Governing Chronic Poverty under Inclusive Liberalism: The Case of the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund

Abstract

The paradigm of 'inclusive neoliberalism' that currently characterises international development places a particular emphasis on community-based responses to the often structural problems of poverty and exclusion. Such approaches have become increasingly controversial: celebrated by optimists as the most empowering way forward for marginal citizens on the one hand, and derided as an abrogation of responsibility by development trustees by sceptics on the other. Uganda provides a particularly interesting context to explore these debates, not least because it has become a standard bearer for inclusive neoliberalism at the same time that regional inequalities within it have become increasingly apparent. Our investigation of the flagship response to deep impoverishment in its northern region, the World Bank-funded Northern Uganda Social Action Fund, offers greater support to the sceptics, not least because of the ways in which the more pernicious tendencies within inclusive neoliberalism have converged with the contemporary politics of development in Uganda.

Increasing the Power of the Poor? NGO-led Social Accountability Initiatives and Political Capabilities in Rural Uganda

“…Yet, the regime was recently characterised as semiauthoritarian (Tripp, 2010) on the basis of a gradual erosion of civil and political rights, increasingly centralised control over resources and potential opponents through a system of corruption-fuelled political patronage, populist policy making, and mounting military expenditure and presence (Kasfir, 2012). Concerns have been raised about rising levels of inequality and the disparity between poverty reduction statistics and the absence of substantive development among smallholders and subsistence farmers, who comprise approximately 70 per cent of the population (Golooba-Mutebi and Hickey, 2010).…”

Donor Agenda-Setting, Bureaucratic Advocacy and Cash Transfers in Uganda (2002-2013)

“…While some general studies on welfare policy-making in Uganda have been published (e.g. Hickey, 2003;Grant, 2006;Hickey et al, 2009;Golooba-Mutebi and Hickey, 2010), these have tended to focus on donors as agents of policy reform and the role of bureaucrats have been neglected. This paper addresses this gap in the literature by showing how donors and a portion of the Ugandan bureaucracy have acted in concert to promote reform, with substantial success.…”

“…'Despite Uganda's success at 'mainstreaming the poverty agenda' in national policy processes via the PEAP and its relatively extensive system of decentralised governance, NUSAF was not integrated into either, with line ministries and government both rejected as the main channel for the project…' (Golooba-Mutebi and Hickey, 2010Hickey, : 1225.…”

“…These interventions aimed at Northern Uganda-forming part of a broader Northern Uganda Reconstruction Programme (OPM, 2010)-were implemented in the aftermath of decades of disruption caused by conflict, collapsing state infrastructure and were in part occasioned by the more precarious nature of agricultural livelihoods in this region. In their analysis of NUSAF, Golooba-Mutebi and Hickey (2010), make clear the 'exceptional' nature of the development efforts in Northern Uganda:…”

Employment Generation in Rural Africa: Mid-Term Results from an Experimental Evaluation of the Youth Opportunities Program in Northern Uganda

“…Take the first belief: From a purely practical standpoint, giving a group of young people a lump sum of cash worth several times their annual earnings, with limited supervision, and expecting them to invest it wisely, is at best a risky development strategy. It is a policy approach criticized both generally and in the case of Uganda (Golooba-Mutebi and Hickey 2010;Hickey 2010). A growing body of research in behavioral economics highlighting time inconsistency and limited rationality heightens concern.…”