climate, food, trade - cuts genevacuts-geneva.org/pdf/pact - study2 - uganda.pdf · climate, food,...

Climate, Food, TradeAnalysis of Institutional Interplay and

Information Exchange

Uganda

Climate, Food, TradeAnalysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

Uganda

Published by:

CUTS International, Geneva37-39 rue de Vermont, 1202 Geneva, SwitzerlandPh: +41(0)22 734 6080 | Fax: +41(0)22 734 3914Email: [email protected] | Web: www.cuts-geneva-orgSkype: cuts.grc

Author:Jane Seruwagi Nalunga, Munu Martin Luther and Faith Lumonya

In Partnership with:Southern & Eastern African Trade, Information &Negotiations Institute (SEATINI), UgandaPlot 69 Bukoto Street, Kamwokya, P.O Box 3138, Kampala, UgandaPh: +256-414-540856, Email: [email protected],Web: www.seatiniuganda.org

Supported by:

Swedish International DevelopmentCooperation Agency (Sida)

Printed by : Jaipur Printers Private Limited, Jaipur, India

ISBN: 978-81-8257-229-4

©CUTS International 2015

The material in this publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for education or non-profituses, without special permission from the copyright holders, provided acknowledgment of the source is made. Thepublishers would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication, which uses this publication as a source. No use ofthis publication may be made for resale or other commercial purposes without prior written permission of CUTS.

#1516

Contents

Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ i

Note on Authors ......................................................................................................................... iii

Acronyms .................................................................................................................................... v

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... vii

1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Situation Analysis: Climate Change, Food Security and Trade in Uganda ..................... 2

1.2 Why Strengthen Inter-institutional Interplay in Climate, Food and Trade? ................... 3

2. Brief Overview of Institutions Involved in the Coordination of Climate Change,Trade, and Food Security Policy ........................................................................................ 4

2.1 Inter-Institutional Coordination: Climate Change, Trade, and FoodSecurity Institutions in Uganda ........................................................................................... 4

2.2 National Level .............................................................................................................. 4

2.3 District Level Institutions of Agriculture, Trade and Climate Change .......................... 9

2.4 Linkage between National and District Level ............................................................. 10

3. Case Studies ..................................................................................................................... 14

3.1 The Case of Nakaseke District ................................................................................... 14

3.2 The Case of Nakasongola District .............................................................................. 38

4 Identified Gaps/Shortcomings and Challenges .................................................................. 22

5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 24

References ................................................................................................................................. 26

Endnotes .................................................................................................................................... 27

List of Figures and Table

Figure 1: An overview of the Ministry with Directorates, Departments and Linkages toCommittees and Parastatals Agencies under the Ministry of Water andEnvironment .............................................................................................................. 6

Figure 2: Structure of Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries .......................... 7

Figure 3: Illustration of Some of the Other Institutions in the Agriculture Sector .................... 8

Figure 4: Effect of Bush Fires in Nakaseke District ................................................................ 15

Figure 5: Charcoal Trading in Nakasongola District .............................................................. 19

Figure 6: Coffee Production in Nakasongola District ............................................................. 20

Table 1: The Mandate of Local Governments regarding Food Security ................................. 11

Acknowledgements

The report is a result of the opinions and contributions from many experts andstakeholders on agriculture, climate change and trade. While the contributors to thisstudy cannot be acknowledged by name, the team is indebted to officials from theMinistries of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives (MTIC),Ministry of Agriculture, AnimalIndustry and Fisheries (MAAIF), Ministry ofWater and Environment (MWE),Ministryof Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED), East African CommunityAffairs (MEACA), various government departments as well as agencies in NakasekeandNakasongola. In addition, stakeholders from the civil society organisations (CSOs),private sector, trade unions, traders, and Parliament made valuable contributions tothis study.

The research team would like to express their gratitude to all the people that havebeen helpful in making this research possible and worthwhile. We are thankful toCUTS International, Geneva for initiating the PACT EAC Project and CUTS Nairobifor coordination of the project implementation.We are equally grateful to JaneNalunga,Munu Martin Luther and Faith Lumonya for their technical efforts that led to thepublication of this study.

We are also thankful to the experts, colleagues, and friends who have contributed tothe success of this study. In particular we would like to acknowledge the PACT EACNational Reference Group members in Uganda for providing comments during variousphases of the study as well as the Project Advisory Committee members.

iClimate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

iiiClimate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

Note on Authors

Jane Seruwagi Nalunga is an expert on trade, tax and investment related issues in generaland the multilateral, bilateral, regional and national trade and investment policies andAgreements in particular. She has more than 20 years of experience in policy research,analysis and advocacy and has authored a number of policy-oriented studies and articles.Jane sits on a number of national policymaking bodies; and advises government andParliament on trade, tax and investment-related matters. She is a member and activelyparticipates in a number of networks at national and global levels.

She holds an Honours Bachelor of Arts degree in History and English Language(Makerere University); a Diploma in Education fromMakerere University; and aMastersof Arts (M.A) in African History from the University of London.

She is an Associate of the Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (ACIS)and currently the Country Director of SEATINI-Uganda.

Martin Luther Munu is a development professional with special interest in influencingthe globalisation process to promote the development needs of poor countries. He holdsa Master of Science Globalisation and Development from the Institute of DevelopmentPolicy and Management-University of Antwerp (IOB-UA), Belgium and a Bachelor inDevelopment Studies from Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. He worked withConsumer Unity&Trust Society (CUTS) International, Nairobi as Assistant ProgrammeOfficer (Trade and Development).

Munu is passionate about democratic governance and human rights as critical issuesin realising sustainable development and has been involved in a number of initiatives atnational, regional as well as global levels, for instance, the World Trade Organisation(WTO) 9th Ministerial Conference in Bali, influencing the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process. He is a staunch believer insupporting local institutions to promote local development in the face of the currentglobal trade and development dynamics.

Lumonya Faith is a young and enthusiastic trade policy researcher, analyst and activist.She holds an Honors Bachelors of Arts degree in Development Economics (specialisingin International Trade) from Makerere University.

She is currently working with SEATINI-Uganda as a Programme Officer onMultilateral trading systems and Bilateral Trade and Investment Negotiations. Shepossesses a wealth of knowledge in trade and trade policy related aspects at national,regional and global level. She previously handled policy analysis and advocacy work ontrade and economic, social and cultural rights and on regional trade integration.

She has authored and contributed to the development of a number of trade and traderelated policy information materials on trade, agriculture and food security issues. Shehas worked closely with policy makers at national and regional level to ensure prodevelopment outcomes in various trade and trade related policy processes.

vClimate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

Acronyms

CSOs Civil Society Organisations

CUTS ARC Consumer Unity & Trust Society Africa Resource Centre

CUTS Consumer Unity & Trust Society

DCOs District Commercial Officers

DDA Diary Development Authority

DICOSS District Commercial Services Support

DSIP Development Strategy and Investment Plan

FBOs Faith Based Organisations

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GoU Government of Uganda

HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection and Acquired ImmuneDeficiency Syndrome

IITC Inter-Institutional Trade Committee

IPC Integrated Food Security Phase Classification

LG Local Government

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries

MDAs Ministries, Departments and Agencies

MFPED Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development

MTIC Ministry of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives

MWE Ministry of Water and Environment

NAADS National Agricultural Advisory Services

NARO National Agricultural Research Organisation

NDP National Development Plan

NEMA National Environmental Management Authority

NGOs Non-Governmental Organisations

NGRCDB Natural Generic Resource Centre and Data Bank

PACT EAC Promoting Agriculture, Climate and Trade Linkages in the EastAfrican Community

PMA Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture

POPDEV Population and Development

PPPs Public Private Partnerships

PSFU Private Sector Foundation Uganda

vi Climate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

PSOs Private Sector Organisations

UDC Uganda Development Corporation

UEPB Uganda Export Promotion Board

UIRI Uganda Industrial Research Institute

UNBS Uganda National Bureau of Standards

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UTCC Uganda Trypanosomiasis Control Council

VEDCO Volunteer Efforts for Development Concerns

viiClimate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

Executive Summary

Over the years, high and unstable food and agricultural commodity prices, concernsabout population growth, increasing per capita food demands, and environmentalconstraints have pushed agriculture and food production into the national andinternational political, policy and research agendas (Doward A, 2013). Uganda hasremained a net food importer despite the fact that agriculture is the backbone of hereconomy. These food deficits are attributed to a number of factors including poorgovernance, unfavorable trade policies, climate change, supply side constraints, poorinfrastructure, and high food prices, among others.

Uganda�s economy is made up of three major sub sectors, i.e. agriculture, forestry andfisheries, which entirely depend on the weather for their production and productivity.Other sectors include livestock, manufacturing, and services sub sectors. To a largerextent, therefore, Uganda�s economy is highly climate change sensitive.

Generally, the approach taken by the Government of Uganda has been to improveagriculture productivity by increasing efficiency and effectiveness of the agriculturesector. This has been done through the adoption of a number of programmes in theform of environment, trade, as well as gender related issues. Most of these programmeshave a common goal of contributing to poverty eradication, food security andenvironmental conservation and sustainability. The major challenge however, has beenlack of adequate institutional coordination amongst the relevant Ministries andstakeholders dealing with the environmental, food security/agriculture, and trade relatedissues, be it vertically from the Central Government to the Local Government (LG)level or horizontally between the responsible institutions at the District level, whichwould be required for a holistic approach.

There is a fundamental linkage between trade, agriculture, and climate change as wasestablished in a previous research undertaken by CUTS International in Uganda, whichinter-alia found that this required effective coordination of the relevant institutionsdealing with the three issues. As a follow-up, this study therefore provides a detailedanalysis of the institutional coordination for climate, trade, and agricultural policy atnational and district levels.

1Climate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

Chapter 1

Introduction

Agricultural trade matters for Uganda�sdevelopment, as it is a major tool for generatingopportunities for poverty alleviation anddevelopment. It has also been viewed as a vehiclefor prosperity in many parts of Africa. Bypromoting economic growth and higher incomes,and by offering access to better goods, services,capital, knowledge and technology, trade inagriculture goods offers new and diverseopportunities for all. However, the kind of tradein which a country engages matters for itsattainment of sustainable development.

For Uganda, agriculture remains the backboneof its economy. Despite its challenges andlimitations, the country also enjoys a competitiveadvantage in the sector if compared to its EACpartners. The agriculture sector in Uganda formsone of the most fundamental economic sectorsof the country�s economy. Although dominatedby the rural population, agriculture contributesup to 48 percent (MAAIF, 2010) of Uganda�strade exports, and employs about 73 percent oftotal population, with the proportion of womenemployed in the sector being 83 percent whilethat of men was approximated at 71 percent in2005 (MAAIF, 2010).1 Agricultural productionand trade contributes up to 23.1 percent2 of thecountry�s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Thesector contributes significantly to the country�sdomestic food requirements.

Indeed, no country is immune to the impacts ofclimate change,3 and, therefore, this poses agreat challenge to Uganda and the world, albeitLeast Developed Countries, of which it belongs,are more vulnerable given their limited capacityto cope. Climate change is one of the greatest

challenges facing the world today. This is mainlybecause mitigating global warming and adaptingto its consequences requires major economicinvestment and, above all, unequivocaldetermination on the part of countrygovernments. Climate change is a threat tofuture development, peace, and prosperity andtherefore must be tackled with the greatest senseof urgency by the entire community of nations.

Within Uganda, efforts have been made by thegovernment to enhance the country�s adaptationand mitigation of the impacts of climate change.Uganda is signatory to the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC) and to the Kyoto Protocol. Thegovernment under the MWE put in place theClimate Change Unit as the focal point for theKyoto Protocol and the UNFCCC in Uganda.Over the years, therefore, the country has beeninvolved in the Conference of Parties (COP)negotiations for a multilateral agreement onclimate change, with the most recent being theCOP 20. Uganda, as a country, is committed toreducing the impacts of climate change forsustainable development and improvedlivelihoods.

Despite this, the country�s human activitiesaimed at improving agriculture production andtrade have led to land degradation, declining soilproductivity, and climate change manifested inthe form of unpredictable weather patterns,which in turn has affected the growth of thesector. Because of this, there is a need for well-coordinated policy and institutional inter-play ofthe country�s climate, agriculture, and traderelated organs in their efforts to increase

2 Climate, Food, Trade: Analysis of Institutional Interplay and Information Exchange

production, marketing, trade, and consumptionin a sustainable way.

Arguably, achieving sustainable developmentrequires a holistic approach in addressingimpacts of climate change and maintaining orincreasing agriculture productivity and trade. Inorder to attain this harmony at the national,regional, or global level, the linkage betweenthese issues and policies and enhancinginstitutional coordination is critical. Thisresearch, therefore, aims to identify theinstitutional inter-play in Uganda on the issuesof climate, trade, and food security.

1.1 Situation Analysis: ClimateChange, Food Security, and Trade inUgandaUganda�s carbon dioxide emissions have beenattributed to area expansion throughdeforestation, inefficient technology (e.g.exhaust fumes from old vehicles) andindustrialisation, although to a very small extent.These facilitate the production of greenhousegases, which accelerate global warming and,therefore, climate change. To a large extent,trade has directly or indirectly influenced themajor causes of climate change, but this has beenmore attributed to global emissions byindustrialised and newly industrialising countriesthan to the country�s economic and humanactivities. The desire for survival, especiallyamidst Uganda�s growing population, has drivenagricultural practices to increase foodproduction for food security. Such practicesinclude, but are not limited, to industrialisation,deforestation, and excessive land use foragriculture and grazing.

Uganda has an under-developed industrial sectorand a largely agrarian economy dependent onrudimentary agriculture methods, i.e. agroecology.4 In addition, the growing population,coupled with globalisation of the trading systemhas increased pressure on the agriculture sectorfor many developing countries including LDCslike Uganda. A June 2013 Integrated Food

Security Phase Classification (IPC) analysiscarried out by food security partners and led bythe MAAIF, a government institution focusedon agriculture in Uganda, revealed that up to975,000 people in the semi-arid region face�stressed� levels of food insecurity, while234,000 more cannot meet their minimum foodneeds.5

1.1.1 Evidence of climate change occurrencesand its effect on trade and food securityClimate change is real and its effects are alreadybeing experienced not only in Uganda and theEAC, but also in many parts of the world.Frequent extreme weather events have beenreported that affect agricultural productionstructures and competiveness. In the next 20years, it has been projected that Uganda�stemperature is likely to increase by up to 1.5degrees celsius and by up to 4.3 degrees by 2080.Although evident today, changes in rainfallpatterns are expected, but the extent of whichis less certain than the changes in temperature.Rainfall has also been hypothesised to increaseby 10-20 percent over most of the country. Inrecent years, some parts of the country haveexperienced mudslides, and droughts have alsobecome more significant, with 13 droughtsoccurring in the period of 1991 to 2006. StudiesinMt. Elgon region indicate that landslides havebeen exacerbated by extreme climate, includingthe heavy rainfall (Knapen et al., 2005).

Food insecurity in some parts of the country hasalso been exacerbated by reduced production ofmajor food crops and a scarcity of forageopportunities for livestock due to droughts andfloods in dry land areas, such as the cattlecorridor inNakasongola. These weather vagarieshave also affected wild life, mountains, riversand forests. Such occurrences could adverselyaffect the performance of the tourism sector,Uganda�s second largest export earner. Thecountry�s infrastructure has also been affectedby these events, a situation that has had directimplications on food security and trade.


1.2 Why Strengthen Inter-institutionalinterplay in climate, food, and trade?The emphasis for strengthening institutionalinterplay between institutions working onclimate change, trade, and food security is basedon the fact that these three issues are interlinkedand dependent on each other. A researchundertaken in Uganda by CUTS International,under the project of Promoting AgricultureClimate Change and Trade linkages, revealedthat the absence of this coordination withinpolicies of these three issues would, to someextent, impede the attainment of sustainabledevelopment. It also revealed that institutions,as key implementers of these policies, should alsobe linked for general institutional coherence indealing with these issues.

Although efforts have been made by thegovernment to link government ministries,departments and agencies (MDAs), and also civilsociety and private sector in mitigating climatechange, increasing agriculture production, andenhancing trade, there are gaps that still existand need to be tackled, a number of gaps exist,which undermines the ability for an effectiveinstitutional interplay to holistically address thethree issues, more so at the district level.Establishing sound working relationship amongthe relevant institutions, whether governmentMDAs or non-state actors working on thesethree issues of trade, climate and agriculture/food security, is fundamental for enhancingcoherent policy development, planning, andcoordinated implementation in Uganda.


Chapter 2

Brief Overview of Institutions Involved in theCoordination of Climate Change, Trade, andFood Security Policy

2.1 Inter-Institutional Coordination:Climate Change, Trade, and FoodSecurity Institutions in UgandaAfrica has contributed very little to globalwarming, yet it will be affected severely byclimate change. While the continent has a roleto play in the mitigation of greenhouse gasemissions, Africa�s major focus is on devisingways for adaptation. In order to address thechallenges of adaptation to climate change,African countries like Uganda need to enhancetheir institutional interplay towards addressingthese challenges, in addition to mobilising thefinancial and technical resources required at bothnational and global levels. Such institutionalcoordination is necessary in strengtheninginformation systems, technical capacity, and theright policies and institutions. The governanceof climate change adaptation will remaininadequate if institutional coordination betweenclimate change and related issues, such as foodsecurity and trade, are not taken into account.

Governments, through the institutionsresponsible for climate, food and trade as wellas ministries/agencies responsible for overalldevelopment planning, could take steps toimprove regular two-way information flow andfeedback between the ministries responsible forthese three issues at the national level, on theone hand, and at the district level, on the otherhand. To achieve this, it may require improving

the rules of procedure, inter-ministerial co-ordination mechanisms, and provision of humanand financial resources. It could also require re-definition and assignment of responsibilities withmechanisms on climate, food and trade issues inthe three relevant ministries/agencies whoseprimary mandate is of particular interest.6

In Uganda, the Ministry of Agriculture, AnimalIndustry and Fisheries (MAAIF), the Ministryof Water and Environment (MWE), and theMinistry of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives(MTIC) are the three institutions in charge ofagriculture, food security, climate change, andtrade, respectively. At the local government level,the District Agricultural Officer and DistrictProduction Officer, District EnvironmentDepartment and the District Commercial Officesare each correspondingly responsible foragriculture, climate change, and trade issues, andthey interact with the national level coordinatingministries, as well as government agencies,through the policy and legal frameworks in place.

2.2 National Level

2.2.1 Institutional Coordination in Planning,Policy Development, Implementation, andMonitoring and EvaluationAlthough the responsibility for climate changeadaptation, mitigation, and increasing trade andfood security often lie within the line ministries,i.e. water and environment, trade, industry and


cooperatives, and agriculture (animal industryand fisheries) respectively, it is critical to havethese issues recognised as economy-wideconcerns.

In Uganda, generally, efforts to mainstreamclimate change, trade, and food security intonational development planning are still at arelatively low level. The process ofmainstreaming climate change adaptation andmitigation in the implementation of agricultureand trade activities should be coordinated by therelevant ministries, departments, and agencieswith an economy-wide mandate/portfolio. Thiswould promote an integration of the differentmandates, which ultimately promotes a coherentapproach. In addition, since climate changeimpacts are manifested at the local level,affecting the livelihoods, health and vulnerabilityof the population, especially the poorest, theresponses put forward at the national level shouldbe cognisant of the grassroots realities. Sustainedgovernment commitment, right from the politicallevel to link the three issues at the highest level,is also prerequisite in addressing hungereradication as well as facilitating increased tradewhich benefits the population and promotessustainable development.

The Office of the Prime Minister is responsiblefor the coordination and implementation ofgovernment policies across ministries,departments, and other public institutions. Itundertakes coordination of the implementationof the National Development Plan (NDP),communication of policies/practices and definingthe ideal National Character and Values forDevelopment, coordinating development ofcapacities for prevention, preparedness, andresponse to natural and human induced disastersand refugees, and coordinating and monitoringthe implementation of Special GovernmentPolicies and programmes. The majorshortcoming with regard to coordination,however, is the limited role the ministry hasplayed in enhancing Uganda�s trade capacity, beit internally or externally. The MFPED, on theother hand, plays a pivotal role in the co-ordination of development planning,mobilisation

of public resources (in this case for addressingclimate change), developing the agriculturalsector, and facilitating trade.

With regard to vertical interplay, the Ministryof Local Government is in charge of coordinatinglocal governments (LGs). Under thisarrangement, LGs are in charge of each districtin the country and they operate under adecentralised system as a means of bringingservices closer to the people. Proponents haveargued that decentralisation provides aninstitutional mechanism for bringing dividedgroups into formal, rule-bound bargainingprocesses (Treismann, 1998).

It is important to note that different players,notably the private sector and civil society,actively compliment the government through itsdifferent ministries and agencies to undertaketheir mandates. These initiatives have beeninstrumental in linking the different stakeholderson agriculture, environmental protection andtrade to promote holistic approaches inaddressing issues. Examples include the UgandaStrategy Support Programme (USSP), where theInternational Food Policy Research Institute(IFPRI) works in partnership with the Ugandangovernment to implement the government�sAgricultural Sector Development Strategy andInvestment Plan (DSIP). Drawing on the skillsand experience of local and internationalresearchers, USSP generates policy-relevantevidence on priority agricultural and ruraldevelopment issues.

2.2.2 Institutions Responsible for ClimateChange, Trade, and Food SecurityNational LevelAt the national level, government ministriesresponsible for environmental, agriculture andtrade issues are complimented by semi-autonomous agencies responsible for specialisedareas. These are discussed below:

The MWE works with different directorates,committees and agencies as illustrated in Figure1. For instance, National EnvironmentManagement Authority (NEMA), a semi-


autonomous institution, established inMay 1995,which focuses on the compliance andenforcement of the existing legal and institutionalframeworks on environmental management inUganda. Departments in the ministry, like thatof Climate Change andMeteorology, work withthe district officers at the Department ofEnvironment to enhance climate changemitigation, adaptation, as well as disseminateweather information to farmers.

With regard to trade, the MTIC, hosts the InterInstitutional Trade Committee, which was setup in 2007 to bring all stakeholders fromdifferent sectors, including agriculture,environment, and human rights, together tocontribute to the trade policy process. Throughthe Department of Internal Trade, the ministryaims to develop and nurture private sectorcompetitiveness, and to support the productivesectors of the economy to trade at both domesticand international levels with the ultimateobjective of creating wealth, employment,enhancing social welfare, and transforming

Uganda from a poor peasant society into amodern and prosperous society. Thedepartment, therefore, undertakes strengtheningof the commercial legal regime, eliminating non-tariff measures, enhancing capacity andeffectiveness of District Commercial Offices, andtrade and gender mainstreaming, among others.The Department of External Trade, on the otherhand, is responsible for providing support to allother productive sectors of the economy topromote exports, and, in doing so, coordinateswith the Department of Internal Trade.

The Department of Industry and TechnologyDevelopment at theMinistry of Trade promotesexpansion and diversification of competitive andenvironmentally sustainable industries bycoordinating, promoting, and supporting theestablishment of linkages and partnerships withother MDAs and the private sector to enhancevalues and benefits from the sector; promotingindustrial research, science and innovation;acquiring, developing, advancing and promotingappropriate technologies; supporting the

Figure 1: An overview of the Ministry with Directorates, Departments, and linkages tocommittees and parastatals agencies under the Ministry of Water and Environment7

Source: Ministry of Water and Environment (2015)


development of Small and Micro Enterprises(SMEs) and industries with a major focus onbackward and forward linkages; developing andpromoting standardisation and enforcementcompliance with technical regulations; anddeveloping specialised skills to support industrialdevelopment, among others.

Other agencies have also been created at theMTIC. These include Uganda National Bureauof Standards (UNBS), which enforces standardsfor the protection of public health, safety andthe environment; Uganda Industrial ResearchInstitute, which focuses on value except forbusiness incubation; Uganda Export PromotionBoard (UEPB), which promotes private sectorgrowth to enhance export earnings; and UgandaDevelopment Corporation, whose mission is tomake long-term investments in strategic sectorsof the economy in order to stimulate industrial

and economic development and thus spur privatesector growth.

With regard to agriculture, the MAAIF seeks topromote and support sustainable and marketoriented agricultural production, food securityand household incomes. The Ministry ofAgriculture is divided into eight departmentsincluding agriculture planning, animal productionand marketing, crop production and marketing,crop protection, farm development, fisheriesresources, livestock health and entomology, andfinance and administrations.

Figures 2 and 3 shows the different levels ofinteraction that the ministry is involved in. Thisranges fromworking with LGs (through districtsand sub counties) while at the same timeengaging development partners, civil society,regional bodies and other ministries. Some of the

Figure 2: Structure of Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries


agencies created under the ministry include: theNational Agriculture Research Organisation(NARO), which works with stakeholders toundertake, promote and coordinate research forcrops, livestock, fish and forestry and to ensurethe dissemination and application of researchresults; and the National Agriculture AdvisoryServices (NAADS), which seeks to contributeto the modernisation of the agricultural sectorin order to increase total factor productivity ofboth the land and labour for the benefit of thefarmers. It aims to promote food security,nutrition and household incomes thoughincreased productivity and market-orientedfarming. The Dairy Development Authority,Coffee Development Authority, and CottonDevelopment Authority are other agencies thatcoordinate players in the diary, cotton and coffeesectors, respectively.

The MAAIF has put in place a Plan forModernisation of Agriculture (PMA) Secretariat.The secretariat coordinates cross-sectoralactivities, specifically, within the agriculturesector. The PMA applies a decentralised and

participatory approach to planning and servicedelivery and is implemented within thedecentralised administrative and politicalframework of Uganda, i.e. the responsibility forimplementation of activities in the field lies withdistricts and sub-counties. However, at thecentral level, a quite comprehensive institutionalarchitecture has been set-up: a PMA SteeringCommittee, chaired by theMFPED, provides theoverall coordination and guidance, while a widerPMA Forum of stakeholders is used to exchangeviews and follow the implementation.

Further, the National Generic Resource Centreand Data Bank (NAGRC) was established bythe MAAIF to offer and conduct specialisedtraining to technicians dealing in breeding, totrain staff and farmers in aspects of animal andfish breeding, collaborate in research on geneticimprovement and characterisation of breeds andproduction environments, and develop guidelinesand implement a field oriented breedingextension service for field workers and farmers.It, therefore, envisions optimised livestockproduction and productivity through animal

Figure 3: Illustration of some of the other institutions in the agriculture sector8


breeding to improve food security and eradicatepoverty in Uganda.

2.2.3 Private Sector and Civil SocietyCSOs and Private Sector Organisations (PSOs)have increasingly become very critical agents indevelopment. The Secretary-General to the UNis quoted to have stated in a speech at the WorldEconomic Forum in Davos, Switzerland (29January 2009) that �Our times demand a newdefinition of leadership � global leadership. Theydemand a new constellation of internationalcooperation � governments, civil society and theprivate sector, working together for a collectiveglobal good�.

Uganda has, over the past few years, sought aprivate sector led economy. In order to reinforcethis, the government of Uganda implementsseveral projects and programmes in partnershipwith the private sector with the aim ofstrengthening the private sector as an engine ofeconomic growth.

In Uganda, the representation/participation ofthe private sector is mostly through theirumbrella organisations � these include: PrivateSector Foundation (PSFU), Uganda NationalChamber of Commerce and Industry, UgandaManufacturers Association, etc. PSFU isUganda�s apex body for the private sector. Thesebodies provide a framework for engagementwith the government on policy issues affectingprivate sector development in the country, withregard to agricultural sector development.

The private sector also engages with farmers,mostly throughmiddlemenwho provide marketsto farmers produce. This is done eitherindividually or collectively through farmergroups, and has proven to be instrumental infacilitating dialogue between the farmers and theprivate sector, especially given the complaintsof farmer exploitation by private buyers.

CSOs, which include Community BasedOrganisations, Faith Based Organisations(FBOs), and trade unions, among others, areactively involved in farmer extension services -for instance, Volunteer Efforts for Development

Concerns (VEDCO), which provides capacitybuilding of farmers to increase production,access markets, and also advocate for favourableagricultural development policy at the nationallevel.

2.3 District Level � Institutions inCharge of Agriculture, Trade andClimate ChangeThere are several institutions, each under anofficer at the district level, charged withundertaking government mandates that interactwith different players in the agriculture, climatechange, and trade sector.

The District Agricultural Officer (DAO)supports farmers in modern productive methods,use of appropriate technologies, providingtechnical assistance to the sub county agriculturesub sector, monitoring and assessment of theprogress of agricultural activities (includingmarketing), undertakes agricultural trainings,organises agricultural shows, collects, analysesand documents agricultural data and managesdemonstration sites.

The District Production Officer (DPO) isresponsible for facilitating the delivery of farmproduction, extension services, identifyingmarket potentials, advising the producersappropriately, ensuring the detection and controlof pests, vermin and animal epidemics in thedistrict, and providing farmers with technicaladvice on the use of chemicals and pesticides.Through engagement with the private sector andcivil society, the DPOs have been able to be moreinvolved in training farmers to enhanceagricultural productivity.

The District Fisheries Officer (DFO) monitorsfishing activities, enforces the law, collectsstatistics, and is responsible for rehabilitation offisheries resources. The officers are alsoresponsible for aquaculture inspection,monitoring, evaluation and regulation of privateservice providers and fish farmers.

The District Commercial Officers (DCOs)report to the District Production Officer, who


works with National Agricultural AdvisoryServices (NAADS), mobilises farmers and trainsthem on marketing and cooperatives, planning,guiding, and advising them on the developmentof the commercial services, industrialcooperatives and related investments inagriculture, and enhancing the quality of goodsand services.

The District Natural Resource Officer, asSecretary to the District EnvironmentCommittee, provides advice to the committeeon all matters relating to the environment,promotes environmental and climate changeawareness through public educationalcampaigns, and gathers andmanages informationon the environment and the utilisation of naturalresources in the district. The officer is supposedto render all the necessary assistance to the otherDistrict Agricultural Officials, especially withregard to matters of the environment.

Finally, the District Environmental Officer liaiseswith all other offices on all matters relating tothe environment, making such reports to theauthority as may be prescribed, promotingenvironmental awareness through publiceducational campaigns, assisting localenvironment committees in the performance oftheir functions as provided for in this act,gathering and managing information on theenvironment and the utilisation of naturalresources in the district, and serving as theSecretary to the District EnvironmentCommittee.

2.4 Linkage between National andDistrict Level

2.4.1 Linkages between the Ministry ofAgriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries andthe District Authorities

At the district level, MAAIF has aimed tosupport and build the capacity of districtauthorities so that they can better deliverregulatory and quality assurance services and cancollect agricultural statistics and information.Under the Agriculture Advisory Services VoteFunction, funding is provided to the districts to:1) increase farmer access to improved

technologies, advisory service delivery, and�proactive participation in value chaindevelopment for profitable agriculturalproduction�; and 2) empower farmers todemand for advisory services, technologies, andquality assurance services.

Under the District Production Services VoteFunction, funding is provided to: 1) strengthenLG capacity in the delivery of services relatingto regulatory services, quality assurance services,agriculture statistics and information, andcapacity building for LGs; and 2) strengthendisease, pest, and vector control and qualityassurance services, improve the agriculturestatistics and information system, and buildcapacity in LG. However, the link betweenMAAIF and the districts is weak, due to limitednumbers of staff. The current MAAIFestablishment has a total of 411 positions out ofwhich only 279 (67 percent) are filled. Evenwhere the positions are filled, the establishedposts are not sufficient to meet the minimumnumbers necessary to cultivate the links. This isespecially critical in regard to the regulatory andpest and disease control functions (many ofwhich are caused by climate change), whichrequire minimum resources for effectiveexecution of the function.9

The major link with the districts is throughNAADS, where the parish, district, and sub-county councils have monitoring and generaloversight roles and are expected to supervisecounterpart financial contributions andNAADS�performance. NAADS� link at the district levelis through the District Production Departments,which are supervised by the ProductionCommittee (comprised of councilors). ImpactEvaluations have revealed that the district leveltechnical teams play a vital role in implementingNAADS.10

The district technical teams ordinarily consistof the District Production Coordinator (whoprovides oversight of the work of the NAADSDistrict Coordinator), the District NAADSCoordinator, the District Veterinary Officer, theDistrict Entomologist, the District ForestOfficer, the District Agricultural Officer, the


District Fisheries Officer, the District Planner,the Internal Auditor, the District InformationOfficer, and the District CommunityDevelopment Officer. The ProductionDepartment typically has a number of divisions:Entomology, Crops, Livestock, Commerce,Fisheries and, in some cases, Forestry.

However, many of these posts are unfilled.Under this department, the ministry workstogether with the Ministry of Trade through theDCOs. Capacity in these District ProductionDepartments has been negatively affected by adelay in implementation of planned reforms and,over the years, highly skilled and experiencedpersonnel have either retired or resigned, buthave not been replaced, due to a suspension ofrecruitment. This situation has been furtheraggravated by the formation of new districts thathas resulted in existing staff having to be shared,thereby spreading the available human resourceseven more thinly. There is need to strengthenboth LG capacities and MAAIF-LGcoordination and plans, as elaborated under theDSIP.

2.4.2 Linkages between theMinistry ofTrade,Industry and Cooperatives and the DistrictAuthoritiesThe Ministry of Trade is represented throughDistrict Commercial Officers (DCOs) at thedistrict level, whose mandate is to promotevertical linkages. It should, however, be notedthat staff shortages, due to the creation of many

districts and subsequent lack of funds to hiremore personnel, have become a major challengein the promotion of government mandates ontrade issues at the district level.

Zackey Kalega, a Senior Commercial Officerunder the Department of Internal Trade, duringan interview, noted that the ministry, throughthe conditional grant system, works at the districtlevel through projects such as the DistrictCommercial Services Support (DICOSS) project,which links DCOs at grassroots with theMTIC.The project is being implemented in 25 selecteddistricts in Uganda, with plans to extend it to 15other districts. DICOSS is a capacity buildingand training project to enable DCOs to delivercommercial services at the grassroots moreefficiently and effectively.

Elizabeth Tamale, an Assistant Commissionerat the ministry, under the Department ofExternal Trade, notes that the planning processunder the LG governing structure at the districtlevel are, to some extent, influenced by thenational level processes. This highlights the flowof information and policy direction from thecentral government to the district level.

The Commissioner further noted that the Inter-Institutional Trade Committee (IITC) at thenational level, although weak, provides aplatform for stakeholder engagement ininfluencing trade policy processes. The IITCwasapproved by the Cabinet in 2007 to assist in

Table 1: The Mandate of Local Governments Regarding Food Security

Mandate of LGs regarding food security11

� Implementation of the decentralised and devolved agricultural (extension) services� Ensuring translation of national policies into local development plans� Agricultural planning (prioritisation of agriculture in the local development plans, drafting

budgets and annual actions plans based on local needs); Mobilisation and empowerment offarmers and farmer cooperatives

� Provision of agriculture permits, dissemination of (market) information, and capacity buildingof farmers

� Development, gazetting, and enforcement of by-laws to regulate food security

Source:MAAIF (2011)


Trade Policy Formulation and is currently underreview.

At the district level, the link between agricultureand trade is undertaken through the Departmentof Production and Marketing at the MTIC. Theministry implements the One-Village-One-Product strategy, where it encourages valueaddition for products. Through the work on thewarehouse receipt system being championed bythe Ministry of Trade at the district level, theministry has indirectly been able to contributeto improving food security in the country.

2.4.3 Linkages between theMinistry ofWaterand Environment and theDistrict AuthoritiesThe District Environment Officers areresponsible for linking the Ministry ofEnvironment and Water to the district levelunder the Ministry of Local Government.According to the literature reviewed, work atthe district level under the District EnvironmentOffice mainly focuses on increasing water supplyat the local level. This singular focus existsdespite the fact that low food production, amongother challenges facing farmers caused by climatechange at the local level, remains one of themajorcauses of poverty and hunger.

The efforts undertaken to assist the locals at thedistrict level to adapt to this reality have mainlybeen through the Ministry of DisasterPreparedness, under the Office of the PrimeMinister, and non-government organisationssuch as the Red Cross. Such institutions,however, are specifically focused on gettingcommunities back to their initial level oflivelihood subsequent to the occurrence of aclimate change disaster.

2.4.4 Analysis of Institutional Interplay ofOfficers/Institutions at National and DistrictLevelsBased on the examination of the differentinstitutions at both the national and district level,an analysis of the interplay between theseinstitutions focuses on coordination and the gapsthat exist therein as highlighted below:

Coordination inUganda�s national level planning,policy development and budgeting between theindependent line ministries and the PlanningAuthority, as well as the LG, is clear and wellstructured, but the interaction between theindependent line ministries during planning andpolicy development remains imprecise andinconsistent.

There is no clear coordination mechanism forbuilding synergies across the staff members underthe district offices in charge of climate, foodsecurity and trade. For example, there is no directrelationship between the environment,commerce and agriculture departments, yet infunctional terms there is a close link betweenthem. The parallel structures at the district arefurther replicated at sub county level.Agricultural Assistants, Fisheries, Veterinary,Entomology and Vermin Assistants areredundant due to the fact that they rely on fundsfrom the district under decentralisation forcommunity sensitisation and training, which ishardly disbursed. This overlap exists despite thefact that environment and market informationare very crucial in increasing agriculturalproductivity in Uganda.

The Local Government Development planningguidelines,12 which are intended to enable thealignment of LG plans to the NDP, specificallyrecognise the need to prioritise cross-cuttingissues, i.e. issues that can contribute toaccelerating or derailing the progress ofdevelopment. The key crosscutting themesidentified include environment, climate change,gender, population, HIV/AIDS, and humanrights.13 In order to achieve sustainabledevelopment results, the government of Ugandaalso adopted a number of planning instrumentsthat carry a strong influence on LG developmentplanning. These include: The Population andDevelopment (POPDEV) planning instrument;Gender Mainstreaming Planning Instrument;Environment Mainstreaming PlanningInstrument; HIV/AIDSMainstreaming PlanningInstrument; Planning Instruments forMainstreaming Human Rights; PlanningInstruments for Integrating/Mainstreaming


Climate Change; andNational Physical PlanningStandards and Guidelines 2011. The guide alsorequires that during the planning process, ananalysis be undertaken with specific attentiongiven to identifying possible implications ofdevelopment at the various levels of governmentand their inter-relation with issues such as foodsecurity and nutrition, among others. The mainissue is therefore the implementation part, whichneeds to integrate the different departmentsunder the three issues of agriculture, climate andtrade with stakeholders.

In terms of engaging stakeholders, the LGs areusually invited to participate in the initiatives ofCSOs. Such initiatives are often directed atagricultural sector development and theycoordinate their responses with agents fromNAADS as well as the District AgriculturalOfficers. In addition, the private sector is alsoinvolved, mostly through Public PrivatePartnerships (PPPs), where government officersengage with the private sector to promote thedistribution of quality seeds and train farmerson techniques for increased productivity.


3.1 The Case of Nakaseke DistrictNakaseke District is located in the central regionof Uganda, comprising one county with sevensub-counties and four town councils. The reliefof Nakaseke District is generally low and flat,characterised by shallow seasonal wetlands inthe North and flat-topped hills in the South. Itsaltitude ranges from 1000-1250m above sea level(average of 1150m). Inmost cases, the interfluvesare broad, flat, or rounded andmurram covered,and the valleys are wide.

Nakaseke District has two rainfall seasons, themain one lasting from March to June and thesecond one from August to November. Theaverage rainfall is 1300mm and the mean annualrainfall is between 1450mm to 1500mm.However, in some instances, the rainfall patterndescribedmay become irregular causing farmers�failure to plan. The variations in temperaturesare not significant. The district recorded a meanannual maximum temperature of between27.5oC-30oC and a minimum of 15oC and 17.50

C. It is also characterised by dry spells, whichsometimes result in bush fires and loss ofvegetation cover, as seen in Figure 4.

Three quarters of the district is covered withsavannah. The soils are generally red, sandy loam,whereas the southern part is relatively fertile andcan support crop farming. In the northern areas,fertility is low. In drier areas, cattle farming isthe dominant occupation. Wide ranges of food

crops grow in the district. The major cash cropin the district is coffee. The citizens in the districtalso earn a living from the sale of surplus food,e.g. rice, cassava, banana, and a range of fruits.The district is predominantly rural.

In the more densely populated areas, annualmulti-cropping is the norm, while in sparselypopulated areas, nomadic pastoralism ispracticed. Rural people use ecosystems asessential productive assets, whether on day-to-day basis or seasonally. The district ischaracterised by rain-fed agriculture with limitedirrigation. The populace depends on sellingagriculture produce for their incomes whenagriculture output is high. The district is a rice-growing region. The rice is grown for both foodand commercial purposes in virgin lands, suchas wetlands, and areas initially covered underforest cover which are cleared to create landwith fertile soils. This has resulted inenvironmental degradation, leading to increasingclimate change challenges such as prolonged dryspells. The interaction between trade, climateand food security is linear, and can either bepositive of negative, in such a way that increasedagriculture production can positively impacttrade and negatively impact climate change.Increased trade, on the other hand, can negativelyand also positively impact food security. Theweather condition, however, will either causeagriculture production and productivity to riseor fall.

Chapter 3

Case Studies


3.1.1 Horizontal Dimension for InstitutionalInterplay for Climate, Trade and Agricultureat the District LevelThe field study undertaken in Nakaseke districttargeted farmers, private sector, civil society andthe district officials, i.e. the District CommercialOfficer, District Environment Officer, DistrictAgriculture Officer, and the District ProductionandMarketing Officer. The methodology of theresearch involved interviews and focused groupdiscussions. The field research targeted a totalof 30 respondents. The purpose of the fieldworkwas to examine the interplay between variousgovernment departments (with regard toagriculture, environment and trade) in terms ofthe execution of their variousmandates. Farmers,Private Sector and CSOs were also interviewedto ascertain the interplay on the ground.

In terms of planning and implementation,Nakaseke district officials constitute theTechnical Committee of Planning, who regularlyplan and budget for the implementation ofactivities. Every department within the district

is represented in this committee in an attemptto coordinate their work. However, there is nospecific sub-committee for the relevantdepartments to holistically address the threeissues of agriculture/food security, climatechange and trade.

Within Nakaseke district, the Production andMarketing Department is in charge of agricultureproduction and trade. The district also has aDistrict Commercial Officer who is in chargeof trade, and is also the Senior Planner of thedistrict. The District Environment Officer is incharge of environment related issues includingclimate change. The Department of Forest andNatural Resources is also responsible forensuring forest and natural resourcemanagement in the district.

The district�s highest amount of resources comesfrom forests through tree growing, charcoalburning and trading, among other naturalresources. The economic attachment, perhaps,explains the commitment in terms of the

Figure 4: Effect of bush fires in Nakaseke district

Source: Field photo by SEATINI Uganda (2015)


existence of an office for forests and naturalresource management and another in charge ofthe environment.

Generally, some of the officials in charge of thethree specific issues have knowledge andunderstanding of the linkages betweenenvironment/climate change, agriculture/foodsecurity and trade. The officials specifically havea greater understanding of the linkage betweenenvironment/climate change and agriculture/food security with very limited knowledge onthe linkage between climate change and trade.They expressed their limited knowledge aboutthe concept of climate change stressing that it isa relatively new issue. It is important to notethat for the three departments to coordinate, therespective government officers must firstunderstand and appreciate the linkages betweenthe three issues. This would enable them see theurgency of coordination in order to achieve theirrespective mandates.

In terms of engagement with other stakeholders,Nakaseke district officials engage with differentCSOs to undertake their mandates. This is moreso with regard to climate change andenvironment issues as a number of projectsundertaken are on climate change mitigation andadaptation. Moreover, there are few CSOsworking on trade related issues at the districtlevel, which hinders greater engagementbetween the District Commercial Officer andmore stakeholders in the civil society.

3.1.1.1. Interactions within the districtauthorities for climate, trade and agricultureThe Senior Planner within the district heads theplanning process. During the planning process,the aspects of food security, climate change andtrade linkages are incorporated. The planningdepartment encourages the linkages between thethree issues in project implementation.

The district officials revealed that they arecommitted to mainstreaming the three issues;however, most of the work at the district levelis largely dependent on projects. They, forexample, cited that most of the projects,including Local Government Development

Grants, are often not cross cutting butconditional in nature, andmay therefore not fullytake into account all the three issues.

At the district level, all three identifieddepartments operate independently of the others.The officers interviewed recalled that, in thepast, the three officers used to undertake fieldvisits as a team. However, presently, with thenumerous changes and limitations as well asvariations in funding among other resources,each of the officers undertakes their tasksindependently. The issue of equity is notadequately taken into consideration in theallocation funds, thereby leaving somedepartments without the much-needed financialresources to even undertake activities.Currently, the Department of Water receivesmore allocations, but there is limited linkagebetween their activities with that of otherdepartments, notably environment and trade.

The district authorities reaffirmed the strong linkbetween environment/climate change, trade andagriculture. However, in Nakaseke district, theofficers noted that climate change is a relativelynew issue and thus most of the work undertakenby the two offices has mainly been gearedtowards protection and conservation of theenvironment. The operations within the district,especially under the Environment Department,work towards the MDG 7 on environmentalsustainability.

The Department of Production and Marketinginteracts with that of Agriculture at the districtlevel to promote the production of crops thathave a quickmaturing period as a climate changeadaptation strategy. This is because it wouldshield farmers from weather vagaries broughtabout by climate change. Farmers areencouraged by both departments to engage inagro-forestry, growing fruit trees and practicingsustainable land use management, conservationfarming and run off farming, e.g. mulching. Thedistrict officers noted that farming techniquessuch as maize growing in basins, which helps totrap water until the maize matures, have alsobeen introduced to farmers.


The weak policy framework, specifically thecurrent laissez faire policy, was pointed out asone of the biggest challenges currently. Underthis policy, there is lack of government push tosupport and coordinate the three issues. The roleof the state in supporting local cooperatives,extension services among others would make iteasier for the respective departments tocoordinate in undertaking their mandates.Currently, each department seems to beundertaking its own mandate with limitedengagement with each other. Moreover, unlikein the past when communities were obligated toproduce certain crops and quantities and to alsostore for future purposes, today, communitiesare reluctant to maintain such policies becausethey do not exist, or those that are in place areweak or not implemented. Lack of a coherentapproach from the government level through thedepartments has, therefore, translated intoreluctance among communities as highlighted.

3.1.1.2 Small-Scale FarmersAll the farmers contacted for the interviews aremembers of farmers� associations, i.e.WobulenziFarmers� District Association andGakolebwawamu Farmers� Forum. Farmers,upon interaction with different agencies, likeNGOs and other government programmes havegained knowledge on adapting to climate change.Therefore, sometimes they change their plantingarea or they change the types of crops that theygrowwhile responding to the changes in weatherpatterns. They also use trenches, mulching,planting shade trees, inter cropping, or growdifferent crops, especially amidst the diversityof foods such as climbing yams (kyetutumula).

In terms of engagement with the private sector,which is mostly through sale of their produce,farmers have been able to earn money hencecontributing to the realisation of governmentobjectives of promoting commercial agriculture,especially during bumper harvest. However,some homesteads were reported to face foodinsecurity due to the increasing demand by themarket especially during seasons when the needfor money is very high, e.g. when school terms

begin, in cases of emergencies, and others. Forexample, farmers in the Nakaseke district wereintroduced to rice growing for purposes of foodsecurity; however, this objective was not metbecause they sold all the rice that they had growndue to financial inadequacies that needed to beaddressed.

Farmers reported of the existence of a workingrelationship with their district officials, althoughlargely ad hoc. They noted that the DistrictProduction Officer, who also operates as theAgriculture Officer, engages them in climatechange and food security issues during trainings.The Sub-county Community DevelopmentOfficer likewise teaches the community againstcutting down trees and engaging in bush burning.However, these trainings do not take intoaccount trade issues.

3.1.1.3 The Private SectorThe engagement of private sector is purely ontrade grounds. The private sector within thedistrict is made up of food whole sellers, treegrowers, timber traders, as well as charcoalburners and sellers. Besides farmers who growfood for home consumption and only sell wherethere is a surplus, within the district, there arelarge plantation owners who engage in growingmaize, fruits and trees for profit. Farmers�interaction with the private sector has beenmostly through sale of produce as well as farmimplements. With regard to engagement withgovernment officers in the district, the privatesector players interviewed attributed the limitedengagement with the district departments to lackof information they consider important to theirbusiness, notably market prices.

The overlapping membership of private sectorplayers has been identified as a major challengein terms of understanding institutional interplay.It is difficult to classify such a member as afarmer or a private sector player. As such, it isdifficult to examine how the private sectorengages with farmers in terms of pricedetermination and market performance.


3.1.2 Vertical Dimensions for InstitutionalInterplay for Climate, Trade andAgriculturebetween the District Level and GovernmentMDAsThe Department of Environment works closelywith the National Environment ManagementAuthority by undertaking stakeholderconsultations for communities� views, which areused to determine terms of approval for anygiven establishment.

Information from the district level revealed afragmented relation between the Departmentof Environment and the MWE. The operationsof the ministry within the Nakaseke district aremore concentrated in developing waterresources, such as boreholes, to increase watersupply in the district. However, concentrationon improving and enhancing water supply in thedistrict without conserving catchment areascould undermine future communities� watersupply needs.

The National Agriculture Advisory Servicesprogramme under the Ministry of Agriculture,likewise, plays a fundamental role instrengthening the inter-linkage between the LGDepartments of Agriculture, Production andMarketing, as well as Environment. Forexample, the programme advanced sustainableenvironment management practices andstressed the need to enhance food security, whilealso increasing their incomes.

With regard to trade, Nakaseke district was notselected as a beneficiary of the DICOSSprogramme. As such, there is limited interactionbetween the Ministry of Trade at the centralgovernment level and the district in terms ofactivities to promote trade. With the exceptionof salaries, the department does not receive anyother funding from the central government,which would be used to undertake activities. Itis, therefore, imperative for the government toallocate more funds to the department, as tradeis central to poverty reduction efforts throughits linkage with the agricultural sector, fromwhich the district derives its livelihood.

3.1.2.1 Mechanisms in place within NakasekeDistrictWithin Nakaseke district, the followingmechanisms exist for climate, trade andagriculture/ food security institutional interlinkages:� The District Technical Planning Committee:

this brings together the various departmentsto contribute to the development planningand implementation process.

� Global Climate Change Alliance: under thisalliance, the District Agriculture Officer andthe District Environment Officer, as well asNatural Resources work together, providinga platform for institutional coordination andinterplay between the Department ofAgriculture and that for Environment.

� District Farmers� Associations: this bringstogether farmers for advocacy aroundagricultural trade and development issues inthe district. Through this forum, the farmershave been able to engage with the districtauthorities, CSOs and the private sector.

3.2 The Case of Nakasongola DistrictNakasongola District is located in the northernpart of the Central Region of Uganda. It isbordered by the districts of Apac to the North,Masindi in the West, Luweero in the South, andKayunga in the East. Agriculture is one of themajor activities (with over 80.1 percent of theeconomically active population engaged inagricultural production), with emphasis on foodcrops such as cassava, maize, sweet potatoes,sorghum, bananas and finger millet and cashcrops, which include coffee and cotton. Fishingand livestock (cattle-rearing) are the otherprincipal economic activities. This districtcomprises one county, with seven sub-countiesand four town councils.

Nakasongola district covers a total area of 3510km2 (about 1.42 percent of the country�s totalsurface area), of which 4.5 percent is coveredby wetlands. The district is located in Uganda�scattle corridor, which is prone to climate changeimpacts. Due to limited tree cover and high


temperatures, it is highly vulnerable to prolongeddrought, floods and erratic rains. Productivityhas steadily declined and poverty levels are high.The region has been described as a severepoverty hotspot. The district has sufferedconsiderably from soil degradation. The districtis increasingly losing wetlands due toovergrazing, charcoal burning andencroachment. There are indications that thesevere climate, causing drying up of vegetationand crops, is getting worse. Nakasongola is oneof the leading charcoal trading districts withinthe central region due to the high demand foraffordable energy which has increased trade incharcoal, as shown in Figure 5. The district hastherefore suffered from severe deforestation. Incases where afforestation has been undertaken,the trees grown are usually sold as constructionmaterials.

3.2.1Horizontal Dimension for InstitutionalInterplay for Climate, Trade, andAgricultureat the District LevelBy design and qualification, the Production andMarketing Department/Officer plays thecoordinating role for the three issues of foodsecurity/agriculture, trade and climate change.The issues of climate change are discussed as acomponent of environment.

The respondents revealed that all the threedepartments develop one work plan and budget,as well as a similar procurement plan. The

activities to be undertaken by each departmentare agreed upon under the District TechnicalPlanning Committee, where all the three officialsare members. Mainstreaming the three issues atthe district level is more organised today than inthe past.

Joint implementation of activities is, however,not a routine as this depends on what a givendepartment plans to do at a certain point in time.For example, activities focusing on post-harvesthandling may necessitate engagement of bothtrade and food security officers and notnecessarily the climate change officer; while, onthe other hand, training on agronomic practicesmay require the presence and engagement of allthe three officials.

The district also undertakes joint monitoring andevaluation programmes by both the technical andpolitical leadership. However this has mainlybeen focused on programmes such as NAADS,a strategy that enhances coherence.

3.2.1.1 Interactions within the DistrictAuthorities for Climate, Trade and Agriculture

3.2.1.2 Small-scale FarmersNakasongola district is one of the driest regionsin Uganda. The farmers within the district have,however, adopted a number of measures toreduce the effect of the drought conditions. Theyhave, for example, adopted the use of watertrenches and water ponds, which are put in theirgardens to keep the crops supplied with waterthroughout the farming season. They alsoundertake mulching and the use of shade treesplanted to provide shade during the dry season.

A coffee farmer in Nakasongola district, GeorgeOngom, revealed that the January dry spells hadnegatively affected the productivity of his coffee.He, however, noted that the coffee seedlings,which he grows under the seedbed (shown inFigure 6), were only surviving because of theefforts and system of irrigation he has madeavailable for the plants.

Figure 5: Charcoal Trading in Nakasongola



In terms of information sharing, the informationobtained by the farmers from governmentdepartments is not coordinated to include issuesof climate, trade and food security. This is mainlydue to the fact that the farmers in this districtobtain the information individually fromgovernment offices as well as their farmers�groups, or from fellow farmers. Otherinformation is obtained from the radio wheredifferent players in the agriculture, trade andclimate change areas conduct radio talk showsand radio adverts.

Support from organisations and programmessuch as the Global Climate Change AllianceUganda with the Climate Change Adaptationprogramme through Kakooge Farmers� companyprovide information on climate change.

Similarly, during the Climate Change AdaptationProgramme, issues of food security and trade arediscussed. For example, while growing coffee,the farmers in Nakasongola have beenencouraged by government extension workersas well as CSOs to undertake intercropping forfood security purposes by planting climbingyams, mangoes, shade trees in order to reduceon the effect of the hot sun.

The farmers also noted that programmes suchas NAADSwere beneficial to farmers at the locallevel in terms of bringing together other playersin the agricultural sector to support farmers. Theprogramme has, therefore, been instrumental inlinking agriculture to trade albeit without a directlink with climate change. However, theprogramme itself faced numerous challenges inall the districts across the country. For instance,there were complaints of corruption, which ledthe government to withdraw NAADS officersfrom the districts and replace them with soldiersto undertake the NAADS mandate. Thistransition has affected the programmes impacton linking the three issues.

3.2.1.3 Private SectorThe private sector players are mainly involvedin the supply of seeds and other farm implementsto farmers. They also provide a market forfarmers� produce, especially coffee producers,who prepare the beans for export. The privatesector focus on climate change has mostly beenthrough the introduction of new technologieslike solar panels for lighting, but this has not beenexpeditiously directed to the agricultural sector.The fact that climate change adaptation is anexpensive venture has discouraged many

Figure 6: Coffee Production in Nakasongola District



business people from entering into such a venturebecause farmers are faced with financialconstraints and therefore may not affordequipment like solar powered irrigation pumps.However, private sector plays have sold new andimproved seeds, which are more resistant todrought, to farmers. The seed dealers in somecases provide extension services for its enhancedperformance.

3.2.2 Vertical Dimensions for InstitutionalInterplay for Climate, Trade, andAgricultureat the District LevelDue to decentralisation and reporting formats,the interaction between the district departmentfor the three issues and the respective lineministries is limited to a larger extent. Forexample, the Production and MarketingDepartment operates under the Ministry ofTrade andMinistry of Agriculture, respectively,yet the department�s link with the line ministriesis weak. Periodically, however, line ministriesobtain information from the districts on variousaspects such as food prices and weatherpatterns, among others. The frequent/continuousreporting and interaction between the lineministries and district authorities is dependenton the existence of a particular project such asDICOSS, currently under theMinistry of Trade.This presents a major challenge on thesustainability of such initiatives upon close ofsuch projects. Therefore, it is important for theministries to focus on programmes that fall withintheir mandate such that a coordinated andsustainable approach can be created.

3.2.2.1 Mechanisms in place withinNakasongola DistrictThe mechanisms that facilitate institutioninteraction in the district include the DistrictTechnical Planning Committee, CouncilCommittee, Monitoring and EvaluationDepartment, and the Climate ChangeCommittee, as highlighted below:� District Technical Planning Committee: this

committee brings together the technicalofficers in the district to plan for theimplementation of activities within thedistricts. The committee is informed by theLocal Government Development PlanningGuidelines, which recognises the need totake into account the crosscutting issue ofenvironment.

� Local Council Committee: this committee,comprised of the Local Councils I-V,supports initiatives on environment throughthe creation of by-laws and awarenessraising on environmental concerns,especially the LC V. They also worktogether with CSOs on a campaign againstdeforestation, strengthening their ability toundertake their mandate. However, such anarrangement always depends on projectsrelevant to CSOs, which may not besustainable.

� Monitoring and Evaluation Department:Undertakes joint monitoring programmesfor agriculture, production and marketing,and environment and natural resourcesdepartments.

� Climate Change Committee for the District:the committee is chaired by the Departmentof Environment and Natural Resources andit coordinates all government responses/activities which impacts the environment/climate change.


In the examination of institutional interplay inthe two districts of Nakaseke and Nakasongola,it has emerged that there is lack of adequatecoordination in the execution of their mandateswith regard to the issues of climate change, foodsecurity, and trade.. This is brought about by anumber of gaps and challenges that arehighlighted in this chapter.

The existence of a human resource gap requiredfor the mainstreaming of the three issues in therespective government departments hasundermined institutional interplay. The challengeof understaffing has subsequently led to multipleroles and responsibilities. For instance, even incases where focal persons on environment havebeen assigned, they also work as CommunityDevelopment Officers, which affects theirperformance in mainstreaming environmentalissues in other areas.

Financial constraints at the district level are amajor challenge affecting institutionalcoordination. Without adequate finances,implementation of programmes have either beenslowed down or halted, especially in the TradeDepartment, which only receives funds forsalaries. In addition, inadequate resources haveaffectedmonitoring and evaluation to ensure thatactual mainstreaming is undertaken as planned.

Variations in funding hinder inter-departmentalcoordination. Much as the challenge of limitedfunds affects all departments, its effects are feltmore in some due to the variation in fundinglevels. As such, the departments with lowerfunding, like trade, cannot effectively engagewith other departments with relatively morefunding, like that of agriculture, to enhance the

linkages. This is because funding from bothdepartments facilitates engagement at thedepartmental level.

The failure to link the three issues at theinstitutional level emerges from the fact thatcoordination in the implementation of theseissues is not deliberately planned for. Much asthere is knowledge of the linkages betweenagriculture and environment among the officers,there is limited knowledge in terms of the inter-linkages with trade, and there are still gaps inthe aappreciation by actors at the district levelof the inter-linkages.

Understaffing at the district level has beencompounded by the reforms undertaken in theexecution of NAADS Programme, which hasaffected work on the agricultural sector. All threesectors complained of the limited humanresource capacities in terms of numbers, but alsoin terms of knowledge and skills. The ProductionMarketing Officer, for example, is also theAgriculture Officer within the district. Changeswithin the agriculture sector, i.e. the removal ofthe NAADS officers, also created a humanresource gap within the district. It should benoted that the NAADS officer played a key rolein enhancing the linkages between the threeissues.

Forest produce generates the highest amount ofrevenue. For this reason, charcoal burning is highand individuals also continue to dedicate theirland to tree growing for timber and charcoal,even though this continues to threaten foodsecurity in the districts. Moreover, the availablemarket for charcoal has incentivisedmore peopleto engage in the business, which calls for greater

Chapter 4

IdentifiedGaps/Shortcomings andChallenges


coordination between the responsibledepartments of agriculture and environment toaddress the challenge.

The changes within the district, created by thelaissez faire policies, have affected collaborationamong the district departments. The DistrictOfficers interviewed noted that in the past, allthe three district officers worked as a groupduring their various field visits; however, therehave been changes as funds are now limited fora sustained collaboration in executing theirmandates.

District Production Officers focus on foodproduction for trade and not food security. Assuch, their focus is more on private sectoroperations to facilitate trade while limitedattention is given to the need to facilitate foodsecurity by increasing the productivity of farmers

alongside encouraging them to store someamounts of the produced food for their foodsecurity needs.

The marketing of the farmers� produce is doneindividually by the farmers or under theirassociations with limited, or no, support fromthe District Commercial Officer or the DistrictProduction andMarketing Officer. It is thereforeimportant for the government to increase thesupport to these officers so that they can facilitatemarket access for farmers.

Community-based organisations that workclosely with farmers within districts lackfunctioning guidelines as well as capacity onagriculture, climate and trade linkages. This hashindered their ability to engage with the districtdepartments working on the three issues.


Based on the analysis, a number ofrecommendations need to be undertaken at bothnational and LG levels in order to promoteinstitutional interplay.

There is a need to adequately fund the threesectors of trade, environment/climate changeand agriculture at the district level. This isbecause the interaction of the three issues hasbeen affected by variations in funding which hasled to poor performance of some departments,like that of trade. However, increased fundingand greater institutional coordination at thenational level would help the district institutionsto coordinate their activities more.

Linkages between institutions within the LG andthe central government in planning and policydevelopment should be more defined in termsof specifically undertaking programmes that aredirected to addressing the issues of trade andclimate change to ensure coherence in policydevelopment and implementation. This isespecially in regard to district authorities andtheir coordination with the respectivegovernment ministries and agencies.

Conditional grant guidelines should be reviewedto ensure that they mainstream issues of climatechange and food security in trade activities atthe district level. This will enable each districtto have development projects that are morecoherent and responsive in terms of addressingthe inter-linkages between the three issues froman institutional point of view.

There is a need to build the capacity oftechnocrats to better understand and appreciatethe link between trade, climate change, and food

security at the national and district level foreffective coordination. Undertaking awarenessraising, capacity building, and informationgeneration and dissemination on the linkagesacross all sections of society could provide a goodmechanism to support such capacity buildingendeavors. This would help them appreciate theimportance of coordination in helping eachdepartment achieve its mandate, which wouldsubsequently translate into more collaborationin planning, budgeting, as well as implementationof their respective activities. There is need forgreater collaboration at the district level topromote horizontal interplay for a holisticapproach in dealing with the three issues. Thisis especially the case with the Office of theAgriculture Department and the Production andMarketing Department, which currently aredisjointed in undertaking their respectivemandates, the latter due to financial constraints.

To enhance a coordinated approach, it isimportant to strengthen government interactionwith farmers by integrating the three issues ofclimate change, agriculture and trade in therespective government programmes, as well asdeliberately seek greater involvement of farmersin such programmes. The NAADS programme,as well as government interaction with othernon-state actors, could support such anendeavour.

Agriculture, climate change, and trade planning,implementation, and research and developmentshould be linked in order to promote a morecoherent and interlinked approach by thedifferent actors involved in the three issues,which include the civil society, farmer groupsand the private sector.

Chapter 5

Recommendations


There is a need to establish and strengthenexisting platforms to bring together stakeholdersto discuss the issues. Platforms such as theTechnical Committee of Planning and theNAADS programme implementation, amongothers, need to be strengthened such that theirimpacts can be widened and replicated in otherareas. In addition the DCOSS programme shouldbe urgently upscaled to districts that were notselected, like Nakaseke, so that they can alsobenefit from the platforms created by suchprogrammes.


1. Development strategy and Investment plan of Uganda

2. Climate change mitigation and adaptation: Paper presented by Alweny Salome and NimpamyaEnock B.K on 3rd October, 2011 at the 1st workshop of the Nakasongola District ClimateChange Pilot Project in the District Production Hall

3. Inclusiveness of Trade Policy-Making: Challenges and Possible Responses for Better StakeholderParticipation by Rashid S Kaukab* Trade Hot topics issue 70

4. Preparation of the joint water and environment sector support programme (JWESSP, 2013 -2018) final programme document April 2013 by Ministry of Water and Environment,Government of Uganda

5. Uganda National Civil Society Engagement Strategy in East African Community RegionalCooperation and Integration Processes, SEATINI Uganda

6. The Political Dimensions of Trade reforms, Impact on Food security in the East AfricanCommunity by Christophher HOnyango, Paul OOtung, SusanWatundu and Danstan Ulwodi.

7. Climate, food, trade: Where is the policy nexus? Uganda, CUTS International

8. Climate change in Uganda: Insights for long termAdaptation and Building community Resilience,Environmental Alert

References


Endnotes

1 http://advocacy.thp.org/2014/01/30/development-strategy-and-investment-plan-dsip-of-uganda-and-the-comprehensive-africa-agriculture-development-programme-caadp

2 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2012.html 19th/Nov/2014

3 Uganda�s Vision 2040

4 Agro ecology is concerned with the maintenance of a productive agriculture that sustains yields andoptimises the use of local resources while minimising the negative environmental and socio-economicimpacts of modern technologies. Agro ecology provides a framework by applying ecological theory tothe management of agro ecosystems according to specific resource and socio-economic realities, and byproviding a methodology to make the required interdisciplinary connections. (Agro ecology in Action;http://agroeco.org)

5 www.irinnews.org Food insecurity threatens 1.2 million in Uganda

6 MWE assigned with responsibilities on trade issues.

7 Ministry of Water and Environment Structures; www.mwe.go.ug 6th January 2015

8 MAAIF structure of its linkages with other institutions http://www.agriculture.go.ug/About-Us/75

9 http://www.agriculture.go.ug/districts

10 GoU2007

11 Republic of Uganda, National Agriculture Policy, Final Draft by the Ministry of Agriculture, AnimalIndustries and Fisheries (2011). Republic of Uganda, Local Government Act, Ch. 243 (1997); Republic ofUganda, Agriculture Sector Conditional Grant FY 2004-2005 (2004).

12 According to a report by the United Nations Development Programme, the Local GovernmentDevelopment planning guidelines were launched on 29th April 2014

13 This was stressed by the Democratic Governance Team leader at the UNDP, Ms. Annet Mpabulungi-Wakabi. http://www.ug.undp.org/content/uganda/en/home/presscenter/articles/2014/04/29/local-government-district-development-guidelines-launched.html.

climate, food, trade - cuts genevacuts-geneva.org/pdf/pact - study2 - uganda.pdf · climate, food,...

Documents