Subvenciones a la Agricultura: El caso de Uganda

The report examines Uganda's agricultural subsidy landscape, highlighting a gap between the government's development priorities and its actual budget allocation, which falls below the 10% public spending target set in the Malabo Declaration. While initiatives like NAADS and Operation Wealth Creation have improved access to inputs and increased coffee exports, the authors argue that subsidies are often poorly timed, top-down, and favor large-scale farmers. Environmental concerns are raised regarding the promotion of monocultures and agrochemicals, and the authors recommend a value-chain approach to subsidy design that includes stakeholder participation and better extension services.

• Uganda's public spending on agriculture is insufficient, failing to meet the commitment made by African leaders in the Malabo Declaration to allocate at least 10% of public expenditure to the sector.
• Government initiatives such as the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) and Operation Wealth Creation have increased input accessibility; for instance, NAADS distributed 623,870 Hass avocado seedlings across 80 districts.
• The Agricultural Insurance Subsidy program has seen a massive increase in coverage, growing from 45,704 insured farmers six years prior to 687,608 farmers by March 2023, although benefits primarily accrue to medium and large-scale farmers.
• Increased government support for the coffee sector through financial aid and the distribution of fertilizers and seedlings contributed to a significant rise in exports; in August 2024, Uganda exported 837,915 bags of 60 kg of coffee valued at USD 221.63 million.
• Agricultural subsidies in Uganda negatively impact the environment by encouraging monocultures and the intensive use of agrochemicals, which increases greenhouse gas emissions and undermines traditional seed systems through the promotion of hybrid seeds.
• The effectiveness of subsidies is hindered by a lack of extension services, with a worker-to-population ratio of 1:2000 to 1:3000, far exceeding the recommended 1:500 ratio.
• Subsidies are often supply-driven rather than demand-driven, leading to the delivery of inputs that are either untimely or unsuitable for the specific needs and conditions of small-scale farmers.

APA

Nalunga, J., & Lubega, J. (2024). Subvenciones a la Agricultura: El caso de Uganda. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/es/articles/policy-analysis/agricultural-subsidies-uganda

Chicago

Nalunga, Jane, and Jonathan Lubega. Subvenciones a la Agricultura: El caso de Uganda. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2024. https://www.iisd.org/es/articles/policy-analysis/agricultural-subsidies-uganda.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Nalunga |first1=Jane |last2=Lubega |first2=Jonathan |title=Subvenciones a la Agricultura: El caso de Uganda |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=December 2024 |url=https://www.iisd.org/es/articles/policy-analysis/agricultural-subsidies-uganda |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{nalunga2024subvenciones, author = {Nalunga, Jane and Lubega, Jonathan}, title = {{Subvenciones a la Agricultura: El caso de Uganda}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2024}, month = dec, url = {https://www.iisd.org/es/articles/policy-analysis/agricultural-subsidies-uganda}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }