IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eptddp/16124.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Development Pathways And Land Management In Uganda: Causes And Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Pender, John L.
  • Jagger, Pamela
  • Nkonya, Ephraim M.
  • Sserunkuuma, Dick

Abstract

This paper investigates the patterns and determinants of change in livelihood strategies (“development pathways”), land management practices, agricultural productivity, resource and human welfare conditions in Uganda since 1990, based upon a community-level survey conducted in 107 villages. The pattern of agricultural development since 1990 involved increasing specialization and commercialization of economic activities, consistent with local comparative advantages and market liberalization. This pattern was associated with changes in land use and agricultural practices, including expansion of cultivated area, grazing lands and woodlots at the expense of forest and wetlands; increased ownership of cattle but declining ownership of other livestock; and increased adoption of purchased inputs (though still low) and some soil and water conservation practices. Despite some agricultural intensification, crop yields, food security, and a wide range of natural resource conditions (especially soil fertility) appear to have degraded throughout most of Uganda. At the same time, many indicators of human welfare and access to goods and services have improved. Six dominant development pathways emerged, all but one of which involved increasing specialization in already dominant activities: expansion of cereal production, expansion of banana and coffee production, non-farm development, expansion of horticultural production, expansion of cotton, and stable coffee production. Of these, expansion of banana and coffee production was most strongly associated with adoption of resource-conserving practices and improvements in resource conditions, productivity and welfare. Other strategies are needed for less- favored areas not suited for this pathway. Road development appears to have contributed to improvements in many welfare and some natural resource conditions, except forest and wetland availability. There are thus likely trade-offs among resource and welfare outcomes when pursuing road development where forests or wetlands are important. Elsewhere, road development can be a “win-win” development strategy. Irrigation was found to reduce pressure to expand cultivated area at the expense of forest, wetland and fallow, and is associated with improvement in several welfare and resource indicators; it may also be a “win-win” strategy. Government and non-governmental organization programs were also found to contribute to improvements in several indicators of productivity, resource and welfare, though there were some mixed results. Such programs may cause declines in one area (e.g., yields of a traditional crop or energy availability) by focusing on improvements in another area (e.g., improvement of another crop or protection of forests). Thus, trade-offs appear to be inherent in many efforts to improve agriculture or protect resources. Population growth had an insignificant impact on most indicators of change, though there is some evidence of population- induced agricultural intensification. Population growth had an insignificant association with changes in resource conditions, and mixed association with welfare indicators. In general, the findings support neither the pessimism of some neo-Malthusian observers or the optimism of some neo-Boserupian observers regarding the impacts of population growth.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:ags:eptddp:16124
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.16124
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/16124/files/ep010085.pdf
Download Restriction: no

File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.16124?utm_source=ideas
LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
---><---

More about this item

Keywords

;

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eptddp:16124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.