makerere university holds the csa national...

A report compiled by the College Communication Officer CAES

MAKERERE UNIVERSITY HOLDS THE CSA NATIONAL POLICY

DIALOGUE

l

ON JUNE 13, 2014

AT

THE GRAND IMPERIAL HOTEL KAMPALA, UGANDA

A report compiled by the College Communication Office CAES

2

Contents

1.0 Program .............................................................................................................................. 3

2.0 Attendance ......................................................................................................................... 4

3.0 Welcome Remarks: ........................................................................................................... 6

4.0 Remarks by FANRPAN Node Institution and Official Opening............................... 8

5.0 About FAO and CSA Initiatives FAO /MAAIF Representative................................ 9

6.0 About FANRPAN and CSA Initiatives ........................................................................ 11

6.1 Discussions on the presentation on FANRPAN and CSA Initiatives ................ 16

7.0 Health Break and group photo .................................................................................... 17

8.0 . Positioning policies and frameworks for CSA Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA)

policy study report- presentation ....................................................................................... 18

8.1 Questions and comments for clarity on the presentation on the scoping study

report ................................................................................................................................... 28

9.0 Group Discussions .......................................................................................................... 30

9.1 Working group 1- policy framework ....................................................................... 30

9.2 Working Group 2- CSA technologies and practice ................................................ 33

9.3 Working group 3- Challenges and opportunities ................................................... 35

9.4 Working group 4- Gender and Community of practice (CoP) ............................. 37

10.0 Closing Remarks by the FAO Country Representative ........................................... 38


3

1.0 Program Time Activity Facilitator/presenter

08:00 – 08:30 am

Arrival and Registrations Ms. Ruthie Mutyaba

09:00 – 10:30 am

Welcome Remarks Prof. Kaaya Archileo

Remarks by FANRPAN Node Institution

and Official Opening

Prof. John Muyonga

About FAO and CSA Initiatives FAO/ MAAIF

About FANRPAN and CSA Initiatives Ms. Hlami Ngwenya

10:30 –11:00 am Health Break and Group Photo

1100-1130 Positioning policies and frameworks for CSA Climate Smart Agriculture(CSA)

policy study report- presentation

Prof. D.S Osiru

11:30-12:45 Group Discussion and Policy

recommendations

All participants

12:45- 13:00 Closure FAO Representative

13:00- 14:00 Lunch and Networking


4

2.0 Attendance

No Name Organization Position/ Affiliation

Email

1 D.S.O.Osiru Makerere Professor [email protected]

2 Claire Nalweyiso CIDI Ass. Project

Manager

cnalweyiso@cidi Uganda.org

3 Balimunsi Hussein

Makerere Lecturer [email protected]

4 John Muyonga Makerere Professor [email protected]

5 RevocatusTwinomuhangi

Makerere Lecturer [email protected].

6 Mandakini Chandra

FAO Intern Mandikini.chandra@mail. mcgll.ia

7 Mathew Abang FAO Crop production

officer

Mathew. [email protected]

8 Jane Anyango Makerere Communication

officer

[email protected]

9 Hadad Kavuma CAN-U Project officer Kavuma. [email protected]

10 NamubiruJalia EMLI P.O Namubiru. [email protected]

11 Kambugu .R Makerere Assist Lecturer [email protected]

12 Aribo Laurence NWE SMO-TR [email protected]

13 Namale Florence Kyambogo Assistant

Lecturer

[email protected]

14 Nalubega Margaret

Kyambogo Asst. Lecturer [email protected]

15 Ameu Martin FAO Prog. Associate [email protected]

16 Grace musimami UFA Director [email protected]

17 Muzaula Peter Famers media

Journalist [email protected]

18 Isaiah twimukirize

MEMD Geophysicist [email protected]

19 Muzira Sula MEMD Geophysicist

20 Peter

Tumutegyeize

Makerere Lecturer [email protected].

ac.ug

21 Stephen

Ssemakula

Community

development

Ex Director Ssemakula @yahoo.com

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


5

concern

22 Agole David Kyambogo university

Lecturer [email protected]

23 Rachel Musoke forestry Retired commissioner

[email protected]

24 Archileo.N.Kaaya makerere Professor and NODE coordinator

Arkaaya2agric.mak.ac

26 Halmi Ngwenya FRANPAN knowledge Manager

hngenya@

27 Muhumuza Albert

Makerere Systems admin [email protected]

28 David Walugembe

UFA security

29 Magezi Akiiki UNMA Director [email protected]

30 Zakayo Muyaka MAAIF Associate commissioner

[email protected]

31 Saggwe.R.Muiro MLHUD Urban officer Mronnie20132000.co.uk

32 Gloria Gummah AFAAS Project f/PHM ggummah@afaas_afica.org

33 Bakole Sudi Media _

34 Stephen Muwaya MAAIF PC-SWU [email protected]

35 Sarah Mujabi UNDP Prog officer

Enunt

[email protected]

36 Ssali Godfrey UMA Policy officer [email protected]

37 Nandudu Susan Deniva

PASCC

38 Akhter Hamid FAO Chief technical adviser

Auhter.hamid.fao.org

39 Pamela okori Kyambogo university

lecturer [email protected]

40 Monica Angom IUEA Lecturer [email protected]

41 Mike Nabade MUK P/O nabade

42 Luzobe Beatrice AFAAS Technical

ass/partnership

43 Kwesiga Steven FAO Technical advisor

071217188

44 Ruthie Mutyaba Makerere administrator O753487288

45 Kabonesa Grace Makerere Office attendant 0783555271

46 Nakanwagi

Rossette

Makerere Office attendant [email protected]

47 Mpairwe Denis Makerere Manager Muri [email protected].


6

steam

48 Carenbume German Embassy

Depart. Head of Cooperation

[email protected]

49 Richard sandal DFID Private Sector Advisor

[email protected]

50 Rose Ahieno BTC Programme

Officer

[email protected]

51 Kennedy Igbokwe FAO Project manager [email protected]

52 Otar James Africa Media

Agency

Director Jamesotar @yahoo.com

3.0 Welcome Remarks:

Prof. Archileo Kaaya , presented on the FANRPAN as follows:

Background to FANRPAN

• FANRPAN: Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis

Network

• Multi-stakeholder network that supports dev’t of better FANR policies

in Africa


7

• Created in 1997, registered in 2002 in Zimbabwe, relocated to Pretoria

South Africa in 2005

• Stakeholder categories: Farmers, Government, Parliamentarians,

Researchers, Private sector, Media, Development Partners

Focus:

• Improving policy research, analysis and formulation on key

priority themes in Africa

• Developing human and institutional capacity for coordinated

policy dialogue among all stakeholders

• Improving policy decision making by enhancing the generation,

exchange and use of policy-related information

FANRPAN Node Countries

• National nodes in 17 African countries including Angola, Benin,

Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Lesotho,

Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa,

Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

• Two meetings each year: Common visioning meeting for Node

Coordinators & Secretariat and The High level Annual Food Security

Regional Policy Dialogue

Uganda Node: Overview

Node was established during the FANRPAN 2011 Annual Food Security

Regional Policy Dialogue in Swaziland; launched in Uganda May 24, 2012

• Makerere Launched a Climate Change Centre named “Makerere

University Climate Change Research and Innovations Centre

(MUCCRI)”

– Unveiling of the Makerere University Climate Change Research

and Innovations Centre (MUCCRI) was done on July 30th 2013 at

the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences (CAES)

by Prof. Samuel Kyamanywa who is also lead investigator. The

MUCCRI office in the college is excellently equipped with state of

the art infrastructure and a database developed in partnership

with FANRPAN.

Future Goals

http://www.caes.mak.ac.ug/news-a-events/latest-news/1489-makerere-university-climate-change-research-and-innovations-centremuccri-launched.html




8

• Establishment of FANRPAN secretariat with full time staff • Integration of climate change issues in the University curriculum

• Continued participation and promotion of policies that support the development of better agriculture and natural resources policies in

Uganda

Acknowledgment

• FANRPAN Secretariat

• African Capacity Building Foundation

• Prof. D. S. Osiru

• Makerere University

4.0 Remarks by FANRPAN Node Institution and Official Opening Speaking on behalf of the Principal Makerere University College of

Agricultural and Environmental Sciences (CAES), Prof. John Muyonga:

Welcomed the participants

to the workshop;

Underscored the need for

farmers to practice CSA;

Said most of the people are

being affected by ways of

farming;

Thanked FANRPAN for

choosing Makerere

University to coordinate the

Uganda FANRPAN Node;

Noted that although

Makerere was a reputable

university in regard to

teaching and research, it is

not good at influencing

Policy;

Implored the different partners to take advantage of the relationship to

enhance research and impacts in society;

Thanked FARNRPAN for organising the workshop;


9

Commended the organising committee for the varied expertise represented

at the forum and expressed optimism that the dialogue would be productive;

Expressed the university’s and college commitment to support the culture of

the node and translate knowledge to disseminate research findings so that

research can make impact and work with the node to influence policy and;

Wished participants good deliberations and declared the workshop open.

5.0 About FAO and CSA Initiatives FAO /MAAIF Representative

Martin...... From the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industries and Fisheries

presented on the COMESA-EAC-SADC Programme on Climate Change

Adaptation and Mitigation in the Eastern and Southern Africa as follows;

COMESA-EAC-SADC Programme on Climate Change Adaptation and

Mitigation

• The programme goal: Impacts of climate change in the COMESA-EAC-

SADC region addressed through successful adaptation and mitigation

actions.

• To contribute to the realisation of the goal of the COMESA-EAC-SADC

programme, various programme outputs are identified/are expected to

be delivered.

FAO and UNDP as one of the implementers of the COMESA-EAC-

SADC programme are to contribute to specific outputs/results of

the programme


10

FAO component

• Project: FAO Technical Support to the COMESA-EAC-SADC

Programme on Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in the

Eastern and Southern Africa Region (OSRO/RAF/307/COM)

• Target: 14 countries (Uganda inclusive)

• Start : Oct 2013

• End: July 2015

Primary beneficiary

The focus of the project is on establishment and supporting the

National Climate Smart Agriculture Task Force to coordinate,

advocate and develop programmes on climate smart agriculture.

Expected Result

COMESA-EAC-SADC Programme result FAO technical support

Member states develop Climate Smart Agriculture programmes within the framework of national and regional

CAADP Investment Plans.

Support the mainstreaming of specific CSA activities in agricultural investment

operations.

Relevant partner organisations are identified and engaged

Support establishment and institutionalization of platforms

that will coordinate stakeholders in CSA scaling up efforts at country level.

At least one project on CSA

developed/piloted at country level

Development and

implementation of CSA projects.

International program for knowledge transfer on CSA

Convening annual scientific symposium


11

6.0 About FANRPAN and CSA Initiatives

FANRPAN Representative Ms. Hlami Ngwenya presented on

FANRPANClimate Smart Agriculture (CSA) Initiativesas follows:

About FANRPAN

Vision: A food secure Africa free from hunger and poverty

Mission: To promote effective Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources

(FANR) policies by

facilitating linkages and partnerships between government and civil

society

building the capacity for policy analysis and policy dialogue in

southern Africa, and

supporting demand-driven policy research and analysis.

Members/National nodes in 17 African countries:

Angola, Benin, Botswana, DRC, Kenya, Lesotho, Namibia, Madagascar,

Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda,

Zambia, Zimbabwe.

• Members- governments, private sectors, research institutions,

women’s organisations, youth organisations, farmer organisations

and other civil society bodies.

• Country Node- manage national policy dialogues and implement

most of the advocacy and policy analysis.

• The in-country dialogues- platform for sharing, learning, debating

and building consensus on priorities for research and policy

advocacy.

Five thematic areas


12

FANRPAN works across five thematic areas, namely:

• Food systems

• Agriculture productivity and markets,

• Natural resources, environment and climate change,

• Social protection and livelihoods, and

• Institutional strengthening and capacity building

FANRPAN Policy Engagement Cycle

Policy Analysis


13

Strategic Partnerships

By virtue of being a Network, FANRPAN works through partnerships to

advocate for a food and nutrition secure African continent.

We work with multiple partners within and across public, private and civic

sectors to harness collective efforts in building connections between local

realities and national, regional, continental and global policy processes

Capacity Development

o Policy Advocacy Training

o Policy Champions (Women Farmers, Youth)

o Journalist Training

o Technical Training Workshops

o Scholarships ( Professional Development (MSCs, PhDs)

o Researchers trained in community action research

Policy Advocacy Messengers

Make policy recommendations

Policy Advocacy

Gather evidence/commission research

Identify gaps and opportunities

Identify current policies addressing the problem

Understanding the Problem


14

FANRPAN National Node Coordinators

Policy Champions

Policy Advocates (youth and women)

Journalists

Elders

Knowledge Management and Communications

FANRPAN has a targeted approach to Communications because of the wide

range of stakeholders that we have

Publications

o Policy Brief Series

o Newsletters

o Policy Advisory Notes

o Project Brochures

o Books Series

o Magazines

Website/Social media

o blog

o E-newsletter

o Twitter from 2,224 followers in February 2013 to 4,055 followers

in November 2013 r

Media and publicity

FANRPAN’s media influence also extends to reach global top-tier media

publications e.g CNBC, Reuters, Guardian, New Agriculturist etc

Documentaries and Showcasing African Success Stories

Policy Advocacy and Engagement Platforms

Global:

International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD)

Food and Agriculture Organisation Committee on World Food

Security (CFS)

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC)

United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD)

World Economic Forum (WEF)

Regional:


15

Joint Conference of African Ministers of Agriculture and Trade

SADC and COMESA policy and development engagements for

member states

FANRPAN High-level Regional Policy Dialogue

National:

Parliamentarian Meeting

National policy dialogues – project focal countries

Farmer Field Days

Theatre for Policy Advocacy – local farmers and policy advocates

engaging policy makers

Using Theatre for Policy Advocacy (TPA)

• Theatre makes use of Africa’s traditional ORAL CULTURE:

• Song, dance, narrative and ceremonial rituals a part of African

tradition

• Defines a community’s identity

• Theatre is a powerful medium for communicating ideas

• Levels the field,

• Breaks barriers and

• Addresses topics that are deemed “taboo”

The TPA process

• Is developed and refined by various development agents, researchers,

social scientists and theatre specialists

• Stimulates dialogue and action - a theatrical performance is a major

social event in rural Africa

• Provides a holistic enactment of the community's responses to the

challenges of daily existence and development

Climate Smart Agriculture Initiatives

• CSA Policy studies and knowledge management- ACBF

• EPCSA (Evidence-based Policies on Climate Smart Agriculture)

supported by NORAD

• SECCAP- (Strengthening Evidence-based Climate Change

Adaptation Policies) supported by IDRC

• AfriCAN Climate (Climate change portal)

• AfricaInteract

• Household Vulnerability studies (FFC and IDRC)

CSA Policy studies


16

1. To undertake a stock taking excises on CSA policies in the region;

2. To share best practices on CSA policy initiatives at national and

regional multi-stakeholder platforms;

3. To provide recommendations for the development national-level

policies on CSA;

4. To support the region on improving their knowledge base and capacity

through Community of Practice;

5. To provide training to various stakeholders on how to communicate

climate change and CSA initiatives to influence policy; and

6. To enhance international – and, in particular, South-South and

North-South – cooperation that facilitate best practices and learning.

7. 16 Scoping studies (15 completed except Angola)

a. Partnership with FAO in 11 countries

8. External review process (ongoing)

9. National dialogues- Validation workshop (ongoing)

10. Synthesis report ongoing

6.1 Discussions on the presentation on FANRPAN and CSA Initiatives

Participants commended the presentation as good and asked the following

questions:

Qn 1: How FANRPAN partners with think tanks like Makerere

University Centre for Policy research.

Response:

i) FANRPAN goes to different countries, identifies institutions that host

the FANRPAN Node

ii) It holds meetings where different stake holders are invited

iii) Host institutions should have good relationship with governments but

not to be influenced by government. Institutions should have

convincing power. In some cases FARNRPAN is hosted by universities

where policy think tanks and journalists can be part of policy

influence.

iv) In other countries FANRPPAN IS hosted by policy think tanks,

Parastatals or NGOs but a few by goverment like Madagascar

QN 2: To what extent have you been able to influence policy at

government level?

Response

i) FANRPAN makes sure that it works together with governments;

ii) It has implemented different projects.


17

iii) Research on working with NGOs has indicated that most projects are

donor funded and came up with strategies of mobilising resources

iv) CSA has been part of projects funded by NORAD which started in five

countries, then ACP and FAO;

v) One of the key projects with tangible results was in four countries

including Swaziland, Zimbabwe in harmonising seed policy with best

practices and protocols. This was attributed to the fact that the

project was long term, focused on identifying advocacy agents and

extended support.

Comment 3: In the presentation it was sited that at regional level meetings

were held with Ministry of Agriculture. Ministry of Environment is much

wider and wished they are taken on board. Similarly, there is the East

African Protocol on environment which is broad covering agriculture and

would like see it part of the list.

Response: Noted and would like to expand the target because FANRPAN

cannot look at Agriculture in isolation but find out much more integrative

approaches to deal with diverse challenges.

7.0 Health Break and group photo

Participants pose for the group photo at the pool side restaurant


18

8.0 . Positioning policies and frameworks for CSA Climate Smart

Agriculture (CSA) policy study report- presentation Prof. D.S Osiru presented on Climate Smart Agriculture for sustainable food

productiona below:

Background

• Africa’s Population expected to double by 2050

• Africa has the largest proportion of the poor and undernourished

• Considerable deficit in food production by 2050

• Meeting food demands is a formidable task for many nations.

• Climate change is a threat multiplier and will exacerbate this

situation.

• Agricultural productivity is likely to decrease

Agriculture: Its importance and practice in Uganda

• Agriculture continues to be most important sector in Uganda’s

Economy

o Employs the largest proportion of the population

o Accounted for 22.5% of total GDP in 2010/11

o Important in Foreign Exchange earnings- account for 46% of

Exports earnings.

o Provides equal opportunity for employment for both men and

women

Current Production Practice

• Agriculture largely rain fed

• Typically farm operations are by Conventional Tillage (CT)


19

• CT has led to severe land degradation which accounts for 80% of

annual Environmental degradation

• Wide spread forest clearing, continuous cultivation, crop residue

burning and overgrazing exposed land to degradation

• Land Degradation also evident in the Cattle Corridor

• Overgrazing by local and mobile pastoralist herds

• Deforestation by excessive use of fuel wood resources and

mismanagement of marginal land

• All combined to make land less productive

Typical farming activity in Uganda

Typical example of burning crop residues

Bush burning before ploughing Burning crop residues after harvest

CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE


20

• CT destroys soil structure

• Creates plough pans leading to poor plant root development

• Breaks down soil aggregates, clogs soil pores leading to soil erosion

Standard Practice in Conventional Tillage

Secondary tillage leads to breakdown of soil aggregates and clogging of soil pores

The influence of wheat stubble (mulch) on soil loss

Effects of excessive tillage


21

Over cultivation giving rise to fine tilth prone to erosion and Bare soil typical of conventional

tillage showing evidence of soil erosion

Cultivation on River Banks at Manafwa River

Summary of major disadvantages of conventional tillage Climate Smart

Agriculture

Definition

• A system that sustainably increases productivity,

• Improves resilience (adaptation)

• Reduces/removes green house gases (mitigation)

• Enhances achievement of national food security and development

goals.

• Promotes agriculture best practices


22

• Promotes integrated crop management

• Promotes Conservation Agriculture and use of improved seeds and

fertilizer use

• Provides ways of adapting to climate change, reducing excessive

disturbance of the soil

• Ensure minimum damage to environment

Principles of Climate Smart Agriculture

• Minimum soil disturbance/No tillage or minimum tillage

• Permanent soil cover (Mulch) and cover crops

• Crop rotation

• Multiple cropping/Intercropping/Agroforestry

• Integrated Pest Management( IPM)

Minimum Tillage/Zero Tillage

Maintenance of permanent soil cover or crop residues (Mulch)


23

Good example of trenches used in the banana fields. This is very useful when the

banana is growing on very steep slopes. The soils are put on the upper side of the

trench ( a practice often called Fanya juu)

Mixed cropping/Intercropping


24

Agroforestry/Alley Cropping

]

Examples of CSA in Uganda

Intercropping of Coffee and bananas (L) and use of stones to stop run off in

Katongelo water shed management


25

Use of Rhodes grass and lablab in rotation in pasture in Sanga -Kirihura

CSA POLICY

• CSA is a new concept in Uganda though some aspects already

known

• No direct policy on CSA in Uganda

• There are ,however several related policies

Related CSA policies

• National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA)

• Agricultural Sector Development strategy and Investment Plan

(DSIP)

• National Climate Change Policy

• National Agriculture Policy (2011)

• National Land Use Policy 2011

• National Environment Management Policy (NEMA)

• Uganda Forestry Policy 2011

• National Development Plan

UGANDA’S NAPA

• Based on highly participatory engagement with communities

• 13 districts representing the major Ecosystems in the Country

i) Highlands (Mbale, Kapchorwa , Kabale)

ii) Low lands (Pallisa, Lira, Kasese

iii) Semi, Arid (Nakasongola, Rakai and Soroti)

iv) Aquatic – Kalangala

v) Lake Victoria Basin, (Wakiso, Mukono) and Masaka.


26

Key Interventions

• Community Tree planting

• Land degradation management

• Strengthening Meteorological Services

• Community water and sanitation

• Water for production/irrigation

• Drought adaptation including research on drought tolerant crops

• Climate change and Development Planning

DSIP

• Focuses on 4 major constraints

i) Increasing agricultural production and productivity

ii) Increasing access to markets and value additions

iii) Creating enabling environment for the private sector in

agriculture and

iv) Strengthening agricultural institutions at the centre

and in local governments.

• Components expected to contribute to adaptation to Climate Change

1. Enhancement of resistance to climate change.

2. Enhance abilities to cope with extreme events.

3. Improve resilience by encouraging use of sustainable

land management practices

4. Improving value addition in value chain

5. Improving institutional set up with its supporting

environment.

• Selected Commodities

• Cassava is among the priorities in terms of support.

• Commercialization of the crop is emphasized

• Setting standards and harmonizing with other policies in

East African Community for cassava and cassava based

products.

• Formation of FG to take advantage of services - e.g.

SOSSPA to handle Value Chain.

• Farmers provided with guidelines and copies of standards

for Value Additions.


27

Institutional Arrangement

• Climate Change Unit

• Department of Meteorology

• NAADS/NARO – to provide quality planting materials and training.

• UNFFE – train farmers in improved farming practice including

aspects of CSA

Key challenges in Formulating CSA Policy

• Limited knowledge of the concept by many actors especially

farmers

• Limited investment by the government, mostly left to the private

sector.

• Weak adaptation of CSA measures and financing to support them.

• Poverty among the majority of farmers, they are more interested in

finding the next meal than changing their way of farming

• Lack of coordination between the different actors, so many small

initiatives that are scattered and uncoordinated.

Tentative Recommendations

• Must involve all the relevant stakeholders

• The target communities have to be given chance to identify and

prioritize their problems

• There should be more coordination among the different

stakeholders

• Ensure involvement of both gender

• Ensure knowledge on value additions and improved marketing of

agricultural produce

• Ensure provision of extension and loan services

• There is need for heightened attention in policy processes and

strategies from government

• Support investments that combine productivity increases and GHG

mitigation from agriculture and elsewhere.

• Identify and scale up best practices, to build capacity and

experience, and to help clarify future choices

• There is need for considerable public and private financing to

ensure rapid implementation of CSA

• Need to focus on varieties that are resilient to increased variability

and extreme events


28

Implications

• Policy makers faced with greater challenge

• To ensure that Agriculture contributes more in addressing food

security issues, development and climate change (adaptation and

mitigation)

• Scoping study attempts to review current

• production as it relates to CSA:

• -what are the exisiting policies and gaps

8.1 Questions and comments for clarity on the presentation on the scoping

study report

Some of the participant read the scooping study report during the workshop

1. Have you covered some aspects of water harvesting/ irrigation as part

of CSA

2. There is a tendency for farmers to go for high input agriculture to

increase productivity. Do you think we need low input agriculture and

going back to indigenous agricultural systems because they were

climate smart?

3. You said Ugandan soils are said to be good. We need to tell people

that we have good soils because many are not travelled. Uganda ought

to be a food basket for the continent.

4. There is an upcoming agricultural show in Wankulukuku, we need

peple from Makerere o show and demonstrate the concept of CSA.


29

5. One of the expected elements of the scooping study was the objectives

that were missed out.

6. Wondered whether the study looked at gender related coping

strategies in regard to CSA

7. The study is missing on irrigation and water management

8. What is the role of Fertilizer use and organic fertilizers in CSA?

9. There are gaps in the information provided. MAAIF has been doing a

lot of work in the districts to implement CSA in district in areas such

as conservation agriculture, water harvesting, integration of livestock,

and crop systems. There is also the CSA Task force that needs to be

put into perspective. There are several NGOs, Private companies,

cooperative linkages in about 30 districts reaching about 7500

farmers.

10. What are the risks associated with CSA?What is the current

scope of adoption and drivers of CSA? There is need for aquantitative

report.

11. Do we actually need a new policy for CSA? We need to assess he

existing policy framework if they have the component of CSA.

12. You highlighted that coordination should be paramount. Most

people are aware of the impact of swamp destructuion. What is the

problem yet we have policies?

13. The key soldiers to help farmers are the extension and advisory

officers that must be awre to support and advocate for CSA.There is

need to build their capacity to interface with farmers.

14. There is need to structure the study in SWOT analysi in regard

to CSA.

15. There is no mention of experiences fom other countries in the

study

16. There is need to look at the issue of mechanization with

conservationagriculture while doing CSA.

17. There is pontential of Uganda in fruit and mango industry. How

can we do that in CSA and in an efficient manner?

Responses from Prof. Osiru

1. Water harvesting is mentioned but not discussed in detail.

2. Uganda was very productive but its productivity declined because of

poor management of soils.

3. Liked the idea showcasing at Wankulukuku and would talk to the

Node coordinator if possible to make presentations.


30

4. The study did not go ito gender related coping strategies and this could

be another area to explore.

5. The objective of the study was to identify policy related aspects on

CSA, the existing practices, and whether there is need for a policy.

6. The usual practice of emphasis in CSA encourages no tilage, you only

prepare ground where you plant.

7.CSA encourages minimal use of and encourages organic fertilizer use

8. Many projects on CSA are going on but was not able to report them all

but is clear is that they are not talked about and farmers are not

encouraged to practice CSA.

9.0 Group Discussions

9.1 Working group 1- policy framework

Looking at the study and your own experience,

No. Question Response

1 What is new?

No clear difference between

good agriculture practices and


31

CSA

Not Enough background information for policy

framework. The information is general

hence the need for specificity. How do we advise government

to provide for policy direction

2 What else could be included/ highlighted in the study (gaps)?

A SWOT analysis be carried out To extent have the practices and technologies been integrated into

CSA principles in order to formulate policy direction

There is need to differentiate farming systems with their

trategies/actions How do you invest in CSA, the

funds and land

Look at the whole value chain i.e linking farmers to markets, value addition and improving

storage Look at challenges ie Market and technologies have to change

A broader definition for CSA

needed including why Uganda is vulnerable to climate change. Is it because of rainfed agriculture,

lack of ability to adapt etc He study document does not

clearly reflect the experiences that can be scaled up

3 What are the key policies and

institutions relevant to CSA in the country? Please be specific about the instruments and incentives used by

these policies, so that we can learn lessons about how exactly they work.

Forestry needs to be part of the

institutional arrangement eg 70% is in the hands of the private sector

Biotechnology and Biosafety policy be included on the list of


32

policies

Include the Wetlands policy and indicate the years for all policies

List the different sector investment plans e.g. cost

climate change policy implementation strategy,

National Forestry plan and the strategic investment plan for wetlands

NB There is no need fo CSA

policy . There are already policies in place addressing CSA.

4 In your view, how effective have those

activities and policies been? Why or why not?

Review the implementation of

the existing policies and place investments to implement the

policies through strategic plans Identify what deters CSA in this

policies and address them

5

How is CSA financing in the country?

Donor funding based on NDP

and National Development goals. This calls for mainstreaming CSA in plnning

process

What are the 3-5 key policy

recommendations emerging from the study and your own experience

Review existing policies to

emphasise CSA

Mobilize and allocate finances to implement the existing policies


33

9.2 Working Group 2- CSA technologies and practice


No. Question Response

1 What is new?

Nothing new interms of Technology and Practice


Indegeneous knowledge, basal planting and reaping, new agicultural/environmental technology,

commercial agricultural focus not just small scale, compilation of technology according to terrain and specific

conditions, mechanisation for widespread use of technology, methods of water

conservation in response to climate stress and irrigation challenges.

3 What CSA practices and technologies have been adopted and implemented? Please make

it clear when the practice is traditional and when they have been driven by policy, research

or donors.

Traditional Policy/Research

Mulching Terracing Intercropping/mixed

farming

Ripping, agroforestry, optimum

stocking, trenching,

hydroping,fish cage farming, mixed faming,


34

irrigation,

precision planting, basin planting

4 Why and how are the CSA

technologies climate smart (adaptation, mitigation and national and household food

security goals)?

Soil conservation and water retention are

climate smart,, organic water and nutrient production are also climate smart, agroforestry mitigates climate

change by creating carbon sinks and making the climate milder

5 What are the key CSA programmes and projects that have been implemented?

MAAIF’s Climate Task Force for CSA, collaboration with international organisations to adopt CSA in districts,

FAO’s , COMESA projecs for the districs, PLAN, IIRRR

6 Who are the stakeholders involved in past and present

CSA activities, and what were/are their roles?

Civil society organisations for awareness raising and trial projects in districts

Small holder farmers implement projects from donors, support and finance

Government coordination, policy and support

Private sector: implementation and

funding NGO’s/International organisations;

perspective, funds, coordination, coordination and support

7 What were the drivers for their

successful adoption?

Financial availability, low yields amd

poverty are good incentives, climate change damage, available information

and technology,, information dispersal mechanisms9 best practices), mobilization and participation of

stakeholders (political will),

8 What were the constraints to

their adoption? Please specify the constraints faced by the farmers and opportunities in

using the various techniques that are being promoted

Funds are inadequate, technology

dispersal, attitude to change and short term profit and finances, limited adaptation resources (inputs and

equipment), limited knowledge management and information, high cost

of inputs for small holder famers.


35

9.3 Working group 3- Challenges and opportunities


No. Question Responses

1 What is new?

The tillage system. You can plant crops even without tilling

the rest of the land as the practice has been


There should be wider consultaion of stakeholders

CSA focused on a few crops like cassava hence should put focus

on other crops Explore fertilize use

3 What are the key challenges to implementing CSA in this country?

The CSA policies are likely to contradict wih some

government policies concerning Modernistaion of agriculture

Changing the mindset of many farmers may not be easy

There is no trained manpower to


36

spread the gospel of CSA

Many of he farmers are part time farmers ie not committed to

agriculture

4 What opportunities remain untapped,

and why? How could they be explored?

Increased interest in agriculture

as a business due to attractive prices for agricultural products and increased demand for food

stuffs globally.

Creating awareness

5 What are the priorities for CSA

implementation in the country?

Farmers and other stake holders should have a positive attitude

towards agriculture

6 What recommendations stem from this analysis? Are there particular policy recommendations?

CSA should also focus on livestock production and fish farming

Strengthen agro forestry

Devise means or methods farmers should use in extreme

weather conditions Build capacity of farmers to

identify climate issues in their areas so as to apply CSA.

Study the advantages and disadvantages of CSA practices

recommended


37

9.4 Working group 4- Gender and Community of practice (CoP)


No. Question Responses

1 What is new?

The report is gender blind, no

gender analysis on coping strategies.

If it did it would highlight issues like reliance of fuel wood, degradation of forests


Conservation agriculture, availability of tilling equipment

and who tills, who does the marketing of farm products, Needs of differend gender in CSA

Examination of gender implications on CSA

who benefits from increased productivity

who has access to critical inputs

who controls the resources

3 What are some of the critical gender issues in the area of CSA and policies

that needs attention?

Conduct gender analysis to relate to CSA


38

4 Are there CSA champions (individual/ organisations) that you are aware of in the country (either at national or local

levels, either “known or unknown”) mention names of individuals/

organisation

In Karamoja there was a climate Change survey on itercropping by Paul Mukisa who set up

Kamaja Pilot farm

5

Are there any existing organised CSA community of Practice (COP) in the

country, a. If not, what can we do to

establish effective CSA

specific COP and support their functioning

b. If yes, what need to be done

to support them?

MAAIF CSA Task Force

CSA projects must be engendered

CoP must be representative

10.0 Closing Remarks by the FAO Country Representative In his closing remarks read for him, the FAO Uganda representative Alhaji

Jallow :

i) Recognized FANRPAN for

undertaking CSA scoping

study that was being

validated;

ii) Appreciated all participants

for sparing their valuable

time to participate in the

validation workshop saying

it was a sign of attachment

to the study and sharing

knowledge on CSA in

Uganda;

iii) Expressed optimism that

the report would enable

stakeholders understand the benefits and risks associated with

adopting particular CSA technologies and practices;


39

iv) Observed that the findings of the study would be of interest not

only to FAO but to the public, private sector and civil society

organizations, among others.

v) Stressed that FAO was interested n the findings of the scooping

study in view of informing CSA programming, policy support and

capacity building of institutions on CSA;

vi) Informed participants that presently, FAO in Uganda had ongoing

projects that potentially would benefit from the findings of the

study through refinement of interventions to emphasize CSA;

vii) Pointed out that the study was particularly important in view of

the FAO/COMESA CSA project for Eastern and Southern Africa of

which Uganda is covered;

viii) Stated that through this project Government of Uganda through

MAAIF planned to undertake different activities including

documenting bes practices and case studies on conservation

agriculture, develop extension materials, produce policy briefs on

CA, formulate ca investment frameworks and mainstream CA in

development plans;

ix) Implored participants to assess if the study findings sufficiently

relate to the activities planned under the project;

x) Unveiled FAO/ COMESA project plans to consider findings from

relevant national studies on CSA/CA to build on FAO global

experiences to scale up CSA in the COMESA –EAC-ESA region.

xi) Mentioned that over the past 30 years, FAO has been supporting

CA implementation at global level that has led to the harnessing

knowledge on climate science and its links to agriculture, forestry

and other land uses , approaches and methodologies to scaling up

CA;

xii) Observed that there was sufficient evidence from Eastern and

Southern African region and beyond that CSA is one of the

promising options that over time can sustainably increase

productivity, profitability and resilience of small holder production

systems without compromising the environment;

xiii) Decried that CSA and CA and other climate smart agriculture

practices are not widely used by the farming communities in

Uganda due to limited awareness, knowledge and support for

widespread use of the technologies;

xiv) Urged all stakeholders to reach out and support the promotion n

upscale CSA in a coordinated manner

xv) Expressed FAO’s commitment to support the National Task Force

to enhance awareness, training and advocacy.

xvi) Declared the workshop closed.

makerere university holds the csa national...

Documents