CPRC Uganda

Attention and action on chronic poverty in Uganda

After a focus on rehabilitating key social and economic infrastructure, then establishing and maintaining a stable macroeconomic environment, the government has turned its attention to structural strategies aimed at translating macroeconomic success into real improvements in people’s standards of living.

This has been concretised in Uganda’s main policy framework, the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP), initially formulated in 1997 and – with revisions - in implementation since then. The aim is eventually to reduce absolute poverty to less than 28% by 2013/14 and reach most of the Millenium Development Goals by then.

The PEAP is implemented through a series of sector-wide and local government development and investment plans, such as the 3 year Education Sector Investment Plan, the Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA), and the Medium-term Competitiveness Strategy for the private sector. These are operationalised through the Medium Term Expenditure Framework, the Poverty Action Fund (PAF), and annual national and district Budget Framework Papers. Implementation is carried out within a decentralised framework, with the private sector playing a growing role in service delivery.

Uganda has a positive framework for poverty reduction. Macro-economic policy, and the growth it has generated, has benefited chronically poor people, especially during certain periods over the past 15 years, and a number of government initiatives have benefited people in chronic poverty, such as Universal Primary Education. Nevertheless, the emphasis has been on the “active poor” or the “working poor” and, despite earlier gains, a significant number of people in Uganda remain poor. Amongst these, many live well below the poverty line for many years: thus, a majority of those that were poor in 1992 had escaped by 1999, but a substantial minority were left behind and many others fell into poverty over this period. People in chronic poverty are too often excluded and/or excluding themselves from such opportunities. A question thus arises as to the effectiveness of current growth objectives, and the current “universalist” approach to poverty reduction, in reaching certain sectors of the population, while increasing numbers have been “left behind”. With around 20% of the population not benefiting from the Country’s current development path, it is doubtful whether the PEAP long-term poverty reduction goals can be reached, if policy changes and (in some cases) innovations are not introduced.

Chronically poor people are especially vulnerable to shocks. Policy has had relatively little to say about vulnerability, whether this is to health shocks, mitigating the consequences of HIV/AIDS, domestic conflict and divorce, wider insecurity problems, and internal displacement. CPRC Uganda’s research suggests a rebalancing of the effort on modernisation, entrepreneurship and human development with a greater emphasis on security and protection.

Four priority areas emerge:

• Bringing peace to the north and, in a first instance, improving services in conflict-affected areas for the very poor. 
• Evidence from other low-income countries suggests that social protection measures, while clearly desirable, are also often affordable. Further policy analysis and pilot initiatives are required to determine the most effective entry points and what might be feasible, including targeting at household level and location-specific interventions.
• Enhancing access to assets for the chronically poor, consisting of a two-pronged approach: assuring women’s land rights, as well as accelerating the implementation of a national school feeding programme and widening access to post-primary education for the very poor.
• Reflecting the centrality of smallholder agriculture in the livelihood of the chronically poor, the pro-poorest focus of current programmes must be enhanced and new initiatives, including free extension services for the very poor, developed.