Micro-scale irrigation project faces headwinds

This aimed at boosting overall productivity and income, thus improving their livelihoods, in line with the broader government initiative to lift nearly 39 percent households from subsistence to commercial production. The programme is also a part of the Uganda National Irrigation Policy which aims to create more irrigated land by the year 2040.

Micro-scale irrigation is when a farmer irrigates a small plot of land. Under the programme implemented by the ministries of Agriculture and Local Governments, farmers cover 25 percent of the cost for solar-powered systems and 75 per cent for petrol-powered systems, with subsidy limits of Shs18m for solar pumps and Shs5m for petrol pumps.

District Local Governments were also mandated to set up demonstration farms and farmer field schools where farmers would learn how to use the technologies. In 2024, Mr Akol conducted a value for money audit to assess the impact of the intervention across four years starting in 2020. The programme that has so far received Shs335.6b will lapse in December.

“Farmers that received irrigation equipment under the UgIFT programme experienced an average of 13.8 percent increase in revenue per acre from Shs1.1m to Shs1.2m while farmers who expressed interest but have not yet received irrigation equipment saw a sharp 47 percent decrease, from Shs1.8m to Shs965,925,” the audit report states.

The use of irrigation systems mitigated risks such as drought or inconsistent rainfall and made it possible for farmers to benefit from the increased prices of crops that are affected by climate change.

“In contrast, non-beneficiaries lacked avenues of transporting the water from the water sources to avail year-round water supply to their plants and were affected by drought which reduced the quality of their output thus attracting lower prices in the market place and thus contributed to the observed decline in income,”the report states.

The impact, according to the report, was most significant in the western region where 98 percent of the farmers interviewed stated that they consistently used certified seed, applied fertilisers, and acaricides as well as used the irrigation systems to produce animal feed like grass, contrary to the north where 95 percent of the farmers interviewed had only used the irrigation systems for one or two seasons of harvesting.

In the east, 88 percent of interviewed farmers in the region had not attended demonstration farm training as was required by the micro scale irrigation guidelines. Lack of knowledge on appropriate irrigation methods and their utilisation grossly negated positive outcomes. Only 147 out of 344 beneficiary farmers had received training from the demonstration sites before acquiring the irrigation equipment, while 197 out of 344 received irrigation equipment without prior training on its use at a demonstration farm.

“Field inspections revealed that farmers that did not attend demonstration farms and farmer field schools, who were cultivating vegetables such as eggplants, tomatoes, and green garden eggs, used the hose pipe system which is inconvenient and causes damage to the crops during the pipe's movement,” the report states.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (Maaif), the lead implementing agency through the Department of Agricultural Infrastructure Mechanisation and Water for Agricultural Production, noted that, “It is important to note that irrigation is not a standalone technique, but rather a component of a comprehensive package of agricultural practices. Maaif offers beneficiary farmers additional agronomical training to improve their abilities, as stated in the FFS handbook.”

The 2024 value-for-money audit followed concerns raised by a previous audit in 2022 that highlighted multiple challenges, including budget allocation issues, slow programme implementation, non-op- erational irrigation equipment, irregularities in the distribution of irrigation equipment and inadequate monitoring and supervision, which threatened to upend the objective of the scheme.

Slow progress

Auditors found that out of the planned activities, 56 percent of irrigation installations on farms were completed, 59 percent of demonstration farms were set up, and only 3 percent of farmer field schools were established.

At the time of the audit, of the 5,580 planned installations, only 3,142 had been completed. Additionally, 187 of the 318 demonstration farms and only 40 of the intended 1,425 farmer field schools had been set up, the Auditor General reported. But according to the Ministry of Agriculture, 4,333 installations have been done on farms, and 592 demonstration sites and 641 farmer field schools were established by December last year.

“The initial phases of the programme encountered difficulties with farmer mobilisation and co-funding, resulting in a restricted number of installations. In the initial stages of implementation, complementary funding is prioritised, with a 75 percent -25 percent division in subsequent years that favours capital development,” the ministry said.

Hijacked

While the programme targeted smallholder farmers, most of the beneficiaries did not fall in this category. According to the Uganda National Irrigation Policy by Maaif, a small-holder farmer is one who either owns or has allocated plots of up to 12.5 acres specifically for crops.

The micro-scale irrigation programme technical guidelines, on the other hand, define a smallholder farmer as one who is primarily engaged in subsistence agriculture but has the potential and willingness to transition into commercial agriculture and supports individual micro-irrigation systems spanning up to 2.5 acres. Contrary to these guidelines the auditors found that: “199 out of the 344 beneficiary farmers (57.85 per cent) owned less than 12.5 acres of farmland implying that the remaining 145 farmers (42.15 per cent) owned more than 12.5 acres of farmland and these farmers were already engaged in commercial farming before receiving the system irrigation within an irrigation scheme.”

Small-scale farmers are said to have been locked out by the high co-payment requirements, while women were left out due to lack of financial capacity to co-fund the programme, and cultural norms often prevented women from owning land. Eligibility was also based on accessibility to land for irrigation for the next 12 months, of up to 2.5 acres, which many women lacked.

The programme thus covered a paltry 19 percent of femaleled households, undermining the objective to encourage gender equality in agricultural decision making and to recognise the potential contribution of women to agricultural productivity.

Accountability concerns

The Auditor General also found questionable use of funds, including instances where districts had nothing on the ground to show for the funds disbursed to them. Many local governments surpassed the Shs30m unit cost of installation, leading the Auditor General to call for an investigation of the variances. According to the report, districts like Sironko, Kibaale and Kapchorwa spent Shs323m, Shs278m and Shs6m respectively in 2022/23 but without any installation provided to the farmers. The variance in the cost per installation for the different districts also raised questions.

For example, “Wakiso spent Shs29m more per beneficiary farmer than Buikwe, while Omoro spent Shs157m more per beneficiary farmer than Amuru. In other words, the cost of reaching one farmer in Wakiso was 2.7 times more than in Buikwe while the cost of reaching one farmer in Omoro was nine times more than in Amuru,”the report said.

The report concludes that the micro-scale irrigation programme has demonstrated significant potential to uplift smallholder farmers. While achieving commendable progress in installations and benefits to participating farmers, the programme faced notable challenges in equitable beneficiary targeting, cost variations, and inadequate training.