week 2: case study - Uganda

hickey (2012) // campenhout (2016) // Sessions devoted to country cases are in place to provide students with practical and historical examples of how dynamics of poverty, inequality and social protection unfold over time. These sessions retrace a country’s challenges and achievements in relation to the core themes of this course: income poverty, multidimensional poverty, demographic transitions, dynamics of inequality and social exclusion and can engage important processes such as state fragility and conflict; globalization and participation in global supply chains; rural and urban divides. However, each case study focuses on the distinctive trajectories of poverty and inequality of specific countries and regions.

van campenhout (2016): Poverty and its Dynamics in Uganda

1. wat is de main question in dit artikel? gwn info deze card

2. wat zijn de ESSAY MUST KNOWSS

1. Main question: Does Uganda’s official poverty measure give an accurate picture—and what happens when we follow the same households over time?

   The authors find that poverty declined, but less than official figures suggest. They also show that many households move into and out of poverty. A national percentage cannot reveal these different experiences.
   
   

2. Five must-knows for your essay

   1. The poverty line matters: an old national basket can misrepresent different local needs and diets.

   2. The revised estimates still show progress, but more poverty and slower reduction.

   3. Panel data reveal movement over time, which a snapshot misses.

   4. Chronic poverty and vulnerability require attention, even when national poverty falls.

   5. Location, livelihoods, health and coping resources matter, but the study’s associations do not establish causation.

   Connection to Hickey: Hickey asks whether Uganda’s development strategy will benefit disadvantaged people. This chapter shows why that question matters: households have different starting conditions and unequal abilities to benefit from growth or withstand shocks.

van campenhout (2016)

1. Uganda’s official estimates showed substantial poverty reduction. But improvements, so why question the offical Ugandan figures? En wat is een probleem met de nationale food basket ?

2. wat doen de auteurs anders?

1. Improvements in other indicators, such as nutrition and assets, appeared less impressive.

   The authors identify a problem with the poverty line:

   • Its food basket came from a 1993–94 survey.

   • It used one national food basket.

   • Later updates mainly adjusted for inflation.

   Yet people eat different foods in different regions. These foods provide calories at different costs.

   For example, matooke—a cooking banana—is important in western and central Uganda. It can be a more expensive source of calories than staples eaten elsewhere.

   One basket can therefore misrepresent the cost of meeting needs in different places. Updating its prices does not fix an unsuitable basket.
   
   

2. The authors create separate poverty lines for six areas because people eat different foods and face different prices. → Kampala, four rural regions and other urban areas. The lines reflect local diets, while aiming to represent a comparable minimum living
   The lines reflect local diets, while aiming to represent a comparable minimum living standard. They call these utility-consistent poverty lines.
   revealed preferences= information about what people choose to consume at particular prices. Under their economic assumptions, those choices help test whether different baskets represent comparable welfare

van campenhout (2016)

1. what changes in poverty estimates?

2. why follow the same households?

1. What changes in the poverty estimates?

   Poverty rate	2005–06	2012–13
   Official-line estimates reproduced in the chapter	31.1%	19.5%
   Authors’ new estimates	42.3%	31.5%

   Both show improvement. The new method shows more poverty and a slower proportional decline.
   How poverty is measured affects who is counted as poor and how successful poverty reduction appears. In Uganda, one national food basket may not reflect the cost of local diets. The authors therefore use regional baskets, while trying to keep the minimum living standard comparable. Their estimates show more poverty and a smaller proportional decline than the official estimates. Both methods still show improvement, but they tell a different story about its size. This illustrates that poverty figures depend partly on methodological choices, rather than simply recording reality
   
   

2. A normal survey shows how many households are poor at one moment. A panel survey follows the same households over time, showing who stays poor, escapes poverty or falls into it. Across four rounds, about 12% were always poor, 36% were never poor, 19% escaped, 8% fell into poverty and 25% moved into and out of poverty in other patterns. These categories describe only the survey rounds: researchers may miss poverty between interviews. Here, “vulnerable” means moving across the poverty line, not simply living close to it.

   For an essay, the main argument is that a falling national poverty rate does not necessarily mean secure improvement for everyone. More households may escape than fall into poverty, while others remain poor or repeatedly move across the line. This means policy needs to address both lasting poverty and the risk of becoming poor again.
   The key lesson: a falling national rate can hide persistent hardship and considerable insecurity
   
   

3. The authors find these patterns. The explanations below are possible reasons, not causes proven by their study.

   Pattern	Why might this happen?
   Chronic poverty is mainly rural and concentrated in the north.	Limited jobs, services and infrastructure can make escaping poverty harder. Conflict may also have damaged livelihoods in the north.
   Female-headed households are more likely to remain poor.	Women may face barriers to land, credit and paid work, while also carrying care responsibilities. Being female is not itself the cause.
   Households with more dependent children are more likely to remain poor.	Resources must support more people who cannot yet earn an income. Childcare can also limit adults’ paid work.
   Subsistence farming is linked to vulnerability.	Families mainly grow food for themselves. Poor rainfall can reduce both their food supply and anything they could sell.
   Commercial farming and other businesses are linked to better outcomes.	Selling products can generate money for necessities and savings. However, these activities also involve risks.
   Distance from healthcare is linked to chronic poverty; longer illness to falling into poverty.	Treatment may require expensive travel. Illness can also stop people working while increasing medical costs.
   Chronic poverty is linked to exposure to conflict.	Conflict can destroy assets, displace families and interrupt farming, trade and services.

   Why does coping matter? Better-off households can use savings after a drought or illness. Poor households may have to eat less or cut other necessities because they have no financial buffer. Some households receive help from family or friends.

   Essay point: The same shock can have very different effects depending on a household’s resources and support. Understanding poverty therefore requires looking at both livelihoods and the ability to cope when things go wrong.

Hickey (2012)

1. waar gaat het artikel over → main argument

2. ESSAY ESSENTIALS

1. Uganda shifted from a strategy centred on poverty reduction to one focused on economic growth and structural transformation. Hickey asks why this happened, who controls the new strategy, and whether poor people will benefit.

   He argues that transforming the economy could create lasting poverty reduction. However, growth does not automatically improve everyone’s life. The government also needs to create jobs, support people who cannot benefit from growth, and implement its plans effectively.

   The article therefore connects development policy to political power, funding and relationships between actors.
   
   

2. 10. What can the article actually demonstrate?

   Hickey uses more than 80 interviews with policy actors, alongside policy documents and observations of the planning process.

   This allows him to explain how development priorities changed and assess weaknesses in the new strategy. However, it was too early to establish its long-term effects.

   He does not prove that the NDP eventually increased poverty. He identifies opportunities, risks and reasons to doubt that its ambitions will automatically become reality.

   The main argument to use in an essay

   Hickey shows that development strategies are shaped by political power, funding and relationships between actors. Uganda’s move towards structural transformation offered opportunities for lasting poverty reduction and greater government control. However, growth alone cannot guarantee better lives for poor people. This requires job creation, support for small farmers, social protection, attention to regional inequality and a capable state. Greater government ownership also does not automatically mean greater public participation.

   Connection to Van Campenhout

   Van Campenhout shows that households experience different poverty paths: some escape, some remain poor, and others repeatedly move into and out of poverty. Hickey helps explain why a broad national growth strategy may not address all these experiences. People need both opportunities to improve their livelihoods and protection against hardship. This is a connection you can make between the readings, rather than a relationship directly tested by Hickey.

hickey (2012)

1. what changed from PEAP to NDP?

2. why had the PEAP been supported?

1. What changed: from PEAP to NDP?

   Earlier approach: PEAP	New approach: NDP, launched in 2010
   Poverty Eradication Action Plan	National Development Plan
   Strong emphasis on poverty reduction and basic services, including health, education, sanitation.	Strong emphasis on production, infrastructure, growth and modernisation.
   Traditional donors, the Finance Ministry and civil society had important roles.	Political leaders, the National Planning Authority and business representatives gained influence.
   A central goal was reducing poverty.	A central goal became transforming Uganda into a prosperous, middle-income country.

   Structural transformation means changing how an economy produces goods and how people earn a living. For example, workers might move from low-productivity farming into better-paid manufacturing or food-processing jobs. Electricity and roads can help businesses expand and employ people.

   The shift did not mean that healthcare, education and poverty reduction completely disappeared. Instead, their priority declined relative to production and infrastructure.
   
   

2. Uganda depended heavily on foreign aid during the 1990s. This gave traditional donors considerable influence, and powerful donors supported poverty reduction. They worked closely with the Finance Ministry and civil society organisations, such as NGOs. Hickey describes these actors as an “iron triangle” supporting the poverty agenda.

   Domestic politics mattered too. Policies such as free primary education and removing healthcare user fees were popular with voters. Some actors also genuinely believed in reducing poverty.

   The old approach had real achievements: spending on health and education increased, and poverty declined. However, Uganda’s reputation as a success story sometimes overlooked serious problems, including conflict in the north and corruption.

   The lesson: poverty reduction became a priority because influential actors supported it for a mixture of moral, financial and political reasons.
   The lesson: poverty reduction became a priority because influential actors supported it for a mixture of moral, financial and political reasons.

hickey (2012)

1. why did uganda change direction? from the PEAP to NDP?

2. Could structural transformation help poor people?

1. 5. The new approach: NDP

   The National Development Plan (NDP), launched in 2010, emphasised production, infrastructure and modernisation. It replaced the earlier target of reducing poverty to 10% by 2017 with the ambition of reaching middle-income status by 2017.

   Structural transformation means changing how people work and what the economy produces—for example, moving from low-productivity farming into manufacturing or food processing.

   The plan placed productive sectors at the centre of development, with infrastructure supporting them. Water, sanitation, health and education became lower-priority supporting sectors. They did not disappear, but their position changed.

   There were also shifts within sectors: education placed greater emphasis on higher education, while agriculture emphasised larger-scale production and processing.

   6. Did budgets actually change?

   Yes. The shift was more than a change in language. In the 2011–12 budget, roads and energy together received more than a quarter of the total allocation.

   The PAF’s budget share fell from almost 35% in 2007–08 to a projected 9.7%. However, some spending categories had been removed from the PAF, so this fall cannot be treated entirely as a cut in support for poor people.

   The evidence still indicates a shift in priority towards infrastructure and production.
   
   

2. Why did Uganda shift towards economic growth, and why might poor people not benefit?

   Uganda became less dependent on traditional donors because it collected more of its own revenue, received debt relief and gained new funding options. China offered investment and infrastructure finance because it also saw opportunities for trade, construction and oil. Oil discoveries attracted investment and promised future income, but oil revenue had not yet started flowing.

   Uganda’s leaders wanted a more productive economy, so they prioritised roads, electricity and businesses. Better roads could help farmers sell their food, while electricity could help factories operate. Changing how the economy produces goods and how people earn a living is called structural transformation. Politicians promised “Prosperity for All” because people wanted better lives and this could attract votes.

   However, producing more does not always create more jobs. A business can use machines to increase production without hiring more workers. Oil projects can earn large amounts of money while employing relatively few people. Poor families may therefore gain little unless they get jobs, support for their farms or help through public services and social protection. Hickey’s criticism is that the plan did not clearly explain how poor people would share the benefits. He identified this risk; he did not yet prove what the long-term results would be.
   = Uganda wanted to grow its economy through roads, electricity and production. But a richer country does not automatically mean richer families. Businesses may earn more using machines without creating many jobs. Hickey argues that the government must explain how poor people will benefit, through jobs, support for farmers, public services and social protection.

1. what are the main weaknesses of the new strategy?

Weakness	Simple explanation
Support for small farmers	Supporting agriculture does not mean supporting every farmer. The plan focuses mainly on larger farms, while poorer small farmers may receive little help. Agriculture also receives too little funding overall.
Limited social protection	More government money makes support possible, but does not guarantee it. The government prioritises other investments, while financial support for people unable to benefit from growth remains weak. Expected oil income was not yet available.
Regional inequality	Poorer regions face disadvantages that small local projects cannot fix alone. They also need connections to wider markets and infrastructure. Hickey argues that poverty should not simply be blamed on local culture.

An unclear job-creation strategy

Economic growth can occur without creating many jobs. Capital-intensive sectors use expensive equipment but relatively few workers. Oil production could strengthen this pattern.

2. 8. Does greater national ownership mean independence or participation?

   The NDP was more government-led than PEAP. The National Planning Authority, political leaders and business representatives gained influence, while civil society’s influence declined.

   However, the World Bank and IMF remained influential through research, advice, assessments and approval. The World Bank’s recommendations helped shape the focus on infrastructure and transformation. International approval also mattered for investor and donor confidence.

   A revealing example is that the draft received World Bank/IMF assessment before being shown to Parliament.

   Therefore:

   • Greater government ownership does not mean complete independence from international institutions.

   • Greater government ownership does not automatically mean greater influence for citizens or Parliament.

   Development policy emerges through relationships between domestic and international actors, rather than being controlled exclusively by one side.
   → There is also a distinction between government ownership and public participation. Civil society had less influence in the new planning process. A plan can be nationally led without giving ordinary people a stronger voice.

hickey (2012)

1. why might implementation be difficult?

2. is this a completely new development model?

9. Why might Uganda struggle to carry out the plan?

Having a plan is not the same as making it happen. Uganda needs government departments that can work together, manage money and make sure projects are completed. Hickey argues that these abilities are too weak. Political leaders may also use resources to reward supporters instead of helping productive businesses. The plan costs more than the government can safely spend, so some projects have to wait. Oil could provide money later, but it could also lead to conflict over who gets that money.

10. Is this a completely new development approach?

The plan gives the government an active role in helping businesses produce more, rather than leaving development entirely to the market. It takes inspiration from countries in East Asia, where governments helped develop industries. This resembles the Southern Consensus: government supports production and works with businesses, while also promoting jobs and sharing the benefits of growth. However, Uganda’s plan does not clearly explain how it will achieve all of this. The World Bank also supports similar ideas, so the change is not simply Uganda rejecting Western influence.

lecture plus session:

Flashcard 1 — Poverty and Vulnerability in Uganda

1. Why do Uganda’s history and population matter for poverty?

2. Why does falling national poverty not mean that everyone is better off or financially secure?

3. What does the Multidimensional Poverty Index measure?

1. Uganda became independent in 1962, and political instability and conflict have affected its institutions and development. Different regions therefore face different disadvantages. Uganda also hosts refugees from neighbouring countries. Agriculture remains important, while urbanisation changes where people work and what services they need. Its young population creates pressure for schools, healthcare and jobs. A demographic dividend means that a larger working-age share of the population could help the economy grow. However, this only becomes an advantage if people have education, good health and productive jobs.

2. Uganda experienced a large decline in monetary poverty since the 1990s, followed by setbacks associated with COVID-19. However, many households remain close to the poverty line. Illness, drought or lost earnings can push them back into poverty. Poverty reduction also does not automatically mean lower inequality: incomes can rise while the gap between richer and poorer people grows. National figures hide regional differences, with northern and eastern Uganda facing greater poverty and disadvantages in services. Van Campenhout’s panel research helps show this insecurity by following the same households over time.

3. The MPI measures poverty beyond income, including disadvantages in health, education and living standards. It combines incidence, the share of people identified as multidimensionally poor, with intensity, their average weighted deprivation score. In the lecture’s example, 0.531 × 0.509 ≈ 0.270. This means 53.1% of people are multidimensionally poor, and these poor people experience an average of 50.9% of the total weighted deprivations. It does not mean that each poor person experiences 27% deprivation. Because indicators have weights, the score also does not directly tell us an exact number of deprivations.

lecture plus session

Flashcard 2 — Development Strategies, Donors and Growth

1. How did Uganda’s development priorities shift from PEAP to NDP, and why?

2. Why do donors support Uganda, and how can their support influence policy?

3. Why does economic transformation not automatically benefit poor people?

Answers

1. The PEAP—Poverty Eradication Action Plan—placed strong emphasis on poverty reduction and basic services, including education, healthcare, water and sanitation. The NDP—National Development Plan—gave greater priority to infrastructure, energy, industry and productive employment. Both included growth and poverty concerns; the difference was their emphasis. Oil discoveries, China’s growing involvement, changing political incentives and a desire for greater national control helped encourage the shift. Oil promised future income, but discovering it did not immediately give the government money to spend.

2. Uganda was called a “donor darling” because it received strong international engagement and was presented as a development success story. Donors can support poverty reduction while also pursuing economic, political or security interests. Dependence on their funding gives their priorities and conditions influence over government choices. Tied aid requires some spending on goods or services from the donor country, so assistance can also benefit its businesses. Some support is a grant, while some involves loans that must be repaid. In this case, China placed stronger emphasis on infrastructure and business, generally with fewer political conditions, but sometimes with requirements to use Chinese contractors or materials. After 9/11, security interests also helped sustain international support for Uganda; they did not simply replace all poverty concerns.

3. Structural transformation means changing what an economy produces and how people earn a living, for example by developing manufacturing and food processing. Roads and electricity can help businesses and farmers. Farmers do not need their own cars: traders may collect their crops or transport services may become cheaper. However, benefits depend on accessible roads, affordable transport and buyers. Growth can also come from machines and capital-intensive projects that employ few people. Hickey therefore argues that investment must be connected to jobs, support for small farmers, services and redistribution. Greater government control over development does not automatically mean that poor people have more influence or receive more benefits

lecture plus session ZIE WORD BESTANDEN MUST KNOWS PLUS MN SESSION

Flashcard 3 — Public Services and Social Protection

1. Why does removing school fees not automatically provide good education?

2. What is the difference between universal and targeted provision?

3. Why are informal support networks helpful but insufficient?

Answers

1. Removing school fees can allow more children to attend, but schools still need teachers, classrooms and materials. If enrolment rises without enough funding, classes may become overcrowded and learning conditions may worsen. Access and quality are therefore different: being able to enter a school does not guarantee receiving a good education. Missing education data can raise questions about monitoring and accountability, but missing figures alone do not prove deliberate concealment.

2. Universal provision is available to everyone within a defined group, such as all children of a particular school age. Targeted provision is restricted to people who meet selected eligibility rules. Targeting can direct limited resources towards people considered most in need, but mistakes or difficult procedures can exclude people who need help. Universal provision avoids some eligibility barriers, but still requires enough funding to provide adequate support. Neither approach works well simply because it exists on paper.

3. Social protection helps people manage hardship and risks through measures such as pensions, insurance and income support. Many informal and self-employed workers lack formal coverage, so they rely on relatives, neighbours, savings groups and community support. These networks can help after an individual setback, but become overstretched when many people face the same shock, such as a drought. Formal schemes, including public-service pensions and the National Social Security Fund, cover particular eligible groups rather than everyone. This leaves gaps that wider social assistance, health insurance and worker protection policies seek to address.

lecture plus session

Flashcard 4 — Cash Transfers, SAGE and Essay Connections

1. What are cash transfers, and how did SAGE develop?

2. Why do funding, inflation and reliability matter alongside coverage?

3. How can the Uganda case and the two readings be connected in an essay?

Answers

1. A cash transfer gives money directly to recipients so they can pay for their needs. Transfers can provide emergency assistance or longer-term support. Uganda’s SAGE—Social Assistance Grants for Empowerment—developed from a donor-funded pilot to joint donor–government expansion and then government-led national rollout. Expansion coincided with election periods, showing that social protection has political importance. However, this timing alone does not prove that transfers were merely vote-buying or that donors withdrew because of elections.

2. A programme’s coverage tells us who receives support, but we must also ask how much they receive, whether payments arrive reliably and what the money can buy. If a transfer remains at 100 units while prices rise, its real purchasing power falls. The lecture compares an approved budget with a later draft in which SAGE funding remained roughly stable in nominal terms while several other programmes faced large proposed cuts. A draft does not establish final spending, and a stable programme budget does not automatically guarantee an adequate payment for each recipient. Support must be sufficient in practice, not just available in principle.

3. The Uganda case shows that national poverty reduction can coexist with insecurity, regional disadvantage and gaps in protection. Van Campenhout shows these problems at household level: some households remain poor, some escape and others move into and out of poverty. Hickey explains the political choices and relationships shaping development priorities, and questions whether economic transformation will reach disadvantaged households. Together, the readings support the argument that growth must be accompanied by accessible services, opportunities for poor people and adequate social protection. Policies need to help people improve their livelihoods and protect them when things go wrong.