Long policy processes, policy inconsistences and politicization of programs blamed for poor performance of agriculture sector
The 4th National Agricultural forum raised a wide range of issues affecting the implementation of agriculture-related policies in Uganda. The forum which was organized by EPRC in collaboration with PASIC project, MAAIF, IITA and IFPRI, intended to discuss why Uganda, which is considered to have some of the best policies on the continent, had failed to implement those good policies to enhance agriculture production and productivity.
From the presentations and discussions, four main policy challenges were highlighted. First, Uganda has very long policy processes. The example given was the fertilizer and seed policies which are still stuck in the process, five years since their drafting. Failure to have the policies approved was blamed for the un-regulated agro-input markets, characterized by fake and costly inputs.
Second, it was repeatedly noted that most agriculture programs are politicized and hence, end up losing their focus leading to failure of the otherwise well designed programmes. The example given was NAADS program, which initially aimed at making the extension provision demand driven by giving farmers requisite skills so that they are able to demand the services by themselves. Over time NAADS changed mandate to input distribution and this was blamed for the corrupt tendencies that infiltrated the program.
Third, it was also noted that there is poor sequencing and harmonization of policies and programs. Presentations from EPRC researchers showed how the proposed Single Spine Systemby MAAIF, lacks an implementation framework and strategy. The presenters wondered how the program could be rolled out and run effectively without a direction.
Likewise, the presenters pointed out that a similar situation curtailed effective implementation of the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP 2010/11-1014/15) and the First National Development Plan (NDP1). DSIP was developed and implemented without a guiding policy. It was three years later after its implementation- In 2013 that the Agriculture policy was passed and adopted DSIP as an implementation framework, to shape the sectors direction. The presenters argued that it was therefore pertinent for the sector guided by MAAIF to come up with implementation frameworks and have guiding policies before rolling out programs.
Forth, Uganda still lacks crucial policies such as an extension policy. This creates a vacuum in extension service provision and has led to increased dependency of the farmers on government, yet the private sector could also be brought on board as a major player with the right policy and regulatory framework in place. The existing agriculture related support policies such as the land policy are ambiguous. The policy is not clear on the land rights by the bona fide occupants vs absentee land lords. This explains the escalating land conflicts on Mailo tenure regime.
At the end of the forum the participants were in agreement that the low absorption capacity in the agriculture sector and other related ministries can be majorly blamed on lack of clear implementation frameworks and policy direction, and politicization of the existing policies and programs.