DOCSLIB.ORG

Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework (Vmgf)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework (Vmgf) VULNERABLE AND MARGINALIZED GROUPS FRAMEWORK (VMGF) FOR THE UGANDA DIGITAL ACCELERATION PROGRAM [UDAP] FPIC with The Tepeth Community in Tapac FPIC with the Batwa Community in Bundibugyo MARCH 2021 Confidential VULNERABLEV ANDULNE MARGINALISEDRABLE AND MA GROUPSRGINALIZ FRAMEWORKED GROUPS (VMGF) January 2021 2 FRAMEWORK Action Parties Designation Signature Prepared Chris OPESEN & Derrick Social Scientist & Environmental KYATEREKERA Specialist Reviewed Flavia OPIO Business Analyst Approved Vivian DDAMBYA Director Technical Services DOCUMENT NUMBER: NITA-U/2021/PLN THE NATIONAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AUTHORITY, UGANDA (NITA-U) Palm Courts; Plot 7A Rotary Avenue (Former Lugogo Bypass). P.O. Box 33151, Kampala- Uganda Tel: +256-417-801041/2, Fax: +256-417-801050 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nita.go.ug The Uganda Digital Acceleration Program [UDAP) Page iii Confidential VULNERABLEV ANDULNE MARGINALISEDRABLE AND MA GROUPSRGINALIZ FRAMEWORKED GROUPS (VMGF) January 2021 2 FRAMEWORK TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS........................................................................................................................................................ vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Background.................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Proposed Project Location ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Situational Analysis of the Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups in the Program Area .................................. 2 1.4 The Purpose of the VMGF ............................................................................................................................... 2 2. METHODOLOGY FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE VMGF .................................................................... 4 2.1 Desk Review ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Preliminary Stakeholder Consultations ............................................................................................................ 4 3. SOCIAL ASSESSMENT OF THE VULNERABLE AND MARGINALIZED GROUPS . Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. - 1 - 3.2 Specific Objectives of ESS 7 ....................................................................................................................... - 2 - 3.3 Rationale of the Social Assessment .......................................................................................................... - 3 - 3.4 Objectives of the Social Assessment........................................................................................................ - 3 - 3.5 Scope of the Social Assessment................................................................................................................. - 4 - 3.6 The Social Assessment Methodology .......................................................................................................... - 4 - 3.6.1 Consensus Building Kick-off Meetings ................................................................................................ - 4 - 3.6.2 Documentary Review ............................................................................................................................ - 4 - 3.6.3 Preliminary Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) ....................................................................................... - 5 - 3.6.4 Preliminary Community Consultations: ................................................................................................ - 5 - ........................................................................................................................................................................... - 6 - 3.6.5 Preliminary Consultations with Local Government Authorities ........................................................... - 6 - 3.6.6 Preliminary Consultations with other stakeholders supporting VMGs ................................................. - 7 - 3.6.7 Observations arising from Preliminary stakeholder consultations ......................................................... - 8 - 3.6.8 Data Analysis and Report Writing ......................................................................................................... - 8 - 3.6.9 The Key Issues Raised During the FPIC Consultation with the Local Government Leaders in the Social Assessment. ....................................................................................................................................................... - 9 - 3.6.10 CONCLUSIONS AND TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ - 13 - 3.11 Plan for Continuous Stakeholder Engagement .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 4. BASELINE INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC VMGs IN UGANDA ................................................................ 4 4.1 Definition of Indigenous/Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups....................................................................... 4 4.2 Marginalized Groups ........................................................................................................................................ 4 4.2.1 The Batwa Community .................................................................................................................................. 4 4.2.2 The Tepeth Community ................................................................................................................................. 5 4.3 Overview of VMG Districts in Uganda ............................................................................................................ 6 4.3.1 Kabale District ............................................................................................................................................... 6 4.2.2. Kasese District ............................................................................................................................................ 11 4.3.2 Bundibugyo District................................................................................................................................... 12 The Uganda Digital Acceleration Program [UDAP) Page iv Confidential VULNERABLEV ANDULNE MARGINALISEDRABLE AND MA GROUPSRGINALIZ FRAMEWORKED GROUPS (VMGF) January 2021 2 FRAMEWORK 4.4 Information and Communication Technology Infrastructure in the Program Areas ...................................... 19 4.4.1 Overview of ICT Infrastructure in Uganda .................................................................................................. 19 4.4.2 Rural Communications Development Fund [RCDF] ................................................................................... 19 5. LEGAL, POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK ...................................................................... 21 5.1. The Legal Framework.................................................................................................................................... 21 5.1.1. Constitution of the Republic of Uganda (1995) .......................................................................................... 21 5.1.2. The Equal Opportunities Commission Act (2007) ..................................................................................... 21 5.1.3. The National Information Technology Authority Uganda Act (2009) ....................................................... 21 5.1.4. The Uganda Wild Life Act (1990) .............................................................................................................. 22 5.1.5. The Local Government Act (1997) ............................................................................................................. 22 Table 5.1.6 Gap Analysis of Uganda’s Legal Framework and ESS 7 .................................................................. 23 5.2. Policy Framework ...................................................................................................................................... 27 5.2.1. National Land Policy (2013) ..................................................................................................................... 27 5.1.2. National Policy for Older Persons (2009) ................................................................................................. 27 5.1.3. The National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management (2010) ................................................. 27 5.3. Institutional Frameworks ........................................................................................................................... 28 5.3.1. Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development .............................................................................. 28 5.3.2. The Uganda Human Rights Commission ................................................................................................. 28 5.3.3. The Equal Opportunities Commission .....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ending CHILD MARRIAGE and TEENAGE PREGNANCY in Uganda
    ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA A FORMATIVE RESEARCH TO GUIDE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGY ON ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA Final Report - December 2015 ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA 1 A FORMATIVE RESEARCH TO GUIDE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGY ON ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA A FORMATIVE RESEARCH TO GUIDE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGY ON ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA Final Report - December 2015 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) gratefully acknowledges the valuable contribution of many individuals whose time, expertise and ideas made this research a success. Gratitude is extended to the Research Team Lead by Dr. Florence Kyoheirwe Muhanguzi with support from Prof. Grace Bantebya Kyomuhendo and all the Research Assistants for the 10 districts for their valuable support to the research process. Lastly, UNICEF would like to acknowledge the invaluable input of all the study respondents; women, men, girls and boys and the Key Informants at national and sub national level who provided insightful information without whom the study would not have been accomplished. I ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA A FORMATIVE RESEARCH TO GUIDE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGY ON ENDING CHILD MARRIAGE AND TEENAGE PREGNANCY IN UGANDA CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................I
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda 2015 Human Rights Report
    UGANDA 2015 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Uganda is a constitutional republic led since 1986 by President Yoweri Museveni of the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) party. Voters re-elected Museveni to a fourth five-year term and returned an NRM majority to the unicameral Parliament in 2011. While the election marked an improvement over previous elections, it was marred by irregularities. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control over the security forces. The three most serious human rights problems in the country included: lack of respect for the integrity of the person (unlawful killings, torture, and other abuse of suspects and detainees); restrictions on civil liberties (freedoms of assembly, expression, the media, and association); and violence and discrimination against marginalized groups, such as women (sexual and gender-based violence), children (sexual abuse and ritual killing), persons with disabilities, and the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) community. Other human rights problems included harsh prison conditions, arbitrary and politically motivated arrest and detention, lengthy pretrial detention, restrictions on the right to a fair trial, official corruption, societal or mob violence, trafficking in persons, and child labor. Although the government occasionally took steps to punish officials who committed abuses, whether in the security services or elsewhere, impunity was a problem. Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from: a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life There were several reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings. On September 8, media reported security forces in Apaa Parish in the north shot and killed five persons during a land dispute over the government’s border demarcation.
    [Show full text]
  • Vote:550 Rukungiri District Quarter4
    Local Government Quarterly Performance Report FY 2018/19 Vote:550 Rukungiri District Quarter4 Terms and Conditions I hereby submit Quarter 4 performance progress report. This is in accordance with Paragraph 8 of the letter appointing me as an Accounting Officer for Vote:550 Rukungiri District for FY 2018/19. I confirm that the information provided in this report represents the actual performance achieved by the Local Government for the period under review. Name and Signature: Accounting Officer, Rukungiri District Date: 31/07/2019 cc. The LCV Chairperson (District) / The Mayor (Municipality) 1 Local Government Quarterly Performance Report FY 2018/19 Vote:550 Rukungiri District Quarter4 Summary: Overview of Revenues and Expenditures Overall Revenue Performance Ushs Thousands Approved Budget Cumulative Receipts % of Budget Received Locally Raised Revenues 768,329 697,996 91% Discretionary Government Transfers 3,978,084 3,978,013 100% Conditional Government Transfers 29,522,467 29,530,083 100% Other Government Transfers 1,873,561 2,425,114 129% Donor Funding 450,000 268,229 60% Total Revenues shares 36,592,441 36,899,435 101% Overall Expenditure Performance by Workplan Ushs Thousands Approved Cumulative Cumulative % Budget % Budget % Releases Budget Releases Expenditure Released Spent Spent Planning 97,692 94,401 86,491 97% 89% 92% Internal Audit 103,469 108,264 78,275 105% 76% 72% Administration 5,544,298 5,574,561 5,574,108 101% 101% 100% Finance 556,538 553,246 539,337 99% 97% 97% Statutory Bodies 1,184,977 1,132,449 1,114,128 96% 94%
    [Show full text]
  • Karamoja and Northern Uganda Comparative Analysis of Livelihood Recovery in the Post-Conflict Periods November 2019
    Karamoja and Northern Uganda Comparative analysis of livelihood recovery in the post-conflict periods November 2019 Karamoja and Northern Uganda Comparative analysis of livelihood recovery in the post-conflict periods November 2019 Published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Tufts University Rome, 2019 REQUIRED CITATION FAO and Tufts University. 2019. Comparative analysis of livelihood recovery in the post-conflict periods – Karamoja and Northern Uganda. November 2019. Rome. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) or Tufts University concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO or the University in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO or the University. ISBN 978-92-5-131747-1 (FAO) ©FAO and Tufts University, 2019 Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode/legalcode). Under the terms of this licence, this work may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited.
    [Show full text]
  • Napak District
    National Population and Housing Census 2014 Area Specific Profiles Napak District April 2017 National Population and Housing Census 2014 Bokora County Constituency – Napak District This report presents findings of National Population and Housing Census (NPHC) 2014 undertaken by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS). Additional information about the Census may be obtained from the UBOS Head Office, Statistics House. Plot 9 Colville Street, P. O. Box 7186, Kampala, Uganda; Telephone: +256-414 706000 Fax: +256-414 237553; E-mail: [email protected]; Website: www.ubos.org Cover Photos: Uganda Bureau of Statistics Recommended Citation Uganda Bureau of Statistics 2017, The National Population and Housing Census 2014 – Area Specific Profile Series, Kampala, Uganda. National Population and Housing Census 2014 Bokora County Constituency– Napak District FOREWORD Demographic and socio-economic data are useful for planning and evidence-based decision making in any country. Such data are collected through Population Censuses, Demographic and Socio-economic Surveys, Civil Registration Systems and other Administrative sources. In Uganda, however, the Population and Housing Census remains the main source of demographic data, especially at the sub-national level. Population Census taking in Uganda dates back to 1911 and since then the country has undertaken five such Censuses. The most recent, the National Population and Housing Census 2014, was undertaken under the theme ‘Counting for Planning and Improved Service Delivery’. The enumeration for the 2014 Census was conducted in August/September 2014. The Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) worked closely with different Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) as well as Local Governments (LGs) to undertake the census exercise.
    [Show full text]
  • Karamoja Rapid Crop and Food Security Assessment
    KARAMOJA RAPID CROP AND FOOD SECURITY ASSESSMENT KAMPALA, AUGUST 2013 This Rapid Assessment was conducted by: World Food Programme (WFP) - Elliot Vhurumuku; Hamidu Tusiime; Eunice Twanza; Alex Ogenrwoth; Swaleh Gule; James Odong; and Joseph Ndawula Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) - Bernard Onzima; Joseph Egabu; Paddy Namurebire; and Michael Lokiru Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) - Johnson Oworo; Timothy Ojwi; Jimmy Ogwang; and Catherine Nakalembe Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) - James Obo; and Stephen Kataama Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 2 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 3 1.1. Background .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.2. Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 4 1.3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.3.1. Sampling methodology .................................................................................................... 4 1.3.2. Selection of respondents ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Land Use Change and Soil Degradation in the Southwestern Highlands of Uganda
    LAND USE CHANGE AND SOIL DEGRADATION IN THE SOUTHWESTERN HIGHLANDS OF UGANDA Simon Bolwig A Contribution to the Strategic Criteria for Rural Investments in Productivity (SCRIP) Program of the USAID Uganda Mission The International Food Policy Research Institute 2033 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 September 2002 Strategic Criteria for Rural Investments in Productivity (SCRIP) is a USAID-funded program in Uganda implemented by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in collaboration with Makerere University Faculty of Agriculture and Institute for Environment and Natural Resources. The key objective is to provide spatially-explicit strategic assessments of sustainable rural livelihood and land use options for Uganda, taking account of geographical and household factors such as asset endowments, human capacity, institutions, infrastructure, technology, markets & trade, and natural resources (ecosystem goods and services). It is the hope that this information will help improve the quality of policies and investment programs for the sustainable development of rural areas in Uganda. SCRIP builds in part on the IFPRI project Policies for Improved Land Management in Uganda (1999-2002). SCRIP started in March 2001 and is scheduled to run until 2006. The origin of SCRIP lies in a challenge that the USAID Uganda Mission set itself in designing a new strategic objective (SO) targeted at increasing rural incomes. The Expanded Sustainable Economic Opportunities for Rural Sector Growth strategic objective will be implemented over the period 2002-2007. This new SO is a combination of previously separate strategies and country programs on enhancing agricultural productivity, market and trade development, and improved environmental management. Contact in Kampala Contact in Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Security and Nutrition Assessment in Karamoja Sub-Region - July 2017 I Report
    Nakapiripirit District Food Security and Nutrition Assessment in Karamoja Sub-Region - July 2017 i Report Food Security and Nutrition Assessment in Karamoja Sub-Region NAKAPIRIPIRIT DISTRICT REPORT Nakapiripirit ii Food Security and Nutrition Assessment in Karamoja Sub-Region - July 2017 District Report IBFAN Uganda Nakapiripirit District Food Security and Nutrition Assessment in Karamoja Sub-Region - July 2017 iii Report Acknowledgements This report is the outcome of a collaborative well, to the senior district leadership that process and would not have been possible provided initial guidance for the analysis without the contribution of many of the report. individuals: Appreciation also goes to the International WFP & UNICEF are grateful to the Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) that Government of Uganda and the people of was responsible for the overall field data Karamoja for the support provided during collection, analysis and report writing for the entire exercise, especially during data this round of the FSNA. collection across all the Karamoja districts. Last but not least, thanks goes to colleagues Appreciation is also extended to the from WFP field offices in Karamoja and the Ministry of Health and the District Health Regional Bureau; the team of supervisors Offices of Abim, Amudat, Kaabong, Kotido, and Enumerators; community leaders and Moroto, Nakapiripirit and Napak for village health teams who worked tirelessly supporting the assessment exercise and, as to assure quality for the whole exercise. For more information related to
    [Show full text]
  • Kabale District HRV Profile.Pdf
    Kabale District Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Profi le 2016 KABALE DISTRICT HAZARD, RISK AND VULNERABILITY PROFILE a Acknowledgement On behalf of Office of the Prime Minister, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to all of the key stakeholders who provided their valuable inputs and support to this Multi-Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability mapping exercise that led to the production of comprehensive district Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability (HRV) profiles. I extend my sincere thanks to the Department of Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Management, under the leadership of the Commissioner, Mr. Martin Owor, for the oversight and management of the entire exercise. The HRV assessment team was led by Ms. Ahimbisibwe Catherine, Senior Disaster Preparedness Officer supported by Ogwang Jimmy, Disaster Preparednes Officer and the team of consultants (GIS/DRR specialists); Dr. Bernard Barasa, and Mr. Nsiimire Peter, who provided technical support. Our gratitude goes to UNDP for providing funds to support the Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Mapping. The team comprised of Mr. Steven Goldfinch – Disaster Risk Management Advisor, Mr. Gilbert Anguyo - Disaster Risk Reduction Analyst, and Mr. Ongom Alfred- Early Warning system Database programmer. My appreciation also goes to Kabale District Team. The entire body of stakeholders who in one way or another yielded valuable ideas and time to support the completion of this exercise. Hon. Hilary O. Onek Minister for Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Refugees KABALE DISTRICT HAZARD, RISK AND VULNERABILITY PROFILE i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The multi-hazard vulnerability profile outputs from this assessment was a combination of spatial modeling using socio-ecological spatial layers (i.e. DEM, Slope, Aspect, Flow Accumulation, Land use, vegetation cover, hydrology, soil types and soil moisture content, population, socio-economic, health facilities, accessibility, and meteorological data) and information captured from District Key Informant interviews and sub-county FGDs using a participatory approach.
    [Show full text]
  • WHO UGANDA BULLETIN February 2016 Ehealth MONTHLY BULLETIN
    WHO UGANDA BULLETIN February 2016 eHEALTH MONTHLY BULLETIN Welcome to this 1st issue of the eHealth Bulletin, a production 2015 of the WHO Country Office. Disease October November December This monthly bulletin is intended to bridge the gap between the Cholera existing weekly and quarterly bulletins; focus on a one or two disease/event that featured prominently in a given month; pro- Typhoid fever mote data utilization and information sharing. Malaria This issue focuses on cholera, typhoid and malaria during the Source: Health Facility Outpatient Monthly Reports, Month of December 2015. Completeness of monthly reporting DHIS2, MoH for December 2015 was above 90% across all the four regions. Typhoid fever Distribution of Typhoid Fever During the month of December 2015, typhoid cases were reported by nearly all districts. Central region reported the highest number, with Kampala, Wakiso, Mubende and Luweero contributing to the bulk of these numbers. In the north, high numbers were reported by Gulu, Arua and Koti- do. Cholera Outbreaks of cholera were also reported by several districts, across the country. 1 Visit our website www.whouganda.org and follow us on World Health Organization, Uganda @WHOUganda WHO UGANDA eHEALTH BULLETIN February 2016 Typhoid District Cholera Kisoro District 12 Fever Kitgum District 4 169 Abim District 43 Koboko District 26 Adjumani District 5 Kole District Agago District 26 85 Kotido District 347 Alebtong District 1 Kumi District 6 502 Amolatar District 58 Kween District 45 Amudat District 11 Kyankwanzi District
    [Show full text]
  • “Get the Gun!” RIGHTS Human Rights Violations by Uganda’S National Army in Law Enforcement Operations in Karamoja Region WATCH
    Uganda HUMAN “Get the Gun!” RIGHTS Human Rights Violations by Uganda’s National Army in Law Enforcement Operations in Karamoja Region WATCH September 2007 Volume 19, No. 13(A) “Get the Gun!” Human Rights Violations by Uganda’s National Army in Law Enforcement Operations in Karamoja Region Map ......................................................................................................................... 1 I. Summary...............................................................................................................2 Key Recommendations....................................................................................... 6 To the Government of Uganda....................................................................... 6 To Donor Countries and International Development Partners..........................7 To the United Nations Country Team ..............................................................7 II. Methodology....................................................................................................... 8 III. Background.........................................................................................................9 A. Livelihoods and Insecurity in Karamoja .........................................................10 B. Government Approach to Law and Order in Karamoja .................................... 17 Civilians tried by courts martial....................................................................20 C. Government Disarmament Policies in Karamoja............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mosquitoes of Western Uganda
    HHS Public Access Author manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript Author J Med Entomol Manuscript Author . Author Manuscript Author manuscript; available in PMC 2019 May 26. Published in final edited form as: J Med Entomol. 2012 November ; 49(6): 1289–1306. doi:10.1603/me12111. Mosquitoes of Western Uganda J.-P. Mutebi1, M. B. Crabtree1, R. J. Kent Crockett1, A. M. Powers1, J. J. Lutwama2, and B. R. Miller1 1Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 3150 Rampart Road, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521. 2Department of Arbovirology, Uganda Virus Research Institute (UVRI), P.O. Box 49, Entebbe, Uganda. Abstract The mosquito fauna in many areas of western Uganda has never been studied and is currently unknown. One area, Bwamba County, has been previously studied and documented but the species lists have not been updated for more than 40 years. This paucity of data makes it difficult to determine which arthropod-borne viruses pose a risk to human or animal populations. Using CO2 baited-light traps, from 2008 through 2010, 67,731 mosquitoes were captured at five locations in western Uganda including Mweya, Sempaya, Maramagambo, Bwindi (BINP), and Kibale (KNP). Overall, 88 mosquito species, 7 subspecies and 7 species groups in 10 genera were collected. The largest number of species was collected at Sempaya (65 species), followed by Maramagambo (45), Mweya (34), BINP (33), and KNP (22). However, species diversity was highest in BINP (Simpson’s Diversity Index 1-D = 0.85), followed by KNP (0.80), Maramagambo (0.79), Sempaya (0.67), and Mweya (0.56). Only six species (Aedes (Aedimorphus) cumminsii (Theobald), Aedes (Neomelaniconion) circumluteolus (Theobald), Culex (Culex) antennatus (Becker), Culex (Culex) decens group, Culex (Lutzia) tigripes De Grandpre and De Charmoy, and Culex (Oculeomyia) annulioris Theobald), were collected from all 5 sites suggesting large differences in species composition among sites.
    [Show full text]