Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that the cost of inaction regarding climate change in Uganda is significantly higher than the cost of adaptation, estimating annual losses between US$3.1 bn and 5.9 bn by 2025 compared to an adaptation cost of US$406 m over five years. It identifies critical vulnerabilities in water availability, agricultural exports (particularly coffee), biomass energy supply, and infrastructure resilience, while highlighting that many proposed adaptation measures are 'no regrets' investments that provide immediate development benefits.

The report assesses climate change risks for the Mpanga River catchment, focusing on the AEMS-Mpanga hydroelectric plant and water supply for domestic, industrial, and agricultural use. It finds that energy production is more vulnerable than water supply, with potential annual welfare costs from electricity shortages reaching US$98 million by 2035-2040. While water shortages in the Rushango area could cause annual losses up to US$188,000, the energy sector's losses dominate. Adaptation measures, such as improved water resource regulation and catchment protection, are deemed cost-effective, requiring only marginal reductions in losses to yield positive returns. However, implementation is hindered by funding gaps, lack of political will, and poor river flow data.

The study finds that climate change, characterized by rising temperatures and decreasing rainfall, will likely cause significant economic losses in the Mpanga river catchment, particularly in the energy sector. Annual costs for the energy sector are estimated between US$25 million and US$98 million by 2030-2035, while the water supply sector in the Rushango area may face annual losses of US$45,000 to US$79,000. Adaptation measures, including water resource regulation and energy diversification, are considered high priorities as they only need to offset between 2.8% and 32.8% of estimated losses to be economically justified.