010). Most of the industrialised governments rushed to intervene with enormous socioeconomic packages to rescue the ailing private sector, with comprehensive programs to protect the banking sector (Booth, 2011a;
Hickey, 2013; Stiglitz, 2010; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015; Verschoor, 2007). The political success of leftist governments in South America, and the emergence of new resources and ideas from the BRIC countries, had neutralised the ideological premises of the Post-
Washington Consensus through which the groundwork for the PRSPs and MDGs had been laid
(Birdsall & Fukuyama, 2011; Hickey, 2013; Whitfield, 2009). Hickey (2012) observed that these developments ‘loosened the influence of those most clearly aligned with the promotion of … neoliberal policies and the poverty agenda, including transnational corporations and many traditional donors’ (p. 194).
The emphasis on country ownership of the PRSPs had led countries in SSA and South
America to prioritise their own national development plans with a view to achieving middle- income country status. In Uganda, this had led to a substantial decline in reliance on foreign aid, loans, and grants, with donor contributions accounting for about one fifth of the country’s budget, reduced from almost half in the early 2000s (Canagarajh & van Diesen, 2011; Hickey,
2013: ROU; 2014a). The decline in reliance on foreign aid opened an opportunity for much- needed structural transformation. A combination of these factors, at the global and national
98 levels, created an opportunity for the government to reclaim its central role and focus on urgent national priorities rather than pursue post-Washington consensus style macroeconomic stability at the expense of social concerns (Verschoor, 2007; Whitfield, 2009, 2010). The
Museveni regime had reinvented itself by promoting populist policies with immediate political dividends (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010), away from donor guidelines that had informed the PEAP revisions, discussed above. This marked a significant departure from preoccupation with macroeconomic stability and heralded a new transformative development agenda focused on
Uganda’s national priority to modernise agriculture through increased productivity and the expansion and diversification of agro-processing and manufacturing to enhance its competitiveness in global markets (Hickey, 2013; ROU, 2014c; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi,
2015). This was to be achieved through a quasi-market approach involving the public and private sectors (van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015). The government assumed greater ownership of infrastructure and microfinance provision to support agricultural production
(Hickey, 2013).
PEAP Revision III had recommended that poverty reduction could not be achieved without structural transformation and this became the focus of the NDP, a comprehensive state- led plan for development, which replaced PEAP as the country’s national planning framework.
Unlike PEAP’s narrow focus on poverty reduction, it broadened attention to structural transformation, wealth creation, and enhanced productivity (Sennoga & Matovu, 2013). Its aim was to guide Uganda’s transformation from a peasant economy to a modern prosperous country by 2040 (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015). Six five-year plans would be formulated between 2010 and 2040 (ROU, 2010a).
National Development Plan I (2010-2015)
The first NDP, formulated in 2007 and adopted by parliament in 2010, reflected a changed
emphasis on structural transformation through greater diversification of the economy. Its
99 nickname Bonna bagagawale/Abara kere meaning ‘we get rich and eradicate poverty’
signalled the linking of this strategic development framework for economic development with
economic growth as the path to prospeperity. It envisaged a modern and prosperous country
through productive employment as a firm foundation for inclusive growth and sustained
development (van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015). It identified eight national development
objectives:
1. Increasing household incomes and promoting equity.
2. Enhancing the availability and the quality of gainful employment.
3. Improving stock and quality of economic infrastructure.
4. Improving access to quality social services.
5. Promoting science, technology, innovation, and ICT to enhance competitiveness.
6. Enhancing human capital development.
7. Strengthening good governance, defence, and security.
8. Promoting sustainable population and use of environmental and natural resources
(ROU, 2010a, p. 57).
The main goals were economic: macroeconomic stability; high levels of growth, efficiency, and productivity; and synergies between primary growth-promoting and social and enabling sectors (ROU, 2010a). Through diversification of the economy, the aim was to generate employment, increase production, improve technology, and boost household income in three key sectors: agriculture, manufacturing, and services (Lie, 2015). The government hoped this would lead to dramatic changes in the ways in which Ugandans generated their income, since how these three sectors were organised and how different individuals integrated in them had been found to have major implications for poverty reduction (Obwona & Guloba,
2009; Pauw & Thurlow, 2015).
100 The second PSR (ROU, 2014c) reported on NDP I’s from 2010 to 2015 progress on
structural transformation and poverty reduction. In agriculture, the NDP had aimed to
transform livelihoods through: an increase in commercial farming; strengthened property
rights, especially for women; agricultural credit offering partial guarantees and preferential
credit to rural farmers and lowered demands on other forms of collateral, such as producer
groups and community associations; and the provision of equipment, such as ox-ploughs. Thus, the agricultural sector saw a small shift from subsistence farming to commercial agriculture and the growth of non-farming activities, due to the availability of credit. In the manufacturing and service sectors, high-tech manufacturing for export gained leeway over agro-commodities and low technology (Christie, Kyamureku, Kaaya, & Devenport, 2015; Coromaldi, Pallante, &
Savastano, 2015). Agriculture remained the main employment sector. It was dominated by smallholder subsistence farmers, 72% of the rural population, 77% of whom were women and
63% youth (ROU, 2014c).
The PSR (ROU, 2014c) reported that, though the country had achieved impressive economic outcomes over successive years and absolute poverty levels had fallen to 19.7%, growth had been unevenly distributed and had failed to generate the momentum needed for structural transformation. Besides, the National Household Survey 2016/2017 reported a significant rise of income poverty to alarming levels of 27%, clearly painting a grim picture to poverty reduction efforts over the past decades (ROU, 2017). On the employment front, though the total labour force had risen to 16.3 million, the percentage employed in the formal sector was small, falling from 21.5% in 2010 to 18.5% in 2013 compared to those in the informal sector and in self-employment, rising from 70.9% in 2010 to 81.5% in 2013 (ROU, 2015). This was largely explained by a lack of formal education.
101 National Development Plan II (2016-2020)
The second NDP, like the first, aimed to propel the country to middle-income country status
by 2020 through a continued focus on strengthening the country’s competitiveness for
sustainable wealth creation, employment, and inclusive growth (ROU, 2015). To this end, NDP
II identified four objectives:
1. Increased productivity through macroeconomic stability, fiscal expansion,
infrastructure investment, industrialisation, export-oriented, private sector led
growth, and quasi-market mechanisms, in areas of value addition, such as agro-
processing, optimised mineral extraction, and heavy and light manufacturing, such
as fruit processing and brewing industries.
2. Increased competitiveness by prioritising investment in energy, ICT, transport
infrastructure, and product diversification.
3. Enhanced human capital development through: (i) employment creation, fast-
tracking skills development, and retraining of the economically active population
to harness the demographic dividend (the benefits of population growth rates and
the youthful population through appropriate policies); (ii) fertility control and
improved access to family planning services; (iii) improved nutrition; and (iv)
increased years of formal school and improving the quality of education (ROU,
2015).
4. Strong governance to create an enabling environment to accelerate structural
transformation through: (i) greater transparency and accountability; (ii) free and fair
political and electoral processes; (iii) effective government regulations; (iv) citizen
participation in the development process; (v) the rule of law; (vi) peace, security,
and stability; and (vii) constitutional democracy with human rights protection. The
102 aim was to improve service delivery through strong governance mechanisms and
structures and public/private partnerships (ROU, 2015).
In this classical tradition of development economics, the main concern was not economic growth or poverty reduction per se but employment creation as a means to secure better living standards and thereby the elimination of poverty through the trickle-down effect
(Wuyts & Kilima, 2016). The resurgence of neoclassical development economics in the mid-
1980s and early 1990s that led to the Washington consensus propelled Uganda towards
strategies for economic growth (Stiglitz, 2002b, 2010). Despite the focus on poverty reduction
in the late 1990s that led to the PRSPs and NDPs, economic transformation remained a major
priority (Hickey, 2013). As Timer (2009) explained, other factors took precedence, including
the declining share of agriculture in GDP and employment, due to rapid urbanisation, the rise
of the modern industrial and service economy, and declining birth and death rates. Thus, the
key lay in transforming agriculture to increase productivity, provide food security, generate
employment, and stem urbanisation (van Waeyenberg & Bargawi, 2015; Wuyts & Kilama,
2016). The challenge lay in transforming smallholder agriculture from subsistence farming
(72%) to productive agriculture providing increased employment, incomes, and standards of
living given the lack of growth in the non-agricultural economy. Countries that had managed
to overcome poverty and get richer had diversified from agriculture to other products, while
transformation had differentiated successful countries from unsuccessful ones (Van
Waeyenberg & Bargawi, 2015; Wuyts & Kilama, 2016).
Progress in poverty reduction
The Borgen Project (2013) reported that life expectancy in Uganda had been raised by 10 years between 2000 and 2013, from age 46 to 55 years. It also reported that there were problems in the implementation of the universal primary education program (Borgen Project, 2016).
103 Though the government had spent USD300 million annually on this program, parents still paid
50% of school fees and the government just over 27%. This led to high dropout rates of 75%,
especially for girls. The Global Partnership for Education contributed USD100m for the government’s Education Sector Strategic Plan (EESP) from 2004 to 2015 and extended the program to 2018.
According to the MDGs report of 2015, the government of Uganda had made
tremendous achievements in reducing income poverty (Boysen, 2016; UNDP, 2015). Poverty
levels had declined from 56.4% in 1992-1993 to 19.7% in 2013-2014, with rural poverty falling
from 60.4% to 22.8% over the same period, while urban poverty had declined from 28.8% to
9.3%. The UNDP (2015) associated improved income levels among Ugandans with the
government’s ability to meet the direct and indirect costs of education, health, and housing.
They attributed this to government’s deliberate efforts to implement broad-based poverty
reduction measures through its PEAP I, II, and III, and NDP I, covering wide-ranging sectors,
including infrastructure, agriculture, and macroeconomic policies. However, food insecurity
and inequality remained a great policy challenge over the MDG period (Boysen, 2016). The
share of the poorest quantile of 20% in total household consumption had remained stable,
showing that the benefits of growth had not trickled down to every household. The Uganda
National Household Survey 2016/2017 showed that average income poverty levels rose to
27%, clearly highlighting that more Ugandans had slipped back into poverty, with the number
of poor people rising from 6.6 million in 2012/2013 to 10 million in 2016/2017 (ROU, 2017).
The government undertook several measures to address inequality. These included
equalisation grants to poor districts in Northern and Eastern Uganda. This was aimed at
widening the fiscal space of these districts to address social service delivery gaps. Special
initiatives were also introduced, including the Peace, Recovery and Development Plan (PRDP);
Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF); Karamoja Livelihoods Program (KALIP);
104 and Northern Uganda Agricultural Livelihoods Recovery Programme (ALREP). Other national poverty reduction programs introduced included the NAADS program; Youth Livelihood
Programme; and Roll Back Malaria (RBM) (UNDP, 2015).
There was also broad acknowledgement in the literature that, despite these achievements, a significant proportion of Ugandans remained entrenched in poverty
(Byekwaso, 2010; Levine, Muwonge, & Batana, 2014; ROU, 2017). Poverty levels remained high among rural households, who constituted 85% of the Ugandan population with their source of livelihood derived from smallholder agriculture (Krishna, Lumonya, Markiewicz,
Mugumya, Kafuko, & Wegoye, 2006; Mpuga, 2010; ROU, 2015). The economic growth rates had failed to generate the momentum necessary to transform the economy and spread benefits equitably (ROU, 2017). The government attributed this to the country’s heavy dependence on subsistence agriculture, which had become increasingly vulnerable to climate change and variability (ROU, 2017). However, some studies blamed the prioritisation of commercial agriculture, which forced millions of poor people to rely on the market for food (Rwamigisa,
Birner, Mangheni, & Semana, 2013). However, despite the continued government focus on investment in prioritised sectors, most importantly agriculture, the ROU (2017) reported an increase in the incidence and intensity of poverty.
The other important achievement noted in the UNDP (2015) report was the control of malaria, the leading cause of death among children under five; between 2009 and 2014, the prevalence of malaria among children halved. This was broadly attributed to the large-scale distribution of insecticide-treated bed-nets. Similarly, the burden of related diseases like measles and tuberculosis declined. These remarkable achievements helped to halve Uganda’s child mortality rates, thus, highlighting positive progress.
Decentralisation of governance had helped to improve accountability at the lower levels of government, while at the same time expanding access to social services (UNDP, 2015;
105 Steiner, 2010). The local council system created development structures that enabled popular
participation and social engagement at the grassroots level (Golooba-Mutebi, 2004). It improved the flow of information from central to local government and led to greater peace and stability, personal safety, and security of property. It also facilitated representation for women (King, 2015; Robinson, 2007; Ssonko, 2013).
In theory, the introduction of a multiparty democracy would enhance political participation for those over 18 years of age, while the introduction of Barazas or town hall meetings would provide a platform for participation in planning for, and monitoring, social service provision, especially through local government (Golooba-Mutebi, 2004; Steiner,
2010).). However, decentralisation was also resource intensive and this undermined poverty reduction and social transformation (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Steiner, 2010). In practice, there was little meaningful citizen or CSO engagement in policy processes, which undermined credibility and effective service provision (Ssonko, 2013; Steiner, 2010).
Nevertheless, at the broadest level, there were some gains in poverty reduction, especially in education and gender equity with boys and girls enrolling in schools (Canagarajah
& van Diesen, 2011; Parkinson, 2010; Hickey, 2013; Robinson, 2007; UNDP, 2015). Despite socioeconomic, religious, and cultural barriers impeding girls’ education, the government focused on improving school enrolments for both genders, with the current enrolment ratio for boys and girls now standing at 100%.
In the promotion of gender equality and women’s empowerment, notable positive changes involved the formulation of gender responsive regulatory framework, policies, and strategies, including the Domestic Violence Act, 2010, Prohibition of Female Genital
Mutilation Act 2010, Uganda Gender Policy, and Draft Gender Based Violence Policy (ROU,
2015). However, some studies suggested that gender equality efforts remained weak due to institutional barriers perpetuating unequal gender relations (Deininger & Castagnini, 2006;
106 Doss, Meinzen-Dick, & Bomuhangi, 2014; Quaye, Dowuna, Okali & Dziedzoave, 2016;
Upadhyay, 2005). This has undermined the translation of reforms into solid and enduring gains for Ugandan women (Ali, Bowen, Deininger & Duponchel, 2016; Kabeer, 2016; ROU, 2015; wa Githinji, Konstantinidis, & Barenberg, 2014). Other sources indicated that the slow progess in women’s empowerment inhered in PEAP’s failure to address the sociocultural factors that entrenched women’s economic dependence on men, such as asset ownership and inheritance laws (Cooper & Bird, 2012; Deininger & Castagnini; 2006; Ellis & Freeman, 2004; Lwanga-
Ntale, 2014). Though PEAP acknowledged the importance of women’s contribution to increased production, competitiveness, and incomes, it did not introduce measures to eliminate culturally defined gendered divisions of labour (Doss et al., 2014). Nevertheless, progress has been registered in the institutionalisation of gender planning in all sectors and increased collection of gender disaggregated data and information through research (Ali et al., 2016;
UNDP, 2015). Positive changes of these interventions include critical mass of women in the parliament, gender parity enrolment in primary school, increased land ownership by women, improved access to water and sanitation, accompanied with less time spent by women and girls in retrieving water (Kabeer, 2016; Kadaga, 2015; Quaye et al., 2016, wa Githinji et al., 2014).
In environmental sustainability, the government has placed natural resource management at
the core of its socioeconomic transformation strategy (James, 2010). The key drivers to
environmental change in Uganda have been identified as poverty, rapid population growth,
urbanisation, agricultural expansion, informal settlement and development, industrialisation, and climate change (James, 2010; Terry, McLaughlin, & Kazooba, 2015).
Within the MDG 7, government has made significant gains in the provision and delivery of water. The share of rural population having access to clean water improved, reaching to 72% in 2013-2014, as opposed to 52% in 2001-2002. In urban areas, the share of access to clean and safe water increased. Other areas of environmental sustainability achieved included climate
107 change response, solid waste management, wetland restoration, and approaches to reverse loss
of forest cover (Terry et al., 2015).
Developing global partnerships was another cornerstone of Uganda’s development
policy. Debt cancellation by IFIs under the HIPC and MDRI initiatives reduced the country’s
external debt and freed up critical resources, which were later channelled for poverty reduction
and infrastructure and service development through the PAF (Verschoor, 2007). Uganda also
explored partnerships with the BRICS countries, namely, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and
South Africa which transformed the global economy and provided new partnership possibilities
(Hickey, 2013; UNDP, 2015). The emergence of these economic and power centres provided new sources of funding on concessionary terms. This was important given the decline in international aid to 18% in 2013-2014 from over 50% in 2002-2003. Uganda harnessed the opportunity offered to spur its long-term development objectives through proactive engagement with BRICS. The government had signed a trade partnership agreement with
Kenya, which enabled effective and efficient trading of Uganda’s produce with Kenyan buyers
(Borgen Project, 2013).
Within MDG 8, Uganda witnessed one of the fastest growing communication sectors in Africa. Cellular phone usage increased from 4.5 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants in 2005 to 52 in 2013. Improved Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure provided a platform for enhanced public service delivery, with 65% of government institutions providing online services (UNDP, 2015).
In summary, positive progress was noted in income poverty reduction to 19.7%, though rising to 27% in 2017 (ROU, 2017); increased enrolment of boys and girls in primary school; reduced mortality rates for children under the age of five years; gender equality and empowerment; decentralised service delivery and provision; increased use of ICT
108 technologies; improved infrastructural development; macroeconomic stability and growth; and sustained peace and security across the country.
Poverty in Eastern Uganda
The second Poverty Status Report (ROU, 2014c) claimed that poverty levels had fallen in the
Central, Western, and Northern regions but were high in the Eastern region. The western region had experienced the largest decline from 52.7% in 1992-1993 to 8.7% in 2012-2013. This was closely associated with household diversification away from agriculture towards non-farm activities, such as trading in agricultural produce, operating village micro credit facilities, and operating transport businesses − taxis and motorcycles. The Western region had also enjoyed
relative peace for the past 30 years compared to the Northern and Eastern regions (ROU,
2014c). Poverty levels in the central region declined from 45.6% to 4.7% over the same period.
The Northern region had registered a tremendous decline in poverty levels from 73.5% in 1992-
1993 to 43.7% in 2012-2013, though poverty levels remained more than twice the national average. The Eastern region, however, had poverty levels well above the national average, declining from 58.8% to 24.1%, with a slight increase of 0.2 per in 2009-2010 and 2012-2013, mainly attributed to the rise of rural poverty (ROU, 2014c).
The National Household Survey 2016/2017 reported that the Eastern region had reached poverty levels of 48%, with the incidence of poverty ranking highest at 42%. This clearly indicated that multiple policy development interventions for poverty reduction had not yielded the desired positive outcomes since 2000 (ROU, 2017). The PSR (ROU, 2014c) identified adverse weather conditions, such as floods following unusually high rainfall, alternating with extended dry seasons, as a factor in reduced food crop production; increased post-harvest losses and prices; risks associated with production and marketing crop produce; and structural factors, including large family size, high dependency ratios, and growing
109 population pressures contributing to land degradation (Eisen, Enscore, Atiku, Zielinski-
Gutierrez, Mpanga, Kajik, & Gage, 2013; ROU, 2014b).
The United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) had identified large
families as a primary cause of poverty in the Eastern region with resultant limited access to
land and other assets (Doss, 2001; Doss, Truong, Nabanoga & Namaalwa, 2012; Wakabi,
2006). Government records showed that average household size in Eastern Uganda was 5.4 per
household as compared to the national average of 4.8 per household, while fertility rates were
7.5 in comparison to a national average of 6.2 (ROU, 2014b). Land fragmentation in Eastern
Uganda had left many families with small plots of land that were grossly inadequate to cater
for immediate and essential household needs (Nkonya, E., Kaizzi, & Pender, 2005; Wakabi,
2006).
More wide-ranging studies on poverty revealed that poverty in rural Eastern Uganda
was due to poor people’s inability to increase their production capacity due to a lack of
appropriate agricultural technologies and inputs (Doss et al., 2012, 2014; ROU, 2017).
According to the Uganda National Household Survey of 2012/2013, the Eastern region ranked second in terms of food insecurity and had the lowest levels of dietary energy consumption, with the poorest dietary diversity (ROU, 2014b). This was attributed to dependence on subsistence farming by most of the population, with less alternative sources of income to supplement their harvest (ROU, 2014b). Within the region, multidimensional poverty was related to low education levels, poor health services, lack of public utilities, and inadequate housing conditions. The other significant aspect associated with rising income poverty levels in rural Eastern Uganda was the commercialisation of agriculture, as opposed to increasing food crop production for household consumption, which effectively forced poor people to purchase food (ROU, 2017). The biggest improvement was in access to information with only a tenth of the population without a radio, television, or mobile phone (ROU, 2014c).
110 Communities included in the study
The communities in which the study was conducted were in the Soroti, Kumi, and Ngora
districts of the Teso sub-region in Eastern Uganda. The Teso region comprises eight districts:
Amuria, Bukedea, Katakwi, Kaberamaido, Kumi, Ngora, Serere, and Soroti. It has an estimated
3.2 million people or 9.6% of the Ugandan population (ROU, 2014b). Agriculture, especially crop production, is the main source of livelihood for the people in the region. Further, cattle keeping was a major source of livelihood, however, it witnessed significant decline due to political instability and cattle rustling by the neighbouring communities from Karamoja. Like the Northern region, the Teso region had encountered several civil conflicts. The liberation wars by Tanzania against Idi Amin in the late 1970s had devastated the region. This was compounded by the Uganda People’s Army’s incursions from 1986 until the mid-1990s and, in 2003, by the Lord Resistance Army and ongoing cattle raids by armed Karamojong, that mainly affected the Katakwi, Amuria, Kumi, and Bukedea districts (ROU, 2014c).
The Teso region exemplified legacies of unacknowledged conflict and human rights violations, where civil conflicts had devastated the socioeconomic fabric. Annual rainfall averaged 1100 to 1200mm, though erratic rains resulted into droughts and floods (Friss-
Hansen, 2010). These adverse climatic disasters occur periodically negatively impacting on
agricultural production and undermining smallholder agriculture. The most notable disasters
were recorded in 2007, 2010, and 2011 according to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) (2007). The region had poor, shallow, and light-textured soils, with sandy
Loam content. The traditional farming system had long supported a broad range of cash and
food crops, making the Teso region the highest agricultural performer in Uganda.
The PSR (2014) reported Teso’s productive assets lay in land, livestock, especially
oxen, poultry, and tools. The focus on assets fit within the sustainable livelihood framework
and Sen’s (1999) capability approach (Hulme, 2003; Niehof, 2004). Owning and managing
111 land was a key productive asset benefiting males within Uganda’s discriminatory patriarchal
cultures and practices (Lawson et al., 2006). Asset ownership, especially household assets,
such as land, livestock, bicycles, and radios, remained dominated by males in comparison to
females (ROU, 2017). Due to the high cost of imported tractors and fuel, mechanical cultivation was limited, especially for rural farmers in the region. The flatness and lightness of the soils made ox-ploughing the most efficient and effective farming method (Smith et al., 2001).
The decline in the number of draught animals, due to livestock raids and political instability caused by internal conflict, as mentioned previously, had a negative impact on household farming outputs leading to periodic food insecurity throughout the region. Official government reports indicated this arose from dependence on subsistence farming (ROU,
2014c). Smallholder agriculture in the region had, however, grown in the past two decades due to peace and improved access to market opportunities. This was helped by the opening and rehabilitation of the Soroti-Nairobi-Mombasa highway and Soroti-Gulu-Juba South Sudan highway. Also, improved local government structures (Steiner, 2010) had reformed the institutional context influencing smallholder agriculture (Friss-Hansen, 2010; James, 2010).
Conclusion
The chapter discussed the externally driven policy initiatives that were uniformly adopted
across different SSA countries and their dubious success in poverty reduction. Uganda’s
political, economic, and sociocultural structures made the formulation and implementation of
Western policy and service models challenging. They tested the partnership between the
international development institutions and the government of Uganda. The poverty reduction
policies based on partnership and country ownership of development, reinforced in the MDGs
and Paris declaration, gave way to the centralist NDPs (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011;
Hickey, 2012; Kjær & Joughin, 2012). The failure to discharge benefits to the targeted
112 population led to the re-emergence of government extension services in National Development
Plan I and II (Hickey, 2013; Kjær & Joughin, 2012). The government’s role was to create an enabling environment of peace, security, and stability to accelerate social and economic transformation through transparency and accountability, citizen participation in local government structures (ROU, 2000d), and key infrastructure investment (ROU, 2015).
However, growing donor influence diluted local ownership and participation. Dissatisfied with the influence of the donor institutions in the PEAP revisions and the overall poverty agenda, the government shifted its position significantly in the NDPs as it sought structural transformation and deeper national ownership of its development policy (Verschoor, 2007). As in PEAP, agriculture remained a key focus in the NDPs, given its prominence in Uganda’s economy. The NDPs built on the earlier policy and institutional framework of PEAP through which NAADS had been adopted and implemented (van Waeyenberg & Bargawi, 2015). They sought economies of scale around commodities to enhance agricultural trade and sustainable agro-processing. This was accompanied by, among other things, increased research; provision of better farming inputs; technology development; advisory services; and demonstration farms
(Sennoga & Matovu, 2013). The chapter further highlighted the progress made in Uganda’s poverty reduction efforts, before turning attention to the communities where the study was conducted. It provided a backdrop to the study’s focus on agricultural development and the main platform for poverty reduction, NAADS, an outcome of the World Bank PRSPs and HIPC initiative discussed in Chapter 2. These changes reflected a policy shift in a radical move away from top-down, government-led extension services to privatised, demand-driven, farmer-led advisory services, which will be discussed in Chapters 4 and 5.
113 CHAPTER 4
Agricultural development in Uganda and the NAADS framework
Agriculture plays a pivotal role in Uganda’s economic and social development and contributes about 60% to the country’s economy. Agricultural development, the subject of this chapter, was the study’s core focus. The goal of agricultural development in the Ugandan context was the structural transformation of the agricultural sector to make it more productive. The chapter
discusses the premier agricultural development policy, the Plan for the Modernisation of
Agriculture (ROU, 2000c, 2000d), which came into effect in 2001 as one of the key
components of PEAP, discussed in Chapter 3. The PMA was an integral strategy within PEAP
aimed at rapid and sustainable economic growth and structural transformation of the
agricultural sector, and increased ability of the poor to raise their incomes through agriculture.
The PMA’s central focus was on rural agricultural development with the aim of shifting the
livelihoods of subsistence farmers through increased agricultural productivity, household
incomes, and food security.
The International Food and Agricultural Development (IFAD) estimated that
agricultural growth was 11 times more likely to alleviate poverty than growth in other sectors
of the economy, such as utilities and mining (IFAD, 2012). In this vein, this study focused on
agricultural development as a means of reducing poverty through productive agriculture.
Several studies highlighted the importance of agriculture, particularly attempts to modernise
agriculture, as a platform for poverty reduction (Alene & Coulibaly, 2009; Amparire et al 2013;
Bahiigwa, Rigby & Woodhouse, 2005; Collier & Dercon, 2014; Dorosh & Mellor, 2013; Kydd,
Dorward, Morrison, & Cadisch, 2004). This study sought to expand these contributions through a broad in-depth analysis of post-independence agricultural policy and the factors motivating
114 its adoption at the national and global levels. The chapter begins with an overview of the
developmental discourse that placed agriculture at the forefront of Uganda’s economic growth agenda. It then discusses policy shifts through five phases of agricultural development.
To underline the importance of agriculture to Uganda’s economy, it accounted for more than half of the country’s exports, generated a quarter of GDP, and employed two thirds of the economically active population, 80% of whom were engaged in smallholder farming (James,
2010; ROU, 2015). It provided raw materials to the manufacturing sector, a market for non- agricultural output, and a surplus for investment. Agricultural production was possible in 80% of the country due to its rich fertile soils and two annual rainy seasons (ROU, 2015). However, agriculture had yet to prove its ability to alleviate poverty and food insecurity. The government sought to achieve this through its various poverty reduction policies – PEAP (2000-2008) and
NDP (2010-2015), in which NAADS, introduced in 2001, played a central role (Benin, 2011,
2012; Benin et al., 2007; Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Pender, Jagger, Nkonya, & Sserunkuuma,
2004).
Development discourse placing agriculture at the centre of economic
growth
Agriculture has always been the backbone of the Ugandan economy and government, and
foreign donor interventions encouraged agricultural development through agricultural
extension services, improved farming methods, and the provision of seeds and equipment
(Joughin & Kjær, 2010; Kassie, Shiferaw & Muricho, 2011; Kjær & Joughin, 2012; Muyinza
& Ambrose, 2006; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006). The focus on agricultural development by various policymakers at different times was premised on the central role of agriculture in socioeconomic development and transformation (Wuyts & Kilama, 2016). During the colonial era, agriculture was a source of raw materials for industries in Britain. Immediately after
115 independence, agriculture was a source of foreign exchange through the production of cash
crops, such as coffee, cotton, tobacco, and tea (Semana, 1999, 2004).
The impact of the recent developments in the Asian economies, specifically China’s
transformation to a market economy, had a major influence on agricultural development in
recent times (Sumberg, Thompson, & Woodhouse, 2013; Toenniessen, Adesina, & DeVries,
2008). As with most countries in the Global South, China’s was a predominantly rural economy at the time of its transformation from Communism, bearing in mind many SSA countries had experimented with Socialism. China had shown that rapid growth in the productivity of the smallholder agricultural sector had led to a lowering of food prices, increased national income, and savings and investment, and had fueled greater demand for the products of emerging industries (Fan & Zhang, 2008; Hazell, Poulton, Wiggins, & Dorward, 2010; Lipton & Toye,
2010; Poulton, Dorward, & Kydd, 2010; Rao, 2009; Ravallion, 2009). China’s Green revolution had shown how traditional agriculture transformed China into a fast-paced modern sector through the adoption of science-based technology (Dawson, Martin, & Sikor, 2016; Fan
& Zhang, 2008; Mendola, 2007). It generated confidence in agriculture as a cornerstone for growth (Havnevik, Bryceson, Birgegard, Matondi & Beyene, 2007; Ravallion, 2009). Thus, the path to a better quality of life in rural areas was through a focus on technological development to boost agricultural production and productivity (Brick & Visser, 2015; Diiro &
Abdoul, 2015; Rao, 2009; Yamano & Kijima, 2010).
Consequently, Uganda invested one percent of its Gross Domestic Product to agricultural science research in conformity with African Union commitment to allocate one percent of the country’s GDP to agricultural research and development alongside other few
African countries; Malawi, and South Africa (Wopereis, Diagne, Rodenburg, Sié, & Somado,
2008). Technologies new to Uganda included high-yield seed varieties that not only boosted productivity and income earnings, but also sparked demand in the non-farming sectors of rural
116 communities (Larson, Otsuka, Matsumoto, & Kilic, 2014; Ravallion, 2009; Woelcke, 2006).
This led to expansion and improvements in housing, local furniture and textile industries, and a wide range of services, including radio and telecommunications, and transport (Dorosh &
Mellor, 2013).
Hence, agricultural development was seen to hold promise for SSA, the only region
with growth in agriculture falling behind population growth, specifically growth in the
agricultural labour force (Kydd, Dorward, Morrison, & Cadisch, 2004; Lipton, 2010; Poulton
& Macartney; 2012; Ravallion, 2009; Sengupta; 2013; Wiggins, 2014). It was also the major
region in the Global South with more poor people in 2005 than in 1990 (Collier, 2007; Sachs,
2005, 2008; Stringer, Twyman & Gibbs, 2008). Much of the sub-continent’s poverty remained
concentrated in rural areas among smallholder farmers (Collier & Dercon, 2014). The
generation of agricultural growth, particularly in the smallholder sector, could, as in Asia,
increase rural incomes and food supplies and stimulate broad-based economic growth through
linkages with the non-agricultural sector (Jayne, Mather, Mason, & Ricker-Gilbert, 2013;
Lipton, 2010; Ravalllion, 2009, 2013). Given the need for balanced sector growth in the global
economy, countries in SSA were encouraged to exploit agriculture-industry linkages. Hence,
after the development discourse had sidelined agriculture for many years, there came
significant recognition across the world of the vital part it played in economic growth in the
Global South (Larson et al., 2014; Wiggins, Kirsten, & Llambí, 2010; Valdés & Foster, 2010).
The World Bank report on agricultural development placed agriculture at the centre of
the development agenda, linking it with economic growth and poverty reduction with the
coming of the MDGs (Christiaensen, Demery, & Kuhl, 2011; Hagiu & Bărbulescu, 2015;
World Bank Independent Evaluation Group, 2011). Initially, the World Bank had no formal
strategy for agricultural development in Africa. Instead, it formed part of the broad rural
development framework, which changed over the years. In the 1970s, the World Bank’s (2007)
117 interventions in rural areas concentrated on community development expanding to human and sustainable development in the 1990s and 2000s respectively. The rural development strategy continued to shape the Banks’ broad focus, with agriculture forming a small part of the rural
portfolio.
However, a report by the Internal Evaluation Group of the World Bank (World Bank,
2007) highlighted the Bank’s limited positive achievements with respect to agricultural
development in Africa, due to its fragmented intervention policies. It stated that, due to the
complexity surrounding agricultural sector in Africa, the solutions would require coordinated
interventions across a range of activities in the agricultural and related service sectors. The
report added that if improved seeds, water, infrastructures, and credit extensions, among other
measures, were made available simultaneously, rapid transformation in Africa’s agricultural
sector would be achieved (World Bank, 2007). Several studies established this link. For
example, Whitfield (2012) found that:
All countries that have achieved rapid growth and poverty reduction over the long
term experienced an increase in land yields and farm and rural non-farm incomes
during their early phase of transformation unless there was no agricultural sector to
start with (p. 251).
Studies found that agriculture was critical in regions with limited opportunities to support broad-based pro-poor growth (Kydd et al., 2004; Whitfield, 2012) and aid to agriculture was most effective in poverty reduction, an increasing focus towards the end of the millennium
(Kappel, Lay, & Steiner, 2005; Kaya, Kaya, & Gunter, 2013). These global developments
influenced the Ugandan government, as the following discussion on agricultural development
shows.
118 Phases of agricultural development
Influenced by international development aid discourses, agricultural policy in Uganda went
through several stages from state building and planning post-independence to reduced state intervention and increasing marketisation during structural adjustment, and a renewed focus on economic growth following the Asian experience, as already outlined. Table 4.1 shows the link between agricultural development and national development and poverty reduction policy.
Post-independence: Modernising agriculture (1962-1985)
The government’s overarching goal following independence in 1962 was the modernisation
and transformation of agriculture from subsistence to industrialised and commercial farming,
from household food production to large-scale cash crops, such as coffee, cotton, tobacco, and tea for export (Fan & Zhang, 2008; Govereh & Jayne, 2003). The goal was to boost exports in the primary products where Uganda had a competitive advantage. The modernisation plan included centralised state planning, infrastructure development, subsidy and input provision, and land redistribution. It formed part of the rural development strategy to promote poverty reduction (Brett, 1998; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006).
By the end of the 1960s and early 1970s, the government further embedded leftist state-
led planning. With President Milton Obote’s declaration of a common man’s charter,
agricultural and land reform to increase food production and achieve self-sufficiency intensified (Brett, 1998; Kafir, 1985; Kuteesa et al., 2006). At the start of 1970s, the redistribution of land to indigenous people followed Idi Amin’s eviction of Asian commercial farmers.
119
Table 4.1 Phases of agricultural development in Uganda
Period Phases Poverty and development policies NAADS Goals of agricultural development 1962- Post- Economic independence policy and Agricultural extension services Modernisation of agriculture 1985 independence social redistribution program Land redistribution State management of cooperative agricultural production Formation of commodity marketing boards Provision of subsidies and inputs 1986- Reform Economic Recovery Program (ERP) Agricultural extension services Dismantling of cooperatives, privatisation, 1994 (structural aimed at macroeconomic stability liberalisation, deregulation, abolition of subsidies, adjustment) and agricultural reform removal of price controls, and focus on agricultural exports 1995- Post-reform PEAP (1997-1999) Plan for the Modernisation of Provision of start-up capital – entandikwa − soft 1999 Agriculture (PMA) agricultural loans and credit, and seeds 2000- Poverty PEAP I (2000-2003) NAADS (2001) Modernisation, commercialisation, 2010 reduction PEAP II (2004-2006) NAADS revision 1 (2006) decentralisation, targeted advisory and extension PEAP III (2007-2008) NAADS revision 2 (2008) services for the poor, participation and ownership of beneficiaries, technology provision, and centralised microfinancing 2010- Structural NDP I (2010-2015), including the NAADS II (2010-2016) part of Advisory and extension services returned to 2020 transformation Development Strategy and ATAAS government; NAADS distributing inputs (seeds Investment Plan (DSIP) and agricultural equipment) NDP II (2016-2020) Agri-business became the focus of agricultural development Adapted from ROU (2015)
120
The government supported smallholder farmers through agricultural cooperatives and
extension services, and commodity marketing boards. Influenced by China’s Green revolution, the government introduced high-yield crop seeds, fertilisers, and irrigation schemes to ensure sustainable food production (Sanjuán-López & Dawson, 2010; Xiaoyun, Lixia, Xiuli, Gubo, &
Haimin, 2013). However, due to macroeconomic mismanagement, political instability, excessive state intervention, and a weak institutional framework, food insecurity persisted (Fan
& Zhang, 2008; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006).
At the global level, the economic hardships of 1970s as mentioned in Chapters 2 and 3 had a negative impact on agricultural prices and production, and, by extension, on smallholder farming and poverty reduction (Kay, 2008; Semana, 1999). Foreign earnings from agriculture dwindled, curtailing government services and infrastructure development in rural areas. This compromised marketing boards, making them unable to provide subsidies and incentives to rural smallholder farmers (Havnevik et al., 2007). Nevertheless, agricultural productivity had a strong growth multiplier effect on the economy and was thus a key sector for structural adjustment (Dawe & Peter, 2012; Kappel et al., 2005; Mosley, 2012).
Reform: Structural adjustment (1986-1994)
The second reform phase saw government withdrawal from agricultural development under
structural adjustment and the reversal of the agricultural policies put in place in the previous
period. With the liberalisation, privatisation, and deregulation of the agricultural sector, rural
poverty declined. Farmers’ earnings improved due to increased productivity in export crops,
such as coffee, cotton, tea, and tobacco (Deininger & Okidi, 2003; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010;
Wairimu, Christoplos, & Hilhorst, 2016). However, independent studies concluded that this
purported success and income improvement was exaggerated (Belshaw & Lawrence, 1999;
Daniels & Minot; 2015). Under structural adjustment, there was a dramatic decrease in
agricultural production as the state’s role in the provision of extension services, rural finance,
121 and marketing services was reduced (Mosley, 2012; Semana, 1999). Its commercial orientation paid little attention to food crop production and the viability of smallholder farms that formed the backbone of the agricultural sector and the livelihoods of local communities (Ebanyat,
Ridder, Jager, Delve, Bekunda, & Giller, 2010; Eisen, Enscore, Atiku, Zielinski-Gutierrez,
Mpanga, Kajik, Gage, 2013; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006). Hence, the 1980s and 1990s saw stagnation and falling economic conditions among smallholder and peasant farmers, predominantly due to inappropriate neoliberal market-driven structural adjustment policies
(Barrett, Bachke, Bellemare, Michelson, Narayanan & Walker, 2012). The restructuring and privatisation of government institutions saw the removal of agricultural subsidies, which immediately created a service vacuum for farmers (Fan & Zhang, 2008; Kjær & Joughin,
2012). With private sector provision, farming inputs became expensive and extension services were reduced (Hanson & Just, 2001; Havnevik et al., 2007). By the mid-1990s, it was clear that structural adjustment had not been good for the agricultural sector. A slight rise in income recorded by the smallholder farmers was still below the minimum average income required to meet basic needs (Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006). It was clear that smallholder farmers, who constituted most of the Ugandan population, had withstood the negative impact of structural adjustment.
Post-reform (1995-1999)
Faced with decreased agricultural output following the adjustment reforms and declining
support for agricultural research and extension services, new policy options became imperative.
Though the international development institutions acknowledged the complexity of African poverty and the failed reforms, they continued to promote market fundamentalism (Havnevik et al., 2007). The government responded initially with mitigation measures, including start-up capital, soft loans for agricultural inputs, and seed provision (Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Mugambe,
2009). However, the mitigation scheme encountered huge challenges (Opolot & Kuteesa,
122 2006). Besides a weak and non-responsive institutional framework, the decentralised system
of governance introduced in 1997 was unable to handle national challenges affecting the rural
regions (Golooba-Mutebi & Hickey, 2010; Olum, 2014; Steiner, 2007). Thus, targeting of those affected by adjustment reforms ran into problems and the Museveni government saw an opportunity for distribution of patronage and renting of political support among the disaffected poor (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010).
Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA)
The Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA), issued in 2000 and implemented from 2001, was designed to eradicate poverty through changing dominant subsistence farming to business- oriented agriculture (ROU, 2000c, 2000d). It was an integral strategy within PEAP aimed at rapid and sustainable economic growth and structural transformation, and increased ability of the poor to raise their incomes. Its central focus was rural agricultural development, since most rural households engaged in subsistence farming (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015). The PMA sought to remove constraints on productivity and improve governance in the agricultural sector
(Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003). Factors contributing to poor productivity and food insecurity included a lack of access to land for farming, poor farming methods leading to soil degradation, poor soil quality, limited knowledge on sound farming practices to suit soil conditions, minimal access to financing and credit, poor market access, limited road and transport network, and loss of domestic livestock and assets (Jayne, Mather, & Mghenyi, 2010). Problems in governance included corruption, a lack of accountability and transparency, poor delivery of basic public services, weak local leadership, lack of voice for producers, and concerns surrounding safety and security of persons and property (Benin, 2011, 2012; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006). The PMA identified four core objectives relating to these issues:
123 . Increase incomes and improve the quality of life of poor subsistence farmers
through increased agricultural productivity and enlarged share of marketed
production.
. Improve household food security through the market rather than emphasising self-
sufficiency.
. Empowerment of the poor and local communities to take decisions according to
PMA principles
. Integration of gender and other crosscutting issues within planning processes
. Emphasis on deepening decentralisation
. Encourage private provision of goods and services
. Provide gainful employment as a secondary benefit through agro-processing
factories and services.
. Promote sustainable use of, and management policy for, environmentally friendly
technologies (Bahiigwa et al., 2005).
To facilitate agricultural transformation, the PMA prioritised several areas of agricultural development: (i) Research and technology development; (ii) national agricultural advisory services; (iii) education for agriculture; (iv) improving access to rural finance; (v) improving access to markets; and (vi) sustainable natural resource use and management (ROU, 2001c).
These policy interventions were not dissimilar from those adopted in the post-independence phase from 1962 to 1985, discussed in previously. However, there were key differences.
The PMA introduced demand-driven development to allow farmers latitude in controlling agricultural service provision and gave agricultural research and technological development a pivotal role in agricultural transformation. It also offered a decentralised framework with local governments playing a pivotal role and privatised service provision through government contracts (Benin, 2012, 2011). It changed the nomenclature from
124 extension to advisory services to emphasise its focus on information provision within a
participatory ‘two-way exchange’ model giving farmers a say in the services provided and the providers providing them (Yamano & Kijima, 2010). In the earlier system, many smallholder farmers had found extension services, rural finance, and marketing outlets difficult to access
(Friis-Hansen & Kisauzi, 2002; Semana, 2004). Productivity was low with 40% of the
population being food insecure and unable to sustain their households. The PMA also sought
the inclusion of women and other vulnerable groups (Alkire, Meinzen-Dick, Peterman,
Quisumbing, Seymour, & Vaz, 2013; Ampaire et al., 2013; James, 2010; ROU, 2005b).
Advisory service provision was underpinned by decentralisation, participation (increased
farmer involvement), and privatisation (market-oriented service delivery). Its overriding goal
was structural transformation to move agriculture from subsistence farming to productive
agriculture (to increase exports). Being situated within PEAP, it was anticipated that
modernising agriculture would eradicate poverty (Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003). However, in
commenting on the World Bank (2005) study, the Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs
(2017) cited one stakeholder, who noted the ‘PMA is not a plan, it is not about modernisation
and it is not just about agriculture’ (p. 2), so broad, wide-reaching, and confusing was Uganda’s
PMA:
The PMA core document defines and uses several terms in a confusing way. It is not
always clear as to what it means by ‘commercialisation’, and even less so by
’modernisation’. The ’private sector’ is used to include farmers, whereas many
Ugandans would take this to mean commercial businesses. The poorest level of farmers
is referred to as ‘subsistence’ farmers, yet most farmers within this group have strong,
if intermittent, linkages with markets (Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2017,
p. 2).
125 Modernisation and commercialisation accelerated (2000-2015)
When the MDGs focused the development community on poverty reduction once again at the
start of the new millennium, over 80% of Uganda’s population was engaged in smallholder
subsistence farming (Adong, 2014; Lawson et al., 2006). The broad-based Plan for the
Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA) had been a key pillar of PEAP and with PEAP Revision
I (2000-2003), the government shifted its focus once again to the modernisation and
commercialisation of agriculture through the PMA and NAADS (introduced in 2001). It aimed to accelerate economic growth and thereby poverty reduction (ROU, 2003b). In successive
PEAPs and the subsequent NDPs, agriculture remained central economic development and poverty reduction:
Prior to 2007, Uganda pursued a centralized strategy for economic growth and poverty
reduction that placed greater emphasis on agricultural development as a means for
empowering citizens in the rural sector where 80% of the population lives and derives
livelihood through various forms of subsistence farming. The rural sector accounted for
94% of people who live below the poverty line, and subsistence agricultural farming
employed 73% of the population, contributing 20% of the GDP (Makoba & Wakoko-
Studstill, 2015, p. 99).
It accounted for 50% of export earnings and contributed to 38.5% of GDP in 2003-2004, when
PEAP Revision II was introduced (ROU, 2005a, 2010a; van Donge, Henley, & Lewis, 2012).
Revisions of NAADS during the implementation of PEAP Revision II (2004-2006) and
III (2007-2008) aimed at greater inclusivity through centralising governance and enhancing economic development. As with prior programs, NAADS I had failed to benefit targeted vulnerable groups – widows, female-headed households, young people, and orphans that were referred to as the active poor, who were unable to take advantage of the opportunities on offer
126 (Benin, 2011; 2012; Ekou, 2013; Golooba-Mutebi, 2010; Okoboi, Muwanga & Mwebaze,
2012; Okoboi et al., 2013; Wairimu et al., 2006).
Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP)
The DSIP (2010-2015) was designed to support the implementation of the NDP, Uganda’s economic development framework and coincided with NAADS phase II. The Ministry of
Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries (MAAIF) developed the Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP) to contribute to the implementation of the NDP. Its purpose was to serve as a broader policy framework guiding the agricultural sector through harmonisation and consolidation of all past agricultural development strategies (Afranakwapong & Nkonya,
2015). Its goals included: (i) increasing agricultural production and productivity; (ii) improving access to, and the sustainability of, markets; (iii) creating an enabling environment for the agricultural sector; and (iv) undertaking institutional reforms and development in the agricultural sector. This was in line with NAADS’ focus of:
. Delivering advisory services to increase poor farmers’ access to information.
. Developing the capacity of the private sector to provide advisory services and
reduce public expenditure in this area.
As outlined in Chapter 3, NDP I, which succeeded PEAP in 2010, heralded a return to economic development by diversifying the economy and addressing local economic conditions, while accommodating shifts in global donor priorities (ROU, 2010a). The World
Bank and donor community continued to highlight the significance of agriculture in enhancing pro-poor growth, accompanied by good governance, decentralisation, participation, and empowerment of rural smallholder farmers (Collier & Dercon, 2014; Hagiu & Bărbulescu,
2015; Havnevik et al., 2007; World Bank, 2007). Productivist growth and infrastructure investment replaced social expenditure under PEAP (Hickey, 2013).
127 NDP I positioned agriculture as the main pathway to long-term economic development and structural transformation (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; ROU, 2010a; van
Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015). The plan aimed to stimulate economic growth, diversify the economy, absorb surplus labour in the rural non-farm sector, increase rural incomes, reduce poverty, and generate an industrial revolution (van Donge et al., 2012; van Waeyenberge &
Bargawi, 2015). It held that poverty be addressed where it was most prevalent; this meant a targeted focus on rural areas and farming communities (Birner & Resnick, 2010; Diao, Hazell,
& Thurlow, 2010; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015). Furthermore, it recognised that employment and market opportunities were best located where the poor resided to avoid the over-congestion of urban centres with unskilled poor farmers seeking to eke out a livelihood in the larger cities (Larson et al., 2014; ROU, 2014b, 2014c). Hence, within the NDP, the agricultural Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP) (ROU, 2010a) aligned to wealth creation and economic growth (locally coined as Bona Bagagawale – we all get rich)
(Kjaer & Joughin, 2010; Lie, 2015; Wairimu et al., 2016) accelerated through Agricultural
Technology and Agribusiness Advisory Services (ATAAS), under the redesigned NAADS phase II.
Agriculture Technology and Agribusiness Advisory Services (ATAAS)
The redesigned NAADS II fell under the Agricultural Technology and Agribusiness Advisory
Services (ATAAS) project (Okoboi et al., 2013). ATAAS was a five-year project, which began in December 2011, implemented by the Ministry of Agricultural Animal Industry and Fisheries
(MAAIF) with NARO and NAADS to support the NDP, Uganda’s strategic framework for economic development. Besides advisory services through NAADS, the ATAAS project focused on agricultural research, creating its joint activities on research and extension and advisory services (Okoboi et al., 2013). More details on ATAAS are discussed in Chapter 5.
128 Raising agricultural incomes was the centerpiece of the Bona Bagaggawale ‘Prosperity for All’, the ‘Uganda ruling party’s election manifesto in 2006’ (AfranaaKwapong & Nkonya,
2015, p. 122). Makoba and Wakoko-Studstill (2015) explained the significance of this initiative:
The Uganda Government shifted the focus of its rural credit development scheme to a
politically-driven Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SACCOs) approach under the
Prosperity for All (PFA) program (a.k.a. Bona Bagaggawale in Luganda or ‘let all be
rich’). These SACCOs were created to replace microfinance as the latter was considered
to be rather difficult for the political elite to control or influence. In contrast to
microfinance with well-established ‘best practices’ (that the government had supported
and funded in the late 1990s and mid 2000s), SACCOs were considered to be a potent
strategy or vehicle for transforming the country into a middle-income nation by the year
2020. Hence, under the PFA program, SACCOs were not only expected to replace
microfinance, but were seen as potentially moving all rural Ugandans from poverty to
prosperity – an ambitious undertaking by the government (p. 100).
Replacing rural credit resources (MFIs) with state-controlled SACCOs presented enormous challenges for subsistence farmers and only those with politically connections benefited.
Makoba and Wakoko-Studstill’s (2015) historical comparative analysis revealed that the program ‘failed to stimulate economic development and reduce chronic poverty because its activities and operations … excluded the rural people who need them the most’ (p. 100).
There are parallels with NAADS’ structures to be discussed in Chapter 5. Unlike member-owned traditional SACCOs that rely on member savings and share capital, political
SACCOs were almost entirely reliant on government loans channeled through the
Microfinance Support Center (MSC) and Uganda Post Bank:
129 Political SACCOs are not only permitted by government to accept savings or deposits
of their members without being required to be licensed or supervised by the Bank of
Uganda, but also receive wholesale government loans at below market rates to
distribute to their members. In exchange, the political elite use the government loans as
leverage to exercise control and influence over such SACCOs and the political process
in rural areas. (pp. 100-101).
Bona Bagaggawale signaled a shift from poverty reduction to structural transformation and economic development and embodied the ethos of the NDP, which saw the state gradually reassert control of financial resources. These were disbursed through loans to those who promoted the government’s interests, thus, came the politicisation of credit and advisory services.
National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO)
NARO coordinated agricultural research in Uganda. ATAAS, with NAADS under its umbrella, and NARO connected research, advisory services, and the farmer-market-value-chain within the MAAIF. ROU (2010a) had anticipated that linking NAADS and NARO would ensure the effective generation and transfer of agricultural technologies and innovations to farmers, while encouraging the active participation of all stakeholders. Their main priorities were:
. Technology promotion and farmer access to information.
. Agribusiness development to support market access.
. Institutional development and program management.
. Participatory monitoring and evaluation.
They aimed to achieve these priorities through targeted advisory services where farmers learnt how to commercialise their operations to simultaneously provide export produce and food
130 security. This entailed deliberate efforts to support enterprise development to enhance the
performance of emerging agribusinesses and established farming enterprises. It also entailed
creating relationships between NAADS and other public and private institutions involved in
agricultural development. Information provision and management was key to the success of
this process, not only for planning, monitoring, and evaluation of progress, but also in guiding decision-making at all levels (Ekou, 2013). This was a resource-intensive process and ATAAS struggled to recruit and maintain suitably qualified personnel to support its operations (Ekou,
2013). Sluggish growth in the agricultural sector between 2010 and 2015 through NDP I compounded ATAAS’s problems. Growth of only 1% was recorded in 2010-2011, increasing slightly to 1.33% in 2013-2014 (ROU, 2015). Agriculture’s share of the GDP fell from 38.5% in 2003-2004 to 24.7% in 2011-2012 rising slightly to 25.3% in 2013-2014. This was alarming given the weight given to agricultural growth and profitability in national policy.
At the regional level, like other African countries, Uganda subscribed to the
Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP), which broadly aligned to the MDGs at a global level (ROU, 2015). It developed under the New Partnership for
Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and came into effect in 2003 as African leaders committed to increase investment in agriculture sector at the Second Ordinary Session of the African Union in Maputo. This position derived from the AU’s recognition of agriculture’s significant role in enhancing sustained growth and poverty reduction in member states. The CAADP was supported by political and economic communities at the regional and continental level, including the East African Community (EAC). It aimed to revitalise the sector through sound policies for agricultural and rural development. AU member states committed to allocating at least 10% of national budgetary resources to bring about a 6% growth in GDP from the agriculture sector within five years (Mutimba, 2014; Poulton, 2014; ROU, 2015). This commitment to, and consensus on, this African-owned policy agenda served to hedge external
131 intrusions and opposition to national government intervention in the agricultural sector by
‘extending the area under sustainable land management; improving rural infrastructure and
trade related capacities for market aces; increasing food supply and reducing hunger; and
agricultural research, technology dissemination, and adoption’ (Mutimba, 2014, p. 17). This
agriculture-led economic growth would eliminate hunger, reduce poverty, increase food and
nutrition security, and lead to export expansion (Poulton, 2014).
Of critical significance, CAADP’s Development Assistance (DAS) set out the policy
and strategies for increasing efficiency and effectiveness in the mobilisation and utilisation of
aid. However, due to limited resources, the CAADP did not achieve these desired results. Benin
(2011) reported that only six countries had met their commitment within the first five years.
Mutimba (2014) attributed its failure to its top-down approach, inappropriate training, marginalisation of women, and limited resources. In terms of agricultural growth, Africa recorded 4.5% in 2003-2009, which was below the goal of 6% (Poulton, 2014). In Uganda, the agricultural growth rate for 2007-2008 was 2.6%, underlining weak sectoral performance
(AfranaaKwapong & Nkonya, 2015).
Renewed focus on agricultural development (2016-2020)
The increased competitiveness and profitability of the agricultural sector remained the core
focus of NDP II (2016-2020) (ROU, 2015). The plan promoted private investment in agro-
processing of prioritised agricultural products; support for women and youth associations in
agro-processing; equal access to appropriate agro-processing machinery and equipment through favourable credit facilities; and improved flow of market information (Markelove &
Mwangi, 2010; Mwambi, Oduol, Mshenga, & Saidi, 2016). It aimed to increase agricultural production and productivity; access to critical farm inputs; agricultural markets and value addition for prioritised commodities; and institutional capacity (ROU, 2015).
132 Increased agricultural production and productivity
Through investment in priority agricultural enterprises along the value chain, such as cotton,
coffee, tea, maize, rice, cassava, beans, fish, beef, milk, citrus, and bananas, the NDP II aimed
to achieve increased agricultural production and productivity. Several considerations led to
these selections, including food security potential such as maize, beans, cassava, and bananas,
and high contribution to export earnings such as maize, coffee, fish, and tea (Ebanyat et al.,
2010). Secondly, through access to agricultural finance for women farmers, the plan aims to
increase female labour force participation and involvement in cash crop production. Thirdly,
private-sector investment in agro-processing, such as enabling women and youth associations
to engage in agriculture; facilitating access to appropriate machinery and equipment through
favourable credit facilities; and measures to enhance the flow of information, would support
production, transportation, storage, processing, marketing, and distribution of agricultural
products. Finally, the plan encourages research to support its goals and improve irrigation, food production, and labour-intensive technologies that is especially of women farmers; enhance extension services; increase access to, and use of, critical farm inputs; promote sustainable land use and soil management; and increase access to agricultural finance for women.
Increased access to critical farm inputs
The plan seeks to: improve access to high quality animal breeds, and high-yielding seeds and
planting materials; boost access to, and use of, fertilisers by both women and men; increase
access to water for agricultural production, such as irrigation, water for livestock, aquaculture-
fish ponds, and caging for poultry; and increase agricultural mechanisation which is farm
power. With these intervention areas, the plan aims to guarantee sustainability and market-
oriented production, food security, and improved household incomes (ROU, 2015).
133 Improved agricultural markets and value addition for prioritised commodities
Facilitating the transportation of agricultural products requires improvements in the rural road
network, especially feeder, community, and highway roads, as well as construction and
upgrading of strategic roads and the rail system along key routes to ease the delivery of
agricultural products to domestic and regional markets (Fan & Zhang, 2008). Secondly, it is
necessary to minimise post-harvest wastage and enhance quality maintenance of agricultural
stock and storage facilities for crops, livestock, and fish products to enable individual farmers
and farmers’ associations to bulk clean, grade, and store their produce more effectively.
Regarding value addition for prioritised commodities, the plan promotes contract
farming or out-grower schemes for high-value produce to enhance large-scale agro-processing
and ensure a steady supply of quality produce. Finally, on the marketing and distribution of
agricultural products, the plan focuses on building the capacity of existing farmers’
organisations, cooperatives, and producer associations; expanding markets through regional
and international protocols; and extending internet coverage to facilitate access to market and
information sharing.
Strengthened institutional capacity
The plan aims to strengthen the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries
(MAAIF) and public agricultural agencies delivering agricultural services through NAADS.
This involves: revitalising and strengthening agricultural training institutes to respond effectively to knowledge and skills requirements in the extension services; building local government production departments’ capacity to deliver extension and other farm support services; and effective coordination, regulation, planning, reporting, and implementation between the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, and local government production departments in the districts.
134 Conclusion
This chapter discussed the government of Uganda’s deliberate attempts to make agriculture a
centrepiece for economic development, socioeconomic transformation, and poverty reduction.
However, Uganda’s subsistence agricultural economy has proved difficult to shift (Joughin &
Kjaer, 2010). The 4,5% budgetary allocation for agricultural development in the NDP was significantly lower than that in other low-income countries (van Waeyenberg & Bargawi,
2015). Production has been stagnant in the high agricultural export commodities, such as floriculture, tea, coffee, tobacco, cotton, and fish. Thus, despite the policy initiatives described in this chapter, Uganda has not attained the hoped-for development outcomes. This chapter has presented the debate on agricultural development in Uganda through major programs affecting agriculture since the 1960s. It outlined the context in which NAADS was introduced as a component of the sector-wide Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture. Chapter 5 discusses the history of agricultural extension programs and the implementation structure of NAADS through decentralised local government structures.
135 CHAPTER 5
Agricultural Extension in Uganda and National Agricultural
Advisory Services (NAADS) Framework
Though much debated, there was still a lack of knowledge about how to increase agricultural
productivity in Africa and whether improved advisory programs were the best way to do this
(Rivera, 1997). The copious literature on agricultural extension and advisory services contained few insights on the way in which rural farmers received, accessed, and assessed extension programs. The first half of this chapter discusses the literature on the evolution of agricultural extension services in Uganda. The second half discusses NAADS, first situating it within neoliberal economic principles, then outlining its core objectives, implementation levels, structure, key intervention components, and location in the NDP policy framework. It ends with a discussion of its progress.
Evolution of agricultural extension services
The broad focus of agricultural extension services has been efficient agricultural production
and sustainability through knowledge and technology transfer, as countries in the Global South strove to emulate their success in Europe, the USA, and Asia (Anderson & Feder, 2003;
Bembridge, 1993; Davidson & Ahmad, 2003; Parkinson, 2009b; Toenniessen et al., 2008; van den Ban, 1999). These services drew on scientific knowledge through international and national research. This knowledge informed strategic government priorities at the national level influenced by international aid agencies and development institutions. It was carried down to local farmers through a complex structure in the interests of modernising agriculture. Extension services encouraged farmers to tailor their farming activities to maximise productivity through
136 strategic business plans that informed decision making (Anderson & Feder, 2003; Farrington,
1995; Mutimba, 2014; van den Ban, 1999; van den Ban and Hawkins (1988).
There have been variations in extension services across countries, though all shared
similar goals involving education and communication to effect behavioural change (Farrington,
1995; Roling, 1988). Referred to as vulagarisation in France, extension implied simplification of new information for ordinary farmers to understand; as voorlichiting in Holland, it meant keeping light in front of farmers to encourage them to find their way; and the Spanish word capacitacion meant empowering farmers for self-reliance (Roling, 1988). Parkinson (2009b) highlighted the centrality of information and training in extension work. It was premised on the idea that, once equipped with knowledge and information on modern technology and sound business practices, farmers would transform their enterprises into profitable agribusinesses
(Davidson & Ahmad, 2003; Mutimba, 2014). Based on this logic, governments invested in extension services to improve agricultural productivity through commercialisation and modernisation. The premise was that this would, in turn, improve livelihoods for rural households engaged primarily in subsistence agriculture. It would also generate employment as farming enterprises grew and became more productive. Their goals were mainly economic
(Anderson & Feder, 2003; Farrington, 1995).
Publicly funded agricultural extension was introduced in Africa during the colonial era, as shown in Table 5.1. These top-down initiatives were part of modernising development, discussed in Chapter 2, and changed little over the decades (Davidson & Ahmad, 2003; Friis-
Hansen & Kisauzi, 2002; Semana, 2004). In Uganda, they were delivered through the public sector until 2001, when NAADS was introduced (Barungi et al, 2016; Mutimba, 2014; Semana,
1999).
137 Table 5.1 Evolution of agricultural extension services in Uganda
Date Period Focus
1898-1907 Early colonial Colonisation and concentration on cash crops 1920-1956 Traditional Enforced production of cash crops through local chiefs 1956-1963 Progressive farmers Input provision for progressive farmers 1964-1972 Post-independence Commodity approach with progressive farmers engaged in technology transfer 1972-1980 Dormant Political crisis, civil war, and economic disruption 1981-1991 Recovery Unified extension through training and farm visits 1992-1997 Reform Specialised schemes, privatisation, entry of NGOs into extension, and village level participatory approach 1998-2001 Post reform NAADS I introduced as part of PEAP 2001-2014 Advisory services NAADS1 (2001), decentralisation (2007), NDP, and NAADS II (2008) Adapted from Semana (2004)
In the early colonial period (1898-1907), the British government introduced cash crops, including coffee, cotton, tea, rubber, and tobacco, and established research stations to study agriculture and forestry in Uganda. Extension services involved field support to boost national profits through enhance agricultural production for competitive international markets (Barungi et al., 2016; Semana, 2004).
In the traditional period (1920-1956), the colonial government engaged the support of local chiefs to increase the uptake of extension services (Barungi et al., 2016). Uganda was a lucrative source of raw materials for British industries, which provided a ready market and foreign income for the colonial administration (Okoboi et al., 2013; Semana, 1999, 2004).
Supported by local bylaws, local chiefs assisted in the distribution of seeds for cash crops and directed farmers on soil conservation, farming techniques, and storage of food reserves for droughts and famines. These bylaws were premised on the notion that local chiefs would be far more successful in engaging local farmers due to their social and cultural status than public officials in the colonial administration (Semana, 2004).
138 Progressive farmers (1956-1963) received technical training from newly-trained
agricultural extension workers in the train the trainer community development model with its
multiplier effects (Davidson & Ahmad, 2003; Friis-Hansen & Kisauzi, 2002; Semana, 1999).
In this way, it would close gaps in manpower and deliver more cost-effective services (Semana,
1999, 2004). The questionable approach of selecting progressive farmers notwithstanding, this model floundered as trainees failed to share their learning with others (Batungi, 2016; Semana,
2004). The progressive farmers were already privileged, owned resources and land, had the right social and political connections, and were already benefiting from new technologies. The model further embedded unequal power relations and class, caste, and gender divisions. Hence, this technology transfer model was a resounding failure (Okoboi et al., 2013; Semana, 2004; van den Ban & Hawkins, 1996).
Supported by international development institutions and donor agencies, there were improvements to the agricultural extension system in the post-independence period (1964-
1972), with professional training and new extension approaches aimed at poor smallholder farmers (Semana, 2004). The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) supported the Ministry of Agriculture to improve farmer education, technical support, and information dissemination through the media (radio, cinema, television, posters, and leaflets)
(Barungi et al., 2016; Semana, 2004). Outreach projects targeted irrigation schemes, group farms, citrus projects, district farm institutes, and experimental stations (Friis-Hansen &
Kisauzi, 2002). However, this did not lead to significant behavioural change (Semana, 1999,
2004).
There followed a dormant ‘lost phase’ (1972-1980) under Idi Amin’s military dictatorship, which brought internal conflict, political instability, and economic disruption
(Barungi et al., 2016; Brett, 1998). Budgetary allocations and logistical support diminished as extension services floundered (Semana, 2004). This led to the exodus of skilled and technical
139 staff and farmers having to pay for sub-standard extension services (Barungiet al., 2016; Friis-
Hansen & Kisauzi, 2002).
The recovery phase (1981-1991) focused on rehabilitating infrastructure and restoring
basic services under Milton Obote II (1981-1985) and Yoweri Museveni (from 1986). Parallel
extension services were provided by various ministries, nongovernment organisations, and aid
agencies. This led to duplication, wastage, and poor coordination with no clear policy
guidelines (Barungi et al., 2016; Semana, 1999). There were several key developments in 1991,
supported by the World Bank, including the merging of the Ministry of Agriculture and
Ministry of Animal Industry and Fisheries. This created a single chain of command in the
Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) with frontline extension
workers responsible for teaching and advising farmers. Researchers and farmers conducted
program planning in pre-season workshops, and extension workers ran bimonthly training
workshops and supervised visits (the Train and Visit – T & V – approach) (Enyipu, Semana,
& Kabuye, 2002). This Unified Extension System (UES) focused on improving the efficiency
and effectiveness of extension services (Barungi et al., 2016; Enyipu et al., 2002). Extension
staff expanded in number to reach millions of smallholder farmers dotted across the country at
the ratio of one extension worker for every 33,000 farmers (Barungi et al., 2016; Friis-Hansen,
& Kisauzi, 2002). However, this top-down system of technology transfer ran aground due to its lack of responsiveness to farmers’ priorities (Barungi et al., 2016; Enyipu et., 2002;
Farrington, 1995; Kidd et al., 2000; Kydd et al., 2004; Okoboi et al., 2013; Semana, 2004).
In the reform phase (1992-1997) of Museveni’s government, a restructured decentralised institutional framework accompanied economic reform, trade liberalisation, privatisation, and the retrenchment of public servants, including extension staff in the MAAIF
(Barungi et al., 2016; Parkinson, 2009b). It also led to the collapse of public extension credit and marketing services, the dismantling of commodity marketing boards, the reduction of
140 subsidies for agricultural inputs, and the realignment of domestic and international pricing
(Okoboi et al., 2013; Rivera, 1997; Rivera & Alex, 2004; Semana, 1999, 2004). These
economic reforms aimed to increase smallholder farmers’ real incomes in line with relative
price movements and increased service demand with multiplier impacts, such as increased
productivity and producing what the market demands, increased prices for agricultural outputs, and farmer empowerment (Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006; Rivera & Alex, 2004; van den Ban, 1999).
It was thought that decentralising extension services in a rolled back state would make them more democratic and enhance ownership and partnership, client centredness, and responsivity to local interests (Barungi et al., 2016; Francis & James, 2003; King, 2010; Kjaer & Joughin,
2010; Parkinson, 2009b). Thus, began the approach of empowering poor smallholder farmers to demand services that fit with their needs and priorities and bridging the gap between research and technological innovation to change individual farming practices (Anderson & Feder, 2003;
Mutimba, 2014; Semana, 1999, 2004; van den Ban, 1997; venson & Mwabu, 2001).
Hence the end of the recovery phase proved crucial for subsequent developments in the post-reform phase (1998-2001) leading up to NAADS. Extension services would provide information about cropping patterns, effective input use, high-yield seed varieties, and pricing, while extension officers reinforced the value of improved record keeping, assisted farmers to improve their enterprise-management skills, and encouraged them to use efficient production techniques (Barungi et al., 2016). Some scholars suggested that private involvement in the provision and delivery of extension services would enhance their efficiency and sustainability, while others believed that fee-based advice would improve accountability, reduce reliance on public funding, and ensure client preferences were met (James, 2010 James et al., n.d.; Kidd et al., 2000; Kjaer & James, 2017). Micro-Finance Institutions (MFIs) provided credit facilities but remained inaccessible to millions of smallholder farmers, as the terms were restrictive
141 requiring collateral security and immediate payment of loan instalments (Makoba & Wakoko-
Studstill, 2015; Mpuga, 2010; Okoboi et al., 2013; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006).
Wide-ranging independent studies (Barungi et al., 2016; Davis et al., 2012; Deininger
& Okidi, 2001, 2003; Reinikka & Mackinnon, 1999; Wellard et al., 2013), the government’s
own evaluation studies, and the Uganda National Household Surveys (ROU, 2006b) found
agricultural extension services had reached only one third of the agricultural communities
studied, while only 5% of the national population reported contact with extension staff.
Although further studies revealed that extension coverage had been rising during the reform
and post-reform period (1992-1999), increasing from 11% of the farmers in 1992 to 17% in
1999, the achievement was minimal, with only 5% of the national population reporting contact with extension staff (Deininger & Okidi, 2001, 2003). At the local village level, 64% of participants reported that extension staff had not visited them. By 2014, there were 1,500 extension staff in the whole country (Swanson & Davis, 2014), with the government agricultural census indicating only one fifth of 3.6 million households reporting visitation by extension workers in the previous year (Kjaer & Joughin, 2017; ROU, 2010c).
In all regions of Uganda, households relied on the radio as their main source of agricultural information, underscoring the failure of extension staff to reach millions of rural smallholder farmers (Okoboi et al., 2013). Nevertheless, these studies concluded that, in addition to investment in human capital and infrastructure, including improved access to markets, there was a great need for improved availability and awareness of agricultural technologies through research and extension (Deininger & Okidi, 2003).
Decentralisation and economic reform in the post reform phase (1998-2001) had a negative impact on farmer education, downsizing staff affected service provision, and the districts lacked the capacity to steer extension programs (Barungi, 2016; James & Francis,
142 2003; Kidd et al., 2000; Okoboi et al., 2013). This reduced access to extension services for
millions of smallholder farmers.
Several studies have been undertaken on the effectiveness of extension: Friis-Hansen
and Kisauzi (2002) analysed changes in extension interaction with rural farmers in three
districts of rural Uganda. The study focused on establishing approaches and methodologies
used by extension staff to achieve the needs of smallholder farmer. The findings indicated that
farmers’ ability to articulate their needs had been rising considerably. Benin (2007) found that
decentralised extension services had had a positive impact on farmers’ income and service
availability. Hence, PEAP and PMA (ROU, 2000d, 2001a, 200b) were designed to strengthen
agricultural advisory services through NAADS, and it is to this that the discussion now turns.
NAADS
NAADS was established as part of the PMA through an Act of Parliament in November 2001,
following PEAP Revision I in 2000 (ROU, 2000c). It was a 25-year program (2001-2025)
implemented through local government and farmer-owned institutions. The PEAP, which gave rise to NAADS, underwent substantial revisions culminating in the NDP (2010-2015) (ROU,
2003a). Initially, international donors contributed 80% of the NAADS’ budget to transform subsistence agriculture to a modern productive sector (Francis & James, 2003; Rwamigisa et al., 2013). However, NAADS changed over the course of implementation this study covers (up to 2016) as the government reclaimed advisory services. Table 5.2 shows the positioning of
NAADS in national development policy.
NAADS was a semi-autonomous government institution initially charged with the responsibility of transforming Uganda’s agricultural sector by increasing the number of poor farmers engaged in productive agriculture (Benin, 2011, 2012; Ekou, 2013). NAADS I involved the provision of decentralised, user demand-driven, privately provided advisory
143 services within a move to decentralisation. It thus aimed to enhance local control and accountability at the local government level (Golooba-Mutebi, 2004; Ojambo, 2012; ROU,
1997, 2000c) and generate local revenue for local development (Gore & Muwanga, 2014;
Olum, 2014).
Table 5.2 NAADS positioned in successive policies
Date Policy NAADS 2001- PEAP I and N . Advisory and information services to farmers provided A 2006 IIISFP focused A by competitively recruited PSPs as part of developing G R on poverty A public-private sector capability and service systems I eradication D . Empower subsistence farmers to access advisory C PMA focused S services and information for informed decision- U on the 1 making. L T modernisation . Technology development and linkage with markets U of agriculture R . Quality assurance regulations and technical auditing R E . Private sector institutional development A V . Program management and monitoring L
1 . Finance and deliver advisory and technical services P and reduce the government’s share of funding to R advisory services to 50% by 2025. O . D 2007- PEAP III Lack of success of PEAP led focus to shift back to U 2009 R structural transformation (economic development) C E . Agricultural development was pivotal to this T V . ISFP administered through MFCs and NAADS in I O 2 transformation of microfinancing N . PSPs abandoned in 2008 as government reclaimed advisory services 2010- NDP I . Creation of ATAAS (2011-2016) to spearhead A 2015 DSIP N agribusiness and technology development G R . A NAADS subsumed under ATAAS (Okoboi et al., I A 2013) B D . NAADS role changed to distribution of inputs U 2016- NDP II (under S . Agribusiness development S II I 2020 DSIP) N E S S
NAADS’ core focus was the involvement of farmers in decision making through private farmers’ associations at the village level, and farmers’ forums at the sub-county, district, and
144 national levels (Benin, 2011; Ellis & Freeman, 2004; James, 2010; King, 2015; Mosley &
Suleiman, 2007; ROU, 2000c). It was hoped this would widen social and economic
opportunities, increase food security and food quality, and enhance empowerment and
development (Ekou, 2013; James, 2010). In short, NAADS I’s role was to: finance and deliver
advisory and technical services to reduce the government’s share of funding to 50% by 2025;
recruit professionals and private service providers through competitive contracting; provide
empowering advisory services for poor farmers; and develop public-private partnerships to
support NAADS’ systems (Bahiigwa et al., 2005).
Situating NAADS in neoliberal economic principles
The NAADS program was arguably the most important component of the PMA (Ellis &
Bahiigwa, 2003; James & Francis, 2003), which further entrenched modernisation doctrine in
that, initially, it introduced privatised agricultural advisory services (Dorosh & Mellor, 2013;
Enyipu et al., 2002; James & Francis, 2003). While initially donor driven, advisory services
gradually moved back under government control as the financial market to support NAADS
developed (Makoba & Wakoko-Studstill, 2015). Though demand-driven, NAADS initially
envisaged the presence of a market in which farmers individually and collectively purchased
advisory and support services (Ampaire et al., 2013; Parkinson, 2009b). The demand-driven orientation implied a supply of advisory services (for sale) and demand for such services from farmers, who could pay for them. The government’s long-term objective was to withdraw from the financing of advisory services once they had been transferred successfully to private providers (Anderson & Feder, 2003; Benin, 2011, 2012; Hanson & Just, 2001; Kjaer &
Joughin, 2012; Parkinson, 2009b). Reduced public involvement in the long-run would allow private providers to fill the gaps created in service provision and delivery, while competition would encourage them to do so at the lowest possible cost (Barungi et al., 2016; Okoboi et al
145 2013; Parkinson, 2009b). Thus, neoliberal principles applied in NAADS’ operations as follows:
1. The transfer of responsibility from the central government to local administrative
units went hand in hand with privatisation and marketisation (James, 2010; Lie,
2015), as the government out-sourced extension and commercialised services
(Benin, 2012; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010). This was anticipated to create a demand-
driven public-private partnership system, working to promote farmer organisations
and empower farmers to seek and secure advisory services. The focus was on
making farmers clients of extension services with a view to improving their
responsiveness, accountability, and impact (James et al., n.d.)
2. NAADS’ implementation involved partnership with local government, CSOs, local
NGOs, farmer organisations, and private contractors (Barungi et al., 2016; Okoboi,
et al., 2013). Participating smallholder farmers would benefit in several ways:
through the services provided PSPs; information, training, access to input markets,
greater access to credit markets, and orgainisation of input and out marketing. The
services provided were expected to reduce transaction costs and enable farmers to
undertake greater agricultural investments and expand production to meet market
demands.
3. Decentralised farmer organisations assumed a coordinating role to improve
interaction among smallholder farmers and local power brokers, increase
accountability, offer incentives for quality service, and enable the emergence of
small, competitive, for-profit business enterprises (Barungi et al., 2016; Mutimba,
2014; Okoboi et al., 2013; Parkinson, 2009b). This was particularly important for
conscripting poor, illiterate, and immobile farmers to the market, who, in most
cases, were unable to access markets and negotiate with input providers, buyers,
146 and credit institutions. The participating farmers were expected to have greater
information about output prices, knowledge of opportunities available, and access
to output markets due to NAADS’ intervention (Benin, 2012).
4. Smallholder farmers were expected to engage in income-generating activities
through the sale of seeds, surplus land, and agricultural produce. Their raised
income would enable them to purchase advisory services and other supply chain
factor needs relevant to agricultural commercialisation (Kjaer & Joughin, 2012;
Pakinson, 2009a, 2009b; Rivera, 1997). NAADS was to be 50% public funded and
50% farmer funded after 25 years. The expectation was, therefore, that the farmers
would be increasingly able and willing to contribute to the cost of the services they
received, while lowering the burden on the national budget (James et al., n.d.).
5. Private service providers were ostensibly directed by farmers’ organisations to cater
for their needs and they, in turn, would reciprocate by purchasing their services. As
they grew, they would employ staff and thus expand their operations and market
share. Further, private sector involvement in the delivery of advisory services was
expected to raise the level of efficiency and sustainability (James et al., n.d.). Client
contributions (fees) and co-funding would increase accountability, while ensuring
the farmers’ preferences were followed.
6. NAADS training exposed farmers to business principles in a competitive
agricultural market and in this way aimed to develop a strong private sector that did
not need to rely on government support (Benin, 2011; Okoboi et al., 2013;
Parkinson, 2009b). It went from a focus on agricultural production in NAADS I to
agribusiness development in NAADS II (AfranaaKwabong & Nkonya, 2015).
147 NAADS’ core objectives
NAADS I’s core objectives were to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the farming sector through the delivery of training and advisory services (ROU, 2000c;
Rwamigasa et al., 2013). This included knowledge, information, communication, and technology to increase the incomes and quality of life of farmers and their families (Kijima,
Ito, & Otsuka, 2012). NAADS was underpinned by the belief that profitable enterprises ‒ with increased agricultural productivity and greater market share ‒ rested on improved technologies and practices. They also rested on empowered farmers, who participated in decentralised structures, such as farmers’ organisations, that shared costs and engaged in directly linking farmers to markets (Adong, 2014; Ampaire et al., 2013; Bamigboye, 2016; Benin, 2011; Desai
& Joshi, 2014; Jagger & van Laerhoven, 2004; Latynskiy & Berger, 2016; Markelove &
Mwangi, 2010; Nyong, Adesina, & Elasha, 2007). NAADS provided incentives, such as credit, grants in aid, and information, to encourage farmers to adopt the latest farming technologies and practices (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; James, 2010). Those who did, benefited from further information and training.
Successful farmers were those who ran profitable enterprises (Benin, 2011; Cohen &
Levinthal, 1990; Francis & James, 2003; Mosley & Suleiman, 2007). They owned productive assets, like land, bicycles, radios, telephones, ox-carts, and storage facilities (Duncombe, 2014;
Duncombe & Boateng, 2009; Glendenning & Ficarelli, 2011; Martin & Abbott, 2011; Nyareza
& Dick, 2012; Place & Otsuka, 2002; Zossou, Vodouhe, Van Mele, Agboh-Noameshie, &
Lebailly, 2015).
There were guidelines for participation at various levels (Adongo, 2014; James, 2003) though participation was voluntary. Some farmers chose not to participate despite their eligibility for NAADS. Only farmers who were paid-up members of farmers’ organisations were eligible for NAADS. Only those districts and sub-counties that had reached the
148 performance targets of the Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF) and the Local Government
Development Project (LGDP) were eligible to become NAADS sites (ROU, 2000a). Through
PAF, the government set aside funds saved from debt cancellation in the Highly Indebted Poor
Countries (HIPC) initiative, of which Uganda was one of the first beneficiaries (Ferrarini, 2009;
Foster & Mijumbi, 2002; Mijumbi, 2001; William & Canagarajah, 2003). It directed these resources to the poverty alleviation sectors, with agricultural services constituting a key target funded by PAF (Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Kuteesa et al., 2006; Mijumbi, 2001). The services had to have an approved three-year rolling development and investment plan, annual budget, and human capacity to manage NAADS training and support programs (Benin, 2012; ROU;
2001a). Other requirements included site suitability for agricultural production, such as adequate rainfall and water supply with irrigation structures, fertile soil, arable land, and absence or control of pests (James, 2010; ROU, 2000c).
Initial activities at the sub-county level involved sensitisation of the farmers about the
NAADS program and terms of reference for farmer participation (Joughin & Kjaer, 2012;
ROU, 2000c; Rwamigisa, 2013). Institution-building activities preceded this phase. Contracted non-profit organisations and PSPs deemed suitable and closer to the target communities were sensitised and mobilised to perform the key activities required:
1. Mobilising farmers to form new farmers’ associations or strengthen existing
organisations in line with NAADS guidelines.
2. Forming sub-county farmers’ forums.
3. Providing agricultural educational programs.
PSPs were trained in forming and managing groups; mobilising resources; selecting and
developing enterprises categorised as crop or livestock species; and improving the farmers’
capacity to articulate their needs (Adong, 2014; Benin, 2012; Friis-Hansen, 2008; Latynskiy,
2016; ROU, 2000c).
149 Local government structure
Local government structures implemented NAADS as part of decentralisation introduced in
the mid-1980s (Francis & James, 2003; Gore & Muwanga, 2014; Jagger & van Laerhoven,
2004; Ojambo, 2012; ROU, 1997). As shown in Table 5.3, there were five levels of local
government, each run by a democratically elected local council as follows:
. LC1 the village level
. LC2 the parish level
. LC3 the sub-county level
. LC4 the county level
. LC5 the district level
. Ministry of Local Government, national level
Table 5.3 Local government levels and NAADS’ administrative structure
Level Local NAADS’ structures authority Village Local council 1 Farmers’ groups and associations Parish Local council 2 Parish Coordinating Committees (PCCs) Community Based Facilitators (CBFs) Sub-county Local council 3 Sub-county farmers’ forums (SFFs) Technical staff; extension and veterinary staff, NAADS coordinators County Local council 4 County Farmers’ Forums (CFFs) District Local council 5 District Farmers’ Forums (DFFs) District NAADS coordinator District technical staff National Ministry of Local Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries Government (MAAIF) NAADS secretariat National Farmers’ Forum (NFF) Source: ROU (2006a)
150 LC1: Village level
LC1 was the most localised level of administration. The LC1 chairpersons were local leaders
at the village level, who regulated community affairs and formed the contact point with the
higher-level local authorities. Their responsibilities included certification of resident status and livestock and land ownership, and sometimes the collection of local revenue. They mobilised communities to receive government programs (Porter & Onyach-Olaa, 1999; Steiner, 2007;
Bandiera & Rasul, 2006). In terms of participation, each LC1 generated its own community action plan (CAP) based on local priorities and needs. Parish plans were synthesised into sub- county plans, which then went to the district technical planning unit for evaluations and integration (Gore & Muwanga, 2014; Steiner, 2007).
LC2: Parish level
LC2s coordinated the activities of the LC1 chairpersons and provided a link between the sub-
county and village levels in matters and aspects regarding decision making. Their primary
activity in NAADS was to encourage the formation of farmers’ associations at the grassroots
levels through registration and to establish farmer forums at the district and sub-county levels
(Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Ojambo, 2012).
LC3: Sub-county level
The sub-county level had several administrative positions: the sub-county chief, sub-
accountant, the Gombolola Internal Security Officer (GISO), agricultural officers, veterinary
officer, and community development officers, such as social workers (ROU, 1997). In
conjunction with the farmers’ representatives, the sub-county authorities sub-contracted PSPs
to deliver on the contractual obligations to the advisory services for the participating farmers
(Ilukor et al., 2015). The contract highlights the targeted group of beneficiaries, contract
duration, description of items procured, contract value and mechanisms of payment, together
151 with related administrative procedures that contractors must follow. The PSPs could be
individual business people, private companies, or NGOs (Jones, 2013; Yong, 2013).
Coordination and regulation of PSPs took place at the district level (LC5) though procurement committees at the sub-county level selected them (ROU, 2006a)
LC4: County level
LC4 was the most invisible level of local government and no meetings were conducted at this
level (Ssoko, 2013). It comprised local councillors, whose roles and responsibilities were
absorbed into LC5, their major role being to coordinate and link the implementation of sub-
county development activities with the district plans (Olum, 2014; ROU, 1997).
LC5: District level
LC5 was the most important unit of local government, as specified in the Local Government
Act (ROU, 1997). It was the basic unit of local government administration and comprised five levels of administration under a council. One of the basic divisions in local government was between the elected councils and the district civil service. The council determined the policy goals to be implemented by civil servants, who were permanent employees, and controlled district financial resources and accounts. Being better educated and skilled, they had advanced knowledge of the functions of government and the bureaucracy, giving them an upper hand over the elected councils in the management of district affairs (Kappel et al., 2005; Ojambo,
2012; Olum, 2014; Steiner, 2007).
Part II of the Local Government Act (ROU, 1997) detailed the responsibilities of the district, including the provision of education services at the primary and secondary level and medical services, especially through primary healthcare, district hospitals, and health centres; construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance of roads not done by the central government; provision and maintenance of water supplies in coordination with appropriate ministries; and
152 development and physical planning, budgeting, managing agricultural and veterinary extension
services, and community development (Parkinson, 2009a; ROU, 1997; Ssonko, 2013; Steiner,
2010). The six broad themes of the program identified in the next section include a discussion
of other key roles at this level.
NAADS’ structure
Through the NAADS’ structure and procedures, bottom-up participation was encouraged to allow farmers a voice and the power to demand appropriate extension services. It was premised on the idea that strengthening farmer organisations would improve farmers’ knowledge and skills and ability to run agricultural businesses. Skills taught included record keeping, group finance mobilisation and credit access, management, and marketing (Benin, 2011, 2012; Benin et al., 2007; Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Ellis & Freeman, 2004). The NAADS structural hierarchy is shown in Table 5.4.
Farmers’ groups and forums
The ground for NAADS’ was laid by pre-existing farmers’ groups formed by semi-autonomous
NGOs and CBOs that operated with little or no coordination from the central or local government. They provided a model for local farmers’ groups and forums at various local government levels (Adong, 2014; Benin, 2012; Booth, 2011b; Jones, 2013; Zdavovski &
Pilvere, 2015). The structure comprised farmers’ groups at the village level (LCI), parish coordinating committees (PCCs) and community-based facilitators (CBFs) at the parish level
(LCII), sub-county farmers’ forums (SFF) at the sub-county level (LCIII), and county and district farmers’ forums (LCIV & LCV), as shown in Table 5.3 (ROU, 2006a). As well as vehicles for farmer empowerment, these structures were also responsible for contracting PSPs and monitoring the quality, accountability, and transparency of the services they provided
(Adong, 2014; Parkinson, 2009b; ROU, 2006a).
153 Table 5.4 NAADS’ hierarchy
Level Organisational unit NAADS function Farmers’ forum National NAADS Secretariat Provide technical guidance, NFF program coordination, and supervision of the districts District NAADS district coordinator; Establish TDSs, generate DFF district production officer; and technology, develop subject matter specialists enterprises and markets, provide advisory and information services, build private-sector institutional capacity, improve program management, and monito service quality County Member of Parliament – Facilitate the involvement and CFF Chair; SFF executives; participation of national Secretaries for production; leaders in lower-level planning Community development and the agricultural officer; District NAADS development process coordinator (Secretary); Sub- county NAADS coordinators; LIII chairpersons; Sub-county chiefs Sub-county Sub-county chief; NAADS Administer, manage, SFF sub-county coordinators, coordinate, monitor, and farmers’ representatives, and evaluate the services of the technical staff PSPs Parish Parish coordinating Prioritise group enterprises PCC & CBF committees (PCCs) into parish enterprises; link comprising elected farmers’ SFF and farmers’ groups; offer representatives and guidance to farmer groups on community-based facilitators documentation processes; and consolidate farmers’ group reports Village Farmers groups and private Engage in enterprise selection, VFF service providers ensure the accountability and transparency of services offered by NAADS functionaries, identify production constraints and opportunities, and provide feedback on the quality of PSPs
154 Local farmers’ groups and associations were responsible for program implementation
at the grassroots level. Each group was registered and had an address, elected members, and a
leadership structure. Elected representatives represented the farmers’ groups in farmers’
forums in the hierarchical structure at the village, sub-county, county, district, and national
levels ‒ Village Farmers’ Forum, Sub-county Farmers’ Forum, County Farmers’ Forum,
District Farmers’ Forum, and National Farmers’ Forum (Benin et al., 2007; ROU, 2006a).
Members of farmers’ associations were expected to have, or were guided to select, a common
farming interest (Asrat, Yesuf, Carlsson, & Wale, 2010; Benin et al., 2007). Farmers’
associations identified problems and priority areas, participated in planning and mobilising
local resources, engaged in enterprise selection based on evaluations and cost-benefit analyses, and served as a training platform, social network (social capital), and information exchange
(local and modern knowledge) (Barrios, Bekunda, Delve, Esilaba, & Mowo, 2001; Osbahr &
Allan, 2003).
The success of NAADS rested on farmer participation and empowerment in selecting enterprises, identifying service needs, linking with the PCC and SFF, developing and using technology inputs, communication and provision of agricultural information, and contracting to produce agricultural quotas (Kiiza & Pederson, 2014; Martin & Abbott, 2011; ROU, 2008a).
Each participating farmers’ group identified three enterprises and associated constraints for
NAADS to address (James, 2010). The overriding aim was to provide each household with a sustainable income and food security.
Parish Coordinating Committees (PCC)
Farmers’ associations elected representatives to the PCCs, who worked with the sub-county
authorities and monitored NAADS’ performance, as well as the progress of enterprises through group field tours. They provided feedback to farmers’ groups at the village and sub-county levels (ROU, 2006a). They sought to include women, disabled people, and youth. They also
155 consolidated group enterprises into parish enterprises; linked SFF and farmers’ groups; offered farmers’ groups guidance on documentation processes; and consolidated farmers’ group reports (James et al., n.d.; ROU, 2008a). They held meetings and elected PCC representatives to the SFFs.
Sub-county authorities
Sub-county authorities included sub-county chiefs, sub-county NAADS coordinators,
community development officers, LC2 chairs, secretaries for production, and NAADS farmers’ representatives in the SFF, as shown in Table 5.4. Assisted by sub-county technical staff, they were responsible for the administration, management, coordination, and monitoring of
NAADS (Bahiigwa et al., 2005, Benin, 2011). They streamlined collective decision making, set priorities, allocated resources, and coordinated implementation at the sub-county, district, and national levels; planned, budgeted for, and contracted advisory services through their procurement committees; monitored and evaluated PSPs; and approved work plans for inclusion in sub-county development plans. However, there were variations of involvement of sub-county authorities in given districts, as some sub-counties implemented fewer NAADS activities than others. Their level of involvement depended on the extent to which they met the eligibility highlighted previously and fulfilled PAF requirements regarding poverty reduction activities (Benin et al., 2007). The central government allocated funds to the sub-county authorities to be expended in accordance with procedural implementation guidelines.
At the sub-county level, aspects of empowerment were emphasised, not only through
facilitation of contractual obligations for monitoring and supervision, but also in
mobilising the formation of farmers’ groups and encouraging farmers’ associations to
register with the sub-county authorities for consideration as NAADS beneficiary
associations. Benin (2011) explained: Membership in other organisations is also
156 strongly associated with greater likelihood of indirect and direct participation in the
NAADS program, which is consistent with the NAADS program’s approach in terms
of targeting the existing farmer groups to maximise the payoffs from the efforts to build
farmers’ capacity to demand advisory services (p. 257).
Sub-county Farmers’ Forums
The SFF worked hand in hand with the sub-county authorities in implementing programs.
Table 5.5 shows the various position and their attendant responsibilities. It formed a mechanism through which farmers discussed budgets and arrangements for advisory services, including the election of their representatives, decisions on strategic enterprises and technologies, and selection of PSPs.
Table 5.5 Positions and responsibilities at the sub-county level
Position Responsibility Sub-county . Prioritise group enterprises into sub-county priorities to different farmer Farmers’ Forum categories (SFF) . Link the farmers’ groups with the sub-county and district administration . Procure technological inputs and extension services for farmers Community . Work with NGOs and CBOs to mobilise and educate the communities on Development farmer institution formation, management and development Officer . Renders technical guidance on group dynamics, participatory processes, including enterprise selection and development Sub-county . Control NAADS voting processes; provide secretarial support to the SFF; NAADS coordinate NAADS activities; prepare work plans and budgets reviews; Coordinator ensure harmony in implementation at the sub-county level; and take the lead in compiling periodical NAADS reports to district authorities Sub-county . Serve as an accounting officer to ensure the judicious disbursement of funds Chief approved by the SFF and LC III; integrate lower-level priorities in sub- county development plans; and provide technical leadership at the sub- county level
The SFF monitored and evaluated the services of the PSPs. It sought to create a
benevolent culture among elected farmers’ representatives and the sub-county local leadership
157 (Adong, 2014; Benin, 2012). Each sub-county comprised over 100 farmers’ groups represented by two elected members at the SFF level. The sub-county leadership managed implementation, with support from the CBFs and PCCs (Benin, 2011). The formation of the SFF followed a sequence of events:
1. A workshop was organised at the sub-county level to sensitise the sub-county
leadership about the NAADS program. At this workshop, the sub-county leadership
got to know their responsibilities. To initiate the process of the SFF formation, the
sub-county leadership confirmed the list of farmer groups in the sub-county.
2. The sub-county chief and his local leadership invited farmers in the sub-county to
attend a meeting at the sub-county headquarters. During this meeting, the farmers’
elected representatives from the different groups to the interim SFF. Those invited
to attend included at least one to three farmers from each of the existing groups, one
farmer from each parish, who was not yet a member of a farmers’ group, and
women, youth, and people with disabilities. The 15-member SFF included the
secretary for production; sub-county NAADS coordinator; at least one
representative from each parish; one farmer representing farmers of the same
interest; at least four female members; one youth; and one representative of
economically active people with disabilities. Councillors were not eligible for
election to the SFF.
The sub-county chief was the returning officer at the polls. Prior to selection, participants reached consensus on whether to vote by show of hands, lining behind candidates, or by secret ballot; group participants elected the parish they came from and elected one parish representative. From those elected in the first round, the group elected a chairperson. The elected SFF suggested three members to the procurement committee that awarded contracts for
NAADS advisory goods and services. The SFF might comprise farmers who did not belong to
158 a farmers’ group or members from unregistered groups, in which case it would only be given interim status. After a year of properly constituted operation, the group would elect the substantive SFF for a three-year term, renewable for one further term (ROU, 2006a).
County and constituency authorities
The county constituency authorities facilitated the involvement and participation of national leaders in lower-level planning and development. It was the entry point for Members of
Parliament (MPs) to focus on development in their respective constituencies comprising:
. Member of Parliament - Chairperson
. SFF executives
. Secretaries for production
. Community development officer
. District NAADS coordinator - Secretary
. Sub-county NAADS coordinators
. LIII chairpersons
. Sub-county chiefs
District authorities
The district and sub-county authorities were responsible for technology generation, enterprise development, market linkages, advisory and information services, development of private- sector institutional capacity, improvement of program management, and quality assurance
(Bahiigwa et al., 2005; James, 2010). The district authorities comprised NAADS district coordinators, district production officers, subject matter specialists, and DFFs. They ensured the formation of sub-county and district farmers’ forums and supported the establishment of farmer-owned TDSs, which were the institutional interface between farmers and researchers, as indicated in Table 5.3.
159 National secretariat
The National Secretariat was funded by government and donors under the PAF (Bahiigwa et
al., 2005). It provided conditional transfers on a district resource-allocation formula It was responsible for technical guidance, program coordination, and district supervision; each district had a coordinator, paid by the secretariat, and sub-county coordinators, paid by the district
(Benin, 2011; James, 2010). These coordinators procured technical services from PSPs and helped farmers to access advisory services. Access to the PAF funds rested on coordinators’ capacity to organise farmers’ associations alongside the local government hierarchy, as shown in Table 5.3 (Benin, 2011).
Key components of NAADS’ intervention
NAADS aimed to expand farmers’ knowledge and information on modern technologies to raise productivity through the provision of effective and efficient advice and support (Bahigwa et al., 2005, Benin, 2011; ROU 2008b). To this end, key components of intervention were: (i)
Participation and ownership; (ii) financing of NAADS; (iii) farmer education; (iv) selecting enterprises; (v) agricultural extension services; (vi) private service providers; (vii) environmental management; and (viii) participation and inclusion of women.
Participation and ownership
NAADS empowered farmers to demand advisory services to increase their productivity,
income, and food security through their participation in meetings and training, where they were given opportunity to make decisions regarding the implementation of NAADS programs and select enterprises favourable to them. The benefits of participation were advisory services, technology, and production inputs. Farmers participated through farmers’ groups at the community or village level, PCCs at the parish level, SFFs at the sub-county level, and farmers’ forums at the district and national levels (ROU, 2006a). Through these associations and forums,
160 the farmers could invite NAADS coordinators at the sub-county and district levels to train and guide them. These platforms ensured that farmers took ownership of, and demonstrated accountability through, collective planning, demanding services, and selecting enterprises
(Adong, 2014; Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Friis-Hansen, 2008; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Kjær &
Joughin, 2012).
Financing of NAADS
As shown in Table 5.6, NAADS I (2001-2009) was funded through long-term multilateral and
bilateral credit financing that entailed a combination of grants and loans (AfranaaKwapong &
Nkonya, 2015; Okoboi et al., 2013). The estimated cost of NAADS was USD108m, with funding initially provided by donor institutions and foreign governments (80%), local government (10%), central government (8%), and farmers’ associations (2%) (Benin, 2011;
Benin et al., 2007; James, 2003). Contributions were paid into a central Poverty Alleviation
Fund (PAF) and channelled to local government at the district and sub-county levels based on annual performance targets (Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Francis & James, 2003; ROU, 2000a).
Funds were disbursed as unconditional, conditional, and equalisation grants (Francis & James,
2003). Conditional grants to cover essential services comprised 80% of district revenue. They
were supplemented by additional revenue from fees, licenses, and taxes. As Bahiigwa et al.
(2005) explained: ‘The bulk of conditional grants originated from HIPC and other debt-relief and budget support funds that, together with Ugandan government resources, are transferred by the central government to the local government via the Poverty Action Fund begun in 1998-
99’ (p. 490). Unconditional grants covered administration and management costs, while earmarked equalisation grants for specific districts were based on the tax base, population, and service infrastructure, among other considerations (Francis & James, 2003).
161 Table 5.6 NAADS budgetary allocation (USD millions)
Source NAADS I % NAADS II % (2001- (NARO & 2009) ATAAS) USDm (2010- 2016) USDm International Development Agency (IDA) 45.00 41.7 120.0 18.0 International Fund for Agricultural Development 17.50 16.2 - - (IFAD) Global Environment Facility (GEF) 7.2 1.1 Bilateral Agencies and IFAD 23.34 21.6 41.0 6.2 National government of Uganda 9.12 8.5 497.3 74.7 Local government (district and sub county) 10.80 10.0 - - Farmers’ organisation 2.16 2.0 - - Total 107.92 100.0 655.5 100.0 Adapted from Okoboi et al. (2013)
The Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MFPED) and National
Secretariat used a district resource-allocation formula to dispense conditional transfers to
participating districts and sub-counties on a quarterly basis. The district authorities transferred funds to the participating sub-county accounts. NAADS provided about 77% to targeted sub-
counties; 72% of its budget was spent on advisory services, 65% of which went to targeted
sub-counties (ROU, 2000c). However, during NAADS II (2010-2016), there were significant changes as it was subsumed under the umbrella of ATAAS and worked with NARO to bring together research, technology development, and advisory services (Okoboi et al., 2013), which led to an expansion of the budget to USD655.5m allocated to NAADS. The government financed 74.7%, while multilateral and bilateral donor partners contributed 25.3%. Following its poor performance in NAADS I, co-funding was dropped in NAADS II. Unfortunately, the absence of the farmers’ contribution and local government funding drastically affected farmers’ commitment (Barungi; 2016; Okoboi et al., 2013).
After the first revision of NAADS I, beginning in 2007, the government changed the system of financing by introducing Microfinance Support Centres (MSCs) with branches
162 throughout the country. This formed part of the move to create political SACCOs (not to be
confused with traditional savings cooperatives), which relied ‘almost entirely on government loans channelled, through Microfinance Support Centres (MSC) and Uganda Post Bank’
(Makoba & Wakoko-Studstill, 2015, p. 100). Financial extension workers in the MFC worked
through the Integrated Support to Farmer Groups (ISFG) at the sub-county level to train
farmers in financial management. It also brought traditional Savings and Credit Cooperative
Organisations (SACCOs), Savings and Credit Associations (SCAs), Centenary Rural and
Development Bank (CERUDEB), and other NGOs into the government-controlled MSG fold
(ROU, 2008b). The ISFG was the vehicle through which government loans were channelled to
farmers’ associations. The UCSU supported the MFCs and NAADS to strengthen the capacity of farmer forums to manage revolving funds.
Makoba and Wakoko-Studstill (2015) described the challenges that subsistence farmers faced as rural credit resources became increasingly state-controlled through political SACCOs.
Rural peoples’ livelihoods depended crucially on the availability of assets, and, most importantly, financial assets, but the government’s changes to the microfinance system effectively excluded the very poor (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; James, 2010; Makoba
& Wakoko-Studstill, 2015; Manji, 2010).
Farmer education
Prior to NAADS I, prior extension work had not proved effective, due to its expert-led, teacher- centred, top-down, didactic model, which undermined local knowledge and disempowered farmers (James et al., n.d.; Parkinson, 2009a; Rwamigisa et al., 2013; Semana, 1999). Within this pyramid model, selected farmers were expected to mentor other farmers in the community.
However, NAADS II used a demand- or user-driven model, wherein farmers determined their training and capacity-building needs and learners and facilitators engaged in experiential
163 learning to improve farming practices (Davis et al., 2012; Friis-Hansen & Duveskog, 2012;
Hoffmann, Probst & Christinck, 2007; James, 2010).
Selecting enterprises
One of NAADS’ mandates was empowering participating farmers to select the enterprise of
their choice but with full knowledge of the best seed varieties for the climatic conditions in
their areas. Thus, education preceded choice. At the association level, the farmers selected three enterprises that worked well together, for example, cassava, citrus, and dairy farming. This sort of information was in the NAADS implementation manual for trainers, advisory officers, and participating farmers (ROU, 2006a). Once the farmers had nominated viable and profitable enterprises, these suggestions were forwarded to the sub-county farmers’ forums and NAADS’ technical staff for consideration (James, 2010; Joughin & Kjaer, 2010). The revised NAADS implementation manual (ROU, 2006a) set out the procedures for technical planning committees at the sub-county level. These comprised local council members, the sub-county chief, the secretary for production, chairs of the sub-county farmers’ forums, and a NAADS coordinator. This committee selected several enterprises that fit their criteria, e.g., suited geographical and climatic conditions, each financial year (ROU, 2006a).
Agricultural advisory activities
Agricultural advisory services played a significant role in transforming smallholder agriculture to market-oriented production (Mosley, Hudson, & Verschoor, 2004; Wellard, Rafanomezana,
Nyirenda, Okotel, & Subbey, 2013). They did this by providing access to knowledge and technologies and augmenting farmers’ capabilities for technology adoption; developing farmers’ business-management skills; and bridging the gap between research and practice, providing information on cropping techniques, optimal input use, high-yield seed varieties, biological control of insect pests, control of livestock diseases, better methods of natural
164 resource management, and favourable pricing (Hauser, Lindtner, Prehsler, & Probst, 2016;
Kiiza & Pederson, 2014; Martin & Abbott, 2011; Muyinza & Ambrose, 2006).
Private service providers
PSPs could be individual business owners, private firms, or NGOs contracted to deliver
agricultural advisory services (Ilukor et al., 2015; ROU, 2006a; Rwamigisa et al., 2013). A
Memorandum of Understanding was signed at the sub-county with a procurement committee
comprising representatives of farmers’ associations that were usually model farmers. Services
included crop-growing and animal-rearing methods, TDSs, such as demonstration gardens or
piggeries, improved seed varieties to suit climatic conditions, for example, hybrid groundnuts,
sorghum, millet, sunflower seeds, cassava, and potato cuttings, and hybrid animals for
increased production, for example, hybrid-cross goats, pigs, and Friesian cows. The contract
specified the target group of beneficiaries, duration of contract, items procured, contract value,
mode of payment, and other administrative procedures to which the contracting parties must
abide (ROU, 2006a).
The literature and available data on the provision of agricultural advisory services
revealed the complexities involved in decentralised contracted services (Friis-Hansen, 2008;
Hauser et al, 2016; Kelly, Adesina, & Gordon, 2003: Kjær & Joughin, 2012). In the Soroti,
Kumi, and Ngora districts and sub-counties, where this was conducted, there were reports of good performance because of the close coordination and harmonious working relationships between the model farmers and PSPs (Friis-Hansen, 2008; James, 2010; Golooba-Mutebi,
2012). However, many services fell below the required standard and the farmers’ groups were unable to discipline the PSPs who failed to meet their contractual obligations. The Soroti district was an exception, where a strong farmers’ group terminated a contract due to poor quality services (Friis-Hansen, 2008; Kjær & Joughin, 2012). Despite the NAADS secretariat’s regulations and quality assurance and technical auditing services, efforts to create a competitive
165 pool of competent PSPs was delayed by the Ministry of Public Service (Ampaire et al., 2013;
Kjær & Joughin, 2012). Further, there was poor monitoring of PSPs (AfranaaKwapong, 2015).
Environmental management
Since agriculture in Uganda is mostly rainfed and dependent on physical factors, the PMA, the policy framework through which NAADS operated, incorporated climate management interventions (Hisali, Birungi & Buyinza, 2011; Gornall, Betts, Burke, Clark, Camp, Willet &
Wiltshire, 2010: Kansiime & Mastenbroek, 2016). Key among them was the adoption of the agricultural Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP) with a strong focus on supporting agriculture and highlighting climate-change adaptation measures (ROU, 2010a;
IPCC, 2007; James, 2010). Beneath the DSIP, the PMA identified productivity-enhancing technology as one suitable policy strategy to respond to shifting climatic changes, physical environmental conditions like soils, pests and diseases and raised farmers’ resilience (Hisali et al., 2011; Turinawe, Drake, & Mugisha, 2015). It also covered areas of consultations and farmers’ traditional knowledge practices and choices (Irangani & Yoshiharu, 2013; ROU,
2010a). This involved consultations on decentralised institutions, especially national agricultural research systems, designed to ensure that they facilitate bottom-up planning, and were responsive to research findings on local needs. The PMA adopted the national agricultural research systems as a key vehicle to improve the delivery of agricultural research services
(ROU, 2005b). The public agricultural research institutions were reoriented to study local outputs in local environmental conditions. The PMA needed research within the agro- ecological zones of different regions within Uganda. Its main purpose was to generate and use research to transform agriculture into a modern, science-based, market-oriented sector, to increase the efficiency and profitability of the sector, and enhance its contribution to sustained growth (ROU, 2005).
166 The private sector provided some inputs (Kelly et al., 2003) and played a substantial
part in enhancing the marketability of agricultural produce, since this was not a government
responsibility. The government established a conducive policy environment and regulatory
framework for private-sector activity. Significant among the policies was reduction of
bottlenecks by developing new roads, especially feeder roads into rural areas, opening the
economy to multilateral institutions, and facilitating the entry of direct foreign capital into the
economy. Infrastructural development, especially a well-developed rural road network would
reduce transport costs and raise efficiency, encouraging farmers to produce more. This would,
in turn, increase productivity, enhance household income levels, and stimulate economic
growth and poverty reduction (Nelson & Stathers, 2006; ROU, 2010a).
Participation and inclusion of women and other disadvantaged groups
Recognising the significant role women played in the agricultural sector, the NAADS
guidelines of 2006, stipulated active participation and inclusion of women in the management
of advisory services (Ampaire et al, 2013). The representation of the disadvantaged in the
NAADS structures and the promotion of institutional development, especially the management of collective tasks and mass participation, would lead to their increased involvement in decision-making (Alkire et al., 2013). It would provide a platform for women and other disadvantaged groups to articulate their views and was a vehicle for improving gender relations towards equality, as assessed by women themselves (Moyo, 2014). Finally, it would enable the development of a clear understanding of their social environment and its process, as developed by the disadvantaged (ROU, 2006a).
Changes in the implementation of NAADS
Table 5.7 provides a summary of the changes for NAADS I and II. The first phase of NAADS
(2001-2009) was piloted in six districts, as mentioned previously. By 2008, the program had
167 reached every district and sub-county in the country (Afranaakwapong & Nkonya, 2015;
Benin, 2011, 2012). The President thus declared that NAADS had achieved one of its core objectives with no clear indication as to whether it had fulfilled the expectations of all the farmers (Afranaakwapong, 2015).
Table 5.7 Summary of changes in the implementation of NAADS (2001-2016)
Main themes NAADS I (2001-2009) NAADS II (2010-2016)
Empowerment, . Form farmer groups and . Facilitate vertical and horizontal partnerships, and associations linkages ownership . Register new and existing . Give farmers a greater voice in groups at the sub-county level marketing and bargaining power . Open a group bank account . Form large farmer groups, i.e., high- . Payment of co-funding performing organisations . Consolidate achievements . Introduction ISFG credit scheme under NAADS revision I . Access to . Hold group and intergroup . Strengthen research-extension linkage agricultural meetings . Form adaptive research teams at the technology and . Conduct training and district level information workshops on enterprise . Form agricultural zones selection . Link farmer groups and zonal . Contract PSPs agricultural stations . Develop technology demonstration farms at model farmer farms . Link farmers to credit institutions through IFSG Advisory services . Strengthen delivery of demand- . Strengthen farmer groups through driven advisory services public-private partnerships and . Educate farmers’ groups on the private service provision as the public provision and delivery of sector takes on a regulatory role services . Use a variety of methods in service . Provide information delivery, including farmer field schools . Use mobile phones and radio programs and films to disseminate information Agribusiness . Enhance agricultural . Facilitate transfer of specialised development and production and income services to PSPs value addition generation to meet household . Emphasis on marketing and value food demands addition by the private sector . Ensure sustainable environmental and land-management technologies Adapted from Afranakwapong and Nkonya (2015)
168 Secondly, up to early 2008, the advisory services continued to be provided horizontally by PSPs through the affiliated NGOs and private extension agents, and vertically through local government, with the central government through the MAAIF taking the role of regulating service providers (Benin, 2011, 2012). However, by mid-2008, the government reinstated public extension service provision and directed districts to stop contracting PSPs. The delivery of advisory services pivoted back to governmnet through local government production departments, with PSPs retaining only specialised services (Kjaer & Joughin, 2017).
Permanent, pensionable extenison staff at the sub-county were recruited and charged with the responsibility of overseeing advisory services (Afranaakwapong & Nkonya, 2015). At the district level, these services fell under the production office (Kjaer & James, 2010, 2017).
Thirdly, to align NAADS with the DSIP of the NDP, the government revised NAADS
I in 2006 and 2008 (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; Friis-Hansen, 2008; Tusiime, Renard &
Smets, 2013; van Waeyenberge & Bargawi, 2015), and NAADS II implementation came into effect in 2010. The focus was to enhance the effectiveness of advisory services delivered within the framework of the NAADS vision, mission, and principles (Ekou, 2030). NAADS II sought to form larger farmer groups and organisations to facilitate vertical and horizontal linkages and enhance farmers’ bargaining power and capacity to make and implement decisions on marketing. Secondly, it expanded public-private partnerships in the provision of advisory services, with public extension taking on a greater responsibility. This also involved the use of professional and certified service providers on performance-based controls, and developing and enhancing the capacity of public and private professionals (Ekou, 2013). It also implemented a variety of other approaches, including Farmer Field Schools (FFS) and use of other platforms, such as telephones, films, and radio programs to deliver advisory services became a landmark change in NAADS II (Afranaakwapong, 2015).
169 Another key area surrounding NAADS II was the introduction of the agribusiness
development and value addition components. This was a significant change. The private sector took a greater role in agricultural production, marketing, and value addition and there were deliberate attempts to ensure sustainable resource management, particularly land, with new land technologies being implemented (Afranaakwapong, 2015). NAADS II created options for the financing and delivery of advisory and technical services appropriate to different farmer categories. Its overall goalwas to reduce the share of public finance (Ekou, 2013).
To improve access to new agricultural technologies and information, NAADS II strengthened research-extension linkages and formed adaptive research support teams in districts and zonal agricultural research stations and development institutions. It emphasised a closer link between farmers, service prodviders, and researchers, and this was to be achieved through the implementation of the ATAAS project (2010-2016) mentioned in Chapter 4.
ATAAS brought research, technological development, and advisory services under one umbrella (Ekou, 2013). The overall aim of this new shift under NAADS II was to enhance farmer access to new technologies and information through the establishment of technology demonstration sites in villages and field vistits to research stations.
In the revised framework of NAADS I, ATAAS was designed to support the implementation of NAADS’ and NARO’s programs relating to research, extension, and the farmer-market value chain linkage continuum through agri-business development. This significant shift from NAADS’ I direct intervention in supporting farmers’ enterprises.
NAADS II aimed to facilitate the emergence of businesses along the value chain, from input provision through to output (market access).
To facilitate its new structure, NAADS II had to build local government capacity to manage its programs and institutional (public and private) relationships. It also relied on local government to use participatory monitoring and evaluation for service improvement.
170 Progress in NAADS’ implementation
Initially, the World Bank and other donor institutions provided 80% of NAADS’ budget, as
shown in Table 5.6. At its inception, NAADS worked in six districts: Arua, Kabale, Kibaale,
Mukono, Soroti, and Tororo, which were selected as pilot sites. It selected four sub-counties in each of the six districts. By 2005, it had extended services to 37 districts in 344 sub-counties
(Francis & James, 2003) with plans to cover the entire country by 2008 within reach (ROU,
2006a). As the 2006 election drew closer, the ruling government sought to pursue policies with immediate tangible benefits, such as NAADS (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011; Joughin &
Kjaer, 2010). There was a sudden increase in the number of administrative units set to benefit from NAADS in line with the ruling party’s political manifesto ‘Prosperity for All’. Further, the NRM manifesto highlighted provision of inputs to smallholder farmers as a new core aspect of the program (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010). This contradicted NAADS’ initial focus on advisory services and led to overstretched human and associated resources (Francis & James, 2003;
Kjaer & Joughin, 2017).
To provide these subsidised agricultural inputs, the new NAADS master plan of 2006
(ROU, 2006a) and subsequent revised guidelines (ROU, 2008b) made provision for Integrated
Support to Farmer Groups (ISFG), which altered NAADS to a platform for the distribution of state benefits (Kjaer & Joughin, 2012). This new dimension, which ran counter to NAADS original objectives, consumed the bulk of the program’s budget. This sudden, unplanned expansion and redesigned approach to input delivery, coupled with budgetary redirection, effectively turned NAADS to a political tool for renting political support (Batungi et al., 2016;
Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Kjaer & Joughin, 2017). Following the new NAADS guidelines of
2006, the benefiting farmer associations were handpicked by local ruling party leaders and elites (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010). Instead of local NAADS’ committees, local council chairpersons, local NRM (ruling party) chairpersons, and other local politicians and political
171 leaders associated with the NRM regime were given unlimited powers in deciding on the
selection of NAADS’ beneficiaries (Davis, 2008; Parkinson, 2009b; Kjaer & Joughin, 2012).
This had a devastating impact on NAADS, as the responsibility for the formation,
identification, and selection of beneficiary farmer groups, which, initially, was community
driven and based on local priorities, was transferred to local politicians and ruling party
affiliates, who used the process of beneficiary selection to score political gains (Davis, 2008;
Joughin & Kjaer, 2010).
By the close of 2007, independent studies revealed that the program had reached 83.1% of the population in 545 sub-counties in Uganda, and 40,000 farmers’ groups representing
716,000 farmers, or 20% of farming households (Benin, 2011, 2012). It had spent USD40m, signed 1,622 contracts with PSPs to provide specialised services for 40 enterprises the farmers’ groups had identified, while 2,516 CBFs had received training to participate in follow-up services (ROU, 2014a). By 2008, the program had covered the whole country and, by 2010, was being implemented by all the districts (Benin, 2011; Benin et al., 2007; ROU, 2014c).
Evaluation studies conducted in the initial phase of NAADS I reported mixed findings.
Barungi et al. (2016) reported that privatised extension services excluded non-commercial farmers, including poor smallholder farmers, women farmers, and farmers with small plots of land. Also, co-funding and registration and membership fees put services out of reach for these groups (Parkinson, 2009b). Bahiigwa et al. (2005) reported that the targeting of widows, female-headed households, orphans, and male youth had failed as these groups were unable to meet these minimum requirements for entry into the farmers’ associations. A government evaluation study reported that privatisation of services had resulted in the exclusion of less- fortunate farmers (ROU, 2008b). Benin (2011, 2012) found that the elderly, the disabled, and the sick were not accessing NAADS, as they were unable to join farmers’ groups or pay for extension services. Benin (2011) found several factors affected the farmers’ ability to adopt
172 new technologies, develop new enterprises, or apply information learnt. These included lack
of land (ownership), labour, capital, transport, and productive assets like livestock.
Nevertheless, Benin (2012) found positive ratings in the use of improved technologies, market outputs, and improved incomes for beneficiaries among those who were able to participate in NAADS. Several authors had reported that advisory services advisory services, prior to and during NAADS, favoured farmers with resources, who could adopt demonstrated technologies. Many of these farmers were already engaged in commercial production and those located in commercial areas were better connected with road networks and better positioned to take the advantage of market opportunities (Benin, 2012; Davidson, 2000; Kiid et al., 2000;
Wairimu et al., 2016). This put millions of smallholder farmers in rural and marginal areas, with poor road networks, and high transaction costs at a disadvantage and excluded from advisory services.
NAADS, too, targeted economically active poor farmers who belonged to farmers’ groups (Ekou, 2013; Parkinson, 2009b; Okoboi et al 2013). It distinguished between farmers with limited assets, skills, and knowledge and destitute farmers without assets, favouring the former. Therefore, poor smallholder farmers were unable to benefit from NAADS (Barungi et al., 2016; Mutimba, 2014; Okoboi et al., 2013). As Parkinson (2009b) reported, NAADS I had excluded millions of smallholder farmers still entrenched in poverty and cyclical food insecurity. She was extremely critical of the contracting process, which had imposed additional costs and inefficiencies. Contractors had become opportunistic providers for the demand- driven paradigm, and the ability and willingness of farmers to identify their own advisory needs, seek services, and pay for them was also compromised (Parkinson, 2009b).
The World Bank’s (2011) independent review found a misuse and wastage of resources, misdirected inputs, depressed farmer morale, weakened farmers’ groups and forums, and disadvantaged rural smallholder farmers. The review reported that commercialised farmers
173 enjoyed the greatest benefits and that NAADS was effectively capturing an elite group of
farmers in high-level farmers’ organisations. It was also benefiting customers, suppliers,
contractors, researchers, scientists, and government officials. The structure remained top-down and excluded meaningful rural smallholder farmers’ participation.
Benin (2012) reported that the program had enhanced the institutional capacity and
human-resource skills of one in five farming households that had participated in advisory
services. The number of individual members participating in the selected enterprises expanded as the program extended from 24 to 545 sub-counties. PSPs, too, reported increased training and attendance numbers; 1,622 PSPs had been contracted and 40 enterprises had been promoted (Benin, 2011, 2012).
Kjaer and Joughin (2012) reported that mounting pressure from local politicians, the
MAAIF, and the military had generated a strong interlocking set of incentives that forced the government to shift back to top-down extension framework. This was accompanied by the afore-mentioned subsidised inputs to reward various interest groups for political gain.
In his study of the role of advisory services in improving the production of cattle and poultry to alleviate poverty among the rural poor, Ekou (2013) found that inflation and unemployment had hampered transformation to commercialised agriculture and that agricultural advisory services tended to favour the already rich and well-connected farmers.
James et al.’s (n.d.) comprehensive study of participation in advisory services indicated that farmers’ willingness to pay for advisory services (co-funding) depended on membership longevity in farmers’ groups. Longer participation in agricultural advisory services was also associated with increased technology use, and flexible adaptability to change, which, over time, improved farm productivity and benefits (James et al., n.d.).
Okoboi et al. (2013) found farmers ready to take up NAADS services and high adoption rates of new and improved agricultural practices, technologies, and crop enterprises. Strong
174 farmers’ associations, professionally managed agribusinesses, and ready access to markets,
credit, and quality inputs, were critical (ROU, 2014b). Adong (2014) found that most of the
farmers’ groups were positive about the agricultural training they had received. However, there was disagreement on NAADS’ impact with some pointing to the farmers’ inability en masse to engage in market production and improve food security or, indeed, to join farmers’ groups
(Ampaire et al., 2013; Adongo, 2014; Benin, 2012; Kjaer & Joughin, 2012). Further, NAADS alienated millions of farmers whose enterprises were not selected and who, therefore, did not get access to publicly funded technology development (Batungi et al., 2016; Okoboi et al.,
2013). NAADS’ discriminatory system left many farmers sceptical about its intentions and unwilling to invest time, effort, and risk in the program (Barungi et al., 2016; Parkinson, 2009b,
Okoboi et al., 2013). Attending formal meetings and workshops constituted a huge burden to illiterate and uneducated farmers. Some studies suggested that capacity-building workshops were, anyway, a means of channelling resources and funds to those already being paid for hosting them (Okoboi et al., 2013; Mutimba, 2014; Parkinson, 2009b).
There were ongoing frustrations in government over the direction of NAADS (Okoboi et al 2013). Despite continued allocation of resources to the program, frustration continued to mount as poverty levels rose, and millions of smallholder farmers were no better off.
Confidence in advisory services as a platform for poverty reduction waned with no clear evidence that they were working (Kjaer & Jougin, 2012, 2017). Moreover, public resources increased and associated costs mounted as donor funds dwindled and issues of accountability threatened support for the program (Barungi et al, 2016). Despite periodic revisions in 2006,
2008, and 2014 and suspensions in 2007, 2011, and 2014, NAADS had yet to fulfil its promise
(Barungi et al., 2016).
With the NDP (2010-2015), the government adopted the DSIP to stimulate wealth creation, economic growth, and structural transformation within a restructured NAADS under
175 the umbrella of the ATAAS project in collaboration with NARO (Afranakwapong & Nkonya,
2015; Wairimu et al., 2016). This refocused mandate favoured research-based innovation and
development (Ekou, 2013). Again, it would favour productive farmers and exclude poor farmers
at the grassroots (Alinyo & Leahy, 2012; Ilukor, Birner, & Nielsen, 2015; Kjaer & Joughin,
2012, 2017; 2007; Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b; Steiner, 2010).
Conclusion
Extension services in Uganda have gone through many ups and downs since their inception
during the colonial era. The post-reform period leading to the turn of the century saw a marked shift toward privatised, demand-driven services. This paved the way for NAADS I, one of seven pillars in the PMA. NAADS I adopted as a decentralised demand-driven and farmer-led approach from 2007 onwards as donor funding decreased and the government began to assume greater control from 2010 onwards. This new model of extension service provision also involved farmer organisations at the village level participating in decision-making processes around the contracting of service providers. Essentially, then, NAADS was a semi- autonomous, decentralised, farmer-driven, private-sector-led initiative. NAADS initially saw an intensification of the thrust from public to private-sector provision through contracted private service providers with NAADS tasked with recruiting professionals and service providers (Benin, 2011 2012). However, along the way, these roles pivoted back to government
(Barungi et al., 2016). Like prior extension services, NAADS encountered myriad of challenges ranging from inadequate funding, poor accountability, limited transparency, corruption, especially in the procurement of inputs, inadequate staff and technical capacity in local government, limited outreach to farmers, political interference, and deviation from its original goal of offering advisory services (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010; Kjaer & Joughin, 2012,
2017; Parkinson, 2009b). This chapter discussed the emergence of agricultural extension
176 services that culminated in NAADS and its break from public sector to private provision of advisory services (Semana, 2004). It provided a detailed description of NAADS as a backdrop to the next chapter on the study’s methodology.
177 CHAPTER 6
Methodology
Chapter 6 discusses the research approach and methods used to examine the local
implementation of the international poverty reduction development policy through a study
sample of successful rural farmers’ perspectives on, and how they capitalised on the services
provided through, the implementation of NAADS in Eastern Uganda. It begins with a statement of the problem and describes the rationale for, and aims of, the study. It then outlines the research questions before turning to the qualitative, case study research design. This chapter examines the value of this design in addressing the research questions. It describes the research process, the recruitment of participants, and the data collection and analysis methods. It then ends with the ethical considerations and limitations of the study.
Research process
The thesis seeks to understand poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda through a detailed
exploration of dominant international development policy, its influence on national priorities,
and the positive outcomes through the eyes of the beneficiaries which are individuals and
communities at the receiving end of the development policy. It specifically investigates this
through a donor-driven NAADS. Moreover, the thesis seeks to contribute to the understanding
of poverty reduction in other SSA countries that have been at the receiving end of international development policy and aid.
The study began by giving an overview of the literature on multidimensional discourses informing international development, foreign aid, and poverty reduction, while showing how these discourses shifted global development policy at different historical junctures. As outlined
178 in Chapter 2, development theories and discourses have influenced global initiatives aimed at
reducing extreme poverty, including the major international organisations dispensing aid to
developing countries. The study links Uganda’s own development policy and poverty reduction priorities to the broader global poverty agenda discussed in Chapter 3. This new study outlined various shifts in post-independence policy and shows how externally driven initiatives uniformly adopted by the IFIs have continued to frame the national poverty reduction agenda leading to the formulation and adoption of NAADS as a central platform for poverty reduction premised on participation, partnership, and ownership.
Statement of the problem
A critical analysis of policy discourse set the background to this study. The theoretical
arguments presented in Chapters 2, 3, and 4 supported the contention that international
development policy had influenced Uganda’s poverty reduction policies and produced winners and losers (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Deininger & Okidi, 2003; Harrison, 2010;
Hickey, 2013; Lawson et al., 2006; Mugambe, 2009). In keeping with international development policy, NAADS, discussed in Chapter 5, rested on consultation, partnership, and national ownership of advisory services. However, there was little knowledge about whether this collaborative approach had filtered down to local communities and households (Béland &
Howlett, 2016; Fraser, 2005; Lie, 2015). Hence, this study sought to explore how successful farmers and their households benefited from NAADS and the processes of engagement they used to access the resources on offer.
Aims of the study
This study aimed to understand the perspectives and experiences of successful ‘model farmers’, who had been able to reap rewards from the NAADS program by engaging in its administrative
179 structures and processes. It also aimed to develop an in-depth, holistic understanding of the
interpretation of success, and factors contributing to the success of the ‘model farmers’. More
broadly, I wanted to understand what had shaped Uganda’s development programs and poverty
reduction measures, particularly agricultural development policy, given NAADS’ central role.
Research questions
Despite research to date, there was a lack of knowledge about how to increase agricultural
productivity in Africa through improved advisory programs, the focus of this study. Hence, the central research question that this study addressed was:
What factors affected the implementation of advisory service reforms in rural Eastern
Uganda?
To address this central research question, several subsidiary questions were:
1. What policy factors shaped this poverty reduction measure and NAADS’ central role
in agricultural transformation?
2. What were the structures and processes of NAADS and how did they enable
participation, partnership, and ownership in agricultural development?
3. What were the experiences of successful beneficiaries and how had they engaged in the
structures and processes of NAADS?
4. What were the characteristics of ‘successful’ model farmers in NAADS?
5. What factors shaped ‘model farmers’ experiences of success within NAADS in rural
Eastern Uganda?
180 Research design
Given most studies on the NAADS program had been quantitative in nature and sought to measure concrete outcomes, this study used a qualitative case-study approach. The case under study constituted successful ‘model farmers’ who had benefited from NAADS. Many theoretical considerations guided the selection of this research design, including the research problem and questions, the researcher’s personal experience of NAADS, and the audience who might benefit from the study (Creswell, 2013; Yin, 2003). A qualitative case-study approach enabled focused research on a group of participants in a specific local context (Farmer,
Robinson, Elliot & Eyles, 2006), who had benefitted from Uganda’s flagship agricultural development initiative, NAADS.
Qualitative approach
This study adopted a qualitative approach (Ellis & Mdoe, 2003; Kanbur, 2001b). There is increasing recognition of the value of qualitative research in studying people’s direct experience of events and of case study approach to obtain a full picture of the phenomenon under study (Ellis & Mdoe, 2003; White, 2002). Qualitative research is appropriate for capturing feelings, values, thoughts, assumptions, actions, and experiences (Kanbur, 2001b;
Yin, 2009). It is a form of naturalistic inquiry used to explore problems in context to develop
‘a complex, holistic picture, formed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and conducted in a natural setting’ (Creswell, 1998, p. 15). Grounded in social constructionism, qualitative research assumes the view of knowledge in the social world as best constructed from lived experience (Bryman, 2012; Creswell, 2013, 2007; Farmer et al., 2006).
In qualitative research, the researcher focuses on discerning meaning, on uncovering the participants’ views and experiences of a phenomenon – poverty and agricultural development, in this instance – and how they had experienced change and progress. The
181 method is ideally suited to the study of complex phenomena. It seeks to reach as close a
description of people’s perspectives and experiences, as is possible, in their own words and
language, and in terms of their local experience. At the broadest level, this was the area of
international policy on foreign aid and development and the discourses shaping it over time,
as discussed in the literature review. At the next level of analysis, it was important to study
how international policy shaped national development priorities and the organisational
infrastructure for policy and program implementation. Finally, at the community and
household level, came the study of how these influences filtered down to programs affecting
the lives of local people at the grassroots. The literature review and policy analysis formed the
backdrop to the study’s focus on how model farmers constructed meaning from their
experiences in NAADS. This enabled a situated understanding of poverty and development
through the direct experience of the people being studied (Bryman, 2012).
From this, the aim was to develop new theoretical propositions and guides for action, given the lack of qualitative research of this nature (Denzin & Lincoln, 2013). As Silverman
(2005) observed, qualitative research was best suited to little-known areas of study, and to studies seeking to build theory from direct experience of a phenomenon. Such understanding of the perspectives of ‘program beneficiaries’ was absent, since their views were seldom sought. Rather, circumstantial evidence and the observations of those charged with implementing programs at the grassroots level, such as social workers, program managers, development agents or fly-in fly-out researchers, and program monitors who influenced decision-making. My own circumstantial evidence and observations pointed to the importance of listening to people through systematic investigation of the impact of programs on their daily lives (Super & Harkness, 2008). Such in-depth investigation provided access to knowledge and information not heretofore explored and included in discussions on poverty alleviation and development. Hence, the study’s findings would complement already existing publicly
182 available quantitative data, such as national and international statistics, research, and
commentaries on policy. These sources provided important quantitative data, while the study
drew on qualitative methods for their strengths as inductive, naturalistic tools to add to
knowledge and understanding of, and assumptions about, the benefits of NAADS (Patton,
2002a).
Literature review
Key search terms were development, aid, development aid, foreign aid, poverty reduction,
development policy, agricultural development, SSA, and Uganda. Other search terms included key phrases, such as modernisation theory, dependency theory, development discourses, social redistribution, market fundamentalism, structural adjustment, conceptualisations of poverty, the MDGs, SDGs, and human development. Literature sources used included electronic databases, such as EBSCO Megafile Premier, SAGE Journals Online and Wiley and Online
Library, Google, and Google Scholar. Important sources in reference lists of key articles supplemented the database searches. These were used to identify further literature.
Within the area of development, aid, and poverty, literature was selected based on its relevance and significance to contemporary debates through post-war international development efforts and theories that drove them. Search terms to locate relevant literature on electronic databases and the internet in the field included development OR development theories or development interventions or under development, modernisation paradigm OR dependency theories; privatisation OR free markets, decentralisation OR good governance.
Within the area of international aid, literature was selected where it made an original and significant contribution for understanding how aid influenced the construction of poverty reduction programs in the Global South. Search terms to locate relevant literature included aid
OR international development aid OR donor agencies and institutions OR conditional or unconditional aid OR Pearson Commission OR Washington consensus OR post-Washington
183 consensus, participation OR empowerment OR ownership, local OR international institutions.
Included literature examined how aid allocation by powerful international development
institutions, Northern INGOs, and bilateral donor organisations shaped the construction of
poverty reduction policies in developing countries.
Literature was selected for review where it made original and significant contribution
for understanding how shifting conceptualisation of poverty influenced the construction of
poverty reduction interventions at the global and national levels. Search terms to locate relevant literature included poverty OR social policy, human development index OR income poverty, and absolute OR relative poverty.
Within the area of agricultural development, literature was selected where it made significant and original contribution for understanding how agricultural extension had served as a platform for poverty reduction. Search terms included extension services OR advisory services OR technology development or technology diffusion OR new innovations OR smallholder farmers OR agricultural inputs OR evolution of extension OR Uganda extension policy.
The reviews focused predominantly on literature relating to how conceptualisations of poverty at the global level had, over time, influenced national definitions of poverty and, consequently, national priorities on poverty reduction. In addition to these online electronic database searches, there were a host of resource libraries citing policies and literature references available through organisations and research institutes working on poverty reduction. Literature was also sourced through discussions with academics working on poverty reduction through agricultural extension services in Uganda, Australia, New Zealand,
Germany, Denmark, and Canada.
The literature review was significant as a method for examining the background to the key issues and establishing the context for the case study. By examining the Ugandan literature
184 on agricultural development, agricultural extension and advisory services, poverty reduction,
ownership, participation, and partnership, the review sought to identify gaps in knowledge on
the involvement of rural smallholder farmers in agricultural development initiatives, especially
NAADS.
Case study approach
The case study approach is widely used in social science research to develop an understanding
of complex social phenomena and real-life events (Yin, 2003). It is a form of systematic
‘empirical enquiry’ used where ‘the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not
clearly evident’ (Yin, 2009, p. 13). The case study approach draws on multiple sources of
information and seeks exhaustive knowledge about a single ‘case’ or a small number of related
‘cases’ or ‘units’ (Creswell, 2012, 2013; Tharenou, 2007). A number of ‘cases’ in Uganda had
been studied, including the Roll Back Malaria and Universal Primary Education programs
(Super & Harkness, 2008), the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation program (Terry,
McLaughlin & Kazooba, 2015), the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (Golooba-Mutebi
& Hickey, 2010), and the Peace, Recovery Development Program (Wairimu et al, 2016). This
study chose NAADS as the case study due to agriculture’s central role in Uganda’s poverty
eradication and national development plans. The study sought to understand the relationship
between international and national development policy in the construction of national and local
development priorities and how successful ‘model farmers’ at the receiving end were engaged
in the construction and implementation of NAADS and associated changes. The NAADS case
was found suitable because the research problem required analysis of real-life experiences and
perspectives as they emerged (Parkinson, 2009b). While NAADS constituted the case under
study, program beneficiaries, in this case, successful model farmers constituted units of
analysis providing a collective voice for its successes and failures in the specific geographic
185 locations under study. The importance of context in shaping model farmers’ experiences was an essential element of this case study (Eilola, Käyhkö, Fagerholm, & Kombo, 2014).
Recruitment of participants
Target group
NAADS targeted the economic poor with productive assets. To qualify for the NAADS program, farmers had to own land and local authorities had to vet them to ensure they fit the target group (Kjaer & Joughin, 2012). In rural Eastern Uganda, men own productive assets, especially land, given the patriarchal sociocultural structure (Lawson et al., 2006). Women might acquire land through inheritance. Women, young people over the age of 18 years, and people with disabilities, who owned land, also had access to NAADS (ROU, 2000b). Given
NAADS’ goal of enabling farmers to progress from low levels of production and technology adoption to higher levels of enterprise development and commercialisation, NAADS categorised farmers who had benefited from its services as demonstration, lead, and model
(progressive) farmers (ROU, 2008b). A fourth group, nucleus farmers were successful independently of NAADS. The nucleus farmers were engaged in large commercial farming enterprises, employed professional managers and a labour force to run the farming operation.
They were wealthy business people who owned plantations and ran limited liability companies
(ROU, 2008b). The model farmers acted as learning examples to others and offered practical advice on modern farming to enhance their farming practices (Benin, 2012). The model farmers were the highest category engaged in NAADS program. Model farmers who had progressed through the NAADS program constituted the target group for this study. This category of farmers had progressed from subsistence to market-oriented, commercial farming through accessing advisory services and support. They were registered members of farmers’ groups. Usually, a model farmer was a farmer at the take-off stage of commercialisation.
186 Through NAADS, farming enterprises became profitable agribusinesses engaged in high-level productivity through improved technologies and farming practices. The characteristics of model farmers were defined by government under the new NAADS guidelines issued in 2008
(ROU, 2008b) (shown in Appendix H). They are outlined as follows:
1. A farmer engaged in market-oriented farming, who had successfully managed more
than one enterprise, referred to as an enterprise mix.
2. A farmer who had benefited from Integrated Support to Farmer Groups (ISFG) and
fully repaid or had demonstrated credibility and had access to credit. The ISFG
aimed to boost the already ongoing farmer internal resource mobilisation efforts
and maximise the use of acquired knowledge from the demonstrations, expand
enterprise and provide learning opportunity to fellow farmers.
3. A farmer who had the potential to generate UGX20 million (USD 10,000) or more
per annum from farming enterprises.
4. A farmer who had established clear links to sources of inputs and producer markets.
5. A farmer who had the potential to improve technology uptake for other farmers, or
link other farmers to markets.
6. A farmer who was willing to share information on production and marketing with
other farmers.
7. A farmer who had specialised in a series of production activities in the value chain
Model farmers were required to:
1. Serve as a demonstration farmer for improved technologies and good management
of farming enterprises.
2. Be willing to volunteer to provide advice to other farmers.
187 3. Serve as a promoter of improved technologies, by multiplying the technologies
(improved seeds & seedlings) and selling to other farmers.
4. Share production and marketing information with other farmers
5. Keep farm records and marketing information, and use this to advise other farmers
on market-oriented farming (ROU, 2008b, pp. 15-16).
Most importantly for this study, model or successful farmers had reaped the benefits of the
NAADS program and could provide an example to lead and demonstration farmers in the lower categories (shown in Appendix H, description of a model farmer).
Sampling and recruitment
Purposive sampling was used to select participants (Creswell, 2012; Patton, 2002a; Yin,
2009). It relied on the researcher’s knowledge to decide ‘who or what study units are most
appropriate for inclusion in the study based on the potential of the study units’ knowledge
base or closeness of fit to the criteria associated with the study’s focus’ (Silverman, 2005,
p. 129). As Patton (2002b) noted:
The logic and the power of purposive sampling was drawn from selecting information-
rich cases for the in-depth study. Information rich cases were those from which one
could learn a great deal about issues of central importance … yielding insights and in-
depth understanding rather than empirical generalizations … whose study will
illuminate questions under study (p. 273).
Model farmers constituted a rich source of information since they had been able to
negotiate their way through the NAADS program and maximise its benefits. The researcher
believed that model farmers in deep rural villages, away from the government:
188 . Would provide balanced, independent, and well-informed perspectives of their
experiences and perceptions on the success generated by the NAADS program.
. Constituted a core source of information for the investigation as a population at the
receiving end of a successful development policy and, by extension, the NAADS
program.
. Could provide a voice to the concerns of those who had been left out in the from
achieving success from the implementation of development efforts
. Had a unique perspective that could be used to engage other farmers in the policy
making processes.
. Could contribute to improvements in the NAADS program not only for the benefit
of policy-making, but also for other less successful smallholder farmers still
entrenched in poverty.
In qualitative research, sample size is not the overarching criterion to guide the selection of participants and depends on the nature and purpose of the study. The trustworthiness and meaningfulness of the findings rests on the participants’ ability to provide rich information (Patton, 1990). In this study, the researcher recruited 15 model farmers from three purposively selected districts involved in the NAADS program: participants were sought from Soroti, Kumi, and Ngora in Eastern Uganda, as they were easily accessible and had expressed a desire to be part of this kind of study (Stake, 1995). Because the successful model farmers were few in the three districts, less than 50 according to the district registers, 15 participants were thought representative of the successful model farmers of the selected districts and could inform an understanding of the research problem and the central phenomenon under investigation. All Uganda’s 112 districts were implementing NAADS’ programs and, as such, any chosen district could serve as the case study. However, the highest number of poor people lived in the Eastern region and 95% of the selected districts had rural
189 smallholder farmer populations (ROU, 2014a). My experience in the Eastern Region facilitated access to local government authorities in the respective districts and sub-counties and enabled effective communication with the participants in their local dialects; Uganda has over 40 dialects, that is, I had detailed knowledge of the regional context, necessary language skills and experience in conducting participatory and semi-structured interviews.
To recruit participants, I wrote to local government officials in the districts selected for study to inform them about the research project. Once in Uganda, I visited these officials, informed them about the purpose of the visit, reminding them they had expressed an interest in the study following earlier communication. They directed me to the NAADS district coordinator’s officer whom I had also contacted. I reiterated the reason for my visit, informed him about the purpose of the study, briefed him about the commencement of the project, and asked him to sign the information statement and consent forms for the research project (see
Appendix D & F). I had already sought permission for the study from the district local government office, during the ethics clearance process. The coordinator signed the consent forms, opened the NAADS registers and, with me, screened and identified the model farmers from which participants might be selected. There were thousands of NAADS beneficiaries, but fewer successful model farmers, as per the NAADS guidelines (ROU, 2008a). Once the lists and the contacts of the model farmers were ready, I proceeded to the sub-county offices and contacted the assistant NAADS coordinators at the respective sub-counties to identify and locate the selected successful model farmers. Thereafter, I contacted the prospective participants and explained the purpose of the study. I then made appointments with them to sign the participant information statement and consent form (shown in Appendix E & G), following detailed discussion of the study. It was at this point that I made the appointments for the interviews. I repeated the process in the three districts until I had reached the target of 15 participants.
190 Demographic characteristics of the participants
Table 6.1 shows the demographic characteristics of the participants. All interviewees were male except in the majority comprised 93.33%. The female participant had inherited land from her father who had broken away from traditional law on land inheritance by dividing his land equally among his children, and she became a recipient of two acres of land previously used for subsistence farming. She had donated her gardens as technology development sites for model gardens. This gave her right of passage to the NAADS program in her community.
Though polygamy is widely practised (Lee & Whitbeck, 1990) in Eastern Uganda, all participants were in monogamous marriages, possibly because all identified as Christians.
Government statistics showed that 28% of legal unions in Uganda were polygamous (ROU,
2014a). All the participants were engaged in farming activities given the program targeted agricultural communities in rural areas. They had households ranging in size from four to 10 members, which was small for rural communities. Households with between five and seven members constituted 73.3%, while those with households between eight and ten members constituted 13.3%. The participants’ ages ranged from 40 to 63 years; two thirds were over 50 years of age and the remaining third were in their forties. Many of the participants had previously worked in government which equated to 40%. This had provided them with several opportunities, such as working with others, savings and assets, especially land, and organisational and management skill development, all of which were crucial for enterprise management and development. Other participants comprising 27% had been employed in the church, clans, and local CBOs. Model Farmer 02 had become a clan leader and transformed his clan into a farmers’ association.
191
Table 6.1 Characteristics of participants
Model Age Occupation Gender Years Highest Marital Religious Household Place of Farmers (years) in qualification status Affiliation size Interview Present / Previous NAADS 01 63 Farmer Farmer M 13 Primary seven Married Christian 5 Kumel, Ngora 02 45 Farmer Clan leader M 10 Ordinary level Married Christian 4 Akubui, Ngora 03 50 Farmer Smallholder F 13 Primary seven Married Christian 6 Kobuin, Ngora farmer 04 58 Farmer Policeman M 09 Ordinary level Married Christian 6 Atoot, Ngora 05 55 Farmer Local M 08 Ordinary level Married Christian 7 Olimai Kumi councillor 06 58 Farmer CBF M 13 Ordinary level Married Christian 5 Okwangai, Ngora 07 42 Farmer CBF M 07 Diploma agriculture Married Christian 5 Tididiek, Kumi 08 40 Farmer - M 08 Primary seven Married Christian 6 Akadot, Kumi 09 55 Farmer - M 08 Ordinary level Married Christian 7 Kachaboi, Kumi 10 55 Farmer Primary teacher M - Ordinary level Married Christian 7 Kadami, Kumi 11 49 Farmer Local M - Advanced level Married Christian 5 Komolo, Kumi councillor 12 60 Farmer - M 10 Ordinary level Married Christian 6 Gweri, Soroti 13 55 Farmer Reverend M 10 Ordinary level Married Christian 10 Arapai Soroti 14 50 Farmer Reverend M 10 Ordinary level Married Christian 9 Omurang, Soroti 15 40 Farmer Social worker M 10 Degree level Married Christian 4 Awoja, Soroti
192
One fifth of participants had a primary education which was seven years of formal schooling, 13.3% had a secondary education, and two 13.4% had a post-secondary or tertiary education. Model Farmer 15 had a degree in social work. When he lost a job with a local NGO, he went into agriculture. Equipped with education, skills, and experience from the NGO, he mobilised the community, formed a farmers’ association, registered with the local government, and the association became a NAADS benefiting association.
Some participants, such as Model Farmers 006, 007, and 015, who had undergone
NAADS training, had supported the running of NAADS activities at the parish level and were selected as CBFs. They had mobilised other community members and worked as a group of community development workers at the parish level introduced during the second phase of
NAADS in 2006 to provide technical support for the PCCs.
All participants were involved in farming as a core socioeconomic activity. Model
Farmer 01 was among the first to introduce his farmers’ group to the NAADS program in the
Ngora district. Model Farmer 03 was the only female participant and Model Farmer 08 was the only disabled participant.
Data collection
I used two research methods to collect data: in-depth interviews and documentary data analysis.
In-depth interviews
I used in-depth qualitative interviews with model farmers for data collection. The semi- structured in-depth interviews lasted between 60 and 90 minutes’ duration. This enabled the collection of ‘rich descriptions’ of individual subjective experiences and interpretations of success (Sarantakos, 2005). The interviews took the form of a ‘guided conversation’ in which
I ‘pursued a consistent line of inquiry, [so] the actual stream of questions … is likely to be fluid rather than rigid’ (Rubin & Rubin, 1995, pp. 128-129). Semi-structured interviewing allowed
193 me to explore important areas by encouraging participants to expand on their responses, where necessary (Sarantakos, 2005). The interview guide comprised of a predetermined set of four open-ended broad questions with sub-questions (shown in Appendix B). Though time- consuming, in-depth interviewing was best suited to this study’s purpose, and each respondent was interviewed once in English, and in a natural setting (Merriam, 2003), that is, at the participants’ residence and at their convenience. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and returned to participants for member checking to ensure the accuracy of the data was captured.
Documentary analysis
Yin (1994) highlighted three general components under which documentary sources could be
categorised: primary, secondary, and tertiary; public and private; and unsolicited. The
documents could take the form of letters, memoranda, agendas, administrative papers,
newspaper articles, or any format useful to the research. The study drew primarily on state
documents. The Ugandan state produced copious documents, including textual and statistical
materials, such as Poverty Status Reports, Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Reports,
National Household Surveys, Uganda Budgetary Reports, National Housing and Population
Census, and Uganda National Development Plans. Other secondary sources, such as policy
documents, including the NAADS Master Plans (ROU, 2001c, 2006a), the NAADS Act (ROU,
2000c), the NAADS implementation guidelines (ROU, 2008b), the Local Government Act
(ROU, 1997), and Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture Annual Report (ROU, 2005a) were
mined for statistical information and background details. This method was useful as these
primary sources provided accurate historical and contextual accounts and enabled the
researcher to analyse participant data within a broader sociopolitical context (Bryman, 2012).
194 Bryman (2012) contended that documentary sources raised questions of credibility and bias. In most instances, government reports provide accurate information presented in a way that serves its own political interests. This called for caution in interpreting government sources.
Searching for documents relevant to the researcher’s topic was time consuming and at times frustrating, moving one from office to another and sometimes meeting uncooperative staff (Bryman, 2012). The researcher also subscribed to the Makerere University Library for three months to search for appropriate material to corroborate evidence from other sources.
Data analysis
Gibbs (2007) saw data analysis as a form of transformation, which started with sorting,
retrieving, indexing, and coding. I transcribed the recorded data immediately after the
interviews, as mentioned above. Analysis of key emerging themes relevant to the criteria of the model farmers (Braun & Clarke, 2006), regarding participation, ownerships and partnerships well discussed under the CDF, and by extension PRSPs, PEAP, and NAADS in Chapters 3 and
4 followed. I used NVivo, a computer-assisted software package for data analysis and followed the steps suggested by Miles and Huberman (2002) as follows:
1. I read the interview transcripts several times to generate keywords- or codes.
2. I coded the data using the keywords to generate themes and patterns, and identified
variances in the data. Following a review of the transcripts, the transcript from each
participant was analysed
3. I then analysed the data in terms of the key themes, regularities, patterns, and
exceptions.
These three linked processes enabled me to establish clusters, themes, and patterns, without losing information that allowed valid conclusions to be drawn (Huberman & Miles, 2002;
Humble, 2009). Of necessity, qualitative data analysis started with initial interactions with the
195 participant model farmers. The preliminary research questions and the related data review items constituted the guidelines for preliminary analysis. The study relied on descriptions drawn from field notes and interview transcriptions referred to in Appendix C. I classified the data in the transcripts into smaller units based on their importance and significance. Meanings were categorised as per understandings and perspectives that emerged from the data in reference to participation, ownership and partnerships. Classifications were in response to the sub-questions on engagement in the formulation and implementation of NAADS program, benefits associated with participation in the program, what they meant by success, what brought the success, and how and why the program had worked for them. I combined the common codes into themes, which were then organised into core categories. These included:
. Level of participation or involvement, ownership, and partnership.
. Participant interpretations of success and contributing factors.
. The benefits associated with their success.
. Why, and how, the NAADS program worked for them.
Thus, it was possible to identify the processes through which ordinary rural Ugandans meaningfully participated in the development process of their individual households, communities, and country. The cross-cutting links formed good indicators for the successful implementation of NAADS and to determine the extent to which an international development policy filtered to the communities and individual households and produced positive changes.
Ethical considerations
The ethical considerations relating to this study were informed consent, voluntary participation, privacy and confidentiality, risk minimisation, and data storage. The University of Newcastle
Human Research Ethics Committee approved this study: Approval Number H-2015-0247
(shown in Appendix A).
196 Before embarking on data collection in the Eastern Ugandan districts of Kumi, Ngora and Soroti, I made a courtesy visit to the district local government authorities and explained the purpose of the study and informed them of the ethics clearance process. I explained the target participants I wanted to interview. This courtesy visit resulted in approval from the local leadership, who introduced me to the local authorities in the sub-counties and communities where the interviews would take place. I sought the approval of these local government representatives to conduct research in the selected districts to conduct the research on the model farmers via a written letter. With permission granted, letters were prepared for the model farmers, outlining the research purpose and seeking their participation.
A local contact was recruited, coached about the purpose of the study and was informed that his purpose was only to serve as link point between the researcher and the participants once the interview had been completed. This would ensure that in the event of any participants developing second thoughts after the interview, when the researcher had already left Uganda, the local contact could be consulted easily and the information passed over to the researcher in
Australia. The local contact signed a confidentiality agreement.
Throughout the research process, the researcher maintained responsibility to protect the integrity of the participants. Cooperation prior to the start of the research was helpful in minimising any incidences of tension between the researcher and the participants, while scientific research procedures were undertaken, records and results were managed appropriately and that there were no inherent risks. Participants received a written information statement in English which included details for the University’s Human Research Ethics
Committee and a local contact if those that were interviewed developed any queries at any given time regarding their participation and research procedures. The researcher explained the purpose, risks, and benefits of the study. Though the participants were well versed in English, the researcher re-read the participant consent form with them, explaining the content and
197 ensuring they understood the implications of their decision to participate in the study before they signed the form (shown in Appendix G). English is Uganda’s official and national language and widely spoken throughout the country and all the participants were able to read and write English.
Throughout the interview process, the participants were treated with respect and dignity, underlining the fact that they were participants as opposed to human subjects. The researcher was careful not to put pressure on the participants throughout the research process and every participant’s views were considered and upheld. Clarifications, discussions and all decisions made by the researcher in the field were ethically guided.
Voluntary participation and informed consent
Data collection coincided with the second planting season in the Teso sub-region leading to frequent cancellations to fit the participants’ schedules. Some of the participants mistook me for a NAADS staff member and had to be reassured that I was not evaluating or monitoring the program. Whether they believed me, these participants had reservations about the research, making them guarded in their responses. I made every effort to build rapport and establish a comfortable atmosphere for the interview and assured the participants of complete confidentiality and their right to withdraw at any point. At the initial contact with the prospective participants, I introduced myself, explained the purpose and procedures of the study and the benefits of their participation, such as the opportunity to have their voice captured in academic literature, I reiterated that participation was voluntary and they were free to withdraw at any time (shown in Appendix G). All the participants gave their informed consent to participate in, and no one withdrew from the study. During the interview, I treated the participants respectfully and gave plenty of time for them to expound their responses.
198 Privacy, confidentiality, and risk minimisation
I respected the participants’ rights to privacy and confidentiality. I assured them that officials attached to NAADS would not have access to the information they provided. I told them I would protect their anonymity and would not attach names to the questionnaires or cite them in the report. I reduced potential threats to the participants by protecting their identity and dignity, as conveyed in the detailed information I provided regarding the research. Interviews were conducted in their homes, to time schedules appropriate to them, in a language acceptable to the participants. English was found to be the most suitable language; local proverbs relating poverty and local names given to improved seeds and breeds were easily translated by the participants themselves into English. Having worked and studied in the region, I was conversant with the local dialects and, in reporting on the findings, details that could have led to identification of the individual participants were anonymised.
Data storage
All data collected was stored securely on a password-protected university computer and was only accessible to the interviewer and the research supervisors. Participants were only able to access their own transcript. Numerical codes were used to ensure anonymity of audio recordings and notes. Participant data will permanently be destroyed after five years. While in the field in Uganda, data in paper format was kept secure in the lockable bag in the researcher’s room and accessible to the researcher only. On the flight back to Australia, the researcher carried with him data in paper form, the laptop and external hard disk drive where the electronic data was stored and kept in the lockable hand bag. While at the University in
Newcastle, the data in paper was kept securely in the lockable drawer in the researchers’ office.
Conventionally, ethical considerations in research rests on the perspective of ‘doing no harm to the participants’ (Somekh, Burman, Delamont, Payne, & Thorpe, 2011), to this dimension,
199 the study aspired to widen this perspective. Conversely, the study aimed at benefiting
participants positively by contributing to understanding the perspectives and experiences of
successful ‘model farmers’, who had been able to reap rewards from the NAADS program
through social engagement with its administrative structures and processes, and improve
understanding of the development policy in Uganda. Though it was impossible to discern every
aspect of ethical dilemmas throughout the research process, appropriate and adequate
procedures were undertaken to deal with such aspects, and most importantly giving participants
avenues to relay their concerns even after the research process. As such ethical considerations
guided the entire research process of this new study from design throughout the entire phases
of data collection, analysis, writing and reviewing.
Research integrity
It is essential to ensure that work produced is of the highest quality. Qualitative research uses terms like meaningfulness, credibility, accuracy, and trustworthiness in place of validity and reliability and, given the small sample sizes generally used, generalisability is neither sought nor valued (Punch, 2006, 1998). By its very nature, qualitative research seeks in-depth knowledge of a problem in context. It generates locally specific knowledge that is not generalisable to larger populations (Gibbs, 2007). Credibility and trustworthiness rests on reporting that approximates participants’ narratives of their real-life experience (Denscombe,
2010; Padgett, 1998). In this study, the interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and returned to recipients for member checking to ensure the accuracy and trustworthiness of the data collected.
Padgett (1998) identified several issues that might threaten credibility and trustworthiness, including the participants’ reaction to the researchers’ presence in the field; researchers’ biases in asking questions and filtering through observations; and respondent biases related to desirability issues. Padgett’s (1998) key strategies for addressing credibility
200 and trustworthiness were data triangulation and member checking. Triangulation refers to the use of multiple data sources on the same constructs (Denzin, 1978; Patton, 1990).
In this study, I used in-depth interviews and secondary sources, the former to understand direct experience and the latter for policy analysis. The model farmers came from farmers’ groups in three districts in nine sub-counties ‒ Mukongoro, Kanyum, Ongino and
Nyero in Kumi district; Kobuin, Ngora, Mukura, and Kapir in Ngora district; and Gweri and
Arapai, in Soroti district. The interview and secondary-source data comprised case studies
(Yin, 2009). I did not use other data sources but relied on the farmers’ descriptions of their experience. The secondary data sources which were national policy and local program documents ‒ enabled links with macro international development discourse to be made. They included: publicly available reports, such as independent evaluations studies on NAADS;
International Food Policy Research Institute’s (IFPRI) studies on NAADS, government’s own evaluations; NAADS master documents; and guidelines and information accorded with the experiences of program beneficiaries.
Though the case study method allowed for a holistic understanding of NAADS, like qualitative research, it relied on the veracity of participant reporting and their accurate recall of the events shaping their experience (Sommer & Sommer, 1997; Stake, 1995). Inevitably, my own experiences, biases, and assumptions influenced my conceptualisation of the study, and data collection and analysis processes. Thus, qualitative research encourages researcher reflexivity to avoid bias in the production and analysis of the data, given the researcher forms an integral part of the study. I was mindful of this throughout the study and, as discussed in
Chapter 1, made my motivation and position explicit from the outset.
201 Limitations of the study
This was a small-scale exploratory study of a program in a specific local context. The stories of the model farmer participants’ success provided valuable insights into the machinations of
NAADS. They provided explanations of what worked well, and how and what needed improvement for less successful farmers to succeed. As well as insights on rural agricultural development, the findings complement the widely available literature and data on the progress of agricultural development programs, such as NAADS in Uganda. Given that the study was
limited to model farmers, who had progressed through NAADS and were likely to be more
positive about its services than the general pool of beneficiaries, this might have created a bias
in the findings. This focus meant the knowledge, perspectives, and experiences of farmers who
had failed to progress through, or reap the benefits of, NAADS, remains an area for further
study.
Most importantly, the study was carried out in only three of the 32 districts in the Eastern region – an area where there was a high incidence of poverty, while NAADS was implemented in all of Uganda’s 112 districts. The context-based analysis revealed the social, cultural, economic, political, environmental, and physical factors influencing farming practices and development levels in the districts studied and cannot be generalised to all farmers in all districts.
Hence, care must be taken in interpreting the findings of this study, not only due to the limited sample selection, but also as it was a small qualitative study in a particular rural context of Uganda with high levels of poverty. This approach provided insightful understanding for the implementation of NAADS in other districts. By focusing on success stories in this context, I hoped to provide advice and feedback to less successful farmers as to how they, too, might succeed in NAADS.
202 The work of past scholars in diverse settings proved helpful in informing the analysis of international development policy and its influence on Uganda’s poverty priorities and flagship program, NAADS (Benin, 2011, 2012; Easterly, 2001, 2006; Rostow, 1990). I drew on data about NAADS from international policy and program documents, and external evaluations of its services (Benin, 2011, 2012). My perspective was, therefore, shaped by international development policy and prior research and scholarship as part of already established practice, philosophy, and knowledge production on agricultural development in Uganda. As discussed in Chapters 3 and 4, agricultural development policy in Uganda has been constructed within a framework of global neoliberal capitalism, conditional aid and foreign loans, and poverty reduction (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Hickey, 2013; Rostow, 1990). Local development systems, such as decentralised governance and local actors, including NGOs,
CSOs, PSPs, SFF, PCCs, and village farmer associations, aligned with these broader interests on poverty and development (Lie, 2015). Nevertheless, I sought to maintain an unbiased view and, in as far as was possible, allowed the farmers to speak for themselves through their accounts of their experiences with NAADS. This focus on the farmers’ accounts was strengthened by not interviewing or consulting NAADS’ officials. Having worked in local government, I was mindful of the political ramifications of the program and wanted to avoid these influences by focusing on a relatively neutral area of research. Hence, the only challenge
I encountered in conducting the research related to the participants’ heavy workloads through their successful farming enterprises and active involvement in NAADS’ programs. Finding a time to interview them between continuous meetings, training sessions, extension visits, and farm management, led to repeated delays in scheduling interviews.
203 Conclusion
Chapter 6 was the most fundamental part for the success of this study as it set the stage for how the whole study process was going to be conducted. The chapter outlined the study’s methodology. It examined the research methods used and the study’s limitations. Chapters 7 and 8 will present the findings of the study.
204 CHAPTER 7
Findings relating to NAADS
Chapter 7 presents the key findings on the farmers’ experiences in, and their perceptions of, their successful involvement in NAADS. The successes they described were categorised as sociocultural, economic, political, and situational which was based on their physical and geographical location and the environmental factors influencing their farming activities. This chapter examines the macro, mezzo, and micro level factors shaping the participants’ participation in NAADS, as follows:
. It discusses the macrolevel factors shaping NAADS’ implementation, including
social networks and partnerships, gender issues, agricultural technology,
information and communication, and access to microfinance, all of which were
important to the farmers’ engagement at the local level.
. It reports on the benefits accruing from allied mezzolevel institutional development,
including agricultural research and development, demonstration and technology
development sites (TDSs), agricultural markets, local road networks, and water and
irrigation facilities.
. It presents farmers’ accounts of their understanding of the machinations of NAADS,
including the rites of passage, asset ownership, and post-harvest handling and
storage facilities, and NAADS structures and processes, education and training, and
enterprise selection and diversification that shaped their participation in, and family
involvement at, the household or microlevel.
205 Chapters 4 and 5 discussed the macro policy context of NAADS. One of NAADS’ major aims initially was to transfer ownership and decision making to the local government level as part of a broader decentralisation thrust. This was to be achieved through: (i) privatised agricultural extension services; (ii) transformation from subsistence to productive farming; (ii) increased productivity and access to agricultural markets; and (iv) participation in NAADS through representative farmers’ organisations. Prior to the advent of NAADS, critics reported that government-provided agricultural extension services, introduced as part of the structural adjustment reforms, were centrally controlled, inequitably distributed, mired in bureaucratic red tape, lacked accountability to end-users, were not responding flexibly to farmers’ needs, and were a drain on government resources. With structural adjustment, the government cut spending on the agricultural sector, reduced the number of extension staff, eliminated agricultural subsidies, dismantled the cooperative movement, and privatised services to commercialise farming and boost agricultural production for the export market. These changes had a negative impact on smallholder agriculture in which most farmers engaged. In the post- structural adjustment reform phase, the government developed NAADS within the CDF as a demand-driven, farmer-led agricultural extension program to target economically active poor farmers and make them more productive (James et al., n.d.). NAADS sought to modernise and commercialise agricultural through technological information and support as farmers transformed from subsistence to productive, for-profit agriculture. To this end, NAADS had five strategic objectives:
1. Reduce public funding of agricultural advisory services to 50% by the end of
NAADS’ 25-year lifespan in 2025, through privatisation and commercialisation,
with the private sector providing the remaining 50% of costs.
2. Shift from public to private service delivery in the first five years.
206 3. Develop the private sector’s capacity and professional capability to supply
agricultural services.
4. Create options for the financing and delivery of appropriate privatised advisory and
technical services for diversified farming enterprises.
5. Encourage subsistence farmers to transform their farms into productive enterprises
by giving them access to private extension services and market information.
Chapter 7 begins with a discussion of the macrolevel factors shaping NAADS implementation to achieve these goals.
Macrolevel factors shaping NAADS’ implementation
Participants’ views on the macrolevel factors shaping NAADS are discussed as follows:
. Social networks and partnerships
. Agricultural technology
. Information and communication
. Access to microfinance
Social networks and local partnerships
Several social institutions existed in the selected geographic locations of the study, namely
Soroti, Kumi, and Ngora, prior to the implementation of NAADS that provided a platform for
social capital development. They included CBOs, clan and burial associations, local NGOs,
and faith-based organisations. With the advent of NAADS, these institutions were incorporated into the NAADS framework as important social capital networks. Unlike the prior top-down central government extension services, the new guidelines under NAADS encouraged partnership between NGOs, CBOs, PSPs, farmer forums, and local government structures in the delivery of privatised advisory services. Local NGOs had long operated in the region and
207 had built a strong capacity to deliver agricultural extension services. With the advent of
NAADS, many were contracted to provide advisory services. For example, in Teso, the local
Christian NGO, Vision TERUDO (Teso Rural Development Organisation), had operated agricultural extension services since 1982 and SOCADIDO (Soroti Catholic Diocese
Integrated Development Organisation) since 1981, focusing on agricultural business development, income security, and disaster risk reduction. The participants highlighted the role of these NGOs in: building trust, affiliation, and mutual support; facilitating cooperation, communication, and knowledge transmission; enabling collective action; and providing bulk marketing and grain storage facilities. As Model Farmer 01 noted:
We were mobilised by local councillors to register our clan association as farmer
association in the sub-county. We had also received agricultural development training
in TERUDO through the same association. I have continued being the member of this
association as it facilitates bulk storage, transport and marketing our citrus fruits in
Kenya. It also made it simple to buy agricultural inputs as a group than as an
individual. I also continue teaching others through the association.
Participants highlighted the importance of organisations, like TERUDO, in empowering local farmers. Model Farmer 04 noted:
My past involvement with TERUDO in similar related enterprises, such as improved
farming systems, training opportunities, networking bulk selling, all contributed to my
success. When the NAADs program also came, TERUDO, or people who had worked
with TERUDO training us were allowed in the sub-county to continue training us in
agricultural development. So … [name withheld] was an extension officer, and he is
one of the services providers of the NAADS services, we find it easy to deal with him.
208 NAADS contracting system encouraged competition between private service providers, which participants saw as positive because they had a say in the types of services provided. For example, they could instruct the advisory services where to procure needed inputs. Model
Farmer 08 gave the example of the restructured veterinary advisory services that had transformed information and advice on livestock vaccination and environmental management:
The veterinary doctor gave us the prescription of the vaccines we needed for my
Friesian cows and pigs, spraying against ticks, and other diseases. Armed with this
prescription, it has always been easy to go and purchase the drugs from veterinary
shops in Kumi town.
Participants were positive about these partnerships and their role in increasing the availability of agricultural advisory services, with technical support staff from the Serere Agricultural and
Animal Research Institute
Gender issues
NAADS sought to increase women’s involvement in agricultural production. There was only
one female respondent in this study. She observed:
As a woman as well as a model farmer, NAADS helped me through giving advice that
we work together through the association. This enabled me to acquire credit from the
microfinance which I used it for my projects like cultivating, animal rearing (Model
Farmer 03).
The remaining 14 participants highlighted the role played by their wives in all aspects of their enterprise. Women played a key role in earning a liveable income at the individual household level. Model Farmer 12 explained:
209 I involved all my family members into this program, which included my wife, children
and few relatives. My wife was particularly important in in planning, budgeting,
enterprise selection, farm management, post-harvest handling and marketing of the
produce. And because I married one woman, there was a lot of harmony at home
created, enabling us to plan together. Select the best enterprise together and I reached
to association meetings the agreed enterprise at home is what I insisted for myself.
Even the agro-processing mill we bought that now serves this area, my wife is the one
handling book keeping, and keeping the proceeds in her account in the microfinance.
Gender equality influenced the activities of, and resources and opportunities available to, the participants in this study. There was clear gender role division in the distribution of activities and responsibilities between men and women within the participants’ families and households. Within the sociocultural milieu of rural Eastern Uganda, women do most tasks relating to childrearing and household management; cooking, cleaning, caring, and collecting water, and firewood. However, as well as contributing to household food security, women also carry out productive work-related roles in agricultural production and commercial marketing, in the formal and informal sectors, and in managing community resources though men dominated local politics and power structures.
In terms of the labour force, women supplied the bulk of agricultural labour: 80% of food production, and 50-60% of cash crop production (ROU, 2004). As stated in the NAADS
Master Plan, they contributed substantially to national growth and development. Thus, women were a core target group for NAADS, along with young people and people with disabilities
(ROU, 2000c). Nevertheless, men rather than women, were more likely to be engaged directly in NAADS. When questioned about this, the participants noted that men were more eligible for
NAADS in rural Eastern Uganda, because they were more likely to own land, while women had limited land ownership rights. As Model Farmer 03 noted, ‘when we marry women, they
210 move from their parent’ homes to our homes, without any property apart from the clothing they move with’. While NAADS had selected the male participants, their wives had been involved in planning, production, budgeting, and marketing processes. The involvement of women as partners enabled the progressive farmers to harness the women’s capabilities. Model Farmer
05 said:
Even when I take the produce to border market in Malaba between Uganda and Kenya,
and return home after three days or so, my wife takes charge of all enterprises, and
sometimes she also takes the produce to market and I stay home to take care of the
enterprises.
This sharing of roles cultivated harmony in families, and in decision making, especially at the level of enterprise selection, production, and marketing.
Agricultural technology
A major objective of NAADS was to introduce poor farmers to modern farming technologies
and practices. The greatest challenge in transferring agricultural knowledge and information
to smallholder farmers in the pre-NAADS policy era had been the government’s tendency to
focus on agricultural production at the expense of farmer empowerment. With reduced
government spending on agricultural extension services, farmers were expected to bear the
costs of increased production. The priorities, needs, and preferences of farmers were
completely overlooked and Indigenous knowledge on sustainable farming practices was
dismissed in this system. Model Farmer 15 noted:
There has been improvement and availability of modern technologies and information
on: crop production, livestock, and bee keeping technologies; and information on
livestock breeds, planting materials, fertilisers, pesticides and farm equipment, which
211 is consistent with our priorities and preferences. The new advisory services promoted
also included establishing our prior knowledge on natural resource management,
conducting on farm trials while integrating Indigenous and modern technologies to
suit our local context.
NAADS introduced agricultural technology and information through demonstration
sites provided by local farmers. Site visits and cooperative and experiential training
encouraged farmers to experiment with new ideas and practices. Improved technical
knowledge and skills on agricultural production were disseminated in this way, educating
farmers inter alia on the value of planting high-yield seeds and improving storage facilities to
ensure food security in times of drought or floods. As Model Farmer 08 observed:
The continuous contacts I had with extension [staff] ensured that I learnt from them
nursery bed making for the citrus seedlings, how to [use] sprayers, pesticides, and
fertilisers. This ensured that my production improved as compared to previously when
I relied on my traditional knowledge.
The participants in this study had worked closely with NAADS extension staff and, as discussed below, had contributed plots for technology development sites and participated in site visits, e.g., to Serere Agricultural and Animal Research Institute, where they received firsthand information on innovative farming methods. The participants saw the value of shifting from traditional to productive farming, not only to ensure food security for their households, but also to generate profits from increased production.
Information and communication
Radios and telephones were the major sources of information for rural communities in Eastern
Uganda. Newspaper and television coverage was generally poor, with limited access to provide
212 electricity to power television sets. Most of the announcements on government and NGO
development programs were received through radio announcements. The radio, therefore,
played a significant role in informing farmers about weather patterns, pest and disease
infestations, and new products. Communication between farmers and farmers’ associations
and groups at the village level, and the farmers’ forum at the sub-county and district levels was
through telephone and radio, as the postal service system was unreliable and internet access
non-existent. The farmers, therefore gathered information and news through the radio and
through telephonic communication with extension staff, veterinarians, and other key
informants. The radio was the least costly communication medium and enjoyed wide coverage
among largely illiterate rural populations. The participants all talked about the significance of
radio communication in informing people about farmers’ associations and forums and NAADS
activities at the district and sub-county levels. Radios and telephones were essential to the
operation of successful farming ventures. Model Farmer 09 explained:
Through the radio, government programs are communicated to the farmers. This
involves information on training, workshops, seminars, site visitation, changes in
schedules, and I managed to follow up all these through ownership of the radio.
Internal communication within the farmer group as well as with the fora at the sub-
county and district was facilitated through the ownership of telephone, meanwhile
other national programs were regularly announced over the radio. Ownership of the
two made it easy to access most of the important communication especially in our
case with no postal services or television connections.
Telephone and radio was the main form of communication between farmers engaged in
NAADS structures as postal and internet services were rare. The radio was inexpensive and enjoyed wide coverage in the largely illiterate rural population with limited access to information. They were invaluable to rural farmers, who followed the news about government
213 programs, weather forecasts, price changes, and pest and disease invasions. Telephones were used to communicate with extension staff and veterinarians. All participants owned a radio and telephone. Model Farmer 13 noted:
Through the radio, government programs are communicated to the farmers. This
involves information on training, workshops, seminars, site visitation, changes in
schedules, and I managed to follow up all these through ownership of the radio. Also,
communication within the fora and with the forum in the sub-county, the telephone
facilitated, because I owned both of them: it became extremely easy to access most
communication which became very vital for my success.
Access to microfinance
All the participants talked about the importance of access to microfinance and credit. This
affected their choice of enterprise and access to technology. Resource-constrained poor
farmers had little access to microfinance and the government’s withdrawal from the provision
of agricultural finance had put them at risk of manipulation by unscrupulous private
entrepreneurs, as Model Farmer 13 explained:
Sometimes these people take long to process the loans and yet I urgently need the
money to meet the agricultural demands in the farm. When you travel to their offices
you are told to wait and sometimes you get annoyed and come out without any service,
yet traveling to their far offices in district headquarters distracts you from keeping an
eye on the farm. This sometimes forces me and others to seek loans from other money
lenders whose terms are very unsuitable – interest rates very high, and once you delay
repayment, you’re humiliated, property confiscated or all the produce in one garden
is actioned for repayment purposes.
214 At NAADS’ inception, the government had highlighted the need for access to capital through favourable borrowing conditions and the extension of resources to rural centres.
During structural adjustment, private financial institutions had been reluctant to extend credit to smallholder farmers as they were high risk. Microfinance had been taking root slowly in rural Eastern Uganda given only 20% of microfinancing takes place in rural areas, where 88% of Ugandans live (ROU, 2004). Hence, the government’s emphasis on the creation of a regulatory framework for microfinance providers, including training to build institutional capacity and the provision of incentives, such as lower capital requirements, for establishing microfinance branches was welcomed by the participants (ROU, 2000b). All the participants agreed that the government’s focus on boosting access to rural credit through rural credit centres and institutions like the Centenary Rural Development Bank (CERUDEB) owned by the Catholic Church, had boosted their farming enterprises. The adoption of the technology
NAADS was promoting was only possible with the availability of credit to: purchase the equipment they needed; employ farm labour; acquire better fertilisers, hybrid seeds, and pesticides; rent or purchase more land, and transport produce to markets. Model Farmer 12 reported using microfinance services to acquire necessary agricultural inputs:
The microfinance support centre in Soroti helped me to acquire soft loans for
financing the agricultural enterprise. These loans facilitated all the activities from
garden preparation, acquisition of inputs and technologies, planting all the way to
harvesting, post-harvest handling and marketing.
Model Farmer 06 noted:
Centenary Bank gave me an ox-plough and a pair of bulls through soft loan scheme
to facilitate the timely preparation of gardens to ensure timely planting within the
onset of rains.
215 In summary, microfinance institutions identified by the participants were the Microfinance
Support Centre (MSC) established by government with branches throughout the country, and the Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union (UCSCU). These microfinance avenues were brought together through the ISFG. This was a significant contribution of NAADS to rural smallholder farmers in keeping with rural peoples’ livelihoods activities and the fact that the outcomes of those activities were contingent upon the availability of assets and, most importantly, financial assets. In addition to these macrolevel factors shaping the participants’ engagement with NAADS were the organisational structures facilitating its implementation.
Benefitting from allied mezzolevel structures
The mezzolevel infrastructure supporting NAADS implementation included:
. Agricultural research and development
. Demonstration and technology development sites (TDSs)
. Agricultural markets and transport systems
. Local road network
. Water and irrigation facilities
Agricultural research and development
The Serere Agricultural and Animal Research Institute (SAARI), situated in rural Eastern
Uganda’s Teso region, generated and disseminated information on agricultural technology for integrated crop and natural resource management. Successful cereal production in Uganda was the direct result of research conducted at SAARI, especially sorghum, which was easy to grow and constituted the third most important staple cereal food crop in Uganda, after maize and millet, occupying 285,000 hectares of arable land. It was used mainly for food and brewing.
To improve food security and rural household incomes, SAARI generated a number of
216 technologies among which were the Sekedo and Epuripur improved sorghum varieties that were released in 1995. Epuripur sorghum, used by Uganda’s Nile Breweries, generated an income of about 8 billion UGX (USD3 million) annually for farmers, who produced 430,000 tonnes annually (FAO, 2012). The participants’ interactions with SAARI scientists and their use of SAARI products, especially Epuripur sorghum, rice, sweet potatoes - the odope lap variety that matured within a month, cassava, groundnuts, and citrus seeds were of great significance to their success. As Model Farmer 13 noted:
When I went to Serere, I saw what was not possible to me, one garden of sorghum
produced 12 bags of sorghum, completely different from three bags I used to get from
one garden. I also saw sweet potatoes that took one month to get ready compared to
what I used to plant that lasted four to five months to get ready. From Serere I got
high-yielding groundnuts too named Serenut 1, 2, 3, & 4.
Model Farmer 04 added:
I learnt a lot from Serere Animal and agricultural Research Institute, especially the
improved farming practices that improve land like mulching of the soils, [and] how to
use sprayers, agrichemicals and fertilisers.
The site visits had a significant impact on the farmers as they exposed to them to new farming practices being conducted at the research centre.
Demonstration and technology development sites (TDS)
The TDSs were a major vehicle for farmer empowerment through the provision of knowledge, skills, and technology. Their purpose was to correct the inefficiencies of previous agricultural services built on outmoded cultivation technology resulting from a lack of research in the agricultural sector and weak links with farmers leading to the ineffective delivery of extension
217 services to end users. The TDSs were part of NAADS deliberate efforts to involve local farmers in identifying research priorities and assessing the suitability and performance of the latest technology. The participants in this study had donated gardens to serve as TDSs and saw this as a factor in their successful engagement with NAADS, as Model Farmer 11 explained:
Because I donated my land, it was utilised as a demonstration garden for the Komolo
farmers association, and since it was next to my home, I became the caretaker, had
access to meet technical and extension staff all the time whenever they visited the site,
and during the demonstration trainings I could not miss any because I and my garden
were contact points in this village. Through this garden, I learnt a lot as far as modern
farming is concerned.
Having assets to donate to NAADS was a huge advantage for these participants, as it enhanced their status and brought them into direct contact with the latest technology therefore they became the first beneficiaries of the proceeds accruing from the TDSs. The TDSs’ focus on participatory, cooperative adult learning, as well as technology transfer and advice provision, led to innovative, local solutions to agricultural production, marketing, and labour issues.
Initially, the proceeds from the demonstration gardens had been shared rotationally among all the members of the farmer’s association. However, with time, most of the proceeds accrued to the progressive farmers who had offered demonstration gardens.
Agricultural markets
NAADS was faced with the task of addressing structural barriers for smallholder farmers mainly engaged in roadside vending due to their limited access to microfinance and the high costs of transporting their goods to markets. Proximity and access to markets, both local and regional, was essential to productive agribusinesses. Hence NAADS’ focus on marketing and agro-processing was critical to the country’s transition from subsistence to commercial
218 agricultural production. NAADS had to address seasonal fluctuations in the supply of, and
demand for, agricultural produce and assist farmers to achieve a steady income in an industry
subject not only to seasonal changes but also to the vagaries of low and fluctuating prices in
times of economic stress. Proximity to local markets was extremely important to the
participants in this study. For example, the cattle market in the Ngora district made it possible
for the farmers to sell their produce on Thursdays, such as market day. As Model Farmer 03
noted:
Okison market in Ngora town which occurs every Thursday is very vital for us in this
area. People from all over Eastern Uganda converge in Okisoni, and they buy our
produce especially groundnuts, millet, cassava, potatoes, and sorghum. When it comes
to chicken and turkeys, Teso region is the largest producer of chicken and all this we
sell in this market as some goes to the capital city, Kampala.
The transport system in rural Teso, especially its feeder roads, facilitated the transportation of produce to local and regional markets. The cattle and Atutur food markets, held on Saturdays and Mondays respectively, were important outlets to farmers in the Kumi district. Farmers benefitted from the huge population of over a hundred thousand people living in a major town in the Soroti district. Further afield, regional markets included: Kenya, with its huge demand for citrus fruit and maize in their flourishing supermarkets; war-torn South Sudan and the
Democratic Republic of Congo, with their high need for imported agricultural produce; and
Somalia, with their high demand for sweet potatoes from rural Eastern Uganda, the largest producer of sweet potatoes in Africa. However, access to markets depended crucially on the transport infrastructure to support it.
219 Local road network
In rural Eastern Uganda, the local road network was undeveloped with no direct routes to
homes, market gardens, and farms. Households farmed small plots that, in most cases, were
some distance from the family homestead. Hence, farming inputs and outputs had to be carried over vast distances using ox carts, bicycles, wheelbarrows and, in some cases, motorcycles.
Post-harvesting produce had to be moved to the homestead for storage and from there to local markets. The poor transport infrastructure also hampered the delivery of agricultural extension services, since participants had to travel long distances to training centres. Hence only farmers with transportation to traverse this harsh terrain could access NAADS training and support services. Investment in infrastructure development was crucial to the transformation from smallholder agriculture and roadside vending to agribusinesses supplying local and regional markets. The participants in the three districts under study talked about access routes available to them. Model Farmer 15 said:
The road network connecting my village to Kumi town was worked on, even to Ngora,
the Atoot bridge which had constituted a big hindrance to our movement to Ngora
cattle market was recent made about five years ago. This has simplified the
transportation of our products to the market. Of importance to note it has opened this
area to other Dinka traders such as traders from South Sudan, who come and to buy
produce right from the farmer without having to transport the produce to the market.
Feeder roads reduced costs and increased surpluses and, at times, the need for intermediaries, allowing for direct connections between the participants and the local markets. However, most of the model farmers had still to deal with a poor road infrastructure. As Model Farmer 12 noted:
220 The ox carts and bicycles do help me a lot in transporting inputs to the gardens, and
more importantly, the produce from the gardens to the home. I have some distant
gardens, about four kilometres away, where you to cross a swamp and I only manage
to transport the produce using the ox carts and bicycles.
Water and irrigation facilities
Agricultural productivity in rural Eastern Uganda is largely dependent on rainfed agriculture.
However, the participants in this study had benefitted from government-provided boreholes.
The notable beneficiaries of the borehole schemes for NAADS activities interviewed were
Model farmers 04 and 07. Other participants were taught how to dig shallow wells to supplement rain water during dry season. Model Farmer 04 explained:
I was one the beneficiaries of the NAADS boreholes, I gave them a plot of land where
the borehole was constructed, and it has greatly benefited me and the community
around. Because I’m involved in seedling multiplication, I need to water the seedlings
all the time, before they are sold to other farmers. Sometimes I use rain water during
the rainy season, however, during the dry spells which sometimes lasts four to five
months from November to March, the supplements. This enables me to continuously
supply the seedlings.
Model Farmer 07 added:
Because I’m involved in bee keeping and fruits growing, I need water continuously.
Fortunately, in this sub-county, I was the only one who benefited with the construction
of a borehole. With this borehole, I have access to water throughout the year which
ensures continuous production. This borehole is greatly more helpful during the dry
season when the rains are completely gone.
221 Availability of water sources was shared by all the participants and this ensured that they could carry out small-scale irrigation of their plants during the dry spells. This motivated continuous production.
Having sketched the macro factors and mezzo structures facilitating NAADS implementation, the discussion now turns to the participants understanding of its machinations and how to work to maximise its benefits.
Understanding the machinations of NAADS
The participants in this study had all successfully engaged in NAADS and described how to
take full advantage of what it had to offer. First, they had to engage in rites of passage to be
eligible for NAADS.
Rites of passage
To access NAADS’ benefits, participants had to jump through several hoops. Then they had to form or join local farmers’ associations or groups; pay membership fees; undergo training; and own land. As Model Farmer 03 noted:
Once we registered [with] the association in the sub-county with the NAADS
program, I had to make a contribution in form of co-funding to the program and it was
compulsory. The second major aspect was contribution of land. I had inherited land
from my father, so when the NAADS program demanded that you should demonstrate
ownership of land, to qualify as a model farmer, I was able to donate two acres as
demonstration gardens/technology demonstration sites.
The farmers’ associations and groups facilitated access to credit and loans from microfinance institutions for the purchase of farming equipment. They also facilitated the bulk
222 purchasing of agricultural inputs and marketing of produce, by giving their members collective bargaining power to demand better prices for their products, as Model Farmer 14 explained:
I also participated in bulk purchase of inputs with other association members which
ensured acquiring them at subsidised prices as opposed to acquiring as an individual.
The farmers’ associations also made it possible to carry out bulk marketing of our
produce. Hiring a truck to transport our citrus fruits to Busia in Western Kenya needs
the support of others, besides, only my produce alone cannot fill a truck. However,
when we put our produce together as association members, they fill the truck, and
lessen costs for each of us, and transport them to the market, where we get better
prices. Even access to credits, grants and loans, the microfinance centres emphasised
that one had to belong to an association to gain their services.
Membership in farmers’ associations enhanced the participants’ capacity to capitalise
on investments, gain subsidised inputs, and market their produce. For example, the ISFG
framework helped farmers upscale technologies and invest in ongoing production. NAADS
worked with credit associations as part of its strategy for sustainable group development and
investment.
Asset ownership
Ownership of productive assets, like land, bicycles, cows, wheelbarrows, carts, ox ploughs,
and motorcycles that could be shared with other farmers was a huge advantage in accessing
NAADS. All the participants in this study were in this position and attributed their success in
accessing NAADS to the assets they brought to the program, especially land and demonstration sites. Land served as collateral for the participants to access credit and compound their success through the purchase of equipment or acquisition of more land. The participants in this study owned between seven and 15 acres of land and were also able to maximise production by
223 renting land not being cultivated by its owners, who were either elderly, widowed, disabled, or in child-headed households. Model Farmer 02 had rented his neighbour’s land:
I had to show evidence that I own land where I could implement the program, as I was
also able to donate my garden as a demonstration garden. I also went forward to rent
more land from my neighbours and armed with this availability of land, I got more
citrus seedlings, more sorghum and groundnut seeds, besides requesting for more
extension services.
Model Farmer 03 had inherited land from his father:
He had distributed land to my brothers, but gave me too some gardens, and so when
the NAADS people came and wanted the intended beneficiaries to demonstrate
ownership of land, I was among those selected. When they asked us to donate some
land as demonstration gardens for our association and the community, I decide to
contribute two gardens. At first it attracted criticisms from the community, however,
later when my gardens became technology development sites for others to learn, they
became school for knowledge of acquisition, moreover the first proceeds from the
demonstration garden was distributed to me first who had made the contribution.
After land, livestock was the second valuable asset, not only for agricultural production but also for land clearing and ploughing using hand hoes, or bulls or oxen. Animals were also used to carry supplies given the inaccessibility of many of the farms due to poor roads. Bulls were especially valuable. They took an average of three to five years to reach maturity and four were required to plough about half an acre a day. It cost an average of USD30 to plough a garden and most gardens had to be ploughed three times in readiness for planting. Farmers forced to use hand hoes were at a distinct disadvantage given it took an average of three weeks to plough a garden.
224 Oxen were also used to transport goods to markets as they could cross swamps and negotiate terrain inaccessible to modern modes of transport. On average, one in every 10 families in Eastern Uganda owned bulls for ploughing and transport, making this a valuable source of wealth, not only for own use but also for hire once farmers have ploughed their own gardens. Having bulls to plough ensured farmers could benefit from the first rains of the season.
All the participants in this study owned bulls. As Model Farmer 13 noted:
Because I own the bulls and ox ploughs, I do ensure that my gardens are adequately
prepared and crops planted within the first two of weeks of rain, and the rains [in]
Ngora dictate that you must plant groundnuts within the first two weeks [of] first rains
or else you risk losses.
Asset ownership gave the participants a significant advantage, as Model Farmer 01 said:
I have registered a significant improvement in life since I began receiving support
from the NAADS programs ... a marked difference in livelihoods, ability to take the
children to school, pay for medical health bills, building up a permanent structure and
availability of food throughout the year. However, other members within my farmer
group have not yet reached to my level of production and earnings, because I had more
land, more education, and received more trainings than them.
Hence the need for a restrained interpretation of NAADS benefits as reported by this study’s participants. Though the government sought to target rural communities by giving local government a new set of powers, rights, and obligations, the beneficiaries were poor and included women and disabled people excluded from land ownership and employment.
However, the farmer groups were bound by the new 2008 NAADS guidelines relating to gender equality, and representation of youth and people with disabilities, as already discussed.
225 Nevertheless, farmers, including those with disabilities, with pre-existing assets were more likely to succeed, as Model Farmer 08 explained:
I’m physically disabled, with left hand and left leg immovable because of natural
causes … I got in touch with a social worker in the sub-county who encouraged me to
join a community organisation supported by Send a Cow - NGO, which gave us
training on new farming methods and some assets, where I received a Friesian cow.
Our association got registered with the sub-county, it became a farmers’ group
receiving benefits from the NAADS program. I donated my two gardens as
demonstration farm for our association. I had nowhere to cultivate. I, my wife and
children had to go into community gardening to get food for survival. However, within
one year, the proceeds from the demonstration garden were distributed initially to me
first, which was twelve time my previous harvests in the same gardens. This
completely changed my thoughts, plans and aspirations towards this program.
Other participants described how their assets facilitated their involvement in NAADS. Model
Farmer 10 observed:
Those without land or who could not demonstrate ownership of land were left out
from selection as participants, effectively denying them opportunity to have close
contacts with the extension staff.
Participants were aware that ownership of productive assets, mainly land, was imperative for accessing the benefits of NAADS. All Model Farmers donated acreage for model gardens that acted as demonstration gardens or technology development sites (TDS). Others contributed bicycles, cows, wheel burrows, carts, and ox ploughs – Model Farmer, 01, 02, 04, 05, 07, 08,
11, 12, 13, and 14. Due to their ownership assets, participants could also exert influence over enterprise selection compared to other beneficiaries in their respective associations. Those who
226 contributed demonstration sites could compound the benefits available to them, as Model
Farmer 08 explained:
I own a demonstration garden which serves as a technology development site for our
association. In the site, we encounter farmer led extension, on farm trials and
experimentation, trainings on new technology adoption. Also, the proceeds from the
site are evenly distributed within the group and I’m among the beneficiaries.
However, as Model Farmer 10 observed:
Those without land or who could not demonstrate ownership of land were left out
from selection as participants, effectively denying them opportunity to have close
contacts with the extension staff.
Participation in NAADS’ structures and processes
Participants talked about their participation in NAADS, the benefits of this engagement, their
membership in farmers’ groups and associations, the education and training they had received, and the partnerships and social networks they had developed. They had all played an active role, aired their views, talked about their grievances, made their expectations of explicit, and felt empowered by NAADS’ processes. Most importantly, they understood NAADS’ representative administrative structure at the community or village, parish, sub-county, county, and district levels, which was discussed in Chapter 5. They understood the role of these levels of local government in providing avenues for participation in decision making through the formation of local farmers’ groups and associations and election of farmers’ representatives to higher levels of the hierarchy. As Model Farmer 14 explained:
The decentralisation aspect of government allowed us to make decisions that affect
our activities, in that we were able to participate in decision making, planning,
227 enterprise selection, procurement of the inputs and marketing of our produce. This
allowed accountability on the side of the local government staff at the sub-county in
the procurement process, since we too in the association were dealing directly with
the procurement contractors in the supply of inputs. The NGOs trained us, and had
passed information on to us about NAADS, requiring the formation of a new farmers’
group[s] or maintain the old farmers’ association, but register it with the local
government at the sub-county.
Given its pivotal role in increasing rural farmers’ participation in formal decentralised farmers’ associations, participants perceived local government as closest to their communities, possessing local knowledge about local conditions, and playing a significant role in ensuring that NAADS programs were operational in their sub-counties. Also, as discussed in Chapter 5, local government co-funded private extension services with foreign donors contributing 80%, central government 8%, local governments 10%, and farmers 2% through association membership fees, as Model Farmer 01 explained:
During the mobilisation and sensitisation, we were told that we are expected co-
finance the program, since the local government and government had already paid its
part; it was now incumbent upon us to pay our share if we wanted to receive any
benefits from the NAADS program. I, and our association made our payment and we
incorporated as a NAADS benefiting association in the sub-county.
To access NAADS, all the participants were involved in community and village farmers’ associations through which agricultural inputs and technology were transferred and accessed (ROU, 2006b). Supportive agricultural extension staff, community development workers, and social workers in the sub counties mobilised the farmers to participate voluntarily in forming new Farmers’ groups at the village level, where none existed, or join already
228 existing ones in their area of enterprise. The participants saw these farmers’ associations as useful structures that helped them access extension and advisory services, advice on markets and credit information, and enabled them to connect with other farmers and local, regional, and national institutions. Government programs, including those delivered through NGOs, passed through the farmers’ associations and, as Model Farmer 12 observed, the surest way to miss them was not to be a member of a village association. Farmers’ associations shared common farming interests and facilitated collective decision-making processes through which farmers exerted ownership and power in demanding appropriate extension services and agricultural resources. They lobbied and advocated for members’ interests regarding; training, information, marketing, input procurement, and credit services, as well as agricultural shows and trade fairs, contingent upon the associations’ goals and location. The associations had a physical address and a leadership structure with elected office bearers. The farmers’ associations identified challenges, engaged in planning, mobilised internal resources through co-funding, and decided on enterprise selection, informed by sub-county evaluations of profitable enterprises and cost- benefit analyses. The participants indicated that, through these supports, they had improved their business knowledge and skills on issues relating to the management of their enterprises, such as record keeping, financial mobilisation, credit access, and marketing.
All the participants in the districts of Kumi, Ngora, and Soroti had been involved in successful farming associations, which enhanced their capacity to exchange information and pool production and marketing knowledge. As Model Farmer 13 noted, they used them as platforms to demand advisory services and information:
When government programs like Teso restocking program, poverty recovery
program, they all pass through the association which provides a local institutional
framework. And through the association, we are able to demand advisory services,
229 access better agricultural technologies, improve access to information, access credit
when the other members act as collateral security.
Model Farmer 04 noted:
Through the farmers’ group, Amorican, we can make choice of enterprise and present
our demands to the sub-county technical staff, who do the assessment and liaise the
procurement contractors and deliver to us what we asked for.
These sentiments were shared by all the participants who had participated actively in selecting enterprises and demanding extension services, inputs, and technologies through their farmers’ groups. They participated in the affairs that had a significant bearing on their lives and enterprises.
In addition, Model Farmers 04, 06, 07, 10, 11, 13, and 15 participated at the parish level, serving on parish councils and coordinating committees, and in community-based forums. Model Farmers 01, 02, 03, 08, 11, and 12 were of part the farmers’ forums at the sub- county level, where procurement committees and CBFs were responsible for jointly monitoring and evaluating services offered by contracted private advisory service providers. This involved following up on procurement processes, the delivery of inputs, and monitoring the quality of services offered. As Model Farmer 03 explained:
I started with registration of our association with the sub-county that had been formed
under TERUDO, leading to recognition of the association by the local government at
the sub-county as one of the NAADS benefiting associations. With the help of
councillors at the parish and village level, we mobilised more people to join the
association, make co-funding contribution. And because of my active involvement in
mobilising others, I was also elected to the SFF, where I underwent a lot of training
230 on the NAADS program, extension services and advice, making me an empowered
person.
When asked what support services the NAADS program had brought him, Model
Farmer 01 said:
Creation of institutions that collectively supported us which enabled our voices to be
heard especially on the decisions that had an impact on what we’re doing. These
institutions included farmers’ association, at the village level, parish coordinating
committee at the parish level, the farmers’ forum at the sub-county and the district.
Given NAADS’ operational processes, meeting attendance was pivotal to participation.
They were avenues through which members shared and discussed ideas, made plans, exchanged views, elected leaders, and selected enterprises. The business of each of the structures within NAADS hierarchy was conducted through meetings with members as follows:
1. Association meetings usually met once a month, where members made binding
decisions regarding; enterprise selection, advisory services, or inviting NAADS
implementation staff, assistant coordinators and technical staff, including
community development officers, social workers, and extension and technical
advisors, from the sub-county to train, advise, and guide them in their activities at
the group and intergroup levels. NAADS implementation staffs (scientists) were
based in the National Semi-Arid Resources Research Institute (NaSSRI) in Serere,
a nearby district within the sub-region of Eastern Uganda.
2. Farmers’ forum meetings (Model Farmers 01, 02, 03, 08, 11, and 12).
3. Intergroup meetings.
4. Parish level meetings (Model Farmers 04, 06, 07, 10, 11, 13, and 15).
231 5. Sub-county level meetings, for Model Farmer 03, who was active at this level.
Meeting participation gave members a sense of belonging to a social group. They were trained in groups, where they expressed themselves and sought solutions for individual problems as a group. Groups formed social support networks through which members acquired skills, made proposals for credit access, and took ownership of group processes. However, meeting attendance was never constant for all the village farmers’ associations, as some members had equally demanding family responsibilities. Those people who deliberately avoided meetings, had limited opportunity to participate in enterprise selection and preparation for project implementation. The participants indicated that their regular meeting attendance gave them an upper hand in enterprise selection and enabled them to get elected into positions within the association, Parish coordinating committees, and Sub-county farmers’ forum. Model
Farmer 08 noted:
I got mobilised into productive ventures. The parish coordinating committee and the
sub-county farmers’ forum facilitated coordination with me as a model farmer and
ensured close contact. They also participated in sensitising us on the various
government program, such as NUSAF [Northern Uganda Social Action Fund], PRDP,
and other programs. They also gave us technical support and guidance on three
priority enterprises that our association was to select from.
Model Farmer 12 noted:
Through these meetings, I have been able to learn a lot, interact with NAADS officials
and have my priorities passed over for assessment by the technical committee at the
Sub-county who considered my enterprise at procurement.
Participants attended meeting regularly. Model Farmer 14 noted:
232 After hearing about the NAADS program, I begun consulting others, and I joined this
Farmers’ association. I paid the membership fee known as co-funding of the program,
I started attending meetings, trainings, exposure site visitations, and building up
contacts with the extension workers in the Sub-county. This showed my active
participation in the program.
Focus on education and training
Knowledge and skill acquisition was pivotal to NAADS’ implementation and there were
several levels of training. Model Farmer 12 attested the central role of training in NAADS:
Virtually all the activities introduced by the program needed training. Soil
improvement methods, how to use sprayers, how to space seeds and seedlings, how
to use insecticides and pesticides required consistent training.
Farmer Institutional Development
NAADS’ focus on Farmer Institutional Development entailed the contracting of NGOs to train the farmers in identified priority areas. NAADS assistant coordinators and technical staff from the sub-county played a role in training relating directly to operational functioning including:
. Rights, responsibilities, and roles of farmers’ groups.
. Group initiation, growth, and development.
. Leadership skills and development.
. Participatory planning, including enterprise selection and identification of
constraints.
. Writing a constitution.
. Farming as a business and linkages to markets.
. Gender considerations in farmers’ group development.
233 . Participatory monitoring and evaluation.
The goals of this training were to encourage farmers to improve their farming methods through participation in NAADS and accessing supportive technology and extension services provided by the private advisory services contracted to NAADS. The participants said their level of education helped them to understand the machinations of NAADS and the value of active participation. Most of the participants had a secondary education, while Model Farmers
01, 03, and 08 had a primary education and Model Farmer 15 held a bachelor’s degree in social work. He had joined the program following his university studies and reported:
My education level and previous experience in NGO work with self-help initiatives
was very significant especially on organisational skills, the association formation,
enterprise selection, and general enterprise development. The education helped with
skills and knowledge to organise and mobilise community, and to negotiate especially
in making priorities like enterprise selection with the sub-county technical and
procurement teams, ability to plan, budget, mobilise and coordinate. All these skills I
acquired as product of education and post-harvest involvement in local NGO work.
Model Farmers 07 and 15, with their formal schooling and technical education, had an upper hand in capitalising on new technology, developing their enterprises, and using market linkages. Comparing themselves to their counterparts with less educational achievement, all the participants applied the knowledge and information they had acquired through NAADS’ training initiatives to reap benefits from the program’s projects.
Through this operational training, participants learnt the value of participation in meetings, training, and enterprise selection that enabled them to influence decisions that best suited their interests. As Model Farmer 12 recounted:
234 Through training [from] the extension staff, technical staff at the Sub-county, and the
local government to understand our local knowledge and perceptions of the new
program and gave us the enterprises that best suited our local contexts; soils,
geographical location, climatic changes, and sociocultural factors. In this area, we
practise both animal keeping and cultivation and it’s been a practice for generations.
As such, the NAADS program gave us opportunity to select enterprises that best suited
our priorities.
Experimentation and non-formal training
Co-operative learning through farmer experimentation and non-formal training usually
involved a group of 15 to 25 willing members of farmers’ associations and farmers could
graduate to become trainers for example, all the CBFs were trainers who had graduated. Groups participated in rotational meetings held on on-site training visits to successful farms. Co- operative learning shaped participants’ enterprise and related development activities. Group members also monitored their success and compared their progress with that of others. This encouraged them to work even harder to improve their enterprises. Model Farmer 06 said:
Through observation and experimentation with other members from different
associations in different areas, my expertise on agricultural production was raised –
my ability to pursue logical and better decisions regarding my own enterprises
increased.
Over time, as farmers accumulated experience through observed performance and hands-on learning, they gradually shifted from subsistence agriculture to productive technologies. All the participants attributed their success to their adoption of modern technologies and improved farming practices, such as use of fertilisers, improved seeds, soil conservation, and sound
235 management practices. Their yields had increased substantially because of the technical support they had requested and received. As Model Farmer 01 recounted:
We have been expressing demand for technical support from the extension staff in
form of agricultural inputs like agrichemicals, seeds, advice, and guidance, as a result
of increased understanding of the benefits of modern farming methods that raise
productivity once utilised.
Farmers’ field schools
Farmers’ field schools (FFS) provided hands-on experiential training in the field through season-long training to develop practical problem-solving and decision-making skills. The
FFSs comprised 20 to 30 willing farmers, who met weekly in the field for training to improve their capacity for the uptake of new technologies and adaptive farming practices, as Model
Farmer 14 explained:
The farmers’ field school organised us, about 20 farmers, into long season training
activities involving participatory activities, hands on discovery learning and decision-
making opportunities. We meet once a week in the field school for training and the
process is based of non-formal education values, emphasising learning and doing,
thereby empowering me and others to identify and solve our problems … The issues
learnt covered entire ecosystem and crop management, while the less formal aspect of
the learning process through small groups achieved targeted training. I’m also
empowered through multifunctional institutions – farmers’ association at the village
level, farmers’ forum at the sub-county and at the district where I’m an active member
in in all of them.
236 However, the FFS required a heavy time input, as well as trainers and other facilities, so was an expensive method of knowledge and information diffusion to farmers. Nevertheless, the participants had persisted with their training, even when the number of participants decreased, sometimes to only four farmers.
The participants had received specialist skills training in inter alia pest management, improved farming methods, and climate-change adaptation. They reported that training in new farming systems had played a part in their increased production, improved incomes, food security, and general improvement in standard of living. As Model Farmer 03 noted:
In our Farmers’ group, TERUDO had conducted a number of trainings on improved
agriculture, agro-forestry, produce processing and other activities and, as such, I had
already started keeping turkeys, hens and pigs. So, during the implementation of
NAADS program, TERUDO continued giving us training. Other private extension
personnel, as well as NGOs like Send a Cow, continue to train us. Today, I’m the
largest turkey farmer in the area.
Given training was highly influential in ensuring the NAADS beneficiaries understood modern farming techniques, all the participants stressed the importance of adopting modern farming methods and saw training as a key factor in technology adoption.
Enterprise selection and diversification
Enterprise selection formed a large part of NAADS activities and was discussed in rotational
meetings, training, and on-site visits to other successful farms, to learn from other group
members about enterprises and related development activities, which later shaped the
participants’ views in selecting their own enterprises. Through information provision and
training, farmers were encouraged and supported to engage in enterprises suited to local
conditions. For example, the participants in Soroti and Ngora engaged in citrus farming, while
237 those in Kumi reared livestock, especially Friesian cows, pigs, and poultry. Model Farmer 13 noted:
I got in involved in every step of planning and implementation of the program which
allowed sometimes scientist/researchers and extension staff to listen to our concerns
and accept my suggestion[s]. Formation of the association gave us empowerment
through organisation, formulation, prioritisation of farmers’ needs, contracting and
monitoring of service providers. The farmers’ association at the village level was
responsible for program implementation, upward linking of the program to the sub-
county, district and national level. Further, through the association, I was able to
articulate my interest, defend the enterprise selection, and to network with other
successful participants.
Participants were positive about the processes surrounding enterprise selection. Model Farmer
06 noted:
Our farmer association provided us with more opportunities; it provided accessibility
to market information, simplified search for regional and local markets, reduction in
transaction costs and access to new technologies which we had preference and
selected as a group. Most importantly the associations provided a platform for
enterprise selection.
Model Farmer 11 commented on his positive experience in enterprise selection:
The good working relationship enabled the extension staff, technical staff at the sub-
county and the local government to understand our local knowledge and perceptions
of the new program and gave us the enterprises that best suited our local contexts -
soils, geographical location, climatic changes and sociocultural factors. In this area,
238 we practice both animal keeping and cultivation and it’s been a practice for
generations, so when the NAADS people wanted to give us only Friesian cows we
asked them to give us seeds also for cropping, because we were used to both.
Participants in the Ngora and Soroti districts, who planted citrus fruit as a major enterprise, reported increased production yields because of wise decisions on enterprise selection. Some raised their earnings by 800%. Model Farmer 01 noted:
After going through a lot of trainings, on modern farming techniques and practices, I
shifted from traditional farming systems to new farming systems, my production
increased as a testimony of the success of the NAADS program and as such I earn
average of 20 million Uganda shillings [USD7,000] a year, on top of having food
security at home … access to free improved and high yield seeds, breeds, tools and
equipment, such as sprayers, ox ploughs, wheelbarrows, raised production, increased
income earnings and food security.
As Model Farmer 01 from Ngora district recounted:
I had a wider experience in orange growing prior to the program, during initial
meetings on enterprise selection with the NAADS officials, so I insisted on citrus
seedlings as a major enterprise for me and I was given citrus 150 seedlings in 2002,
today I earn average of [USD7,000] from my citrus fruits per season, better than those
who were given chicks.
Participants in the Kumi district, who engaged in livestock farming, reported similar successes. They opted for pig farming, as well as Friesian cows, rather than zebu cows previously reared for milk production. Zebu cows had produced two litres of milk a day for household consumption. Model Farmer 07 observed:
239 The selection of a Friesian cow was one of the best decisions I ever made in the
NAADS program. Previously, I kept local breed cattle, though they were less
demanding in terms of care, treatment and feeding, the returns were completely low,
compared to the new Friesian cow. It’s expensive to keep, it’s a full-time job but I get
a lot of milk about 20 litres a day compared to traditional cows where I used to get
two litres a day.
Model Farmer 08 said:
After being trained by the Send a Cow NGO, our association was registered in the
Sub-county and we qualified to receive benefits from the NAADS program, I
personally received a Friesian cow where I get more milk today compared to before.
Model Farmer 14 noted:
Because the NAADS program gave me the opportunity to select the enterprise of my
choice, I selected Friesian cow, where I had experience in looking after Friesian cows
while a worked in Kumi hospital farm for 15 years. I have been able to take care of
the cow properly and it has improved my income earnings.
However, Model Farmer 09 was an exception in choosing pig production:
I benefited from piggery enterprises, I accessed large white and landrace piggery
technologies that I used for breeding more piglets. There has been an increased
number of piglets that I breed here, with each piglet fetching average of UGX60.000
[USD20] per piglet after every two months.
As well as choosing the right enterprises, also important was the adoption of modern technologies and improved farming practices, such as use of fertilisers, soil conservation and
240 management practices. Participants were now using improved seeds, such as drought-resistant sorghum (Epuripur) and dryland millet (Apese). Model Farmer 14 said:
From one bag of Epuripur sorghum given to me by NAADS, I harvested 15 bags,
contrary to about three bags I used harvest from one bag. This trend was similar withy
cassava stems, groundnuts, sweet potatoes and other crops where I received improved
seeds.
Participants had also diversified their enterprise portfolios and involved themselves in a broad range of farming activities, growing a range crops, for example, cassava and groundnuts along with citrus fruit or keeping a range of livestock, such as pigs, goats, and poultry along with Friesian cows. Model Farmer 03 added:
We are participating in a wide range of improved crops and animals, I grow produce
for commercial purpose such as citrus fruits and Epuripur, as well as domestic purpose
for consumption such as sweet potatoes, cassava, Apese millet, groundnuts and maize.
I also have one Friesian/dairy cow producing milk for sale, I have few pigs, goats and
turkey and chicken. This range of enterprises enables me to have both cash and food
security at the household.
Model Farmer 07, who kept bees, noted:
Besides the crops and livestock, I’m involved in beekeeping known as apiary, and I
have 150 beehives around. I have also been called by other NGOs and local
governments to train farmers in apiary in several districts like Tororo, Oyam, and Lira.
A diversified portfolio ensured income and food security, as well as fulfilling household nutritional needs, and led to socioeconomic gains at the household level. Reported were no
241 longer affected by seasonal food insecurity, famine, and hunger that characterised most parts of rural Eastern Uganda.
Post-harvest handling and storage facilities
Post-harvest handling was critical to successful agribusinesses and smallholder farms and
gardens. Hence post-harvest handling was a crucial part of the NAADS training program. Farm
Africa is an NGO working in Eastern Africa to help people earn their livelihoods through
sustainable agriculture. It had trained farmers from the Katine Joint Farmer’s Group to improve
the post-harvest handling and storage of their produce. Model Farmer 16 noted:
The training and the post-harvest technology that I received in post-harvest handling
was so significant in giving me post-harvest best practices of harvesting, drying,
sorting and grading the grain. When the maize, beans, rice and cassava is poorly dried
up the buyers give less prices, affecting incomes earned. However, because of this
knowledge and the equipment, my produce are of high quality, fetching high prices.
Provision of storage facilities, too, was an issue of concern in Eastern Uganda, where,
previously, every parish has had a storage facility. With the structural adjustment reforms,
storage facilities became privatised leaving smallholder farmers’ unable to afford the charges
levied. Thus, these facilities became unviable. NAADS left it to participants to build large
granaries for the storage of produce immediately after harvesting and drying. These
individually owned storage facilities were a critical resource during dry seasons and in periods
of high demand. They helped stabilise prices and served as insurance against famine-associated
production shortfalls, as Model Farmer 08 noted:
Had I not build up the storehouse, keeping my sorghum and rice, until Nile breweries
came to buy was not going to be possible. I would have shared the produce with
242 vermin, especially rodents, termites, cockroaches, and starving relatives and
neighbours. The storehouse ensured that my sorghum remained safe until Nile
breweries came to buy it.
The success of the participants in this study could be related to the extent to which they had participated in the programs provided through NAADS and its decision-making hierarchy.
Their economic success could be measured by the benefits that accrued for them from their involvement in NAADS and the extent to which they had increased their productivity and agricultural earnings. Hence the discussion of findings now turns to an examination of participants’ participation in NAADS.
Family involvement at the household or microlevel
One of the most influential factors in the success of participants at the microlevel was the
involvement of family members in their enterprises. Families with young members able to
undertake the heavy labour were at a distinct advantage. The participants in this study had
family members ranging in age from 15 to 30 years working in their enterprises. Elderly
relatives looked after the homestead and took care of younger children. These families did not
own fridges and stoves and cooked over open fires. As Model Farmer 11 noted:
Few of my relatives were of a great help … my mother took care of the home while I
and my wife went to the garden and she helped scare birds away from the rice as it
dried. She also kept meals warm in the fire and that meal was collected and brought
to garden as breakfast and lunch, giving workers more energy to work. Without that
meal and with no restaurants nearby, it would be inconceivable to continue working
in the garden after 12 pm.
243 The ability to hire labour to complement the family’s contribution was also a factor in the success of the participants, who favoured neighbours and distant relatives to help in times of grasscutting in case of Friesian cows, garden preparations, ploughing, weeding, cultivation, harvesting, transportation, and other related activities. Sometimes labour was exchanged for food. Eitai is a practice where a rich farmer hires community labour from other people and slaughters a goat, cow, or turkey or prepares lunch or dinner for them. As Model Farmer 09 said:
I hired community members and relatives to help in my garden especially rice
harvesting which sometimes overwhelms me; the rice is ready, needs to be harvested
in span like five days, the rains are threatening, the birds are all over. The only way to
save the harvest is to engage more labour, which came in form of relatives and the
community.
Engaging family members, close relatives, and community members in farming enterprises besides generating employment minimised the stealing of produce. The farmers valued experienced workers, noting older women were especially skilled in weeding millet, rice, and sorghum and young people in weeding cassava and maize.
Conclusion
Chapter 7 presented the participants’ experiences in NAADS and their perception of their
success at the individual household, association, and community levels. It focused on the
farmers’ experiences and perceptions of factors at three levels:
. At the macrolevel – access to finance, technology, and being able to draw upon
social networks were identified as crucial.
244 . At the mezzolevel – various aspects of agricultural infrastructure were deemed
important.
. At the microlevel – factors directly related to the NAADS program, such as how to
become eligible to receive advice and support from the program, were dealt with.
Chapter 8 examines the situational or contextual factors that shaped these outcomes.
245 CHAPTER 8
Factors contributing to participants’ success
As mentioned in Chapter 7, the dynamics shaping the participants’ success and NAADS’
impact were categorised as sociocultural, economic, political, and physical environmental
factors. Chapter 8 discusses these factors beginning with the sociocultural factors and
continuing with the economic, political, and environmental factors, as shown in Table 8.1. It
shows that NAADS worked at a variety of levels shaping social, cultural, and economic change to support the transition to productive agriculture.
Sociocultural factors
This section discusses the influential sociocultural factors that emerged from this study as
follows:
. Reduction of Alcohol consumption
. Religious influences
. Faith-based and other local NGOs
. Traditional rural leadership institutions
. Monogamous family advantage
. Use of local languages
246 Table 8.1 Factor contributing to participants’ success
Factors Main themes Sociocultural . Reduction of alcohol consumption . Religion . Faith-based and other local NGOs . Traditional rural leadership institutions . Monogamous family advantage . Use of local languages
Economic . Land . Livestock . Transport . Radios and telephones . Storage facilities . Family labour
Political . Local governance . Accountability . Political stability . Inclusion
Physical, environmental . and geographic factors Climate change . Land management . Pest control
Reduction of alcohol consumption
In rural Uganda, people consume locally brewed alcohol that is malwa or pombe, largely at
small social gatherings or cultural events, such as funerals, birthday parties, harvest
celebrations, marriage ceremonies, recreation, and socialising with others. These events are
continuous throughout the year, with some people starting to drink in the early morning.
Participants indicated that alcohol consumption was a traditional practice embedded in their
culture that was also associated with the wastage of resources, domestic violence, and laziness.
Model Farmer 02 noted:
247 When I got engaged in the modern agriculture which NAADS brought, I had to dedicate
the time to search for grass to feed the animals, chicken-food for feeding the chicken
and on top of delicate care taking, which was different from the previous agriculture I
practiced where the animals and birds could look for their own food. This therefore
called for time, I had to leave out other activities like drinking and concentrate in
farming activities.
Model Farmer 02 went on to add:
As an active Christian member in the Catholic Church, we are strongly encouraged to
moderate our drinking habits and if possible leave it out. And, ever since I left out
drinking; quarrelling, family fights, and wastage of money ceased. I’m able to
concentrate on my enterprises as opposed to wasting time at the drinking joints yet my
turkeys, chicken and the Friesian cows require continuous feeding and taking care of,
which calls for full-time involvement.
All the participants had ceased alcohol consumption to conserve resources. This had created harmony in their homes and generated a focus on productive activities. The Church was a major influence in discouraging alcohol consumption. The Pentecostal revival movement, which was strong in these communities, cited Biblical verses to discourage alcohol consumption, including Ephesians 5:18 and Proverbs 20:1. All the participants interviewed were active practising Christians, who indicated their regular church service attendance and conversance with religious teaching on the dangers associated with alcohol for its members.
Religion
The Teso sub-region, where the study was conducted, is an area of diverse religious affiliations, including Catholic, Anglican, Pentecostal evangelical revivalist, and, to a lesser extent, Islamic
248 and African traditional religions. Further, several faith-based organisations were active in
NAADS, exerting their influence through their emphasis on monogamous marriages. The church encouraged its members to respect and live harmoniously with others at the family and community levels. This had repercussions on economic productivity. Model Farmer 11 noted:
I married one woman as per the Christian teachings and requirements in our Pentecostal
church, and having one partner, and being faithful and loving ensured harmonious
living at the household, association and community levels, and ensured successful
implementation of our selected enterprises. We have no fights or quarrels and this has
really produced positive results in planning, budgeting, management of the enterprises
and marketing of the produce.
Also promoted was temperance and controlled alcohol consumption. Churchgoers were strongly discouraged from drinking alcohol, and all the participants shared this perspective.
Faith-based and other local and international NGOs
Faith-based NGOs in Teso, namely, the Anglican Teso Diocese Development Organisation
(TEDDO) and Pentecostal Vision Teso Rural Development Organisation (Vision TERUDO), played a prominent role in shaping development and poverty reduction. Vision TERUDO had
mobilised communities to form farmers’ groups and offered agricultural training on food
security, through the distribution of improved cassava cuttings, while TEDDO has been active in training communities in water management, especially rainwater harvesting and the construction of Ferro tanks for water storage in local communities. Model Farmer 03 noted:
Those of us, particularly me, who had been involved in agricultural production with
other NGOs found it very easily possible to move forward with NAADS program. Our
association that had been formed under vision TERUDO got registered in the sub-
249 county as a NAADS benefiting association, and thereafter we started receiving benefits
like training, extension services and inputs.
Initially established for emergency and relief purposes, the Soroti Catholic Diocese Integrated
Development Organisation (SOCADIDO) had shifted its focus to agricultural development offering targeted training for farmers’ groups on sustainable modern farming practices and climatic change adaptation. The participants in all the regions studied talked about the significant role of faith-based organisations in establishing operational structures to support access to NAADS in rural communities.
Other local NGOs mentioned by the participants included Send a Cow, Community
Integrated Development Initiative (CIDI), Heifer International, Build Africa, and World
Vision. Most participants said their interactions with local, national, and international NGOs contributed to their success in NAADS. Model Farmer 06 noted:
NGO support came in the form of seed materials, improved animal breeds, extension
support and organisational development. In most cases, those benefits could not reach
everyone in the group, but participants, like me, received them.
Model Farmer 15 added:
Through social mobilisation that NGOs spearheaded, we formed a community
organisation, which was later transformed to a farmer’s forum, through which NAADS
was able to give us extension services, technology, and inputs.
Traditional rural leadership institutions
Traditional institutions represented Indigenous, historical, and cultural resources that were an
integral part of the organisational structures of local African rural communities. These
institutions played a role in local administrative systems covering material and spiritual
250 dimensions with a significant focus on sustainability, morality, and cohesiveness as key elements of a strong community. Most of the participants indicated that these institutions promoted solidarity, human centeredness, social cohesion, and harmonious relations. These traditional institutions played a key role in mobilising their members to participate in development programs. The participants believed that they were effective in linking their villages to development programs, because of their comprehensive understanding of local priorities and needs. They offered leadership training and administrative skills and experience for rural people. Notable among the traditional institutions was the Ikarubok clan in Mukongoro
Sub-county comprising about 300 households organised around an institution called Emorimor of Akadot. The clan head − Model Farmer 11 − became the head of the Akadot village farmers’ association. He said he owed his success to the leadership skills and experience offered to him by this traditional institution:
Having been a head of this Ikarubok clan for a substantive time, I learnt leadership and
administrative roles, that became useful when we decided [to] join [the] first NAADS
through our clan as farmers’ association. Besides, the clan represented unity,
togetherness and social cohesion among us in Akadot and when we joined the NAADS
program, all the members have continued to operate uniformly; we hold several
meetings in burials, funeral rights and village ceremonies.
These positions were shared by other members, especially Model Farmer 02 in Namasagali,
Ngora district, who transformed their clan association into a farmers’ group.
Monogamous family advantage
In subsistence-based agricultural societies, labour-intensive agriculture predominated, with
limits imposed by the availability of land and productivity dependent on large numbers of
workers. As such, subsistence farming depended on large extended families, polygamous
251 marriages with numerous children, and traditional structures. Polygamy was widely practised
in rural Eastern Uganda and had a significant bearing on the success of government programs.
Under the influence of polygamy, wives competed to produce as many children as possible for
the husband, leading to huge financial pressures and, in most cases, children from large
families were unlikely to get an education. Consequently, their skills remained undeveloped
and they were ill-prepared to contribute (Lawson et al 2006; Lee & Whitbeck, 1990) to society
given the sociocultural environment generating the cycle of poverty. Against this backdrop, a
distinguishing feature of the successful farmers in this study – consistent with the Western
values and practices NAADS sought to instill, was their preference for smaller families. The
Christian religions also promoted nuclear families and, given all the participants adhered to
Christian beliefs and practices, all had monogamous marriages. The first respondent recruited
for the study, located in Ngora district, Model Farmer 01 had one wife and four children. He
saw his small family as an asset and the reason why he had made major savings from his
agricultural output:
Because I have one wife and few children as opposed to my neighbours, who have
average of three wives with over 15 children, I have been able to educate all my
children. I have also been able to construct a permanent house, moving away from a
grass-thatched one and I also earn average of UGX22 million [USD12000] every year.
Successive participants indicated their strong opposition to polygamy and all attributed their success to their monogamous marriage. In Uganda, 28% of married women and 29% of rural women were in polygamous relationships (ROU, 2006b). In this study, all the participants associated their ability to save money, ensure food security, and educate their children with the benefits of having a single spouse and a small family. Men and women chose monogamous marriages strategically, as fewer children lessened the pressure in times of scarcity, especially as competition for resources escalated and land ownership for productive purposes became
252 more precarious. Harmonious partnerships between husbands and wives also created unified pursuits of family objectives achieved through working together on planning, budgeting, and priority setting.
Use of local languages
Though NAADS paid little attention to the use of local languages and traditional knowledge, farming communities had developed a local vernacular for improved high-yield seed varieties and livestock breeds, and related farming practices. Apese, that is, improved millet seeds meant teenage girl − a source of domestic labour in rural Uganda, and a source of bride price that could easily shift the family status once the girl married. The participants highlighted that locally named high-yield seed varieties made it easy for them to comprehend their meanings and purposes and this enhanced their acceptability among association members. The most significant names included the following:
. Apese which is high-yield millet seeds, derived its name from the status attached to
teenage girls in rural Uganda, where they were sources of domestic labour and,
when they married, their bride price would raise the family’s social status.
. Epuripur which is a high-yield sorghum, derived its name from a famine that
struck the Teso sub region in 1994. This crop proved the saviour of communities
and people believed that failure to grow Epuripur sorghum would lead to famine.
. Eroket, an elaborate pesticide used for spraying citrus fruit, derived its name from
an old man in Ngora, Eroket Benjamin, known for resolving community disputes,
problems, and conflicts, and winning cycling competition, over various distances.
His name thus became associated with problem-solving pesticides, which increased
their acceptability to local communities.
253 . Nalongo which is high-yield maize varieties derived its name from that given to
fertile women, who had produced twins, triplets, and quadruplets. It refers to high-
yield maize seed varieties because of their capacity to carry multiple corncobs.
Model Farmer 04 said:
I use Eroket pesticides to spray my citrus seedlings in line with the advice I received
from the extension staff. Other group members are all using Eroket because of its
precise nature of destroying pests that invade our citrus plants. When you use it
according to the advice given, you will never go wrong on citrus fruits.
Model Farmer 06 added:
Epuripur sorghum grains from Serere research station matures in a short time and its
good for both food consumption as well as for cash as Nile breweries buys it for making
beer. Once, you grow Epuripur sorghum, you will never experience hunger in your
house, it takes a very short time, and you can be assured of the market and get income
for their household requirements like education, clothing, education and others.
These positions were shared by all the participants interviewed. They covered a wide range of enterprises supported by the NAADS program, including chicken, turkeys, pigs, and cows.
Local NAADS participants easily accepted local naming as they associated the names with significant life stories, events, and prominent people.
Economic factors shaping the success of NAADS
The economic factors shaping the success or failure of agricultural activities related to assets
accumulated prior to and through NAADS, which targeted economically active poor farmers,
who belonged to farmers’ groups or associations. Their distinguishing features included limited
254 assets, skills, and knowledge, as distinct from the destitute who had no assets or access to them.
The policy focus reflected a well-designed strategy to provide services tailored to the diverse needs of Uganda’s poor farmers, as highlighted in Chapter 5. Assets played a prominent role in the economic security and success of agricultural programs for households in most parts of
SSA, in the absence of sustainable livelihoods and gainful waged employment. Asset management was a source of economic security. Key assets included land, livestock, transport, radios and telephones, storage facilities, and family labour. These assets facilitated the use of farming processes, local transportation of agricultural produce to local markets, and ploughing gardens thus generating additional income. They were also security against natural disasters, like floods and droughts, and provided initial capital for growth. In the rural cattle-keeping communities, like rural Teso, the area of this study, the livestock provided milk, though in small quantities, but still provided some household income as a foundation to more profitable and productive engagement. Key assets identified in this study included land, bulls and oxen that is animal power, carts, motorcycles, bicycles, and wheel barrows, radios and telephones, and grain storage facilities, as discussed in Chapter 7.
Land
Control and ownership of assets had a very critical implication to increasing productivity, more
specifically in agriculture and enabling people to break out of poverty traps. NAADS was
implemented using land owned by its members. In Eastern Uganda, land ownership systems
included private, customary, and freehold tenure systems. The success of any project based on
land use was contingent upon land tenure. All the participants interviewed owned land ranging
from seven to 15 acres.
Besides owning land, participants could hire or rent land from other landowners in the
village who were not cultivating it, such as the elderly, widowed, disabled, and child-headed
255 households. Renting additional land meant they could grow more crops, seek more agricultural
extension services, and donate demonstration gardens. Model Farmer 07 said:
I had to show evidence that I own land, where I could implement the program, as I was
also able to donate my garden as a demonstration garden. I also went forward to rent
more land from my neighbours and, armed with this availability of land, I got more
citrus seedlings, more sorghum and groundnut seeds, besides requesting for more
extension services.
Model Farmer 03 noted:
I had inherited some land from my father, he had distributed land to my brothers, but
gave me too some gardens, and so when the NAADS people came and wanted the
intended beneficiaries to demonstrate ownership of land, I was among those selected.
When they asked us to donate some land as demonstration gardens for our association
and the community, I decide to contribute two gardens. At first it attracted criticisms
from the community, however, later when my gardens became technology development
sites for other to learn, they became school for knowledge of acquisition, moreover the
first proceeds from the demonstration garden was distributed to me first who had made
the contribution.
The advantages of having a demonstration garden were the readily available services and
training workshops to maximise its productivity. Extension staff conducted informal meetings
and related training on demonstration sites and the closer the site to the participants, the greater
the benefits. Initially, the proceeds from the demonstration sites were shared rotationally
among all association members. However, with time, most of the proceeds from demonstration
sites accrued to model farmers, who provided demonstration sites. Progressive farmers could
256 also acquire short-term loans from the CERUDEB and other microfinance outlets, with land as collateral.
Livestock
Bulls and ox ploughs were the most valuable assets after land, as they were used for land clearing and ploughing in rural Eastern Uganda, where most poor farmers used hand hoes.
There were no tractors, besides in Kanyum and Mukongoro Sub-counties, where one or two existed, most the farmers could not afford to hire or rent them. Furthermore, farmers owned gardens in different locations and it was difficult to move tractors from one location to another.
Ox-ploughs, therefore, provided the best alternative. The bulls were local breeds that took an average of three to five years to mature. Four bulls ploughed an average of half an acre per day. The bulls were also used to pull carts to transport produce to homes and markets. They were ideally suited to crossing swamps and negotiating poor roads inaccessible to motorised vehicles. On average, one in ten families owned bulls for ploughing and transport, while the remainder hired them, if they could afford to. Farmers who owned bulls first ensured that their own gardens were ploughed before hiring out their bulls. They could take advantage of the first rains. Gardens had to be prepared for planting within the first two weeks of rain. All the participants interviewed owned bulls and, when the first rains arrived, they would plough their gardens as fast as possible before hiring or renting them out. During harvesting times, those who owned bulls would ensure their harvests were transported to their homes for post-harvest handling, storage, and, later, to local markets. Transportation was a problem for those without bulls, who had either to find alternative options. Some had to carry produce on their heads and backs, leading to poor handling, time wastage, and, sometimes, an inability to transport the produce from the gardens. Model Farmer 13 noted:
257 Because I own the bulls and ox ploughs, I do ensure that my gardens are adequately
prepared and crops planted within the first two of weeks of rain, and the rains Ngora
dictate that you must plant groundnuts within the first two weeks first rains or else you
risk losses.
Hiring bulls and ox ploughs was costly, at an average of USD30 to plough a garden once, while it took three weeks to complete one garden with hand hoes. To get the garden ready for planting, one had to plough it a minimum of three times, so many farmers used hand hoes.
Storage facilities and post-harvest handling
Storage facilities were vital to agricultural production. Prior to structural adjustment, every parish in rural Teso had a storage facility, where people could store their produce after harvesting and thus build food reserves. Without government subsidies, free community storage facilities collapsed and privatisation brought in a fees-based system that was unaffordable for most smallholder rural farmers, forced to store their produce around the home, which attracted rodents and termites that destroyed grain reserves. NAADS did not provide warehouses, where farmers could store their produce until the prices were favourable.
However, the model farmers built large granaries for grain storage. These grain reserves helped stabilise prices and served as insurance against famine-associated production shortfalls. Model
Farmer 08 noted:
Had I not build up the storehouse, keeping my sorghum and rice, until Nile breweries
came to buy was not going to be possible. I would have shared the produce with vermin,
especially rodents, termites, cockroaches, and starving relatives and neighbours. The
storehouse ensured that my produce remained safe until Nile breweries came to buy it,
especially sorghum.
258 The participants owned granaries to store groundnuts, sorghum, millet, rice, and dried peas.
Prices for agricultural produce tended to be lower during and immediately following harvesting. Farmers could store their produce until prices rose and reap huge profits.
Family labour and community involvement
The participants relied on readily available family labour, relatives, and people in the nearby communities because: they lived close by, were affordable and reduced costs, did not need a lot of supervision, were likely to work hard, and had local knowledge on soils and climate variations. Low labour costs increased profitability. Families with younger members were better positioned to maximise land use. Participants had family members ranging in age from
15 to 30 years, who contributed to gardening, ploughing, cultivation, and feeding animals and chicken. Older family members helped in the home, providing security during the day to harvested produce by scaring birds away, tending to animals, looking after small children, and keeping meals warm on the fire, as there were no fridges. As Model Farmer 11 noted:
Few of my relatives were of a great help … my mother took care of the home, while I
and my wife went to the garden and she helped scare birds away from the rice as it
dried. She also kept meals warm in the fire and that meal was collected and brought to
garden as breakfast and lunch, giving workers more energy to work. Without that meal
and with no restaurants nearby, it was inconceivable to continue working in the garden
after 12 pm.
In good seasons, participants hired additional non-family labour for grass cutting for dairy cattle, garden preparation, ploughing, weeding, cultivation, harvesting, and transporting produce. Some worked in exchange for food. Known as Eitai, this was a traditional practice, where a rich farmer hired community labour and, in return, slaughtered a goat, cow, turkey, or provided food for them. Model Farmer 10 explained:
259 I hired community members and relatives to help in my garden, especially rice
harvesting, which sometimes overwhelms me: the rice is ready, needs to be harvested
in span like five days, the rains are threatening, the birds are all over. The only way to
save the harvest is to engage the more labour, which came in form of relatives and the
community.
Household composition, availability of family and hired labour, was important to productivity.
Participants employed experienced people known to them to boost their success. Older people, especially women, were good at weeding cereal grains like millet, rice, and sorghum, while young people were good at weeding cassava and citrus. Older people also contributed local knowledge and experience that was valuable for sound decision-making. This division labour between the younger generation and old generation was part of the traditional cultural heritage that had long sustained rural communities.
In summary, this section has examined the economic factors contributing to the participants’ success in NAADS. The discussion now turns to the political factors.
Political factors
Through NAADS, the government showed its strong commitment to democratisation – giving
people a voice − through an inclusive approach in local governance. Participants associated
strong governance with positive gains as it created an enabling environment and enhanced
possibilities for their success. The political factors they discussed included:
. Local governance
. Accountability
. Political stability
. Inclusion and equity
260 Local governance
As already discussed, NAADS devolved decision making to the local government level as part of the government’s decentralisation policy under the World Bank’s CDF, mentioned in
Chapter 2, and the economic recovery program (ERP), discussed in Chapter 3. It was part of the government’s embrace of global neoliberal economic reforms. Decentralisation devolved responsibility onto local governments and communities to take ownership of development programs and public service delivery. Hence, NAADS focus on local participation.
Decentralised agricultural extension services were tasked with increasing agricultural productivity, raising household incomes, improving food security, and reducing poverty.
NAADS used the language of empowerment in which its demanded appropriate advisory services and private service providers were accountable to local farmers. Participants were positive about local government institutions and their involvement in NAADS. As Model
Framer 14 explained:
These strategies embedded in the local government system have increased my
participation in the decentralised planning spaces as we are actively involved in the
decision-making process through our village council meetings and planning processes.
These avenues became a platform for social mobilisation in the formation of farmer
association to which I represent as a model farmer.
Model Farmer 05 added:
I’m a former Parish councilor, and through my participation in the local government
activities, I got involved in all these government programs, such as NAADS, NUSAF,
RBM, PRDP, as well as others. It was this experience and skills that helped me to
mobilise my own community to form a farmer association. The association has
261 promoted socioeconomic and political empowerment through working the existing
local government structure and the NAADS program.
Decentralised governance provided a platform for efficient government provision. The participants believed this was reflected in the provision of public goods and services, especially infrastructure and agricultural research programs; feeder roads to remote rural areas, connecting deep rural villages to district centres like Akadot, Atoot, and Kadami to Kumi district headquarters, that is a highway to Kenya, South Sudan, and to the capital city Kampla.
The Serere agricultural research institute had played a key role in producing new breeds and technologies associated with increased yields. These measures enabled them to move from subsistence production to more commercial production.
Accountability
NAADS encouraged accountability through its representative structure, whereby members in the farmer associations at various levels held their elected leaders accountable through periodic elections. These leaders included the heads of associations at the village, parish, sub-county, and district levels. Other accountability structures included the chairpersons of contract committees and local government officials chairing village (n=1), parish (n=2), sub-county
(n=3), county (n=4), and district (n=5) local government councils. The participants highlighted the mutual importance of these accountability structures. Model Farmer 04 noted:
As the head of this association, I was always called in to the sub-county to have
meetings with the sub-county farmer’s forum and sub-county technical staff. During
these meetings, I presented our association’s selected enterprises, the progress of our
individual projects, and urgent services that our association needed. Also, in these
meetings, I got updates regarding ongoing procurement processes, changes in selecting
262 contractors, new service providers, and any other related information. And whatever
information I received in the sub-county, I shared with all my association members.
Such information sharing was essential for decision-making, enterprise selection, procurement processes, and priority setting, as Model Farmer 04 explained:
Because the extension staff, technical staff and local government at the sub-county
understood our importance of local knowledge and perception of the programs, they
gave us necessary information, allowed us to actively participate in the activities of the
NAADS program and thus we selected enterprises based on priority areas of the
program.
Model Farmer 12 added:
I have been at the forefront in implementation of this program, right from association
formation, encouraging others to join us, convincing the NAADS people that we had
the capacity to handle all the enterprises that they were giving us … and through the
association, I was able to articulate my interests, defend the selection of my enterprises
Participants participated in program monitoring and evaluation, for which NAADS extension and technical staff at the sub-county level were primarily responsible. Model Farmer
14 noted:
The farmers’ association brought in empowerment through organising, prioritising
farmers’ needs, and contracting and motoring service providers and evaluating the
performance of our association and individual enterprises. The farmers’ associations at
the village level are responsible for program implementation, upward linking of the
program to the sub-county, district, and national level.
263 Participants held leaders accountable through voting in elections of office bearers at all levels and felt that their votes were influential in improving service delivery, most importantly vetting of PSPs at the sub-county level.
Political stability
Violence and political conflicts had a negative impact on agricultural production leading to
food insecurity, famine, and hunger in Northern Uganda. The Teso region, however, had not
witnessed any form of political instability since the 1987 and 1992 insurgencies in several
districts in the Eastern region, including Katakwi and Amuria, instigated mainly by the Lord’s
Resistance Army and Karamojong cattle raiders. Although parts of the Teso region were affected by this political instability, the region has been politically stable for the past two decades allowing NAADS to take root in the districts under study − Kumi, Ngora, and Soroti.
Model Farmer 01 noted:
During the time when Teso experienced political instability, we lost a lot of property,
destruction of social and economic lives, I was jailed because of political leanings.
However, since I was released from jail, the region has had political stability that has
allowed us to concentrate in productive activities, especially on these activities brought
by NAADS.
Inclusion
The participants were aware of NAADS inclusion policies regarding women, young people, and people with disabilities. Model Farmer 03, the only woman in this study, reported:
Vision TERUDO mobilised us into village farmer groups to participate in the
development process, particularly in agriculture development and food security. When
the NAADS program arrived, women like myself were strongly encouraged to lead the
264 associations and benefit from the new program. Other fellow women in the community
did not make it to become model farmers, however, they took up other responsibilities
like lead farmers and treasurers of their association. All women in this village joined
farmer associations.
Model Farmer 03 continued:
I’m a woman leading our association … after our association was recognised in the sub-
county as a NAADS benefitting association, I continued mobilising women and other
members in our community to actively participate in government programs. A number
of women, youth and people with disability joined and received a lot substantial training
in modern agricultural methods, bookkeeping, enterprise management and other related
trainings that have incredibly helped a lot of households here to increase their
production.
Nevertheless, there was a long way to go on gender equity in patriarchal Uganda.
Physical environmental and geographical factors
Physical environmental and geographical factors that concerned the participants included:
. Climate change
. Land management
. Pest control
Climate change
Participants had long drawn on traditional knowledge but, through NAADS education and
training programs, learnt about the science of climate change. Though smallholder farmers had
long been aware of the vagaries of the weather, having lived through droughts and floods, they
265 now understood that rising temperatures, prolonged dry seasons, and extreme weather conditions were a product of human-induced climate change. NAADS sought to equip the farmers with climate-management skills. The skills would help them to deal with changes in: precipitation, temperature, and extreme weather conditions; soil warming due to higher air temperatures, which accelerated the natural decomposition of organic matter and affected fertility; and diminishing soil cover under drier conditions, where root growth and decomposition of organic matter were suppressed. The modern farming practices they were taught were designed to prevent soil degradation through over farming.
Participants reported that seasonal weather variations had become harder to predict and this had a major impact on crop production. They had witnessed declining rainfall in the usual
April to June and September-November rainy seasons, as well as heavy rains and floods in the low-lying Kapir and Ongino Sub-counties. In most cases, they had witnessed a delay in the start of the rains, accompanied by shorter rainy seasons and rising temperatures, which affected plant growth, livestock performance, water availability, and a functioning ecosystem. Model
Farmer 04 noted:
The rains of Ngora these days are unpredictable and require early preparations of
gardens and that when the first rains strike, planting must follow immediately within
two weeks. Failure to plant within the two weeks, you have to be rest assured of having
no better harvest at the end of the season. The second rains are completely unreliable
and therefore I utilise mostly first rains and which calls for adequate preparation.
Participants responded to rainfall variations by shifting planting dates to fit changing rain patterns, as Model Farmer 12 noted:
Due to changes of rain patterns, the major cultivation activities now have to be done in
the first season with first rains, with more emphasis placed on short-term crops like
266 sunflower, sorghum, and maize. This, therefore, calls for adaptation measures, such as
shifting planting dates, paying more attention to fast maturing plants to meet short rain
seasons and early rains, and adaptation of new ways of farming.
The participants came from agricultural families that had followed in the footsteps of their
ancestors, who would read the climatic and weather signs in the movement of birds, winds,
changes in leaf colour, and appearance of the moon to predict the appropriate times for
planting. These were among the few successful farmers who benefited from the NAADS
program. They combined this traditional knowledge with what they learnt in NAADS, as
Model Farmer 09 noted:
The moment the migratory birds [locally translated as Atotoyen birds that migrate
following rain patterns, during the dry season; they move south-westward and towards
the rain season and change direction towards the deserts in the north]. These birds help
us to predict the arrival of rains and they pass just before Easter days. Their movement
to the north-east direction is always accompanied by rain
Model Farmer 10 added:
We experience here three seasons: Winter/Aiporo occurring from April to July,
Spring/Konokamu, occurring from August to November, and Summer/Kamu –
occurring from December to March. The first season of Winter is accompanied by a lot
of rain and this is where we do a lot farming, the second season Spring, has rain too,
but no so much, however, we grow short term maturing crops especially sorghum and
peas. The third season is completely dry, and there are no much farming activities going
apart from taking care of the livestock and preparation of gardens, inputs in anticipation
of Winter rains.
267 Participants highlighted the critical role of local knowledge in interpreting the seasons.
It helped them deal with rain patterns and make important seasonal decisions on which crops to plant and when. Farmers with advanced Indigenous knowledge make the best use of these seasons, while others just waited for the rains to return before planting. Likewise, the frequency and intensity of dry spells required adaptive farming practices. Farmers rely on natural precipitation as their major water source in the absence of irrigation facilities. Participants had experienced several droughts and incurred huge losses in livestock, especially cattle, pigs, and goats. This affected the level of employment and agricultural output.
Through NAADS intervention, they now planted drought-resistant crops, such as cassava and sweet potatoes and practised intercropping and crop rotation to maintain fertility and minimise the effects of drought. Model Farmer 11 explained:
Traditional knowledge of intercropping and land terracing makes a significant
contribution to avert consequences of drought and ensure sustainability of the
production process. I grow and my wife grow tree crops like cassava, citrus fruits, and
mangoes alongside food crops like beans, peas, maize, and millet. This prevents soil
erosion, loss of water in the soil during dry season, and enhances soil fertility.
Finger millet, due to its vulnerability to drought, was replaced by cassava as the main staple food crop as it performed well in a range of agro-climatic conditions. Cassava could remain on the ground for long periods after its maturity so harvesting could be staggered. Model Farmer
15 noted:
Instead of relying on sorghum, maize and groundnuts, we were advised to diversify to
other crops that are more resistant and can withstand extended droughts. This included
planting cassava and sweet potatoes because of their compatibility with the changing
climate.
268 They planted short-term crops and early maturing varieties like sorghum, millet, maize, beans, rice, and groundnuts, all of which were ready for harvesting in four months. They used intercropping, planting more than one crop in the area, such as maize followed by beans. This ensured the dry leaves from the maize covered the soil and reduced the water or moisture loss.
It also improved soil fertility. Crop diversification led to increased productivity and reduced the risk of adverse weather conditions (Niehof, 2004). The participants also planted varieties that were tolerant to diseases, such as Serenut for groundnuts, Valencia and Harmolin for citrus, and Longe for maize. Participants had also been assisted to use alternative water sources during drought, as Model Farmer 04 reported:
Because of changes in the rainfall received in Ngora district, sometimes leading to
droughts, the NAADS program constructed for me a borehole for watering the citrus
fruits, especially seedlings during dry seasons. This enabled me to maintain multiplying
seedlings and selling to other farmers throughout all seasons.
Model Farmer 10, who was involved in apiary farming, said:
I dug water well in my compound as per the advice from the NAADS technical staff.
The presence of water in my compound enabled the bees to access water throughout
the year, while keeping me business of harvesting honey. The water also kept on
attracting more bees throughout the year and such I increased my beehives from 25
given to me by NAADS to now 70.
In the Soroti district, the local NGO TEDDO had trained people in the community in rain harvesting techniques and the construction of Ferro water tanks fort rainwater harvesting.
Model Farmer 12 in Soroti district benefited from these tanks:
269 The training that I went through in water harvesting and the donation of a Ferro tank
from TEDDO helped us in this community to harvest water that we use for small-scale
irrigation, and for me I use the water for irrigating my seedlings during the dry season.
Rainwater harvesting was relatively simple and cheap and helped the community to deal with
water scarcity during dry spells. It ensured the availability of water for their seedlings, which
they sold when the rains returned and the demand for seedlings rose. It was also important for
the long-term sustainability of modern high-yield seed varieties.
Land management
Preventing land degradation depended crucially on farmers’ understanding of inappropriate land use and its destructive impact on ecosystems. Land degradation had led to declining productivity for smallholder farmers in rural Eastern Uganda due to high population growth rates and poor farming practices. Traditional farming practices, such as zero tilling, mulching, agro-forestry, organic farming, bush shifting cultivation and fallowing, where they shifted from one garden to another once the garden was exhausted, had long been practised to restore soil fertility (Barrios et al., 2001). In the recent times, due to population growth rates, many of these practices had been abandoned, due to land fragmentation and scarcity. This had led to low crop yields, soil erosion, and pest, disease, and weed infestation. The participants pointed out that, because of their small families, the pressure on their gardens had been minimal, leading to less fragmentation and associated problems. They continued to combine old methods of land preservation with modern practices involving the use of fertilisers to improve productivity.
Model Farmer 13 said:
We were born two in my family, I and my sister and when she got married, I remained
a lone with all the land that my father had. This reduced the chances of dividing and
sub dividing the land. It also ensured that I had more land to plant, fallow and carry out
270 crop rotation. This ensured that my land remained fertile, supporting the growth of
different crops.
Model Farmer 04 said:
I produced few children that have all grown and divided the land among them. I
bought more land and they also bought more land from the neighbours. Now given
the fact that they were few and we a lot land now, we can afford to carryout bush
fallowing, diversify production and carryout crop rotation.
Model Farmer 02 added:
I have continued practising old methods of soil conservation, such as mulching, organic
farming, agro-forestry, bush-fallowing, zero tilling, crop rotation alongside the modern
methods underscored in the NAADS program, such as fertiliser application and
diversification.
Participants had learnt conservation techniques to restore soil fertility and control soil loss, such as permanent soil cover with crops and crop residues, crop rotation, and minimal soil disturbance. Model Farmer 12 explained:
Through targeted training … we learnt modern agricultural practices that included land
conservation methods where land was deemed to have deteriorated. These practices
involved mulching, crop rotation, and minimum disturbance of soil while cultivating.
The combination of these new methods with the old natural resource conservation
methods went a long way in protecting the soil, while enhancing nutrients cycle, leading
to high productivity for those of us who followed the advisory knowledge.
Most participants, however, occupied areas with favourable loam soil suitable for agricultural practices. Those in Ongino sub-county in Kumi district, where the soils were not suited to
271 cultivation, engaged in livestock and poultry. Model Farmer 05 said he had outperformed other
NAADS beneficiaries in the sub-county because he had selected animal rearing and bee
keeping, while others opted for grain production. Model Farmer 05 noted:
We live in low-lying areas of Kumi district near lake Bisina, where the soils are
completely rocky and do not support the growth of many crops, thus in our association,
we selected piggery and Friesian cows. We could not select groundnuts because it
requires fertile soils. Areas like Ngora with fertile soils selected groundnuts and a range
of other crops.
Model Farmer 04 added:
In Ngora district, every home grows groundnuts and sweet potatoes due to ability of the
soils to support their growth. So even when we joined the NAADS program, despite
the fact that citrus was encouraged for us to select, we also included potatoes and
groundnuts in our selection because we were sure that those crops have always
performed well in gardens.
The ability to adopt the new farming techniques introduced by NAADS, especially soil and
water conservation practices, helped minimise land degradation, as Model Farmer 02
explained:
The new techniques of farming that we learnt combined with old agricultural practices,
such as mulching of our soils and agro-forestry, ensured that the soils retained water
even during the dry season, and, as such, my crops continued doing well, while the
droughts ravaged every garden around.
Participants had invested in land terracing, application of manure, planting of trees, and
soil and pest management, as Model Farmer 05 noted:
272 The NAADS program taught are to conserve our soils and nutrients enhancing
practices. This helped to keep the soils fertile, support farming activities and maintain
high levels of production.
Participants owned their land and had complete control over its use, which enhanced their suitability for NAADS programs, as already discussed. Model Farmer 01 noted:
Most of this land I’m using I bought it, and in order for me to utilise it effectively, I
moved here away from place of birth which is four kilometers. Sometimes, I also hire
more land from the people around who cannot use their own land.
Under the postcolonial government, land was government owned, which discouraged investment in land conservation measures. This changed with the enactment of the 1998 Land
Act (ROU, 1999), which marked a radical shift to private freehold land ownership, and improved farming systems and sustainable agricultural projects that minimised the impact of land degradation. Resource conservation was reinforced through demonstration sites, as Model
Farmer 04 noted:
When we visited Budadiri, in Sironko district, we saw how the farmers there build up
terraces to control running water, because of the steep slopes where live and plant their
crops, we also learnt how they protected their gardens against high tides and soil
erosion. Even after our exposure site visit to them, we have continued interacting with
them and learning more and they also learn more us.
It was also reinforced through the social capital, as Model Farmer 07 noted:
In the association, because we all live together almost in the same communities, we try
to ensure that whoever received seeds, pigs and other inputs must take care of them as
273 per the guidelines and where he fails to afford treatment or animal feeds, we lend each
other the supporting services.
Pest control
Pest and diseases could cripple smallholder agriculture, termites, especially, damaged crops,
like cassava, maize, groundnuts, and millet. NAADS taught the participants scientific control
measures, mainly the use of chemicals, to control pests. Termites also affected livestock,
especially Friesian cows, as they damaged the grass and maize used as feedstock, as Model
Farmer 13 noted:
The termites have consistently destroyed our elephant grass meant for feeding the
Friesian cow, this gives a me an extra burden to search for grass in distant areas and
sometimes not feeding the cow properly which in turn affects the quantity of milk
produced. Besides, these termites too destroy maize especially at a time when I’m about
to harvest the corn. This demoralises us a lot.
Farmers also continued to use traditional control practices that included the digging anthills and removal of queen termite mounds or smoking them. Model Farmer 07 talked of further measures:
We constantly combine the use of chemicals and our local knowledge on dealing with
these termites. In most cases the insecticides are very effective, however, if you have
not received adequate training on their application, they do not make any difference.
While traditional practices are more effective, though labour-intensive, digging anthills,
smoking, boiling water, and digging valleys to lead rainwater to anthills are labour-
intensive practices.
274 This section highlighted the continued significance of indigenous knowledge alongside modern scientific practices promoted by NAADS for environmental management. It showed the participants’ adaptability and resilience in coping with harsh climatic conditions, unfavourable topography, and unwanted pests.
Conclusion
Chapter 8 analysed how four categories of factors – sociocultural, economic, political, and
physical – contributed to the farmers’ success, from their perspective. This analysis revealed
that relatively small monogamous family units, owning land, and being able to offer land for
demonstration sites were among the most important factors. The following chapter discusses
these findings in relation to the literature.
275 CHAPTER 9
Discussion
As was shown in Chapter 3, a series of household surveys and related studies showed that, between 1992 and 2006, Uganda had one of the largest and fastest growing economies in
Africa and achieved the highest reduction in income poverty in the world (Kakande, 2009;
Daniels & Minot, 2015; Levin et al., 2014). To effect socioeconomic development across the country, policy proposals, including PEAP I, II, and III, led to a massive investment in infrastructure development and service provision in the education, health, transport, agricultural, and related social sectors (Morgan, 2009). However, most of these policy measures failed to translate to positive change for the rural majority (Hickey, 2005). The decline in poverty levels reflected in official statistics recorded a rise in average income
(Lawson et al., 2006), though poverty and food insecurity prevailed (Krishna et al., 2006).
Hence, some scholars insisted the hype around poverty reduction was exaggerated (Belshaw
& Lawrence, 1999; Daniels & Minot, 2015; Hickey, 2013; Lwanga-Ntale, 2014; McGee,
2004). PEAP gave way to a series of NDPs with an overarching focus on social and economic transformation and deeper national ownership (Hickey, 2013; Van Waeyenberge & Bargawi,
2015), central to which was agricultural development through the flagship NAADS program, the focus of this study (Kjær & Joughin, 2012: Wairimu et al., 2016). Chapters 7 and 8 presented the perspectives of successful beneficiaries of NAADS and the factors shaping their success. Chapter 7 examined the findings relating to NAADS and the macrolevel factors shaping its implementation, including social networks and local partnerships, gender issues, agricultural technology, information and communication, and access to microfinance, as shown in Table 9.1.
276 Table 9.1 Findings relating to NAADS
Level Factors Key findings Macro . Social networks and local . NAADS absorbed already existing social capital networks, partnerships including clan associations, burial groups, village savings clubs, and women’s groups, realising the importance of adding to an already existing social momentum. They brought in local institutions that were trusted by community members and involved local leaders, such as heads of clans, to enhance their . Gender issues local acceptability. . Though gender issues were written into NAADS policy, the . Agricultural technology system remained patriarchal and male-dominated. . NAADS program to modernise agriculture rested on the . Information and government’s provision of the latest agricultural technology. communication . Information and communication was essential to NAADS . Access to microfinance operation. . The provision of start-up capital was an important feature of the participants’ success. Mezzo . Agricultural research and . NAADS worked on a model of demand-driven development or development ‘development as informed demand’. . Demonstration and . The logic behind NAADS was educate farmers to demand technology development sites what they wanted and provide this. It is a reactive model of (TDS) development built on ostensibly proactive participatory . Agricultural markets processes. . Local road network . There were strong parameters to what NAADS offered and . Water and irrigation facilities how its resources were to be accessed. . NAADS processes asked farmers to bargain for what it had to offer. Micro . Understanding the . Participants were model farmers before their involvement in machinations of NAADS NAADS. They had assets and resources and functional farms o Rites of passage with post-harvest handling and storage facilities. o Asset ownership . Participants cottoned on to the machinations of NAADS and o Post-harvest handling were willing participants to get what they wanted and reap its and storage facilities rewards, had undergone training, offered TDS sites, and o Participation in NAADS participated in enterprise selection. They demonstrated that ‘if o NAADS’ structures and you play the play the game, you will reap the rewards’. processes . They were in monogamous marriages, had smaller families, o Education and training and were God-fearing Christians in keeping with the nuclear Farmer Institutional o family models NAADS sought to promote. Development o Experimentation and non-formal training o Farmers’ field schools o Enterprise selection and diversification . Family involvement at the household or microlevel
277 Beneficial structures at the mezzolevel included agricultural research and development,
demonstration and technology development sites (TDS), agricultural markets, local road
networks, and water and irrigation facilities. Chapter 9 discusses these findings referring to the
literature reviewed in prior chapters.
Several key factors influenced the participants’ success at the microlevel, including their understanding of the machinations of NAADS, rites of passage, asset ownership, and post- harvest handling and storage facilities, and their participation in NAADS’ structures and processes. Other factors included education and training, farmer institutional development, experimentation and non-formal training, farmers’ field schools, and enterprise selection and diversification, as well as family involvement at the household or microlevel.
Macrolevel
Social networks and local partnerships
The study showed that the NAADS program absorbed already existing social capital networks, including clan associations, burial groups, village savings, village saving clubs, and women groups, recognising the importance of their social momentum. They brought in local institutions that were trusted by community members and involved local leaders, such as heads of clans, to enhance their local acceptability. The findings indicated that the participants experienced modest but positive changes, expanding and diversifying their social networks through partnership, ownership, and participation, in the process creating a platform for the flow of resources, information, and ideas. These networks enhanced the capability of the smallholder farmers engaged in this study to control and determine access to development and improve their standard of living (Benin, 2011, 2012; Jagger & van Laerhoven, 2004). They enabled inclusive, bottom-up involvement in local development (Ruckert, 2006; Desai & Joshi,
2014). Though the farmers in this study had engaged effectively in networking, other
278 researchers have reported that many local recipients were less successful at generating appropriate support (Béland & Howlett, 2016; Booth, 2011b; Benin, 2012; Öniş & Şenses,
2005).
Gender issues: Inclusion and equality of women
NAADS’ guidelines encouraged the inclusion of women. Though the participants were aware of NAADS inclusion policies regarding women, young people, and people with disabilities, their interests were limited mostly to their families, especially their wives as partners in their productive farms and their involvement in enterprise selection and marketing of produce.
Participants valued a sense of ownership and control and were interested in the benefits for their own households. Other researchers have reported that the processes employed by NAADS remained patriarchal and male-dominated and produced limited changes for smallholder rural women farmers (Alkire et al., 2013; Doss et al, 2014). It also manifested in the representation of women in the rural farmer associations and their ability to influence decisions on enterprise selection and management, and control of resources and income (Ampaire et al., 2013; Doss,
2002; Doss et al., 2014) or in enhancing women’s access to land and other key productive assets at the household level. Furthermore, child dependency ratios in female-headed households led to care responsibilities and less time for training, site visits, and enterprise management (Cooper & Bird, 2012; Doss, 2002; Doss et al., 2014; Ellis & Freeman, 2004;
Kabeer, 2016; Lie, 2015; Lwanga-Ntale, 2014; Quaye, et al., 2016; ROU, 2015; Smith et al.,
2001). Land ownership was a key to the success of the participants in this study, and this included the one female model farmer of the 15 interviewed. However, beyond this, this study has not added to knowledge on the inclusion of women in NAADS.
279 Agricultural technology
This study found that participants willingly adopted new technology and NAADS played a key role in this (Desai & Joshi, 2014; Fan & Zhang, 2008; Kelly et al., 2003). They responded to information targeted at accelerating farmer progression to productive commercial agriculture, drew resources from sub-county level demonstration sites, and engaged in skills development for technology use (Benin, 2012; Ekou, 2013; Hoffmann et al., 2007; Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b,
2010). Though the participants of this study had benefited from technology development, other researchers have reported that many poor rural smallholder farmers had experienced credit and labour constraints that prevented them from taking advantage of the new technology offered through NAADS (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; Benin, 2012; Diiro & Abdoul, 2015;
James, 2010; Nkonya et al., 2005; Okoboi et al., 2012; Pender, 2008; ROU, 2005; Turinawe et al., 2015).
Information and communication
Access to the right information at the right time, in a usable format and from a trusted source,
was pivotal to success (Kiiza & Pederson, 2014). Most model farmers had telephones and radios that gave them access to the information they needed, such as expert advice on livestock and crop maintenance, appropriate seed and livestock varieties, timely planting, weather updates, and planting and harvesting techniques (Duncombe, 2014; Martin & Abbott, 2011). This saved of travel costs as farmers consulted with one another, established the availability of, and accessed inputs, negotiated prices, acquired information on price changes or availability of market for the products, monitored financial services with microfinance institutions and other lenders, accessed updates on loan repayments, and arranged meetings telephonically.
280 Access to microfinance
Access to start-up capital was an important feature of the participants’ success in operating an
efficient, viable, productive, profitable, modern farming enterprise. NAADS identified external financial service providers at the sub-county and district levels that supported the capacity development of the farmers’ forums and groups to manage the revolving funds and schemes on offer (ROU, 2008b) and linked farmers’ groups to the MSC, UCSCU, and CERUDEB for soft agricultural loans for the purchase of ox ploughs that greatly improved labour productivity
(Ampaire et al., 2013; Benin et al., 2007; Benin, 2011, 2012; ROU, 2008b). All the model farmers (n=15) were linked directly to the microfinance institutions that provided support for the acquisition of productive assets and labour in the face of limited banking services in rural areas. While the microfinance framework of alleviating poverty and empowering rural smallholder farmers was commendable, it was also an effective vehicle for the extension of global capitalism to rural areas and imposed extra burdens on the very poor.
Donors and international development institutions viewed participation in rural microfinance schemes as platform for the extension of financial stability and sustainability.
They aimed to contribute to the broad goals of deepening financial markets outside the domain of capital markets (James, 2010; Mpuga, 2010). Microfinance reflected a paradigm shift away from state-owned and regulated commercial banks, to local private institutions providing capital to eligible citizens, including rural smallholder farmers. This shift effectively removed the state from its responsibility to secure social and economic opportunities for its citizens shifting it onto private institutions (Manji, 2010; Mpuga, 2010; Quagrainie et al., 2010; Todaro,
2011). The adoption of largely market-based approaches for enhancing rural financial access fit within the neoliberal global framework, as only farmers with productive assets had access to microfinance services; those without assets and productive enterprises were ineligible for microfinance (Benin et al., 2007; ROU, 2008b). By conferring agricultural microfinance to the
281 private sector, with the government only performing a regulatory role, rural microfinance provision became effectively determined by market forces, away from needs-based access
(Mpuga, 2010). Consequently, like any other private business, microfinance services were driven by profit maximisation with minimal costs, and short-term gains. Profit and sustainability had a pervasive effect on how microfinance operated (Afranakwapong &
Nkonya, 2015; Benin et al., 2007; Carter & Barrett, 2006; Quagrainie et al., 2010). Thus, farmers with a potential to reap gains from their produce and enterprises in a short period were targeted, leaving out millions of smallholder farmers.
Most microfinance facilities were concentrated in urban areas (Mpuga, 2010). The
Centenary rural development bank that provides loans for bulls and ox ploughs for agricultural purposes had offices only in Kumi town and Soroti town, leaving out Ngora and other distant rural areas. The government’s microcredit management centre (Microcredit Support Centre -
MSC) has only one office serving the region of four million people. As such, under the current dispensation, access to rural finance is highly prohibitive as thousands of rural small holder farmers could not access the services (Mpuga, 2010). Barrett and Carter (2006) showed how poorer rural households in Madagascar were systematically left out from accessing credit facilities in contrast to their wealthy counterparts who could take advantage of government program, upscaling technology uptake and raise their rice production yields by 60-80%. As discussed in Chapter 3, the rise of poverty levels, food insecurity and unemployment in rural
Uganda was attributed to the elaborate SAPs reform policies implemented in the so called ‘lost decade’ (Lawson et al., 2006). In line with rising poverty levels, the study found that the provision of credit opportunities right from Entandikwa allowed the government, in collaboration with the IFIs, to provide some form of welfare assistance to rural farmers and low-income earners, but the process being compliant to the neoliberal reforms that they were obliged to implement (Quagrainie et al., 2010). In short, microfinance services were designed
282 to provide a kind of social security for those that had been left out by the adjustment reforms, yet the framework for provision remained the same; those with skills, assets and information benefitted, through ISFG implementation which facilitated their connection to microfinance institutions.
Mezzolevel
NAADS worked on a model of demand-driven development or ‘development as informed
demand’ (James et al., n.d.). The logic behind NAADS program was to educate farmers to
demand what they wanted and provide this. It is a reactive model of development built on
ostensibly proactive participatory processes. There were strong parameters to what NAADS
offered and how its resources were to be accessed. NAADS processes asked farmers to bargain for what it had to offer in terms of agricultural research and development, TDSs, agricultural markets, and infrastructure development, including local road networks and water and irrigation facilities.
Agricultural research and development
The participants saw value in agricultural research and development, especially relating to the matching of enterprises, modern crop varieties, and climatic and soil conditions, and, in part, attributed their increased productivity to this (Alene & Coulibaly, 2009; Kassie et al., 2011).
This had helped them to overcome local production constraints, adapt new technologies to local
conditions, and select enterprises accordingly (ROU, 2008b).
Demonstration and technology development sites (TDS)
One participant had provided a TDS for experimentation and the female participant provided a
garden site. These sites provided access to training, interaction with extension staff, and
experimentation with improved seeds, especially for the participants who owned demonstration
283 gardens. The 15 model farmers interviewed in this study all indicated ownership of a TDS.
Additionally, the participants received more inputs and support services from the extension staff and most importantly, additional training in their demonstration gardens, which partly influenced their success (Wellard et al., 2013; Woelcke, 2006).
Agricultural markets
Proximity and access to local and regional markets was essential to the participants’ productive agribusinesses. NAADS addressed seasonal fluctuations in the supply of, and demand for, agricultural produce and assisted participants to achieve a steady income even in times of economic stress (Adong, 2014; Diao et al.,2010; Poulton et al., 2006). This participant had access to local livestock and crop markets and regionally to Southern Sudan for food produce and Kenya for fruit (Barrett et al., 2012), especially citrus (Kasekende & Atingi-Ego, 1999;
Kelly et al., 2003). NAADS also made fertilisers and other agro-chemicals accessible
(Markelova & Mwangi, 2010) and the participants had benefitted from these local and regional markets and accessible inputs.
Infrastructure development
The participants had benefitted from the infrastructure development, such as local feeder roads, networks, and highways for transporting agricultural products to local, regional, and international markets (Calderon & Serven, 2010; Fan & Zhang, 2008; Fraser, 2005; ROU,
2014b). The road network, especially the highway from the port of Mombasa in Kenya, through to Eastern Uganda, and connecting to Congo and South Sudan, opened market opportunities for rural farmers. This route promoted export-oriented production and trade, as it opened these rural isolated areas of Eastern Uganda to regional markets where the model farmers could sell their produce at better prices than local markets (Calderon & Serven, 2010). The early success of the Green revolution in Asia was broadly attributed to infrastructural development,
284 particularly the road network that facilitated access to complementary inputs and reduced transport costs (Dawson et al., 2016; Toenniessen et al., 2008). While these highways and road networks opened these rural and remote areas of Eastern Uganda to regional markets, the farmers complained that their products sometimes received low prices due to the high-quality standards required (Markelova & Mwangi, 2010; Mwambi et el., 2016; Poulton & Macartney,
2012). However, in comparison to local markets, the regional markets offered better opportunities for well-organised model farmers (Barret et al, 2012). The improved road network meant farmers could access improved seeds on time and sell their produce in urban centres and regional markets, which, at the same time, encouraged the farmers to adopt improved seeds.
Microlevel
Understanding the machinations of NAADS
Chapter 7 presented the participants’ perspectives on how they were able to reap the rewards
of NAADS and showed how, through training, they were acculturated to NAADS’ objectives
and the Western values and agenda on which they were based. Thus, they used the language of empowerment, demanding services and resources, gaining knowledge, having their voices heard, gaining a sense of belonging through group membership, participation in decision- making, building consensus and commitment, and transparency and accountability (Barrett et al., 2012; Desai & Joshi, 2014; Francis & James, 2003; Friis-Hansen & Duveskog, 2012;
Hyden, 2007; Muyinza & Ambrose, 2006; Moyo, 2014; Ojambo, 2012; Steiner, 2007). The rites of passage or eligibility criteria, as discussed in Chapter 7, showed why the participants’ assets as landowners gave them a huge advantage in benefitting from what NAADS had to offer. Many had participated in, and experienced the benefits of, participating in NGO-led development projects and had made an easy transition to association membership and
285 engagement. They could afford the membership fees and appreciated the value of local partnerships and networks. Perhaps, the greatest learning curve came in understanding how to select enterprises that suited the physical and climatic conditions of their areas (Asrat et al.,
2010; Brick & Visser, 2015; James, 2010). This led to a diversity of enterprises supported by
NAADS, including citrus farming, beekeeping, and large-scale meat and milk production for export, in addition to market gardening supplying fresh meat, fruit, milk, and vegetables to local communities.
Unlike previous centralised, non-participatory, and non-responsive extension services offered by government, NAADS represented a significant shift in agricultural service provision and program delivery (Wellard et al., 2013). The participants paid indirectly for NAADS through co-funding and membership fees (Hanson & Just, 2001). NAADS’ overarching long- term goal was to displace central government transfers with farmer contributions and services provided by private contractors (Kassie et al., 2011). In this sense, it engaged in demand-driven development, where participating farmers, through their respective farmers’ associations and forums, received specific training on their selected enterprises (Fan & Zhang, 2008; James et al., n.d.; Kelly et al., 2003; Wellard et al., 2013) and demanded extension services from PSPs.
In this way, a neoliberal market orientation effectively filtered down to rural households to create a capitalist/commercial smallholding class capable of demanding self-financed extension services (Benin, 2012; James, 2010; Mosley et al., 2004; Mosley & Suleiman, 2007).
Others have reported that extension services under the NAADS program had excluded rural poor farmers that did not belong to farmers’ associations or whose farming enterprises had not been selected as qualifying for public funding (Adong, 2014; Ampaire et al., 2013). Thus, in a sense, participants were model farmers before their involvement in NAADS, because they had assets and resources and functional farms, and could afford to participate in the farmers’ associations and forums. They cottoned on to the machinations of NAADS and were willing
286 participants to get what they wanted and reap its rewards, had undergone training, offered TDS sites, and participated in enterprise selection. They demonstrated that ‘if you play the play the game, you will reap the rewards’. However, others have reported that NAADS excluded a large proportion of rural farmers engaged in subsistence farming (Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015;
Wairimu et al., 2016).
An area where NAADS had been most beneficial for the participants was in enterprise
selection. Participants could determine their own priorities within their reshaped farming
enterprises that conformed to NAADS’ eligibility criteria (Benin, 2011; Friis-Hansen, 2008;
Mwambi et al., 2016; Okoboi et al., 2012; Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b; ROU, 2006a). The
participants had taken advantage of every opportunity offered to increase their household food
security, access to markets, livestock production, food storage, and access to potable water,
such as boreholes and hand-pump wells. Their diversified portfolio of production had raised
their household income and savings substantially (Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Friis-Hansen, 2008).
To continue to raise incomes and ensure food security, donor institutions had urged the
government to restructure agricultural production through NAADS I, II, and III to enhance
export-led growth (Barrett, 2008; Markelova & Mwangi, 2010; ROU, 2010a) rather than food
crops to meet individual, community, urban and regional demand (Kansiime & Mastenbroek,
2016; Mandemaker et al., 2011). The participants had been trained to concentrate on
commercial crops, such as citrus and sorghum used for beer-brewing industries, at the expense
of food crops. Some researchers reported that this had created cyclical food insecurity as
farmers switched to commercial production to enhance household income rather than produce
traditional food crops like cassava, millet, rice, and sweet potatoes for local markets (Boysen,
2016; Ebanyat et al., 2010; Tusiime et al., 2013; Wairimu et al., 2016). Some poor rural farmers
had become victims of the either middlemen or private contractors, who offered low prices
knowing that, without their services, the farmers would be unable to transport their produce to
287 regional and national markets (Ilukor et al., 2015). Some believed the new policy dispensation was simply a continuation of SAPs legitimating and escalating a neoliberal market orientation
(Öniş & Şenses, 2005; Wairimu et al 2016). Even traditional food crops were now grown to increase profit margins by storing grain until it could attract a higher price through increased demand (Ebanyat et al., 2010). Food products had become exchangeable commodities subject to the dictates of the free market system (Alinyo & Leahy, 2012; Barrett, 2008; Boysen, 2016;
Govereh & Jayne, 2003). Though the emphasis on cash crops and exports created synergies in the availability of inputs, credit, and management training, significant competition for land and labour impacted negatively on food production (Boysen, 2016; Govereh & Jayne, 2003).
In Chapters 3, 4 and 5, it was reported that over 80% of the population derived its livelihood from agriculture, with over 85% of these being poor rural subsistence farmers
(Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Friis-Hansen, 2008; Mpuga, 2010; ROU, 2014b, 2015) and food crops contributing over 60% of the agricultural GDP (ROU, 2015). This gave a sense of the elitist goals of NAADS, to take the crème de la crème ‒ so-called model farmers ‒ and support them to produce for export, while leaving the bulk of the poor struggling to achieve food security for day-to-day survival. Most smallholder rural farmers in Uganda were unable to store part of their food for future risks, such as famine and floods (Alinyo & Leahy, 2012). Instead, they were left to the vagaries of the market with food an expensive commodity manipulated for profit, given NAADS’ goal of wealth creation by raising rural incomes and livelihoods through growth and transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture (ROU, 2010a; Wairimu et al., 2016).
Chapter 8 presented the findings relating to the contextual factors that created the conditions for NAADS’ implementation and how these contributed to the success of the model farmer participants in this study. The focus on model farmers might have skewed the picture of NAADS and a focus on less successful farmers might have led to a completely different
288 scenario. However, to all intents and purposes, this study revealed the contextual factors that led to, and supported, the success of the study’s participants, as shown in Table 9.2.
Sociocultural factors
The findings suggested a relationship between context and the success of model farmers. These included sociocultural factors relating to influence of the Christian religion on the reduction of alcohol consumption, supportive engagement with local NGO and FBOs, traditional rural leadership institutions, family involvement, and extended family networks, and use of local languages. NAADS promoted modern, Western values that the model farmers had adopted, including Christian values of diligence and sobriety, small nuclear families, and monogamous marriages. Participants attributed their success, in part, to this sociocultural milieu presenting a picture of advantaged citizens further advantaged by NAADS’ program of productive agriculture.
Alcohol consumption and influence of Christian values
Alcohol consumption is a traditional practice embedded in the economic and sociocultural life
of local communities. Here local brews play an important role in the local economy and
community life. It generates incomes, especially for the women or families involved in alcohol production. However, excessive alcohol consumption is a problem in many rural communities.
This is worsened by the fact that electricity coverage in rural Eastern Uganda is profoundly inadequate. Thus, drinkers preferred to drink during the day as it was difficult to move around at night. In short, their productive hours were spent drinking. This generated significant impacts on time-consuming, labour-intensive, commercial, and subsistence agricultural programs
(Lawson et al., 2006).
289 Table 9.2 Contextual factors influencing success
Factors Main themes Key findings
Socio . Reduction of alcohol consumption and . The adoption of Christian values of influence of Christian religion diligence and sobriety, small nuclear cultural families, and monogamous marriages shaped the sociocultural milieu to which the participants attributed their . Local NGO and FBOs, traditional rural success. leadership institutions, family . Participants benefited from local involvement, and extended family NGOs and FBOs, traditional networks leadership institutions, family involvement, and extended family networks. . Education and training . Prior education and NAADS’ training enhanced participants’ success. . Involvement in NAADS . Participants perceived the benefits of active engagement in NAADS. . Use of local languages . Use of local languages enhanced understanding of NAADs. Economic . Assets, including land, livestock, . Ownership of land, livestock, transport, radios and telephones, storage transport, radios and telephones, and facilities, and family labour storage facilities, as well as the presence of family labour advantaged the participants in this study. . Diversification . Diversification of crops and livestock enhanced success. Political . Local governance and accountability . Participants understood the structures accountability structures of local government. . Political stability . None of the participants had been affected by the political instability in Uganda. . Inclusion and equity . The participants perceived NAADS structures as inclusive and equitable. Physical . Climate change . Participants understood and accepted the rationale behind enterprise selection to suit climatic conditions. . Soil and land management . They understood and practised sound farming methods to get the most out of their land. . Pest control . They used NAADS’ resources to maintain pest control.
290 Further, aside from ethnic and political conflicts and physical or mental health problems, consistent alcohol consumption and abuse was one of the key factors maintaining chronic poverty in rural and areas of Uganda. Alcohol consumption was substantially higher in circumstances where people lived under harsh conditions in poor surroundings, with poverty characterising every aspect of life, including education, housing, and health. Alcoholic consumption was also associated to aggressive and violent behaviour, generating social disharmony at the household level in the form of domestic violence, more so in a society like
Uganda with a weak institutional legal framework for dealing with interpersonal violence.
Participants talked in the interviews about how; alcohol disrupted family life, encouraged crime and laziness, led to unemployment and unreliable farm labour, and social instability. They expressed pride in their sobriety and linked this to their religious affiliation as active Christians.
They spoke of their adherence to church teachings and virtues of love, faith, and trust that had been instrumental in ensuring their success. Other studies carried out within the region have shown the positive role of the Pentecostal church in the Kumi district in enhancing capacity building, agricultural development, food security, and water resource management (Jones,
2013). Studies in Tanzania, Ghana, Togo, and Ethiopia showed how faith motivation led to active involvement in public life (Yong, 2013). These findings highlight the active role of religious agencies in shaping the development discourse and poverty reduction programs
(Jones, 2013).
Use of local languages for naming new technologies
The participants created a connection with the new technologies and innovations they were
learning by naming them in their local vernacular. Hence, the participants talked about how
they had renamed seed and crop varieties and pesticides in descriptive terms that were
meaningful to them. Some scholars reported that knowledge embedded within local languages was accessible, easy to recall, and likely to increase the chances of changed practices (Cohen
291 & Levinthal, 1990). Integrating local languages and knowledge with scientific terms enhanced the use of sustainable farming practices by making them adaptable to local contexts (Eilola et al., 2014). In short, local naming became an effective tool for reaching rural farmers across the rural Eastern region (Zossou et al 2015).
Engagement in local structures
Participants had been involved in, and benefited from, their engagement with local NGO and
FBOs, traditional rural leadership institutions, family involvement, and extended family
networks. The availability and provision of supportive resources through social networks and
structures had long been recognised as significant in sociological studies, which suggested that
the ties constituting social networks were embedded with social resources (Marsden &
Campbell, 1984). These might include social capital for the pursuit of socioeconomic goals.
Having social capital enhanced farmers’ utility for NAADS. Having strong social networks
and political connections, also enhanced the farmers’ ability to take advantage of opportunities on offer from the government and strengthened their position in NAADS.
Engagement with NGOs and FBOs
As the government abandoned state-controlled cooperatives and agricultural extension services for neoliberal market-oriented policies and structures, the ‘privatisation and restructuring of government institutions created an immediate vacuum in the provision of services for farmers’
(Rao, 2009, p. 35) that NGOs bridged (Yong, 2013). At the same time, village farmers’ associations and producer groups became a vehicle for democratisation eroding the disempowering, top-down, monopolistic cleavages (Adong, 2014; Ampaire et al., 2013;
Latynskiy & Berger, 2016). Prior to structural adjustment, farmers had relied heavily on parastatals that were sold off to private investors (Kasekende & Atingi-Ego, 1999). The contribution of NGOs to agricultural development has been widely recognised (Craig & Porter,
292 2003). For the participants in this study, NGOs provided information and support in the form of credit facilities, extension services, and training in productive, profitable, and sustainable agricultural practices. NGOs have long been associated with agricultural development and facilitated the implementation of the NAADS program (Jones, 2013). They were thus well- placed to benefit from the education and technological skills development the program offered.
NGO plans and strategic activities dovetailed with NAADS’ objectives. Their NGO involvement prepared them well for the NAADS program.
Similar findings have been reported in Uzbekistan, where NGOs had sensitised community members for involvement in community projects (Stevens, 2005). NGOs in the agricultural sector had played an influential role in advocating for farmers’ interests at the national and international levels, through collaborative partnerships with local and international institutions (Zdanovskis & Pilvere, 2015). Studies conducted in Ugandan NGOs showed that, through social mobilisation and community organisation, local community groups had become stronger and more self-reliant. Elsewhere in SSA, specifically in Ghana, NGOs had long provided resources to poor farmers (Porter, 2003).
Several participants had benefited from FBOs, such as Vision TERUDO in the Ngora district and TEDDO in the Soroti district with its strategic focus on water, sanitation, and hygiene. Three participants in Mukongoro sub-county in Kumi district had received training in livestock rearing from Vision TERUDO and had been given Friesian cows from Send a Cow.
TEDDO had supported participants in the construction of wells and hand pump boreholes to irrigate their fields, especially those involved in market gardening such as growing of tomatoes.
The clean water from the wells and boreholes became available for household use, thus saving the time women spent in search of domestic water from swamps three kilometres away. Time saved was available for agricultural work, especially drying and preservation of produce, and post-harvest handling.
293 Traditional institutions
Most local structures were tied to traditional institutions representing Indigenous, rural
communities. These local administrative systems led by traditional leaders exerted a material
and spiritual influence on village life, settling conflicts through village courts. With the advent of NGOs and NAADS they had to be co-opted into local development initiatives. Informal cultural institutions have been found to play a critical role in forest preservation (Fabusoro et al., 2014).
Extended family network
Part of this traditional network is the extended family system that has long sustained labour-
intensive subsistence agriculture, but its growth has been curtailed by the availability of land,
poor productivity, and the vagaries of nature resulting in seasonal drought and floods. This
subsistence system has thrived on polygamy and large families (Lee & Whitbeck, 1990) that
severely hampered the transition to commercial farming, which NAADS aimed to engender.
As already discussed, monogamy and smaller nuclear families were essential to successful
commercial farming as was the blurring and diversification of traditional gender roles within
households. Thus, traditional sociocultural practices in rural Eastern Uganda largely worked
against the success of government programs like NAADS. However, richly rewarded were the
relative few who had made the sociocultural transition, especially those who engaged women
as partners, given women constituted most of the rural population (ROU, 2014c). Polygamy
disempowered women, tying them to traditional reproductive childrearing and household roles
(Lee & Whitbeck, 1990). Conversely, it might be argued that the transition to commercial
farming, that is, the modernisation of agriculture, undermined the sociocultural foundation of
the extended family system. Participants in this study had moved away from their traditional
ties, buying land away from their areas of birth, and establishing their homes and nuclear
294 families there. Of the 15 participants, 10 had bought their land rather than inherited family plots.
Family involvement
Farmers who actively participated with their wives as partners in their farming enterprises
reaped great benefits from NAADS and felt empowered by the program. As others have noted, there were distinct roles for men and women in the farming system, as they engaged in different crop and livestock production (Quaye et al., 2016). The men tended to concentrate on cash crop production such as coffee, tobacco, cotton, cereal grains, maize, sorghum, and millet, while the women focused on food crops for family consumption and ensured food security, while simultaneously providing labour for cash crop production (wa Githinji, Konstantinidis, &
Barenberg, 2014). These distinct gender roles were manifest among the participants, who produced mainly for market or commercial purposes especially citrus fruit, rice, and maize, while their female partners tended to engage more in food production for domestic consumption (cassava, potatoes, groundnuts, and sorghum millet). As regards livestock, the women concentrated on small ruminants, such as rabbits, pigs, poultry, goats, and sheep, and poultry, such as chicken, ducks, and turkeys, while the men concentrated on large livestock, especially cattle.
A closer examination of these findings largely indicates that gender equality was a key ingredient in the few successful cases of farmers under the NAADS program as both men and women assumed similar responsibilities in decision making on access to, and control over productive assets for agriculture (Quaye et al., 2016). In similar related studies on women’s participation in climate adaptation approaches conducted in the semi-arid farming communities of central Tanzania, ‘participation in decision-making, division of labour, resource access and control, knowledge and skills’ (Nelson & Stathers, 2009, p. 83) were critical aspects, where women made successful adaptations to climate change.
295 Education and training
There was also a relationship between education, knowledge, and attitudes and willingness to
learn new methods of agriculture pertinent to the success of progressive farmers. The model
farmers got involved in learning innovation in agriculture. They adopted and adapted new
technology, such as planting high-yielding seed varieties and using fertilisers and pesticides.
The participants were aided by extension staff conducting village-based trials in new
technology development sites, such as demonstration gardens, and social learning through copying the success of others observed during on-site visits (Bandiera & Rasul, 2006; Semana,
1999). Others have found that the learning process required complementary skills, good
numeracy, and basic science and English understanding that were a product of all model
farmers’ having attained some education (Bandiera & Rasul, 2006). Interest to search for new
information was found to be related to increased education levels and greater use of new farming methods, practices, and technologies. Better educated farmers, such as the participants
in this study, were ready and able to take risks and adopt innovative techniques and practices.
All had a formal education, with 12 having completed their secondary education and one had completed primary education, one had a degree, and one a diploma. Others have also found that engagement in training led to the increased adoption of improved agricultural practices, which, in turn, led to increased productivity and profits and improved household income and standards of living (Kijima et al., 2012). Others also reported that NAADS’ training in modern farming methods, enterprise management, leadership, and participation had changed the farmers’ attitudes towards market production moving them away from the subsistence farming practised for generations (Benin, 2011, 2012; Okoboi et al., 2012; Parkinson, 2009a).
NAADS training provided new knowledge, values, and skills that enhanced the model farmers’ capacity as agents of change. The positive changes highlighted in this study attest their ability to, and success in, negotiating NAADS’ structures, discussed in Chapter 4. Others have also
296 reported on how access to knowledge, power, and ownership had empowering effects for farmers engaged in NAADS (Desai & Joshi, 2014; Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Evenson &
Mwabu, 2001; Hauser et al., 2016; Pender, 2001).
Involvement in NAADS
Smallholder producers, through farmers’ associations and groups, became significant structures through which the government, NGOs, and private partners implemented their programs to increase productivity and food security. They were the means through which smallholder farmers accessed credit, agricultural information, and shared distribution services and market outlets (Desai & Joshi, 2014; Markelova & Mwangi, 2010). Members paid subscription fees. The Amorican farmers’ group became the formal vehicle of access to the
NAADS program in the Ngora district. It created an efficient link between fruit farmers and wholesale and retail markets in western Kenya, where there was a huge demand for fruit, thus minimising the middlemen from farm gate to consumer in the less profitable value chain. In
Soroti district, the Awukot farmers’ group had hired trucks to transport fruit to the border between Uganda and Kenya, where there was high demand for fruit produce. From there, they connected with the wholesalers and retailers and reaped higher prices. This motivated the farmers to increase their productivity to maintain these lucrative markets.
Model farmers could access the benefits of NAADS through joining or forming farmers’ associations. It was thus important for farmers to be connected to NGO and community structures associated with NAADS, especially the farmers’ associations. However, many potential participants were unable to afford the expensive subscription fees levied by some farmers’ associations that thus excluded low-income earners and subsistence farmers. Put differently, the system was designed to increase commercial farming in a context where most small landholders were engaged in subsistence farming, especially in the rural and remote areas of Eastern Uganda. Here less-educated people favoured informal community structures outside
297 the formal NAADS network (Desai & Joshi, 2014). However, the participants in this study were all actively engaged in farmers’ associations and identified attendance at meetings as vital to their success. In these meetings they made plans, exchanged views and ideas, selected enterprises, and discovered exciting new possibilities for success. Others have also reported that meetings provided one of the best avenues for involving citizens in decision making
(Williamson & Scicchitano, 2015). The farmer-to-farmer peer social learning approaches emphasised in the NAADS program helped to widen the knowledge and tools at the farmers’ disposal, and the options available to them, to make positive decisions on their agricultural enterprises and respond to the challenges inherent in rural agricultural settings (Benin, 2012;
ROU, 2008b; Wellard et al., 2013). It also promoted local knowledge and built model farmer capacity, while strengthening relationships of reciprocity and enhancing knowledge sharing
(Adong, 2014). This provided potential for low-cost information dissemination and increased the number of farmers supporting the new agricultural innovation practices advocated by
NAADS (Wellard et al., 2013) to improve long-term agricultural production, food security, and sustainable livelihoods (Friis-Hansen, 2008).
Participants saw equitable sharing and distribution of proceeds from the model gardens within respective farmer associations as promoting social cohesion and community cooperation, supported by local community norms of sharing and reciprocity. Sharing proceeds acted like a sort of microcredit, where initial beneficiaries, who kept livestock such as pigs, goats, and cows, passed their off spring to new beneficiaries within their respective farmer associations (Friis-Hansen, 2008). The revolving scheme with ISFG grants, discussed in
Chapter 4, resulted to increased availability of internally mobilised funds necessary for acquisition of improved technologies.
This section discussed the sociocultural factors that helped successful farmers benefit from NAADS. It raised the possibility that farmers and their families able to adapt to
298 modernisation were more likely to benefit from poverty action funds and programs, given they tended to target categories of households and farmers who conformed to their prototype of a model farmer, for whom the possession of assets presented major advantages, as the next section shows.
Economic factors
The economic factors that enhanced the participants’ success in NAADS, as presented in
Chapter 7, related to asset ownership, including land, livestock, transport, radios and
telephones, storage facilities, and family labour.
Asset ownership
Assets ownership played a significant role in enhancing participants’ success in NAADS (Ellis
& Bahiigwa, 2003). Land ownership was important in rural Eastern Uganda, where a large proportion of households relied on land as a source of income and food (Smith et al., 2001;
Yamano & Kijima, 2010). In this study, all the participants owned land and, consequently, received the inputs, access to credit, and technical advice to improve their productivity, supporting the findings of earlier studies in central Uganda that the amount of land owned and the nature of the land tenure system had a huge bearing on the farmers’ choices and standard of living (Deininger & Castagnini, 2006; Ellis & Freeman, 2004; Place & Otsuka, 2002). Others found that rural poverty was significantly associated with absence of land and livestock (Pender et al., 2004), while yet others demonstrated a link between assets holding and various outcomes measures (Doss et al., 2012). Limited access to asset ownership, especially land, was a constraining factor for the very poor and the destitute, who were unable to reap the benefits of
NAADS (Kydd et al., 2004). NAADS’ focus was engagement with smallholder farmers large enough to own land and able to adopt new technologies and produce substantial marketed outputs (Dorosh & Mellor, 2013).
299 A second asset was livestock to pull ox ploughs and carts to transport harvests from gardens to homes. Participants indicated the significance of oxen and ox-ploughs in simplifying their farming activities, labour productivity, and timeliness in planting and transportation of harvests. Other studies have highlighted the economic value of animal power in raising productivity, simplifying transportation of produce, especially in communities with undeveloped road systems (Asrat et al., 2010: Ebanyat et al., 2010: Nkonya et al., 2005). Others found that failure to consider access to transport was a major omission (Kelly et al., 2003).
Participants reported the importance of radios and telephones for communication and information dissemination. Numerous studies have reported similar findings (Duncombe,
2014; Duncombe & Boateng, 2009; Glendenning & Ficarelli, 2011; Martin & Abbott, 2011;
Nyareza & Dick, 2012; Place & Otsuka, 2002; Zossou et al., 2015). The participant followed government programs, connected with suppliers, kept up to date with markets and prices for their produce, and weather forecasts and updates through the radio. The UNDP MDGs progress report (UNDP, 2015) on Uganda reported that dependency on non-agricultural activities had been rising in rural parts of the country, especially the growth of the telecommunication sector which had incentivised access to business and market information for rural farmers.
Participants could take advantage of information relayed on the radio and text messages updates on agricultural prices.
Another important asset for participants was food storage facilities. With the unpredictability of production seasons, more especially the shifting rain patterns, participants could store agricultural produce for sale when prices rose and for household consumption. This ensured the constant availability of food and income for their households. It also protected produce from rodents, termites, insects, weevils, borrowing relatives, destruction from leaking roofs and invasion by pests, and enhanced their capacity to sell the produce when the prices rose (Eisen et al., 2013). Historically, in rural Uganda, granaries were commonly used to store
300 agricultural produce, especially cereals, as a better plague management strategy because it ensured the separation of the produce from human inhabitation, reducing the risks of contact with rodent invasions. However, with deteriorating food harvests and low production levels, granaries were abandoned (Ebanyat et al., 2010). With the increased production levels resulting from NAADS, the demand for improved storage facilities increased and the use of appropriate food storage practices enhanced profits for model farmers. Given NAADS did not offer storage facilities, the model farmers’ ownership of storage facilities and knowledge of their importance ensured that produce for sale and food for household consumption kept beyond harvest time.
As already discussed in Chapters 4 and 5, NAADS targeted the economically active poor, who owned productive resources, and who, through their resources, could pursue productive investment in agricultural development. The participants referred to ox ploughs, ox carts, bicycles, and wheel barrows as productive resources for transportation in a terrain characterised by small roads, swamps, and sometimes inaccessible modern road networks.
Finally, family labour constituted a further economic asset for participants. The shift of agricultural production from subsistence to market-oriented production is contingent upon the existence of household and hired labour (Doss, 2001). The findings presented in Chapters 7 and 8 highlighted the model farmer participants’ access to household and hired labour to support agricultural production. Most had relatively small nuclear families and involved their wives and children in their enterprises, as well as extended family members (McMillan, 1987).
A rotational community labour force, drawn from the local community, supplemented family labour (Doss et al., 2014; Doss, 2002).
Diversification
The model farmer participants had all diversified their production and livelihood portfolios to
ensure success. They drew on a combination of resources, assets, and investment to diversify
their agricultural practices and altered their food practices by incorporating new food into the
301 household diet (Ellis & Bahiigwa, 2003; Niehof, 2004). Collectively, the participants’ livestock activities included in pigs, poultry, Friesian cows, Boer goats and crop production included maize, rice, cassava, millet, sorghum, and citrus fruit. This blend of diversified enterprises ensured food security, healthy nutrition, and a sustained income.
The section has discussed the findings relating to the participants’ economic assets that stood them in good stead for accessing the benefits that NAADS offered as a pathway to poverty reduction. It also follows that in developing countries, physical assets, household resources and labour are positively associated with building of pathways out of poverty, and as such, asset-building interventions and social policies need to be designed properly in order to generate positive impact towards poverty reduction. The final section discusses the findings relating to the political factors associated with the model farmer participants’ success.
Political factors
The political factors mentioned by the participants included local governance and
accountability structures, political stability, and inclusion and equity, as discussed below.
Local governance and accountability structures
A system of local governance was designed to galvanise grassroots participation in the political
decision-making process within a decentralised institutional framework (Bahiigwa et al., 2005;
King, 2015; Olum, 2014; Ssonko, 2013; Steiner, 2007). The participants understood the local government structures and their relationship to NAADS that provided a platform for their success. They viewed them operationally as a means of access rather than politically to enhance performance of neoliberal markets. The local partnerships policy had far-reaching implications in Uganda, especially in rural settings, where local government was still young and growing.
With a limited educated citizenry, these partnerships could be distorted by dominant partners thus eroding local confidence in them (Craig & Porter, 2003). Though ostensibly aimed at
302 poverty reduction through popular participation and active involvement, the introduction of for-profit PSPs such as contractors, created a third sector of privatised development agents
(Béland & Howlett, 2016; Desai & Joshi, 2014; Fraser, 2005). These could be agents of exclusion for those unable to pay for the services they offered (Ilukor et al., 2015). However, the participants in this study saw the PSPs as agents of improved agricultural development that attenuated challenges of elite capture and absenteeism as well as building and consolidating collaborative relation-based referral arrangement which became imperative in improving the delivery of services.
Politically influential people and political supporters at the local government level included traditional leaders, retired civil servants, especially teachers, police, and social workers, many of whom had no prior background in agricultural development (Birner &
Resnick, 2010). These local elites held most of the power and could steer benefits to maintain existing distribution patterns (Blair, 2000). Hence, many smallholder farmers were easily bypassed by extension services, subsidised inputs, and credit access. This stood in stark contrast to the demand-driven development model NAADS promoted, where farmers exerted political leverage through their farmer groups (James et al., n.d.). It effect, these contrasting systems led to exclusive eligibility criteria to determine who participated and was selected as a model farmer (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010).
The participants highlighted the importance of elections in holding local leaders accountable and ousting poorly performing local leaders. However, the low-level participation in local council elections meant that there was little check on the power and behaviour of local leaders. National politics significantly impacted on the local election process, creating difficulties for local citizens to elect their chosen leaders to local council committees and farmer forums (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2011; Hickey, 2013). This was exacerbated by the fact that
303 rural poor peasants lacked knowledge of local leaders’ responsibilities and accountability structures.
Nevertheless, the participants believed that the extension services provided by NAADS improved accountability, especially of contracted PSPs, through the procurement committee at the sub-county level (Parkinson, 2009b). It comprised farmer representatives, who met periodically to vet PSP applications to offer advisory services and establish TDSs. Farmers’ groups also provided a platform for accountability as these groups facilitated collective decision making on bottom-up participation to strengthen farmers’ voices and power to demand services. The participants viewed these processes uncritically despite their construction within a market-oriented, demand-led, privatised service delivery (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010).
Political stability
The participants in this study had not been affected by the political turmoil that had
characterised post-independence Uganda (Robinson, 2007), especially in the Northern region
that had witnessed political instability for the past 30 or so years.
Inclusion and equity
The participants perceived NAADS structures as inclusive and equitable. They were aware of
inclusion guidelines regarding women, youth and persons with disabilities. Inclusivity and
equitability increased representation and offered significant benefits, and came with leadership
experience, skill acquisition, and empowerment. However, only one woman and one person
with a disability participated in this study.
304 Physical factors and environmental
Climate change
The physical and environmental factors discussed by participants related to complex climatic
changes impacting on agriculture, including higher temperatures, greater crop water demand,
erratic rainfall accompanied by extreme weather conditions like heatwaves, floods, and
droughts, land degradation, and pest control (Gornall et al 2010). The participants adapted
innovations to address these challenges and to increase the value and productivity of their
assets, such as land, labour, and capital. They attempted to mitigate the negative impacts of
these changes through sound agricultural practices and land-use management approaches
(Hisali et al., 2011; James, 2010), such as diversification, as already discussed, small-scale
irrigation, and water conservation through rainwater harvesting. Participants integrated their
traditional knowledge with new technologies to enhance their adaptive capacity and ensure
their success. They exchanged information with other smallholder farmers, for example, on the
anticipated arrival and progress of rains. Indigenous knowledge and practices, included the use of local languages as an important sociocultural factor, promoted cooperation, coordination, and monitoring of climate changes. This proved useful in informing agricultural decisions regarding planting seasons, preparation of gardens, acquisition of farm equipment, and the adoption and diffusion of agricultural knowledge (Bamigboye, 2016; Eilola et al., 2014;
Hoffmann et al., 2007; Irangani & Shiratake, 2013).
Soil and land management
Smallholder farmers with long-term interaction with their soils, provided deep insights into the sustainable management of tropical soils, as they developed approaches of identifying and classifying local indicators of soil quality properties and suitability (Barrios et., 2001). In the
Sahel region of SSA, the smallholder farmers practised zero tilling, mulching, fallowing, agro-
305 forestry, and organic farming as a means for natural resource conservation (Nyong et al., 2007).
This kind of indigenous knowledge served in the development of sustainable agriculture through climate mitigation and adaptation strategies. The agricultural development and technology transfer approach pursued under NAADS tapped into this local knowledge and the strength of participatory collaboration in local Indigenous networks (Afranakwapong &
Nkonya, 2015). NAADS maximised the benefits of indigenous knowledge for enhancing agricultural development programs, while integrating social and natural scientific methods
(Osbahr & Allan, 2003). For participants to reap the benefits of NAADS, they opted for different techniques involving a combination of both improved modern knowledge and indigenous knowledge.
The participants adopted a combination of improved crop and animal breeds suited to local environmental and physical conditions, and meeting needs. They talked of informal innovations and the selection of appropriate technology, such as planting materials stemming from their own sources. They highlighted their capability to define soils according to location, potential for production, and perceptions of constraints and opportunities, coupled with their ability to mediate access to different kinds of resources. Some indicated their ability to identify soils suitable for farming activities. In Ongino sub-county in Kumi district, the participants talked of their soils being more suitable for animal than crop husbandry. In Mukura sub-county,
Ngora district, participants spoke of their soils being suitable for groundnuts and citrus growing, those crops having been grown there for centuries. The interaction of model farmers and their soils gave deep insights on the quality and suitability of their soils and what enterprises could best be supported, generating success once they had received training through
NAADS on modern agricultural technology (Ebanyat et al., 2010; Payton et al., 2003).
The farmers had implemented cropping patterns prior to NAADS program, such as new combinations of crops, crop rotation, spacing, and use of fertilisers. This prior knowledge of
306 cropping patterns was easily improved with the advent of NAADS (Friis-Hansen, 2008).
Participants also talked about other sociocultural innovations, such as allowing herds of cows to pass through the cultivated garden several times for a period of not less than two hours to ramp up the soil after planting grains (millet, rice, and sorghum) This ensured that grains were covered by soils through a natural process of cows passing over it, as well as dung being harvested as either local manure or fertilisers. Other dimensions of sociocultural innovations exploited by the participants were the dissemination agricultural knowledge through local informal network in rural villages. They talked of new innovations being shared orally through their social networks. Such personal communication from the neighbours facing similar circumstances was easily trusted beyond formal training in NAADS. Besides talking to each other, the participants monitored their activities, technology use, crop and animal diversification, and new practices (Davis et al., 2012). Cohen and Levinthal (1990) suggested that the ability of farmers to recognise, assimilate, integrate, and apply new information to their production decisions, purposes, and practices rested on, and was determined by, their prior related knowledge and experience.
Pest control
The high-yielding seed varieties promoted by NAADS were susceptible to pests (Eisen et al.,
2013). As already discussed, storage facilities available to all the study participants facilitated
pest control and management. Further, the availability of knowledge resources from NAADS,
combined with Indigenous knowledge, permitted the participants to deal with seasonal
occurrences of pests and diseases that could cripple smallholder agriculture. Termites,
especially, damaged crops, like cassava, maize, groundnuts, and millet. NAADS taught the
participants scientific control measures, mainly the use of chemicals, to control pests. Termites also affected livestock, especially Friesian cows, as they damaged the grass and maize used as feedstock.
307 Conclusion
Chapter 9 discussed the findings in relation to the literature presented in previous chapters, highlighting the self-perpetuating impact of NAADS’ neoliberal intentions to create wealth and economic growth. It argued that, rather than a program for poverty reduction, NAADS was a development project aimed at agricultural transformation. Its supportive structures and processes introduced sociocultural changes that altered the fabric of rural households and the farming enterprises in which they engaged. Despite the stated aims of poverty reduction, food security, and sustainable livelihoods, demand-driven development was the key turn (James et al., n.d.). As Rowden (2010) observed, development did not necessarily equal poverty reduction. Uganda’s agricultural development program was a clear indication of this with its aim of enhancing productive export-led agriculture. One might argue that NAADS sought to identify, find, acculturate, and support ‘model farmers’ for this purpose. Success bred success.
Hence, nuclear households able to adapt to, and benefit from, the modernisation framework would be supported. In effect, poverty action funds and agricultural programs, undergirded by a neoliberal market orientation, targeted categories of households and ‘model farmers’, who constituted a very small percentage of the overall population engaged in agriculture, even though its target was the poor rural farmers, 85% of whom engaged in rural subsistence agriculture (Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Friis-Hansen, 2008; (James, 2010; ROU, 2015). NAADS’ benefits accrued to a very small minority. One might conclude that international development aid, channeled through public-private partnership initiatives, such as NAADS, played a key role in perpetuating inequalities and benefitting the population unevenly.
308 CHAPTER 10
Conclusions and recommendations
Informed by global development discourse, SSA governments developed and implemented
successive interventions to reduce extreme poverty and food insecurity, with variable success
(Apodaca, 2010; Dijkstra, 2002; Harrison, 2001; Hickey, 2013; Konkel, 2014; Sachs, 2005,
2008). The Ugandan government constructed its poverty-reduction plan to align with
international development aid policy that has achieved some success in recent years
(Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Hickey, 2013). However, rural poverty levels
remained high as the majority were excluded from development policy interventions. This
study provided insights into the development theories adopted following World War II to
explain and understand factors impacting on development in SSA. As indicated in Chapter 1,
the constant thread is modernisation theory.
Consistent with these theories, the study showed how dominant international
development policy had influenced Uganda’s national priorities and premier agricultural
development and poverty-alleviation program, NAADS. It revealed how NAADS was
constructed and implemented within the plan to modernise agriculture. This, it was presumed
would add to knowledge from past studies on agricultural development in Uganda (Adong,
2014; Afranakwapong & Nkonya, 2015; Ampaire et al., 2013; Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Barungi et al., 2016; Benin, 2011, 2012; Benin et al., 2007; Fan & Zhang, 2008; James, 2010; James et
al., n.d.; Joughin & James, 2010; Kjaer & Joughin, 2012; 2017; Lawson et al., 2006; Okoboi
et al., 2012, 2013; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006; Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b, 2010).
The study revealed important insights from the perspectives and experiences of
successful farmers, who had benefited from NAADS, on factors contributing to their success.
309 The rationale for this research focus was the researcher’s belief that the experience of successful farmers would provide a critical insight into the implementation of poverty reduction efforts and, at the same time, provide guidelines for less successful farmers wanting to reap NAADS benefits. In so doing, it addressed the following research questions:
1. What policy factors shaped Uganda’s poverty reduction measures and NAADS’
central in poverty reduction?
2. What were the processes and structures of NAADS and how did they enable
participation, ownership and empowerment in agricultural development?
3. What were the experiences of successful beneficiaries and how had they engaged
in its processes and structures of NAADS?
4. What were the characteristics of ‘successful’ model farmers in the NAADS
program?
5. What factors shaped ‘model farmers’ experiences of success within NAADS?
Before turning attention to the study’s implications and suggestions for further study, this chapter begins with the conclusions of the study as follows:
1. External influence affected policy construction and implementation.
2. Non-economic considerations were vitally important to NAADS’ success
3. NAADS changed over the course of implementation
3.1 Though privatised at the outset, the government reclaimed advisory services
3.2 NAADS floundered due to the local governments’ lack of capacity to deliver
advisory services within decentralised governance.
4. NAADS’ key objectives related to productive agriculture.
5. NAADS’ focus was local farmers in local contexts.
6. NAADS benefited targeted groups unequally.
310 7. Model farmers benefited because they fit NAADS’ eligibility criteria.
8. NAADS facilitated the model farmers’ success.
Conclusions
1. External influences affected policy construction and implementation
Through its exploration and analysis of dominant development discourses and the policy
trajectories they informed, this study demonstrated the enormous influence of external agencies in establishing Uganda’s national priorities on poverty alleviation and development
(Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Harrison, 2001; Hickey, 2013). In examining the development of post-war global international development policy from the earlier phases of modernisation and structural adjustment to comprehensive development, PRSPs, the HIPC initiative, and poverty alleviation, it highlighted the neoliberal trajectory of economic development tied to conditional aid (Hickey, 2013; Lie, 2015). Despite successive development policies, millions of people remain poor in Uganda. Most disadvantaged are the rural poor, despite Uganda’s targeted poverty eradication and national development plans (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Fraser, 2005; Hickey, 2013; Lie, 2015: ROU, 2015). International pressure toward market fundamentalism hampered Uganda’s efforts to construct its own social development policies responsive to national and local needs (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006,
2011; Hickey, 2013). This might change in coming years as remittances from the Ugandan diaspora overtake international aid and alter the unequal power relations between Uganda and external institutions (Fraser, 2005; Lie, 2015).
2. Non-economic considerations were vitally important to NAADS’ success
NAADS’ brief was to provide education to move largely unproductive smallholder subsistence
farmers to lucrative productive agriculture using the latest research and technology
311 (AfranaaKwapong & Nkonya, 2015; Benin, 2011, 2012; Barungi et al., 2016). Though its development coincided with PEAP and its goals of poverty reduction, essentially NAADS’ focus was agricultural transformation for economic gain (AfranaaKwapong & Nkonya, 2015).
Enhancing productivity and profit required major infrastructure investment and plantation agriculture to maximise yields (Collier & Dercon, 2014; Easterly, 2001, 2006; Rostow, 1990;
Sachs, 2005, 2008). The government, in partnership with international donors, invested heavily in agricultural development placing a key emphasis on advisory services, despite their variable past success (Friis-Hansen & Kisauzi, 2002; James et al., n.d.). It saw farmer education as key to behavioural change and developed a complex hierarchical structure within NAADS to educate farmers about modern farming practices (Friis Hansen, 2008). However, little was said about the sociocultural barriers to agricultural transformation and the non-economic factors prohibiting widespread participation. This study found sobriety, religion, traditional structures, monogamy, and small families played a major role in successful participation in NAADS.
Though more had been written about political factors (Kjaer & Joughin, 2012, 2017), these too determined who benefited and who was excluded, especially at election times, when government used platforms like NAADS to score favours with prospective voters. This changed the entire participatory ethos of NAADS, as government assumed more centralised control for a program built on local government involvement and privatised services (Kjaer &
Joughin, 2012; 2017). There was, too, a greater awareness of environmental factors and the devastating impact of climatic events on poor communities. However, economic and political considerations trumped environmental concerns in development programs.
3. NAADS changed over the course of implementation
The documentary analysis in the first half of this thesis showed how dominant development
discourses shaped policy trajectories relating to poverty reduction and development. It
demonstrated the enormous influence of external agencies in establishing Uganda’s national
312 priorities in these areas (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Harrison, 2001; Hickey, 2013;
Verschoor, 2007). By the time NAADS was introduced in 2001, policy had shifted to a new phase of modernisation and structural adjustment that sought less government involvement and increasing privatisation of services within comprehensive development frameworks, like the
PRSPs following the HIPC initiative. This poverty reduction phase, though still focused on economic development, emphasised human development and people’s participation in externally funded government programs. Yet, millions of people remained poor in Uganda.
Most disadvantaged were the rural poor, despite Uganda’s targeted poverty eradication and national development plans (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Fraser, 2005; Hickey,
2013; Lie, 2015: ROU, 2015; Verschoor, 2007). NAADS straddled the poverty reduction and development continuum being part of PEAP and the PMA. It was part of the international thrust for the national government to construct and take ownership of its own development policies so they would be responsive to national and local needs (Canagarajah & van Diesen, 2006,
2011; Hickey, 2013). However, this changed as the government gradually brought advisory services and the financing thereof under central control (Barungi et al., 2016; Kjaer & Joughin,
2007; Makoba & Wakoko-Studstill, 2015).
3.1 Though privatised at the outset, the government reclaimed extension
At the outset, foreign donors funded 80% of NAADS’ budget and had a huge influence on the
evolution of participatory advisory services. The election in 2006 marked the turning point at
which the government realised that the farmer network NAADS had created provided a
gateway to win the votes of the majority rural population in Uganda (Joughin & Kjaer, 2010).
The government also changed the way it dispensed financial services to local farmers that
severely disadvantaged those without access to credit (Makoba & Wakoko-Studstill, 2015).
Gone were the cooperatives and traditional savings schemes that had long sustained subsistence agriculture (Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006; Wairimu et al., 2016). Without credit, the farmers could
313 not implement the knowledge and resources gained through NAADS. They could not diversify their farming operations, regardless of their participation in NAADS or the advice and education they received (AfranaKwapong, 2015; Benin, 2011, 2012). They could not build commercially productive agribusinesses, improve their livelihoods, and enhance household food security and nutrition (AfranaKwapong, 2015; Benin, 2011, 2012; Nkonya et al., 2005;
ROU, 2010a). Thus, without access to finance, education fell on fallow ground. Model farmers succeeded because they had assets and access to credit. They had something to offer and, therefore, could participate in farmers’ groups and access ISFG and advisory services.
Initially, agricultural advisory services and rural finance were provided by private agencies with government creating the complex institutional structure for their efficient operation (Makoba & Wakoko-Studstill, 2015). Reduced public involvement in the long run was anticipated to allow private professionals to fill the gaps created in service provision and delivery, while competition would encourage them to do so at the lowest cost possible (Barungi et al 2016; Okoboi et al., 2013; Opolot & Kuteesa, 2006). However, this did not eventuate, and a complex system of microfinancing instead evolved under the government’s control to enable farmers to capitalise on the knowledge and technology NAADS had opened their eyes to
(Makoba & Wakoko-Studstill, 2015). Despite the huge investment in agricultural development, the country continued to witness cyclical food insecurity in rural areas with the UN declaring in 2016 that 70% of the Ugandan population was in the food emergency zone (ROU, 2017;
Wairimu et al., 2016). Many of these rural, smallholder farmers were women (ROU, 2015;
Wakabi, 2006). Most vulnerable were widows, female headed-households, orphans, and young males, who, despite NAADS’ inclusive guidelines, could not meet the minimum requirements for entry into the farmers’ associations and NAADS’ programs (Adongo, 2014; Ampaire et al.,
2013; Benin, 2012; Kjaer & Joughin, 2012; Bahiigwa et al., 2005). The NAADS policy
314 framework had effectively prioritised farmers with resources, who could adopt demonstrated technologies (Ekou, 2013).
3.2 NAADS floundered due to the local governments’ lack of capacity to deliver
advisory services
Initially, NAADS was part of the government’s decentralisation framework in which the onus
of good governance was devolved onto local government. Chapter 7 showed how model
farmers negotiated the complex structure of demand- or user-driven agricultural services
(Adong, 2014; Ampaire et al., 2013; Bahiigwa et al., 2005; Wairimu et al., 2016). For services to be demand-driven, farmers had to be educated about these structures and the role they had to play to access advisory services starting with membership of farmers’ groups (Parkinson,
2009a, 2009b). Their participation in these groups then empowered them to be outspoken about the kind of services they wanted to support their enterprises. However, they first had to learn about the best kind of crops to grow or livestock to rear in their geographical location. This meant understanding soil and climate conditions, and land management to get the best yields.
They also had to learn to manage their business operations, keep records, and expand them to generate local employment. As well as growing or rearing conditions, and business management skills, they needed storage facilities to store surpluses for hard times when droughts or floods hit. Once they were running productive enterprises, they had to learn about markets and how to access them and they needed transport to get their produce to central markets. This needed a good transport system, and so on.
Thus, advisory services provided comprehensive education and support to help largely uneducated poor rural farmers learn new skills and alter their farming practices. But they were interwoven with local government administrative units, as outlined in Chapter 5, that were often overstretched and lacked the human resource capacity and associated resources to
315 effectively support them (Kjaer & Joughin, 2017; Steiner, 2007). Meaningful citizen participation and service delivery within the framework of good governance promoted by international institutions, therefore, proved very hard to achieve in rural Uganda (Canagarajah
& van Diesen, 2006, 2011; Golooba-Mutebi & Hickey, 2010; Kjaer & Joughin, 2017; Forster
& Mijumbi, 2002; Mijumbi, 2001; Steiner, 2007, 2010).
There were inevitable tensions and competition in which those who were already advantaged were best prepared to benefit from the opportunities on offer (Bahiigwa et al.,
2005). Further, economic development goals had long been in tension with local ownership, participation, and empowerment, and universal poverty reduction guidelines (Andrews, 2013;
Hickey, 2013; Stiglitz, 2002b). Successive comprehensive development frameworks from
PEAP and NAADS to the NDP were all framed within the discourse of structural transformation that had predominated despite the rhetoric and ideal of local ownership of development (Hickey, 2012, 2013; Stiglitz, 2002b; Whitfield, 2009). Uganda’s Development
Strategy and Investment Plan reconfigured NAADS to focus on the economic objectives of employment and increased productive agricultural for export markets (Barungi et al., 2016; van
Waeyenberg & Bargawi, 2015; Wairimu et al., 2016). Thus, though NAADS was configured on good governance principles linked to farmer participation and ownership, and local control of resources, its over-riding focus remained economic – to increase agricultural productivity through modern advanced technological and scientific agricultural practices.
4. NAADS’ key objectives related to productive agriculture
Modernising agriculture to foster economic growth through increased agricultural productivity was the key focus of NAADS. A cynical view of NAADS would construe it as an economic development and wealth creation initiative rather than a poverty reduction program. The model-farmer framework disproportionately benefitted individuals who owned land and key productive assets. There were several mechanisms to ensure model farmers rose to the top.
316 Since technology development and demonstration sites relied on participating farmers’ contribution of land, those able to contribute in this way, received compensatory benefits, such as fully resourced productive gardens. Thus, some might see the framing of NAADS as a poverty reduction measure as misleading. Rowden (2010) might see it as a clear example of development that did not necessarily equate to poverty reduction given its exclusive focus on successful farmers, which built on already wealthy individuals and expanded the well-being and quality of life of those already engaged in productive agriculture (Adong, 2014; Benin,
2011, 2012; Benin et al., 2007).
Initially, NAADS followed the privatisation model recommended by donor institutions that financed its programs. The contractual agreements between farmers’ associations and private service providers, which gave a semblance of accountability, effectively aimed to increase private sector involvement in advisory service provision. Conversely, it decreased government involvement in direct service provision, constructing its major role as policy development. Further, though enterprise selection was a vehicle of empowerment, it was also an effective tool for encouraging participants to select viable commercial enterprises to fulfil an export market orientation. To this end, farmers’ associations and forums aligned farmers’ investment interests and priorities at the village level with export expectations that drastically altered traditional perspectives on subsistence farming to fulfill family needs. Farmers now viewed agriculture as a profitable enterprise and counted crops and livestock, not as an indication of family wealth, but as potential sources of loss or gain. In effect, potentially the new policy dispensation went deeper and achieved what structural adjustment had failed to do:
Succeed in creating a small capitalist stronghold in rural areas and deepening a market orientation.
In short, NAADS success as a poverty alleviation strategy has yet to be determined and its effectiveness in achieving the economic goal of productive agriculture warrants further
317 systematic study. This study underscored that, while improving farmers’ access to advisory services, rural finance, and regional markets as key aspects of rural agricultural development, the approach taken, namely, service delivery initially through a privatised, market orientation, and politicisation during the 2006 elections, effectively dented direct poverty reduction efforts.
By examining the discourses shaping development, the study framed NAADS’ emergence within international development policy that informed national development priorities, agricultural development as wealth creation, and the programmatic structure to identify and nurture model farmers for productive agriculture to service profitable export markets. It has contributed useful information on how model farmers perceived and used NAADS, how they interacted with its structures and processes to enhance the productivity of their farming enterprises, bearing in mind that they started out with distinct advantages that predisposed them to success. The findings showed that a combination of interacting social, cultural, economic, political, physical, and environmental factors predisposed the farmers to success. The model farmers underscored the importance of local factors in enhancing agricultural productivity and only indirectly, poverty reduction and food security.
5. NAADS’ focus was local farmers in local contexts
Despite critiques that externally driven policies would be imposed uniformly and
indiscriminately on local communities (Fraser, 2005; Lie, 2015), the experiences of the farmers in this study were varied and rich and reflected the nuances of local, rural settings in rural
Eastern Uganda, and their meaningful engagement with NAADS. It also showed how NAADS had engaged effectively with local, traditional institutions and NGOs to leverage social capital to support and enhance its activities (Birner & Wittmer, 2003; Ekou, 2013). NAADS absorbed already existing social capital networks, including clan associations, burial groups, village savings clubs, and women’s groups, realising the importance of adding to already existing social momentum (Adong, 2014; Kjær & Joughin, 2012; Latynskiy & Berger, 2016). It brought
318 in local institutions that were trusted by community members and involved local leaders, such as chiefs and heads of clans, to enhance the program’s local acceptability (Bastiaensen et al.,
2005; Craig, 1997; Jones, 2013).
NAADS began its interactions with farmers by acculturating potential beneficiaries into its participatory structures, processes, and operating procedures. Once this had been successfully accomplished, the farmers were encouraged to exercise their voice in demanding the advisory and supportive services they required to enhance their agricultural productivity
(Benin, 2011, 2012). NAADS initially worked on a model of demand-driven development built on the logic that once educated and inducted into farmers’ groups, farmers would demand what they wanted from privatised advisory services and PSPs would provide this (James et al., n.d.).
It employed a reactive model of development built on ostensibly proactive participatory processes (Parkinson, 2009a, 2009b). However, there were strong parameters to what NAADS offered and how its resources and benefits were to be accessed. Through its processes, model farmers bargained for what NAADS had to offer, a process they experienced as empowering.
6. NAADS benefited targeted groups unequally
Those who benefited, like model farmers, tended to already fit the profile of ideal NAADS’ beneficiaries: they had something to offer, they could afford to join farmers’ groups and pay membership fees. They had assets and owned land that they could make available for NAADS training and education sites. Less likely to benefit were farmers from poor and vulnerable groups with nothing or very little to bring to the table. When cooperatives were disbanded in favour of the privatised services NAADS promoted initially, poor farmers bore the brunt of their demise and were even less well-off with the microfinancing system was introduced under central government control. This was because these disadvantaged farmers had even less chance of accessing the credit so vital to modernising their subsistence farms. Time away from small-scale subsistence farming to attend NAADS’ meetings, workshops, and seminars meant
319 even lower farming yields for already struggling farmers. The significance of moving from traditional institutions like cooperatives and subsistence farms could only be fully grasped with awareness of the sociocultural structures and practices that had sustained millions of poor families far removed from government assistance. They had the most to lose and without cultural sensitivity and awareness, could not be enticed to change their farming ways. Though this study focused on how model farmers successfully negotiated NAADS’ structures, the findings on non-economic factors pointed to the need for a different system for poor rural farmers taking advisory services to their door, as it were. The study also showed that education alone would not lead to behavioural change. There were other sociocultural and familial factors that supported farmers in carrying forward new knowledge to manage successful agribusinesses. It showed that NAADS had enjoyed some, though limited, success, as most poor rural farmers who had not been reached lacked knowledge on how to improve agricultural productivity and were still trying to eke out a living through unproductive subsistence agriculture.
7. Model farmers benefited because they fit NAADS’ eligibility criteria
A major conclusion of this study was that NAADS targeted farmers that fit their participation
criteria. This might also be interpreted as farmers that fit NAADS’ eligibility criteria were most likely to achieve the successful outcomes NAADS anticipated (Benin, 2011, 2012). These farmers were of sober habits, in monogamous marriages, with relatively small nuclear families.
Their wives and family members participated in their farming enterprises. They followed
Christian and Western values and believed in the virtue of hard work and commitment. They were self-reliant, possessed assets to bring to the NAADS initiative, and understood the machinations of its programs. Thus, the farmers were model farmers before their entry into
NAADS – richer individuals who were much easier to work with, and could afford program requirements. Besides, they had political connections and access to microfinance. Put
320 differently, NAADS targeted farmers with viable enterprises and helped make them more productive (Barungi et al., 2016; Mutimba, 2014; Okoboi et al., 2013). They targeted model farmers to provide stories of the program’s success. Bahiigwa et al. (2005) believed that, due to its preoccupation with, and focus on, the privileged minority and resource ownership as an entry point, NAADS excluded most of the rural poor. In time, through its commercial orientation in the supply and demand of agricultural services, the idea was that NAADS would itself become a stand-alone, sustainable private enterprise so the government could then redirect public resources to pro-poor interventions, though this did not eventuate (Parkinson,
2009b). A different picture might have emerged from a study of poor, less successful farmers to identify the barriers hindering their access to NAADS. Indirectly, this study supported prior findings on NAADS’ failure to target the poorest of the poor (Rwamigisa et al., 2013).
8. NAADS facilitated the model farmers’ success
NAADS provided the infrastructure and training to facilitate the model farmers’ success. Its
policies and structures conformed initially to international funders’ requirements for
participatory, democratic, and accountable processes. International development policy placed
the onus on national governments to provide political stability and institute decentralised local
governance with accountability structures. In keeping with the African Union’s pledge that
African countries would commit one per cent of their GDP to agricultural research and
development, Uganda invested heavily in this area. It became one of the few African countries, along with Malawi and South Africa, to meet this target (Mutimba, 2014; ROU, 2010a;
Wopereis et al., 2008). NAADS provided a business model for agricultural enterprises that rested on diversification. It led model farmers through a business development cycle from enterprise selection, to business management, financing, marketing, grain storage, and market distribution as its outward-growth strategy linked the agricultural sector to regional markets within a restructured rural economy (Barungi et al., 2016; Kay, 2008). Mutations and shifts
321 followed as poor farmers attempted to reconfigure their livelihoods by adopting elements of this new business approach while pursuing their old activities (Kay, 2008). As Fan and Xhang
(2008) believed that administrative weaknesses prevented African countries, including
Uganda, from emulating the scale of China and South-East Asia’s agricultural development miracle. This study provided some insights into the African cultural differences that predisposed rural families to short-term subsistence farming.
Implications of the study
This study was motivated partly by the lack of context-focused research with poverty reduction measures extensively studied at the macrolevel rather than in local rural contexts (Adong, 2014;
Hickey, 2013; Lie, 2015). The disadvantage of qualitative, context-focused research, such as this study on Eastern Uganda, is that the results cannot be generalised to a wider population. In
Eastern Uganda, poverty levels were high (ROU, 2014c, 2017) and the number of model farmers was likely to represent a small minority of farmers in this region. Nevertheless, the perspectives of successful rural model farmers provided useful and insightful information on how global aid driven programs, like NAADS, could succeed more broadly. Thus, the guidelines emanating from this study could be used in farmer recruitment, briefing, and training to enhance their acceptability to NAADS. The model farmers showed that, rather than being a total failure in Uganda, NAADS had enjoyed some success, even in a high-poverty region, such as Eastern Uganda. The model farmers’ experiences might hold the key to increasing NAADS’ chances of success more broadly. While at a whole-of-population level, measures might show dire results, at the context-driven level, a more hopeful picture emerged. ‘What worked and what did not work’ for the successful model farmers is useful not only to policy makers and
NAADS’ officials, but also to other rural smallholder farmers still entrenched in poverty and wanting to access the benefits of NAADS.
322 This study suggests the importance of a local focus and the tailoring of development programs to enhance the livelihoods of local people in rural communities, where poverty levels remain high. Ways need to be found to support local community initiatives drawing on their strengths and assets, such as local leadership structures. In situations like rural Eastern Uganda, specifically in the Kumi, Ngora, and Soroti districts, where poverty levels and poverty incidence remain high, there is an urgent need to address the financial constraints preventing rural smallholder farmers from joining local farmer associations. There are millions of farmers in need of support and subsidies to farmers’ associations in poor communities would go a long way in increasing membership and access to training and ensuring NAADS increased its reach at the local, village level.
NAADS’ focus on agricultural production for the market had dire consequences for food security (ROU, 2017). Enterprise selection was driven by export interests rather than food production for local consumption. The model farmers focused on market production, though with less attention to household food security. To reach poor farmers, NAADS would have to offer access to credit for those without assets, expand and pursue targeted training for those with completely no skills, while at the same time incentivise meeting attendance with a kind of financial inducements and other opportunities such as increased provision of inputs and facilitation of collective marketing of outputs, food production emphasis, and visitation to demonstration sites or exposure visitations. Besides, small-scale irrigation schemes should be emphasised to target smallholder farmers in the context of climate variability. Equitable opportunities and well-managed local structures might facilitate increased local engagement so poor farmers could benefit from productive farming ventures and improved yields
(Rwamigisha et al., 2013). Modern agricultural practices and methods should be accompanied by a strong local institutional framework, a vibrant extension service-delivery system, and
323 skilled labour force to take farmers through modern methods of farming, thus generating high yields and secure livelihoods.
The study also suggested that increased political competition, especially from rural communities, could generate the social momentum to demand policies that meet the aspirations of rural poor farmers and their families (King, 2015; Steiner, 2007). In the absence of political competition, policies would continue to reflect an urban bias, as the urban population constituted more organised interest groups than rural folk. The presence of electoral competition would incentivise political leaders to adopt broad-based public policies with an eye on the voting majority who, in most cases, were rural smallholder farmers (Golloba-Mutebi
& Hickey, 2010; King, 2015; Steiner, 2007). Bates and Block (2013) indicated the importance of competitive electoral process in creating policies favourable to rural farmers. James and
Francis (2003) showed that, under decentralisation, service delivery had remained ineffective due to limited service civic engagement with local governments to ensure downward accountability and equity. Necessary efforts beyond modernisation, economic growth, and market opportunities must be highlighted to improve people’s living conditions (Ojambo,
2012; Steiner, 2010; Wairimu et al., 2016).
In short, the main rationale for the research focus on model farmers was the researcher’s belief that the experience of successful farmers would provide guidelines for less successful farmers so that they too might reap NAADS’ benefits. From the study’s findings, these guidelines might include the following:
1. Familiarise yourself with the structure and operations of NAADS.
2. Participate in its structures by joining a local farmer’s group and paying co-fund.
3. Attend meetings and training sessions.
4. Communicate on the infrastructure you need to manage or optimise your farm’s
potential.
324 5. Make these assets; including land, transport, and farm machinery available for
training and technology development sites if you possess them.
6. Ensure that you have storage facilities to stockpile grain for sale when the price is
right.
7. Engage in the farmer institutional development initiative by visiting
experimentation and technical development sites, and farmers’ field schools.
8. Participate in training relating to enterprise selection and participate in decision
making on enterprise development and diversification to maximise your land’s
potential.
9. Access microfinance, where this is available.
10. Ensure you are connected via phone and radio to follow important weather
predictions and gain information and advice on planning and marketing to enhance
your farming enterprise.
11. Practice sustainable agricultural and soil and land-management practices, which are
context specific.
12. Involve your immediate family, most importantly husband and wife working as
partners, and enlist the support of extended family network in developing and
managing your farming enterprise.
13. Actively get closer and involved in the local government structures and activities
both at community level as well as the sub-county.
14. Make the best use of local institutional frameworks especially existing local NGOs,
CBOs, local churches, and CSOs, and take advantage of their activities.
15. Diversify your production or be willing to diversify the enterprise choice;
participate in crop farming as well as animal rearing
325 These guidelines could be accompanied by a briefing sheet on the factors contributing to the success of model farmers (shown in Appendix H).
The study also led to insights into understanding the patterns of human interaction, consequences, and changes associated with the NAADS program at various levels, namely, the micro, mezzo, macro, and international levels of development. At the international level were international development institutions dispensing aid and financing 80% of NAADS budget, at the macro level was the national government with its sector ministries overseeing policy development and priority setting, while at the mezzo level were the regional institutional networks. At the community level were individual households, farmers, and famer associations and other actors who were targeted by the NAADS framework of intervention. The study yielded interesting lessons regarding interactions between these levels, most importantly how universal development policies filter down to different levels and context, thus failing to generate universal results, while at the same time situating social scientists at the centre of policy-making process. In this way, the study went beyond the scope of NAADS program, by researching social dimensions and social organisational barriers to successful poverty reduction intervention. This provides a very important contribution to understanding how social considerations affect poverty reduction in societies that are tied to their traditional ways of life.
Suggestions for further research
One potential area for further research would be to undertake similar studies in other regions
of Uganda to provide further understanding of the effectiveness of NAADS. Studies of less
successful farmers are needed to highlight the barriers to their access to NAADS and how these might be overcome. In other words, it could be argued that, by only engaging privileged farmers, the findings of this study are largely removed from the realities of less privileged farmers who remain entrenched in poverty and food insecurity. Further research is also needed
326 on the impact of NAADS on wealth creation, enhancing agricultural productivity, improving
Uganda’s agricultural export markets, poverty alleviation, food security, and sustainable livelihoods.
Another area warranting in-depth study is the involvement of vulnerable groups in
NAADS, such as women, young people, and people with disabilities. Women, especially, constitute a large group involved in rural smallholder agriculture within Uganda’s patriarchal society, where they experience discrimination due, among other factors, to land-ownership and inheritance laws. These laws need to be changed to ensure women have equal access to
NAADS and its benefits.
Relatedly, further research might explore ways in which international development organisations might enhance the effectiveness of inclusive development policy to create opportunities for rural women. Women’s participation remains limited, despite guidelines for inclusion in NAADS’ policies. The sociocultural and legal factors preventing their participation clearly need to be addressed in policy and legislation. It would thus become illegal to exclude women from development programs. Since there are many female-headed households in rural areas, a focus on women’s empowerment would likely have a major positive impact on poverty alleviation and food security. Case studies of women’s experience would go a long way to highlight the need for sociocultural and legislative change towards greater gender equality.
Overall, while the findings of this new study widen the knowledge and understanding on international development policy and its influence on national government’s priorities on poverty reduction and food security, more detailed studies on other international development programs such as: Roll Back Malaria; Universal Primary Education; Feed the Future; Rural
Water Supply and Sanitation; Rural Electrification and Energy Africa; the Millennium Village
Project; and among others are needed in both the Ugandan and SSA context. The NAADS program adopted under the universal PRSPs and HIPC initiative in 2001, is expected to run up
327 to 2026, and will require more rigorous and detailed studies at the end of the program to establish a clear and balanced picture of its overall impact among all the beneficiaries. This highlights a need for additional studies premised on the lessons from the findings of prior studies, including this one.
Conclusion
The study found that NAADS could be considered a success but only in a very limited fashion, given its lack of reach and extremely selective basis for participation. Most importantly, it excluded women and other vulnerable groups. Few studies had focused on NAADS’ role in contributing to or exacerbating food security. While the model farmers had achieved food security, the fact that it had not reached most poor rural subsistence farmers had a potentially devastating impact on the wider community and the nation as a whole. Conversely, widespread participation in NAADS-type practices could potentially be of immense benefit to those it excluded through its complex fee-based farmer group structure. This case study of NAADS demonstrated the need for a much more context-specific analysis of wide-scale development
‘solutions’ and programs and potentially the need for locally-derived and locally-based programs rather than singular universal ones.
328 REFERENCES
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2002). Reversal of fortune: Geography and
institutions in the making of the modern world income distribution. Quarterly Journal
of Economics, 117(4), 1231-1294.
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2005). The rise of Europe: Atlantic trade,
institutional change, and economic growth. American Economic Review, 95(3), 546-
579.
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2006). Understanding prosperity and poverty:
Geography, institutions, and the reversal of fortune. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Addison, T., Hulme, D., & Kanbur, S. M. R. (Eds.). (2009). Poverty dynamics
interdisciplinary perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Adong, A. (2014). Impact of households’ membership of farmer groups on the adoption of
agricultural technologies in Uganda: Evidence from the Uganda census of agriculture
2008/09. Agricultural Economics Research, Policy and Practice in Southern Africa,
53(2), 108-136.
Afranakwapong, N., & Nkonya, E. (2015). Agricultural extension reforms and development in
Uganda. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 7(4), 122-134.
Ahmed, M. (2005). Bridging research and policy. Journal of International Development, 17(6),
765-773.
Alacevich, M. (2009). The World Bank’s early reflections on development: A development
institution or a bank? Review of Political Economy, 21(2), 227-244.
Alacevich, M. (2011). Early development economics debates revisited. Journal of the History
of Economic Thought, 33(2), 145-171.
329 Alacevich, M. (2012). The right kind of revolution: Modernisation, development, and United
States of America foreign policy from the Cold War to the present. Technology &
Culture, 53(3), 727-729.
Alauddin, M. (2013). Structuralism and dependency theories: Distinctions and critiques.
Retrieved July 21, 2017 from
https://alauddinmd.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/structuralism-and-dependency-
theories-distinctions-and-critiques/
Alene, A. D., & Coulibaly, O. (2009). The impact of agricultural research on productivity and
poverty in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Policy, 34(2), 198-209.
Ali, D., Bowen, D., Deininger, K., & Duponchel, M. (2016). Investigating the gender gap in
agricultural productivity: Evidence from Uganda. World Development, 87, 152-170.
Alinyo, F., & Leahy, T. (2012). Designing food security projects: Kapchorwa and Bukwo,
Uganda. Development in Practice, 22(3), 334-346.
Alkire, S., Meinzen-Dick, R., Peterman, A., Quisumbing, A., Seymour, G., & Vaz, A. (2013).
The women’s empowerment in agriculture index. World Development, 52, 71-91.
Ampaire, E., Machethe, C., & Birachi, E. (2013). Rural producer organisations and poverty
reduction in Uganda: Are there gender disparities in the distribution of membership
benefits? Journal of Rural Cooperation, 41(1), 60-79.
Anderson, J. & Feder, G. (2003). Rural extension services. World Bank Policy Research
Working Paper No. 2976, World Bank Washington, DC.
Anderson, J. & Feder, G. (2004). Agricultural extension; Good intentiions and hard realities.
The World Bank Research Observer, 19(1), 42-60.
Andrews, M. (2013). The limits of institutional reform in development: Changing rules for
realistic solutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
330 Andrews, N. (Ed.). (2013). Africa yesterday, today and tomorrow: Exploring the multi-
dimensional discourses on ‘development’. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
Press.
Apodaca, C. (2010). Do global strategies for poverty eradication in Sub-Saharan Africa work?
An Assesment of several international macro-economic policies. Journal of Third
World Studies, 27(2), 109-134.
Asrat, S., Yesuf, M., Carlsson, F., & Wale, E. (2010). Farmers’ preferences for crop variety
traits: Lessons for on-farm conservation and technology adoption. Ecological
Economics, 69(12), 2394-2401.
Bahiigwa, G., Rigby, D., & Woodhouse, P. (2005). Right target, wrong mechanism?
Agricultural modernisation and poverty reduction in Uganda. World Development,
33(3), 481-496.
Bamigboye, E. O. (2016). Utilisation of indigenous knowledge systems for sustainable
vegetable production in Ekiti state: Implications for sustainable agricultural
development in Nigeria. Agriculture & Forestry, 62(1), 91-97.
Bandiera, O., & Rasul, I. (2006). Social networks and technology adoption in Northern
Mozambique. The Economic Journal, 116(514), 869-902.
Bardhan, P. (1996). Effeciency, equity and poverry alleviation: Policy issues in less developed
developed countries. Economic Journal, 106(438), 1344-1356
Barrett, C. B. (2008). Smallholder market participation: Concepts and evidence from Eastern
and Southern Africa. Food Policy, 33(4), 299-317.
Barrett, C. B., Bachke, M. E., Bellemare, M. F., Michelson, H. C., Narayanan, S., & Walker,
T. F. (2012). Smallholder participation in contract farming: Comparative evidence from
five countries. World Development, 40(4), 715-730.
331 Barrett, C. B., & Carter, M. R. (2013). The economics of poverty traps and persistent poverty:
Empirical and policy implications. Journal of Development Studies, 49(7), 976-990.
Barrios, E., Bekunda, M., Delve, R., Esilaba, A., & Mowo, J. (2001). Methodologies for
decision making in natural resource management: Identifying and classifying local
indicators of soil quality Cali, Columbia: International Center for Tropical Agriculture
(CIAT).
Barungi, M., Guloba, M., & Adong, A. (2016). Uganda’s agricultural exyension system: How
appriopriate is the single spine structure? Research Report No. 16. Economic Policy
Research Centrre, Kampala.
Bastiaensen, J., Herdt, T. D., & D’Exelle, B. (2005). Poverty reduction as a local institutional
process. World Development, 33(6), 979-993.
Bates, R. H., & Block, S. A. (2013). Revisiting African agriculture: Institutional change and
productivity growth. Journal of Politics, 75(2), 372-1384.
Bebbington, A., & Farrington, J. (1993). Governments, NGOs and agricultural development;
perspectives on changing inter-organisational relationships. Journal of Development
Studies, 29(2), 199- 219.
Béland, D., & Howlett, M. (2016). How solutions chase problems: Instrument constituencies
in the policy process. Governance, 29(3), 393-409.
Belshaw, D., & Lawrence, P. (1999). Agricultural tradables and economic recovery in Uganda:
The limitations of structural adjustment. World Development, 27(4), 673-690.
Benin, S. (2011). Returns to spending on agricultural extension: The case of the national
agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program of Uganda. Agricultural Economics,
42(2), 249-267.
332 Benin, S. (2012). Impact of the national agricultural advisory services (NAADS) program of
Uganda: Considering different levels of likely contamination with the treatment.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 94(2), 386-392.
Benin, S., Nkonya, E., Okecho, G., Pender, J., Nahdy, S., Mugarura, S., Kato, E., & Kayobyo,
G. (2007). Assessing the impact of the National Agricultural Advisory Services
(NAADS) in the Uganda rural livelihoods. Discussion Paper 724. Washington, DC:
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
Birdsall, N., & Fukuyama, F. (Eds.). (2011). New ideas on development after the financial
crisis. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Birner, R., & Resnick, D. (2010). The political economy of policies for smallholder agriculture.
World Development, 38(10), 1442-1452.
Birner, R., & Wittmer, H. (2003). Using social capital to create political capital: How do local
communities gain political influence? A theoretical approach and empirical evidence
from Thailand. In N. Dolsak & E. Ostrom (Eds.), The commons in the new millennium:
Challenges and adaptation (pp. 291-334). London: Politics, Science and the
Environment series. Cambridge and London Press.
Blackmon, P. (2008). Rethinking poverty through the eyes of the International Monetary Fund
and the World Bank. International Studies Review, 10(2), 179-202.
Blair, H. (2000). Participation and accountability at the periphery: Democratic local
governance in six countries. World Development, 28(1), 21-39.
Booth, A., & Mosley, P. (2003). The new poverty strategies: What have they achieved?
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Booth, D. (2003). Patterns of difference and practical theory: Researching the new poverty
strategy processes in Africa. Journal of International Development, 15(7), 863-877.
333 Booth, D. (2011a). Aid, institutions and governance: What have we learned? Development
Policy Review, 29(1), 5-26.
Booth, D. (2011b). Towards a theory of local governance and public goods provision. Institute
of Development Studies Bulletin, 42(2), 11-21.
Borgen Project (The). (2013). 5 Poverty statistics on Sub-Saharan Africa. Retrieved February
9, 2017 from http://borgenproject.org/5-poverty-statistics-on-sub-saharan-africa/.
Borgen Project (The). (2016). Uganda’s struggling universal primary education policy.
Retrieved February 9, 2017 from http://borgenproject.org/ugandas-struggling-
universal-primary-education-policy/.
Boysen, O. (2016). Food demand characteristics in Uganda: Estimation and policy relevance.
South African Journal of Economics, 84(2), 260-293.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research
in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Brett, E. A. (1998). Responding to poverty in uganda: Structures, policies and prospects.
Journal of International Affairs, 52(1), 313-337.
Brick, K., & Visser, M. (2015). Risk preferences, technology adoption and insurance uptake:
A framed experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 118(8), 383-396.
Broad, R. (2004). The Washington consensus meets the global backlash: Shifting debates and
policies. Globalisations, 1(2), 129-154.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Byekwaso, N. (2010). Poverty in Uganda. Review of African Political Economy, 37(126), 517-
525.
Calderon, C., & Serven, L. (2010). Infrastructure and economic development in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Journal of African Economies, 19(1), 13-87.
334 Canagarajah, S., & van Diesen, A. (2006). The poverty reduction strategy approach six years
on: An examination of principles and practice in Uganda. Development Policy Review,
24(6), 647-667.
Canagarajah, S., & van Diesen, A. (2011). The poverty reduction strategy approach six years
on: An examination of principles and practice in Uganda. Development Policy Review,
29, 135-156.
Carney, D. (1998). Changing public and private roles in agricultural services provision: A
literature survey. Overseeas Development Institute, London England.
Carter, M. R., & Barrett, C. B. (2006). The economics of poverty traps and persistent poverty:
An asset-based approach. Journal of Development Studies, 42(2), 178-199.
Cecchini, S., & Notti, F. (2011). Millennium Development Goals and human rights: Faraway,
so close? Journal of Human Development & Capabilities, 12(1), 121-133.
Chang, H.-J. (2003). Kicking away the ladder: Infant industry promotion in historical
perspective. Oxford Development Studies, 31(1), 21-32.
Chang, H.-J. (2005). Reclaiming development: An alternative economic policy manual. Future
Survey, 27(4), 10-11.
Chang, H.-J. & Grabel, I. (2005). Reclaiming development from the Washington consensus.
Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27(2), 273-291.
Chen, S., & Ravallion, M. (2004). How have the world's poorest fared since the early 1980s?
World Bank Research Observer, 19(2), 141-169.
Chen, S., & Ravallion, M. (2010). The developing world is poorer than we thought, but no less
successful in the fight against poverty. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(4), 1577-
1625.
Chibba, M. (2011). The Millennium Development Goals: Key current issues and challenges.
Development Policy Review, 29(1), 75-90.
335 Christiaensen, L., Demery, L., & Kuhl, J. (2011). The (evolving) role of agriculture in poverty
reduction: An empirical perspective. Journal of Development Economics, 96(2), 239-
254.
Christie, M. E., Kyamureku, P., Kaaya, A., & Devenport, A. (2015). Farmers, peanuts, and
aflatoxins in Uganda: A gendered approach. Development in Practice, 25(1), 4-18.
Clark, D., & Hulme, D. (2010). Poverty, time and vagueness: Integrating the core poverty and
chronic poverty frameworks. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(2), 347-366.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning
and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
Collier, P. (2007). The bottom billion why the poorest countries are failing and what can be
done about it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Collier, P., & Dercon, S. (2014). African agriculture in 50 years: Smallholders in a rapidly
changing world? World Development, 63, 92-101.
Collier, P., & Dollar, D. (2002). Aid allocation and poverty reduction. European Economic
Review, 46(8), 1475-1500.
Collier, P., & Dollar, D. (2004). Development effectiveness: What have we learnt? The
Economic Journal, 114(496), 244-271.
Commission on International Development. (1969). Partners in development. London: Pall
Mall Press.
Contreras, D. (2001). Economic growth and poverty reduction by region: Chile 1990-96.
Development Policy Review, 19(3), 291-302.
Cooper, E., & Bird, K. (2012). Inheritance: A gendered and intergenerational dimension of
poverty. Development Policy Review, 30(5), 527-541.
336 Coromaldi, M., Pallante, G., & Savastano, S. (2015). Adoption of modern varieties, farmers'
welfare and crop biodiversity: Evidence from Uganda. Ecological Economics, 119,
346-358.
Correll, D. (2008). The politics of poverty and social development. International Social Work,
51(4), 453-466.
Coulter, J., & Onumah, G. (2002). The role of warehouse receipt systems in enhanced
commodity marketing and rural livelihoods in Africa. Food Policy, 27(4), 319-337.
Craig, D. (2006). Development beyond neoliberalism? Governance, poverty reduction, and
political economy. New York: Routledge.
Craig, D., & Porter, D. (2003). Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers: A new convergence. World
Development, 31(1), 53-69.
Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). A framework for design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Collecting qualitative data. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daniels, L., & Minot, N. (2015). Is poverty reduction over-stated in Uganda? Evidence from
alternative poverty measures. Social Indicators Research, 121(1), 115-133.
Davis, K., Nkonya, E., Kato, E., Mekonnen, D. A., Odendo, M., Miiro, R., & Nkuba, J. (2012).
Impact of farmer field schools on agricultural productivity and poverty in east africa.
World Development, 40(2), 402-413.
337 Dawe, D., & Peter, T., C. (2012). Why stable food prices are a good thing: Lessons from
stabilizing rice prices in Asia. Global Food Security, 1(2), 127-133.
Dawson, N., Martin, A., & Sikor, T. (2016). Green revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa:
Implications of imposed innovation for the wellbeing of rural smallholders. World
Development, 78, 204-218. de Haan, A. (2009). How the aid industry works: An introduction to international development.
Boulder, CO: Kumarian Press.
Degnbol-Martinussen, J. (2003). Aid: Understanding international development cooperation.
New York: Zed Books.
Deininger, K., & Castagnini, R. (2006). Incidence and impact of land conflict in Uganda.
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60(3), 321-345.
Deininger, K., & Okidi, J. (2003). Growth and poverty reduction in Uganda, 1999–2000: Panel
data evidence. Development Policy Review, 21(4), 481-509.
Denscombe, M. (2010). The good research guide: For small-scale social research projects.
Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd
ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
th Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2013). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (4
Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Desai, R. M., & Joshi, S. (2014). Can producer associations improve rural livelihoods?
Evidence from farmer centres in India. Journal of Development Studies, 50(1), 64-80.
Devarajan, S., Easterly, W. R., & Pack, H. (2003). Low investment is not the constraint on
African development. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 51(3), 547-571.
Diao, X., Hazell, P., & Thurlow, J. (2010). The role of agriculture in African development.
World Development, 38(10), 1375-1383.
338 Dibua, J. I. (2006). Modernisation and the crisis of development in Africa: The Nigerian
experience. Basingstoke: Ashgate.
Dibua, J. I. (2008). Modernisation and the crisis of development in Africa. International
Sociology, 23(2), 264-268.
Diiro, G. M., & Abdoul, S. G. (2015). Agricultural technology adoption and nonfarm earnings
in Uganda: A semiparametric analysis. Journal of Developing Areas, 49(2), 145-162.
Dijkstra, G. (2002), The effectiveness of policy conditionality: Eight country experiences.
Journal of development and Change, 33(2), 307-334
Dijkstra, G. (2005). The PRSP approach and the illusion of improved aid effectiveness: Lessons
from Bolivia, Honduras and Nicaragua. Development Policy Review, 23(4), 443-464.
Dijkstra, G., & van Donge, J. K. (2001). What does the ‘show case’ show? Evidence of and
lessons from adjustment in Uganda. World Development, 29(5), 841-863.
Dollar, D., & Levin, V. (2006). The increasing selectivity of foreign aid, 1984-2003. World
Development, 34(12), 2034-2046.
Dorosh, P. A., & Mellor, J. W. (2013). Why agriculture remains a viable means of poverty
reduction in Sub-Saharan Africa: The case of Ethiopia. Development Policy Review,
31(4), 419-441.
Doss, C. R. (2001). Designing agricultural technology for African women farmers: Lessons
from 25 years of experience. World Development, 29(12), 2075-2092.
Doss, C. R. (2002). Men’s Crops? Women’s Crops? The gender patterns of cropping in Ghana.
World Development, 30(11), 1987-2000.
Doss, C., Meinzen-Dick, R., & Bomuhangi, A. (2014). Who owns the land? Perspectives from
rural Ugandans and implications for large-scale land acquisitions. Feminist Economics,
20(1), 76-100.
339 Doss, C., Truong, M., Nabanoga, G., & Namaalwa, J. (2012). Women, marriage and asset
inheritance in Uganda. Development Policy Review, 30(5), 597-616.
Driscoll, R., & Evans, A. (2005). Second-generation poverty reduction strategies: New
opportunities and emerging issues. Development Policy Review, 23(1), 5-25.
Duncombe, R., A., (2014). Understanding the impact of mobile phones on livelihoods in
developing countries. Journal of Development Policy Review, 32(5), 567-588.
Duncombe, R., & Boateng, R. (2009). Mobile phones and financial services in developing
countries: A review of concepts, methods, issues, evidence and future research
directions. Third World Quarterly, 30(7), 1237-1258.
Easterly, W. (2001). The elusive quest for growth: Economists’ adventures and misadventures
in the tropics. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.
Easter, W. (2002). The lost decades: Explaining developing countries stagnation inspite of
policy reform 1980-1998. Journal of Economic Growth, 6(2), 423-438.
Easterly, W. (2005). What did structural adjustment adjust? The association of policies and
growth with repeated IMF and World Bank adjustment loans. Journal of Development
Economics, 76(1), 1-22.
Easterly, W. (2006). Reliving the 1950s: The big push, poverty traps, and takeoffs in economic
development. Journal of Economic Growth, 11(4), 289-318.
Easterly, W. (2009). Can the west save Africa? Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 373-
447.
Easterly, W. & Levin, R. (2003). Tropics, germs, and crops. The role of endowments and
economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 50(1), 3-39.
Ebanyat, P., Ridder, N., Jager, A., Delve, R., Bekunda, M., & Giller, K. (2010). Drivers of land
use change and household determinants of sustainability in smallholder farming
systems of Eastern Uganda. Population & Environment, 31(6), 474-506.
340 Eilola, S., Käyhkö, N., Fagerholm, N., & Kombo, Y. H. (2014). Linking farmers’ knowledge,
farming strategies, and consequent cultivation patterns into the identification of healthy
agroecosystem characteristics at local scales. Agroecology & Sustainable Food
Systems, 38(9), 1047-1077.
Eisen, R. J., Enscore, R. E., Atiku, L. A., Zielinski-Gutierrez, E., Mpanga, J. T., Kajik, E.,
Gage, K. L. (2013). Evidence that rodent control strategies ought to be improved to
enhance food security and reduce the risk of rodent-borne illnesses within subsistence
farming villages in the plague-endemic West Nile region. Uganda. International
Journal of Pest Management, 59(4), 259-270.
Ekou, J. (2013). Eradicating extreme poverty among the rural poor in Uganda through poultry
and cattle improvement programs: A review. Journal of Development and Agricultural
Economics, 5(11), 444-449.
Ellis, F., & Bahiigwa, G. (2003). Livelihoods and rural poverty reduction in Uganda. World
Development, 31(6), 997-1013.
Ellis, F., & Freeman, H. A. (2004). Rural livelihoods and poverty reduction strategies in four
African countries. Journal of Development Studies, 40(4), 1-30.
Ellis, F., & Mdoe, N. (2003). Livelihoods and rural poverty reduction in Tanzania. World
Development, 31(8), 1367-1384.
Engerman, D. C., & Unger, C. R. (2009). Introduction: Towards a global history of
modernisation. Diplomatic History, 33(3), 375-385.
Enyipu, A., Semana, A. R., & Kabuye, S. (2002). Implementing a unified extension system in
the context of decentralisation: Challenges for extension staff of Tororo district. Eastern
African Journal of Rural Development, 18(1), 1-9.
341 Epure, M. (2015). Book review. Peet, R., Hartwick E. Theories of development: Contentions,
arguments, alternatives. Journal of Economic Development, Environment & People,
4(4), 74-77.
Erixon, F. (2003). Aid, trade and economic development poverty and recovery: The history of
aid and development in East Africa. Economic Affairs, 23(4), 27-33.
Erixon, F. (2005). Aid and development: Will it work this time? International Policy Network,
Handway Print Centre: London, Great Britain.
Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering Development. The making and unmaking of the Third World.
New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Esquivel, V. (2016). Power and the sustainable development goals: A feminist analysis. Gender
and Development, 24(1), 9-23.
Evenson, R. E., & Mwabu, G. (2001). The effect of agricultural extension on farm yields in
Kenya. African Development Review, 13(1), 1-23.
Eyben, R. (2015). 'Power' in 'empowerment': A case study of constructing a text against the
mainstream. European Journal of Development Research, 27(5), 811-825.
Fabusoro, E., Sokoya, G. O., Ayorinde, O. S., Alarima, C. I., & Oduguwa, O. O. (2012). Gender
analysis of production system and decision making in Fulani agro-pastoral households
in southwestern Nigeria. Gender & Behaviour, 10(2), 4687-4711.
Fan, S., & Zhang, X. (2008). Public expenditure, growth and poverty reduction in rural Uganda.
African Development Review, 20(3), 466-496.
Farmer, T., Robinson, K., Elliott, S. J., & Eyles, J. (2006). Developing and implementing a
triangulation protocol for qualitative health research. Qualitative Health Research,
16(3), 377-394.
Farrington, J. (1995). The changing public role in agricultural extension. Food Policy, 20(6),
537-544.
342 Farrington, J., Christoplos, I., Kidd, A. D., & Beckman, M. (2002). Can extension contribute
to rural poverty reduction? Syntheisis of a six- county study. Agricultural Research and
Extension Network No. 123: Overseas Development Institute.
Feltenstein, A., & Sarangi, S. (2005). Macroeconomic stabilization and economic growth: The
case of Uganda. African Development Review, 17(1), 1-22.
Fergusion, J. (2010). The uses of neoliberalism. Antinode, 41, 166-184
Ferrarini, B. (2009). Compensatory aid and debt relief: A case study of Uganda. Journal of
Development Studies, 45(7), 1134-1149.
Fike, R. (2009). Does foreign aid really work? by Roger C. Riddell. Economic Affairs, 29(1),
107-108.
Fischer, A. M. (2010). Towards genuine universalism within contemporary development
policy. Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 41(1), 36-44.
Foli, R., & Béland, D. (2014). International Organizations and Ideas About Poverty in Sub-
Saharan Africa. Poverty and Public Policy, 6(1), 3-23.
Foster, M., & Mijumbi, P. (2002). How, when and why does poverty get budget priority:
Poverty reduction strategy and public expenditure in Uganda. Overseas Development
Institute. London, UK:
Fosu, A. K. (2010). Does inequality constrain poverty reduction programs? Evidence from
Africa. Journal of Policy Modeling, 32(6), 818-827.
Francis, P., & James, R. (2003). Balancing rural poverty reduction and citizen participation:
The contradictions of Uganda’s decentralization program. World Development, 31(2),
325-337.
Frank, A.G. 1967. Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America. New York: Monthly
Review Press.
343 Frank, A. G. (1991). Latin American development theories revisited: A participant review
essay. European Journal of Development Research, 3(2), 146-159.
Fraser, A. (2005). Poverty reduction strategy papers: Now who calls the shots? Review of
African Political Economy, 32(104/5), 317-340.
Friis-Hansen, E. (2008). Impact assessment of farmer institutional development and
agricultural change: Soroti district, Uganda. Development in Practice, 18(4/5), 506-
523.
Friis-Hansen, E., & Kisauzi, D. (2002). Evolution of extension-farmer relationship in Uganda.
Paper presented at the Extension and Rural Development: A Coverngernce of Views on
International Approaches? Workshop, Washington, DC, 12-15 November.
Friis-Hansen, E., & Duveskog, D. (2012). The empowerment route to well-being: an analysis
of farmer field schools in East Africa. World Development, 40(2), 414-427.
Fukuda-Parr, S. (2003). The human development paradigm: Operationalizing Sen's ideas on
capabilities. Feminist Economics, 9(2/3), 301-317.
Fukuda-Parr, S. (2011). Theory and policy in international development: Human development
and capability approach and the Millennium Development Goals. International Studies
Review, 13(1), 122-132.
Fukuda-Parr, S. (2016). From the Millennium Development Goals to the sustainable
development goals: Shifts in purpose, concept, and politics of global goal setting for
development. Gender & Development, 24(1), 43-52.
Fukuda-Parr, S., & Hulme, D. (2011). International norm dynamics and the ‘end of poverty’:
Understanding the Millennium Development Goals. Global Governance, 17(1), 17-36.
Fukuda-Parr, S., Yamin, A. E., & Greenstein, J. (2014). The power of numbers: A critical
review of millennium development goal targets for human development and human
rights. Journal of Human Development & Capabilities, 15(2/3), 105-117.
344 Gabizon, S. (2016). Women's movements' engagement in the Sustainable Development Goals:
Lessons learned from the women's major group. Gender and Development, 24(1), 99-
110.
Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Analysing qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Glendenning, C. J., & Ficarelli, P. P. (2011). Content development and management processes
of ICT initiatives in Indian agriculture. Information Development, 27(4), 301-314.
Go, D. S., & Quijada, J. A. (2012). The odds of achieving the MDGs. World Bank Research
Observer, 27(2), 143-184.
Golooba-Mutebi, F. (2004). Reasseing popular participation in Uganda. Journal of Public
Administration and Development, 24(4), 289-304.
Golooba-Mutebi, F. (2012). In search of a right formula: Public, private and community- driven
provision of safe water in Rwanda and Uganda. Public Administration and
Development, 32(4/5), 430-443.
Golooba-Mutebi, F., & Hickey, S. A. M. (2010). Governing chronic poverty under inclusive
liberalism: The case of the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund. Journal of
Development Studies, 46(7), 1216-1239.
Gore, C. (2004). MDGs and PRSPs: Are poor countries enmeshed in a global-local double
bind? Global Social Policy, 4(3), 277-283.
Gore, C. (2010). The MDG paradigm, productive capacities and the future of poverty reduction.
Institute of Development Stuidies Bulletin, 41(1), 70-79.
Gore, C. D., & Muwanga, N. K. (2014). Decentralization is dead, long live decentralization!
Capital city reform and political rights in Kampala, Uganda. International Journal of
Urban & Regional Research, 38(6), 2201-2216.
345 Gornall, J., Betts, R., Burke, E., Clark, R., Camp, J., Willett, K., & Wiltshire, A. (2010).
Implications of climate change for agricultural productivity in the early twenty-first
century. Biological Sciences, 365(1554), 2973-2989.
Govereh, J., & Jayne, T. S. (2003). Cash cropping and food crop productivity: Synergies or
trade-offs? Agricultural Economics, 28(1), 39-50.
Gray, M. (2006). The progress of social development in South Africa. International Journal of
Social Welfare, 15, 53-64.
Gray, M., Coates, J., & Davies, K. (2017). Social development, the environment and the future
of the planet. In J. Midgley & M. Pawar (Eds.), Future directions of social development
(pp. 143-163). London: Palgrave.
Greig, A., Hulme, D., & Turner, M. (2007). Challenging gloal inequality: Theory and practice
in the 21st century. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gruber, J. (2011). Making development more ‘fit for purpose’. Progress in Development
Studies, 11(1), 19-32.
Grünbacher, A. (2012). Cold-war economics: The use of Marshall Plan counterpart funds in
Germany, 1948–1960 Central European History, 45, 697–716.
Hagiu, A., & Bărbulescu, M. (2015). The implication of World Bank in raising agricultural
productivity. Agricultural Management 17(1), 29-36.
Haines, A., & Cassels, A. (2004). Can the Millennium Development Goals be attained? British
Medical Journal, 329(7462), 394-397.
Hanmer, L. C., Pyatt, G., & White, H. (1999). What do the World Bank's poverty assessments
teach us about poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa? Development and Change, 30(4), 795-
823.
Hanson, J. C., & Just, R. E. (2001). The potential for transition to paid extension: Some guiding
economic principles. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83(3), 777-784.
346 Harrison, G. (2001). Post-conditionality politics and administrative reform: Reflections on the
cases of Uganda and Tanzania. Development & Change, 32(4), 657-679.
Harrison, G. (2005). The World Bank, governance and theories of political action in Africa.
British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 7(2), 240-260.
Harrison, G. (2010). The Africanization of poverty: A retrospective on ‘make poverty history’.
African Affairs, 109(436), 391-408.
Hauser, M., Lindtner, M., Prehsler, S., & Probst, L. (2016). Farmer participatory research: Why
extension workers should understand and facilitate farmers’ role transitions. Journal of
Rural Studies, 47(Part A), 52-61.
Havnevik, K., Bryceson, D., Birgegård, L.-E., Matondi, P., & Beyene, A. (2007). African
agriculture and the World Bank: Development or impoverishment? Uppsala: The
Nordic African Institute.
Hazell, P., Poulton, C., Wiggins, S., & Dorward, A. (2010). The future of small farms:
Trajectories and policy priorities. World Development, 38(10), 1349-1361.
Henderson, D. (1980). The Brandt report and HMG’s response. Journal of Economic Affairs,
1(1), 53-55.
Herath, D. (2008). Development discourse of the globalists and dependency theorists: Do the
globalisation theorists rephrase and reword the central concepts of the dependency
school? Third World Quarterly, 29(4), 819-834.
Herath, D. (2009). The discourse of development: Has it reached maturity? Third World
Quarterly, 30(8), 1449-1464.
Hickey, S. (2005). The politics of staying poor: Exploring the political space for poverty
reduction in Uganda. World Development, 33(6), 995-1009.
Hickey, S. (2009). The politics of protecting the poorest: Moving beyond the ‘anti-politics
machine’? Political Geography, 28, 473-483.
347 Hickey, S. (2012). Beyond ‘poverty reduction through good governance’: The new political
economy of development in Africa. New Political Economy, 17(5), 683-690.
Hickey, S. (2013). Beyond the poverty agenda? Insights from the new politics of development
in Uganda. World Development, 43, 194-206.
Hill, P. S., Buse, K., Brolan, C. E., & Ooms, G. (2014). How can health remain central post-
2015 in a sustainable development paradigm? Globalization & Health, 10(1), 1-10.
Hisali, E., Birungi, P., & Buyinza, F., (2011). Adaptation to climate change in Uganda:
Evidence from micro level data. Global Environmental Change Part A: Human and
Policy Dimensions, 21(4), 1245-1261.
Hoeffler, H. (2011). The political economy of agricultural policies in Africa: History, analytical
concepts and implications for development cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of
International Agriculture, 50(1), 29-53.
Hoffberg, M. D. (2007). The problem with external assistance: Institutions, commitment and
trust. Conference Papers (n.d). Annual Meeting of the American Sociological
Association, New York.
Hoffmann, V., Probst, K., & Christinck, A. (2007). Farmers and researchers: How can
collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology
development? Agriculture and Human Values, 24(3), 355-368.
Huberman, M. A., & Miles, M. B. (2002). Miles M. and Huberman M. (2002). The qualitative
researcher’s companion Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hulme, D. (2003). Chronic poverty and development policy: An introduction. World
Development, 31(3), 399-402.
Hulme, D. (2012). Global poverty. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
Hulme, D., & Scott, J. (2010). The political economy of the MDGs: Retrospect and prospect
for the world's biggest promise. New Political Economy, 15(2), 293-306.
348 Humble, Á. M. (2009). Technique triangulation for validation in directed content analysis.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 34-51.
Hussain, M., Berg, A., & Aiyar, S. (2009). The macroeconomic management of increased aid:
Policy lessons from recent experience. Review of Development Economics, 13(3), 491-
509.
Hyden, G. (2007). Governance and poverty reduction in Africa. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(43), 16751-16756.
Hyden, G., & Lanegran, K. (1993). Aids, policy and politics: East Africa in comparative
perspective. Policy Studies Review, 12(1/2), 47-65.
Ilcan, S., & Lacey, A. (2015). Enabling the Millennium Development Goals: Political
technologies of calculation and the counter-calculation in Namibia. Globalisations,
12(4), 613-28.
Ilukor, J., Birner, R., & Nielsen, T. (2015). Addressing governance challenges in the provision
of animal health services: A review of the literature and empirical application
transaction cost theory. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 122(1/2), 1-13.
Imai, K. S., Gaiha, R., & Thapa, G. (2010). Is the millennium development goal on poverty
still achievable? The role of institutions, finance and openness. Oxford Development
Studies, 38(3), 309-337.
International Monetary Fund & World Bank. (1999). Coalitions for change. Board of
Governors annual meeting, 25 September, Washington D. C.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts,
adaptation and vulnerability. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
International Fund for Agricultural Development. (IFAD). (2012). Enabling poor rural people
to overcome poverty in Uganda. Retrieved January 21, 2017 from
https://www.ifad.org/documents/10180/246adc40-0f82-433c-b331-dca1611b39ad
349 Irangani, M., & Yoshiharu, S. (2013). Indigenous knowledge used in rice cultivation in Sri
Lanka: An analyis from an agricultural history perspective. Indian Journal of
Traditional Knowledge, 12(4), 638-650.
Irz, X., Lin, L., Thirtle, C., & Wiggins, S. (2001). Agricultural productivity growth and poverty
alleviation. Development Policy Review, 19(4), 449-466.
Jagger, P., & van Laerhoven, F. (2004). Equity and accessibility of rural public services: A
comparative institutional analysis of local governance in Brazil and Uganda. Paper
presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, 2 September,
Chicago, IL.
James, P. A. S. (2010). Using farmers' preferences to assess development policy: A case study
of Uganda. Development Policy Review, 28(3), 359-378.
James, P. A. S., Smart, J. C. R., Smith, J., Bulling, M. T., Beed, F. D. & Luwandagga, D. (n.d.).
The effect of participation in the Ugandan national agricultural advisory services on
willingness to pay for extension services, African Journal of Agricultural Resources,
6(1), 1-9.
Jayne, T. S., Mather, D., Mason, N., & Ricker-Gilbert, J. (2013). How do fertilizer subsidy
programs affect total fertilizer use in sub-Saharan Africa? Crowding out, diversion, and
benefit/cost assessments. Agricultural Economics, 44(6), 687-703.
Jayne, T. S., Mather, D., & Mghenyi, E. (2010). Principal challenges confronting smallholder
agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Development, 38(10), 1384-1398.
John, A., & Storr, V. H. (2009). Can the West help the rest? A review essay of Sachs' the end
of poverty and Easterly's the white man's burden. Journal of Private Enterprise, 25(1),
125-140.
Jones, B. (2013). The making of meaning: Churches, development projects and violence in
Eastern Uganda. Journal of Religion in Africa, 42(1), 74-95.
350 Joughin, J., & Kjaer, A. M. (2010). The politics of agricultural policy reform: The case of
Uganda. Forum for Development Studies, 37(1), 61-78.
Kabeer, N. (2016). Gender equality, economic growth, and women’s agency: The ‘endless
variety’ and ‘monotonous similarity’ of patriarchal constraints. Feminist Economics,
22(1), 295-321.
Kadaga, R. (2015). Sustainable development goals. Parliamentarian, 96(1), 8-9.
Kakande, M. (2009). Poverty monitoring. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kanbur, R. (2001a). Economic policy, distribution and poverty: The Nature of disagreements.
World Development, 29(6), 1083-1094.
Kanbur, R. (2001b). Qualitative and quantitative poverty appraisal: Complementarities,
tensions and the way forward. Ithaca, NY: Department of Applied Economics and
Management, Cornell University.
Kansiime, M. K., & Mastenbroek, A. (2016). Enhancing resilience of farmer seed system to
climate-induced stresses: Insights from a case study in West Nile region, Uganda.
Journal of Rural Studies, 47(16), 220-230.
Kappel, R., Lay, J., & Steiner, S. (2005). Uganda: No more pro-poor growth? Development
Policy Review, 23(1), 27-53.
Kasekende, L. (2007). Introduction. African Development Review/Revue Africaine de
Development, 19(1), 1-5.
Kasekende, L. A., & Atingi-Ego, M. (1999). Impact of liberalization on key markets in sub-
Saharan Africa: the case of Uganda. Journal of International Development, 11(3), 411-
436.
Kasfir, N. (1985). Uganda’s uncertain quest for recovery. Current History, 84(501), 169-173.
Kassie, M., Shiferaw, B., & Muricho, G. (2011). Agricultural technology, crop income, and
poverty alleviation in Uganda. World Development, 39(10), 1784-1795.
351 Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The worldwide governance indicators:
Methodology and analytical issues. Hague Journal of the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220-246.
Kay, C. (2008). Reflections on Latin American rural studies in the neoliberal globalisation
period: A new rurality? Development and Change, 39(6), 915-943.
Kay, C., & Gwynne, R. N. (2000). Relevance of structuralist and dependency theories in the
neoliberal period: A Latin American perspective. Journal of Developing Societies,
16(1), 49- 69.
Kaya, O., Kaya, I., & Gunter, L. (2013). Foreign aid and the quest for poverty reduction: Is aid
to agriculture effective? Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64(3), 583-596.
Kayizzi-Mugerwa, S., & Levin, J. (1994). Adjustment and poverty: A review of the African
experience. African Development Review, 6(2), 1-39.
Kempe, R., H. (1999). Development prospects and policy for Africa: Structural adjustment and
beyond. Review of Black Political Economy, 26(4), 75-92.
Kelly, V., Adesina, A. A., & Gordon, A. (2003). Expanding access to agricultural inputs in
Africa: A review of recent market development experience. Food Policy, 28(4), 379-
405.
Kidd, AD, 2001. Extension, poverty and vulnerability in Uganda: Country Study for the
Neuchâtel Initiative. Working Paper 151, ODI (Overseas Development Institute),
London.
Kidd, A., Lamers, J., Ficarelli, P. & Hoffman, V. (2000). Privatising agricultural extension:
Caveat Emptor. Journal of Rural Studies, 16, 95-102
Kiiza, B., & Pederson, G. (2014). Adoption of ICT-based market information and farm-gate
prices received: The case of smallholder farmers in Uganda. Journal of Current Issues
in Media & Telecommunications, 6(1), 109-126.
352 Kiiza, J. (2006). Institutions and economic performance in Africa: A comparative analysis of
Mauritius, Botswana and Uganda. World Institute for Development Economic
Research, Working Papers: RP2006/73. United Nations University: Maastricht,
Netherlands.
Kijima, Y., Ito, Y., & Otsuka, K. (2012). Assessing the impact of training on lowland rice
productivity in an African setting: Evidence from Uganda. World Development, 40(8),
1610-1618.
King, S. (2015). Political capabilities for democratisation in Uganda: Good governance or
popular organisation building? Third World Quarterly, 36(4), 741-757.
Kjær, A. M., & Joughin, J. (2012). The reversal of agricultural reform in Uganda: Ownership
and values. Policy and Society, 31(4), 319-330.
Koehler, G. (2016). Tapping the sustainable development goals for progressive gender equity
and equality policy? Gender & Development, 24(1), 53-68.
Konkel, R. (2014). The monetization of global poverty: The concept of poverty in World Bank
history, 1944 to 1990. Journal of Global History, 9(2), 276-300.
Krishna, A., Lumonya, D., Markiewicz, M., Mugumya, F., Kafuko, A., & Wegoye, J. (2006).
Escaping poverty and becoming poor in 36 villages of Central and Western Uganda.
Journal of Development Studies, 42(2), 346-370.
Krugman, P. (1995). Dutch tulips and emerging markets. Foreign Affairs, 74(4), 28-44.
Kuteesa, F., Magona, I., Wanyera, M., & Wokadala, J. (2006). Uganda: A decade of budget
reform and poverty reduction. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 6(2), 99-123.
Kuteesa, F., Tumusiime-Mutebile, E. Whitworth, A., & Williamson, T. (Eds.). (2010).
Uganda's economic reforms insider accounts. New York: Oxford University Press.
353 Kydd, J., Dorward, A., Morrison, J., & Cadisch, G. (2004). Agricultural development and pro-
poor economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: Potential and policy. Oxford
Development Studies, 32(1), 37-57.
Larson, D. F., Otsuka, K., Matsumoto, T., & Kilic, T. (2014). Should African rural
development strategies depend on smallholder farms? An exploration of the inverse-
productivity hypothesis. Agricultural Economics, 45(3), 355-367.
Latynskiy, E., & Berger, T., (2016). Networks of rural producer organizations in Uganda: What
can be done to make them work better? Journal of World Development, 78(3), 572-586.
Lawson, D., McKay, A., & Okidi, J. (2006). Poverty persistence and transitions in Uganda: A
combined qualitative and quantitative analysis. Journal of Development Studies, 42(7),
1225-1251.
Lee, G. R., & Whitbeck, L. B. (1990). Economic systems and rates of polygyny. Journal of
Comparative Family Studies, 21(1), 13-24.
Leeson, P. T. (2008). Escaping poverty: Foreign aid, private property, and economic
development. Journal of Private Enterprise, 23(2), 39-64.
Lemanski, C. (2016). Poverty: Multiple perspectives and strategies. Geography, 101(1), 4-10.
Levine, S., Muwonge, J., & Batana, Y. M. (2014). A robust multi-dimensional poverty profile
for Uganda. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 15(4), 369-390.
Lie, J. H. S. (2015). Developmentality: Indirect governance in the World Bank-Uganda
partnership. Third World Quarterly, 36(4), 723-740.
Lipton, M. (2010). From policy aims and small-farm characteristics to farm science needs.
World Development, 38(10), 1399-1412.
Lipton, M., & Toye, J. (2010). Does aid work in India? A country study of the impact of official
development assistance. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1828-1829.
354 Luiz, J. M. (2009). Institutions and economic performance: Implications for African
development. Journal of International Development, 21(1), 58-75.
Lwanga-Ntale, C. (2014). Inequality in Uganda: Issues for discussion and further research.
Journal of Development, 57(3-4), 601-617
Lwanga-Ntale, C., & McClean, K. (2004). The face of chronic poverty in Uganda from the
poor's perspective: Constraints and opportunities. Journal of Human Development,
5(2), 177-194.
Magdoff, H. (1970). Militarism and imperialism. American Economic Review, 40, 237-242.
Makoba, J., W., & Wakoko-Studstill, F. (2015). From prosperity for all (PFA) to prosperity for
few (PFF): Political SACCOS and their impact on rural development in Uganda.
Journal of Third World Studies, 32(2), 99-122.
Mandemaker, M., Bakker, M., & Stoorvogel, J. (2011). The role of governance in agricultural
expansion and intensification: A global study of arable agriculture. Ecology & Society,
16(2), 1-14.
Manji, A. (2010). Eliminating poverty? Financial inclusion, access to land, and gender equality
in international development. Modern Law Review, 73(6), 985-1004.
Manning, R. (2008). Aid effectiveness: Implementing the Paris principles. OECD DAC Journal
on Development, 9(1), 51-65.
Manning, R. (2009). Using indicators to encourage development: Lessons from the Millennium
Development Goals. Danish Institute for International Studies Report one: Copenhagen,
Denmark.
Marangos, J. (2012). The post Keynesian retort to 'After the Washington consensus'. Journal
of Post Keynesian Economics, 34(4), 583-609.
355 Marcus, R., Wilkinson, J., & Marshali, J. (2002). Poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs):
Fulfilling their potential for children in poverty? Journal of International Development,
14(8), 1117-1128.
Markelova, H., & Mwangi, E. (2010). Collective action for smallholder market access:
Evidence and Implications for Africa. Review of Policy Research, 27(5), 621-640.
Marsden, P. V., & Campbell, K.E. (1984). Meauring tie strength. Social Forces, 63(2), 482-
501.
Martin, B. L., & Abbott, E. (2011). Mobile phones and rural livelihoods: Diffusion, uses, and
perceived impacts among farmers in rural Uganda. Information Technologies &
International Development, 7(4), 17-34.
McGee, R. (2000). Meeting the international poverty targets in Uganda: Halving poverty and
achieving universal primary education. Development Policy Review, 18(1), 85-106.
McGee, R. (2004). Constructing poverty trends in Uganda: A multidisciplinary perspective.
Development & Change, 35(3), 499-523.
McGregor, A., & Sumner, A. (2010). Beyond business as usual: What might 3-D wellbeing
contribute to MDG momentum? IDS Bulletin, 41(1), 104-112.
Mcknight, G.H. (2013). Harry Johnson’s new boot: The Uganda agreement and ideas of
development. Journal of Historical Sociology, 26(2), 234-263.
Mendola, M. (2007). Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: A propensity-
score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh. Food Policy, 32(3), 372-393.
Merriam, S. B. (2003). Qualitative research in education: Interaction and practice. Qualitative
Social Work, 2(3), 365-368.
Midgley, J. (1981) Professional imperialism: Social work in the Third World.
London: Heinemann.
356 Midgley, J. (2003). Social development: The intellectual heritage. Journal of International
Development, 15(7), 831-844.
Midgley, J. (2014). Austerity versus stimulus: Theoretical perspectives and policy
implications. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 41(2), 11-31.
Mijumbi, P. B. (2001). Uganda's external debt and the HIPC initiative. Canadian Journal of
Development Studies, 22(2), 495-525.
Miles M. & Huberman M. (2002). The qualitative researcher’s companion: Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Mironenko, O., Lucas, P. L., Tarasova, N., & Zlinszky, J. (2015). Sustainable development
goals: Why do we need them? Social Evolution & History, 14(2), 176-190.
Mishra, U. S. (2004). Millennium Development Goals: Whose goals and for whom? British
Medical Journal, 329(7468), 742.
Misturelli, F., & Heffernan, C. (2010). The concept of poverty: A synchronic perspective.
Progress in Development Studies, 10(1), 35-58.
Misturelli, F., & Heffernan, C. (2012). The shape of change: A memetic analysis of the
definitions of poverty from the 1970s to the 2000s. Journal of International
Development, 24, 3-18.
Morgan, D. (2009). Poverty reduction and national autonomy: The implications of domestic
politics in Uganda. Undercurrent, 6(2), 36-47.
Mosley, P. (2012). The politics of poverty reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mosley, P., & Suleiman, A. (2007). Aid, agriculture and poverty in developing countries.
Review of Development Economics, 11(1), 139-158.
Moyo, C. S. (2014). Active participation of rural women in developmental issues: Poverty
alleviation lessons for South Africa. Gender & Behaviour, 12(3), 5994-6001.
357 Moyo, D. (2009). Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is another way for Africa.
London: Allen Lane.
Mpuga, P. (2010). Constraints in access to and demand for rural credit: Evidence from Uganda.
African Development Review, 22(1), 115-148.
Mugambe, K. (2009). The poverty eradication action plan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Muhumuza, W. (2005). Unfulfilled promises? NGOs’ micro-credit programmes and poverty
reduction in Uganda. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 23(3), 391-416.
Mutimba, J. K. (2014). Refelections on agricultural extension and extension policy in Africa.
South African Journal on Agricultural Extension, 42, 15-26
Muyinza, H., & Ambrose, A. (2006). Using participatory communication to transfer
agricultural technologies: Experience of farmer groups in a pigeonpea project, Apac
district, Uganda. Journal of Uganda National Agricultural Research Organisation
51(3/4), 234-238.
Mwambi, M. M., Oduol, J., Mshenga, P., & Saidi, M. (2016). Does contract farming improve
smallholder income? The case of avocado farmers in Kenya. Journal of Agribusiness
in Developing and Emerging Economies, 6(1), 2-20.
Mwangi, E. & Markelova, H. (2009). Collective action and property rights for poverty
reduction: A review of methods and approaches. Development Policy Review, 27(3),
307-331.
Nanda, V. (2006). The ‘good governance’ concept revisited. The annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 603(1), 269-283.
Narayan, D. (2000). Voices of the poor: Crying out for change: Oxford: Oxford University
Press
358 Nelson, V., & Stathers, T. (2009). Resilience, power, culture, and climate: A case study from
semi-arid Tanzania, and new research directions. Gender and Development, 17(1), 81-
94.
Niehof, A. (2004). The significance of diversification for rural livelihood systems. Food Policy,
29(4), 321-338.
Nixson, F. (2006). Rethinking the political economy of development: Back to basics and
beyond. Journal of International Development, 18(7), 967-981.
Nkonya, E., Kaizzi, C., & Pender, J. (2005). Determinants of nutrient balances in a maize
farming system in Eastern Uganda. Agricultural Systems, 85, 155–182.
Noorbakhsh, F. (1999). Standards of living, human development indices and structural
adjustments in developing countries: An empirical investigation. Journal of
International Development, 11(1), 151-175.
Norton, A., Bird, B., Kakande, M., Brock, K., & Turk, C. (2001). A rough guide to PPAs:
Participatory poverty assessment. An introduction to theory and practice. Overseas
Development Institute. Retrieved June 29, 2017 from
http://www.participatorymethods.org/sites/participatorymethods.org/files/a%20rough
%20guide%20to%20ppas_%20norton.pdf
Nunnenkamp, P., & Thiele, R. (2013). Financing for development: The gap between words and
deeds since Monterrey. Development Policy Review, 31(1), 75-98.
Nyamugasira, W. (1998). NGOs and advocacy: How well are the poor represented?
Development in Practice, 8(3), 297-308.
Nyareza, S., & Dick, A. L. (2012). Use of community radio to communicate agricultural
information to Zimbabwe's peasant farmers. Aslib Proceedings, 64(5), 494-508.
359 Nyong, A., Adesina, F., & Elasha, B. O. (2007). The value of indigenous knowledge in climate
change mitigation and adaptation strategies in the African Sahel. Mitigation &
Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(5), 787-797.
O’Brien, D. (2010). Partners in development: Report of the commission on international
development. International Journal, 65(2), 532-539.
Obeng-Odoom, F. (2013). Africa's failed economic development trajectory: A critique. African
Review of Economics & Finance, 4(2), 151-175.
Obwona, M., & Guloba, M. (2009). Poverty reduction strategies during post-conflict recovery
in Africa. Journal of African Economies, 18(1), 77-98.
Ojambo, H. (2012). Decentralisation in Africa: A critical review of Uganda's experience.
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 15(2), 69-88.
Okoboi, G., Kuteesa, A., & Barungi, M. (2013). The impact of the NAADS program on
household production and welfare in Uganda. Africa Growth Initiative Working Report
7. Africa Growth Initiative, Brookings Institution.
Okoboi, G., Muwanga, J., & Mwebaze, T. (2012). Use of improved inputs and its effect on
maize yield and profit in Uganda. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition &
Development, 12(7), 6931-6944.
Olum, Y. (2014). Decentralisation in developing countries: Preconditions for successful
implementation. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, 15, 23-38.
Omona, J., & Mukuye, R. (2013). Problems of credibility of NGOs in Uganda: Implications
for theory and practice. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit
Organisations, 24(2), 311-334.
Oneal, J. R. (1994). The affinity of foreign investors for authoritarian regimes. Political
Research Quarterly, 47(3), 565-588.
360 Öniş, Z., & Şenses, F. (2005). Rethinking the emerging post-Washington consensus.
Development and Change, 36(2), 263-290.
Opolot, J., & Kuteesa, R. (2006). Impact of policy reforms on agriculture and poverty. In T.C.
Dublin (Ed.), IIIS Discussion paper No. 158. Dublin: Trinity College Dublin.
Orlove, B., Roncoli, C., Kabugo, M., & Majugu, A. (2010). Indigenous climate knowledge in
Southern Uganda: The multiple components of a dynamic regional system. Climatic
Change, 100(2), 243-265.
Osbahr, H., & Allan, C. (2003). Indigenous knowledge of soil fertility management in
Southwest Niger. Geoderma, 111(3–4), 457-479.
Padgett, D. K. (1998). Qualitative methods in social work Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pamuk, H., Bulte, E., Adekunle, A., & Diagne, A. (2015). Decentralised innovation systems
and poverty reduction: Experimental evidence from Central Africa. European Review
of Agricultural Economics, 42(1), 99-127.
Parkinson, S. (2009a). Modes of influence: Participation in publicly administered development
programmes. Public Administration & Development, 29(2), 145-154.
Parkinson, S. (2009b). When farmers don’t want ownership: Reflections on demand-driven
extension in Sub-Sahara Africa. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension,
15(4), 417- 429
Parkinson, S. (2010). The learning organisation as a model for rural development. Development
in Practice, 20(3), 329-341.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002a). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002b). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Social
Work, 1(3), 261-283.
361 Pauw, K., & Thurlow, J. (2015). Prioritizing rural investments in Africa: A hybrid evaluation
approach applied to Uganda. European Journal of Development Research, 27(3), 407-
424.
Peet, R., & Hartwick, E. R. (2009). Theories of development: Contentions, arguments,
alternatives. New York: Guilford Press.
Pender, J. (2001). From ‘structural adjustment’ to ‘comprehensive development framework’:
Conditionality transformed? Third World Quarterly, 22(3), 397-411.
Pender, J., Jagger, P., Nkonya, E., & Sserunkuuma, D. (2004). Development pathways and land
management in Uganda. World Development, 32(5), 767-792.
Perraton, J. (2004). Joseph Stiglitz’s, globalization and its discontents. Journal of International
Development, 16(6), 897-905.
Place, F., & Otsuka, K. (2002). Land tenure systems and their impacts on agriculture
investments and productivity in Uganda. Journal of Development Studies, 38(6), 105-
130.
Poku, N., & Whitman, J. (2011). The Millennium Development Goals: Challenges, prospects
and opportunities. Third World Quarterly, 32(1), 3-8.
Porter, G. (2003). NGOs and poverty reduction in a globalizing world: Perspectives from
Ghana. Progress in Development Studies, 3(2), 131-145.
Porter, D., & Onyach-Olaa, M. (1999). Inclusive planning and allocation for rural services.
Development in Practice, 9(1/2), 56-67.
Poulton, C., Dorward, A., & Kydd, J. (2010). The future of small farms: New directions for
services, institutions, and intermediation. World Development, 38(10), 1413-1428.
Poulton, C., Kydd, J., & Dorward, A. (2006). Overcoming market constraints on pro-poor
agricultural growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. Development Policy Review, 24(3), 243-
277.
362 Poulton, C., & Macartney, J., (2012). Can public–private partnerships leverage private
investment in agricultural value chains in Africa? A preliminary review. Journal of
World Development, 40(1), 96-109.
Pradhan, N. C. (2012). Role of international institutions in openness and growth process.
Journal of International Economics 3(2), 73-95.
Prebisch, R. (1950). The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems.
Economic Commission for Latin America and United Nations Department of Economic
Affiars. Retrieved July 21, 2017 from
http://archivo.cepal.org/pdfs/cdPrebisch/002.pdf
Prebisch, R. (1962). The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems.
Economic Bulletin for Latin America 7(1), 1-22.
Preston, P. (1999). Development theory: Learning the lessons and moving on. European
Journal of Development Research, 11(1), 1-29.
Preston, P. (2012). Theories of development. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
Preston, P. W. (1999). Development theory: Learning the lessons and moving on. European
Journal of Development Research, 11(1), 1-29.
Prosterman, P. (2013). Enhancing poor rural women’s land rights in the developing world.
Journal of International Affairs, 67(1), 147-164.
Punch, K. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Punch, K. (2006). Developing effective research proposals (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Quagrainie, K. K., Ngugi, C. C., & Amisah, S. (2010). Analysis of the use of credit facilities
by small-scale fish farmers in Kenya. Aquaculture International, 18(3), 393-402.
363 Quaye, W., Dowuona, S., Okai, M., & Dziedzoave, N. (2016). Gender dimensions of decision-
making on production assets and challenges facing women. Development in Practice,
26(1), 77-90.
Quibria, M. G. (2005). Rethinking development effectiveness. World Economics, 6(1), 101-
117.
Quilligan, J. B. (2010). The superbubble behind ‘the great moderation:’ How the Brandt report
foresaw today's global economic crisis. Integral Review: A Transdisciplinary and
Transcultural Journal for New Thought, Research, & Praxis, 6(1), 115-152.
Raja, R.G.& Subramanian, A. (2008). Aid and growth: What does the cross-country evidence
really show? Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(4), 643-665
Rao, J. M. (2009). Challenges facing world agriculture: A political economy perspective.
Development and Change, 40(6), 1279-1292.
Ravallion, M. (2009). Are there lessons for Africa from China’s success against poverty? World
Development, 37(2), 303-313.
Ravallion, M. (2013). How long will it take to lift one billion people out of poverty? World
Bank Research Observer, 28(2), 139-158.
Ravallion, M., & Chen, S. (2011). Weakly relative poverty. Review of Economics and
Statistics, 93(4), 1251-1261.
Reardon, T. (1997). Using evidence of household income diversification to inform study of the
rural nonfarm labor market in Africa. World Development, 25(5), 735-747.
Reardon, T., Berdegue, J., & Escobar, G. (2001). Rural nonfarm employment and incomes in
Latin America: Overview and policy implications. World Development, 29(3), 395-409.
Reinikka, R., & Mackinnon, J. (1999). Lessons from Uganda on strategies to fight poverty.
Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 2440. Washington, DC: World Bank.
364 Republic of Uganda (ROU). (1997). Local Governments Act. Kampala: Ministry of Local
Government.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (1999). Report on the Land Act implementation study. Kamapala:
Ministry of Lands, Water, and Environment.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2000a). Eligibility criteria and qualification process for PAF
programmes. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2000b). Learning from the poor: Uganda Participatory Poverty
Assessment Report:. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic
Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2000c). National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS):
Master document of the task force and joint donor groups. Entebbe: Ministry of
Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2000d). Uganda's Poverty Eradication Action Plan: Summary
and main objectives of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. Kampala: Ministry of
Finance, Planning and Economic Development. Retrieved June 17, 2017 from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPRS1/Resources/Country-Papers-and-
JSAs/Uganda_IPRSP.pdf
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2001a). Poverty Action Fund 2000-2001: General guidelines for
the planning and operation of conditional grants. Kampala: Ministry of Finance,
Planning and Economic Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2001b). Uganda Poverty Status Report 2001: Milestones in the
quest for poverty reduction. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic
Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2001c). Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture: Eradicating
poverty in Uganda. Entebbe: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
365 Retrieved July 22, 2017 from http://www.inclusivebusinesshub.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/05/PMAMaindocument.pdf
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2002a). Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Report:
National Report. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2002b). Participatory Poverty Assessment — Phase II:
Deepening the understanding of poverty — National report. Kampala: Ministry of
Finanace, Planning and Economic Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2003a). PEAP revision guide: Poverty monitoring strategy.
Kampala: Ministry of Finanace, Planning and Economic Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2003b). Uganda's progess in attaining PEAP targets in the
context of the Millennium Development Goals. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning
and Economic Development. Retrieved January 21, 2017 from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/UGANDAEXTN/Resources/CG_2003_GoU_PEA
P_targets.pdf.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2004). Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP). Kampala:
Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2005a). Evaluation report: Plan for modernisation of agriculture.
Kampala: Oxford Policy Management and Office of the Prime Minister.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2005b). National Agricultural Research Act. Entebbe: Ministry
of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2006a). National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS):
Implementation modalities Entebbe: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and
Fisheries.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2006b). Uganda National Household Survey 2005/2006.
Kampala: Uganda Bureau of Statistics.
366 Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2008a). National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS): The
fourth quarter progressive report 2007/2008. Entebbe, Uganda: Ministry of
Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2008b). National Agricultural Advisory Services: New
implementation guidelines. Kampala: National Agricultural Advisory Services.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2010a). National Development Plan: Growth employment and
socio-economic transformation for prosperity. Kampala: National Planning Authority.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2010b). Uganda National Household Survey 2009/2010: Socio-
economic module abridged report. Kampala: Uganda Bureau of Statistics.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2010c). Summary report of Uganda census of agriculture
2008/09. Entebbe: Ministry of Agriclture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2014a). Budget speech: Financial Year 2014/2015. Kampala:
Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2014b). Poverty Status Report 2014: Structural change and
poverty reduction in Uganda. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic
Development.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2014c). National Population and Housing Census. Kampala:
Uganda Bureau of Statistics.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2015). Second National Development Plan (NDPII) 2015/16-
2019/20. Kampala: National Planning Authority. Retrieved January 21, 2017 from
http://npa.ug/wp-content/uploads/NDPII-Final.pdf.
Republic of Uganda (ROU). (2017). Uganda household nation survey 206/207: Socio-
economic report. Kampala: Uganda Bureau of Statistics.
367 Ricker-Gilbert, J., & Jones, M. (2015). Does storage technology affect adoption of improved
maize varieties in Africa? Insights from Malawi’s input subsidy program. Food Policy,
50(1), 92-105.
Riddell, R. C. (2007). Does foreign aid really work? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Riddell, R. C. (2011). Aiding the world’s poor: New challenges for donor states. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Rivera, W. M. (1996). Agricultural extension in transition worldwide: structural,
financial and managerial strategies for improving agricultural extension. Journal of
Public Administration and Development 6, 151-161
Rivera, W. M. (1997). Agricultural extension into the next decade. European Journal of
Agricultural Education and Extension, 4(1), 29-38.
Rivera, W., & Alex, G. (Eds). (2004). Demand-driven approaches to agricultural extension:
Case studies of international initiatives. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Robinson, M. (2006). Uganda. Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 37(2), 14-26.
Robinson, M. (2007). The political economy of governance reforms in Uganda.
Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, 45(4), 452-474.
Robinson, M., & Friedman, S. (2007). Civil society, democratisation, and foreign aid: Civic
engagement and public policy in South Africa and Uganda. Journal of Democratisation,
14(4), 643-668.
Rodrik, D. (2014). The past, present, and future of economic growth. Challenge, 57(3), 5-39.
Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., & Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions rule: The primacy of institutions
over geography and integration in economic development. Journal of Economic
Growth, 9(2), 131-165.
Roling, N. (1988). Extension science: Extensin information systems in agricultural
development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
368 Rosche, D. (2016). Agenda 2030 and the sustainable development goals: Gender equality at
last? An Oxfam perspective. Gender and Development, 24(1), 111-126.
Rostow, W. W. (1990). The stages of economic growth: A noncommunist manifesto, (3rd ed.)
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rowden, R. (2010). Poverty reduction is not development. Review of African Political
Economy, 37(126), 503-516.
Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2017). Uganda’s Plan for the Modernisation of
Agriculture. Retrieved July 22, 2017 from
http://www.netpublikationer.dk/um/6207/html/chapter05.htm
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ruckert, A. (2006). Towards an inclusive-neoliberal regime of development: From the
Washington to the post-Washington consensus. Labor, Capital and Society, 39(1), 34-
67.
Rwamigisa, P. B., Birner, R., Mangheni, M.N. & Semana, A. (2013). How to promote
institutional reforms in the agricultural sector? A case study of Uganda’s national
agricultural advisory services (NAADS). Paper presented at the International
Conference on the ‘Political Economy of Agricultural Policy in Africa’, 18-20 March,
Pretoria, South Africa.
Sachs J. (2005). The end of poverty: Economic possibilities of our time. New York: The
Penguin Press.
Sachs, J. (2008). Common wealth: Economics for a crowded planet. New York: Penguin Press.
Sachs, J. D., & McArthur, J. W. (2005). The millennium project: A plan for meeting the
Millennium Development Goals. Lancet, 365(9456), 347-353.
369 Saith, A. (2006). From universal values to Millennium Development Goals: Lost in translation.
Development & Change, 37(6), 1167-1199.
Sanderson, S. K. (2005). World-systems analysis after thirty years: Should it rest in peace?
International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 46(3), 179-213.
Sanjuán-López, A. I., & Dawson, P. J. (2010). Agricultural exports and economic growth in
developing countries: A panel cointegration approach. Journal of Agricultural
Economics, 61(3), 565-583.
Sarantakos, S. (2005). Varieties of social research. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Scott, A., & Lucci, P. (2015). Universality and ambition in the post-2015 development agenda:
A comparison of global and national targets. Journal of International Development,
27(6), 752-775.
Scurrah-Ehrhart, C. (2007). Economic vulnerability, beer and HIV/AIDS: The struggle to
sustain farmer livelihoods and indigenous sorghum varieties in Eastern Uganda.
Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 28(1), 71-89.
Semana, A. R. (1999). Agricultural extension services at crossroads: Present dilemma amd
possible solutions for the future in Uganda. Retrived from May 20, 2017 from
http://www.codesria.org/Links/conferences/ifs/Semana.pdf
Semana, A. R. (2004). Agricultural extension services at crossroads: Present dilemma amd
possible solutions for the future in Uganda. Monograph, Department of Agricultural
Extension/Education, Makerere University. Retrived from May 20, 2017 from
http://www.codesria.org/Links/conferences/ifs/Semana.pdf
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Knopf.
Sen, A. (2000). A decade of human development. Journal of Human Development, 1(1), 17-
23.
370 Sen, A. (2001). Economic development and capability expansion in historical perspective.
Pacific Economic Review, 6(2), 179-191.
Sengupta, R. (2013). Ecological limits and economic development: Creating space. New Delhi:
Oxford University Press.
Sennoga, E. B., & Matovu, J. M. (2013). Public spending composition in Uganda and its
implications for growth and poverty reduction. Public Finance Review, 41(2), 227-247.
Shamsul, B. (1997). The economic dimension of Malay nationalism: The socio-historical roots
of the new economic policy and its contemporary implications. Developing Economies,
35(3), 240-261.
Shilliam, R. (2012). Redemption from development: Amartya Sen, Rastafari and promises of
freedom. Postcolonial Studies, 15(3), 331-350.
Silverman, D. (2005). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (2nd ed). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sjöstedt, M. (2013). Aid effectiveness and the Paris declaration: A mismatch between
ownership and results-based management? Public Administration & Development,
33(2), 143-155.
Slack, L. (2015). The post-2015 global agenda: A role for local government. Commonwealth
Journal of Local Governance, 16/17, 3-11.
Smith, D. R., Gordon, A., Meadows, K., & Zwick, K. (2001). Livelihood diversification in
Uganda: Patterns and determinants of change across two rural districts. Food Policy,
26(4), 421-435.
Solberg, E. (2015). From MDGs to SDGs. Harvard International Review, 37(1), 58-61.
Somekh, B., Burman, E.,Delamont, S., Payne, M., & Thorpe, R. (2011). Research in the social
sciences. In B. Somekh & C. Levin (Eds.), Theory and methods in social research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
371 Sommer, R., & Sommer, B. (1997). A practical guide to behavioral research: Tools and
techniques (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ssonko, D. K. W. (2013). Decentralisation and development: Can Uganda now pass the test of
being a role model? Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, 13(14), 30-45.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stein, A., & Horn, P. (2012). Asset accumulation: An alternative approach to achieving the
Millennium Development Goals. Development Policy Review, 30(6), 663-680.
Steiner, S. (2007). Decentralisation and poverty: Conceptual framework and application to
Uganda. Public Administration & Development, 27(2), 175-185.
Steiner, S. (2010). How important is the capacity of local governments for improvements in
welfare? Evidence from decentralised Uganda. Journal of Development Studies, 46(4),
644-661.
Stephen, H. (2014). A framework for understanding aid effectiveness: Determinants, strategies
and tradeoffs. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 1(1), 58-72.
Stevens, D. (2005). NGO–Mahalla partnerships: exploring the potential for state–society
synergy in Uzbekistan. Central Asian Survey, 24(3), 281-296.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2002a). Globalization and its discontents. London: Allen Lane.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2002b). Participation and development: Perspectives from the comprehensive
development paradigm. Review of Development Economics, 6(2), 163-182.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2010). Freefall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy.
New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Stokke, O. (2013). Aid and political conditionality. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
Stringer, L. C., Twyman, C., & Gibbs, L. M. (2008). Learning from the South: Common
challenges and solutions for small-scale farming. Geographical Journal, 174(3), 235-
250.
372 Stuart, E., & Woodroffe, J. (2016). Leaving no-one behind: Can the Sustainable Development
Goals succeed where the Millennium Development Goals lacked? Gender &
Development, 24(1), 69-81.
Subramanian, A. (2007). The evolution of institutions in India and its relationship with
economic growth. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(2), 196-220.
Sumberg, J., Thompson, J., & Woodhouse, P. (2013). Why agronomy in the developing world
has become contentious. Agriculture and Human Values, 30(1), 71-83.
Sumner, A. (2006). In search of the Post-Washington (dis)consensus: The ‘missing’ content of
PRSPS. Third World Quarterly, 27(8), 1401-1412.
Sumner, A., & Melamed, C. (2010). The MDGs and beyond: Pro-poor policy in a changing
world. Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 41(1), 1-6.
Sun Young, J., & Smith, R. J. (2007). The economics of poverty: Explanatory theories to
inform practice. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 16(1/2), 21-39.
Super, C. M., & Harkness, S. (2008). Globalization and its discontents: Challenges to
developmental theory and practice in Africa. International Journal of Psychology,
43(2), 107-113.
Swanson, B. E. & Davis, K. (2014). Staus of agicultural extension services and rural advisory
services worlwide summary report. Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services, Lindau,
Switzerland.
Tarabini, A., & Jacovkis, J. (2012). The Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers: An analysis of a
hegemonic link between education and poverty. International Journal of Educational
Development, 32(4), 507-516.
Terry, A., McLaughlin, O., & Kazooba, F. (2015). Improving the effectiveness of Ugandan
water user committees. Development in Practice, 25(5), 715-727.
Tharenou, P. (2007). Management research methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
373 Thirlwall, A. P. (2006). Growth and development with special reference to developing
economies (8th ed.). Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Thirtle, C., Lin, L., & Piesse, J. (2003). The impact of research-led agricultural productivity
growth on poverty reduction in Africa, Asia and Latin America. World Development,
31(12), 1959-1974.
Timer, C.P., (2009). A world without agriculture: The structural transformation in historical
perspective. Washington, D.C: The AEI Press.
Todaro, M. P. (2011). Economic development (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Toenniessen, G., Adesina, A., & DeVries, J. (2008). Building an alliance for a green revolution
in Africa. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1136, 233-242.
Tribe, M. (1982). Critical reflections on the Brandt commission report: A review article.
African Affairs, 81(325), 577-582.
Turinawe, A., Drake, L., & Mugisha, J. (2015). Adoption intensity of soil and water
conservation technologies: A case of south western Uganda. Environment,
Development & Sustainability, 17(4), 711-730.
Tusiime, H. A., Renard, R., & Smets, L. (2013). Food aid and household food security in a
conflict situation: Empirical evidence from Northern Uganda. Food Policy, 43, 14-22.
United Nations. (2015). The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. Retrieved January
13, 2017 from
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev
%20(July%201).pdf
United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (1996). Uganda human development report
1996. Kampala: UNDP. Retrieved January 13, 2017
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/257/hdr_1996_
374 United Nations Development Program. (2006). Clean water is a right. Economist, 381(8503),
67-68.
United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2015). Millennium Development Goals
Report for Uganda 2015. Kampala: UNDP.
United Nations Millennium Project. (2005). Investing in development: A practical plan to
achieve the Millennium Development Goals. Retrieved January 13, 2017 from
http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/MainReportComplete-lowres.pdf
Upadhyay, B. (2005). Women and natural resource management: Illustrations from India and
Nepal. Natural Resources Forum, 29(3), 224-232.
Valdés, A., & Foster, W. (2010). Reflections on the role of agriculture in pro-poor growth.
World Development, 38(10), 1362-1374. van den Ban, A. W. (1999). Agricultural development: Opportunities and threats to farmers
and implications for extension organisations. The Journal of Agricultural Education
and Extension, 6(3), 145-156. van den Berg, H., & Jiggins, J. (2007). Investing in farmers: The impacts of farmer field schools
in relation to integrated pest management. World Development, 35(4), 663-686. van Donge, J. K., Henley, D., & Lewis, P. (2012). Tracking development in South-East Asia
and Sub-Saharan Africa: The primacy of policy. Development Policy Review, 30(1), 5-
24. van Vuuren, D. P., Kok, M., Lucas, P. L., Prins, A. G., Alkemade, R., van den Berg, M.,
Stehfest, E. (2015). Pathways to achieve a set of ambitious global sustainability
objectives by 2050: Explorations using the IMAGE integrated assessment model.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 98, 303-323. van Waeyenberge, E., & Bargawi, H. (2015). Moving beyond the paradox of macroeconomic
stability in Uganda? Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 33(1), 121-140.
375 Verschoor, A. (2007). The trojan-horse principle in development assistance: A reading of
Uganda’s experience with aid. Review of Development Economics, 11(1), 78-91. wa Githinji, M., Konstantinidis, C., & Barenberg, A. (2014). Small and productive: Kenyan
women and crop choice. Feminist Economics, 20(1), 101-129.
Wairimu, W., Christoplos, I., & Hilhorst, D. (2016). From crisis to development: The policy
and practice of agricultural service provision in northern Uganda. Agriculture & Human
Values, 33(4), 799-812.
Wakabi, W. (2006). Population growth continues to drive up poverty in Uganda. Lancet,
367(9510), 558-558.
Wellard, K., Rafanomezana, J., Nyirenda, M., Okotel, M., & Subbey, V. (2013). A review of
community extension approaches to innovation for improved livelihoods in Ghana,
Uganda and Malawi. Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension, 19(1), 21-35.
White, H. (2002). Combining qualitative and qualitative approaches in poverty analysis. World
Development, 30(3), 511-522.
Whitfield, L. (2009). The politics of aid: African strategies for dealing with donors. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Whitfield, L. (2010). The state elite, PRSPs and policy implementation in aid-dependent
Ghana. Third World Quarterly, 31(5), 721-737.
Whitfield, L. (2012). How countries become rich and reduce poverty: A review of heterodox
explanations of economic development. Development Policy Review, 30(3), 239-260.
Wiggins, S. (2014). African agricultural development: Lessons and challenges. Journal of
Agricultural Economics 65(3), 529-556.
Wiggins, S., Kirsten, J., & Llambí, L. (2010). The future of small farms. World Development,
38(10), 1341-1348.
376 Williams, D. G. (1996). Governance and the discipline of development. European Journal of
Development Research, 8(2), 157-177.
Williamson, J. (2004). The strange history of the Washington consensus. Journal of Post
Keynesian Economics, 27(2), 195-206.
Williamson, T., & Canagarajah, S. (2003). Is there a place for virtual poverty funds in pro-poor
public spending reform? Lessons from Uganda’s PAF. Development Policy Review,
21(4), 449-480.
Woelcke, J. (2006). Technological and policy options for sustainable agricultural
intensification in Eastern Uganda. Agricultural Economics, 34(2), 129-139.
Woodhouse, P. (2003). Local identities of poverty: Poverty narratives in a decentralised
government and the role of poverty research in Uganda. Paper presented at the
Development Studies Association Annual Conference, University of Glasgow.
Wopereis, M. C. S., Diagne, A., Rodenburg, J., Sié, M., & Somado, E. A. (2008). Why
NERICA is a successful innovation for African farmers: A response to Orr, Sumberg,
Olaf and Oswald from the Africa rice center. Outlook on Agriculture, 37(3), 169-176.
World Bank, (WB). (1969). World finance. Banking, 62(5), 45.
World Bank. (2001). Poverty Reduction and the World Bank: Progress in operationalizing the
WDR 2000/2001. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2005). Pro-Poor Growth in the 1990s: Lessons and insights from 14 countries.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2007). World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development.
Washington DC: World Bank.
World Bank Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). (2011). Growth and productivity in
agriculture and agribusiness: Evaluative lessons from World Bank group experience.
Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved June 29, 2017 from
377 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTGPAA/Resources/Agribusiness_eval.pdf.
World Bank Policy Research Bureau (1993). The East Asian miracle. Economic growth and
public policy. London: Oxford University Press.
World Bank Study Assessing Aid (1998). Assessing aid: What works, what doesn’t and why.
London: Oxford University Press.
Wuyts, M., & Kilama, B. (2016). Planning for agricultural change and economic
transformation in Tanzania? Journal of Agrarian Change, 16(2), 318-341.
Xiaoyun, L., Lixia, T., Xiuli, X., Gubo, Q., & Haimin, W. (2013). What can Africa learn from
China's experience in agricultural development? Institute of Development Studies
Bulletin, 44(4), 31-41.
Yamano, T., & Kijima, Y. (2010). The associations of soil fertility and market access with
household income: Evidence from rural Uganda. Food Policy, 35(1), 51-59.
Yates, J., & Okello, L. (2002). Learning from Uganda’s efforts to learn from the poor:
Reflections and lessons from the Uganda participatory poverty assesment project. In K.
Brock & R. McGee (Eds.), Knowing poverty: Critical reflections on participatory
research policy (pp. 69-98). London: Earthscan.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Yong, A. (2013). Pentecostalism and development: Churches, NGOs and social change in
Africa. Edited by Dena Freeman. Religious Studies Review, 39(2), 122-122.
378 Zapatrina, I. (2016). Sustainable development goals for developing economies and public-
private partnership. European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review,
11(1), 39-45.
Zdanovskis, K., & Pilvere, I. (2015). Engagement of agricultural non-governmental
organisations in making the common agricultural policy. Economic Science for Rural
Development, 38, 239-249.
Ziai, A. (2011). The Millennium Development Goals: Back to the future? Third World
Quarterly, 32(1), 27-43.
Zossou, E., Vodouhe, D. S., Van Mele, P., Agboh-Noameshie, A. R., & Lebailly, P. (2015).
Linking local rice processors’ access to rural radio, gender, and livelihoods in Benin.
Development in Practice, 25(7), 1057-1066.
379 APPENDIX A: ETHICS APPROVAL
HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Notification of Expedited Approval
To Chief Investigator or Project Supervisor: Professor Mel Gray Cc Co-investigators / Research Students: Doctor Kate Davies Mr Samuel Ariong Re Protocol: Poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda: The case of National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program Date: 13-Aug-2015 Reference No: H-2015-0247 Date of Initial Approval: 12-Aug-2015
Thank you for your Response to Conditional Approval submission to the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) seeking approval in relation to the above protocol. Your submission was considered under Expedited review by the Chair/Deputy Chair. I am pleased to advise that the decision on your submission is Approved effective 12-Aug- 2015. In approving this protocol, the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) is of the opinion that the project complies with the provisions contained in the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, 2007, and the requirements within this University relating to human research. Approval will remain valid subject to the submission, and satisfactory assessment, of annual progress reports. If the approval of an External HREC has been "noted" the approval period is as determined by that HREC. The full Committee will be asked to ratify this decision at its next scheduled meeting. A formal Certificate of Approval will be available upon request. Your approval number is ….. If the research requires the use of an Information Statement, ensure this number is inserted at the relevant point in the complaints paragraph prior to distribution to potential participants. You may then proceed with the research.
380 Conditions of Approval This approval has been granted subject to you complying with the requirements for Monitoring of Progress, Reporting of Adverse Events, and Variations to the Approved Protocol as detailed below. PLEASE NOTE: In the case where the HREC has ‘noted’ the approval of an External HREC, progress reports and reports of adverse events are to be submitted to the External HREC only. In the case of Variations to the approved protocol, or a Renewal of approval, you will apply to the External HREC for approval in the first instance and then register that approval with the University's HREC. Monitoring of Progress Other than above, the University is obliged to monitor the progress of research projects involving human participants to ensure that they are conducted according to the protocol as approved by the HREC. A progress report is required on an annual basis. Continuation of your HREC approval for this project is conditional upon receipt, and satisfactory assessment, of annual progress reports. You will be advised when a report is due. Reporting of Adverse Events 1. It is the responsibility of the person first named on this Approval Advice to report adverse events. 2. Adverse events, however minor, must be recorded by the investigator as observed by the investigator or as volunteered by a participant in the research. Full details are to be documented, whether or not the investigator, or his/her deputies, consider the event to be related to the research substance or procedure. 3. Serious or unforeseen adverse events that occur during the research or within six (6) months of completion of the research, must be reported by the person first named on the Approval Advice to the (HREC) by way of the Adverse Event Report form (via RIMS at https://rims.newcastle.edu.au/login.asp) within 72 hours of the occurrence of the event or the investigator receiving advice of the event. 4. Serious adverse events are defined as: o Causing death, life threatening or serious disability. o Causing or prolonging hospitalisation. o Overdoses, cancers, congenital abnormalities, tissue damage, whether or not they are judged to be caused by the investigational agent or procedure. o Causing psycho-social and/or financial harm. This covers everything from perceived invasion of privacy, breach of confidentiality, or the diminution of social reputation, to the creation of psychological fears and trauma. o Any other event which might affect the continued ethical acceptability of the project.
5. Reports of adverse events must include:
o Participant's study identification number; o date of birth; o date of entry into the study; o treatment arm (if applicable); o date of event;
381 o details of event; o the investigator's opinion as to whether the event is related to the research procedures; and o action taken in response to the event. 6. Adverse events which do not fall within the definition of serious or unexpected, including those reported from other sites involved in the research, are to be reported in detail at the time of the annual progress report to the HREC.
Variations to approved protocol If you wish to change, or deviate from, the approved protocol, you will need to submit an Application for Variation to Approved Human Research (via RIMS at https://rims.newcastle.edu.au/login.asp). Variations may include, but are not limited to, changes or additions to investigators, study design, study population, number of participants, methods of recruitment, or participant information/consent documentation. Variations must be approved by the (HREC) before they are implemented except when Registering an approval of a variation from an external HREC which has been designated the lead HREC, in which case you may proceed as soon as you receive an acknowledgement of your Registration. Linkage of ethics approval to a new Grant HREC approvals cannot be assigned to a new grant or award (ie those that were not identified on the application for ethics approval) without confirmation of the approval from the Human Research Ethics Officer on behalf of the HREC. Best wishes for a successful project. Professor Allyson Holbrook Chair, Human Research Ethics Committee For communications and enquiries: Human Research Ethics Administration Research Services Research Integrity Unit, The Chancellery, The University of Newcastle Callaghan NSW 2308 T +61 2 492 17894 F +61 2 492 17164 Email [email protected] RIMS website https://RIMS.newcastle.edu.au/login.asp Linked University of Newcastle administered funding: Funding body Funding project title First named investigator Grant
382 APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE
Poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda: The case of National Agricultural Advisory
Services (NAADS) program
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR THE MODEL FARMERS
INTERVIEW INFORMATION
Interview participant ID Date
Place of Interview Time of Interview
Audio recording ID Length
INTERVIEW STATEMENT
Thank you for agreeing to take part in this research and for coming for this interview. As indicated in the information statement, which I am sure you read and understood, I am carrying out research to understand the poverty reduction programs in a rural setting. This will be achieved through interviewing persons like you and who have successfully implemented the NAADS program. This interview will be audio recorded so that I get a correct record of your responses. The audio record will be converted to a written document which I will bring to you for verification. Your name remains anonymous and it will not be possible to identify you with any data I will collect. In this interview, I will informally discuss with you issues about your education level; past experience in involvement of the similar projects, with ether government or NGOs; environmental factors like rain, soils, drought and land ownership; Employment, what else do you do like working with government or NGOs, private business; asset possession before the program was implemented; proximity to other social infrastructures, like roads, electricity, markets; gender; culture; tribal issues, a guide of which has been provided. Throughout the interview, feel free to ask any question or to cancel the interview. I already have some details about yourself, which I will ask you to verify or update. Do you have any questions?
383
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
a. Gender………………………………….. b. Age……………………………………… c. NAADS program recipient…………………………………. d. How long have you been a recipient………………………………… e. Qualifications…………….…………………………………………………………….. f. Any other details……………..…………………………………………………………
GUIDING QUESTIONS
1. Model farmer’s engagement in the construction and implementation.
a. Briefly talk about yourself.
b. What is the meaning of a model farmer and how can one become one?
c. Do you see yourself as a model farmer?
d. What makes you to be called a model farmer?
e. What separates you from other non-model farmers?
f. Describe your role in the construction and implementation of the program.
g. Outline your involvement in this program.
h. What NAADS support services and goods did you receive?
i. What kind of implementation opportunities did the program present to you?
j. Were these opportunities accessible to everyone?
2. Benefits associated with the program or that ensued.
a. Trainings, in form of workshops, conferences and seminars?
b. Access to free improved and high yielding seeds, breeds, tools and equipment.
c. How did you ensure that you received them?
d. What helped you to join the farmers group and maintain your membership even
when you had already been successful?
3. Factors contributing to your success.
384
a. Education levels?
b. Environmental factors, rain, fertile soils, sunshine etc?
c. Assets, like land ownership, bulls, ploughs, carts, etc ?
d. Access to social infrastructures like roads, electricity, markets?
e. Working relationships with the local authorities, NAADS coordinators and
central government, specifically Ministry of Agriculture.
f. Employment, like being employed in government, NGOs, or previously in the
same sector. Or who works for you, women, men, relatives etc
g. Culture, does it encourage hard work, views about government programs?
4. How and why the program worked for model farmers
a. Attending meetings regularly?
b. Given opportunity to decide a kind of enterprise; goats, chicken, cows, seeds
tools etc?
c. Level of closeness to the coordinators, assistant coordinators and committee or
group heads?
d. Having relatives at the NAADS secretariat, Ministry of Agriculture, district
local government or having worked in the same sector
Thank you for participating in this interview
385
APPENDIX C: CODING SUMMARY
Nodes Nodes\\Assets ownership Nodes\\Association Nodes\\Attitude changes Nodes\\Bulk marketing Nodes\\Climatic conditions Nodes\\Co-funding Nodes\\Coordination activities Nodes\\Culture Nodes\\Demand of extension services Nodes\\Demonstration Garden Nodes\\Diversification Nodes\\Economic\Credit Nodes\\Economic\Enterprise selection Nodes\\Education Nodes\\Empowerment Nodes\\Financial security Nodes\\Food availability Nodes\\Gender relations, Nodes\\Government programs Nodes\\household investment Nodes\\Increased production Nodes\\Increased incomes Nodes\\Infrastructures Nodes\\Inputs Nodes\\Institutions Nodes\\Local government Nodes\\Local government\decentralisation Nodes\\Markets Nodes\\Meetings Nodes\\Microfinance Nodes\\NGOs Nodes\\Participation Nodes\\Past experience Nodes\\Political\political stability Nodes\\skills development Nodes\\Social networks Nodes\\Standard of living Nodes\\Technical support Nodes\\technology adoption Nodes\\Training Nodes\\Working relations
386
APPENDIX D: INFORMATION STATEMENT FOR LOCAL
AUTHORITIES
Professor Mel Gray School of Humanities and Social Science Faculty of Education and Arts University Drive Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Phone: +61 2 4921 6233 Fax: +61 2 4921 7818 Email: [email protected]
Information Statement for Research Project
Title: Poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda: The case of National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program Researchers: Professor Mel Gray (Principal Supervisor) and Mr. Samuel Bernard Ariong (Student) Document Version 1; Dated 05/05/2015 For the district local authorities
You are asked to give permission for access to the records and details of NAADS files for this research study being conducted by Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong, for his Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Newcastle supervised by Professor Mel Gray of the School of Humanities and Social Science. This project has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Newcastle (Approval Number H-2015-0247) and will take place in the districts of Kumi, Ngora and Soroti, Eastern Uganda from September 2015 to February 2016.
Why is the research being done? The study aims to develop a clear and detailed understanding of the factors contributing to the success of model farmers: how they were involved in the design and implementation of NAADS; what environmental factors, like good soils and rainfall, gender characteristics, ethnicity, education levels, and so on has contributed to their success; what role has their ability
387
to network and negotiate with bureaucratic structures and processes played; and so on. By studying factors leading to success, mechanisms to support the less successful might be developed.
Who can participate in the research?
This research has only one category of participants. These are: • Model farmers implementing the NAADS program aged 18-60 years selected purposively from the NAADS records at the district and are thought to have relevant information.
Model farmers are to be selected purposively, that is, those thought to have rich information regarding their success and implementing the NAADS program are selected to participate in this study.
What participants would be asked to do?
If one agrees to participate, he/she will be asked to undergo an interview session with Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong, and respond to follow up interview, if necessary. No reimbursement or payments will be made to participants.
What choice do you have?
Participation in this research is entirely on choice. Only those people who give their informed consent will be included in the project. Whether or not one decides to participate, his/her decision will not disadvantage anyone. If one decides to participate, he/she may withdraw from the project at any time without giving a reason and have the option of withdrawing any data which identifies him/her.
How much time will it take?
The interview will take about 60-90 minutes for each participant.
388
What are the risks and benefits of participating?
The benefit of participating in this research is that one will contribute to knowledge on how to support informed policy construction and support the less successful farmers and other millions still entrenched in poverty in the face of development policy, and by sharing their own experiences one is offering himself/herself an opportunity to be heard. There are no risks associated with participation in the research.
How will privacy be protected?
Any information collected by the researchers which might identify a participant will be stored securely and only accessed by the researchers unless they consent otherwise, except as required by law. The interview notes and audio records will be anonymous and it will not be possible to identify participants from these records. Numerical codes/identifiers will be used to ensure that audio records and notes remain anonymous. Data in electronic form will be kept secure in a password protected computer file with external hard-drive backup. While in Uganda, data in paper form will be kept secure in a lockable handbag in the researchers’ room accessible by the researcher only. In transit to Australia, data in paper form together with the laptop and external hard disk that stores electronic data will be kept secure in a lockable hand bag which the researcher will carry with him onto the flight. In Australia, data in paper form will be kept secure in a lockable drawer in the researchers’ office where no one will have access except the researcher. Data will be retained for at least 5 years at the University of Newcastle. The electronic data will be destroyed by deleting all files from the computer and hard disk while data in paper form will be destroyed by shredding.
How will the information collected be used?
The data will be reported in a thesis to be submitted for Mr. Samuel Bernard Ariong’s degree while parts of it will be presented at development policy related conferences and published in papers in peer reviewed policy journals. Individual participants will not be identified in any reports or presentations arising from the project. You will be able to review the recording and transcripts to edit or erase your contribution after the interview. Non-identifiable data may be also be shared with other parties to encourage scientific scrutiny, and to contribute to further research and public knowledge, or as required by law. Information shared will include poverty reduction approaches as suggested strategies. You will be asked during the interview if you
389
require a summary of the results so the researcher could send you a copy. A copy of the final report will be deposited in the libraries of the University of Newcastle.
What do respondents need to do to participate?
The respondents will be advised to read the Information Statement and be sure they understand its contents before they consent to participate. If there is anything they do not understand, or they have questions, they will contact the researcher. If they would like to participate, they complete the attached Consent Form. I will contact them to arrange a time convenient to them for the interview.
Further information
If you would like further information, please contact the researchers using contact details provided below: Samuel Bernard Ariong Phone: +256 782493365 or +256 701493365 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] Professor Mel Gray Phone: +61249216233 Email: [email protected] Omalinga Simon Peter, Ministry of Water; Technical Support Unit3 Soroti, at 0782394920. Thank you for considering this invitation.
Name: Professor Mel Gray Name: Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong
Position: Principal Supervisor Position: Student
Signature: Signature:
390
Complaints about this research
This project has been approved by the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee,
Approval No. H-. Should you have concerns about your rights as a participant in this research, or you have a complaint about the manner in which the research is conducted, it may be given to the researcher, or, if an independent person is preferred, to the Human Research Ethics
Officer, Research Office, The Chancellery, The University of Newcastle, University Drive,
Callaghan NSW 2308, Australia, Telephone +61249216333
Email [email protected]
391
APPENDIX E: INFORMATION STATEMENT FOR PARTICIPANTS
Professor Mel Gray School of Humanities and Social Science Faculty of Education and Arts University Drive Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Phone: +61 2 4921 6233 Fax: +61 2 4921 7818 Email: [email protected]
Information Statement for Research Project
Title: Poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda: The case of National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program Researchers: Professor Mel Gray (Principal Supervisor) and Mr. Samuel Bernard Ariong (Student) Document Version 1; Dated 05/05/2015 For the participants
You are invited to participate in the research study for the above-mentioned research project being conducted by Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong, for his Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Newcastle supervised by Professor Mel Gray of the School of Humanities and Social Science. This project has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Newcastle (Approval Number H-2015-0247) and will take place in the districts of Kumi, Ngora and Soroti, Eastern Uganda from September 2015 to February 2016.
Why is the research being done? The study aims to develop a detailed and clear understanding of the factors contributing to the success of model farmers: how they were involved in the design and implementation of NAADS; what environmental factors, like good soils and rainfall, gender characteristics, ethnicity, education levels, and so on has contributed to their success; what role has their ability to network and negotiate with bureaucratic structures and processes played; and so on. By
392
studying factors leading to success, mechanisms to support the less successful might be developed.
Who can participate in the research? This research has one category of participants. These are: • Model farmers implementing the NAADS program aged 18-60 years selected purposively from the NAADS records at the district and are thought to have relevant information. Model farmers are those considered to have been successful in reaping the benefits of the program and their productivity has increased as a result of implementing the program. You were selected to consider this invitation to participate in this study as one of the model farmers, with rich information and implementing NAADS program.
What participants would be asked to do? If you agree to participate, you will be asked to undergo an interview session with Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong, a student and respond to follow up interview, if necessary. No reimbursement or payments will be made to participants.
What choice do you have? Participation in this research is entirely your choice. Only those people who give their informed consent will be included in the project. Whether or not you decide to participate, your decision will not disadvantage you. If you decide to participate, you may withdraw from the project at any time without giving a reason and have the option of withdrawing any data which identifies you.
How much time will it take? The interview will take about 60-90 minutes for each participant.
What are the risks and benefits of participating? The benefit of participating in this research is that you will contribute to knowledge on how to support the construction of informed policy making, and by sharing your own experience you are offering yourself an opportunity to be heard. There are no risks associated with your participation in the research.
393
How will your privacy be protected? Any information collected by the researchers which might identify you will be stored securely and only accessed by the researchers unless there is consent otherwise, except as required by law. The interview notes and audio records will be anonymous and it will not be possible to identify you from these records. Numerical codes/identifiers will be used to ensure that audio records and notes remain anonymous. Data in electronic form will be kept secure in a password protected computer file with external hard-drive backup. While in Uganda, data in paper form will be kept secure in a lockable handbag in the researchers’ room accessible by the researcher only. In transit to Australia, data in paper form together with the laptop and external hard disk that stores electronic data will be kept secure in a lockable hand bag which the researcher will carry with him onto the flight. In Australia, data in paper form will be kept secure in a lockable table in the researchers’ office where no one will have access to except the researcher. Data will be retained for at least 5 years at the University of Newcastle. The electronic data will be destroyed by deleting all files from the computer and hard disk while data in paper form will be destroyed by shredding.
How will the information collected be used? The data will be reported in a thesis to be submitted for Mr. Samuel Bernard Ariong’s degree while parts of it will be presented at development policy related conferences and published in papers in scientific journals. Individual participants will not be identified in any reports or presentations arising from the project. You will be able to review the recording and transcripts to edit or erase your contribution after the interview. Non-identifiable data may also be shared with other parties to encourage scientific scrutiny, and to contribute to further research and public knowledge, or as required by law. Information shared will include poverty reduction approaches as suggested strategies. You will be asked during the interview if you require a summary of the results so that the researcher could send you a copy. A copy of the final report will be deposited in the libraries of the University of Newcastle.
What do you need to do to participate? Please read this Information Statement and be sure you understand its contents before you consent to participate. If there is anything you do not understand, or you have questions, contact the researcher. If you would like to participate, please complete the attached Consent Form. I will contact you to arrange a time convenient to you for the interview.
394
Further information If you would like further information, please contact the researchers using contact details provided below: Samuel Bernard Ariong Phone: +256 782493365 or +256 701493365 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] Professor Mel Gray Phone: +61249216233 Email: [email protected] Omalinga Simon Peter, Ministry of Water; Technical Support Unit3, Soroti, at +256782394920, where Ariong was previously employed.
Thank you for considering this invitation.
Name: Professor Mel Gray Name: Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong Position: Principal Supervisor Position: Student
Signature: Signature:
Complaints about this research This project has been approved by the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee, Approval No. H-2015-0247. Should you have concerns about your rights as a participant in this research, or you have a complaint about the manner in which the research is conducted, it may be given to the researcher, or, if an independent person is preferred, to the Human Research Ethics Officer, Research Office, The Chancellery, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan NSW 2308, Australia, Telephone +61249216333, email Human- [email protected].
395
APPENDIX F: CONSENT FORM FOR LOCAL AUTHORITIES
Professor Mel Gray School of Humanities and Social Science Faculty of Education and Arts University Drive Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Phone: +61 2 4921 6233 Fax: +61 2 4921 7818 Email: [email protected]
Consent Form for the Research Project (local authorities)
Title: Poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda. The case of National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program. Researchers: Professor Mel Gray (Principal Supervisor) and Mr. Samuel Bernard Ariong (Student) Document Version 1; Dated 5/05/2015 I agree to allow the researcher to access the records and personal data of model farmers in the district files, their site location and to seek their consent to take in the above research project and give my consent freely.
I understand that the project will be conducted as described in the Information Statement, a copy of which I have retained.
I understand the participants can withdraw from the project at any time and do not have to give any reason for withdrawing. They will be able to review the recording and transcripts to edit or erase their contribution after the interview.
I consent to (circle YES to those activities you agree to participate in, and circle NO to those activities which you do not agree to participate in): • Farmers will participate in an interview and having it audio recorded Yes/No • Farmers to participate in a follow up interview, where necessary and having it audio recorded Yes/No
I understand that their personal information will remain confidential to the researchers.
I have had the opportunity to have questions answered to my satisfaction.
Print Name:
Contact phone number (for further contact about the study):
Signature: Date:
396 APPENDIX G: PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
Professor Mel Gray School of Humanities and Social Science Faculty of Education and Arts University Drive Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Phone: +61 2 4921 6233 Fax: +61 2 4921 7818 Email: [email protected]
Consent Form for the Research Project (Participants) Title: Poverty reduction in rural Eastern Uganda: The case of National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program Researchers: Professor Mel Gray (Principal Supervisor) and Mr Samuel Bernard Ariong (Student) Document Version 1; Dated 5/05/2015
I agree to participate in the above research project and give my consent freely.
I understand that the project will be conducted as described in the Information Statement, a copy of which I have retained.
I understand I can withdraw from the project at any time and do not have to give any reason for withdrawing. You will be able to review the recording and transcripts to edit or erase your contribution after the interview.
I consent to (circle YES to those activities you agree to participate in, and circle NO to those activities which you do not agree to participate in): • Participating in an interview and having it audio recorded Yes/No • Participating in a follow up interview, where necessary and having it audio recorded Yes/No
I understand that my personal information will remain confidential to the researchers.
I have had the opportunity to have questions answered to my satisfaction.
Print Name:
Contact phone number (for further contact about the study):
Signature: Date:
397 APPENDIX H: DESCRIPTION OF MODEL FARMERS
A model farmer is one that is at the take-off stage to commercialise his/her farm enterprise(s), managing his/her farm as a business. A model farmer has attained a high level of productivity having adopted improved technologies and farming practices, and achieves increased incomes with potential to earn UGX20 million and more annually. The model farmer, therefore, provides good learning opportunities to other farmers. He/she is, however, limited by inadequate infrastructure and access to financial services to realise his/her full potential.
A model farmer may or may not be a member of a farmer’s group but would be expected to register as a member of one, and provide advisory services to farmers’ groups, once selected.
Characteristics and selection criteria for a model farmer
A model farmer i. is market oriented and is successfully managing more than one enterprise (enterprise mix) ii. has benefited from ISFG and fully repaid or has demonstrated credibility and access to credit iii. has potential to generate UGX20 million or more per annum from his farming enterprises iv. has established a clear link to sources of inputs and produce market v. has potential to multiply and be a source of improved technologies for other farmers, and/or link other farmers to markets vi. is willing to share information on production and marketing with other farmers vii. is highly specialised and undertaking a series of activities under the value chain
Table 3: Selection criteria for model farmers
No. Criteria Max. Score 1 Is engaged in enterprise mix and/or highly specialised, and 25 has the potential to generate UGX20 million per year. The model farmer must have registered success in at least one enterprise 2 Has benefited from ISFG or has credibility and security to 20 access financing/credit facilities 3 Shows willingness and is prepared to access and share 20 technologies and advice with other farmers; and to demonstrate to and train them 4 Is an active and committed member of a registered farmers’ 15 group or is willing to join a registered farmer group 5 Has linkage to input and/or output market 10 6 Has direct access to basic production resources especially 10 land with capacity for expansion Total 100
398
Roles of a model farmer
The model farmer will: i. serve as a demonstration farmer for improved technologies and good management in the enterprises that s/he is promoting ii. has willingness and motivation to donate time (volunteer) in providing advice to other farmers iii. serve as a source of improved (foundation) technologies by multiplying them and selling to other farmers iv. share production and market information with other farmers v. keep farm records and marketing information, and use this to advice farmers on market oriented farming
Selection procedure for model farmers
The model farmers will be selected through a two-stage process. Potential model farmers in each selected enterprise being promoted in the parish will be identified by a Parish Identification Committee. This committee will be composed of the following membership: i. Representatives of registered farmer groups elected by all farmers in the parish (4) ii. Members of the Parish Coordinating Committee (PCC) (4) iii. Community Based Facilitators (CBFs) (2) – one to be the Secretary iv. LC I Secretaries for Production (2) v. Parish Chief (Chair)
In the event that the youth, women and people with disabilities (PWD) are not represented among the above, there will be a special consideration to ensure that they are represented in the committee.
A list of potential model farmers, 70% of whom will be members of a registered farmers’ group, while 30% will be from outside farmers’ groups, identified in each parish will be submitted to the Sub-county NAADS Coordinator (SNC) for compilation and presentation to the Sub- county Selection Committee (SCC) for vetting and final selection. The SCC will consist of the following members: i. The Sub-county Farmer Forum Executive (including the sub-county NAADS Coordinator and Secretary for Production) ii. One representative of each of the PCCs (number of parishes in sub-county) – two of whom should be female, youth or PWD iii. LC 3 Chairperson iv. Sub-county Chief (Chair)
Note: 1. The sub-county NAADS Coordinator is the Secretary to this committee 2. The chairperson of the ruling party shall be co-opted on this committee
399
Identification and final selection of the model farmers in the sub-county will be according to the criteria in Table 3. If a member of the Sub-county Selection Committee has been identified as a potential model farmer, s/he will be excluded from the deliberations of the SCC.
Type of support provided and return obligations
Model farmers will be selected in each of the enterprises that have been prioritised by the sub- county. In order to access support, the selected model farmers will work closely with the sub- county technical team to identify his commercialisation constraints and technology needs. They will then reach agreement on clear terms of reference for the support to be provided. The individual model farmers will then be required with the assistance of the technical team, to submit a proposal clearly spelling out on how the funds would be used and the range of services and technologies that will be provided to farmers groups. This proposal would be evaluated and approved by the Sub-county Procurement Committee. The model farmer will then enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Sub-county Farmers’ Forum. The MoU will clearly spell out the roles and responsibilities of: model farmer; farmer groups; the sub-county farmers’ forum and extension workers.
Model farmers will be required to pay back the value of support they receive in terms of services and technologies provided to farmer groups. It is expected that a model farmer would provide demonstration, advice and technologies to approximately 5 or 10 farmer groups involved in the enterprise(s).
400