Anne Rietveld, Sam Mpiira and Charles Staver

Targeting young adults/ young households in Central Uganda: Where is the next generation of farmers?

Context

• Agriculture employs over 60% of Ugandan population • Agricultural output mainly from smallholder farmers• Banana are primary source for food and income:

average per capita consumption 256 kg/person/year

Case of Central Uganda:Maintaining or expanding banana productivity is difficult because of soil fertility decline and built up of pests and diseases

Potential solution:Could on-farm trees and shrubs be used as a source of mulch for the bananas and fodder for zero-grazing livestock to improve banana productivity?

Problem statement

ProjectWe proposed a focus on young households and youth

(18-35 years) as potential users of the proposed new technology

• Maximum return to investment• Alternative to out-migration and urban poverty• Land-saving technology interesting for youth with

few resources

BUT Household heads in baseline have an average age of 46.5 years

Where are the young adults and young households in our pilot sites?

1. Young households and young adults hidden in parents households2. Young households have livelihood strategies to accumulate capital off

farm before returning when inherited land becomes available or resources are accumulated for land purchase and investment in agriculture

3. Young people are present in the pilot sites and possibly involved and interested in agriculture-based livelihoods but we were not able to reach them because of bias / partner interests or similar

4. Young households and young adults are little interested in agriculture and are working in local towns and larger urban areas

Methodology• Three sites in Central Uganda selected (Nakaseke, Sembabule

and Kiboga)• Baseline study

– survey farming households in pilot sites – on age, land, labor, social capital, sources of income and use of trees,

shrubs, manure and mulch – N = 203

• Tracking young adults – surveying participants of farmer experimentation groups about their

adult children – On residence, occupation, reasons for leaving or staying,

contributions to farm labor and future expectations– N = 56

1. Young households and young adults are hidden in parents households

• 13% of all household members in baseline study is between 20 and 35 years old whereas this is 22% on national level

• Only 15% of adult children in study are living with parents

Hypothesis 1

2. Young households have livelihood strategies to accumulate capital off farm before returning when inherited land becomes available or resources are accumulated for land purchase and investment in agriculture

•75% of adult children work outside agriculture•1/3 of adult children own land, independent of residence•Many parents expect their children to return one day to the village

Hypothesis 2

3. Young households are present in the pilot sites and are involved in agriculture, but we were not able to reach them

• A significant bias is unlikely

• Even if a bias could (partly) explain for the high average age of household heads in the baseline, most of the adult children of these households heads have left the village and are not working in agriculture

Hypothesis 3

4. Young households and young adults are little interested in agriculture and are working in local towns and larger urban areas instead

Hypothesis 4

Residence adult children PercentageKampala-city 38.5%Regional towns 24.7%Parental village 21.8%Compound parents 14.9%

• Only 27% employed by agriculture • Out-migration of young people does not necessarily need to rule out their participation in farm work

• With average HH size of 10 and average land holdings of 5.3 acres children will not inherit sufficient land for viable farming livelihoods • Large differences between pilot sites with regards to out-migration, land-ownership and parent’s expectations regarding return• The degree in which young people migrate seems to be related to distance to urban centre(s) and economic (farming) opportunity in the locality• Often the driver for urbanization is not (only) the ‘quest for economic opportunity’ but ‘a cultural preference’ for urban life (Beuvink 2010)

Discussion

Conclusion

Young rural people don’t have much interest in investing in agriculture nor do they have the capacities and opportunities to do so

Young people see more future in migrating to urban areas

Migration is not necessarily permanent, many young people frequent their parents’ compound to help out with farming activities, indicating that links with agriculture remain even after out-migration