World Bank needs balanced approach to Uganda’s development efforts

On May 6, 2010 Sylvia Juuko reported in the New Vision (Uganda) that the World Bank effective July this year will focus its assistance on the oil sector, urban development and governance. While these are no doubt important areas one wonders what criteria were used in selecting them over rural development and agriculture – which is Uganda’s economic mainstay and the World Bank’s recent announcement that it would direct more resources to agriculture which had been neglected – unemployment, nutrition, health, education, school feeding program, industrialization and environment.

Kundhavi Kadiresan, World Bank representative, reported that Uganda is one of the largest recipients of soft loans from the World Bank, noting that Uganda’s portfolio of International Development Assistance (IDA) financed operations stood at $1.3 billion. Instead of reporting dollar figures, it would have been more helpful if Kadiresan had presented outcomes of these investments and the extent to which they have helped to reduce poverty. It is known that much of World Bank resources go to pay high salaries, allowances and travel costs of foreign advisers and consultants who then deposit the money in their home bank accounts.

Uganda’s economic growth alone is insufficient for poverty eradication

In May 1987, the National Resistance Movement (NRM) government under the leadership of President Museveni signed an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for assistance. The government opted for the ‘shock therapy’ or extreme version of structural adjustment or Washington Consensus. The agreement called for the abandonment of employment policy in favor of disciplining inflation, promotion of economic growth and export-orientation, privatization of state corporations, retrenchment of public servants, and significant state withdrawal from the economy and virtual abandonment of social policy especially in education and health sectors.

Investments in infrastructure and the economy generally declined considerably. For example in 2008 budget allocation to agriculture, Uganda’s economic mainstay, declined from 4.2 percent in 2007 to 3.8 percent against African Union’s 1993 decision to allocate at least ten percent of national budget to the sector.

The government handed over responsibility for economic management to the invisible hand of market forces and laissez faire (let alone) capitalism as required under the neo-liberal economic ideology. A trickle down mechanism was expected to distribute the benefits of economic growth through employment creation in the private sector. As expected under the Washington Consensus the government focused on law and order by investing heavily in the armed forces, police and intelligence sectors to contain any resistance against the harmful effects of structural adjustment. To mobilize resources for this effort, the government had earlier imposed a 30 percent charge for converting old currency into the new notes against the advice of the IMF.

How Bairu descended from prosperity into absolute poverty

Some of us went to school for several reasons: to get a good education, job and income to enable us meet our basic needs and a little more but most importantly to make a contribution that would help others improve their welfare. This can be done by creating jobs however modestly or providing facilities that enable others to embark on productive work or providing information or sharing knowledge that can be used in policy formulation and strategy design that can ultimately make a positive contribution in people’s lives.

We (my family and I) have made a modest contribution at two levels. We have made investments in our home district of Rukungiri with the principal intention of helping others to improve the quality of their lives. From these investments we created some jobs, we produce food, milk, timber and fuel wood and provide residential and commercial space for the people of Rukungiri.

Throughout my adult life the desire to help or defend those in need has been at the center of my work. And for some forty years I have tried to understand why Bairu and Bahutu in the Great Lakes Region are poor and getting poorer. Is their endemic poverty due to in-born or human-made causes?

The rise of Bahororo in Uganda politics with Britain’s helping hand

From Makobore to Mbaguta to Kaguta

Many people are still asking me to write concisely about the history of Bahororo: who are they, where they came from, where they live, how they are related to Bahima, Batutsi and Banyamulenge, and above all how they rose to prominence in Uganda politics.

Location before they entered the Great Lakes Region

Bahima, Batutsi, Bahororo and Banyamulenge are cousins. They change names and language whenever they move to a new place. In former Ankole District they are called Bahima; in Rwanda and Buruindi Batutsi; in Eastern DRC Banyamulenge and in Rujumbura Bahororo. Until recently Bahororo were relatively unknown because they registered or introduced themselves as Bahima. We shall say more later on.

There is credible evidence that they are Nilotic Luo-speaking people who entered the Great Lakes Region in the 15 and 16th centuries from Bahr el Ghazal in Southern Sudan and not from Ethiopia as John Hanning Speke had written in 1863 (Eric Kashambuzi. Uganda’s Development Agenda in the 21st Century 2009). They are known for their love of long-horn cattle. J. Roscoe described them this way: “Men become warmly attached to their cows; some of them they love like children, pet and talk to them, and weep over their ailments. Should a favorite cow die, their grief is extreme and cases are not wanting in which men have committed suicide through excessive grief at the loss of an animal” (Richard Poe 1999).

Ugandans need to understand the causes of population growth first

Of late there has been a resurgence of writing and debate about Uganda’s population ‘explosion’ or ‘bomb’ that will destroy development efforts because savings are going into feeding unproductive mouths of children instead of investing in productive enterprises. Increasingly we are witnessing people who are not trained in population much less experienced in this complex subject writing and commenting with confidence like they know more than any other Ugandan or for that matter any other expert. Some of these may have had one day or one week’s seminar in population matters and begin to talk with authority.

Population dynamics are very complex in time and space. We have seen the regrettable results of countries that rushed into reducing population growth rapidly by force or couples that did not want children or just one or two. These countries and their governments are now rushing to reverse the trend. Have you heard of “Conception Day” in one of the developed countries where a national holiday has been declared so that the citizens can stay at home and increase their population? Have you heard of a wide range of incentives that are being offered in developed countries so that their populations can have many children? What I am saying is that rushing into curbing population growth can be costly in the long term.

Maintaining good relations with donors has been costly to Uganda

Obote became Prime Minister at Uganda’s independence with the tacit backing of foreign interests. During the initial years he pursued an economic policy based on the World Bank’s recommendation to continue a colonial economic policy of growing and exporting raw agricultural materials in exchange for manufactured products. He would also allow foreign companies to continue business as before October 1962 when Uganda became independent. Besides, being Protestant Obote was preferred to Kiwanuka who was Catholic (W. O. Oyugi et al., 1988).

In the second half of the 1960s Obote began to make adjustments in economic policy including partial nationalization of foreign enterprises. Foreign business interests and their governments were not happy and Obote’s government was shown the exit in January 1971. A gentle giant and pliable Amin was installed. When Amin like Obote before him nationalized private companies, he incurred the wrath of the British and the UK government cut off $58 million of credit to Uganda.