Uganda Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management 2010 - 2020

March 2010 Uganda Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management 2010 - 2020 MMTI SIP MAAIF SIP MLHUD SIP MEMD SIP MWE SIP Disclaimer The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations, including UNDP, or their Member States. Copyright © UNDP 2014 All rights reserved Printed in South Africa March 2014 Design and Layout Terrence Reddy Printing Seriti Printing UGANDA STRATEGIC INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT 2010 - 2020 March 2010 Empowered lives. Resilient nations. 44 4 Acronyms and Abbreviations 8 Foreword 10 Executive Summary 12 1.0 INTRODUCTION 16 2.0 CONTEXT AND RATIONALE 18 2.1 Country issues 18 2.2 Sector issues 18 2.2.1 Agriculture 18 2.2.2 Water and Environment 19 2.2.2.1. Climate Change Impacts 19 2.2.2.2 Vulnerability 21 2.2.2.3 Adaptation 21 2.2.2.4 Mitigation/ Innovative Mechanisms 22 2.2.2.5 Forests 22 2.2.2.6 Water Resources 23 2.2.3 Energy 24 2.2.4 Lands 24 2.2.5 Trade 25 2.3 Geographical coverage of the Framework 27 2.3.1 The Cattle Corridor 28 2.3.2 Uganda’s Highlands 29 2.3.3 Eastern and Northern Uganda 30 2.3.4 The Lake Victoria Crescent 31 2.4 Commitment to the U-SIF SLM 24 3.0 FRAMEWORK DESCRIPTION 33 3.1 Goal 33 3.2 Development Objective 33 3.3 Activity Themes 33 3.3.1 Theme 1: Supporting on-the-ground activities for scaling up SLM 33 3.3.2 Theme 2: Strengthening the enabling institutional and policy environment for SLM 39 3.3.3 Theme 3: Strengthening commercial and advisory services for SLM and alternative livelihood options 39 3.3.4 Theme 4: Supporting SLM research and dissemination of best-bet technologies 40 3.3.5 Theme 5: Improving and strengthening SLM knowledge management, M&E and information dissemination 41 3.4 Communication Strategy 41 ContentsContents 55 4.0 INSTITUTIONAL/ IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS 42 4.1 Delivery Mechanism 42 4.2 SLM Country Platforms 43 5.0 MONITORING AND EVALUATION 44 5.1 Monitoring & Evaluation Objectives 44 5.2 Key shared indicators across sectors 45 5.2.1 Benchmarks/ baselines 45 5.2.3 Management Information System (MIS) 45 46 45 5.4 The future 46 6.0 SLM SUSTAINABLE FINANCING MECHANISM 47 6. 1 Introduction 47 6.2 Concluded, On-going and Planned SLM initiatives 48 6. 3 Analysis of potential sources, instruments and mechanisms 48 6.3.2 Opportunity from internally generated revenue 49 6.3.3 Opportunity from Local Service Tax and Graduated Tax Compensation 49 6.3.4 Barriers to mobilisation of internal revenue 49 6.3.5 Major policy and strategic implications 50 6.3.6 Opportunities from external funding sources, instruments and mechanisms 50 6.3.6.1 Sources: major donors 50 6.3.6.2 Donor delivery mechanisms 51 6.3.6.3 Donor disbursements by sector 51 6.3.6.4 Donor Coordination Mechanisms 51 6.3.6.5 Factors likely to influence the mobilisation of external funding 51 6.3.6.6 Major policy and strategic implications 52 6.3.7 Main vehicles used to finance SLM 52 6.3.7.1 Introduction 52 6.3.7.2 Funding SLM through agricultural sector’s budget 53 6.3.7.3 Funding SLM through Integrated Water Resources Management 53 6.3.7.4 Funding SLM through poverty alleviation fund (PAF) 53 6.3.7.5 Funding to SLM through Peace, Recovery and Development Plan 53 6.3.7.6 Funding to SLM through Luwero Triangle and Rwenzori Rehabilitation Programmes 52 6.3.7.7 Local and municipal budgets 53 6.3.7.8 Funding SLM through Projects 53 5.2.2 Aggregation procedures 5.3 Knowledge Management 66 6 6.3.7.9 Implications for SLM 53 6.3.7.10 Key constraints and barriers 53 6.3.8 Opportunities from innovative funding sources, instruments & mechanisms 53 6.3.8.1 Funding SLM through national and sector specific funds 53 6.3.8.2 Funding SLM through commercial banks 54 6.3.8.3 Funding SLM through micro-finance institutions 54 6.3.8.5 Funding SLM through small grant making institutions 55 6.3.8.6 Compensation for environmental services (CES) 55 6.3.8.7 Climate change-related funds and mechanisms 55 6.3.8.8 Trade Related Financing Mechanisms 56 6.3.8.9 Key policy recommendations 58 7.0 REFERENCES 59 8.0 APPENDICES 62 Annex I 63 Annex II 64 Annex III 67 Annex IV 72 Annex V 84 Annex VI 94 77 7 LIST OF BOXES Box 1 snoitnevretni dna skcenelttob ytiroirp MLS rotces erutlucirgA 18 Box 2 adnagU ni egnahc etamilc fo stcapmI 20 Box 3 adnagU ni egnahc etamilc ot esnopser ni detpoda secitcarp tnemeganam retaw dna dnaL 22 Box 4 snoitnevretni dna skcenelttob ytiroirp MLS rotces tnemnorivne dna retaW 24 Box 5 snoitnevretni dna skcenelttob ytiroirp MLS rotces ygrenE 24 Box 6 snoitnevretni dna skcenelttob ytiroirp MLS rotces sdnaL 25 Box 7 snoitnevretni dna skcenelttob ytiroirp MLS rotces edarT 26 Box 8 noitceles enoz /metsysoce rof airetirC 27 Box 9 rodirroC elttaC eht ni seussi MLS 28 Box 10 sdnalhgih eht ni seussi MLS 29 Box 11 adnagU nrehtron dna nretsae ni seussi MLS 30 Box 12 tnecserC airotciV ekaL eht ni seussi MLS 31 Box 13 pu-gnilacs rof noiger eht ni saera rehto dna adnagU ni elbaliava seigolonhcet /secitcarp MLS tseB 35 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of targets for priority practices/ technologies for scaling up in target zones 15 Table 2 secitcarp MLS detceles fo stifeneb dna stsoc evitacidni ,stegraT 36 Table 3 sronod pot yb tnemesrubsid dia detcejorp dna lautca fo yrammuS 50 Table 4 sdnuf ronod gnibrosba srotces niaM 51 Table 5 adnagU ni sdnuf latnemnorivne suoirav fo sutatS 54 Table 6 FIS MLS-U eht rof xirtaM stluseR 65 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Uganda’s Cattle Corridor 28 Figure 2 Soil erosion hotspots in Uganda 29 Figure 3 snoigeR nrehtroN dna nretsaE gnithgilhgih adnagU fo paM 30 Figure 4. nisaB / tnecserC airotciV ekaL ehT 31 Figure 5 alognosakaN ni noitadarged revoc dnaL 69 88 8 Acronyms and Abbreviations ADF African Development Fund AfDB African Development Bank AFOLU Agriculture, Forestry and Land Use AfT Aid for Trade AGBD Above Ground Biodiversity AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in East and Central Africa BNF Biological Nitrogen Fixation BGBD Below Ground Biodiversity CA Conservation Agriculture CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme CAP Community Action Plans CBA Community Based Advisors CBO Community Based Organization CDC Commonwealth Development Cooperation CDO Community Development Officer CDM Clean Development Mechanism CIAT International Centre for Tropical Agriculture COMESA Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa CP Country Program CSIF Country Strategic Investment Framework CSO Civil Society Organization DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DDP District Development Plan DEAP District Environment Action Plan DFI District Farm Institute DFID Department for International Development DSIP Development Strategy and Investment Plan DTIS Diagnosis Trade Integration Study DWD Directorate of Water Development DWRM Directorate of Water Resources Management EIF Enhanced Integrated Framework ENR Environment and Natural Resources EPA Economic Partnership Agreement EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility FIEFOC Farm Income Enhancement and Forestry Conservation Project GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environment Facility GHG Green House Gases GIS Geographical Information System GM Global Mechanism GOU Government of Uganda GTZ German Society for Technical Cooperation HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IAG Inter-Group Association ICRAF World Agroforestry Centre ICT Information Communication Technology IDA International Development Agency IDRC International Development Research Centre IF Integrated Framework IFAD International Fund for Agriculture Development IGAD Inter Government Authority on Development INM Integrated Nutrient Management INSPIRE Integrated Soil Productivity Initiative through Research and Education JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency LCD Least Developed Country LG Local Government LVB Lake Victoria Basin LVEMP Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project LUM Land use Management MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries MDGs Millennium Development Goals Acronyms and Abbreviations 99 9 MEA Multilateral Environment Agreement ME&MD Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development MIS Management Information System MLH&UD Ministry of Land, Housing & Urban Development MoLG Ministry of Local Government MSP Medium Size Project MTTI Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry MUIENR Makerere University Institute of Environment and Natural Resources MW&E Ministry of Water and Environment NAADS National Agricultural Advisory Services NAP UNCCD National Action Plan NAPA UNFCCC National Adaptation Programmes of Action NARL National Agriculture Research Laboratories NARO National Agricultural Research Organization NCSA National Capacity Self Assessment NDP National Development Plan NEMA National Environment Management Authority NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development NFA National Forestry Authority NGDP National Gross Domestic Product NGO Non Government Organization NR Natural Resource NRB Natural Resource Base NWFP Non Wood Forest Products NWSC National Water and Sewerage Corporation PAD Project Appraisal Document PEAP Poverty Eradication Action Plan PELUM Participatory Ecological Land Use Management PER Public Expenditure Review PES Payment for Ecosystem Services PMA Plan for Modernization of Agriculture PS Permanent Secretary REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation R&D Research and Development SEAP Sub-County Environment Action Plan SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SIP Sector Investment Plan SLM Sustainable Land Management SSA Sub Saharan Africa SWAP Sector Wide Approach TA TerrAfrica TDP Trade Development Plan TOR Terms of Reference UEPB Uganda Export Promotion Bureau UGX Uganda Shilling ULAMP Uganda Land Management Project UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNDP United Nations Development Program UNEP United Nations Environment Program USAID United States Agency for International Development VCM Voluntary Carbon Markets WB World Bank WFP World Food Program WTO World Trade Organization QUISP Quality Infrastructure and Standards Programme 10 FOREWORD Uganda can achieve sustainable development and a green economy by focusing on sustainable management and use of the land and water resources owing to the high dependence on natural capital particularly agriculture and other land based natural resources. Formulation of the Uganda Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management (U-SIF SLM) was commissioned by the Government of Uganda in 2007 with direct support from key TerrAfrica partners including NEPAD, FAO, UNCCD-GM and the World Bank. CAADP partners such as DFID, USAID, Norway, SIDA and GTZ have directly or indirectly supported the process. U-SIF SLM was also developed as part of the new National Development Plan and its specific sector plans for agriculture, water and environment, energy, lands and trade – i.e. the Development Strategy Investment Plans (DSIPs) for the five sectors. The purpose of the U-SIF is to upscale SLM practices across sectors programmatically and to avoid duplication across stakeholders and sectors. It will tap into synergies across sectors and promote sharing of common baselines, knowledge and monitoring and evaluation. The goal of the Uganda Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management (U-SIF SLM) is to promote key sectors co-operation to improve natural resource based livelihoods and other ecosystem services. The U-SIF SLM is a multi-sector national initiative spearheaded by the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) – the focal ministry for the UNCCD, CAADP and TerrAfrica. The SIF aims at providing an integrated cross-sector approach to investing in solutions to crosscutting SLM challenges. It also aims at scaling up and mainstreaming SLM into the centre of the national development agendas. The U-SLM SIF focuses on: (i) Supporting on-the-ground activities for scaling up SLM; (ii) Strengthening the enabling institutional and policy environment for SLM; (iii) Strengthening commercial and advisory services for SLM and alternative livelihood options; and (iv) Supporting SLM research and dissemination of best-bet technologies provides a broad coverage of interventions to improve the needed technological base and capacity as well as institutional synergies to effectively deliver impact on SLM in an integrated and participatory approach by a wide array of stakeholders. Targets include but are not limited to: • Development of Land Suitability maps and Land Use Plans for at least 50% of the country • Updating the soils information/mapping for at least 50% of the country • Development and operationalization of watershed management plans in at least 15 sites • Rehabilitation/restoration of degraded agricultural landscapes in at least 20 districts • Increase tree cover on agricultural landscape through promotion of agro forestry and afforestation with at least 60 tree nurseries. • Strengthen and train at least 150 co-operative produce and marketing groups in the development of SLM friendly value chains in • Support development of local community alternative livelihood initiatives in at least 30 districts. • Support communities in at least 10 districts to acquire and use efficient charcoal making kilns and 200 schools acquire energy efficient cook stoves In line with Uganda’s development plans and strategies, the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries in co-operation with the Ministries of Lands Housing and Urban Development, Water and Environment, Energy and Mineral Development and Trade, Industry and Cooperatives developed this Sustainable Land Management (SLM) Strategic Investment Framework (SIF) with the aim of pursuing an integrated approach to address cross cutting issues relating to SLM. The SIF identifies the key SLM challenges which undermine growth and productivity in the five key sectors that have a direct bearing and impact on land. In particular it points out land degradation hot spots where remedial SLM efforts need to be concentrated for investments to deliver significant impact. Foreword 11 The SLM investment areas in the SIF are aligned by sectors and take into account their respective mandates. The SIF however recognizes that most SLM issues are cross cutting thus requiring joint action across two or more sectors to be ached through inter sectoral projects and programmes. It is important to note that the SLM-SIF provides an effective platform to build synergies between the 3 Rio Conventions namely the UNCCD, the UNFCCC and the CBD at the local and national levels. This is largely justified by the fact that most of man’s destructive activities on the environment are carried out mainly on the land. In addition, the contribution of SLM practices/technologies to biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration and increased resilience to climate change risks are enormous. It is therefore urgent to continue pursuing the SLM agenda as a key component of our national development focus by ensuring its effective mainstreaming into Local Governments, sector and national development frameworks using simple, clear and measurable indicators. I would like to thank Uganda’s’ development partners for the continuous support in developing the U-SIF. Special thanks go to UNDP, GEF, WB, FAO, Norway, NEPAD, CAADP and other TerrAfrica Partners for the financial and technical assistance provided in this regard. V. R. Rubarema Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries 1212 10 Executive Summary The Government of Uganda recognizes land degradation as a major impediment to sustainable growth in agriculture, natural resources productivity, and national economic development. Natural resources comprising land, forests, wetlands, soils, minerals, fisheries, climate, etc., contribute over 50% of the National Gross Domestic Product (NGDP). Currently, the country’s population is estimated at 32.7 million (2009 State of the World Population Report by the United Nations Population Fund). However, 85% of the population is rural based and engaged in agricultural production which contributes 42% of the NGDP. Ugandan agriculture is characterized by low yields and low input use; fertilizer use is at an average of 1 kg of nutrients ha-1 year-1; this is one of the lowest levels in the world. It is also important to note that 92% of Uganda’s source of energy is wood fuel; while 7% is supplied by petroleum and 1% electricity. Land degradation threatens to significantly undermine the future productivity growth in agriculture and forestry sectors in Uganda. This is especially important because of the limited scope for bringing additional land resources into production, in particular in most of the identified land degradation hotspots. The only viable option in these areas is sustainable intensification, i.e. increasing the productivity of land and genetic resources in ways that do not compromise the quality and future productive capacity of those resources. The urgently needed smallholder productivity revolution in Uganda must be based on a technology change that systematically integrates Sustainable Land Management (SLM). The figures presented above are a strong argument for the role of land resources in reducing poverty and fighting hunger. Sound management of these natural resources can support and sustain the welfare of countries, such as Uganda, as they move up the development ladder. SLM must therefore be a key part of the development strategy. However, past investments in land productivity have not received the desired attention in the development agenda of the country. Despite some land and water management successes, past efforts have been insufficient in comparison to the scale of the problem due to a project-specific or single sector approach to complex rural land use and land use change. This did not permit capturing the cross-sectoral nature of land management. The poor coordination and collaboration across sectors, themes, stakeholders and partners places a drag on investment performance. However, recent developments by the Government to remedy this situation, along with greater international attention being placed on climate risk and agriculture, provide reason for optimism regarding how we invest in the economic and environmental security that sustained land productivity can deliver. One challenge on this front that this framework aims to rectify is a comprehensive articulation of Uganda’s investment priorities related to land use and management. The Government recognizes that the SLM approach is one way of combating land degradation and mitigating climate change effects while supporting sustainable human livelihoods. Sustainable Land Management strategies and practices enable farmers and communities to adapt, as well as become more resilient, to climate change by increasing food production, conserving soil and water, enhancing food security and restoring productive natural resources. Additionally SLM strategies and practices can prevent land degradation, restore degraded lands, and reduce the need for further conversion of natural forests and grasslands. Successful SLM practices include water harvesting technologies; community based participatory watershed management; terracing; integrated nutrient management (INM); agro-forestry practices; energy saving stoves; etc. Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is defined, according to the TerrAfrica partnership (2005), as the adoption of land use systems that, through appropriate management practices, enables land users to maximize economic and social benefits from the land while maintaining or enhancing ecological support functions of land resources. Formulation of the U-SIF SLM was commissioned by the Government of Uganda with direct support from key TerrAfrica partners including NEPAD, UNDP, FAO, UNCCD-GM, and the World Bank. CAADP partners such as DFID, USAID, Norway, SIDA and GTZ have directly or indirectly supported the process. The framework is a living document owned by the government. The development of the U-SIF SLM began with stocktaking and gap analysis on SLM that brought together the body of recent analytical work undertaken in the country, such as the SLM Public Expenditure Review (2008) supported by the World Bank and the SLM Stocktaking and Gap Analysis (2008) supported by UNDP. The objectives of the SLM Stocktaking and Gap Analysis were: to take stock of completed SLM projects (2001-todate); on-going and planned initiatives in SLM; to document lessons Executive Summary 1313 11 learnt, best practices and recommendations; to carry out a quick stakeholder analysis to assess their existing capacities and main capacity needs within their mandate with regard to formulation, implementation and monitoring of SLM activities, strengths and weaknesses; and to analyze the main bottlenecks and opportunities for SLM mainstreaming and up scaling. The highly consultative process for carrying out the stock taking and gap analysis helped to identify barriers and gaps that hinder up-scaling existing good SLM practices. The barriers (which prevent addressing/ solving the root causes) and gaps were grouped into four categories, namely institutional and policy barriers, economic and financial barriers, social and behavioral barriers, and technological and knowledge management barriers. U-SIF SLM was also developed as part of the new National Development Plan and its specific sector plans for agriculture, water & environment, energy, lands, and trade – i.e. the Development Strategy Investment Plans (DSIPs) for the five sectors. Purpose The purpose of the SIF is to upscale SLM practices across sectors programmatically and to avoid duplication across stakeholders and sectors. It will tap into synergies across sectors and promote sharing of common baselines, knowledge and monitoring and evaluation. Added value The use/ added value are the provision of common baselines; common priorities for the multi-sectoral approach; individual project preparation; etc. Additionally the U-SIF SLM will provide a programmatic tool to operationalize existing strategies and national action plans relating to SLM and to identify additional priority activities to complement existing plans which were not captured in sectoral approaches to SLM. By providing a joint operational framework to implement priority interventions to combat land degradation, the SIF will also facilitate synergies in the country level implementation of the Rio conventions and across the broad themes of climate change, international waters, and biodiversity. Preparing and updating the SIF provides the opportunity to unite government, private sector and civil society stakeholders around a shared concrete plan of action to scale up SLM and to improve the governance of land management decisions in the country. The SIF design has taken into account and build upon other planning frameworks at national levels, including specific agreements with development partners who support SLM investments. Goals and Objective of the Investment Framework The goal of the Uganda Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management (U-SIF SLM) is to promote key sectors cooperation to improve natural resource based livelihoods and other ecosystem services. The U-SIF SLM is a multi-sector national initiative to be spearheaded by the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) – the focal ministry for the UNCCD, CAADP and TerrAfrica. The SIF aims at providing an integrated cross-sector approach to investing in solutions to crosscutting SLM challenges. It also aims at scaling up and mainstreaming SLM into the center of the national development agendas. The development objective is to strengthen sector cooperation in order to halt, reverse and prevent land degradation/ desertification and to mitigate the effects of climate change and variability. The U-SIF SLM has a 10 year (2010-2020) horizon organized into two phases: Phase I (2010-2015) and Phase II (2015-2020. The SIF is intended to be a living document, and the implementation schedule will take the form of a “rolling” programme which will be updated at regular intervals. The planning and sequencing of investments will be aligned with National Development Plan planning horizons, including Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks, and other budgetary processes as well as country/ development partner planning frameworks. The objectives will lead to impacts from discrete investments in multiple sectors and locations that will (i) raise crop and range productivity; (ii) reduce deforestation; (iii) secure ecosystem services such as water filtering, biodiversity, and carbon storage; and (iv) improve rural livelihoods. The Investment Framework has five themes that guide interventions toward the objectives and impacts above. These are: 1414 12 (i) Supporting on-the-ground activities for scaling up SLM; (ii) Strengthening enabling environment for SLM; (iii) Strengthening commercial and advisory services for SLM; (iv) Supporting SLM research; and (v) Improving and strengthening SLM knowledge management and monitoring and evaluation. Geographical coverage and targets The SIF SLM targets four (4) land degradation hotspots/ agro ecoligical zones across the country that were identified/ based on the SLM PER (2008); SLM Stocktaking and Gap Analysis (2008) and other SLM analytical studies. These agro ecological zones are: Southwestern and Eastern Highlands, Lake Victoria Crescent Region, the Cattle Corridor, Eastern and Northern Uganda. Targets for priority technologies for scaling up in the target zones are shown in Table 1. Demonstrations will be established and fully financed and managed for at least three years and thereafter handed over to the farmers/ herders/ community. Incentives to the tune of 20-30% will also be provided to support the communities/ farmers to scale up SLM technologies. It is anticipated that additional scaling up will occur through voluntary/ stimulation through advice and learning via farmer exchange visits; extension messages, etc. Other targets include but not limited to: • Development of Land Suitability and Land Use Plans/ Maps for at least 75% of the country • Up dating the soils information/ mapping for at least 75% of the country • Development and operationalisation of at least 15 participatory micro-watershed management plans • Rehabilitation/ restoration of at least 10 badly degraded sites/ micro-catchments • Establishment of at least 60 tree growing community groups with at least 60 tree nurseries to support agro forestry, afforestation and reforestation initiatives • Establishment/ strengthening of at least 150 groups/ cooperatives in the cattle corridor (that promote the development of SLM friendly value chains (e.g. Non-Wood Forest Products – NWFP ) • Establishment and operationalization of at least 150 pilot initiatives for alternative livelihoods/ income (bee keeping, aquaculture, etc) • Training of at least 150 groups/ cooperatives in entrepreneurial skills/ business development skills • Training of at least 150 local artisans in the construction of efficient charcoal making kilns and 200 local artisans in the construction of energy efficient stoves. 15 13 Table 1: Summary of targets for priority practices/ technologies for scaling up in the target zones Practice (top priorities only) Targets in the 4 Priority zones (Targets per zone) or Specific zone Demonstrations Established with incentives Established voluntarily/ stimulated through advice Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) 1,000 ha 10,000 ha 2,500 ha Contour bunds 1,000 km 10,000 km 2,500 km Grass contours/ bunds 1,000 km 10,000 km 2,500 km Intercropping 2,000 ha 20,000 ha 5,000 ha Mulching 2,000 ha 20,000 ha 5,000 ha Conservation Agriculture 1,000 ha 20,000 ha 5,000 ha Agroforestry 1,000 ha 20,000 ha 5,000 ha Woodlots 1,000 ha 20,000 ha 5,000 ha Terracing (mainly targets SW & Eastern Highland Zones) 100 ha 1,000 ha 250 ha Rehabilitation/ reclamation of degraded watersheds & sites (Strategic Interventions) 200 ha/ zone Shallow wells 50 units 500 units 125 units Household rain water harvesting /Ferro-cement tank 100 units 1,000 units 250 units Institutional rain water harvesting /Ferro-cement tank 50 units 500 units 125 units Run-off/ Water harvesting from roads, paths etc 2,000 ha 20,000 ha 5,000 ha Large surface runoff harvesting reservoirs (mainly targets cattle corridor) 100 units (350 M3 lined with HDPE dam liners/ valley tanks or small check dams) 200 units 50 units Household energy saving stoves 5,000 units 20,000 units 5,000 units Institutional energy saving stoves 100 units 1,000 units 250 units Efficient kilns for charcoal production (mainly targets cattle corridor) 100 units 500 units 50 units The U-SLM Investment Framework will cost US$ 245,305,000 and is expected to be financed through a mix of resources.. Funding sources for U-SIF SLM implementation will include general budget support at national and decentralized levels; private sector investment by farmers, herders, forest users and private sector service providers; as well as funds made available from bilateral and multilateral development partners. The agriculture sector is the SLM focal sector, and also considered a crucial sector for rural development. The sector also receives off-budget support from donors and international NGOs. Special government initiatives such as the Integrated Water Resource Management IWRM), the Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF), and the Northern Uganda Peace Recovery and Development Plan (NUPRDP) are also opportunities to leverage financing for SLM. Financing through projects is another of the mechanisms, and of significance are initiatives that advocate for cross-sectoral cooperation to deliver sectoral and development objectives such as the Aid for Trade Framework (ATF) of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Innovative financing through trust funds, banking institutions, climate change related funds [e.g. Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCM)], and market based mechanisms such as organic production offer opportunities to harness financing for SLM. 16 INTRODUCTION It is estimated that 85% of Uganda’s population is rural and dependant on the land for its livelihood. The availability and productivity of land in turn depends on how it is managed to generate food, income, and environmental benefits such as clean water and reduced climate risk. Land and unskilled labour are, in general, the principle assets of the rural poor. The few human or capital endowments spent by farmers on land care can be overwhelmed by land degradation and climate risks. The associated loss of productivity imposes high social and economic costs because of linkages that exist between lagging agricultural growth, rural poverty and food insecurity. In Uganda, land degradation in the form of soil erosion and soil nutrient depletion is a serious problem. Around 36% of Uganda is affected by severe land degradation and 10% by very severe land degradation. Land degradation has important consequences on the productivity of agricultural land and other natural resources, and is closely linked to poverty. The socio-economic implications of land degradation and climate risk in Uganda include rural poverty, food insecurity, high cost of food, rural to urban migration and encroachment on natural reserves. Available information in Uganda shows that the poor are increasingly farming marginal land prone to land degradation. Expansion into marginal areas brings increased risks of crop failure and loss of soil, forest, watershed functions, and biodiversity. Consequently there is an urgent need in Uganda to break the cycle between poverty and land degradation by employing strategies that empower farmers economically and promote sustainable agricultural intensification using efficient, effective and affordable SLM practices. Highly degraded areas are also more prone to the effects of climate variability and change because those areas have reduced resilience. Climate variability and change is expected to have adverse impacts on the existing and potential development activities in Africa (Ottichilo et al., 1991; Box 2). It affects the bio-productive system on which most economic investments in Africa are based. The impacts of increased temperature and decreased rainfall have been projected to cause shifts in vegetation zones which is likely to be felt in the various sectors of the economy such as agriculture, tourism and industry. People living in poverty are the least equipped to adapt to climate variability and change. As a consequence, Uganda, with at least 38% of its population still living below the poverty line and deriving their livelihood largely from agriculture, climate variability and change pose serious concerns. Uganda, like most African countries, remains vulnerable to the effects of climate change since agriculture depends primarily on climate. Under the current situation of climate change which has a big influence on economic and ecological issues, the condition of vulnerable social groups like women and children in Uganda and most African countries is likely to worsen. However, investment in land productivity has not received the desired attention in the development agenda of the country. Despite some land and water management successes, past efforts have been insufficient in comparison to the scale of the problem due to a project-specific or single-sector approach to complex rural land use and land use change. This did not allow for capturing the cross-sectoral nature of land management; the poor coordination and collaboration across sectors, themes, stakeholders and partners places a drag on investment performance. However, recent developments by the Government to remedy this situation, along with greater international attention being placed on climate risk and agriculture, provide reason for 1.0 Introduction 1717 15 optimism that we are all standing upon a turning point in how we invest in the economic and environmental security that sustained land productivity can deliver. One challenge on this front that this document aims to rectify is a comprehensive articulation of Uganda’s investment priorities related to land use and management. The Government recognizes that the SLM approach is one way of combating land degradation and mitigating the effects of climate change while supporting sustainable human livelihoods. Cognizant of the above challenges, the Government convened a range of agencies and stakeholders to prepare a harmonized Strategic Investment Framework (SIF) for SLM. The thrusts of the U-SLM SIF are: • Enhancing productivity by supporting yield increases, • Improving land quality and sustainability (soil health; water availability; vegetation cover, soil carbon targets, ecosystem services) • Improving household welfare (livelihoods, food security, incomes; diversification) • Building sectoral collaboration and synergies in SLM • Reducing risk exposure (from climate variability and change) • Mainstreaming SLM principles and practices into sector DSIPs (Development Strategy and Investment Plans) and inputs in the NDP (National Development Plan) Document Structure This U-SIF SLM document comprises 6 main sections. Following this introduction, Section 2 describes the strategic context and rationale of the framework including sector issues, the country’s overall vision for SLM, the visions for each sector and the hotspot areas, and shared principles and commitments of the framework; Section 3 describes the framework, including the objectives, intermediate and long-term results, framework components, and prioritized and costed investment activities. Institutional/ implementation arrangements are described in Section 4, while Section 5 outlines the framework’s Monitoring and Evaluation arrangements to measure collective progress and achievements, centered on a small set of shared indicators and targets. Section 6 is on financing mechanisms for the framework. 18 CONTEXT AND RATIONALE 2.0 2.1 Country issues The proposed U-SIF SLM is a multi-sectoral national initiative bringing together five sectors in government with mandates that have a direct bearing on land degradation vis-à-vis sustainable land management. These include the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) – the focal ministry for UNCCD (United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification); Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MEMD); Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE); Ministry of Land, Housing and Urban Development (MLHUD); and Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry (MTTI). The SLM SIF aims at providing an integrated approach to finding solutions to the crosscutting SLM challenges. It also aims at scaling up and mainstream SLM into the Sector Investment Plans (SIPs) which feed into the National Development Plan (NDP). There is need for both horizontal scaling up i.e. extending the use of research outputs to larger groups in either the same or a different environment and vertical scaling up i.e. influencing and effecting institutional and policy changes. The goal of the U-SIF SLM is to promote sectors cooperation to improve natural resource based livelihoods and other ecosystem services. The overall vision of the U-SIF SLM is - Natural resources based livelihoods and ecosystem services/ functions improved. 2.2 Sector issues 2.2.1 Agriculture In Uganda, 85% of the population is engaged in agricultural production, which contributes 42% of the National Gross Domestic Product, 80% of the export earnings and employs 90% of the labour force. Over 95% of the farmers are smallholders with landholdings averaging 2 ha of land (Kisamba-Mugerwa, 2001). The majority of these smallholder farmers have some land but limited by capital. The largest group of households classified as being poor has consistently been those engaged in agriculture, with recent increase in poverty being particularly marked for those engaged in crop .)30 /2002 ni %05 ot 0002 /9991 ni %93 morf gnisir( yrdnabsuh This is mainly attributable to low profitability from agricultural enterprises arising from low input use, rainfall dependency, non competitive market prices, etc. For households involved in non-crop agriculture, on the other hand, poverty declined from 42% to 34% (UBOS, 2005). The vision for the agriculture sector therefore is – Sustainably managed land and water resources contributing to improved productivity and rural welfare (livelihoods, food security, income) and ecosystem services/ functions (water availability, buffering against climate change risks such as drought and floods, and genetic diversity/ biodiversity). Box 1. Agriculture sector SLM priority bottle necks and interventions A. Bottlenecks and gaps • Nutrient mining • Soil erosion/ limited use of land management prac tices • Poor infrastructure for water for production • Under developed early warning system with regard to food security • Climate change and variability • Poor knowledge management and M&E • Poor policy harmonization and implementation • Mono-cropping production for export Context And Rationale 1919 B. Priority interventions • Integrated Nutrient Management including inorganic and organic fertilizers, BNF, agro-forestry, etc. • Soil and water conservation • Conservation agriculture (entailing minimum tillage, cover crops, judicious crop rotations, etc) • Water utilization components e.g. drinking struc tures, irrigation, etc. • Development of an early warning system • Adaptation to climate change and variability e.g. drought resistant/ early maturing crop varieties, etc. • Validation of decision support tools/ crop models • Knowledge management and M&E • Policy harmonization & implementation (e.g. Land Use Policy, agriculture and trade development policies) 2.2.2 Water and Environment Currently, there is insufficient understanding of the directions and severity of climate change in Uganda, and the potential impacts of these climate changes for land management. These impacts will differ strongly for the various parts of the country, and may be most significant in the fragile/ high risk areas experiencing accelerated land degradation in form of soil erosion, nutrient and biomass depletion, etc. 2.2.2.1. Climate Change Impacts Climate change is likely to have a wide range of interrelated impacts for the environment and economy of Uganda and the well-being of its people. The impacts and mechanisms identified in existing literature are collated in Box 2. Whilst many of these are negative, there may also be potentially beneficial outcomes such as increased grazing area for livestock in the cattle corridor with increased rainfall or opportunities to grow more profitable crops and watering points arising from extensive runoff from degraded hilltops e.g. artificial lakes formed in Mbarara after the 2008 second rain season. Climate change impacts are also likely to exacerbate some existing stresses, for example land degradation. 2020 18 Box 2.: Impacts of climate change in Uganda – collated from the literature (Orindi and Eriksen 2005, Orindi and Murray 2005, Hepworth and Goulden 2008, MWE 2007) Impact Mechanism Water Change in river flow regimes Higher temperatures and melting of Rwenzori glaciers temporarily increasing and then reducing flows in the Semiliki river downstream Water scarcity Higher temperatures, evaporation and recurrent drought leading to stress, higher demands for water, conflict, and biodiversity loss. Partially implemented water resource regulation system hands legal access to water to the powerful Flooding Higher mean and increased intensity rainfall, coupled with land degradation and encroachment raises risks of loss of life and property and damage to infrastructure via flooding Health Malaria Extension into higher or once cooler areas with temperature increase where resistance may be low Water Borne Disease Flooding is associated with diarrheal disease including cholera epidemics, particularly where sanitation is poor and in slum areas Respiratory disease & eye infections Associated with dust storms arising from prolonged dry spells Malnutrition and famine Associated with lower food production and insecurity, particularly with widespread damage brought by floods and droughts Agriculture and food security Seasonal rainfall change Erratic onset and cessation of the rainfall seasons. Shorter rains. Crop failure or lower yields of staple foods like beans, cassava, maize and bananas; reduction in traditional varieties; and more crop disease (e.g. Banana Bacterial Wilt and Coffee Wilt Disease) Additional agricultural workloads – particularly women. Higher average rainfall, high intensity events Crop damage and soil erosion Pastoralists Increase in rainfall in semi-arid areas could be beneficial, given mobile pastoralists take advantage of the rains. Droughts reduce viability of cattle corridor and precipitate conflict Lower milk production Fisheries Changes in nutrient cycling and loss of spawning brought by temperature and water level change reduce productivity Environment Land degradation and deforestation Higher forest fire risk in dry periods; pressure on forests when other livelihood assets collapse; salinization and soil erosion Species extinctions As niches are closed out by shifts in climate regime Infrastructure Transport links and settlements Damage to bridges, roads, telecommunication and buildings during flood and storm events Economy Energy Changes in Lake level reducing flows available for power generation. Higher energy costs and energy poverty with knock on implications for charcoal use, deforestation and land degradation Exports (e.g. coffee) Changes in temperature may affect export capacity. For example, Coffee is Uganda’s primary export crop. Robusta sensitive to higher temperatures. Too much rain reduces flowering, which reduces production and also effects drying of beans. Diseases, pests and mould, hit both production and quality. Food prices Increase due to pressure on internal and international production capacity Tourism Potentially in decline due to degraded environment and infrastructure Poverty Multiple Exacerbated. Vulnerability increased Insecurity Nile flows Changes in water balance and demand heightens competition, potential for conflict. Migration In response to acute or chronic climate induced stresses 2121 19 2.2.2.2 Vulnerability Uganda is highly vulnerable to climate change and variability – its economy and the well being of its people are tightly bound to climate. Human induced climate change in the coming century has the potential to halt or reverse the country’s development trajectory. A recent International Climate Risk Report labels Uganda as one of the most unprepared and most vulnerable countries in the world (CIGI, 2007). Poverty, low diversity of income and livelihoods, HIV/AIDS, insecurity and weak institutions are key factors in heightening Uganda’s vulnerability to climate change, lowering its resilience and adaptive capacity. Resilience, the ability to cope and recover is low within Uganda. Therefore in planning interventions around climate change it is vital to understand and consider these underlying issues and their often unequal distribution as well as direct sectoral impacts. 2.2.2.3 Adaptation Adaptation in the context of climate change is an adjustment in a system in response to actual or expected climatic changes and its impacts. It includes changes and adjustments designed to moderate, offset potential damages or to capitalize on the changes in climate. In turn, adaptive capacity is the potential or ability of a system, region, or community to adapt to the effects or impacts of climate change (IPCC third Assessment Report, 2001). Early adaptation to climate change can moderate impacts and even secure benefits. SLM can reduce vulnerability and help people adapt to climate variability and change. Despite the large potential for SLM to contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation in SSA, little of this potential is currently being realized. SLM practices are adopted on only a small percentage of agricultural land in SSA. Many SLM practices can simultaneously achieve both adaptation and mitigation goals, especially those that increase soil organic carbon. SLM represents a preventative approach to climate change that can reduce the need for costly ex post coping measures, like changing crops and livelihoods, clearing new lands for agriculture and migration. The predicted negative yield impacts of climate change are often dwarfed by proven positive yield impacts of improved land management. In addition to positive impacts on average yields, many SLM practices reduce the variability of agricultural production (for example, soil and water conservation and organic amelioration practices that improve soil moisture holding capacity or integrated pest management practices that reduce vulnerability to pests), while others can help to diversify agricultural income (for example, agroforestry with non timber tree products or crop rotations). A combination of SLM practices can be used to combat the different manifestations of climate change. Adaptation to climate change takes place in a dynamic social, economic, technological, biophysical, and political context that varies over time, location, and sector (IPCC 2001). This complex mix of conditions determines the capacity of systems to adapt. The main features of communities or regions that seem to determine their adaptive capacity are: economic wealth, technology, information and skills, infrastructure, institutions, and equity. These factors combine to contribute to the very low adaptive capacities of many countries in Africa. Within a given country, determinants of this capacity cascade down along nested spatial and economic scales. Recently IFPRI and Makerere University Institute of Environment and Natural Resources - MUIENR (Majaliwa et. al., 2009) conducted a study in Uganda, with an objective of generating context specific recommendations on how to improve food security and economic development while reducing climate change related risks using sustainable land and water management practices and other strategies. The communities involved in this research revealed high level of awareness of climate change and how this phenomenon is affecting livelihoods. All 12 communities involved in the study reported to have experienced climate change in a variety of ways in the past 30 years. Responses to climate change and other biophysical and socio economic changes are related in a complex way. For example, deforestation and tree cutting were the most frequently reported biophysical changes. Communities have taken sustainable land and water management (SLWM) practices that have been empirically shown to be effective in addressing moisture stress and rainfall variability. Notably, communities reported to have adopted or enhanced use of mulching, manure and tree planting. Communities in Kapchorwa and Kamuli also reported to have adopted new varieties that are drought tolerant. Majaliwa et al. (2009) further reported that communities in Moroto have shifted from pastoral livelihoods to crop production. Such change has been a result of cattle rustling 2222 20 and insecurity in northeastern Uganda. The change has increased vulnerability of the communities to climate change since crop production in the area is riskier than the pastoral livelihoods that the communities have practiced for ages. These findings underscore the complex nature of response to climate change and the need to address adaptation by taking multi-sectoral approach. Box 3. Land and water management practices adopted in response to climate change in Uganda. New or increased SLWM practices in the past 30 years Moroto Kapchorwa Kamuli Total (out of 12 villages) No. of villages reporting (out of 4) Manure 2 3 2 7 Mulching 3 2 3 8 Improved crop varieties 0 1 2 3 Agroforestry 0 2 0 2 Stone lines/contour ridges 2 1 0 3 Diversion channels/trenches/trash lines 3 1 2 6 Water harvesting 2 2 0 4 Protection and management of water resources 1 3 2 6 Tree planting & protection 2 2 2 6 Controlled grazing 4 2 0 6 Water resource development1 4 0 1 5 1Water resource development includes: Development of livestock watering points – such as dams, and private or community potable or livestock water boreholes Source: Majaliwa et al., 2009 (IFPRI & MUIENR, UgandaCase Studies). 2.2.2.4 Mitigation/ Innovative Mechanisms Climate change mitigation through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCM) has had a limited impact in Uganda, although it is thought there is potential for Uganda to benefit from these in the future. Constraints such as high transaction costs and limited indigenous capacity are being tackled through a number of initiatives, but the situation should be strengthened to ensure that Uganda benefits from these mechanisms. There are opportunities to promote climate change mitigation and adaptation through SLM in Uganda using existing mechanisms. In the present context, the opportunities include: • Increased use of the CDM to finance Afforestation and Reforestation (A/R) projects; • Increased use of voluntary carbon markets (VCM) and carbon mitigation funds to test and demonstrate methodologies for a wider range of agriculture, forestry and land use (AFOLU) activities; • Increased use of adaptation funds to support SLM priority activities • Increased funding for climate change mitigation and adaptation through programs promoting SLM; and • Increased integration of climate change mitigation and adaptation activities, including SLM, into development strategies of GOU and donors. 2.2.2.5 Forests Uganda’s natural forest cover consisting of tropical high forest (THF), woodlands and forest plantations has declined drastically from 54% (approx. 13.2 million hectares) in the 1950s to the present 4.9 million hectares representing approximately 20% of the total area of the country (ENR SIP, 2007; NEMA, 2004/05). A large proportion of the rural population depends on forest resources for basic needs and forestry provides a range of environmental services and 2323 21 biodiversity values, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, watershed regulation, climate regulation, soil and water conservation, and nutrient cycling. The forestry sector contributes about 6% to Uganda’s GDP and creates about 850,000 jobs; about 100,000 in the formal sector and the majority in fuel-wood and charcoal production. The gross economic output attributable to biodiversity use is estimated to be US$ 546.6 million per year while indirect benefits from ecosystem services and functions that support and maintain production are estimated to be a further US$ 200 million per year (Uganda National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2002) Despite the value of Uganda’s natural resources to its economy, the environment is severely strained. The stress has been attributed to deforestation, population growth and human encroachment. The problem is particularly acute outside of protected areas, on forested private and public/ communal lands that are not regulated or managed by government. Communities living in these non-regulated forest lands depend on forest resources for firewood, building materials, medicinal plants but are also faced with more immediate livelihood needs, prompting over-exploitation. The deforestation rate is estimated to be 55,000 ha per year, based on habitat change from 1990-1995. Other estimates push the figure higher to between 1.1% and 3.15% per year. Today, while only 15% in forest reserves is degraded, 50% of all the tropical high forest on private land is degraded. Most of the proposed SLM interventions have strong ecosystem rehabilitation attributes and carbon sequestration elements and hence can benefit from CDM mechanisms. Additionally, Uganda’s action plans and programs provide an enabling environment for Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES). Uganda has also entered/ engaged (2009) in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and taken the lead in promoting PES throughout the East African region - activities undertaken by Eco-Agriculture and Katoomba Group – Forest Trends and other partners are good starting initiatives. These initiatives provide opportunities for incentives to promote SLM interventions. Consequently, there is need to increase benefits to communities from ecosystem services markets by increasing supply of solid SLM projects from the U-SIF SLM and to build an aggregate model to efficiently support a range of small-scale farmers, pastoralists, etc. 2.2.2.6 Water Resources The rapidly growing population and economy have placed increased demand on the water resource. The water resources are also under threat from land degradation on-site and off site effects; especially those associated with soil erosion. The main ecological concern with soil erosion and siltation is the loss of water storage capacity of water bodies and wetlands. Land degradation also affects the hydrological regime (rainfall, run-off, evapotranspiration, infiltration, etc.), which have several negative consequences including climate change, siltation, and increased flood hazards. Nutrient loading into aquatic eco-systems has led to eutrophication of some water bodies. In that regard, land degradation is becoming both a growth and environmental issue in Uganda. Sustainable land management will greatly contribute to halt the land degradation trends and hence protect the national ecosystems and those which are international in nature like the Lake Victoria and Nile River basins. The thrust of the U-SIF SLM in this sector therefore is to have environmentally sound, sustainable, integrated socio economic development of micro/ small watersheds and climate change mitigation. The vision in this sector therefore is reduced risk exposure (climate change risks and mitigation) and community-based participatory managed watersheds providing desired goods and services (see Box 4). 2424 22 Box 4. Water and environment sector SLM priority bottle necks and interventions A. Bottlenecks and gaps • Impacts of climate change and variability; • Inadequate early warning systems (short and medium term weather and climate forecasts - drought, floods, etc) • Deforestation and poor watershed management • Poor infrastructure for water for production • Poor knowledge management and M&E • Poor policy harmonization and implementation B. Priority interventions • Adaptation and mitigation to impacts of climate change and variability • Establishment of early warning systems (short and medium term weather and climate forecasts drought, floods etc) • Water harvesting/ water supply to pastoral commu nities • Watershed management , • Afforestation, reforestation and agro-forestry • Knowledge management and M&E 2.2.3 Energy Biomass, representing 93% of energy consumption, is the main source of energy in Uganda. Fuel wood energy is the major source of energy for domestic cooking, heating and lighting the country. Over 90% of Ugandans use fuel-wood as their main or only source of energy, consuming 22 million tons annually as domestic firewood and 4 million tons as charcoal (MWLE, 2002). It has been estimated that even if the entire hydroelectric potential of the country is fully utilized, 75% of total energy consumption would continue to be met through biomass energy by the year 2015 (Akankwasa and Tromborg, 2001). As a means of mitigating these staggering statistics, government is in the process of implementing programs such as the Energy for Rural Transformation and has enacted policies for modernization and liberalization of energy production, thus the country is progressively moving from a position of low-intensity-energy-use towards higher levels of clean energy intensity. Nevertheless, electrification access in Uganda is still very low, standing at approximately 10% nationally and 4% in rural areas. The electrification of most parts of the country through the grid extension in the near future is still a far cry (MEMD, 2007). In that regard, biomass principally firewood and charcoal, is projected to continue being an important source of energy, especially for the rural poor, who constitute the majority of Ugandans. There is need therefore to develop a sustainable energy economy, which will ensure its security, availability and affordability, while sustaining the diversity of both the resources and systems. The focus/ thrust in the energy sector is sustainable use of biomass energy, and development and increased use of renewable energy from the current 4% to 60%. Box 5. Energy sector SLM priority bottle necks and interventions A. Bottlenecks and gaps • Unsustainable biomass energy sources management (inefficient utilization, over extraction, losses, etc) • Underdeveloped renewable energy sources • Poor knowledge management and M&E • Poor policy harmonization B. Priority interventions • Sustainably managed biomass energy sources (balanced and efficient utilization) • Developed renewable energy (e.g. gasification for homes and institutions) • Improve efficiency in charcoal production • Knowledge management and M&E • Watershed management (water availability, soil erosion control, etc) The vision in the energy sector therefore is – sustainably managed biomass energy sources and adequately developed gasification processes to reduce pressure on biomass and improve end-use efficiency. 2.2.4 Lands Poor land use leading to the degradation of natural and environmental resources is partly attributed to the insufficient data and information on environmental, ecological and socio economic parameters. Decision-making on the use of the land resources is seldom based on current data and information on available resources and their respective comparative advantage in supporting sustainable livelihood systems and provision of quality environmental/ ecological services and functions. 2525 23 The focus/ thrust in the lands sector is development of land use plans and the community based watershed management and development process i.e. Participatory Land Use Planning (PLUP) that results in/ into community action plans (CAP). The communities have to appreciate that the interventions will benefit them and hence “ownership”. There is a need to methodically link this effort with sector interventions to maximize sector investment performance. The vision for this sector therefore is - Adequately planned land use systems countrywide supported with strong/ well developed community based participatory micro-watershed plans. Box 6. Lands sector priority SLM bottle necks and interventions A. Bottlenecks and gaps • Lack/ absence of Land Use Plans • Lack of support for LGs, investors, and other land users to implement the land use policy and land use plans • Land tenure insecurity • Poor knowledge management and M&E • Poor policy harmonization B. Priority interventions • Development of land use plans • Participatory land use planning (PLUP) • Participatory watershed management plans • Improved land administration • Knowledge management and M&E • Policy harmonization & implementation (e.g. Land Use Policy) 2.2.5 Trade Trade has a direct bearing on how farmers, herdsmen and communities manage their land. Land quality determines the degree of production in both quantitative and qualitative terms; hence, it determines the tradability of agricultural products. Trade impacts on SLM in a number of ways. Trade pressures may trigger: • Inefficient and wasteful use of land, forest and water resource (e.g. charcoal production); • Inappropriate crop intensification and use of agronomic practices not suitable for local soil and water conditions; • Expansion of agriculture to marginal lands which are not capable of sustaining food production; • Land conversion to meet cultivation needs e.g. depletion of wood and bush lands (Statistical Abstract, 2009) Trade remains the main driver for the country’s economy through exports and imports, with US$ 3.4bn as total exports for goods and services in 2007, and the total import bill in the same year as US$ 5.5bn, representing a trade deficit of US$ 2.1bn. The shrinking world market for the country’s traditional exports e.g. coffee, tea, cotton, etc. has resulted into wider trade imbalances with imports growing faster than exports. However, most of the imports do not necessarily feed into the production process because they are mainly consumables, a situation which is unsustainable and undesirable. Uganda is for instance increasingly importing agricultural food products (e.g. cereals and cereal preparations – accounting for 3.83% of total imports). Import substitution in food crops offers the opportunity for a favourable trade balance by promoting food production for commercialization, and strengthening the respective value chains for this purpose. Export diversification has been a key component of the trade policy reform. Non-traditional exports such as fish and fish products, horticultural products, etc account for the bulk of the county’s merchandise export earnings. The National Export Strategy 2008-2012 also puts emphasis on trade development for non traditional exports including natural ingredients. Many of such natural ingredients are derived from Non-Wood Forest Products (NWFP) and regarded as having a great trade development potential which may work as an incentive for reducing deforestation and promoting sustainable forest management. For example, world demand for essential oils was US$ 755m in 2006, with a growth rate of 7% between 2002 and 2006, and used for therapeutic and aromatic purposes while the world demand for Gum Arabic stood at US$ 278m in 2006 and grew by 30% in 2002 – 2006, and traded volumes increased by 3% in the same period. Other promising natural products include honey and wild fruits. SLM may add value to trade processes by providing opportunities for product diversification, making supplies more reliable, reducing waste, optimizing the use of resources and improving product quality. SLM can also be a powerful marketing instrument through eco-labeling and organic certification. One of the major concerns in the trade sector is the absence of inter-sectoral linkages between trade and the productive sectors - primarily agriculture and environment. Trade 2626 24 development is hinged on the development and implementation of harmonized sectoral plans, and continuous monitoring and feedback on trade opportunities and challenges, and also the socio-economic and ecological impacts. Opening up trade opportunities to provide alternative livelihoods, improving the productive capacity and enhancing the competitiveness of the commodities and non commodities are some of the priorities defined for the trade sector. A. Bottlenecks and gaps • Weak value chains for SLM friendly products e.g NWFP • Limited use of SLM production practices within commodity sectors such as coffee, cotton and tea • Weak compliance to trade standards and requirements • Limited access to trade and market information • Poor knowledge of SLM value added to value chain development • Lack of M&E of trade impacts on SLM • Absence of integrated/ multi-sectoral sub-sector strategies • Weak cross-sectoral collaboration and cooperation • Weak harmonization of trade and agriculture development policies B. Priority interventions • Promote trade diversification by encouraging food import substitutes (e.g. production of cereals) and value chains that do not increase pressure on land e.g. pineapples, vanilla and Non Wood Forest Products (NWFPs) • Increase the use of SLM practices in the value chains of commodity products such as coffee, cotton and tea • Align production of export commodities to climate change by adopting practices that make the value chains more resilient to climate change impacts • Enhance inter-ministerial cooperation on trade development for agricultural and natural product sectors • Build capacity and facilitate standardization, packaging, labeling and certification for SLM friendly value chains • Increase access to information on markets and key requirements • Knowledge management and M&E • Mainstreaming SLM into trade planning and policy making processes, and related implementation plans. • Support the alignment of trade and agriculture development policies The growing number of eco-labeling and certification schemes for environmentally-friendly products reflect the growing demand for sustainably traded products as private companies realize that environmentally-friendly practices are opportunity for innovation, product diversification and improving brand image. In order to respond to the urgent need to diversify the country’s export base in light of the continued low performance of the traditional export commodities on the international markets, SLM could contribute by (i) promoting the use of SLM-friendly practices in the major export commodity sectors; (ii) supporting market diversification by encouraging food import substitutes and value chains that do not increase pressure on land ; and (iii) aligning planning and policy making processes in the trade and agriculture sectors as well as the related implementation plans. The vision for this sector therefore is - To develop and nurture private sector competitiveness, and to promote trade diversification by supporting the development of value chains based on SLM production systems. Box 7. Trade sector priority SLM bottle necks and interventions 2727 25 2.3 Geographical coverage of the Framework Box 8: Criteria for ecosystem/ zone selection Three factors determine the comparative advantage (development domain) of locations across Uganda: (i) agro-ecological potential; (ii) access to markets; and (iii) population density (World Bank, 2008). Selection of the land degradation hotspots took into account these three comparative advantages of the locations across the country. The criteria used for the selection of the specific land degradation hotspot are reported below. 1. Uganda’s drylands/ Cattle corridor Generally the area is characterized by low population density, low market access and low agro-ecological potential. However, in relative terms, Uganda’s drylands particularly the “Cattle Corridor” bears the greatest impacts of land degradation - land use trends show an increase in deforestation, reduced fallow periods, overgrazing, bush-burning, etc. SLM trends on the other hand indicate generally very low adoption. In addition, the area experiences erratic rainfall patterns and drought is a recurrent phenomenon. Ultimately, areas characterized by low rainfall and high temperatures, heavy land use and lack of conservation measures succumb to desertification/ effects of climate change and variability 2. Uganda’s Highlands [Southwestern & Eastern Highlands] The highlands are characterized by high population density, high market access, and high agro-ecological potential. Land scarcity is extreme in the densely populated region. Land use trends show a substantial increase in cultivated areas but given the fragile ecosystem of the highlands this has lead to increased soil erosion. Settlements are also on the increase. SLM trends on the other hand indicate declining fallow periods, destruction of fallow strips and soil bunds. High population density has lead to extensive land fragmentation; a problem for sustainable land management. High population areas are also often associated with poverty and the need for improved management systems to increase food security. 3. Eastern and North ern Uganda Eastern and Northern Uganda are characterized by high population density, high market access, and high agro ecological potential. Generally, the Eastern region has inherently low soil fertility and nutrient depletion is extreme where there is agricultural intensification. Land use trends show reduced fallow periods, deforestation, and extensive drainage of wetlands. SLM trends indicate very low adoption. Northern Uganda experienced a 2 decade insurgency which seriously impacted land management and resulted in unprecedented poverty levels. Currently, the area is undergoing resettlement with rapid ecosystems dynamics where conflicts in land use is increasing and environmental degradation is enhanced. Eastern and Northern Uganda contain the poorest households in Uganda, yet poor households have less ability to invest in soil and water conservation measures 4. Lake Victoria Crescent/ Basin The Lake Victoria Crescent is characterized by high population density, high market access, and high agro ecological potential. High temperatures and intense rainstorms subject the soils in the region to climate induced degradation. Land use trends show an increase in area under cultivation but with unsustainable land management practices e.g. continuous cultivation due to increasing population pressure; deforestation; and decreasing wetlands Soil nutrient depletion and soil erosion are the major forms of land degradation in Uganda and therefore commonly used as indicators for land degradation (World Bank, 2008). The spatial distribution of land degradation in the country has been determined by considering both biophysical and socio economic factors. The biophysical factors include topographical characteristics such as slope, elevation, rainfall, land cover, climate and soil erodibility (Voortman et al., 2000), while socio-economic factors include population pressure, poverty, land tenure, agricultural commercialization, access to markets, among others (World Bank, 2008). On that basis, four (4) land degradation hotspots across the country were identified, namely: Southwestern and Eastern Highlands, Lake Victoria Crescent Region, the Cattle Corridor, Eastern and Northern Uganda (Box 8). 2828 26 2.3.1 The Cattle Corridor Figure 1. Uganda’s Cattle Corridor (Source: Land Resources Database, NARL – Kawanda) Box 9. SLM issues in the Cattle Corridor Why is the zone important? • covers approximately one third of the total land area in Uganda • holds over 80% of the national cattle herd • livestock production contributes 7.5% to the NGDP and 38% of the agricultural GDP Land degradation impacts & drivers Decline in the carrying capacity of land and therefore low productivity; the main driver being overgrazing which has led to • soil compaction • erosion (particularly gully erosion) • emergence of low-value grass species & vegetation Additionally, there is extensive deforestation/ tree cutting for charcoal production. The zone is very susceptible to impacts of climate change and variability SLM practices with potential • Fallow strips • Community based participatory watershed management • Construction of SWC structures [contour bunds or channels] • Water harvesting • Afforestation and reforestation On average, it receives 500 – 1,000 mm of rainfall annually and drought is a common recurrent phenomenon. The area accounts/ holds over 80% of the national cattle herd. Livestock production contributes 7.5% to the national GDP and 38% to the agricultural GDP (FAO Yearbook, 1994). With a potentially available rangeland area of 7.5 million hectares and an average stoking rate of 1.82 ha per cow, the country has a potential of grazing over 4.0 million cows for meat production. However, the utilization of rangelands for sustainable agricultural (crop & livestock) production faces severe limitations and challenges. The major constraints to agricultural production include low and declining soil fertility, poor management of important resources like pastures, water, and soils. In general, Uganda’s Cattle Corridor/ dry-lands bear the greatest impacts of land degradation. The situation in this area is aggravated by frequent and severe drought, lack of viable alternative livelihoods systems and employment, poor access to information and credit, poor infrastructure and in some cases lack of political participation. Uganda’s “Cattle Corridor” stretches from the northeast through central to the southwest of the country (Fig. 1). It generally traverses 25 districts with total area coverage of 84,000 km2, which is approximately over one third of the total 241,000 km2 land area in Uganda. 2929 27 Overgrazing has led to soil compaction, erosion (particularly gully erosion) and the emergence of low-value grass species and vegetation with subsequent declines in the carrying capacity of land and therefore low productivity. Other features characterizing the drylands of Uganda include “export” of wood fuel (especially charcoal), seasonal fires, communal land ownership, communal conflicts, livelihoods dominated by rearing livestock, marginal productivity for arable farming, frequent food emergencies, squalor and endemic abject poverty. All these trigger and drive poverty, overuse of land and damage to its recoil capacity, eventually manifesting in negative physical and social characteristics. The vision for this area therefore is – improved water supply/ availability to pastoral communities, increased vegetative/ biomass cover and reduced resource use conflicts. 2.3.2 Uganda’s Highlands The highlands occupy around 25 percent of the country’s land area and contain 40 percent of the country’s population. They are found in the South western, Eastern, Western and North eastern regions (Figure 2.). Those with steep slopes, such as Kabale, Kisoro, Bundibugyo, Mbale and Kapchorwa, are the most seriously affected by erosion. • Contains 40% of the country’s population • Highest population density 270 people km-2 • Extensive soil erosion and frequent fatal & destructive landslides • Land degradation impacts & drivers • Declining soil productivity due to extreme levels of soil erosion driven mainly by steep slopes, population pressure, deforestation, vulnerable soils, poor farming methods e.g. reduced fallows SLM practices with potential • Terraces • Improved fallows • Community based participatory watershed management • Construction of SWC structures [contour bunds or channels] • Afforestaion; reforestation and agroforestry Figure 2. Soil erosion hotspots in Uganda (Source: World Bank, 2008) Box 10. SLM issues in the highlands Why is the zone important? 3030 28 Population densities are, in general, high in these areas, averaging to about 270 people km-2 (NEMA, 2001/2002) and most land, including marginal lands, are under cultivation. Furthermore, fallowing is practiced by less than 10% of the households and the average fallow period has declined from 1.4 years in the late 1980s to 0.6 years in the late 1990s (World Bank, 2008). A key issue in the highlands is nutrient depletion of soils. Nutrient depletion is most intense in East Africa because of high outputs of nutrients in harvested products, erosion and the relatively high inherent fertility of the soils. Losses of up to 130 kg N, 44 kg P and 25 kg K per ha per year have been reported in the East African highlands (Smaling et al., 1997). Inorganic fertilizers are not used but organic manures from homesteads are applied on bananas. Crop harvests and soil erosion are the major causes of nutrient losses at the crop level. There is as yet little evidence that the increases in population densities have led to sufficient adoption of land management practices to offset worsening erosion and nutrient depletion (Nkonya et al. 2002). The vision for the highlands therefore is – improved land management practices leading to reduced soil erosion. 2.3.3 Eastern and Northern Uganda Eastern Uganda covers districts in the traditional Busoga and Tororo/ Bukedi area. Generally, the Eastern region (Figure 3) has inherently low soil fertility and nutrient depletion is extreme where there is agricultural intensification. Land use trends show reduced fallow periods, and increased deforestation and drainage of wetlands. Wetlands drainage has reached alarming levels in eastern Uganda, where the region ranks highest with 20% of wetlands destroyed, compared to an average of 2.9% for the central, northern, and western regions (NEMA, 2001/02). Box 11. SLM issues in eastern and northern Uganda Why is the zone important? • Recovering from civil strife • High potential of being a grain basket for the country & contributing to the GDP Land degradation impacts & drivers • Inherently low soil fertility in eastern Uganda and extreme nutrient depletion where there is agricultural intensification • Increase in flood and drought events due to wetland reclamation and climate change • Rapid ecosystem dynamics due to resettlement in northern Uganda SLM practices with potential • Conservation agriculture • Improved fallows • Community based participatory watershed management • Construction of SWC structures [contour bunds or channels] • Afforestation; reforestation and agro-forestry Figure 3. Map of Uganda highlighting Eastern and Northern regions 31 31 29 SLM trends indicate very low adoption of best practices. Northern Uganda (Figure 3) experienced a two decade insurgency which seriously impacted land management and resulted in unprecedented poverty levels. Currently, the area is undergoing resettlement with rapid ecosystems dynamics where conflicts in land use is increasing and environmental degradation is enhanced. Eastern and Northern Uganda have the poorest households in Uganda; yet poor households have less ability to invest in soil and water conservation measures The vision for eastern and northern Uganda therefore is – improved land management to enhance and maintain soil fertility for increased productivity. 2.3.4 The Lake Victoria Crescent Lake Victoria, with a surface area of about 68,800 km2 is the second largest freshwater body in the world, and it’s a trans boundary resource shared by Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. It has a catchment area of 194,000 km2 with the catchment/ basin in Uganda covering about 31,040 km2 (16%) (Fig.4). The population density in the basin estimated at 180 per km2 is higher than the national average. Development Domains in Uganda Box 12. SLM issues in the Lake Victoria Crescent Why is the zone important? • Most urbanized region and therefore with high population • Extensive pressure on land and lake based resources • Point and non-point pollution of Lake Victoria • Land degradation impacts & drivers • Deforestation through increased demand for charcoal, firewood & construction timber • Reduced fallows • Encroachment/ Conversion of wetlands/ sediment filter for farming and house construction SLM practices with potential • Improved fallows • Community based participatory watershed management • Construction of SWC structures [contour bunds or channels] • Alternative livelihoods e.g. high value crops, zero grazing, etc. • Afforestation; reforestation and agro-forestry Figure 4 The Lake Victoria Crescent (Source: World Bank, 2008). 3232 30 High population growth, coupled with poverty and unsustain able agricultural practices have increased pressure on land. Small-scale farmers have resorted to cultivating in areas with steep slopes, riverbanks, forests, and wetlands. Their activ ities have contributed to increased soil erosion, decreased nutrient retention in soils and wetlands, and thus increased mineral and biogenic sedimentation in Lake Victoria. Over-grazing has also contributed significantly to soil erosion. The highest erosion risks are fields cultivated with annual crops, and rangelands on bare hills. The average annual soil loss is highest on annual crops (85 ton ha-1), followed by degraded rangelands (45 ton ha-1), banana (28 ton ha-1) and coffee (27 ton ha-1). The estimated economic value of the soil lost due to erosion in the LVB is approximately US$ 10 million per year (Lake Victoria Environment Management Project II Appraisal Document (PAD), 2009). Extensive wetlands around Lake Victoria are being destroyed or degraded through conversion to agricultural land, excavation for sand and clay, and use as disposal sites. It is estimated that about 75% of Lake Victoria’s wetlands area has been affected significantly by human activity, and about 13% is severely damaged. Deforestation in the basin has been severe over the last few decades, including loss of high altitude forests, riverine forests, and lowland forest/ woodlands in then national parks and reserves. The loss in permanent vegetation cover has accelerated runoff and increased exposure of soil to sheet and gully erosion. The remaining forests, woodlands and trees in the savanna systems and on-farm across the basin are facing severe pressure due to increasing demands of the growing population for biomass energy, timber, etc. Valuable indigenous trees, wildlife, and non-wood forest products, including diverse medicinal plants are threatened. The regional vision for the Lake Victoria Basin is “A prosperous population living in a healthy and sustainably managed environment providing equitable opportunities and benefits” (LVEMP II PAD, 2009) 2.4 Commitment to the U-SIF SLM Uganda Government’s main development objective is poverty eradication. Therefore the value of addressing land degradation to Uganda can be measured in accordance with its relevancy and contribution to this broad objective. The Government of Uganda has, since ratifying the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in 1997, progressively undertaken efforts to mainstream and support initiatives aimed at adapting and scaling up SLM practices in Uganda. The GoU further recognizes land degradation as one critical threat to underpinning sustainable growth in agriculture and natural resources productivity. This is evidenced by a growing consensus in Uganda that addressing issues of SLM is inextricably tied to the reduction of poverty and achieving food security and environmental sustainability. However, past efforts have failed to comprehensively address land degradation due to several critical barriers including, a narrow, project-specific or at times ad hoc approach to the problem, which does not address the cross-sectoral nature of land degradation. The other critical barrier has been inadequate coordination and cooperation among the different sectors in government whose mandates have a direct bearing on land degradation. Cognizant of this, Government noted that SLM is a wide and cross cutting issue involving and requiring joint and collective interventions whose key elements may fall under the mandate of different ministries/ sectors. It is in this context that the GoU through its core related Ministries, namely the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF), the Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE), the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MEMD) and the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (MLHUD), undertook to collectively pursue objectives of mainstreaming work on SLM as an integral and critical component of the new agriculture drive as detailed in the NEPAD’s Comprehensive African Agriculture Development (CAADP) and the NEPAD’s Environmental Action Plan (EAP). In this regard MAAIF, MWE, MEMD, MLHUD concluded an Inter-Ministerial Cooperation Framework (IMCF) on SLM on 3rd October, 2007. The IMCF aims at enhancing collaboration and joint action between the sectors in developing and implementing a Country SLM SIF. Due to mandates such as wild life protection, protected areas, bio-trade which in one way or another are related to SLM, a Technical Working Committee (TWC) established by the IMCF brought on board Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry (MTTI). 33 33 FRAMEWORK DESCRIPTION 3.0 Taking into account the visions, priorities, gaps and bottlenecks identified above for each sector and zone the U-SIF SLM includes the following goal , objectives and results:. 3.1 Goal The overall goal of the U-SIF SLM is to ensure that key sectors are cooperating to improve natural resources based livelihoods and other ecosystem services 3.2 Development Objective The development objective is to strengthen sector cooperation in order to halt, reverse and prevent land degradation/ desertification and mitigate the effects of climate change and variability 3.3 Activity Themes The Uganda SIF SLM has five thematic areas under which discrete activities are grouped. These activities are/ will be funded from various sources and implemented by various actors. The five themes are: (i) Supporting on-the ground activities for scaling up SLM; (ii) Strengthening the enabling institutional and policy environment for SLM; (iii) Strengthening commercial and advisory services and alternative livelihood options; (iv) Supporting SLM research and dissemination of best-bet technologies; (v) Improving and strengthening SLM knowledge management, M&E and information dissemination. Interventions under Theme 1, Theme 2 and Theme 3 will be implemented and concentrated in the selected micro catchments in the four zones in a manner similar to operations of the “Millennium Villages” i.e. the micro-catchments will be the operational areas for all interventions. It is anticipated that this approach will promote synergies, complementarities and create a greater impact which can easily be scaled out to other areas. Working with same groups will reduce operational costs e.g. in formation of groups and group dynamics. Additionally, the 10 year U-SIF SLM interventions/ operations will be split into two phases: Phase I covering the first 6 years (2010-2015) and Phase II covering 2016-2020. The phasing approach will enable mid-term assessment and bringing on board emerging issues. 3.3.1 Theme 1: Supporting on-the-ground activities for scaling up SLM This theme aims at scaling-up proven technologies/ SLM best practices (Box 14) in the four priority agro-ecological zones or target fragile high risk areas experiencing accelerated land .cte ,noitelped tneirtun ,noisore lios fo mrof ni noitadarged There exists a wide range of experiences on SLM management techniques/ technologies that are ready for scaling up in the appropriate farming systems, such as erosion control through terracing, mulching and contour ploughing, agroforestry, conservation agriculture, integrated nutrient management (INM), etc. Under the micro-watershed management approach the capacities of the communities will be developed to plan and implement participatory micro-watershed management plans and overall watershed management. The communities will be empowered to rehabilitate degraded sites and micro watersheds. Transition to catchment based water resources management will be a major driving principal under this theme. Conventional soil and water management practices, integrated nutrients management, conservation agriculture, etc. will be scaled Framework Description 3434 33 up in the priority zones. Incentive mechanisms based on Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCM), carbon mitigation funds, etc will be promoted. Additionally, this component will support the promotion of energy saving stoves [with efficiency improvements of 30-50% over traditional charcoal stoves] in homes and institutions; efficient kilns in charcoal production to improve efficiency; [this will reduce per capita consumption and thus reduce biomass extraction]; renewable energy e.g. gasification for homes and institutions and overall improvement in biomass management at the grassroots level. To promote sustainability of this intervention, local artisans will be trained in the fabrication of energy saving stoves and charcoal production kilns. Establishment of woodlots will be promoted to improve vegetative cover and reduce pressure/ demand on existing forests. Theme 1 will further promote water supply to pastoral communities by promoting construction of rainwater harvesting ferro-cement tanks for homes and institutions. Valley tanks and check dams will be constructed to harvest runoff from roads, large rocks, etc. to provide water for domestic and livestock use. Small scale irrigation practices will be promoted via demonstrations on water/ run-off harvested and harnessing of water from permanent and semi permanent sources. Micro-projects have been proposed under Theme 1 as a vehicle to implement/ scale out strategic interventions. Micro projects or sub-projects will be determined and implemented in a participatory manner with the communities and the line institutions providing technical backstopping. The micro projects will address strategic interventions/ activities that cannot be handled by the communities on their own e.g. construction of check dams to prevent massive soil erosion; demarcation and fencing off sensitize/ highly vulnerable areas, etc. A summary of the most common best practices/ technologies available in Uganda and other areas in the region for scaling up is reported in Box 13. Table 1 summarizes indicative costs of selected SLM technologies/ interventions to be promoted under Theme 1. It is important to note that the indicative costs do not include other overhead costs e.g. training of trainers and other operational expenses by extension agents. Detailed schedule of activities, implementation arrangements/ responsible sectors/ lead institutions and costs are shown in Annex VII. The budget/ estimated costs for Theme 1 is US$ 124,475,000 3535 34 I. Practices to improve SWC • Community based participatory watershed management • Construction of SWC structures [contour bunds, channels, live/ grass contour bunds in low lying areas or foot slopes, terraces] • Conservation agriculture [minimum soil disturbance, cover crops, mulching, judicious crop rotations] II. Practices to restore and maintain soil fertility • Integrated Nutrient Management • Adapted leguminous cover crops for improved fallows [biological nitrogen fixation] • Compost making and application • Agro-forestry III. Water for production & domestic use • Water harvesting structures/ valley tanks and dams; ferro cement tanks • Small scale irrigation • Run-off harvesting IV. Practices to increase forest cover [afforestation; reforestation] or reduce pressure on forests • Biomass management (Agro-forestry & afforestation; reforestation) • Energy saving stoves • Efficient kilns for charcoal production • Gasification • Woodlots V. Alternative livelihoods • Non Wood Forest Products (NWFP) • Livestock-based products e.g. zero grazing, ruminants • High value crops e.g. fruits & vegetables (e.g. pineapple, and apples for the highlands) Box 13. SLM best practices/ technologies available in Uganda and other areas in the region for scaling-up 3636 P ra ct ic e (t op p ri or it ie s on ly ) E st ab li sh m en t C os ts ( U S $ ) A n n u al M ai n te n an ce c os ts Ta rg et s in t h e 4 P ri or it y zo n es ( Ta rg et s p er z on e) o r S p ec if ic z on e B en ef it ( ec on om ic , e co sy st em , c li m at e) D em os E st ab li sh ed w it h in ce n ti ve s E st ab li sh ed vo lu n ta ri ly / st im u la te d th ro u gh a d vi ce IN M $ 4 0 0 / h a $ 3 0 0 / h a 1 0 0 0 h a 1 0 ,0 0 0 h a 2 ,5 0 0 h a S h o rt – t er m : H ig h er p ro d u ct iv it y w h en c o m b in ed o n t h e p lo t; s o il n u tr ie n t m in in g r ed u ce d ; y ie ld s in cr ea se d ; C li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n m ea su re / r is k s re d u ce d . L o n g t er m S o il c ar b o n i n cr ea se d C o n to u r b u n d s $2 8 0 / km $ 5 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 k m 1 0 ,0 0 0 k m 2 ,5 0 0 k m S h o rt t er m C h ec k s th e ve lo ci ty o f ru n o ff , c o n se rv es in s it u m o is tu re , in cr ea se s g ro u n d w at er r ec h ar g e; y ie ld s / ra n g el an d s im p ro ve d L o n g t er m Im p ro ve s ec o sy st em s se rv ic es G ra ss c o n to u rs / b u n d s $1 2 0 / km $ 4 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 k m 1 0 ,0 0 0 k m 2 ,5 0 0 k m S h o rt t er m C h ec k s th e ve lo ci ty o f ru n o ff , c o n se rv es in s it u m o is tu re , in cr ea se s g ro u n d w at er r ec h ar g e; y ie ld s im p ro ve d L o n g t er m Im p ro ve s ec o sy st em s se rv ic es In te rc ro p p in g $9 0 / h a $ 4 5 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 0 ,0 0 0 h a 5 ,0 0 0 h a S h o rt t er m Im p ro ve s so il f er ti li ty , r ed u ce s so il a n d w at er lo ss a n d im p ro ve s p ro d u ct io n / yi el d s o f m ai n c ro p ; C li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n m ea su re / r is k s re d u ce d . L o n g t er m S o il c ar b o n i n cr ea se d ; e co sy st em s er vi ce s im p ro ve d M u lc h in g $ 2 5 0 / h a $ 1 0 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 0 ,0 0 0 h a 5 ,0 0 0 h a S h o rt – te rm : C h ec k s an d m in im iz es s o il e ro si o n m ai n ly t h ro u g h re d u ce d t il la g e p ra ct ic es a n d im p ro ve d s o il c o ve r; I m p ro ve s ch em ic al an d p h ys ic al p ro p er ti es o f th e so il ; C o n tr o ls w ee d s; C li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n m ea su re / r is k s re d u ce d . L o n g t er m S o il c ar b o n i n cr ea se d ; ec o sy st em s er vi ce s im p ro ve d C o n se rv at io n A g ri cu lt u re $ 3 0 0 / h a $ 2 0 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 0 ,0 0 0 h a 5 ,0 0 0 h a S h o rt – te rm : C h ec k s an d m in im iz es s o il e ro si o n m ai n ly t h ro u g h re d u ce d o r n o t il la g e p ra ct ic es a n d im p ro ve d s o il c o ve r; I m p ro ve s ch em ic al a n d p h ys ic al p ro p er ti es o f th e so il ; C o n tr o ls w ee d s; Im p ro ve s w at er in fi lt ra ti o n r at e an d c o n se rv es s o il m o is tu re ; I m p ro ve s so il fe rt il it y; c o st e ff ec ti ve a n d t im el y cr o p e st ab li sh m en t. C li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n m ea su re / p ra ct ic e L o n g t er m : B u il d s so il o rg an ic m at te r (S O M ) co n te n t ; I m p ro ve s ec o sy st em s se rv ic es A g ro fo re st ry $ 2 0 0 / h a $ 1 0 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 0 ,0 0 0 h a 5 ,0 0 0 h a S h o rt t er m : I m p ro ve s s o il f er ti li ty , r ed u ce d e ro si o n ; i m p ro ve d y ie ld s an d s h o rt t er m b en ef it s o f in te rc ro p p in g ; I m p ro ve d n u tr it io n ; i m p ro ve s in co m es t h ro u g h s al es /p ro d u ct io n o f h ig h v al u e cr o p s ; C li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n a n d m it ig at io n m ea su re / p ra ct ic e L o n g t er m : P ro d u ct iv e tr ee s p ec ie ; im p ro ve d e co sy st em s er vi ce s W o o d lo ts $1 7 0 / h a $ 1 0 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 0 ,0 0 0 h a 5 ,0 0 0 h a S h o rt t er m : R ed u ce d d em an d o n a va il ab le b io m a ss ; R ed u ce d d ef o re st at io n ; R E D D ; R eh ab il it at io n o f d eg ra d ed l an d s; w in d b re ak ; C li m at e ch an g e m it ig at io n m ea su re L o n g t er m : I m p ro ve s ec o sy st em s er vi ce s; R E D D ; l o n g t er m b en ef it s th ro u g h p ro d u ct iv e tr ee s p ec ie s Ta bl e 2: T ar ge ts , i nd ic at iv e co st s an d be ne fi ts o f se le ct ed S LM p ra ct ic es 1 1 S o u rc e o f co st s: L a n d U se M an a g e m e n t – L a ke V ic to ri a E n vi ro n m e n t M a n a g e m e n t P ro je ct a n d S o il s D at ab a se – N A R O K aw a n d a a n d M A A IF – D ir e ct o ra te o f C ro p R e so u rc e s 3737 P ra ct ic e (t op p ri or it ie s on ly ) E st ab li sh m en t C os ts ( U S $ ) A n n u al M ai n te n an ce c os ts Ta rg et s in t h e 4 P ri or it y zo n es ( Ta rg et s p er z on e) o r S p ec if ic z on e B en ef it ( ec on om ic , e co sy st em , c li m at e) D em os E st ab li sh ed w it h in ce n ti ve s E st ab li sh ed vo lu n ta ri ly / st im u la te d th ro u gh a d vi ce Te rr ac in g $7 0 0 / h a $ 2 5 0 / h a 1 0 0 h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 5 0 h a S h o rt – t er m : C h an g e in s lo p e to r ed u ce s so il lo ss , r u n o ff a n d in cr ea se ra in fa ll in fi lt ra ti o n a n d y ie ld ; i m p ro ve s so il f er ti li ty L o n g t er m : I m p ro ve s ec o sy st em s er vi ce s R eh ab il it at io n / re cl am at io n o f d eg ra d ed w at er sh ed s & si te s $1 9 0 5 0 0 / h a (d ep en d in g o n s ta te o f si te ) $3 5 1 5 0 / h a S tr at eg ic in te rv en ti o n s: 2 0 0 h a / zo n e S h o rt t er m : R eh ab il it at io n o f d eg ra d ed l an d s: g u ll y re h ab il it at io n b y ch ec k d am s, r ev eg et at io n o f b ar e h il ls , fi ll in g a n d r ev eg at at io n o f cl ay , sa n d , s to n e an d m u rr u m q u ar ri es / m in es H ea lt h – r ed u ce d p re va le n ce o f m al ar ia v ia r ed u ce d m o sq u it o b re ed in g si te s (r eh ab il it at ed p it s/ ex ca va ti o n s i t es t h at s er ve a s b re ed in g g ro u n d s fo r m o sq u it o es ) L o n g – te rm : I m p ro ve s ec o sy st em s er vi ce s S h al lo w w el ls $3 ,0 0 0 / u n it $ 4 0 0 / u n it 5 0 u n it s 5 0 0 u n it s 1 2 5 u n it s S h o rt – te rm : C o n se rv at io n m ea su re f o r li ve st o ck w at er in g , a ls o p ro vi d es c le an d ri n ki n g w at er f o r sc h o o ls / in st it u ti o n s an d d o m es ti c u se H ea lt h : r ed u ce d in ci d en ce o f w at er b o rn e d is ea se s (d ia rr h ea ; t yp h o id et c) t h ro u g h p ro vi si o n o f cl ea n d ri n ki n g w at er H ou se ho ld r ai n w at er h ar ve st in g /F er ro c em en t ta nk $ 5 0 0 / u n it ( 2 ,0 0 0 to 3 ,0 0 0 l it er s ca p ac it y) $ 1 0 0 / u n it 1 0 0 u n it s 1 ,0 0 0 u n it s 2 5 0 u n it s S h o rt t er m : C o n se rv at io n m ea su re t o co ll ec t an d r et ai n r o o f ru n o ff , ea sy t o co n st ru ct a n d m at er ia ls r ea d il y av ai la b le , a ls o p ro vi d es c le an w at er f o r d o m es ti c u se H ea lt h : r ed u ce d in ci d en ce o f w at er b o rn e d is ea se s (d ia rr h ea ; t yp h o id et c) t h ro u g h p ro vi si o n o f cl ea n d ri n ki n g w at er In st it ut io na l ra in w at er h ar ve st in g /F er ro c em en t ta nk $ 5 ,0 0 0 / u n it (2 0 ,0 0 0 t o 3 0 ,0 0 0 li te rs . C ap ac it y) $ 2 0 0 / u n it 5 0 u n it s 5 0 0 u n it s 1 2 5 u n it s S h o rt t er m : C o n se rv at io n m ea su re t o co ll ec t an d r et ai n r o o f ru n o ff , E a sy t o co n st ru ct a n d M at er ia ls r ea d il y av ai la b le , a ls o p ro vi d es c le an d ri n ki n g w at er f o r sc h o o ls / in st it u ti o n s H ea lt h : r ed u ce d in ci d en ce o f w at er b o rn e d is ea se s (d ia rr h ea ; t yp h o id et c) t h ro u g h p ro vi si o n o f cl ea n d ri n ki n g w at er R u n o ff / W at er h ar ve st in g f ro m ro ad s, p at h s et c $ 3 0 0 / h a $ 1 0 0 / h a 1 ,0 0 0 h a 2 0 ,0 0 0 h a 5 ,0 0 0 h a S h o rt – te rm : C h ec k s an d m in im iz es s o il e ro si o n m ai n ly t h ro u g h r ed u ce d o ve rl an d w at er f lo w v o lu m e an d v el o ci ty ; In cr ea se s in fi lt ra ti o n a n d u n d er g ro u n d w at er r ec h ar g e; In cr ea se s yi el d s; r ed u ce s m o is tu re s tr es s; C li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n m ea su re / ri sk s re d u ce d . L o n g t er m E co sy st em s er vi ce s im p ro ve d La rg e s ur fa ce ru no ff h ar ve st in g re se rv oi rs (m ai nl y ta rg et s ca tt le co rr id or ) $ 5 ,0 0 0 / u n it $ 5 0 0 / u n it 1 0 0 u n it s (3 5 0 M 3 li n ed w it h H D P E d am li n er s/ v al le y ta n k s o r sm al l ch ec k d am s) 2 0 0 u n it s 5 0 u n it s S h o rt – t er m : E co n o m ic al / su it ab le w h er e so il s ar e h ig h ly p er m ea b le w it h s ig n if ic an t w at er s ee p ag e lo ss es ; d am li n er s g u ar an te e h ig h w at er re te n ti o n ; s m al l s ca le ir ri g at io n f ea si b le H ea lt h : r ed u ce d in ci d en ce o f w at er b o rn e d is ea se s (d ia rr h ea ; t yp h o id et c) t h ro u g h p ro vi si o n o f cl ea n d ri n ki n g w at er H ou se ho ld e ne rg y sa vi ng s to ve s $ 2 5 / u n it $ 1 0 / u n it 5 ,0 0 0 u n it s 2 0 ,0 0 0 u n it s 5 ,0 0 0 u n it s S h o rt – te rm : M it ig at io n m ea su re t o co m b at v eg et at io n / fu el w o o d d ep le ti o n L o n g t er m : E co sy st em s er vi ce s im p ro ve d 3838 P ra ct ic e (t op p ri or it ie s on ly ) E st ab li sh m en t C os ts ( U S $ ) A n n u al M ai n te n an ce c os ts Ta rg et s in t h e 4 P ri or it y zo n es ( Ta rg et s p er z on e) o r S p ec if ic z on e B en ef it ( ec on om ic , e co sy st em , c li m at e) D em os E st ab li sh ed w it h in ce n ti ve s E st ab li sh ed vo lu n ta ri ly / st im u la te d th ro u gh a d vi ce In st it u ti o n al en er g y sa vi n g st o ve s $ 4 0 0 / u n it $ 5 0 / u n it 1 0 0 u n it s 1 ,0 0 0 u n it s 2 5 0 u n it s S h o rt – t er m : M it ig at io n m ea su re t o co m b at v eg et at io n /f u el w o o d d ep le ti o n L o n g t er m : E co sy st em s er vi c e s im p ro ve d E ff ic ie n t ki ln s fo r ch ar co al p ro d u ct io n (m ai n ly t ar g et s ca tt le c o rr id o r) $ 2 ,0 0 0 / u n it $ 5 0 0 / u n it 1 0 0 u n it s 5 0 0 u n it s 5 0 u n it s S h o rt – t er m : M it ig at io n m ea su re t o co m b at v eg et at io n /f u el w o o d d ep le ti o n L o n g – te rm : E co sy st em s er vi ce s im p ro ve d Notes: 1. Demonstrations will be financed in full for a period of at least 3 years (per site) and thereafter left to the beneficiaries/ community to manage 2. Incentives will be provided at a rate of at least 20-30% of the technology costs at the time of establishment and thereafter left to the beneficiaries/ community to manage. 3. Voluntary/ stimulated through advice – all costs solely met by the farmer/ community 39 38 The other main thrusts of this theme are: • Strengthening institutional capacity (at all levels) to plan, implement, monitor SLM interventions • Developing capacity of local institutions to enforce bye laws and regulations in SLM • Establishing a platform that provides a forum for strengthening collaboration, sharing information, joint implementation of activities; clear separation of roles and responsibilities among others. • Improving land tenure security • Mainstreaming gender issues in SLM • Promoting avenues to reduce conflicts on natural resource use – especially in the cattle corridor/ semi-arid areas • Delivery of services to mobile pastoralists/ communities. • Improved coordination and advocacy for SLM Activities under Theme 2 are estimated to cost US$ 62,570,000 3.3.3 Theme 3: Strengthening commercial and advisory services for SLM and alternative liveli hood options Sustainable trade means ensuring continuous and stable supplies, reducing inefficient and wasteful use of resources, reducing pressure on the land resource and promoting use of sustainable production practices. Identifying the links between trade and the productive sectors of the economy notably agriculture and environment is important in establishing the impact of trade on land degradation. The process is also mirrored onto the trade priorities as defined in the Action Matrix of the DTIS report, presenting five major thrusts to constitute this theme: i) Promoting trade diversification. The emphasis is on trade diversification with due consideration of the impacts of trade on land degradation and also the SLM value added to trade development. Diversification by; supporting value chains which do not increase pressure on the land resource (e.g. NWFP, pineapples, vanilla), supporting value chains that may contribute to increased food security and improve the trade balance through food import substitution (e.g. maize, rice, cassava), and supporting development of non commodity value chains (livestock and related products, and services such as eco-tourism); (ii) Aligning production for trade to climate change by promoting the use of SLM practices in the production of the key commodity products (coffee, cotton, tea) and adaptation practices that could make these value chains more resilient to climate change impacts thence ensuring sustainable supplies; 3.3.2 Theme 2: Strengthening the enabling institutional and policy environment for SLM This theme will strengthen the enabling environment required for effective scaling up of SLM. This will include mainstreaming of SLM into sector (DSIPs), national development frameworks (NDP), district development plans (DDPs) and district environment action plans (DEAPs) and Sub-county Environment Action Plans (SEAPs). Interventions for adaptation and mitigating the effects of climate change will also be targeted under this theme. The capacity for climate monitoring will be strengthened and old climatic data will be collected from up-country stations, analysed, archived and disseminated. The implementation and up-grading of the NAPA to cover medium to long-term national climate change adaptation will be supported under this theme. To reduce risks and vulnerability to climate change impacts, early warning systems (drought; floods; food security/ forecasts) and emergency response plans will be developed and implemented under this theme. Development of land use plans will be a major activity under Theme 2. Outputs from Theme 4 (Land Suitability Mapping) will be used to develop Land Use Plans and it is anticipated that by the end of the second phase (2020) 75% of the country will have been covered and appropriate land use plans developed. The harmonization of polices and regulatory frameworks in support of SLM will be carried out under this theme. Each sector will be responsible for updating policies and regulatory frameworks within the sector and thereafter the policies will be harmonized by a joint multi-sector team of experts. Local institutions will be empowered to enforce bye-laws and regulations in SLM. Another aspect of the enabling environment is institutional coordination. The capacity of UNCCD National Focal Point Office will be strengthened and an SLM Secretariat established. The overall coordination and management framework will be established to oversee the implementation of the SLM agenda. The Inter-Ministerial National Steering Committee (NSC) that provides oversight on all SLM activities, Inter-Ministerial Technical Working Committee (IMTC) that provides technical guidance, and the SLM Country Platform that brings together all SLM stakeholders will be supported under this theme. The capacity of implementing institutions; participating NGOs, LGs, etc will be strengthened. 4040 Most of the Land Resources and INM studies will be carried out by the National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO). The National Agricultural Research Organization is responsible for all agricultural research in Uganda and operates under the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries (MAAIF). NARO’s Research Strategy notes the environmental challenges that face Uganda and, in particular, soil degradation, mining of nutrient resources, deforestation, and desertification. It recognizes the need to demonstrate that land better managed will not only yield better crop/ livestock and financial returns but also contribute to sustainable livelihoods and environmental quality. Climate change adaptation information will be generated to develop climate change scenarios and establish costs/ implications of climate change. The climatic data is required for managing climate risk to ensure that SLM gains are durable, and to harness synergies between adaptation and mitigation. Land degradation assessment studies, under this theme, will provide information on the magnitude, effects and monetary value of land degradation. This information is vital for planning purposes. Crop simulation models will be used to investigate the effects that climate change and variability will have on agriculture under a variety of potential scenarios. The potential scenarios will give researchers opportunities to plan future strategies including adaptation and mitigation based on the most likely outcome. Activities under Theme 4 are estimated at US$ 29,880,000 39 Strengthening institutional capacity (at all levels) to plan, Developing capacity of local institutions to enforce bye Establishing a platform that provides a forum for strengthening collaboration, sharing information, joint implementation of activities; clear separation of roles and Promoting avenues to reduce conflicts on natural resource use – especially in the cattle corridor/ semi-arid areas Delivery of services to mobile pastoralists/ communities. Activities under Theme 2 are estimated to cost US$ Strengthening commercial and advisory services for SLM and alternative liveli Sustainable trade means ensuring continuous and stable supplies, reducing inefficient and wasteful use of resources, reducing pressure on the land resource and promoting use of sustainable production practices. Identifying the links between trade and the productive sectors of the economy notably agriculture and environment is important in establishing the impact of trade on land degradation. The process is also mirrored onto the trade priorities as defined in the Action Matrix of the DTIS report, presenting five major i) Promoting trade diversification. The emphasis is on trade diversification with due consideration of the impacts of trade on land degradation and also the SLM value added to trade development. Diversification by; supporting value chains which do not increase pressure on the land resource (e.g. NWFP, pineapples, vanilla), supporting value chains that may contribute to increased food security and improve the trade balance through food import substitution (e.g. maize, rice, cassava), and supporting development of non commodity value chains (livestock and related products, and services (ii) Aligning production for trade to climate change by promoting the use of SLM practices in the production of the key commodity products (coffee, cotton, tea) and adaptation practices that could make these value chains more resilient to climate change impacts thence ensuring sustainable supplies; (iii) Build capacity and facilitate standardization for value chains that do not increase pressure on the land resource, and also for non commodity value chains to enhance their competitiveness and entry into markets; (iv) Promote trade in sustainably produced commodities and non commodity products; (v) Enhance coordination and inter-sectoral collaboration between agriculture and trade to match supply and demand, and to increase the coherence of trade and agricultural development plans and related investments. Investments in alternative livelihoods will be promoted by supporting the development of value chains that reduce pressure on land resources, and also enhancing land productivity through SLM friendly production practices. Focus will be on communities living in degraded areas to reduce the impact of the human activities, reduce the effects of climate change and land degradation, and also provide incomes through enhanced trade opportunities. Capacity enhancement (institutional and enterprise level) for sustainable production, standards compliance and business skills development will be core areas of support, and so will be trade promotion activities for the selected value chains. Value addition through the development of market based technologies (storage and processing facilities) and market information are also elements under this theme. A review of the ongoing and pipeline programmes and projects reveals numerous sectoral opportunities to leverage financing towards the above mentioned trade interventions through project formulation and enhanced inter-sectoral synergies and collaboration using the SLM platform. A matrix of the mentioned interventions is included as Annex VI and Theme 3 activities are estimated to cost US$ 13,700,000 3.3.4 Theme 4: Supporting SLM research and dissemination of best-bet technologies Additional studies are required to build the knowledge base in a number of SLM areas. Research will be carried out to develop site-specific fertilizer recommendations for 5 key cereal/ legume crops, since the current fertilizer recommendations were developed in the 1960s. Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) options will also be evaluated. Using a combination of satellite images, aerial photo interpre tation and other field based approaches / methodologies land resources assessments will be carried out to update soils information, land cover / vegetation, etc and there-after develop land suitability maps that are a pre-requisite for the development of land use plans. The assessment will cover all the four target zones (full coverage in the zones) and produce detailed land suitability maps at a scale of 1:50,000. 4140 3.3.5 Theme 5: Improving and strengthening SLM knowledge management, M&E and information dissemination This component aims at targeting knowledge generated being effectively managed and disseminated, in user friendly modes, to all stakeholders. It further aims at building transparent and participatory action, coalition among sectors, enhancing alignment around common goals and reinforcing trust via a robust M&E system. The main thrusts of this theme are (a) the development and operationalization of an integrated Geographical Information System (GIS) supported Management Information System (MIS); (b) the development and operationalization of a Results based Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Framework and (c) development and implementation of an effective Information Management and Communication Strategy. Activities under Theme 5 are estimated to cost US$ 14,680,000 3.4 Communication Strategy A communication, advocacy and consensus building strategy centered on a common SLM vision is a key priority in the investment framework. A communication objective specifies what one would wish a particular target audience to do, when and over what period; it may also be for information purposes only. In order to achieve these objectives each level needs its own approach in terms of target audiences to be reached, message to be channeled and media to be used. Effective communication moves in progressive levels from awareness, understanding, knowledge, positive attitudes, and informed choice to positive behavior. It promotes interaction among stakeholders through information, dialogue, co ordination, and partnership and ultimately mitigates the challenges of land degradation and sustainable development. To address the challenges of land degradation, climate change, etc requires intensive, strategic, professional and well resourced communication efforts. Therefore strategic approaches should include: • Internal communication • Advocacy and outreach to policy makers, opinion leaders, etc • Public information and education campaign • Media advocacy • Capacity development/ strengthening (institutional, human and infrastructural) Development of M&E and knowledge management tools, capacities, and IT will need financial support. These activities have been costed and included in the SLM Investment Framework. 42 41 INSTITUTIONAL/ IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS 4.0 4.1 Delivery Mechanism One of the expected outcomes of national U-SIF SLM is the establishment of national and local partnerships that operate across sectors and leading to the adoption and institutionalization of SLM approach. The delivery mechanism for SLM implementation is expected to facilitate the realization of local and global linkages by targeting mostly small scale farming activities such as CA, soil and water conservation, agro-forestry and agro-biodiversity conservation. SLM interventions within the framework of rationalized land use planning, community participation, coalition building at local and national levels and integrated ecosystem/ watershed approach are expected to contribute towards realization of local and global environmental benefits. Implementation of the framework will take place through existing and new projects and programs, institutions, and stakeholders. The need for an inclusive and integrated implementation approach that takes into account synergies and partnerships between various players in dealing with challenges of SLM is well articulated and needs to be understood by stakeholders. Due to its multi-sector nature, the U-SIF SLM will involve many stakeholders at the various levels. Consequently it is vital to establish a well structured and coordinated implementation arrangement that will bring together all the actors. The implementing institutions will be in five main categories as per schedule in Annex IV • NGOs, CSOs, CBOs • Private sector organizations • Local governments • Parastatals • Government institutions At the national level, overall coordination is anchored in the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries but actively involves all relevant line ministries. MAAIF will be responsible for the SIF coordination through the UNCCD Focal Point Office. The implementation of activities will be carried out by relevant sector departments, local governments, research institutions, universities, private sector, NGOs, CBOs and civil society. Figure 5 Shows the organogram of national implementation arrangements while Annex V gives details of the institutional mandates, etc (Institutional Map and Responsibilities). There is an Inter-Ministerial National Steering Committee composed of Permanent Secretaries (MFPED, MAAIF, MWE, MLHUD, MEMD, MTTI, and the MoLG) to provide policy guidance and overall oversight. The steering committee will meet quarterly. At the second level there will be a National Technical Working Committee (TWC) that will provide overall technical guidance. Taken together, this forms a national SLM Country Platform that convenes all key implementers and other stakeholders in one forum for the U-SIF SLM coordination, sharing information, harmonizing protocols for data collection, and providing an opportunity for participatory monitoring of the program. Institutional / Implementation Arrangements 4342 41 4.2 SLM Country Platforms The SLM Country Platforms are made of: • The Inter-Ministerial National Steering Committee composed of Permanent Secretaries of the five sectors • The National Technical Committee (SLM-NTC) composed of technical officers from the five sectors • The National SLM Multi-Stakeholder Platform/ Committee composed of NTC members , 2 representatives from the NSC, etc • The CSO – SLM Network composed of CSOs, etc and led by/ under the PELUM (Participatory Ecological Land Use Management) umbrella. The SLM Country Platforms will bring together all key implementers and other stakeholders. The platforms will be a national level all-inclusive (with CSOs/ NGOs, CBOs, LGs and private sector representation) facility for national level consultation and dialogue in elaboration and implementation of the SLM agenda. The National Platforms reinforce sector performance. Membership to the Country Platforms will be from the following categories of representation: • NGOs, CSOs, CBOs • Private sector organizations • Local governments • Parastatals • Government institutions Women, the disabled and the disadvantaged groups should be represented on the country platform. Technical Working Committee/ SIF Coordination Team The team is constituted by technical officers from lead implementing departments, institutions, academia and the LGs. The TWC provides overall technical guidance for the implementation of the U-SIF SLM. Membership to this committee should not exceed 15 members. The TWC will be responsible for harmonizing protocols for data collection and provide an opportunity for sharing of experiences on program implementation. Implementing Institutions Local level Existing structures at the grassroots are to be the main entry points for implementation of activities, such as farmer groups or environment committees. Where committees do not exist communities should be supported to establish them. Lessons learnt during the stocktaking and gap analysis showed that implementation of activities is more successful when implemented by groups/ committees. Creation of parallel structures should be avoided. 44 43 MONITORING AND EVALUATION 5.0 5.1 Monitoring & Evaluation Objectives The objective of the M&E is to achieve efficient and effective U-SIF SLM performance by providing feedback to project management and other stakeholders at all levels to improve operational plans and to take timely corrective action in case of shortfalls and constraints. Monitoring of the investment framework will be a combination of continuous assessments and periodic reviews by key stakeholders at every level of implementation in order to ensure that input deliverables/ deliveries, work schedules, targeted outputs and other required actions are according to plan. It (M&E) should be a well planned flow of information from investment activities to the coordinating center and vice versa. Monitoring should provide the means for implementing agencies to track the progress of all/ development activities during implementation and remain alert in case of shortfalls or deviations, for early corrective action. It should keep other stakeholders (the legislature, the public, CSOs, and development partners) informed about the progress being made in implementing the investment framework, and therefore enable them to offer informed advice to decision makers. In translating the provisions of this framework into actions for monitoring and evaluation, it is envisaged that individual agencies should identify specific activities with their respective mandates. It is also recommended that through a joint planning exercise involving, representatives of all stakeholders, the monitoring activities foreseen under this framework should be shared out among stakeholders, depending on where their respective comparative advantage lies. Common goals, targets, and ways to measure progress toward them, and share lessons from them across sectors, is at the heart of this investment framework. The M&E is building on existing processes and methodologies at country level particularly that of the National Planning Authority (NPA). The M&E will strengthen knowledge management, benchmarking, and design and implementation of discrete investments on the ground. This in turn will help build transparent and participatory action coalitions in sectors, enhances alignment around common goals, and reinforces trust. The performance monitoring of the investment will be carried out on the basis of predefined indicators and on the progress made against execution of specific activities defined in the schedule of activities (Annex VI). Taking cognizance of the fact that this is a long term intervention (10 years) intermediate outcomes and outcome indicators have been developed for the first five years (Phase I). After the first five years new challenges, emerging issues and opportunities will be considered/ brought on board and thereafter outcomes and indicators for the remaining five years (Phase II) will be developed. MONITORING AND EVALUATION 4544 43 Implementation will be guided by one shared Results framework and monitoring system (Results Matrix Annex II) to which all activities contribute, and on which all stakeholders report. Data and experience will be gathered from the monitoring system and transformed into actionable knowledge that directly supports investment planning and project implementation. Several of the developed indicators and targets can be aggregated and disaggregated e.g. uptake rates of SLM practices by farmers, hectares with SLM practices (reported by land use: crop, range, forest), country level knowledge products developed and disseminated (disaggregated by audience and activity) while others are locally specific e.g. SLM friendly products (number of groups/ cooperatives established, rate of production of agreed crops/ products) for the “Cattle Corridor”. 5.2.1 Benchmarks/ baselines Baselines are a vital part of the M&E plan of the U-SIF SLM. Right at inception, baselines will be established and the U-SIF SLM targets will be building on completed and on-going initiatives in SLM.. Realistic targets have been set (Table 2 and the Results matrix – Annex II) and these should guide the establishment of baselines and benchmarks that tally with the indicators. Several on-going initiatives have attempted to indicate baselines but most of them are very crude estimates and hence unreliable. Hence the recommendation of establishing baselines, at inception, based on secondary literature and quick field surveys. Short term consultancies will expedite the process of establishing reliable baselines. 5.2.2 Aggregation procedures At the national level where and when possible, indicators will be aggregated to help cross fertilize knowledge, reflect progress made at sub-regional and regional levels, and contribute to enhance accountability and benchmarking. These will be reported by land-use type, and target agro ecological zone, range, crop, gender (to the extent possible), and forest and measured against baseline data: e.g. satellite imagery and databases; the aggregation procedures will be standardized in all sectors to the extent possible. It is expected to take time, and as such a phased approach to alignment will be pursued. 5.2.3 Management Information System (MIS) A management information system is composed of elements, which operate in coordinated and integrated manner, with each element making a specific contribution to the systems output. These elements are: users; data or information; methods of data collection, storage, processing, output and dissemination; hardware and software; trained personnel; data exchange mechanisms (standards, protocols and communication networks); and feedback mechanisms. The MIS should be GIS based/ supported. The objectives of the MIS are: • To establish national and institutional MIS to improve data gathering, monitoring and information dissemination • To harmonize the central node MIS with other relevant sector nodes MIS (lands, water & environment, agriculture, trade and energy, NPA) to ensure cost effective management of information 5.2 Key shared indicators across sectors 46 45 44 the decision-making and development planning, to all stakeholders, by providing reliable and timely data. For effective use of information generated within the investment framework institutions, there should be both vertical and horizontal information flow. Institutions should be able to provide information to the coordinating secretariat, which is the central hub or clearing house, and they should be able to exchange information amongst themselves and other sectors. Institutional MIS should be integrated to the central hub MIS. Institutions should be able to provide information to the central hub where the main database server will be hosted. Each participating institution should therefore be linked to the coordinating hub using technologies of Local Area Networks (LAN) and Wide Area Networks (WAN). The Central Hub MIS should in turn harmonize with other relevant sector MIS, as efficiency savings are possible when efforts are coordinated and data shared. A consultant will be hired to recommend system design and system requirements. 5.3 Knowledge Management Knowledge Base for SLM (integrated with MIS) A country knowledge base with GIS capabilities will be used to track progress of the SLM portfolio and the coalition. Knowledge management embodies collection, analysis, and packaging and information dissemination. 5.4 The future Looking forward to USIF 2.0: what needs to be done to fill gaps and improve the Framework and the Uganda land coalition (The USIF is an iterative process). Establishment of baselines is very critical for the M&E framework. Consequently the baselines should be established after inception of the U-SLM SIF first batch of activities. The capacity of the UNCCD Focal Point will have to be gradually improved until it is in position to effectively handle all the required central coordination activities. Prior to full capacity development some of the activities of the Focal Point may have to be temporarily delegated to lead institutions in the relevant sector/s. It is further envisaged that in future several projects will be developed based on the U-SLM SIF and these will then be funded by different agencies / partners. In the context of the investment framework MIS should provide powerful set of tools, and a holistic approach to 4746 SLM SUSTAINABLE FINANCING MECHANISM 6.0 6. 1 Introduction A study was commissioned to support Uganda’s effort to combat land degradation and desertification using a holistic and integrated planning approach achieved through the Country Strategic Investment Framework. Specifically, it analyzed funding opportunities and amounts for Sustainable Land Management from three perspectives, namely internal, external and other innovative financing mechanisms. The summary below highlights the main findings of this study. Overall, it was found that there hasn’t been a structured way to record and continually trace funding for Sustainable Land Management. For this reason, and until this is addressed, one can only gauge the funding opportunities and amounts in a broad way for SLM relevant sectors and sub-sectors. Nonetheless, there is evidence that the flow of Overseas Development Assistance and Foreign Direct Investment to Uganda has been steadily rising. Following Uganda achieving above 0.500 Human Development Index, the proportion of grants in relation to loans is falling. By implication, it is going to require strong justification for the government to borrow for many programmes including that of Sustainable Land Management. Even after the external resources are received, it is going to demand that SLM relevant sectors prioritize SLM interventions if they have to compete for resources. This is more so in view of the fact that increasingly, government is showing its preference to use external funds under the general budget support in comparison with projects. It is however gratifying that Poverty Action Fund, National Agricultural Advisory Services, transfer to Local Governments and re-installment of Graduated Tax Compensation collectively offer opportunities and potential increased amounts for SLM. Other funding opportunities for SLM are to come from commercial banks, micro-finance institutions, and special area programs like the Northern Uganda Reconstruction Programme and Luwero Triangle and Rwenzori Rehabilitation Programmes. Importantly, beginning July 2009, government is to fund several projects relevant for SLM. Overall, the projections of government are that funding levels will continue to increase, even before it realizes revenue from the oil exploration. Further, the project mode of delivery mechanism and off budget support point to the conclusion that opportunities for SLM funding still exist. A critical limitation of projects in delivering for SLM is that they lack a coherent, coordinated and integrated approach. Accordingly, they do not, in any one geographical setting, bring the necessary mix of interventions technologies, extension, water for production, pest control, marketing, etc. to the farmers. Rather instead, they are scattered all over different places, concentrating on limited interventions with a consequence that more land degradation continues to be registered despite increased funding. There is no doubt that it is going to require high level commitment to improve coordination of delivering of SLM interventions. In that regard, the role of Inter Ministerial Coordination Committee for SLM becomes eminent. However, it is gratifying to note that in addition to a few isolated successful SLM related interventions, government wants to re-orient its programmes to make SLM receive the necessary support. The World Bank and Norway for example, have committed $7 million and $1.8 million respectively to market SLM in its own right. Other global initiatives such as the Aid for Trade Initiative promote integrated approaches to trade development to meet the Millennium Development Goals and particularly poverty alleviation. The Aid for Trade (AfT) framework is implemented through the Enhanced SLM SUSTAINABLE FINANCING MECHANISM 48 47 47 Integrated Framework with a Trust Fund whose contributions come from multi-lateral and bilateral donors including the EC, World Bank, and Japan among others. Donor support to the Aid for Trade framework implementation is also channeled through donors’ traditional ODA. Taking advantage of sectoral opportunities to meet mutual goals such as poverty reduction is paramount and multi-sectoal platforms such as the SIF provide the opportunity to do so. It is also going to be imperative that government invests in overcoming barriers to accessing funding from new and innovative mechanisms like carbon funds. Equally, as commercial banks and micro-finance institutions continue to be used to channel agricultural credit, government must study why they still face barriers with a view of getting long term solutions. The current incentives government gives for agricultural lending, coupled with new opportunities on the horizon- carbon funds, Standard Bank agricultural loans should fully be taken advantage of. In addition, government will need to address causes of low absorption rates even when resources are available. The external negative factors like global recession could hit Uganda harder if sufficient preparedness is not made to hold on to the modest resources already received for SLM. Over time, government has improved its macro planning frameworks, sector plans and local government plans. A major achievement has been to link the plans to the Medium Term Expenditure Framework through the Budget Framework Papers. In that regard, units, departments, ministries, etc. must link their budgets to verifiable indicators they want to achieve and be held accountable. Following that approach will be the most dependable way to trigger resources at all SLM relevant sectors. The on-going process of formulating the Nation Development Plan offers another entry point for SLM. Sectors are obliged to comply with the guidelines for submission of their thematic papers that will in turn inform the content of the National Development Plan. 6.2 Concluded, On-going and Planned SLM initiatives As noted earlier, past investments in land productivity have not received the desired attention in the development agenda of the country. In addition, past efforts have been insufficient in comparison to the scale of the problem a factor attributable to a project-specific or single-sector approach to complex rural land use and land use change. However, this does not mean that there has not been any effort to address land degradation in the country. The government of Uganda with financial support from several development partners is implementing several multilateral and bilateral SLM initiatives at multiple levels (local, national, and regional). Annex VI gives a detailed project-by-project listing including concluded, on-going and planned project profiles from the different sectors. It also provides the delivery mechanisms/ areas of intervention, the target areas, implementing agencies, among other parameters. 6.3 Analysis of potential sources, instruments and mechanisms 6.3.1 Internal funding sources, instruments and mechanism A critical gap for SLM financing has always been failure to link the planned activities with resources allocation framework. Until recently, the Medium Term Expenditure Framework has played a useful role in supporting fiscal discipline and the allocation and reallocation of resources to priorities. There are a number of path breaking approaches to resource 4948 48 allocation decision making that have reinforced, and been reinforced by, the Medium Term Expenditure Framework. The first of these is the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP), which was the model for Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers. The PEAP is the basis for all planning related to the Medium Term Expenditure Framework and guides the setting of priorities for the annual budget process. It is reviewed annually, involving very broad based consultation. For the annual budget, Cabinet translates this broad based consensus into guidance on priorities. Sectors then prepare sector Budget Framework Papers, which are also informed by sector strategic plans and any new policy decisions by government. This leads into the second path breaking approach, namely the creation of Sector Working Groups (SWGs). Each Sector Working Groups consists not only of relevant officials but also donor, civil society and private sector representatives. This group is responsible for preparing the sector budget request, including new policy proposals, in the form of the sector Budget Framework Paper. Working through this arrangement is the only way to be sure that from sector’s point of view, SLM is a priority. If it is not, it will not be prioritized. It is important to support the priority setting with strong evidence for SLM. It is imperative that the recommended planning framework by National Planning Authority is followed by sectoral institutions advocating for SLM. This is yet another important entry point for SLM. A third path breaking approach relates to the interaction with donors. In addition to donors being members of Sector Working Groups, they also participate actively in the annual Public Expenditure Review process (managed by the Government, not donors) that culminates in a national Budget Framework Paper that is presented to the Parliament. This close interaction has led donors to gradually shift towards budget support and away from projects. 6.3.2 Opportunity from internally generat ed revenue The generation of internal revenue has improved over the years and is likely to improve further (Table 8). This improvement is very crucial because often, the release of donor funding or ODA is tied to governments counter-part funding. Thus, failure to raise and provide local contribution can be a barrier to resource mobilization for SLM. It is also the intention of government to increase its share of the development budget. 6.3.3 Opportunity from Local Service Tax and Graduated Tax Compensation In 2006, government abolished the Graduated Tax, which was the main source of revenue for local governments. At the time, it was the policy to leave 35% of the tax collected for use at source while 65% was remitted to the higher local governments. At that time, local governments collectively collected $27.5m. The mode of providing Graduated Tax Compensation to local governments in lieu of the loss of revenue from Graduated Tax to finance decentralized service is not sustainable. Accordingly, government introduced a local Service Tax as a sustainable tax measure for local government to generate their local revenue. However, one pending barrier is that the Local Service Tax as an alternative source of revenue for local governments has not yet been turned into law. In meantime, the government has agreed in the FY 2008/09 to reinstate the budget item for Graduated Tax Compensation to local governments. US$ 27.5m has been provided for compensation, out of which, $16.5m was maintained in the Unconditional Grant item. By implication, it will be imperative to impress it upon local governments to allocate some of these funds to SLM at community level. 6.3.4 Barriers to mobilisation of internal revenue Over the years there has been modest progress in the generation of internal revenue. However, there are still many barriers and constraints to be overcome namely: • Disrupted economic activities, particularly in Northern Uganda for the last 20 years. Government is addressing this problem now by resettling people from the Internally Displaced People’s Camps. • Low revenue base, mainly on account of disruption of economic growth in the 1970s and early 1980s. Government has been very aggressive in attracting foreign investment and diversifying economic activities • Low culture for tax compliance. The Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) is addressing this barrier through non formal education programmes. It has also supported the integration of tax education in the formal education curriculum • Weak tax administration. This is being addressed through the rationalisation of the tax regime, and continuous training of URA staff. 50 49 49 6.3.5 Major policy and strategic implications Based on the review of funding opportunities, amounts and constraints, the following are the major policy implications. (i) SLM funding can best be triggered by all relevant sectors. They must conform to the Budget Framework Papers as fully elaborated in the previous sections. (ii) In as much as internal revenue is increasing, so are the national developmental demands. It will be imperative therefore to bring the definition of SLM to operational levels so that all emerging developmental demands advocate for SLM. (iii) Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries should come up with a “theme” which can be used by Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development to capture and track funding for SLM (iv) Special effort should be undertaken to sensitise Local Governments so that they can invest part of the UGX 45 billion for Graduated Tax Compensation into SLM. (v) The SLM relevant sectors should comply with the monitoring and evaluation matrix recommended by the National Planning Authority in their submissions of thematic papers to feed into the National Development Plan. 6.3.6 Opportunities from external funding sources, instruments and mechanisms 6.3.6.1 Sources: major donors The current and projected 10 major funders to Uganda are given in the Table 2. The World Bank through the International Development Association window has cumulatively remained the top donor. It is followed by the European Union, African Development Fund, Sweden, in that order. Strategically, it will be imperative that government markets SLM among these donors. It was found that the World Bank and Norway have already earmarked funds in the name of SLM. Table 3: Summary of actual and projected aid disbursements by top donors Actual Projected 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 Plan Total US$ (m) 1. International Development Association 559 64 221 200 50 472 2. European Union 109 74 106 112 107 327 3. African Development Fund 87 96 57 83 0 141 4. Sweden 17 6 37 26 12 76 5. Denmark 34 33 21 21 16 59 6. Germany 38 2 15 14 11 40 7. Norway 26 25 18 10 8 37 8. Japan 5 0 22 11 3 36 9. United Kingdom 85 71 9 10 5 25 10 Nordic Development Fund 5 0 9 12 3 24 Source: Public Investment Plan FY 2009/10-2011/12 Uganda receives aid flows in terms of loans and grants. A changed pattern has been noticed in these flows. In 2005/06, the government received more grants (87%) and few loans (13%). At the time, this was in line with the debt strategy that favoured grants to loans as a measure to maintain debt sustainability. However, in 2006/07, the composition changed to more loans (79%) than grants (21%). The underlying reason is that Uganda graduated to a middle income country and can no longer get grants from multilateral institutions [MFPED, 2009]. This will have implications for raising funds for SLM. In particular, government will have to find it extremely profitable to borrow for SLM. On average, donor commitments during the period 2003/04 to 2007/08 were US$722.8million per year. In 2003/04, total donor commitments were US$ 583.5 million; they increased and more than doubled in 2004/05 to US$ 1,269.8 million before decreasing to US$509.8 million in 2005/06. 5150 50 The decline was due to aid cut back because of delayed fulfillments of related good governance conditionalities and high government expenditure on public administration. The implication there is that should Uganda not always aspire to score highly on good governance conditions, it could be a big barrier to resource mobilization generally to the country, and specifically to SLM. 6.3.6.2 Donor delivery mechanisms Further, it can be seen from the table below that, there is clear indication that government has systematically shifted from using project mode mainly to general budget support, the latter being the preferred mode of assistance to the country. With regard to the grants, it should also be noted that agriculture absorbed 17% of the total grants in the FY 2007/08. Overall, the implication is that it is now going to be more competitive to access funds for SLM under budget support compared to the projects. In fact, the Uganda SLM PER established that funding to SLM reduced systematically after 2003/04, which coincided with more resources shifted to general budget support. However, despite the government’s effort to convince Development Partners to put their aid on budget, some continue to provide support managed outside government systems. These projects mainly grants are those activities or finances most directly managed by a Government Institution. This is not only contrary to the partnership principles but also to the Paris Declaration and Accra Action Agenda. 6.3.6.3 Donor disbursements by sector Excluding security and payments of interest, the main sectors absorbing donor funds are as follows: Table 4: Main sectors absorbing donor funds Sector Amount ($million) 2007/08 Percentage (%) Land, Housing and Urban Development 47.8 10.76 Works and transport 46.3 10.41 Agriculture 34.5 7.76 6.3.6.4 Donor Coordination Mechanisms Recognizing the high transaction costs, government promoted donor coordination and alignment throughout the 1990s. At the 1999 Stockholm Conference on “Making Partnerships Work”, the government laid out its intent for its relationship with donors and proposed a set of principles for the management of donor assistance that were later signed by both government and key donors as far back as 2003. This spurred the birth of PEAP Volume 3 “Building Partnerships to implement the PEAP”. This further led to the establishment of joint sector working groups, the development of sector wide approaches programs and pooled funding mechanisms, joint missions, informal partnerships, and joint analytical work and advisory services by development partners. Subsequently, the annual poverty reduction support credit process played an important role in strengthening donor harmonisation. The poverty reduction support credit has been a focus for donors that provide budget support to participate in joint discussions with government and to link their disbursements to the fulfillment of agreed prior actions that are themselves derived from PEAP. As described later, donors are now adopting Division of Labour exercise. 6.3.6.5 Factors likely to influence the mobilisation of external funding (i) Division of labour exercise In a bid to improve partnership and aid effectiveness, government has embarked on the above exercise. The objective is to generate a more efficient development partner division of labour that ensures balanced spread of financial support and policy dialogue. Development partners will increasingly become selective in their programming and policy dialogue, with each concentrating efforts on sectors or areas based on their comparative advantage. The division of labour is expected to result in reduced transaction costs in external resources and management. (i) Effects of the ongoing global recession The current global financial crisis is likely to affect domestic consumer demand for both locally produced goods and services as well as for imports. The slowdown in economic activity will affect domestic tax revenues directly. In addition, falling remittances from abroad are expected to negatively affect domestic consumption, and hence revenue from consumption taxes such as VAT, Excise duty, etc. The tourism industry is also likely to perform poorly as potential visitors cancel their holiday plans. Overall, companies are likely to register loses with adverse consequences for domestic taxes such as corporation tax and VAT, and the situation may be exacerbated by increased applications for tax exemptions to keep local companies afloat. Owing to the global recession, Ministries have had budget cuts in this quarter. 52 6.3.7.6 Funding to SLM through Luwero Triangle and Rwenzori Rehabilitation Programmes 6.3.7.5 Funding to SLM through Peace, Recovery and Development Plan 6.3.7.4 Funding SLM through poverty alleviation fund (PAF) 6.3.7.3 Funding SLM through Integrated Water Resources Management 51 51 (i) Flouting of procedures to manage external resources MFPED has laid down procedures to manage external resources efficiently. Briefly, the SWG is supposed to identify and prioritise its needs, formulate proposals and then for MFPED to seek external funding. In case of loans negotiations with potential credit institutions on the terms and conditions are made, and cabinet and parliament approvals are sought before signing of loan agreements. However, according to MFPED, 2009, these procedures have been flawed. This has led to a real challenge in utilisation of the external resources to an extent that a lot of the resources remain unutilised for a long time and a number of projects have gone beyond their appraisal life. In the case of both loans and grants, such institutions as IDA and African Development Bank /F this money has attracted commitment charges (a charge for not utilising the money) which has denied the economy of vital resources. Owing to these barriers, government has stated that it will limit its borrowing to (i) infrastructure, (ii) education and health and (iii) agriculture. 6.3.6.6 Major policy and strategic implications There is no doubt that the government is still receiving modest funding from ODA. Given that much of this is increasingly favoured to be disbursed under the General Budget Support, it is going to be imperative for the sector to own SLM issues so that in turn, they compete for resources under the budget support. There are of course barriers to attracting and utilising additional ODA, some of which are within the means of the government to address, whereas others are beyond. Included in the former are poor absorption rates, and weak governance. In the latter are included the financial crunch associated with global recession. 6.3.7 Main vehicles used to finance SLM 6.3.7.1 Introduction It has emerged from the previous sections that government raises a pool of resources from within and externally. Thereafter, it can choose to disburse the funds to different institutions through either: (i) general budget support; (ii) project; (iii) off-budget The following sections show the opportunities for SLM funding by the recipient SLM-related sectors and institutions. Agriculture has been listed as one of the SLM focal sectors. There is great opportunity that resources will systematically increase. By vote function, most of the resources will be allocated to Agricultural Advisory Services, crops and animal resources in that order. In addition, there are off budget opportunities from donors and Non-Governmental Organisations, especially JICA (for rice), WFP& FAO, Heifer project (send a cow) to mention but a few. There are emerging good practices for SLM related funding opportunities in respect of integrated water Resources Management (IWRM). A catchment-based IWRM was piloted in Rwizi catchment in Western Uganda. More initiatives are to be rolled out countrywide. The government has allocated $4.218 m in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework period to support integrated water resources management through the catchment model. Another instrument through which SLM related interventions are funded is the Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF). The main advantage of PAF is that its resources are ring-fenced, that is, not subject to budget cuts. In the FY 2007/08, government undertook reform of the PAF, whereby it shifted away from the inclusion of individual items of expenditure under the PAF (often resulting in fragmented interventions), to the inclusion of an all encompassing sector strategy to improve the focus of pro-poor budgeting. As already mentioned, one of the instruments the government is going to use to support the recovery of Northern Uganda is the PRDP. If well coordinated, some of the planned interventions could support SLM. Up to 40 PRDP districts are to benefit. There is no doubt that failure to provide for natural resource management was a big omission. Although the Budget Framework Paper does not reflect the break-down in use of the funds to support the above programmes, suffice it to mention that part will go to economic 6.3.7.2 Funding SLM through agricultural sector’s budget 5352 52 activities like agriculture. The amount budgeted for is $5.0 million for next financial year. 6.3.7.7 Local and municipal budgets Local Governments used to generate a lot of local revenue from Graduated Tax, out of which 35% was let at the local level for development work. Since it was abolished in 2006, all local governments (districts and municipalities) depend on transfers from the centre, and projects located in these districts. In the FY 2008/09, local governments will receive UGX 1.23 trillion or 34% of national budget (excluding) donor projects. To tap part of this amount, local governments must mainstream SLM issues not only in their development plans, but also the Budget Framework Papers. However, suffice to mention some of the resources to be transferred to local governments: • Local Government Development Programme. This non earmarked discretionary funding to local governments has two components of Local Development Grants and Capacity Building Grant • National Agricultural Advisory Services. A total of UGX.86.74 billion will be availed in 2008/09 • Agriculture Extension Conditional Grant • Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture Grant • Natural Resources Conditional Grant 6.3.7.8 Funding SLM through Projects As already reflected, project modality is one of the ways in which funding for SLM is managed. To support SLM resource mobilisation, a database of on-going projects with direct and indirect bearing to SLM has been made. It needs to be regularly updated. 6.3.7.9 Implications for SLM The disjointed nature of projects, without providing funding for adequate mix of interventions is not sustainable for SLM. This is going to require high level commitment by the Inter Ministerial Committee for SLM. However that stated, it has been shown that there are many funding opportunities under the projects, although some geographical areas are more favoured than others. 6.3.7.10 Key constraints and barriers • Low staffing levels In particular, the Local Government Production structures are currently operating at below 50% staffing levels. Yet most of SLM programmes are delivered at their local level. In order for Local Governments to adequately deliver agricultural services, an additional recruitment of staff to a level up to 75% for next financial year is required. To realise this target government would need additional resources amounting to $5 m. Until government improves its earning capacity, it may not recruit more staff. • Failure to fund established structures As part of restructuring, Ministry of Agriculture Animal industry and Fisheries established agencies like Dairy Development Authority, NAGRIC and COCTU. However, the start up funds for these semi-autonomous institutions has never been realised. The current provision under MAAIF non wage for these institutions leaves a funding gap of $4.6 m the factors lower the capacity of the sector to support SLM. • Weak plans and reporting on outputs The Local Governments have been preparing work plans as one of the major requirement for accessing the money under central government transfers. However, it has been noted that some work plans are not so detailed and specific to provide the detailed activities and the corresponding geographical location. This constrains the verification process while undertaking monitoring by the various stakeholders, including those supporting SLM relevant programmes like NAADS. With effect from FY 2009/10, each local government will prepare a comprehensive work plan based on the format of the Performance Contract Form B indicating the planned activities both at the Higher Local Governments (HLG) and Lower Local Government (LLG) clearly specifying the activity location by sub county. This information will provide a critical input for public accountability and monitoring under the new modality for public discussions, the “Barazas”. 6.3.8 Opportunities from innovative funding sources, instruments & mechanisms 6.3.8.1 Funding SLM through national and sector specific funds A financing approach has been the establishment of national funds. Table 4 provides clear evidence of such funds. Some are operational but not necessarily supporting SLM and others are about to be made operational. 54 53 53 Table 5: Status of various environmental funds in Uganda Fund name Legal basis Status 1. National Environment Fund National Environment Act, 1995 In existence, but funds only used by NEMA 2. The Wildlife Fund Uganda Wildlife Act, 1996 Not yet operational 3. The Land Fund The Land Act, 1998 Just been set in motion, mainly for tenants to acquire land titles 4. National Tree Fund National Forestry and Tree Planting Act, 2003 Not yet operational , may be after July, 2009 5. Desertification Fund United Nations Convention to Combat Drought and Desertification Not yet operational 6. Fisheries Fund Uganda Fisheries Policy Yet to be given legal status 7. Bwindi and Mgahinga Conservation Trust Bwindi and Mgahinga Conservation Trust Deed Operational 8. Energy Fund Energy Act Operational One of the longest funds is the Bwindi and Mgahinga Conservation Trust. It was formed in 1992 initially with GEF funding of $4 million. Both USAID and the Royal Netherlands Embassy provided additional funding. According to the Deed establishing the trust, 60% of the revenue from the interest on the fund finances community projects some of them very relevant to SLM. However, the projects are only those within the first parishes adjacent to Bwindi and Mgahinga National Parks. Overall, it can be stated that the Bwindi and Mgahinga Conservation Trust has been and will continue to be a source of funds for some SLM related activities in that geographical area. Annually, the drawings from the TRUST have ranged from $150,000 to $ 200,000. 6.3.8.2 Funding SLM through commercial banks Banks as private institutions can play a big role in SLM-related projects, through lending say to agriculture or forestry. Unfortunately, over the years, the proportionality of credit to agriculture continues to fall compared to other sectors rise. Otherwise in absolute terms, banks lent UGX 94 billion in 2007 to agriculture. It is probable that about the same or more money could be channeled to agriculture in future. The concern however is that much of this is taken by big rather than small farmers. Besides, almost three quarters of the agricultural credit goes for crop finance that is, marketing. The government has taken deliberate steps to give incentives to banks through Bank of Uganda so that they can lend to agriculture. However, going by the trend in the past, the incentives have not stimulated banks yet. By implication, there are many barriers which hinder banks from taking advantage of these incentives. Perhaps in the lead to capitalise on the above incentives, Standard Bank has announced a $ 100 million fund especially for agriculture. No doubt this will boost some of the SLM related interventions particularly those implemented by the private sector. The fund is earmarked to benefit four African countries of Ghana, Mozambique, Tanzania and Uganda for use as loans to small farms and agricultural businesses. (New Vision, 7 April, 2009). Mozambique has already signed for $ 25 millions. 6.3.8.3 Funding SLM through micro-finance institutions The Microfinance Centre Ltd, which was incorporated by government in 2001, is now considered a linchpin of government micro-credit programmes under the Rural Financial Services Strategy. From SLM point of view, the Centre will offer a great source of funding because it offers affordable credit through loan products that support the agricultural production value chain namely: production, value addition and marketing. Currently, the centre offers five products, namely: (i) Agricultural Development Fund; (ii) Business Development Fund; (iii) Micro-Enterprise Fund; (iv) Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) Fund, and (v) Guarantee Fund It should be noted that the Microfinance Centre Ltd 5554 54 provides wholesale credit to savings and Credit Cooperative Organisations commonly known as Savings and Credit Cooperative Organisations (SACCOs) and to Micro-Finance Institutions. It is projected that between 2004 and 2011, the centre will disburse $24.6 million, out of which $ 18.43 million has already been secured. The spread of 12 regional branches countrywide will ensure widespread access to credit from the Centre. More resources are likely to be mobilized by the Centre, especially from the African Development Bank ($30 million) and Islamic Development Bank ($10 million). There are some few barriers of using the Centre for SLM. First, it does not offer extension services to agriculture and cannot dictate good practices of land management. Secondly, by insisting that borrowers pay from the profits of their enterprises, the borrowers are more likely to look for profits at all costs even when it may cause over-use or degradation of the land. 6.3.8.5 Funding SLM through small grant making institutions Besides commercial banks, and Micro-Finance Institutions, there are other small grant making institutions and programmes that offer opportunities for SLM. The main limitation about them is that they too invest in resource mobilisation and they do not offer a predictable pattern of future funding. It should be noted that it is difficult to establish a national picture of funds absorbed by NGOs, CBOs, etc. in the name of SLM. This is because there is no central location where that information is obtained. The same applies to the private sector. 6.3.8.6 Compensation for environmental services (CES) In Uganda, one can state broadly that there are two forms of incentives for rewarding ecosystem services, namely: (i) direct monetary payments to land managers or resource users as providers and guarantors of particular ecosystem services, and (ii) payments/ incentives in kind such as access to resources in protected area, access to markets, access to information and training In the first category, one can site a few examples like ECOTRUST-Trees for Global Benefits Program, West Nile Power Project, UWA FACE project in Mt. Elgon and Kibale and Rwoho. Examples in the second category are also many particularly by NGOs like Nature Uganda and CARE International supporting communities in afforestation programs. The World Bank has announced a $360 million carbon fund for Africa, and Uganda hopefully will benefit from it. Otherwise the government through the National Forestry Authority has prepared a concept note lobbying for support to make its Readiness Action Plan to tap carbon funds. Until it is made, one cannot tell how much Uganda will obtain. 6.3.8.7 Climate change-related funds and mechanisms The private sector interest in climate change is generally still low because of low awareness and lack of systematic national programme to guide it. The few companies that are taking interest are motivated by the emerging business enterprises and related funds. However, they have found that there are many procedures to be fulfilled. They also need to invest substantial money before they get benefits, and presently they lack sufficient capital for investment. To sum up the private sector has come to realise that Clean Development Mechanism projects are bureaucratic, risky and complex. These are critical barriers. Despite the many barriers yet to overcome, suffice it to mention that there are some positive developments emerging both in private and public-private projects. Uganda has already benefited from the sale of carbon credits at the Nyagak Mini hydro project of West Nile Electrification Company. Currently, it is estimated that the average annual carbon reduction (CERs) from this project is 36,210 tonnes. Further, there a few other projects being prepared for registration. There are (i) the Uganda Nile Basin Reforestation Project implemented by National Forest Authority (NFA) in partnership with Rwoho Environmental Conservation and Protection Association, a 250 member community organisation (ii) Kakira Co generation project (iii) Kikagati Co-generation project and (iv) landfill gas recovery initiatives under development within nine municipalities. Equally, the Bujagali Hydro-power project is on line for preparation for registration as a Clean Development Mechanism project. A climate Change Unit has been set up in the Ministry of Water and Environment and it keeps the National Register of Clean Development Mechanism Projects The potential for Uganda to benefit from Clean Development Mechanism is significant. The Uganda Investment Authority which markets opportunities for Clean Development Mechanism and carbon market investment has identified thirty sites suitable for mini-hydro power investment which could generate between 10 -20 MW each and parcels of land of between 500 and 16,000 hectares available for afforestation on 49-99 year leases. 56 55 55 That said, Uganda also has a more extensive track record with the Voluntary Carbon Market than with the Clean Development Mechanism, with reforestation projects associated with carbon offsets operating as early as the mid 1990’s, through the work of the FACE foundation. Examples of successful entry into international carbon markets are evident through schemes like Plan Vivo. Environmental conservation Trust of Uganda work with communities to plan afforestation and reforestation projects enabling them to access voluntary carbon market through the Plan Vivo system. They are currently working with around 300 farmers, selling about 75 tonnes of CO 2 a year with a target of 100 tonnes a year. Around 400 farmers are on a waiting list for Ecotrust. It should also be noted that Uganda is advocating for Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD). In preparation to take advantage of the emerging related funding opportunities, it has approached both the World Bank and the Norwegian Embassy to prepare its readiness plan. World Bank has already shown willingness to support Uganda, under the auspices of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF). The World Bank has announced a $360 million carbon fund for Africa from which Uganda could benefit. Like other funds, one cannot fully predict how much of the innovative funds would actually be realized by Uganda. This is because they are channeled under agreement. They can only be accessed on first come first serve basis. In other words, they are not like ODA. The lack of enabling policy framework complicates the issue. For example, the government cannot raise $200,000 or more to finalize the readiness plan for carbon funds. 6.3.8.8 Trade Related Financing Mechanisms The Aid for Trade Initiative (AfT) was established to help developing countries, particularly LDCs, to build the supply side capacity and trade-related infrastructure that is needed to implement and benefit from WTO agreements and to expand their trade. Since the launch of AfT at the 6th WTO Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong in 2005, commitments to finance trade development have been constantly increasing by about 10% a year. In 2007 commitments from bilateral and multilateral donors reached USD 25.4 billion; non concessional lending in trade-related financing provided an additional USD 27.3 billion. Within the AfT framework, in Least Developed Countries (LDCs), a specific mechanism has been set for the identification of trade needs, the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF). The EIF is a mechanism for coordinating the delivery of AfT technical assistance and the channeling of AfT funds. The goal of the EIF is to enhance the capacity of LDCs to use trade as a means to reduce poverty and promote sustainable development. Priority interventions for the EIF are identified through a national diagnostic study, the Diagnostic Trade Integration Study (DTIS) and the related Action Matrix, which lists all trade priorities, including constraints to overall competitiveness, sectors of greatest export potential, and main actions for better integration into the global trading system. A specific Trust Fund was created to support the creation of the EIF implementation structure at the national level and the implementation of the priority activities identified through the DTIS. The EIF plays only a catalytic role which should trigger the bulk of AfT financing from the bilateral and multilateral donors who committed to support AfT implementation. Uganda is one of the beneficiaries of the EIF. The Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry (MTTI) is the EIF focal point within the country. Uganda therefore has developed a DTIS and Action Matrix, establishing trade priorities for the country. It can therefore access funds for trade development both through the EIF Trust Fund and through the funding provided by donors supporting the AfT process in the country. Trade and SLM are closely interlinked. The DTIS supports export development for traditional commodities, such as cotton, tea and coffee. These have major implications on the use of natural resources through land use practices, input utilisation and also land conversion to accommodate agricultural expansion needs. It is therefore crucial that SLM relevant ministries and institutions engage in the AfT/EIF implementation process and mainstream actions aimed at mitigating the impacts of trade on SLM. At the same time, the SLM focal point ministry and other relevant ministries and institutions may also need to lobby with the trade institutions to integrate in the DTIS other value chains which may contribute to enhancing SLM such as the NWFPs. To access EIF Trust Fund resources to promote SLM-friendly activities, the SLM focal point ministries have to submit eligible proposals that take into consideration the cross sectoral issues and also contribute to trade development. The CSIF is a multi-sectoral platform that provides the framework to formulate and design proposals for AfT/EIF funding that take into account both environmental and trade-related needs. 5756 56 The EIF Trust Fund is just one of the funding options under AfT. By increasing engagement with MTTI and participating more actively to the implementation of the AfT/EIF agenda, the other ministries will also be able to access the trade support programmes of bilateral and multilateral donors. Sweden for example has a major programme to support the EIF implementation and this is the Quality Infrastructure and Standards Programme (QUISP). A summary matrix of ongoing programmes related to trade and SLM is included as Annex VI. Eco-labels and organic certification schemes Uganda farmers are increasingly selling organic products because of their niche on the market. The FAO/ WHO Codex Alimentarius guidelines, recognized by UNCTAD in its Trade and Environment Review 2006, defines organic agriculture as “a holistic production management (whose) primary goal is to optimize the health and productivity of interdependent communities of soil, life, plants, animals and people”. Similarly, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), which has over 750 member organisations in 108 countries, defines it as “a whole system approach based upon sustainable ecosystems, safe food, good nutrition, animal welfare and social justice. Organic production therefore is more than a system of production that includes or excludes certain inputs”. A large percentage of agriculture production especially by rural smallholder farmers can be considered organic. Indeed, in the African region, Uganda enjoys a huge and strategic comparative advantage in the production of organic agricultural products. This is largely because of a number of factors. First, Uganda is considered to have very conducive weather conditions that can support organic agriculture allowing increasing agricultural production without having to resort to non-organic agricultural inputs. Secondly, Uganda currently has one of the lowest agro chemical usages in Africa estimated at less than 1 kg/ha. This figure is substantially less than the African average of 9 kg/ ha or the East African average estimated at less than 5 kg/ha. Funding SLM through private sources of funding A limiting factor in Uganda is that there is no central point where one can get good grasp of the flows of funds to SLM. However, suffice it to mention the practices adopted by the private sector in the key sectors relevant to SLM, that is, agriculture and forestry. • Forestry Uganda has long history of afforestation by communities, sometimes supported by international Non-Governmental Organisations and organisation. Most of the support came under the auspices of conservation agencies and from equally minded agencies and Non-Governmental Organisations. Notable examples of supporters included USAID, CARE International, African Wildlife Foundation, WWF, IUCN. Most of them continue to provide that support. However, a recent case study has demonstrated that the private sector can set aside and use substantial funds in tree planting. Under the European Union-funded Sawlog Production Grant Scheme, over 5,000 hectares have been planted with the understanding that it is a 50:50 cost share between the scheme and the private planters. At an estimated cost of UGX 1,200,000 per hectare, it implies that the private farmers have been investing at minimum of UGX 600,000. This would translate to UGX 3 billion for 5,000 hectares, equivalent to $1.7 million. Owing to the success of the scheme, European Union and Norway are jointly preparing to inject additional €10m and $10m respectively. This will in turn trigger more resources from the private sector in the next 4 years. The scheme ensures that tree planters under it do not reduce the flow of environmental services. For example, some of the big farmers are borrowing a lot of funds to invest in afforestation with hope that they could also benefit from the carbon funds. Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC) is currently looking for a grant manager to manage $100 million fund for commercial forestry in Uganda. With very many investors in Uganda now conversant with commercial forestry, the likelihood that they could be some of the beneficiaries is also very high. Further, the cabinet has now approved the set-up of a Tree Fund, under the auspices of the National Forestry and Tree Planting Act, 2003. The modus operandi is yet to be determined. Until then, one cannot confirm whether many donors would subscribe to this fund that could trigger the use of additional private funds. It should also be noted that there are many increasing private companies contracting farmers for certain groups. This is true for tobacco with British American Tobacco; sorghum with Nile Breweries; cotton with Duvenant. 58 57 57 • Agriculture/ farming The support by private companies to agriculture/ farming is built on their linkages to smallholder farmers. British American Tobacco (U) Ltd has been supporting tobacco growers to also plant trees, mainly eucalyptus, for use in curing tobacco. In turn, this reduces their likelihood to degrade the environment in search of fuel. British American Tobacco (U) Ltd adopted this strategy out of both business and social responsibility. Notura is exploring feasibility to export beef to Europe. The Norwegian Confederation Associates are identifying suppliers from East Africa and Ethiopia to supply them with textiles, crafts and herbs among others. Likewise, Nile Breweries supports farmers to grow sorghum it uses in the manufacture of some beer brands. Duvenant, another private company also offers credit for cotton it eventually buys. 6.3.8.9 Key policy recommendations (i) Government should hasten to make its Readiness Plan so that it can trigger funding opportunities for carbon funds under the World Bank (ii) Government should study organic agriculture with a view of coming up with a realistic policy to support it (iii) Government should work closely with commercial banks and Micro-finance institutions so that their lending for agriculture is also environmentally benign 5946 7.0 REFERENCES Barbier, E.B. 1997. The Economic Determinants of land Degradation in Developing Countries. In Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 352:891-899 CIGI 2007. International Risk Report: The Center for International Governance (CIGI). Cropper, M. and Griffiths, C. 1994. The Interaction of population growth and environmental quality. American Economic Review: 84(2):250-254 de graaf, j. 1993. Soil conservation and sustainable land use. An economic approach. Development Oriented Research in Agric. A Royal Tropical Institute Series. erenstein, O. 1999. The economics of soil conservation in developing countries: The case of crop residue mulching. A PhD thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, The Netherlands ENR-SIP (Environment and Natural Resources – Strategic Investment Plan), 2007. Ministry of Water and Environment, Kampala, Uganda. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Fertilizer Year Book, 2000 Global Mechanism and ICSTD 2007, “Promoting Sustainable Land Management through Trade: Examining the Linkages between Trade, Livelihoods and Sustainable Land Management in Degraded Areas” Hellmuth, M.E., Moorhead, A., Thomson, M.C., and Williams, J. (eds) 2007. Climate Risk Management in Africa: Learning from Practice. International Research Institute for Climate and Society (IRI), Columbia University, New York, USA. Henao, J. and C. Baanante. 2006. Agricultural production and soil nutrient mining in Africa: implications for resource conservation and policy development. Background paper prepared for the Africa Fertilizer Summit. June 9 – 13, 2006. Abuja, Nigeria. Hepworth, N. and Goulden, M., 2008, Climate Change in Uganda: Understanding the implications and appraising the response, LTS International, Edinburgh Holden, S., B. Shiferaw and M. Wik (1998): Poverty, Credit Constraints and Time Preference of Relevance for Environmental Policy. Environment and Development Economics 3: 105-130. IPCC 2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation & Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) James J. McCarthy, Osvaldo F. Canziani, Neil A. Leary, David J. Dokken and Kasey S. White (Eds.) Cambridge University Press, UK. pp 1000. Kazoora. 2009. Country strategic investment framework: formulation of resource mobilisation strategy for sustainable land management in Uganda . April. 2009. Draft Report Kisamba-Mugerwa, W. 2001. Social background. pp. 186 199. In J.K. Mukiibi (ed.). Agriculture in Uganda. Vol I General Information. Fountain Publ/ CTA/ NARO. Larson, B. and G. Frisvold (1996): Fertilizers to Support Agricultural Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: What is Needed and Why. Food Policy 212(6): 509-525. Majaliwa M., E. Nkonya, F. Place, J. Pender and P. Lubega. 2009. Case Studies of Sustainable Land Management Approaches to References 60 59 59 Mitigate and Reduce Vulnerability to Climate Change in Sub Saharan Africa: The case of Uganda. (IFPRI & MUIENR) MEMD, 2007. The Renewable Energy Policy for Uganda. MEMD, 2007. 2007/2008 Policy Statement. Presented to Parliament for the debate on the estimates of revenue and expenditure. MWE, 2002. The National Forest Plan. Kampala: Ministry of Water, Lands, and Environment, Uganda. MWLE, 2002. The National Forest Plan. Kampala: Ministry of Water, Lands, and Environment, Uganda NEMA (National Environmental Management Authority). 2004/2005. The State of the Environment Report for Uganda 2004/2005. Kampala, Uganda NEMA (National Environmental Management Authority). 2001/2002. The State of the Environment Report for Uganda 2004/2005. Kampala, Uganda NEMA (National Environmental Management Authority). 2001. The State of the Environment Report for Uganda 2000/2001. Kampala, Uganda. NEMA (National Environmental Management Authority). 1999. The State of the Environment Report for Uganda, 1998. Kampala, Uganda Nkonya, E., J. Pender, P. Jagger, D. Sserunkuuma, C. Kaizzi, and H. Ssali. 2004. Strategies for sustainable land management and poverty reduction in Uganda. Research Report 133. International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, DC Ottichilo, W.K. and Others. 1991. Weathering the storm – climate change and investment in Kenya. African Centre for Technology Studies, Nairobi, Kenya Pender, J., P. Jagger, E. Nkonya, and D. Sserunkuuma. 2001. Development pathways and land management in Uganda: causes and implications. Washington, DC. International Food Policy Research Institute, EPTD Discussion Paper 85 Pender, J. (1996): Discount Rates and Credit Markets: Theory and Evidence from Rural India. Journal of Development Economics 50: 257-296. Republic of Uganda. 1998. Land Act, 1998. Kampala, Uganda. Government Printer. SIP1-2 .2006 Assessment of the nature and extent of barriers and bottlenecks to scaling –up sustainable land management investments in Uganda. Strategic Investment Program for SLM in Sub-Saharan Africa. Sivakumar, M.V.K. and R. Stefanski. 1997. Climate and land degradation: An overview. Environmental Science and Engineering. Scotney, D.M., and F.H. Dijkhuis. 1989. Recent changes in the fertility status of South African soils. Soil and Irrigation Research Institute. Pretoria, South Africa. Smaling, E., M. Toure, N. Ridder, N. Sanginga, and H. Breman. 2006. Fertilizer use and the environment in Africa: friends or foes? Background paper prepared for the Africa Fertilizer Summit. June 9 – 13, 2006. Abuja, Nigeria. Uganda Bureau of Statistics, 2005. 2002 Uganda population and housing census. Entebbe 6160 Uganda National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2002 Voortman, R., B. Sonneveld, and M. Keyzer. 2000. African land ecology: Opportunities and constraints for agricultural development. Centre for International Development (CID), Harvard University. Working Paper 37 World Bank. 2009. Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project II. Project Appraisal Document (PAD) World Bank. 2008. Uganda – Post-Conflict Land Policy and Administration Options. Volume 3: Lessons from northern Uganda. June, 2008. World Bank. 2008. Sustainable Land Management. Public Expenditure Review Yaron, G., and Y. Moyini. 2003. The contribution of environment to economic growth and structural transformation. Report prepared for ENR Sector Working Group. , Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) Review. 6258 8.0 APPENDICES i. Proposed definition for SLM, and land degradation, land quality and typology of SLM practices ii. Results Matrix for U-SIF SLM iii. Diagnostic summary (existing USIF text, stocktaking, barrier analysis, SLM PER, IFPRI overview of land degradation in Uganda, emphasis on quantifying land degradation and SLM, etc.) iv. Institutional mapping v. Schedule of activities, Key Inputs , Responsible Institution and Indicative Costs vi. Detailed project-by-project listing Appendices 6361 61 Annex I Proposed definition for SLM, and land degradation, land quality and typology of SLM practices Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is defined, according to the TerrAfrica partnership (2005), as the adoption of land use systems that, through appropriate management practices, enables land users to maximize economic and social benefits from the land while maintaining or enhancing ecological support functions of land resources. Land refers to cropland, range, pasture, forest and woodlands. Land is defined by the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) as the terrestrial biologically productive system that comprises soil, vegetation, other biota, and the ecological and hydrological processes that operate within the system. Land degradation refers to the reduction or loss of the biological or economic productivity and complexity of land, resulting from land uses or from a process or combination of processes, including processes arising from human activities and habitation pattern. These include long-term loss of natural vegetation; soil erosion caused by wind and/or water; deterioration of the physical, and chemical and biological or economic properties of soil (UNCCD). Land quality refers to the degree of biological productivity and complexity of land. SLM practices include both technologies and approaches applied to raise land quality. The precise practices are usually site specific, and this indicator allows project managers freedom in defining what is an SLM technology or practice. For example, tree planting may be an SLM practice in one area but not in another because the practice may negatively affect downstream water availability. Technologies refer to agronomic, vegetative, structural, and management measures that control land degradation in the field. Examples include terracing, forestation, reduced tillage, micro-irrigation, etc. Approaches include ways and means of support that help to introduce, implement, adapt, and apply technologies in the field. Examples include watershed management, climate risk management, community land use planning, etc. SLM friendly products refers to commodities and non commodities produced based on sustainable practices such as INM, inter-cropping, conservation agriculture, and agro-forestry, and also products that do not increase pressure on the land such as pineapples, vanilla, and tree crops. SUGGESTED WORKING DEFINITION FOR SLM IN UGANDA Sustainable Land Management (SLM) can be defined as any intervention that is aimed at sustaining or restoring the productive capacity of land. Specifically, in agriculture, SLM is the maintenance over time of soil productivity. This requires the combination of soil fertility treatment (application of mineral and organic fertilizers to the soil) with soil and water conservation measures (implementation of agronomic, soil management and physical measures such as contour ridging, terracing, tied ridges or providing ground cover through mulching, use of plants, leaving crop residues, and water harvesting and conservation structures). Management regimes such as grazing reserves and corridors are also included. SLM will focus more on some elements of this combination depending on the terrain, ecosystem, climate and use of land which determine the potential forms of degradation; SLM will always encompass all elements of the farming system (small and large livestock, commercial and subsistence crops, agro-forestry) which impact on ecosystem services such as water infiltration, biodiversity, carbon storage. Specifically, in natural resources management and energy, SLM is the maintenance over time of the country’s forest and water resources. SLM involves the rehabilitation of degraded environments, and watershed areas, the prevention of forest destruction 6462 and depletion, and the systematic replanting of felled trees. Measures to ensure sustainable management of water and forests would include watershed planning, the creation of forest reserves, the prevention of bush fires, tree planting schemes for firewood, sustainable logging and harvesting permits accompanied by replanting, and forest management regulations and legislation and non timber forest products. Typology of SLM actions Specific practices that can be used in combination to advance toward SLM are listed in the table below: SLM practices Land/water mgt approaches Land/water mgt technologies Land use regimes Agronomic and vegetative measures Structural measures • Watershed plans • Community land use plans • Grazing agreements, closures, etc. • Other • Intercropping • Agro-forestry in crop or grazing systems • Afforestation and reforestation • Mulching and crop residue • Crop rotation • Fallowing • Low till • Composting/green manure • Integrated pest mgt • Vegetative strip cover • Contour planting • Re-vegetation of rangelands • Integrated crop-livestock systems • Woodlots • Alternatives to wood fuel • Sand dune stabilization • Other • Terraces and other physical measures (e.g., soil bunds, stone bunds, bench terraces, etc.) • Flood control and drainage measures (e.g., rock catchments’ water harvesting, cutoff drains, vegetative waterways, stone-paved waterways, flood water diversion, etc.) • Water harvesting, runoff management, and small-scale irrigation (shallow wells/ boreholes, micro ponds, underground cisterns, percolation pits, ponds, spring development, roof water harvesting, river bed dams, stream diversion weir, farm dam, tie ridges, inter-row water harvesting, half-moon structures, etc.) • Gully control measures (e.g., stone check dams, brushwood check dams, gully cut/reshaping and filling, gully re-vegetation, etc.) • Other Annex II Results Matrix for U-SIF SLM The U-SIF SLM is a 10 year investment framework that is multi-sectoral. The following Results matrix based on results that should be achieved within the first five years (Phase I) They are based on the assertion/ premise that the framework will be implemented in a highly evolving and innovative mode. The framework will be evaluated midway (end of Phase I) and challenges, opportunities and emerging issues will have to be brought on board. Baseline figures are scanty and in most cases not available. It is therefore mandatory to establish the baselines right at the beginning of the U-SIF SLM. The targets at the end of each phase (2015 and 2020) will be based on baselines that have to be determined right after inception. The Framework is organized along 5 thematic areas, each addressing a critical barrier identified during the diagnostic studies. 6563 63 Ta bl e 6: R es ul ts M at ri x fo r S LM In ve st m en t Fr am e W or k G oa l: T h e go al o f th e U ga n da S tr at eg ic In ve st m en t Fr am ew or k fo r S u st ai n ab le L an d M an ag em en t (U S LM S IF ) is t o pr om ot e k ey s ec to rs c oo p er at io n t o im pr ov e n at u ra l r es ou rc e ba se d li ve li h oo d s an d ot h er e co sy st em s er vi ce s. D ev el op m en t O bj ec ti ve : Th e d ev el op m en t ob je ct iv e is t o st re n g th en s ec to r co op er at io n in o rd er t o h al t, r ev er se a n d pr ev en t la n d d eg ra da ti on / d es er ti fi ca ti on a n d to m it ig at e th e ef fe ct s of c li m at e ch an g e an d va ri ab il it y R es u lt s c h ai n h ie ra rc h y In di ca to rs B as el in es & T ar g et s (O th er d et ai le d ta rg et s in T ab le 2 ) D at a so u rc es R ep or ti n g R es p on si bi li ty A ss u m p ti on s U se o f re su lt s in fo rm at io n Th em e 1 : S u pp or ti n g on t h e g ro u n d ac ti vi ti es f or s ca li n g u p S LM R es u lt 1 : S L M s ca le d u p i n p ri o ri ty zo n es 1 .1 H ec ta re s w it h S L M p ra ct ic es (r ep o rt ed p er t ar g et z o n e, la n d u se , c ro p , r an g e, e tc ). 1 .2 N u m b er o r % l an d u se rs ad o p ti n g S L M p ra ct ic es (r ep o rt ed p er t ar g et z o n e; la n d u se : c ro p , r an g e, f o re st et c) B a se li n e es ta b li sh ed at in ce p ti o n / 2 0 1 0 P ro je ct i m p le m en ta ti o n re p o rt s fr o m d is cr ee t o p er at io n s ag g re g at ed M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N at io n al Te ch n ic al C o m m it te e (N TC ) S L M u p t ak e is d ri ve n b y st re n g th en ed p o li ci es in st it u ti o n s, s ta ke h o ld er in vo lv em en t, k n o w le d g e s h ar in g ; fi n an ci n g a va il ab il it y a n d al ig n m en t o f ef fo rt s P ro vi d e fe ed b ac k o n a d o p ti o n t o im p ro ve t h e co u n tr y’ s sc al in g u p ap p ro ac h a n d in ve st m en t. Th em e 2 : S tr en g th en in g en ab li n g in st it u ti on al a n d p ol ic y en vi ro n m en t R es u lt 2 : Im p ro ve d p o li ci es in st it u ti o n s, a n d fi n an ci n g f o r S L M 2 .1 . T o ta l ch an g e in in ve st m en t to w ar d S L M ( d is ag g re g at ed if p o ss ib le b y d is tr ic t a n d d o m es ti c o r e xt er n al f u n d in g s o u rc e) B a se li n e – S L M S u st ai n ab le F u n d in g M ec h an is m R ep o rt 2 0 0 9 . N et i n cr ea se p er an n u m S L M In ve st m en t Fr am e w o rk p o rt fo li o in cl u d in g o p er at io n s p u b li c ex p en d it u re r ev ie w s; b u d g et ar y d at a , e tc M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N TC D o m es ti c f u n d in g so u rc es e xi st to b e le ve ra g ed b y w el l o rg an iz ed co u n tr y le ve l st ak eh o ld er s a n d ca n b e tr ac ke d B en ch m ar ki n g a n d a d vo ca cy o n b ar ri er s in t h e e n ab li n g en vi ro n m en t t h at h in d er in ve st m en t e xp an si o n in S L M 2 .2 . I m p ro ve d s co re o n t h e C o m p o si te s In d ex f o r th e S L M E n ab li n g E n vi ro n m en t 1 0 % in cr ea se e ac h ye ar b a se d o n 2 0 0 9 fi g u re s E xp er t su rv ey t o o l M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N TC C o m p o si te In d ex t ra ck in g t o o l B en ch m ar ki n g . 2 .3 : C o u n tr y’ s S L M c o al it io n st re n g th en ed , a s m ea su re d b y an im p ro ve d s co re o n t h e co al it io n A ss es sm en t s u rv ey t o o l 1 0 % in cr ea se e ac h ye ar b a se d o n b a se li n e E xp er t su rv ey t o o l M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N TC M u lt i se ct o r b a se d a p p ro ac h es re d u ce t ra n sa ct io n s c o st o ve r th e m ed iu m t o lo n g t er m , a ll o w in g g re at er i n ve st m en t e ff ic ie n cy . S ta ke h o ld er s se e b en ef it s in co al it io n s B en ch m ar ki n g R es u lt 3 : S L M ac ti o n s a re m ai n st re am ed in g o ve rn m en t an d d o n o r p ro g ra m m es 3 .1 S L M a ct io n s ar e in cl u d ed i n D S IP s, N D P a n d C A A D P c o m p ac t, N D P b y 2 0 1 0 & 2 0 1 6 C A A D P c o m p ac t b y 2 0 1 0 5 D S IP s b y 2 0 1 5 8 0 D E A P S b y 2 0 2 0 3 0 0 S E A P S b y 2 0 2 0 P ri m ar y d o cu m en ts P R S P s, C A A D P ro u n d ta b le s, e tc M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N TC M ai n s tr ea m in g w il l l ea d t o g re at er i n ve st m en t o n t h e g ro u n d . 3 .2 N u m b er o f in te rn at io n al p ar tn er s’ co u n tr y a ss is ta n ce st ra te g ie s w it h S L M a ct io n s 2 b y 2 0 1 0 4 b y 2 0 1 5 5 b y 2 0 2 0 P ri m ar y d o cu m en ts : C o u n tr y A ss is ta n ce S tr at eg y (C A S ) et c. In te rn at io n al p ar tn er s in c o u n tr y, M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N TC D em o n st ra te t an g ib le in cr ea se in in te rn at io n al s u p p o rt t o S L M . 6664 64 R es u lt 4 : C li m at e ri sk in co rp o ra te d in to d ec is io n m ak in g o n S L M 4 .1 % o f m aj o r st ra te g ie s a n d p la n s w it h i n te rv en ti o n s t o m an ag e cl im at e ri sk t o S L M 2 5 % b y 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 % b y 2 0 1 5 1 0 0 % b y2 0 2 0 P ri m ar y d o cu m en ts N at io n al S L M C T co al it io n m em b er s U N F C C C & U N C C D Fo ca l P o in ts ; N TC S u ff ic ie n t d at a av ai la b le f o r st at is ti ca l a n al ys is c le ar a n d co m p ar ab le d ef in it io n s o f d is a st er s a n d c li m at e h a za rd s 4 .2 % o f S L M o p er at io n s t h at ad d re ss s p ec if ic c li m at e vu ln er ab il it ie s 3 0 % b y 2 0 1 0 7 0 % b y 2 0 1 5 9 0 % 2 0 2 0 P ro je ct i m p le m en ta ti o n re p o rt s fr o m d is cr et e o p er at io n s, p o rt fo li o re vi ew s U N F C C C & U N C C D Fo ca l P o in ts ; N TC S u ff ic ie n t d at a a va il ab le f o r st at is ti ca l an al ys is , cl ea r an d co m p ar ab le d ef in it io n s o f d is a st er s an d c li m at e h a za rd s. Th em e 3 : S tr en g th en in g co m m er ci al a n d ad vi so ry s er vi ce s fo r S LM a n d al te rn at iv e Li ve li h oo d op ti on s R es u lt 5 : M ar ke ti n g in fo rm at io n an d m ar ke t in fr a st ru ct u re fo r S L M f ri en d ly p ro d u ct s 5 .1 # o r P er ce n t o f S L M f ri en d ly p ro d u ct s a n d p ra ct ic es d ev el o p ed 5 .2 # o f va lu e ch ai n s d ev el o p ed an d b a se d o n S L M p ro d u ct io n sy st em s 5 .3 # C u m u la ti ve n u m b er o f in ve st m en ts i n a lt er n at iv e li ve li h o o d s in s u p p o rt o f S L M 2 5 % b y 2 0 1 5 6 0 % b y 2 0 2 0 P ro je ct i m p le m en ta ti o n re p o rt s fr o m d is cr et e o p er at io n s, p o rt fo li o re vi ew s M T TI – IF & M A A IF U N C C D F o ca l P o in t / N TC Th em e 4 : S u pp or ti n g S LM r es ea rc h a n d di ss em in at io n o f b es t – b et t ec h n ol og ie s R es u lt 6 : R el ia b le d at a / te ch n o lo g ie s g en er at ed a n d d is se m in at ed 6 .1 # o f d at a se ts / t ec h n o lo g ie s 6 .2 # o f in st it u ti o n s u si n g t h e d at a / d at ab a se s fo r p la n n in g a n d m an ag em en t P ro je ct i m p le m en ta ti o n re p o rt s fr o m d is cr et e o p er at io n s, p o rt fo li o re vi ew s N A R O , U n iv er si ti es & O th er L ea d A g en ci es Th em e 5 : I m pr ov in g an d st re n g th en in g S LM k n ow le dg e m an ag em en t, M & E a n d in fo rm at io n d is se m in at io n R es u lt 7 : K n o w le d g e g en er at ed a n d d is se m in at ed o n S L M 7. 1 # k n o w le d g e p ro d u ct s d ev el o p ed a n d d is se m in at ed 1 0 b y 2 0 1 0 1 5 b y 2 0 1 5 2 0 b y 2 0 2 0 R ep o rt s fr o m l S L M P la tf o rm a n d p ar tn er s M A A IF U N C C D Fo ca l P o in t / N TC ; C o al it io n m em b er s an d in te rn at io n al p ar tn er s. D at a an d c ap ac it y ex is t to c ar ry o u t a n d a p p ly a n al yt ic al w o rk to in fo rm d ev el o p m en t o f p ro g ra m m e b a se d a p p ro ac h es In cr ea se s ta ke h o ld er c ap ac it ie s to s h ar e an d a p p ly k n o w le d g e to p ri o ri ti se in ve st m en t a cr o ss se ct o rs . S u p p o rt a d vo ca cy a n d d ec is io n m ak in g . 7. 2 # C o m p re h en si ve S L M in fo rm at io n s ys te m o p er at io n al (k n o w le d g e b a se M & E ag g re g at io n a n d t o o ls , e tc 2 0 1 1 : p il o t 2 0 1 2 : f u ll p ro d u ct av ai la b le 2 0 1 2 a n d an n u al ly s u ff ic ie n t m ai n te n an ce t ra in in g an d u se R ep o rt s fr o m S L M P la tf o rm M A A IF U N C C D Fo ca l P o in t / N TC ; C o al it io n m em b er s an d in te rn at io n al p ar tn er s. E xi st in g o r n ew s ys te m s c an b e w el l u ti li ze d t o en h an ce kn o w le d g e ac ce ss Im p ro ve s in ve st m en t t ar g et in g , al ig n m en t, c o m p ar ab il it y a n d im p le m en ta ti o n 6765 65 Annex III Diagnostic summary Land Degradation and National Economic Development Land degradation is the reduction in quality, productivity (biological or economic), capacity or stability of a natural resource resulting from human activities, natural catastrophes and climatic changes. Degradation has sapped the production capacity out of most environments thus undermining the production sustainability. It is a serious problem not only in Uganda, but the whole of Africa. According to Scotney and Dijkhuis (1989), if the degradation of cultivated lands were to continue at present rates, crop yields could be reduced by fifty percent within 40 years. This makes the problem very significant because the agricultural sector in Uganda accounts for almost half the GDP and employs over 80% of the people (NEMA, 2001). It is also estimated that, the natural resource base contributes about 54 per cent of GDP, almost 100 per cent of the direct employment and 90 per cent of the country’s exports. Over 80 per cent of the population lives in rural areas and mainly dependent on land, forests, wetlands, fisheries, wildlife and other natural resources for their livelihoods with interactions mainly at subsistence level (ENR-SIP, 2007). The massive dependence on natural resources for the livelihoods of millions of its people has resulted in deterioration of the productivity of the resource. Land degradation in Uganda, as elsewhere in the world, is in most cases an unintended side effect of production activities. Natural resources users do not deliberately set out to degrade these resources, but are obliged to pursue practices irrespective of the implication (Erenstein, 1999); and more often than not, the costs of degradation outweigh the benefits underlying the degradation process (de Graaf, 1993). In regard of the foregoing, the costs of environmental degradation to the country’s economy are quiet substantial. Recent cost estimates of natural resource degradation, in the country, put the costs at 17% of GDP per year of which 6% consists of deforestation and 11% is constituted by soil degradation (Yaron and Moyini, 2003). As environmental quality deteriorates, it is the poorer segments of society that are affected the most since their livelihoods and welfare very much depends on the environment. The current state of poverty in the country is partly attributed to the degradation and unsustainable exploitation of the environment and natural resource base (Yaron and Moyini, 2003). The major forms of land degradation in Uganda are: soil erosion; decreasing soil fertility; agrochemical pollution; and desertification. However, the magnitude of land degradation varies from one part of the country to another depending on the farming practices, population pressure, vulnerability of the soils to erosion; and the general relief of the area (NEMA, 1999). Studies have shown that soil erosion is a major constraint in all 9 cropping systems in Uganda and soil fertility in 5 of the 9 systems and wherever there has been agricultural intensification (NARO/MAAIF, 1996). The main causes of land degradation are: high population growth rates; poor methods of cultivation; deforestation; bush burning; and overgrazing, among others (NEMA, 2001). These factors have had a negative impact on food production and hence food security. Per capita food production (tones/ year) reached a record high of around 1.47 in 1978 and then hit a low of about 0.83 in 1980. Despite increases from 1986, per capita food production is less than in the 1970s. In cognizance of these deficiencies, the Government of Uganda has come up with several frameworks e.g. the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) and the Plan for Modernization of Agriculture (PMA) to address issues of land degradation and increase agricultural production (MFPED/ MAAIF, 2000). Government also recognizes that the Sustainable Land Management (SLM) approach is one way of combating land degradation while supporting sustainable human livelihoods. Government’s commitment in promoting SLM for national economic development is manifested in the development policies, institutional frameworks and targeted programs to ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources. There are five sectors in government with mandates that have a direct bearing on land degradation vis-à-vis sustainable land management (SLM). These include: Agriculture; Energy; Water and Environment; Land, Housing and Urban Development; and Trade and Tourism. Land degradation and Rural Poverty Linkages It is estimated that 85% of Uganda’s population is rural-based and depend on natural resources, mainly agriculture, for their livelihood. They generally have land and unskilled labour as their principle assets, and thus few human or capital endowments. 6866 66 Poverty may not be a direct cause of environmental degradation, but instead may operate as a constraining factor on poorer rural households’ ability to avoid land degradation or to invest in mitigation strategies (Barbier, 1997). Land degradation and the associated loss of productivity impose high social and economic costs because of linkages that exist between lagging agricultural growth, rural poverty and food insecurity. Around 36% of Uganda is affected by severe land degradation and 10% by very severe land degradation. Land degradation has important consequences for the productivity of agricultural land and other natural resources, and is closely linked to poverty. Land degradation in Uganda is expressed through stagnating and declining yields in food crops, in particular cereals. The socio-economic implications of land degradation in Uganda include rural poverty, food insecurity, high cost of food, rural to urban migration and encroachment into natural reserves (SIP1-2 Uganda Report). A large proportion of the rural poor in Africa appears to be located on “low potential” and “fragile” lands, which are prone to chronic land degradation. Much of these marginal and resource-poor lands may also have been non-agricultural land (forests, wetlands, hillsides) originally. Consequently, rural poverty and human-induced soil degradation are inexorably related in Africa (Cropper and Griffiths, 1994). Expansion into marginal areas brings increased risks of crop failure, environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity. Available information, in Uganda, shows that the poor are increasingly farming marginal land prone to land degradation. Consequently there is an urgent need in Uganda and indeed in Sub Sahara Africa (SSA) to break the cycle between poverty and land degradation by employing strategies that empower farmers economically and promote sustainable agricultural intensification using efficient, effective and affordable SLM practices. SSA is the only region in the world where, overall, livelihoods and food security continue to deteriorate. Causes of Land Degradation in Uganda The key drivers for land degradation and low productivity on small-scale farms nationally are lack of labour and capital to invest in sustainable land management; poverty and land fragmentation leading to over-exploitation of the land; inappropriate farming practices/ systems including, burning of grasslands/ organic residues, continuous cultivation with minimum soil fertility enhancement, overgrazing, etc.); increasing rural population densities leading to deforestation and encroachment on rangelands and wetlands; lack of non-farm income opportunities; inadequate policies e.g. policies on land tenure and land management. a. Labour and Capital Labour and capital resources available at the household level to invest in soil maintenance and management remain limited. The middle income and poorer farmers in particular cannot afford to hire agricultural labour. The absence of a well functioning rural financial system is considered to be a significant obstacle to agricultural development in Uganda. In 2000, 95% of households had access to some form of credit, but only about 20% of households had access to formal credit. Access varied widely across the country (Nkonya et al., 2004). Lack of credit reduces their ability to acquire and use purchased inputs needed for sustainable agricultural development (Larson and Frisvold, 1996). It also contributes to a short-term perspective of farmers, which fuels overexploitation and degradation of the natural resource base (Pender, 1996; Holden et al., 1998). b. Deforestation Uganda’s natural forest cover consisting of tropical high forest (THF), woodlands and forest plantations has declined drastically from 54% (approx. 13.2 million hectares) in the 1950s to the present 4.9 million hectares representing approximately 20% of the total area of the country (ENR-SIP, 2007; NEMA, 2004/05). A large proportion of the rural population depends on forest resources for basic needs and forestry provides a range of environmental services and biodiversity values, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, watershed regulation, climate regulation, soil and water conservation, and nutrient cycling. The forestry sector contributes about 6% to Uganda’s GDP and creates about 850,000 jobs; about 100,000 in the formal sector and the majority in fuel-wood and charcoal production. 6967 67 According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005), the expansion of agricultural land into forest areas leads: · to loss of below ground biodiversity (BGBD) and above ground biodiversity (AGBD). Reduced BGBD leads to reduced agricultural productivity and reduces the resilience of agricultural systems, which then become more vulnerable to adverse climatic events (erosion, pests, diseases, and other threats), · to loss of capacity to fix below and above-ground carbon as organic matter and biomass respectively, · loss of trees that are a global carbon sink that contributes to controlling climate change, · loss of other ecosystem services (provisioning, cultural, regulating and supporting) A countrywide biomass study completed in 1996 indicated that the tropical high forest had decreased by 1.1% from 3.8% of land cover through degradation and encroachment. The forests play an important role in carbon sequestration and reduction of carbon emissions hence deforestation and land degradation affects the carbon banks and hence the global climate. The major causes of deforestation are provision of wood fuel and clearing of land for agricultural and pastoral activities. Ninety percent of the total population who live in rural areas directly depends on firewood for their energy needs, and a big fraction of the urban dwellers depend on charcoal. Available information shows that 92% of Uganda’s source of energy is wood fuel, while only 7% is supplied by petroleum and 1 percent by electricity. The 1986 World Bank Report estimates production of wood fuel at 15.6 million cubic meters per annum while consumption is about 18.3 million cubic meters which puts demand in excess of the supply by 2.7 million cubic meters Satelite image of Nakasongola area depicting a high degree of landcover degradation. Such bare soil is very prone to soil erosion Figure 5: Land cover degradation in Nakasongola c. Overgrazing Livestock numbers are on the increase in Uganda and this has exerted intense grazing pressure on the land. Therefore for sustainable management there is a need to pay attention to the carrying capacities of Uganda’s rangelands. Rangelands occupy 107,000 km2 (44%) of the country’s land area; support over 6 million people and hold 80% of the national cattle herd. Due to overstocking and limited use of land management practices, the condition of the rangelands is terribly over-grazed. In addition to over-grazing, the rangelands are located in arid and semi-arid areas, which are fragile ecosystems. Overgrazing amidst fragile ecosystems is a serious problem, which has led to soil compaction, gully erosion, and the emergence of low-value invasive vegetation with subsequent declines in carrying capacity and thus productivity of the land. There is no coherent rangelands policy that addresses the broad range of environmental issues such as land tenure, immigration of people from densely populated areas, and transhumance of pastoralists. 7068 68 d. Poor farming practices The frequency and duration of land rest periods (fallows), which can arrest the decline of soil fertility, has decreased because of smaller farm sizes due to increasing population pressure. The situation is further exacerbated by low external input use and limited use of land management practices. Very few farmers apply fertilizers. Chemical fertilizer use declined ten fold between 1962 and 1980 to almost zero except in large estates. Between 1990 and 1995, only 6,000 tons of fertilizers were imported into the country (none are produced locally) and most of that (95%) was used on the estates (Nkonya et al., 2004), implying that the majority of smallholder farmers do not use fertilizers. Even in projects providing micro-finance for agriculture, small-scale farmers have not used the credit to purchase fertilizer. Today fertilizer usage in Uganda is said to be one of the lowest in the world; though it is one of the most likely technologies to improve soil fertility (Pender et al., 2001). The average inorganic fertilizer application is 1 kg fertilizer nutrients ha-1 year-1, which compares unfavorably with 46 kg ha-1 year-1 for Kenya and 578 kg ha-1 year-1 for the Netherlands (FAOSTAT, 2002). Non-use of fertilizers adds to different forms of land degradation (removal of natural vegetation, soil physical degradation, soil fertility depletion, wind and water erosion), but also negatively affects biodiversity and actual and potential carbon sequestration (Smaling et al., 2006). Low external input use and continuous cultivation has lead to a situation of severe nutrient mining. According Henao and Baanante (2006), nutrient mining is a major problem in the African agricultural lands. e. Drought Drought is the consequence of a reduction in the amount of rainfall over an extended period of time often associated with other climatic factors, such as high temperatures, high winds and low relative humidity, that can aggravate the severity of the event (Sivakumar and Stefanski, 1997). In Uganda, drought is a serious production constraint in rangelands. In these areas semi arid and dry sub humid conditions prevail. They also experience erratic rainfall patterns, receive rainfall ranging between 500-800 mm/ annum where drought is a common recurrent phenomenon. Drought contributes to desertification. Widespread reliance on rain-fed agriculture, subsistence farming and pastoralism, poor crop and animal husbandry practices, water scarcity and population pressure contributes to vulnerability to drought. Ultimately, areas characterized by low rainfall and high temperatures, heavy land use and lack of conservation measures succumb to desertification. According to the UNCCD, desertification is defined as land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various factors including climatic variation and human activities; Uganda’s dry lands occupy what is referred to as the “cattle corridor”, an area stretching from the North–East through Central to the South–West of the country (Figure 3). f. Land tenure Land tenure refers to the terms and conditions under which access to land rights are acquired, retained, used, disposed of, or transmitted. Land tenure security can influence land management, because it may affect farmers’ incentive or ability to invest in land improvements (Nkonya et al., 2004; Kisamba-Mugerwa, 2001). Farmers holding land under insecure tenure are not likely to invest in costly and long-term land management investments (Nkoya et al., 2004). Four major land tenure systems, namely customary, freehold, leasehold, and mailo, are recognized by the Land Act of 1998 (Republic of Uganda, 1998). Holders of land under some of these tenure systems do not have tenure security. For example, about 60% of holdings in the mailo tenure system are under the kibanja form of tenure, for which the holder operates land on a freehold basis without ownership title and without paying rent. The customary type of ownership (18% of holding area) is one in which individual ownership is not recognized, but rather the right of using the land is allocated by the traditional authorities. Uncertainty about land tenure systems has prevented a large number of farmers from investing in their land. In a recent study for Northern Uganda (World Bank, 2008) the following recommendations on how to address the issues pertaining to tenure insecurity were made:(a) customary tenure be codified so that it can be used for legal precedent in case of litigation; (b) customary tenure has its own capacity to evolve and eventually move onto registration and therefore certification and registration should not be forced on the local populace; (c)the legal processes and procedures for registration and certification need urgent reform as they are at risk of being used by individuals for land grabbing; and (d) the first point of jurisdiction for dispute resolution and land administration over customary tenure should rest with traditional institutions (clans) and to the extent possible these 7169 69 institutions need to be integrated into the statutory land administration. g. Land holdings/ ownership/ gender Most cropland in Uganda is cultivated by small-scale farmers, with farm sizes averaging 2 ha of land (Kisamba-Mugerwa, 2001). Approximately 85 percent of the country’s population lives in rural areas and depends on agro-pastoralism for its food and income (NEMA 2001). The farms and often the individual fields are commonly divided amongst the sons as land is inherited, leading to increasing fragmentation of land holdings. Sub divisions eventually lead to individual pieces of land becoming sub-economic (Kisamba-Mugerwa, 2001). The farmers are mostly poor, with few resources and numerous production constraints leading to low yields. Women and children provide most of the agricultural and use simple hand tools. In 1911, per capita land holding in Uganda was about 8 hectares but currently it is estimated to be less than 1 ha, a decrease of about 90% in period of 9 decades. This is a clear manifestation of population growth. Population growth and small farm sizes have an implication on land use. Continuous cultivation, intensification and changing the cropping systems are some of the outcomes of this development. Apparently, soil erosion is greater on smaller farms and some of the intensive practices used on the smaller farms tend to increase soil erosion. Land fragmentations has serious implications on land ownership, especially regarding women, and level of investment in land management practices h. Policy Lack of coordination of government actions on land has been one of the underlying causes of land degradation. A major constraint to restoring soil fertility and land in general has been the common belief that Uganda is endowed with some of the best soils and lands in Africa. This has resulted in low priority being given to addressing the issue at policy, research and extension levels, as well as by donors. Consequently, one important constraint is, besides the insufficiency of funds, the absence of a framework to integrate and coordinate soil fertility and land management related activities, including policy formulation and public investment in land across the country. i. Climate variability and change and Land Degradation Highly degraded areas are more prone to the effects of climate variability and change because those areas have lost/reduced resilience. Climate variability and change is expected to have adverse impacts on the existing and potential development activities in Africa (Ottichilo et al., 1991). It affects the bio-productive system on which most economic investments in Africa are based. The impacts of increased temperature and decreased rainfall have been projected to cause shifts in vegetation zones which is likely to be felt in the various sectors of the economy such as agriculture, tourism and industry. According to the World Bank (2000) people living in poverty are more susceptible to climate variability and change. As a consequence, Uganda, with at least 38% of its population still living below the poverty line and deriving their livelihood largely from agriculture, climate variability and change poses serious concerns. Uganda, like most African countries, remains vulnerable to the effects of climate change since agriculture depends primarily on climate. Under the current situation of climate change which has a big influence on economic and ecological issues, the condition of vulnerable social groups like women and children in Uganda and most African countries is likely to worsen. j. Trade and Land degradation The competitiveness of developing countries has also been undermined by unsustainable farming practices which are often associated to the production of export commodities. Indeed, in view of the limited opportunities for value-addition and diversification, increased revenues are likely to be triggered by quantity rather than quality. The focus on raising agricultural production for exports can lead to i) inefficient and wasteful use of land and water resources, ii) inappropriate crop intensification, iii) use of farm machinery and agronomic practices that are not suitable for local soil and water conditions, and iv) expansion of agriculture on to marginal lands which are not capable to sustain food production and where small farmers are forced to adopt unsustainable farming practices1. 1 “Promoting Sustainable Land Management through Trade: Examining the Linkages between Trade, Livelihoods and Sustainable Land Management in Degraded Areas”, the Global Mechanism and ICTSD 2007“ 7270 70 Annex IV Institutional mapping – Stakeholder Matrix Showing Ministries, Institutions and Departments Relevant to SLM (Partly adapted from NCSA-NEMA/UNEP 2007) UGANDA Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 1.Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development Formulate macro-economic policies and mobilize and allocate financial resources for manage ment of natural resources • Formulate relevant macro-economic policies • Allocate funds, general mobilization of funding and coordination of donor inputs into management of NRs • Provide economic and financial incentives and disincentives for MEAs implementation 1.1 Uganda National Council for Science and Technology Develop and implement strategies for integration of science and technology in national devel opment and advise government on formulation of policies that enhance and foster integration of science and technology in the national economic development • Formulate policies for use of science and technology in national development • Develop guidelines for integrating science and technology into sectoral development policies • Support research on new technologies • Provide information on technology development and promotion 2. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisher ies (MAAIF) Support, promote and guide the production of crops, livestock and fish, in order to ensure improved quality and increased quantity of agricultural produce and products for local consumption, food secu rity and export • Provide technical assistance to districts on sustainable agricul tural management • Formulate and review relevant agricultural policies, standards and guidelines • Houses the focal point for UNCCD, and report to the Conference of Parties • Collaborate with other sector institutions and programs in imple mentation of NAP to combat desertification • Control and manage crop and animal epidemics, and diseases affecting production • Promote sustainable utilization of NRs for agricultural production • Provide technical advice and supervision in agricultural advisory services and entomology • Train and build capacity in agriculture extension, vector and vermin control for local governments • Design and develop national information base on drylands • Monitor private veterinary and agricultural service providers to ensure provision of quality services • Has overall responsibility for NAADS and NARO – semi autono mous bodies 2.1 National agriculture Re search Organization (NARO) Undertake, promote and coor dinate research and technology transfer in all aspects of crop, livestock, fisheries and forestry. • Develop agricultural, livestock, and fodder technologies • Disseminate the above technologies to agricultural and pastoral communities • Develop and disseminate appropriate post-harvest technologies 2.2 National Agricultural Advisory Services To develop a demand driven, farmer-led agricultural service delivery system targeting the poor subsistence farmers, with empha sis on women, youth and people with disabilities • Provide support for advisory and information services to farmers • Develop agricultural technologies and link farmers to markets • Ensure quality by regulation and technical auditing of service providers • Strengthen private sector institutions to provide quality exten sion services • Establish a programme management and monitoring system 7371 71 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 2.3 PMA Secretariat Eradicate poverty by transforming subsistence agriculture to com mercial agriculture • Promote research and develop technologies on MEAs • Promote privatization of agricultural advisory services • Promote rural financial services • Promote agricultural marketing and processing • Promote agriculture education • Sustainable use and management of NRs • Develop infrastructure 2.4 Planning Department 2.5 Directorate of Crop Resources Initiate and formulate policy on crop production, farm develop ment, and crop protection and regulation. Develop and modern ize the sector through improved use and conservation of land resources as well as development of appropriate technologies and techniques. • Crop production and protection management • Guide farm development • Guide regulation of the crop resources 2.6 Department of Farm Development Guide, support and promote the activities related to farm develop ment in the sector • Watershed management including soil and water conservation; irrigation and drainage • Farm planning and systems development • Agricultural engineering • Water for agricultural production • Farm structures • Farm energy 2.7 Department of Animal Production and Marketing Promote, support and guide ani mal production and marketing • Ensure production and marketing of dairy and meat • Ensure animal nutrition • Ensure public health and marketing 2.8 Department of Animal Health & Entomology Support, promote and guide all livestock health and entomology • Ensure national livestock disease control • Ensure national veterinary inspection and regulation • Ensure livestock vector control 2.9 Dept. of Crop Protection Guide, support and promote the activities related to crop protec tion in the sector • Crop regulations and certification • Crop diagnosis and epidemiology 2.10 Dept of Crop Produc tion Promote, support and guide crop production on the sector • Initiate and formulate policies • Render services for increased productivity of farm and farm labor • Advise and guide on improved and appropriate production and marketing technologies to farmers, producers and buyers 2.11 Uganda National Farm ers Federation (UNAFFE) Coordination of farmers’ activities in Uganda • Promotion of sustainable farming practices • Due to their strategic office set up at the districts, coupled with partnerships and affiliation with other institutions (e.g. MAAIF), UNAFFE and ACU provide an important plat form for SLM initia tives to reach the grassroots population 2.12 Agriculture Council of Uganda (ACU) ACU is set up by the private sector to promote constructive dialogue with government, parliament, and local authorities 2.13 National Coordinating Body (NCB)/ the National Steering Committee (NSC) for UNCCD/ NAP Task forces Ensure the tasks are accom plished in order to support SLM and prevention of land degrada tion • Mainstreaming NAP into planning frameworks • Developing a rangelands policy • Capacity building 2.14 Key CSOs/ NGOs Conduct advocacy campaign to government so that there is effec tive accountability • Advocacy research • Advocacy campaign • Enforcement to ensure compliance of agreed mandates. 7472 72 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 3. Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE) • Responsible for sustainable forest and woodland management activities and for integrated watershed management • Responsible for development of water resources for production • Overseas NFA and NEMA 3.1 National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) Coordinate, monitor and super vise all matters of environment in the country • Awareness raising on ENR management • Influence policy development to reflect management of fragile ecosystems • Monitor environment management, including EIAs • Coordinate institutions and individuals to ensure harmony in management of NRs 3.2 National Forestry Authority Manage and coordinate sustain able management and utilization of all forestry resources • Coordinate sustainable management and utilization of all forestry resources • Ensure compliancy with the national development strategy on poverty eradication • Advise on afforestation and reforestation • Provide policy guidelines for collaborative management • Provide guidelines for sustainable energy use and production from biomass 3.3 Directorate of Water Resources Management (DWRM) To manage and conserve water re sources for the present and future generations • Initiate national policies, set standards and priorities for water resources management in the country • Develop national plans for promotion of agricultural production through providing water for livestock, irrigation, aquaculture and rural industry • Make assessment for water for production • Develop surface water reservoirs e.g. dams and valley tanks for livestock production in the cattle corridor • Rehabilitation of existing dilapidated dams • Develop and disseminate small-scale irrigation technologies • Promote small-scale aquaculture in ponds and existing reservoirs • Provide technical assistance to local governments and other stakeholders in design, construction and management of water for production infrastructure • Promote sustainable management of water sheds 3.4 Directorate of Environ mental Affairs Promote and ensure effective coordination, and collaboration of Environment, Meteorology (Weather and Climate) and Climate Change; Forestry and Wetlands sub-sectors for sustain able development. Monitoring of the autonomous and semi-autono mous bodies under MWE to ensure effective operations. • Formulate national policies, standards and legislation for envi ronmental management • Coordinate and supervise national projects of environmental management • Monitor the performance of the divested Authorities under the Ministry • Coordinate environmental issues of the various government ministries • Inspect, monitor and coordinate the activities of Local Govern ments • Provide technical advice, support supervision, and training to Local Governments personnel as required • Mobilize support and resources for environmental management • Liaise with regional and international environmental agencies and processes • Provide technical advice to top management of the Ministry on matters concerning NEMA and NFA and Natural resources man agement. 7573 73 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 3.5 Department of Meteo rology Monitor weather and climate, exchange data / information and products and issue advisories • Collect and disseminate climate information to support NR management, economic activities (e.g. construction) and social services • Provide early warning signals related to climate variability 3.6 Department of Rural Water and Sanitation Provision and maintenance of ad equate supply of water for human consumption and other uses in rural areas, by local governments in liaison with the Directorate of Water Development. • Support to LGs, private sector and NGOs in the provision of water and sanitation services and implementation of water resources management activities is carried out in integrated way. • Carry out DWD mandate of quality assurance, regulation, mon itoring and evaluation, policy review, enforcement of standards etc. • Ensure policies and guidelines set by Central governments are responding to the needs of the water users. • Provide a spring board for future for effective decentralization of water resources management to appropriate levels. Sensitiza tion, mobilization and training will be key. • Comprehensive data base / information system is put in place and available to users at different level depending on the need and sensitivity of the information. Information is accurately collected to feed the databases 3.7 Department of Forestry Support Services Manage all Central Forest Re serves on a sustainable basis. Supply high quality forestry-relat ed products and services to Gov ernment and the private sector on a contractual basis( The National Forestry and Tree Planting Act 2003) • Conduct research , formulate national policy , strategies and plans for the management of forests • Coordinate and supervise national projects on forestry manage ment. • Monitor the performance of National Forestry Authority and other agencies for effectiveness in implementation of the national polices, plans and standards for forestry management. • Inspect and monitor activities of the Local Governments in forest ry management. • Provide technical support, advise and training to local govern ments. • Mobilize support and resources for forestry management includ ing the National Forestry Plan. • Liaise with international environment agencies • Coordinate environment issues of various Government institu tions and other agencies. 3.8 Department of Environ ment Support Services Management of the environment and shall coordinate, monitor and supervise all the field of the environment (The National Envi ronment Act 1995) • Conduct research ; formulate national policy , strategies and plans for Environment management. • Coordinate and supervise national projects on environment management • Monitor the performance of National Environment Management Authority and other Agencies for effectiveness in implement ing the national policies , plans and standards for Environment Management. • Inspect and monitor the activities of Local Government in envi ronment management • Provide technical advice and support to Local Governments • Mobilize support and resources for environment management • Liaise with international environment agencies. • Coordinate environmental issues of the various Government insti tutions and other agencies. 7674 74 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 3.9 Wetlands Services Department Ensure conservation, wise use and protection of wetlands in Uganda through increased ap preciation and effective manage ment, as a means to achieving sustainable development through out the country. • Conduct research; formulate national policy, legislation, stan dards, strategies and plans for management of wetlands. • Coordinate and supervise national projects on wetlands • Inspect and monitor the activities of local governments in wet lands management • Provide technical advice, support and training to local govern ments. • Mobilize resources for wetlands management including NWS strategic plan. • Liaise with international wetlands agencies • Coordinate and build the capacity of various Government institu tions and other agencies to deal with wetlands issues within their jurisdictions. • Undertake monitoring and inspections of wetlands. Environment and Natural Resources Sector Working Group Ensure sustainable use and man agement of the environment and natural resources • Review the ENR sector • Prepare and monitor sector plans • Review ENR indicators in PMA and M&E framework Private Sector Promote and coordinate private sector involvement in national development • Develop infrastructure relevant to MEAs • Invest in technologies relevant to MEAs • Create alternative employment opportunities 4. Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development (MLHUD) Ensuring security of land tenure and productive use of land resources • In-charge of land administration, which includes land registration and the development of a Land Information System • Has been in-charge of developing a National Land Policy 4.1 Department of Planning & Quality Assurance To harmonize and coordinate strategic sector plans, sector budgeting, resource mobilization, Monitoring & Evaluation, Quality Assurance, Development of statis tical information of the sector Ministry • Rational and sustainable utilization, development, effective management of land resources for social welfare and economic development 4.2 Department of Surveys & Mapping To provide policy and legal frame work for conducting national surveys, mapping • Establishment of survey controls, survey of international bound aries, production and printing of topographic and thematic maps 4.3 Department of Land Registration To process land related docu ments, register land dealings and issue land titles • More equitable distribution of land access and ownership, and greater tenure security for vulnerable groups • Availability, accessibility, affordability, and use of land informa tion for development 4.4. Department of Land Administration To inspect and provide guidance to land administration institu tions and provide timely and reli able valuation services to support various Government programmes • Transparent, accountable and easily accessible institutions and systems for decentralized delivery of land services • Democratic and decentralized land administration with struc tures that are transparent and accountable that will ensure that land services are readily available and accessible to the majority of people so that the desired impact on poverty reduction and protection of the vulnerable can be attained. 4.5 Department of Physical Planning Ensure a harmonized National, regional and urban physical planning • National land use policy and National Land Use Plan in place 4.6 Department of Land Use, Regulation and Compliance To ensure compliance with the recommended Land Uses • National land use policy and National Land Use Plan implemented and complied with • Sustainable and productive use of land and based resources 7775 75 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 4.7 Department of Urban Development To promote orderly and organized urban development • A safer urban environment and sustainable urban livelihoods 5. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development Establish, promote the devel opment, strategically manage and safeguard the rational and sustainable exploitation and utilization of energy and mineral resources for social and economic development • Formulate appropriate energy policies • Ensure effective development, exploitation and management of energy and mineral resources • Promote rural electrification • Explore alternative and renewable sources of energy • Develop and disseminate energy conservation technologies 5.1 Department of Finance and Administration To ensure effective and efficient Financial and Administrate support services to all Ministry Departments and staff. • Financial management and accounting • Administration, personnel services and human resources devel opment. • Supplies and facilities management • Planning and Budgeting. • Resource Centre. 5.2 Department of Energy Resources To promote and co-ordinate the development of energy resources, ensure adequate supply of energy and promote efficient utilization of energy for social and economic development. Roles and functions • Formulation and review of national policies on energy • Preparation of national plans for development, supplies and utili zation of energy resources. • Identification of suitable new energy sources to be developed for use in Uganda. • Mobilization of finances and technical assistance for the develop ment of the energy resources. • Co–ordination and supervision of government energy develop ment projects. • Co-ordination of plans and activities of Local Governments in relation to energy. • Promotion of energy sources development and co-ordination of effort of various institutions involved in this function • Provision of technical assistance to Local Governments in ener gy-related activities. • Provision of technical assistance as may be required by various institutions involved in energy resource development • Monitoring and advising on energy supplies to ensure sufficiency and availability. • Making forecasts of petroleum products requirements in the country, and working out strategies for satisfying the require ments • Monitoring and guiding utilization of energy in the country to promote and ensure efficiency and compliance with policies ,standard and plans, and also to minimize wastage as well as the degradation of the environment; • Inspection, monitoring and co-ordination of the activities of Local Governments in the area of energy development, utilization and conservation, and where necessary providing technical assis tance and support supervision or training ,to ensure implementa tion of national policies and adherence to performance standards relating to energy ; • Initiation of policy on atomic energy. • Maintaining an up-to-date information base on energy resource ;and • Controlling and managing disasters caused by or related to ener gy resources. 7876 76 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 5.3 Department of Geologi cal Surveys & Mines To promote and ensure rational development and utilization, in a safe and sustainable environment of the mineral resources for the socioeconomic enhancement of the people of Uganda. • The geosciences Data Division preserves and disseminates the geosciences data of the department. Through documentation, cartography and computer sections • Laboratory Division collects/receives raw data and samples. It analyses and processes the same for interpretation. • Maintains a body of expertise that can use this data to advise the government, the private sector and the general public. • To carry out investigations and promotional activities to attract investment in exploration and development of mineral resources. • To carry out engineering geology investigations and monitor earthquakes and other related natural disasters such as land slides and volcanoes and advise on remedies. • To provide active and effective and reliable laboratory services in the mineral sector for institutional and public use; • And to administer the Mining Act and Regulations, and provide advisory services to miners and mining methods and environmen tal protection. 5.4 Department of Pe troleum Exploration & Production To promote petroleum exploration n the country by attracting com panies to invest in the sector • To promote investment in petroleum exploration and production by packaging and disseminating preliminary exploration data • Monitor and regulate petroleum exploration operations undertak en by oil companies in the upstream sub sector. • Participate in the geophysical, geological and geochemical data acquisition, processing and interpretation n order to asses the petroleum potential of the Country. • Initiate policy and legislation on petroleum exploration and devel opment ; and • Build national I institutional capacity in the field of petroleum exploration and development. 5.5 Department of Petro leum Supplies 5.6 Uganda Electricity Distribution Company To strengthen, enlarge and make efficient power supply in order to enable the provision of adequate and reliable energy to meet national economic and social development needs • Provide appropriate tariff structure to motivate a shift from bio mass to electricity as a source of energy • Provide energy funds, as incentives to be accessed by local com munities for rural electrification 6. Ministry of Tourism Trade and Industry (MTTI) To formulate and support strate gies, plans and programs that pro mote and ensure expansion and diversification of tourism, trade, cooperatives, environmentally sustainable industrialization, ap propriate technology, conserva tion and preservation of national natural and cultural heritage, to generate wealth for poverty erad ication and benefit the country socially and economically • Formulate appropriate trade, tourism and industry policies • Development of a National Trade Sector Development Plan • Gazetting conservation areas for wildlife and cultural resources • Provide data on new and potential markets for NR related prod ucts • Procure small scale technologies relevant to NR management 6.1 Uganda Wildlife Au thority Manage wildlife and wildlife protected areas of Uganda • Formulate relevant policy guidelines for community participation in tourism • Ensuring ecosystem health of wildlife protected areas • Prepare guidelines for sustainable management of wildlife resources • Promote sustainable alternative sources of livelihoods from wildlife resources 7977 77 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 6.2 Department of Trade Internal Trade • Formulate and implement specific sectoral policies necessary for prudent management of a liberal economy, such as competition and consumer protection policies • Encourage and foster collective action through, inter alia, the development and strengthening as well as diversification of cooperatives • Strengthen the district commercial offices, through provision of sufficient technical, human and financial resources. • Design and implement appropriate strategies to promote value addition, production of high-value-low volume products, and niche marketing • Encourage the use of local materials in the production process with a view to stimulating growth in local production sectors • Encourage the consumption of locally produced goods and ser vices • Harmonize local taxation and licensing policies and practices with national trade development priorities, with a view of elimi nating double/ multiple taxation External Trade • Enhance the capacity of the country to engage in trade negotia tions • Develop and implement measures and strategies to enhance par ticipation of Uganda’s service industry in international (services) trade • Pursue regional economic integration with a view to increasing effective market access opportunities for Uganda’s goods and services • Work within the multilateral trading system to ensure that Ugan da’s economic and commercial interests are an integral part of its work program and outcomes 6.3 Department of Industry and Technology • Establish, revive, and strengthen leading policy implementing institutions, to ensure effective coordination of all policy imple mentation initiatives • N collaboration with the private sector, develop and upgrade infrastructure to facilitate industrial transformation • Create national capacity for innovation, science and technology to ensure sustainable industrial transformation • Promote quality and application of standards in manufacturing industry to ensure sustainable industrial output for both local and export markets 8078 78 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 6.4 Department of Tourism, Wild Life and antiquities • Promote and market Uganda as a competitive and favorite tourist destination on the global and domestic tour and travel market • Identify, protect and develop the natural, artificial, cultural and heritage attractions into tourism products that attract tourist visitors • Develop and enhance the human resource capacity in the tourism sector into a dynamic and competitive resource able to attract and serve the growing tourist demand • Regulate and plan for the growth of the tourism sector by providing an enabling legal framework, sector regulations, and cultivating public private sector collaboration • Promote tourism investment through the provision of information, incentives, and development of the investment opportunities in Uganda • Assure, harmonize and enhance the quality of tourism services to internationally acceptable standards in the country • Mainstream tourism development in all social and economic sectors thereby equitably spreading the benefits of tourism, pro moting employment and growth. 6.5 Department of Co-oper ative Development 7. Ministry of Local Govern ment Guide, harmonize, mentor and ad vocate for all Local Governments • Build capacity of Local Governments (human and physical) for efficient service delivery, including NR management • Adhere to other national policies on ENR management • Promote decentralized management of NRs 8. Ministry of Works, Hous ing and Communication Plan, develop and maintain adequate and effective infra structure, to facilitate of safe and efficient transport services by road, water, rail and air; Promote an efficient communi cations system throughout the country; Promote and foster sustainable human settlements; and Manage works on Government buildings • Open-up rural roads to ease trade and movement of inputs and commodities • Promote information and communication technology to enhance NRs information and data collection and dissemination • Macro planning, coordination, monitoring and setting standards • Liaison with donors and MFPED to monitor donor and Poverty Action Fund programmes in the sub-sector • Support the district and urban councils in procurement and main tenance of their plants and equipment • Organizing training and capacity building programmes 9. Ministry of Education and Sports Provide for, support, guide, coordinate, regulate and promote quality education and sports to all persons in Uganda for national integration, individual and nation al development • Formulate national policies on education and sports • Planning for the sector’s development • Develop human resources to address MEAs issues • Promote agriculture education • Promote adult literacy, formal and informal education • Give technical guidance, coordination and mentoring • Monitoring and evaluation • Inspection and regulation 10. Ministry of Gender and Social Development Coordinate, monitor and review the formulation of gender respon sive policies and their implemen tation within sectors • Gender policy formulation • Sensitization on gender issues at all levels • Ensuring that gender issues are reflected in NR management policies • Coordinating gender integration in socio-economic development • Technical guidance on mainstreaming gender in development • Mobilizing communities in resource management 8179 79 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests 11. Prime Minister’s Office 11.1 Department of Pacifi cation and Development Ensure peace, reconciliation, conflict resolution, rehabilitation and development in Karamoja, northern Uganda and Luwero Triangle • Give early warning on disasters e.g. famine and drought • Formulate policies and plans for disaster preparedness and management • Coordinate sectoral activities with regard to livestock develop ment in Karamoja region 11.2 Department of Disaster Preparedness and Refugees To manage the response to refu gees by assuring their welfare and protection within the framework of national policy, international laws and standards, while safe guarding the local and national interests • Coordinate implementation of government policies on disaster management • Alleviate suffering and rehabilitate disaster victims • Creating local capacity to plan, implement and monitor disaster management programmes • Contribute to poverty eradication by ensuring minimum produc tion of disaster victims • Develop and operate disaster early warning systems • Provides for preparation of local, district and national disaster management plans 12. Academic Institutions Provide quality teaching, research and offer professional services to meet the changing needs of society • Research on MEAs issues • Training man power • Outreach programmes National Level Mandate Potential role Environment and Natural Resources Sector Working Group Ensure sustainable use and man agement of the environment and natural resources • Review the ENR sector • Prepare and monitor sector plans • Review ENR indicators in PMA and M&E framework Private Sector Promote and coordinate private sector involvement in national development • Develop infrastructure relevant to MEAs • Invest in technologies relevant to MEAs • Create alternative employment opportunities NGOs Effective participation in activi ties addressing land degradation, desertification, environmental conservation and mitigating effects of Drought in Uganda • Community mobilization • Create awareness on ENR issues in Uganda • Awareness and training of CBOs and local people on MEAs issues • Lobby and advocate for MEAs issues District level Mandate Potential role Department of Production and Environment Ensure sustainable management of the environment and natural resources • Prepare the District Environment Action Plan • Coordinate and monitor ENR management in districts • Sensitize local people on environmental management • Implement policies on environment management in the districts Department of Agriculture Provision of agriculture advisory services to enhance food security and increase farmers’ incomes • Provide agriculture advisory services to farmers and pastoralists • Implement agricultural policies in the districts • Promote sustainable land husbandry technologies Department of veterinary services Promote qualitative and quanti tative production of livestock and livestock products in an environ mentally sustainable manner • Training pastoralists in livestock management • Promoting pasture management and conservation • Address livestock overstocking • Promote livestock improvement 8280 80 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests Department of fisheries Contribute to sustainable allevia tion of poverty and food insecuri ty in the districts • Ensure sustainable utilization of fisheries resources in the dis tricts • Implement policies for sustainable fisheries management • Train fishermen in sustainable fisheries harvesting methods Department of Water Promotion and management of water resources in the districts • Implement policies on water development and management in the districts • Implement water resources management plans and strategies at the local level • Contract private sector organizations to develop water resources in the districts • Disseminate small scale irrigation and water harvesting technol ogies • Ensure sustainable utilization and management of water catch ments • Supervise construction of water dams, ponds and reservoirs in the district District Technical Planning Committee Plan all development activities in the districts • Formulate the district development plan • Monitor implementation of sectoral policies and plans in the districts NEPAD CAADP A strategic framework which guides country development efforts and partnerships in the agricultural sector. • Designating agriculture-led growth as a main strategy to achieve the MDG of halving the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day (MDG 1) • Pursuing a 6 percent average annual growth rate at the national level • Allocating 10 percent average annual sector growth rate at national level • Exploiting regional complementarities and cooperation to boost growth • Adopting the principles of policy efficiency , dialogue, review, and accountability, shared by all NEPAD programs • Strengthening and expanding partnerships and alliances to in clude farmers, agribusiness, and civil-society communities • Assigning program implementation to individual countries, coor dination by designated Regional Economic Communities (RECs), and facilitation by the NEPAD Secretariat TerrAfrica Partnership between African countries, regional organizations and international actors • Directly supports implementation of CAADP and UNCCD agendas • Provides a common platform for aligning investments and knowl edge by supporting program based approaches to scale up SLM IGAD Secretariat Facilitate and coordinate imple mentation of the IGAD Sub-Re gional Action Plan to combat desertification • Coordinate implementation of the IGAD SRAP • Support synergistic NAP implementation • Facilitate the identification, formulation and implementation of programmes/ projects addressing issues of trans-boundary ecosystems management • Promote partnership and capacity building for resource mobiliza tion to support NAP and SRAP implementation processes • Mobilize resources for implementation of the IGAD SRAP 8381 81 Ministry or Institution Mandate Roles and interests IGAD Climate Prediction and Application Centre Monitor drought in a timely man ner with respect to its intensity, geographical extent, duration and impact upon agricultural produc tion and to give early warning for the formulation of appropriate strategies to combat its adverse effects • Develop regional and national controlled climate data banks • Data processing including development of basic climatological statistics • Timely acquisition of near real time climate data • Monitor space-time evolutions of weather and climate extremes over the region • Capacity building in climate monitoring, modeling and prediction services • Delineation of risk zones of extreme climatic events • Assessment of impacts of extreme conditions of various so cio-economic activities • Timely dissemination of early warning products • Conduct public awareness and education of users of meteorolog ical products • Organization of climate outlook for the Greater Horn of Africa countries The Global Mechanism To promote actions leading to the mobilization and channeling of substantial financial resourc es, including for the transfer of technology, on a grant basis, and/ or on concessional or other terms, to affected developing country parties • Promoting partnership building among stakeholders • Marketing and creating awareness of the UNCCD to stakeholders • Mobilizing and channeling catalytic financial resources to prepare NAPs and accrued projects and programmes • Brokerage for UNCCD implementation • Analyzing and advising on funding for UNCCD implementation upon request • Collecting and disseminating information and technologies rele vant to UNCCD implementation International NGO Network on Desertification (RIOD) To promote action to combat desertification and to give NGOs and CBOs an effective role in the preparation, implementation and review of NAPs • Raise awareness on desertification in the North and South • Lobby for NGO participation in CCD implementation at interna tional level • Promote North – South and South – South cooperation and ex change of experiences in combating desertification among NGOs and CBOs • Contribute to planning, implementation, monitoring and evalua tion of elements of the UNCCD referring to participation of NGOs and CBOs • Facilitate global information sharing among NGOs in their efforts to combat desertification 8482 82 Annex V Schedule of activities, Key Inputs, Responsible Institution and Indicative Costs Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) Theme 1: Supporting on-the-ground activities for scaling – up SLM (Investment) 1.1Watershed Manage ment Practices promoted and degraded sites/ micro-catchments reha bilitated 1.1.1 Develop capacity/ Empower communities to rehabilitate selected degraded Catchments / sites 1.1.1 Assess capacity for multi-stakeholder management of watersheds; Build capacity and systems for multi-stakeholder man agement of micro-watersheds; MWE 4,850 1.1.2 Develop and implement participatory micro-watershed man agement plans 1.1.2 Develop and implement at least 15 Participatory micro-watershed manage ment plans in 10 years; Train communities in the restoration of degraded sites; Under take restoration or rehabilitation of at least 10 degraded sites/ micro-watersheds; Pre pare information for dissemination MWE 7,750 1.1.3 Strengthen com munity based investment in afforestation and reforestation 1.1.3 Establish 60 tree growing community groups in pilot areas; group dynamics train ing; Establish 60 tree nurseries in targeted zones; Pilot tree growing and engagement in the carbon trade as incentives MWE 7,375 1.1.4 Promote transition to catchment based water resources manage ment 1.1.4 Develop capacity at the grassroots in catchment based water resources manage ment; Support catchment based initiatives MWE 3,500 1.2 Conventional Soil and Water Conservation practices promoted 1.2.1 Scale out soil and water conservation prac tices in target areas 1.2.1 Procure field equipment for S&WC; train local artisans in the fabrication of simple S&WC field equipment; Conduct Training of Trainers sessions in target ar eas; Scale out Conservation agriculture; contour bunds; grass bunds; runoff har vesting, etc in target zones (See Table 2 for targets) MAAIF 40,500 1.2.2 Undertake Commu nity driven micro-proj ects in S&WC 1.2. 2 Develop guidelines for identifying micro-projects in S&WC; Identify 60 fund able micro-projects; Sensitize communi ties on available opportunities for com munity projects; Implement the identified micro-projects in SLM MAAIF 8, 850 8583 83 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 1.3 Incentive Mecha nisms for scaling up SLM / for SLM adoption promoted 1.3. Establish and op eretionalize links with Carbon Markets 1.3.1 Establish links with private and pub lic payments for environmental services (PES) MWE & NGOs Eco-agricul ture; Katoomba Group 1,500 1.3.2. Promote participation in Clean De velopment Mechanism (CDM) for applicable SLM activities; Link communities to Carbon , REDD incentives / markets/ mechanisms [– Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCM)] MWE & NGOs Eco-agricul ture; Katoomba Group 650 1.3.3 Advocate for government involve ment in carbon negotiations/ carbon in centives (to reduce operational costs and negotiate for better prices) MWE & NGOs Eco-agricul ture; Katoomba Group 550 1.4 Biomass energy / charcoal saving technol ogies promoted 1.4.1Promote efficient kilns in charcoal produc tion 1.4.1 Procure materials; Train 150 local ar tisans in the construction of efficient kilns; disseminate info. 1.1 MEMD & Private Sector 2,500 1.4. 2 Promote energy saving stoves in home steads and institutions. 1.4.2 Procure materials; Train 200 local artisans in the construction of efficient stoves; disseminate info. MEMD & Private Sector 2,300 1.4.3 Promote gasifica tion 1.4.3 Procure materials; Train 200 local ar tisans in the construction of gasification structures disseminate info. MEMD & Private Sector 1.700 1.4.4 Promote estab lishment of woodlots at individual and community levels 1.4.4 Train communities; establish quick maturing tree species suitable for fire wood; strengthen capacity of 60 groups / community nurseries MEMD & Private Sector 2,250 1.5 Water supply (for production and domestic uses) to pastoral com munities improved 1.5.1 Promote water harvesting technolo gies/ practices (water for domestic, livestock, irrigation etc) 1.5.1 Procure materials and construct; household and institutional rainwater harvesting/ ferro-cement tanks demos; Train 200 local artisans in the construction of household and institutional ferro-ce ment tanks; Provide incentives for private sector participation MAAIF & MWE 5,600 1.5.2 Construct valley tanks to harvest run-off 1.5.2 Procure materials for valley tanks; Construct valley tanks / large surface run off harvesting resovoirs (300M3 ) lined with HDPE dam liners; train local artisans in the construction of valley tanks and harvesting runoff from roads, roofs; huge rocks etc; conduct training of trainers. Provide incen tives for private sector participation MAAIF & MWE 10,000 8684 84 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 1.6 Small scale irrigation practices promoted 1.6.1 Establish small scale irrigation demon strations (utilizing run off /harvested water) 1.6.1 Procure small scale irrigation equip ment for pilot areas; Conduct training in irrigation and water management (farm ing communities; herdsmen and extension agents) MAAIF 7,800 1.6.2 Promote harnessing of water from permanent and semi-permanent sources 1.6.2 Organize 90 farming communities around permanent /semi-permanent water bodies; Encourage and provide incentives to private sector to invest in provision of water services; train communities in water harnessing techniques MAAIF 5,800 1.6.3 Establish water utilization infrastructure (watering points, water delivery piping) from water sources 1.6.3 Procure materials for simple water delivery from 90 water sources ( piping materials; drinking troughs etc); establish demos; train farmers; herdsmen in instal lation etc MAAIF 7,500 1.6.4 Promote diversifi cation 1.6.4 Support -. value chains which do not increase pressure on land (e.g. pineap ples, vanilla, NWFPs); value chains which may contribute to increase food security ;)doof elpats - avassac ,snaeb ,eziam .g.e( non-traditional sectors (e.g. livestock and related products); services: e.g. eco-tour ism MTTI 3,500 Theme 1 Sub total 124,475 Theme 2 : Strengthening the enabling institutional and policy environment for SLM 2.1 Capacity of UNC CD / NAP Focal Point strengthened to coordi nate, monitor and super vise SLM activities 2.1.1 Establish SLM Secretariat 2.1.1. Hire assistants / staff ; office rental; recurrent costs 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 4,800 2.1.2 Strengthen Capac ity of UNCCD National Focal Point Office 2.1.2 Assess capacity needs for project co ordination; Strengthen the infrastructure and equipment capacity of the national focal point office; Strengthen human ca pacity; procure vehicles; Vehicle O&M etc; Office Recurrent expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 3,500 2.1.3 Establish the project coordination framework 2.1.3 Develop and implement project annu al work plans and budgets; Develop and im plement project management systems and procedures; Establish the network of proj ect stakeholder institutions ( governments institutions, NGOs, LGs; CBOs, etc);Carry out a capacity assessment of stakeholder institutions; Implement capacity building plan for approved stakeholder institutions 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 1,350 2.1.4 Support Inter-Minis terial Technical Working Committee 2.1.4 Facilitate meetings; local and inter national travel; recurrent expenses; Advo cacy expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 850 2.1.5 Support SLM Platform 2.1.5 Facilitate meetings; local and inter national travel; recurrent expenses; Advo cacy expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 2,250 2.1.6 Support National Steering Committee 2.1.6 Facilitate meetings; local and inter national travel; recurrent expenses; Advo cacy expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 1,500 2.1.7 Strengthen the institutional implemen tation framework 2.1.7 Assess capacity needs for institu tions/ nodes coordination; Develop and im plement project management systems and procedures; Equip implementation units/ nodes at national and district levels; 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 3,500 8784 84 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 1.6 Small scale irrigation practices promoted 1.6.1 Establish small scale irrigation demon strations (utilizing run off /harvested water) 1.6.1 Procure small scale irrigation equip ment for pilot areas; Conduct training in irrigation and water management (farm ing communities; herdsmen and extension agents) MAAIF 7,800 1.6.2 Promote harnessing of water from permanent and semi-permanent sources 1.6.2 Organize 90 farming communities around permanent /semi-permanent water bodies; Encourage and provide incentives to private sector to invest in provision of water services; train communities in water harnessing techniques MAAIF 5,800 1.6.3 Establish water utilization infrastructure (watering points, water delivery piping) from water sources 1.6.3 Procure materials for simple water delivery from 90 water sources ( piping materials; drinking troughs etc); establish demos; train farmers; herdsmen in instal lation etc MAAIF 7,500 1.6.4 Promote diversifi cation 1.6.4 Support -. value chains which do not increase pressure on land (e.g. pineap ples, vanilla, NWFPs); value chains which may contribute to increase food security ;)doof elpats - avassac ,snaeb ,eziam .g.e( non-traditional sectors (e.g. livestock and related products); services: e.g. eco-tour ism MTTI 3,500 Theme 1 Sub total 124,475 Theme 2 : Strengthening the enabling institutional and policy environment for SLM 2.1 Capacity of UNC CD / NAP Focal Point strengthened to coordi nate, monitor and super vise SLM activities 2.1.1 Establish SLM Secretariat 2.1.1. Hire assistants / staff ; office rental; recurrent costs 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 4,800 2.1.2 Strengthen Capac ity of UNCCD National Focal Point Office 2.1.2 Assess capacity needs for project co ordination; Strengthen the infrastructure and equipment capacity of the national focal point office; Strengthen human ca pacity; procure vehicles; Vehicle O&M etc; Office Recurrent expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 3,500 2.1.3 Establish the project coordination framework 2.1.3 Develop and implement project annu al work plans and budgets; Develop and im plement project management systems and procedures; Establish the network of proj ect stakeholder institutions ( governments institutions, NGOs, LGs; CBOs, etc);Carry out a capacity assessment of stakeholder institutions; Implement capacity building plan for approved stakeholder institutions 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 1,350 2.1.4 Support Inter-Minis terial Technical Working Committee 2.1.4 Facilitate meetings; local and inter national travel; recurrent expenses; Advo cacy expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 850 2.1.5 Support SLM Platform 2.1.5 Facilitate meetings; local and inter national travel; recurrent expenses; Advo cacy expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 2,250 2.1.6 Support National Steering Committee 2.1.6 Facilitate meetings; local and inter national travel; recurrent expenses; Advo cacy expenses 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 1,500 2.1.7 Strengthen the institutional implemen tation framework 2.1.7 Assess capacity needs for institu tions/ nodes coordination; Develop and im plement project management systems and procedures; Equip implementation units/ nodes at national and district levels; 2.1 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 3,500 85 85 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 2.2 Capacity of insti tutions; LGs, CSOs etc to plan, implement and monitor SLM improved 2.2 Strengthen capaci ty of institutions at all levels ( LGs; CSOs; etc) to plan, implement, monitor SLM interventions 2.2 Human and infrastructure develop ment – staff training (short and long term); computers; network expansion etc; recur rent expenses 2.2 MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 3,500 2.3 Priority SLM issues mainstreamed into devel opment frameworks and action plans 2.3.1 Mainstream SLM into sector and national development frameworks (DSIPs and NDP) 2.3. 1 Prepare guidelines for mainstream ing SLM issues into DSIPs, and NDP; Train stakeholders on skills for mainstreaming; Mainstream during the 5 year planning cy cle. 2.3.1 MWE, MAAIF, MEMD, MTTI, MLHUD 500 2.3.2 Strengthen SLM mainstreaming, develop ment and implementation of DEAPs & SEAPs with integrated SLM issues 2.3.2 Prepare guidelines for mainstreaming SLM issues into DSIPs, SEAPs, DDPs; Train stakeholders on skills for mainstreaming; Lobby district councils and department to mainstream SLM into DDPs and DEAPS; Promote partnerships with NGOs and other actors to operationalize the DEAPs 2.3.2 Local government & NEMA 1,800 2.4 Climate/ climate variability and Change monitoring system improved 2.4. Strengthen capacity for climate monitoring 2.4 Human and infrastructure develop ment – staff training (short and long term); procure vehicles; computers; network ex pansion etc; Rehabilitation of old climatic stations; Collection, analysis and archiving / digitizing historical climatic data scat tered at various climatic stations 2.4 MWE – Met Dept. 6,500 8886 86 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 2.5 Vulnerability to cli mate change / variability reduced 2.5.1 Strengthen ca pacity in early warning systems (Short term and medium term weather and climate forecasts drought, floods etc) 2.5.1 Capacity development (short term and long term training); procure computers and soft wares; Develop low cost early warning systems, contingency and decision support systems; Info. Dissemination mechanisms including sensitization of end-users of weather and climate information. 2.5.1 MWE – Met. Dept. 2,550 2.5.2 Develop capacity in early warning systems (food security / forecasts etc) 1.1.2 Human capacity development for the Early Warning Unit /Centre(short and long term training); Infrastructure development for the Early Warning unit /Centre (com puters; software etc); Collection, archiving and analysis of data; Build knowledge base (IK) of adaptive capacity/ strategies by communities; Info. dissemination mecha nisms 2.5.2 MAAIF – Early Warning Unit 1,200 2.5.3. (a) Support imple mentation of the National Climate Adaptation Pro gram of Action (NAPA) 2.5.3 (a) Coordinate implementation of NAPA projects within line ministries and Institutions; Monitor gaps and strengths in NAPA implementation; Pilot NAPA subproj ects in pilot villages known as the millen nium development villages (NAPA villages) 2.5.3 (a) MWE – Climate Change Unit/ UNFCCC Focal Point 500 2.5.3 (b) Upgrade the NAPA to cover medium to long-term national cli mate change adaptation 2.5.3 b) Review the NAPA, and update with a view to putting n place a revised NAPA. Roll out NAPA implementation to the rest of districts in the later years. 2.5.3 (b) MWE – Climate Change Unit / UNFCCC Focal Point 250 2..5.3 (c) Support imple mentation of the National Action Plan on Desertifi cation (NAP) 2.5.3 Support UNCCD Focal point Office to coordinate NAP and SLM activities 2.5.3 (c) MAAIF – UNCCD Focal Point 300 2.5.4 Develop stakehold er capacities to address climate change at all levels 2.5.4 Train end users on various adapta tion methodologies as well as mitigation options; develop capacity in Mitigation projects’ implementation including CDM projects and adaptation options. Pilot demonstration projects on Climate change adaptation and mitigation increasing over all awareness. 2.5.4 MWE – Climate Change Unit/ UNFCCC 1,300 2.5.5. Promote infor mation dissemination / awareness on Climate & climate change 2.5.5 Involve the media in promoting cli mate change and variability awareness in cluding mitigation and awareness. Support communities to apply weather and climate information for adaptation and early warn ing. Disseminate weather and climate in formation through the media. 2.5.5 MWE – Met Dept./ Climate Change Unit 500 2.5.6 Develop emergency response plans 2.5.6 Strengthen contingency planning and funding; Formulate response strategies; Mainstream SLM into disaster management and emergency response strategies and op erations; 2.5.6 PM Office 570 2.6 Policies and regula tory frameworks relevant to SLM harmonized 2.6 Harmonize and update sector policies, legal and regulatory frameworks 2.6 Identify/ Review SLM policies, laws and regulations and propose areas for up dating (with emphasis on bye-laws and or grass root regulations); Train LC to make bye-laws from existing policies ; Carry out stakeholder sensitization/ consultations at all levels; Awareness at the grassroots; Un gnitadpu rof sgniteem ecrof ksat ekatred policies; 2.6 MAAIF, MWE, MLHD, MTTI and MEMD 3,500 8987 87 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 2.7 SLM interventions linked to trade 2.7 Enhance coordination of SLM interventions and trade 2.7 Promote coordination on the develop ment and implementation of agriculture and trade sector development policies and plans (e.g. ENR SWAp, Agriculture In vestment Plan, Trade Development Poli cies; Develop integrated and multisectoral sub-sector strategies for each relevant sub-sector/value chain (which may lower the pressure on land or increase food secu rity; Set up a monitoring system on market trends, demand and supply of relevant sta ple crops which could be traded at regional level (e.g. maize, beans, cassava) and carry out marketing studies in the region 2.7 MTTI and MAAIF 700 2.7 Capacity of local institutions to enforce bye laws and regulations in SLM developed 2.7 Develop capacity of local institutions to enforce bye laws and regulations in SLM 2.7 Sensitize LCs and local communities on laws and ordinances on SLM; Sensitize LCs to put in place mechanisms to enforce bye laws and ordinances in SLM; Advocate for a consistent and effective mechanisms for participatory enforcement of laws on SLM; Rationalize mandates of relevant in stitutions in enforcing laws and policies; Increase paralegal training in ENR/SLM management laws; Train and involve legal aid agencies in awareness raising on SLM laws and policies; Translate laws into local languages 2.7 MWE – NEMA or dele gated agency 2,850 2.8 Gender issues mainstreamed in SLM programs/ interventions 2.8 Mainstream gender issues in SLM interven tions 2.8 Advocate for equity and recognition of different gender roles in SLM; Integrate gender issues in SLM policies; Train SLM actors in gender perspective e.g. gender analysis, and monitoring and evaluation; Sensitize community leaders on gender issues in SLM; Advocate for integration of gender analysis in SLM R&D programmes 2.8 All sectors 350 2.9 Land use plans developed 2.9 Develop land use plans from land suitabil ity maps 2.9 Procure hard wares and soft wares; de velop capacity in land use planning (short courses only) ; Archive and digitize the different layers of info. (topography, soils; climate; vegetation; land suitability maps etc); Develop detailed land use plans for the four zones at a scale of 1:50,000 ; hold consultation meetings at all levels ; dis seminate products. 2.9 MLHUD 7,450 9088 88 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 2.10 Promote avenues/ practices to reduce conflicts on NR use (land tenure) 2.10.1 Strengthen / Develop capacity to peacefully resolve/ han dle conflicts in NR use 2.10.1 Train manpower in NR conflict res olution skills; Integrate peace building mechanisms into extension messages for SLM; Strengthen local institutions in planning, monitoring, evaluation and im plementation of SLM; Formulation and enforcement of bye-laws and ordinances on NR use; Formulation of pastoral code ; Advocate for alternative livelihoods sys tems to minimize conflicts; Disseminate info. On innovative / successful resolution mechanisms 2.10.1 MLHUD; MAAIF & MWE 2,500 2.10.2 Pilot Land demar cation. in selected areas 2.10.2 Land demarcation. 2.10.2 MLHUD 5,500 2.10.3 Promote delivery of services to mobile pastoralists 2.10.3 Sensitize policy makers and district technical staff on importance of mobile fa cilities/ services for pastoral systems; Ad vocate for policy focusing on improvement of livelihoods in pastoral systems; Advo cate for provision of mobile infrastructure for pastoralists by the relevant sectors 2.10.3 MAAIF 2,500 Theme 2 Sub-total 62,570 Theme 3 : Strengthening commercial and advisory services for SLM and alternative livelihood options 3.1 Investments in alternative livelihoods supported 3.1.1 Promote production and marketing of SLM friendly by-products from drylands 3.1.1 Establish and strengthen 150 groups/ cooperatives in the Cattle Corridor; pro mote the development of SLM friendly value chains such as non wood forest prod ucts (e.g. gum Arabic, aloes, shea butter) through skills development and value add ing technology support 3.1 MTTI & MAAIF 1,500 3.1.2 Promote incentive mechanisms for the private sector to invest in drylands etavirp eht ot sevitnecni edivorP )a( 2.1.3 sector to invest in storage, processing and marketing of agro-products; Train dry land farmers in post-harvest handling of agro-products processing; Develop stan dards on storage of agro-products MTTI & MAAIF 1,300 3.1.2 (b) Advocate for development of basic infrastructure; Advocate for poli cy targeting incentives for private sector investments in drylands; Advocate for mi cro-finance outreach institutions in target districts MTTI & MAAIF 350 3.1.3 Promote alternative livelihood opportuni ties (aquaculture, fruit growing, bee keeping, agro-forestry etc) 3.1.3 Advocate for micro-finance services to drylands or link communities to micro-fi nance institutions; Setup 150 pilot initia tives for alternative incomes (bee keeping, aquaculture, agro forestry); train commu nities on enterprise development; Support pilot initiatives in processing and value ad dition to increase marketing opportunities; Disseminate information on available and new alternative livelihoods MTTI & MAAIF 4,500 3.1.4 Promote production and trade in crops that reduce pressure on land 3.1.4 Build capacity & facilitate standard ization, packaging, labeling and certifica tion of crops which do not increase pres sure on land (e.g. pineapples, vanilla, gum Arabic, aloe, shea nuts, etc.) and; Link val ue chains to climate change and variability financing mechanisms MTTI 500 9189 89 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 3.1.5 Develop capacity in business development skills 3.1.5 Train 150 groups/ cooperatives in en trepreneurial/ business development skills MTTI 1,450 3.2 Market information flow and infrastructure; and business skills enhanced 3.2.1 Identify markets and create business to business linkages for enterprises in national, regional and internation al markets 3.2.1 Identify potential markets and pre pare entry strategy; Develop and opere tionalize a market information dissemina tion system (SMSs; community radios; spot messages; newspaper briefs etc); create B2B linkages for selected value chains; disseminate information of standards and guidelines for export of non commodities to national, regional and international mar kets MTTI 2,500 3.2.2 Provide incentives to the private sector to develop market infra structure (cold storage facilities; rural based processing, etc) 3.2.2 Sensitize private sector on opportu nities for investment in drylands; provide incentives and support the development of centralized market infrastructure facilities based on a public/private sector partner ships. MTTI 1,600 Theme 3 Sub-total 13,700 Theme 4 : Support SLM Research and dissemination of best 4.1 Fertilizer recommen dations updated in the target zones 4.1 Develop site specific fertilizer recommenda tions 4.1 Establish fertilizer response trials for 5 key crops at 10 sites; analysis and dissemi nation of info. 4.1 MAAIF NARO 7,800 4.2 Land suitability maps developed for the target areas 4.2.1 Assess and update land resources informa tion in the target zones 4.2.1 Strengthen human capacity in land use planning at all levels (long-term and short term training); procure hard wares and software for field and laboratory/ main hub database; procure vehicles; procure satellite images; aerial photos; maps etc; carry out land resources assessments for the four zones; ground truth field data etc 4.2 MAAIF NARO 12,080 4.2.2 Develop land suit ability maps for the target areas (aprrox. ¾ of the country) evihcra ,ezylana ,ezitigid ,elbmessA 2.2.4 the different layers of land resources, cli matic etc information for the four zones; develop detailed land suitability maps at a scale of 1:50,000; carry out consultations with stakeholders; disseminate info. 5,500 4.3 Climate change adaptation information generated 4.3. 1 Establish costs / implications of climate change impacts (current estimates and cost of no-action, etc) 4.3.1 Assess the vulnerability of sectoral policies and plans to the impacts of cli mate change; Cost current sectoral climate change impacts; Project potential cost of sectoral impacts of future climate change. 4.3.1 MWE – Climate Change Unit / UNFCCC 550 4.3.2 Develop climate change scenarios (to guide climate change adaptation advisory services) 4.3.2 Assemble all data necessary to input into appropriate models; Attachment for 2 scientists to two different centers of ex cellence in climate change modeling. Run models to generate scenarios for future climate change; Develop robust adaptation advisory ser vices 4.3.2 MWE Climate Change Unit / UNFCCC 1,500 4.3.3 Establish/ assess magnitude, effects and monetary value of land degradation 4.3.3 Studies on land degradation 4.3.3. MWE – Climate Change Unit 1,550 9290 90 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 4.3.4. Support studies on value chains 4.3.4.Studies on improving value chains resilience to climate change; Studies pro viding evidence of the higher economic returns of value chains embedding SLM production practices (taking into consider ation the opportunity costs 4.3.4 MTTI 900 Theme 4 Sub-total 29,880 Theme 5 : Improving and strengthening SLM knowledge management 5.1. MIS for M&E estab lished 5.1 Develop and oper ationalize an integrated GIS supported Man agement Information System (MIS) 5.1 Assess the institutional capacity for SLM data management (Consultancy); Es tablish a network of stakeholders for SLM data sharing; Design a MIS to include -a) raw data capture and processing system for field operators; b) processing, analysis and storage in the data bank ; Develop a GIS Supported MIS System (Consultancy); Strengthen the infrastructure and equip ment base for SLM data management (GIS and MIS hardware and software procure ment and installment )- Central Hub; In stitutional nodes; Operationilize the MIS; Update and harmonize data management protocols including systems and proce dures; Train key data management stake holders in processing and analyzing remote sensed information; Package information from the geo-referenced database for dis semination 5.1 MAAIF UNCCD Focal Point or Des ignated Lead Institution 3,750 5.2. Results – Based M&E Framework established 5.2. Develop and opera tionalize a Results-Based M&E Framework 5.2 Establish M&E Framework (Consultan cy); Develop and test participatory M&E tools (Consultancy); Establish baselines for all activities; Develop M&E training mate rials; Conduct M&E training; Evaluate dif ferent SLM project interventions; Conduct regular M&E; Package information for dis semination 5.2 MAAIF UNCCD Focal Point or Des ignated Lead Institution 3,350 5.2.2 Develop and oper ationalize an M&E that links to the trade M&E system 5.2.2Develop a M&E system to assess the impact of trade activities on SLM (e.g. building on the trade M&E system); Identify successful cases and promote the sharing of knowledge to showcase SLM embedded in value chains; Collect statistical data and develop information systems which would help market development for non-commod ity value chains which are good for SLM MTTI 600 5.3 An effective infor mation management and communication system developed 5.3 Develop and opera tionalize an information management and commu nication system 5.3 Carry out an information needs and capacity assessment of the information stakeholders; Recruit and train informa tion specialists in SLM information man agement ; Re-package key information into simplified formats; Translate key basic segaugnal lacol 5 tsael ta otni noitamrofni (Swahili, Luganda, Luo, Runyakitara and Ateso); Develop and implement informa tion management and sharing frameworks for all key stakeholders 5.3 MAAIF - UNCCD Focal Point 4,530 9391 91 Outputs Main Activity and key sub-activities Indicative Key Inputs (See detailed targets in Table 2) Responsible Sector/ Lead Institution Total Indic ative Costs (‘000 $) 5.4 Increased public awareness of SLM inter ventions 5.4 Develop and imple ment a robust Communi cation Strategy 5.4 Develop and implement the communi cations strategy by, among others: Sup porting the implementation of SLM related curricula in schools (poems, songs, dra ma); Media campaigns including TV, Radio, print, etc; Developing and disseminating SLM materials, posters, brochures for all Stakeholders; Developing and delivering training and awareness programmes to all Stakeholders; Establishing and or strength ening community based drama groups; Publishing quality SLM information in journals and internet/project website; Pre sentation of findings at conferences, exhi bitions at national and international level; Carry out periodic evaluation and update of the awareness campaign 5.4 MAAIF - UNCCD Focal Point 2,450 Theme 5 – Sub-total 14,680 GRAND TOTAL 245,305 9492 A n n ex V I D et ai le d pr oj ec t by p ro je ct li st in g of o n go in g an d pl an ne d in it ia ti ve s in S LM U SI F Th em e U SI F R es ul ts a re a D el iv er y M ec ha ni sm (i nt er ve nt io n ar ea ) E xi st in g P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s P ro po se d / N ew o r E xp en de d P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s1 O n go in g pr oj ec ts Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Fi na nc in g (0 00 U S$ ) Ti m e fr am e P ro po se d ac ti vi ti es Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Th em e 1: S up po rt in g on th e – gr ou nd ac ti vi ti es f or sc al in g up S LM 1. 1 Im pr ov ed w at er sh ed m an ag em en t an d re ha bi li ta te d de gr ad ed s it es / m ic ro ca tc hm en ts D ev el op a p la n fo r im pr ov ed m an ag e m en t of L. K yo ga ba si n M it ig at io n of L ak e K yo ga fl oo ds L. K yo ga B as in M W E M W E M W E M W E 35 0 [G O U ] 20 0 0 20 10 D ev el op c ap ac it y/ E m po w er c om m un it ie s to re ha bi li ta te s el ec te d de gr ad ed C at ch m en ts / si te s A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s 2 M W E N at io na l W et la nd s M an ag em en t P ro gr am m e E n h an ce d kn ow le dg e & u n de rs ta n di n g of e co lo gi ca l pr oc es se s an d so ci al ec on om ic v al u es o f w et la n ds C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e 5, 98 0 [R G B ] 20 01 20 10 D ev el op a nd im pl em en t pa rt ic ip at or y m ic ro w at er sh ed m an ag em en t pl an s A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s P ro m ot e ap pr oa ch es t o co m m un it y pa rt ic ip at io n in fo re st m gt Fo re st m gm t an d co n se rv at io n [E U ] St re ng th en c om m un it y ba se d in ve st m en t in af fo re st at io n an d re fo re st at io n A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s M an ag em en t of w at er re so ur ce s of U ga nd a S up po rt t o W at er R es ou rc es M g’ t 6, 00 0 [D A N ID A ] 20 03 20 12 P ro m ot e tr an si ti on t o ca tc hm en t ba se d w at er re so ur ce s m an ag em en t A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s 1. 2 In cr ea se d ad op ti o n o f in te gr at ed n u tr ie nt m an ag em en t( IN M ) pr ac ti ce s P ro m ot io n of s oi l a nd w at er co n se rv at io n te ch no lo gi es w it hi n co m m un it ie s in ta rg et ed h ot sp ot s Fa rm In co m e E nh an ce m en t P ro je ct [I m pr ov e ru ra l w el fa re t hr ou gh s u st ai na bl e re so ur ce m gt & a gr ic . de ve lo pm en t] B u sh en yi & Li ra , M W E / M A A IF 5, 11 5 [A D F & N or di c] 20 05 20 10 S ca le o u t IN M in cl ud in g so il a nd w at er co n se rv at io n pr ac ti ce s, a gr o fo re st ry , im pr ov ed f al lo w s, c on se rv at io n ag ri cu lt ur e, et c. A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s M A A IF a nd M W E w / LG A s, N A A D S , o th er s? A d d re ss t h e se ri ou s d ec li n e in s oi l f er ti li ty & c ro p p ro d u ct iv it y IN M A S P M A A IF M A A IF M A A IF E U 20 02 U n d er ta ke c o m m u n it y d ri ve n m ic ro p ro je ct s in S & W C A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s Im pr ov em en t of c om m un it y ba se d S LM in it ia ti ve s S u st ai na bl e La nd M an ag em en t K ab al e & K is or o 1, 57 2 [U N E P] 20 07 20 12 S oi l f er ti li ty m gt a nd s up po rt to t ea p la nt in g S o il C o n se rv a ti o n & A g ro fo re s tr y C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e S ID A A cc es s to im pr ov ed s ee d va ri et ie s, f er ti li ze rs & pe st i c id es A fr ic a D ev el op m en t Fo un da ti on P ro gr am m e K am pa la M FP E D M FP E D 1, 00 0 [U S A / G O U ] 20 06 20 11 E nh an ce h ou se ho ld in co m es th ro ug h w ea lt h cr ea ti on P ov er ty A ll ev ia ti on P ro je ct 1, 00 0 [G O U ] 20 07 20 12 1. 3 P ro m ot io n of In ce nt iv e m ec ha ni sm s fo r sc al in g up S LM / S LM a do pt io n S up po rt c om m un it ie s to ac ce ss c ar bo n fi na nc e fo r co n se rv at io n Tr ee s fo r G lo ba l B en ef it s B u sh en yi , H oi m a, M as in di E C O TR U S T D FI D , U S A C ap ac it y B ui ld in g, C FM A gr ee m en ts P a rt ic ip a to ry F o re st M g t o f C e n tr a l & P ri va te /C o m m u n a l fo re st s H oi m a, M as in di N FA U S ID E st ab li sh & o pe ra ti on al iz e li nk s w it h C ar bo n M ar ke ts E st ab li sh li nk s w it h C ar bo n m ar ke ts M W E & N G O s [E co Li nk c om m un it ie s to C ar bo n , R E D D in ce nt iv es / m ar ke ts A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s M W E & N G O s [E co A dv oc ac y fo r ca rb on in ce nt iv es M W E & N G O s [E co ag ri cu lt ur e, K at oo m ba G ro up ] ag ri cu lt ur e, K at oo m ba G ro up ] ag ri cu lt ur e, K at oo m ba G ro up ] 9593 U SI F Th em e U SI F R es ul ts a re a D el iv er y M ec ha ni sm (i nt er ve nt io n ar ea ) E xi st in g P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s P ro po se d / N ew o r E xp en de d P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s1 O n go in g pr oj ec ts Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Fi na nc in g (0 00 U S$ ) Ti m e fr am e P ro po se d ac ti vi ti es Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y 1. 4 In cr ea se d ad op ti on o f al te rn at iv e so ur ce s of e ne rg y by t ar ge t co m m un it ie s an d in st it ut io ns D ev el op U ga nd a’ s ru ra l e ne rg y an d in fo rm at io n/ te ch no lo gy se ct or E ne rg y fo r R ur al Tr an sf or m at io n C ou nt ry w id e M E M D / G TZ 67 ,6 00 [G EF / ID A ] 20 02 P ro m ot e ga si fi ca ti on A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s M E M D M E M D P ro m ot io n of a lt er na ti ve en er gy t ec hn ol og ie s fo r co m m un it ie s in t ar ge te d a re as (b io m as s, g as if ic at io n) P ro m ot io n of s us ta in ab le ch ar co al p ro du ct io n in Lu w er o & N ak as on go la [P ro m ot e su st ai na bl e ch ar co al p ro du ct io n] C at tl e co rr id or , N or th er n & e as te rn U ga nd a, L . V ic to ri a B as in M E M D G EF / U N D P 20 06 20 10 P ro m ot e e ff ic ie nt k il ns in c ha rc oa l p ro du ct io n C at tl e co rr id or , Tr ai ni ng o n en er gy s av in g te ch no lo gi es & p ro vi si on o f tr ee s ee dl in gs A gr ic . I nt er ve nt io ns & li ve li ho od s up po rt f or ID P s Li ra , A m ur ia LG s/ N G O s FA O 20 06 P ro m ot e en er gy s av in g st ov es in h om es te ad s & in st it ut io ns A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s M E M D , N G O s Su pp ly , p ro m ot e & c on se rv e su it ab le t re e se ed s fo r tr ee pl an ti ng Tr ee S ee d C en tr e V ar io us M W E M W E M W E M W E M W E EU / G O U O ng oi ng P ro m ot e es ta bl is hm en t o f w oo dl ot s A ll f ou r ta rg et zo ne s M E M D , N FA N G O s Im pr ov e m gt o f U ga nd a’ s fo re st r es ou rc es t o m ee t do m es ti c ne ed s Im pr ov e m gt o f U ga nd a’ s fo re st r es ou rc es t o m ee t do m es ti c ne ed s Fo re st ry r eh ab il it at io n C en tr al R es er ve F or es t N or w ay G re en U ga nd a by e st ab li sh in g ne w f or es t r es ou rc es Fo re st s ec to r po li cy a nd st ra te gy D FI D 1. 5 Im pr ov ed w at er su pp ly [f or p ro du ct io n & d om es ti c us e] t o pa st or al c om m un it ie s D ev el op m en t o f w at er in fr as tr uc tu re W at er f or p ro du ct io n [P ro m ot e de ve lo pm en t o f w at er s up pl y to m od er ni se ag ri cu lt ur e] 27 ,6 30 (D A N I D A ) 19 99 20 15 P ro m ot e w at er h ar ve st in g te ch no lo gi es / pr ac ti ce s (w at er f or d om es ti c, li ve st oc k, ir ri ga ti on , e tc .] C at tl e co rr id or C at tl e co rr id or C at tl e co rr id or M W E M A A IF M W E M A A IF M W E M A A IF M W E M A A IF M W E M A A IF [M an ag em en t o f w at er re so ur ce s of U ga nd a] Su pp or t t o W at er R es ou rc es M g’ t C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e C ou nt ry w id e 60 ,0 00 (D A N ID A & SI D A ) 20 03 2 01 2 E st ab li sh / co ns tr uc t v al le y ta nk s 1. 6 P ro m ot io n of sm al l s ca le ir ri ga ti on pr ac ti ce s R es ea rc h on s pe ci fi c cr op s fo r pr od uc ti on & p ro du ct iv it y Fa rm p ow er & S m al l ir ri ga ti on s ys te m r es ea rc h V ar io us N A R O / M A A IF A R TP II & ID A O ng oi ng E st ab li sh s m al l s ca le ir ri ga ti on de m on st ra ti on s (u ti li zi ng r un o ff / ha rv es te d w at er ) In cr ea se f oo d pr od uc ti on & ac hi ev e se lf s uf fi ci en cy in r ic e Sm al l s ca le ir ri ga ti on de ve lo pm en t I & II M A A IF FA O P ro m ot e ha rn es si ng o f w at er f ro m p er m an en t an d se m i pe rm an en t s ou rc es La ve V ic to ri a ba si n, e as te rn an d no rt he rn , hi gh la nd s E st ab li sh w at er u ti li za ti on in fr as tr uc tu re [u ti li zi ng w at er f or m p er m an en t a nd s em i pe rm an en t s ou rc es ] La ve V ic to ri a ba si n, e as te rn an d no rt he rn , hi gh la nd s 9694 94 U S IF T h em e U S IF R es u lt s ar ea D el iv er y M ec h an is m (i n te rv en ti on a re a) E xi st in g P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s P ro p os ed / N ew o r E xp en de d P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s1 O n g oi n g pr oj ec ts Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge n cy Fi n an ci n g (0 0 0 U S $) Ti m e fr am e P ro p os ed a ct iv it ie s Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge n cy Th em e 2 : S tr en g th en in g en ab li n g en vi ro n m en t fo r S LM 2 .1 S tr en g th en ed ca p ac it y o f U N C C D Fo ca l p oi n t O ff ic e to c o or d in at e an d ad vo ca te f or U S IF S LM S u p p o rt f o r c o o rd in a ti o n s tr u c tu re s a n d o ff ic e s a t n a ti o n a l le v e l S u p p or t to M TC S S ec re ta ri at K am p al a M F P E D 9 0 0 [E U / A u st ri a] 2 0 0 5 2 0 1 0 E st ab li sh S LM S ec re ta ri at S tr en g th en c ap ac it y o f U N C C D N at io n al F o ca l P oi n t O ff ic e E st ab li sh t h e p ro je ct c o or d in at io n f ra m ew or k S u p p or t In te r M in is te ri al T ec h n ic al W or ki n g C o m m it te e S u p p or t S LM P la tf or m S u p p or t N at io n al S te er in g C o m m it te e S tr en g th en t h e in st it u ti o n al im p le m en ta ti o n fr am ew or k 2 .2 S tr en g th en ed ca p ac it y o f in st it u ti o n s; L G s, C S O s, e tc t o p la n , im p le m en t, m o n it or S LM in te rv en ti o n s Im p ro ve c o ll ab or at io n a m o n g va ri o u s st ak eh o ld er s S tr en g th en in g th e R o le o f C S O s in U g an d a K am p al a U L A [I LC ] S tr en g th en c ap ac it y o f in st it u ti o n s at a ll le ve ls ( LG s, C S O s, e tc .) t o p la n , i m p le m en t, m o n it or S LM in te rv en ti o n s A ll f o u r ta rg et zo n es U N C C D f o ca l p oi n t o ff ic e, M W E , M A A IF , M M E D , M T TI , M LH U D C a p a ci ty b u il d in g f o r C B O s to a d d re ss e n vi ro n m e n ta l is su e s C a p a ci ty b u il d in g f o r C B O s to a d d re ss e n vi ro n m e n ta l is su e s S u p p or t to P ri or it y E n vi ro n m en ta l A sp ec ts o f D E P s K ib al e/ M b al e3 E C O TR U S T [W B ] 2 .3 In cr ea se d m ai n st re am in g o f S LM in to n at io n al a n d lo ca l d ev el o p m en t fr am ew or k s P ro vi si o n o f ta rg et ed S LM te ch n ic al — a ss is ta n ce t o se ct or p la n n in g M ai n st re am S LM in to s ec to r an d n at io n al d ev el o p m en t fr am ew or k s (D S IP s & N D P ) N at io n al U N C C D f o ca l p oi n t o ff ic e, M W E , M A A IF , M M E D , M T TI , M LH U D S tr en g th en S LM m ai n st re am in g , d ev el o p m en t an d im p le m en ta ti o n o f D E A P s & S E A P s w it h in te g ra te d S LM is su es 2 .4 Im p ro ve d cl im at e/ cl im at e va ri ab il it y an d ch an g e m o n it or in g sy st em s P ro vi d e st ra te g ic in te rv en ti o n s & d ev el o p ca p ac it y to d el iv er s er vi ce s M et eo ro lo g ic al S u p p or t fo r P M A C o u n tr y w id e C o u n tr y w id e C o u n tr y w id e C o u n tr y w id e 5 4 0 [G O U ] 2 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 S tr en g th en c ap ac it y fo r cl im at e m o n it or in g M W E – M et D ep t, M W E – C li m at e C h an g e U n it 2 .5 R ed u ce d vu ln er ab il it y to cl im at e ch an g e P ro vi d e re le va n t in fo rm at io n to s ta ke h o ld er s fo r ap p ro p ri at e ac ti o n . D ev el o p m en t o f N at io n al E ar ly W ar n in g S ys te m . M A A IF M A A IF M A A IF 2 2 0 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 8 S tr en g th en c ap ac it y in e ar ly w ar n in g sy st em s (S h or t te rm a n d m ed iu m t er m w ea th er a n d cl im at e fo re ca st s d ro u g h t, f lo o d s et c) M W E , M A A IF , M W E – C li m at e C h an g e U n it D ev el o p ca p ac it y in e ar ly w ar n in g sy st em s (f o o d se cu ri ty / f or ec a st s et c) M W E , M A A IF , M W E – C li m at e C h an g e U n it S u p p or t im p le m en ta ti o n o f th e N at io n al C li m at e A d ap ta ti o n P ro g ra m o f A ct io n ( N A P A ) M W E , M A A IF , M W E – C li m at e C h an g e U n it U p g ra d e th e N A P A t o co ve r m ed iu m t o lo n g te rm n at io n al c li m at e ch an g e ad ap ta ti o n S u p p or t im p le m en ta ti o n o f th e N at io n al A ct io n P la n o n D es er ti fi ca ti o n ( N A P ) D ev el o p st ak eh o ld er c ap ac it ie s to a d d re ss cl im at e ch an g e at a ll le ve ls P ro m o te in fo rm at io n d is se m in at io n / aw ar en es s o n c li m at e & c li m at e ch an g e – at al l l ev el s D ev el o p em er g en cy r es p o n se p la n s 2 .6 H ar m o n iz ed p o li ci es a n d re g u la to ry fr am ew or k s re le va n t to S LM A d d re ss ir ri g at io n p o li cy & im p le m en t su st ai n ab le ir ri g at io n S m al lh o ld er Ir ri g at io n D ev ’t & W at er H ar ve st in g P ro je ct In cr ea se p o li cy a tt en ti o n t o ke y a sp ec ts in p ro m o ti n g S LM N at u ra l R es o u rc e M an ag em en t P ro je ct G O U H ar m o n iz e an d u p d at e se ct or p o li ci es , l eg al an d re g u la to ry f ra m ew or k s 9795 95 U SI F Th em e U SI F Re su lt s ar ea D el iv er y M ec ha ni sm (in te rv en ti on a re a) Ex is ti ng P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s Pr op os ed / N ew o r E xp en de d P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s1 O n go in g pr oj ec ts Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Fi na nc in g (0 00 U S$ ) Ti m e fr am e Pr op os ed a ct iv it ie s Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Su pp or t C O M ES A’ s ag ri c. Po lic y & re gi on al in te gr at io n ag en da Ag ri c. P ro du ct io n, M ar ke ti ng an d Re gi on al In te gr at io n H ea dq ua rt er s M A AI F 42 9 [W FP ] 20 07 20 12 Fo rm ul at e ap pr op ri at e po lic ie s fo r t he p ri va te s ec to r Co or di na ti on o f M SE & M ic ro fi na nc e O ut re ac h Pl an Co un tr y w id e M FP ED 18 ,4 30 [N or w ay ] 20 04 20 11 2. 7 D ev el op ed ca pa ci ty o f l oc al in st it ut io ns to en fo rc e by e la w s an d re gu la ti on s in S LM Ca pa ci ty o f l oc al in st it ut io ns to e nf or ce b ye la w s an d re gu la ti on s in S LM d ev el op ed D ev el op c ap ac it y of lo ca l i ns ti tu ti on s to en fo rc e by e la w s an d re gu la ti on s in S LM 2. 8 SL M g en de r is su es m ai ns tr ea m ed in n at io na l a nd lo ca l d ev el op m en t f1 am ew or ks M ai ns tr ea m g en de r i ss ue s in S LM 2. 9 D ev el op m en t o f la nd u se p la ns D ev el op la nd u se p la ns fr om la nd s ui ta bi lit y m ap s 2. 10 p ro m ot io n of av en ue s/ p ra ct ic es to re du ce c on fl ic ts o n N R us e [l an d te nu re ] La nd te nu re Sy st em at ic d em ar ca ti on M LH U D Pi lo t l an d de m ar ca ti on in s el ec te d ar ea s Ea st er n & N or th er n U ga nd a M LH U D Re fo rm in g th e la nd s ub s ec to r La nd T en ur e Re fo rm P ro je ct Co un tr y w id e M LH U D 23 ,0 50 20 01 20 11 St re ng th en / de ve lo p ca pa ci ty to p ea ce fu l re so lv e/ h an dl e co nf lic ts in N R us e Ea st e r n & N or th er n U ga nd a M LH U D Re fo rm in g th e la nd s ub s ec to r by p ro vi di ng a fr am ew or k La nd T en ur e Re fo rm II M LH U D D FI D / G O U 20 01 20 11 P ro m ot e de liv er y of s er vi ce s to m ob ile pa st or al is ts Ca tt le c or ri do r 9896 96 U SI F Th em e U SI F Re su lt s ar ea D el iv er y M ec ha ni sm (i nt er ve nt io n ar ea ) Ex is ti ng P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s Pr op os ed / N ew o r E xp en de d P ro gr am s/ P ro je ct s/ In it ia ti ve s1 O n go in g pr oj ec ts Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Fi na nc in g (0 00 U S$ ) Ti m e fr am e Pr op os ed a ct iv it ie s Lo ca ti on Im p. A ge nc y Th em e 3 : St re ng th en in g Co m m er ci al an d ad vi so ry se rv ic es fo r SL M fr ie nd ly pr od uc ts a nd pr ac ti ce s 3. 1 In cr ea se d in ve st m en ts in al te rn at iv e liv el ih oo ds A gr o bu si ne ss d ev el op m en t fo r s el ec te d va lu e ch ai ns – m ai ze , c of fe e, le gu m es , o il se ed s D ev el op in g th e be ef v al ue ch ai n U G ro w th (p ip el in e pr oj ec t) N or tu ra B ee f P ro je ct C at tl e Co rr id or D is tr ic ts M A A IF M A A IF D A N ID A /E C N or w ay U SD 25 m Pr om ot e pr od uc ti on a nd m ar ke ti ng o f S LM fr ie nd ly b y pr od uc ts fr om d ry la nd s C at tl e co rr id or M TT I Pr om ot e in ce nt iv e m ec ha ni sm s fo r t he p ri va te se ct or to in ve st in d ry la nd s C at tl e co rr id or M TT I Ex ca va ti on & s to ck in g of fi sh po nd s, tr ai ni ng b en ef ic ia ri es Im pr ov ed li ve lih oo ds a nd in co m e di ve rs if ic at io n am on g co nf lic t af fe ct ed ho us eh ol ds in n or th er n an d no rt h ea st er n U ga nd a Va ri ou s di st ri ct s Pr om ot e al te rn at iv e liv el ih oo d o pp or tu ni ti es (a qu ac ul tu re , f ru it g ro w in g, b ee k ee pi ng , ag ro fo re st ry , e tc ) A ll fo ur ta rg et zo ne s M A A IF , M W E St re ng th en th e na ti on al ca pa ci ty fo r a qu ac ul tu re de ve lo pm en t A qu ac ul tu re d ev el op m en t pr oj ec t Va ri ou s di st ri ct s M A A IF FA O / G O U 3. 3 St an da rd s a nd st an da rd iz at io n fo r no n co m m od it y va lu e ch ai ns St an da rd s an d qu al it y po lic y, re gu la to ry fr am ew or k, co or di na ti on , q ua lit y in fr as tr uc tu re a nd a w ar en es s Q ua lit y In fr as tr uc tu re a nd St an da rd s Pr og ra m m e (Q U IS P) Co un tr y w id e Bu ild c ap ac it y & fa ci lit at e st an da rd iz at io n fo r cr op s w hi ch d o no t i nc re as e p re ss ur e on la nd (e .g . p in ea pp le s, v an ill a, g um A ra bi c, a lo e, sh ea n ut s, e tc .) A ll fo ur ta rg et zo ne s M TT I 3. 3. E nh an ce d m ar ke t in fo rm at io n fl ow a nd in fr as tr uc tu re ; a nd bu si ne ss s ki ll s Tr ad e pr om ot io n an d m ar ke ti ng In cr ea si ng p ro du ct iv it y an d in co m e sh ar e of m ar ke te d pr od uc ti on Tr ad e Li nk s A gr ic . S ec to r P ro gr am m e Su pp or t P ha se II H ea dq ua rt er s Em ba ss y of Ir el an d M A A IF 1. 09 6 [D A N ID A] 20 04 20 10 M ar ke ti ng a nd fe as ib ili ty s tu di es fo r n on co m m od it y va lu e ch ai ns Id en ti fy m ar ke ts a nd li nk e nt er pr is es to na ti on al , r eg io na l a nd in te rn at io na l m ar ke ts A ll fo ur ta rg et zo ne s A ll fo ur ta rg et zo ne s M TT I M TT I Tr ai ni ng o f s ta ff a nd p ro vi si on lo gi st ic s at d is tr ic t a nd H ea dq ua rt er le ve l Su p p or t f or in st it ut io na l de ve lo pm en t Co un tr y w id e M A A IF 35 5 [G O U ] 20 04 20 10 Pr ov id e in ce nt iv e to th e pr iv at e se ct or to de ve lo p m ar ke t i nf ra st ru ct ur e (c ol d st or ag e fa ci lit ie s; ru ra l b as ed p ro ce ss in g, e tc ) A ll fo ur ta rg et zo ne s M TT I, M A A IF En ab lin g th e po or fa rm er s in cr ea se th ei r i nc om es a nd fo od s ec ur it y A gr ic . M ar ke ti ng a nd Su pp or t P ro je ct W FP N or th M A IF 4, 77 0 [W FP ] 20 02 20 10 D ev el op c ap ac it y in b us in es s de ve lo pm en t sk ill s C at tl e co rr id or (K ar am oj a) C re at e op ti o n s fo r f in an ci ng & th e de liv er y of a pp ro pr ia te ad vi so ry a nd te ch ni ca l se rv ic es G ov er nm en t P ur ch as es 62 ,5 00 [G O U ] 20 04 Es ta bl is h ef fe ct iv e av en ue s fo r m ar ke t in fo rm at io n di ss em in at io n Notes: Notes: Notes: 102 Notes: 103 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, Plot 5, Kyadondo Road. Block A, Legacy Towers, Nakasero P.O. Box 34518 Kampala, Uganda - East Africa. Fax: +256 (0) 414 255183 Tel: +256 (0) 414 531411 e-mail: ps@agriculture.go.ug www.agriculture.go.ug