Implementing plant clinics in the maelstrom of policy reform in Uganda

Abstract

Pests and diseases are key production constraints for Ugandan small-scale farmers. In 2010, the Ugandan Government, as part of its agricultural development strategy, adopted plant clinics to improve plant health extension for farmers and to contribute to strengthening disease surveillance. Despite government commitment and a growing demand for this new type of farmer service, effective implementation of plant clinics turned out to be a challenge. We examine how agricultural policies and institutional setups, and their political context, influenced the implementation of plant clinics from 2010 to 2011. We argue that the political agenda surrounding the decentralization and agricultural extension reforms, initiated in 1997, substantially weakened the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries and undermined institutional stability and the effectiveness of delivery of public extension services. Implementation of plant clinics was further affected by a new district reform and the national elections taking place during the study period. The dual purpose of the plant clinics created uncertainty about their organisational belonging. They fell through the cracks of extension and disease control. This was exacerbated by the unclear roles and authority of the Ministry vs. local governments. For plant clinics to succeed the fundamental issues of governance, resources and implementation structure need to be addressed. The Ugandan experience shows the importance of understanding not only the policy and institutional frameworks in which plant clinics operate, but also the effects of political imperatives and donors on policy implementation. This study provides a basis for institutional and policy analysis related to the implementation of plant clinics elsewhere.

Conflicts of Interests When Connecting Agricultural Advisory Services with Agri-Input Businesses

“…We were able to show that there are some conflicts of interest, although they seem usually small and not to the disadvantage of the grower, but rather to the consumer and the environment. This confirms only partly the often-raised concerns when agri-input sellers become linked to extension services [2,9,10,35,36].…”

“…In some countries such high acceptance rates by validation teams are also found, such as in Zambia (S. Toepfer, pers. observation, 2015), but in other countries, acceptance rates can be much lower, such as in Uganda [36,37]. The large majority of extension workers, regardless of their affiliation with agri-businesses, appear to adhere to regulations [26,31,32] and IPM standards such as advising multiple pest management methods including monitoring and decision making [24] (Figure 1).…”

“…In this way, it is more convenient for them to hold clinic sessions than it is for the governmental extension workers. Moreover, input shops are already familiar to growers as points for advisory support, whereas plant clinics of governmental bodies need to be effectively advertised to increase growers' awareness of the clinics' existence and operating schedule [20,36]. The rate of growers visiting a plant doctor only once and never again was much higher for non-business-linked plant doctors than for visits of agri-business-linked doctors, the latter being usually more repeatedly, thus regularly visited.…”

Access and coverage: which farmers do plant clinics reach in Uganda?

“…The plant clinic approach intends to address one of the common shortcomings of agricultural extension services, namely their tendency to target a narrow range of crops and problems and to work with selected farmer groups and individuals. The recent National Agricultural Advisory Services of Uganda (NAADS), for example, worked with farmers' groups on selected commodities providing general information on agronomic and animal husbandry practices, with little focus on pest and disease management (Kibwika, Wals, and Nassuna-Musoke 2009;Danielsen, Matsiko, and Kjaer 2014).…”

“Here we give advice for free”: the functioning of plant clinics in Rwanda

“…This study did not look specifically at the coordination between RAB and the local government, but other studies have highlighted the challenges of establishing effective plant clinic coordination across institutions. Experiences from Uganda show that interministerial plant clinic coordination was hindered by differences in mandates, roles and management procedures, as well as poor accountability and incentive systems and weak enforcement of regulations (Danielsen, Matsiko, and Kjaer 2014). To what extent this applies to Rwanda too cannot not be deduced from this study.…”