A Farmer-Centered Budget? Why Uganda’s National Budget Framework Paper (NBFP) FY2026/27 Plan Leaves Farmers Behind?

Uganda's small-scale farmers feed the nation. They account for 89% of all farmers and produce around 80% of the country's annual agricultural output. So why does the proposed national budget appear to be moving in the opposite direction?

Nearly 9 in 10 farmers in Uganda are small-scale producers, yet the proposed FY 2026/27 National Budget Framework Paper signals a troubling shift away from investing in them. At a time when food security concerns are rising and climate shocks are intensifying, the question is unavoidable: who is this budget really designed to serve?

Uganda’s small-scale farmers are the backbone of the national food system. They account for approximately 89% of all farmers and produce close to 80% of the country’s food. They feed urban populations, sustain rural livelihoods, and manage much of the country’s natural resource base. Yet a closer look at the proposed budget allocations suggests that these farmers are not at the centre of national investment priorities.

The budget is framed under the theme, “Putting Citizens at the Centre of Budget Priorities.” On the surface, the macroeconomic outlook appears promising. GDP growth is projected at between 6.5% and 7%, and the economy is estimated at Shs249.4 trillion. However, beneath these positive indicators lies a pattern of allocation that raises serious concerns about equity and long-term sustainability.

One of the clearest signals is the proposed 20% reduction in the Agro-Industrialisation Programme—from Shs1.83 trillion in FY 2025/26 to Shs1.47 trillion in FY 2026/27. This is not just a budget adjustment; it is a direct hit on the systems that support smallholder farmers. Agriculture employs about 62% of Ugandan households, meaning that any contraction in public investment has immediate implications for rural incomes, productivity, and food security.

In practical terms, reduced funding could limit access to extension services, quality inputs such as improved seeds and fertilizers, and market linkages that enable farmers to earn fair prices. These are not optional supports; they are essential for agricultural transformation.

At the same time, the allocation to the Natural Resources, Environment, Climate Change, Land and Water Management Programme is projected to increase by 16% to Shs418.6 billion. While this appears encouraging, it still accounts for just about 1% of the total national budget. For a country already experiencing frequent droughts, floods, and erratic rainfall, this level of investment falls far short of what is required to build climate resilience.

Climate variability is no longer a distant threat—it is a daily reality for millions of farmers. Without adequate investment in climate-smart agriculture, water management, and land restoration, Uganda risks undermining the very foundation of its food system.

In contrast, capital-intensive sectors are seeing significant increases. The Sustainable Extractives Industry Development Programme is projected to rise by 94% to Shs1.698 trillion. While investment in oil and minerals has the potential to generate future revenues, the scale of this increase relative to cuts in agriculture raises important questions about national priorities.

 A balanced approach is essential. Over-prioritising extractives at the expense of agriculture risks deepening rural inequality and weakening the country’s food security base.

Access to finance remains another major barrier for small-scale farmers. Current government-supported loan schemes largely target farmers with 50 acres or more, effectively excluding the majority. This threshold locks out the very producers who need financing the most. Expanding eligibility criteria would enable more farmers to invest in productivity, diversify crops, and participate in value chains.

Land rights present a similar picture of partial progress. The Systematic Land Adjudication and Certification programme has issued about 391,000 land titles, which is commendable. However, only about 23% of land in Uganda is formally registered, still below the African Union’s 30% target. The gap is particularly pronounced for women and marginalised groups, limiting their ability to invest, access credit, and secure livelihoods.

It is important to recognise that these budget decisions are being made in a constrained fiscal environment. Overall resource inflows are projected to decline by 4.1%, from Shs72.376 trillion to Shs69.4 trillion, amid reduced external support and lower domestic borrowing. Public debt remains high, estimated at $32.33 billion. In such a context, prioritisation becomes even more critical.

But constrained resources should not justify underinvestment in the sectors that sustain the majority of Ugandans. Instead, they demand smarter, more inclusive allocation decisions.

If the FY 2026/27 budget is truly to put citizens at the centre, a recalibration is necessary. Agricultural funding should be restored or protected to avoid reversing gains in productivity and rural livelihoods. Investment in climate resilience must go beyond the current 1% allocation to match the scale of the challenge.

Agricultural financing schemes should be redesigned to include small- and medium-scale farmers, not just large landholders. Land registration efforts must be accelerated, with deliberate focus on women and vulnerable groups. And importantly, the growth of extractive sector investments should not come at the expense of long-term food security and rural development.

Uganda’s small-scale farmers are not a special interest group; they are the economy’s foundation. A budget that sidelines them is not merely a policy oversight; it is a strategic risk. If Uganda is serious about inclusive growth, resilience, and food security, then the numbers must reflect the people who feed the nation.

Uganda`s small-scale farmers are not a special interest group; they are the bedrock of the national food system. A budget that genuinely puts citizens first must invest in the farmers who keep the country fed, the land that sustains them, and the climate resilience that will determine whether they can continue to do so for generations to come.