Monitoring and Analysis of Classical and Contemporary Factors of Production in Uganda: A Qualitative Study

The Ugandan economy is a combination of traditional agriculture-based production and emerging knowledge-intensive sectors. Production factors, according to classical economic theory, are a function of land, labour, and capital, representing the agrarian and industrial roots of the economy. According to Smith (1776), Ricardo (1817), land remains an important input in production, although labour and physical capital are generally limited by inadequate skills and financing in Uganda. The increase in contemporary production emphasizes entrepreneurship, innovation, and knowledge/technology as the driving forces behind value creation. Drucker (1993) and Romer (1990) advance that the qualitative approach involves policy analysis and a series of in-depth interviews with key informants who can provide evidence for an in-depth critical examination of how productive capacity in Uganda relates to both classical and contemporary factors. In that context, the study adopts an interpretivist-constructivist paradigm in which stakeholders contextualize the meaning of and implement a strategy for production. The findings indicate that classical factors remain foundational but that contemporary factors, mainly entrepreneurship and ICT-driven innovations, serve as critical drivers of economic diversification and structural transformation. However, incomplete access to quality education and technology, and financing opportunities, hinders complete exploitation of such contemporary production factors. These factors lead to a hybrid framework that incorporates both classical and modern factors as likely to constitute a far more comprehensive model against which Ugandan development could be understood. This includes policy implications involving investing in the development of skills and digital infrastructure, along with supporting entrepreneurship programs to harmonize productive capacity between traditional and modern sectors. These measures will enhance economic productivity, decrease unemployment, and strengthen Uganda's competitiveness within regional and global markets.

Uganda, factors of production, entrepreneurship, knowledge economy

1. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2013). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Becker, G. S. (1993). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. BoU (Bank of Uganda). (2023). Financial Inclusion and Access to Credit in Uganda. Bank of Uganda. https://www.bou.or.ug [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Drucker, P. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. Harper Business. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Grant, R. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists: Between ethical conduct and regulatory compliance. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kaggwa, C., Sserwadda, A., & Mugisha, F. (2021). Digital transformation and economic growth in Uganda: Opportunities and challenges. Uganda Journal of Development Studies, 18(2), 45–62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kallio, H., Pietilä, A.-M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Kasekende, L., & Ssemogerere, G. (2018). Financial sector reforms and economic development in Uganda. Bank of Uganda Research Paper. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Mill, J. S. (1848). Principles of Political Economy. London: Longmans. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. MoFPED (Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development). (2020). National Development Plan III 2020/21–2024/25. Government of Uganda. https://www.finance.go.ug [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. MoFPED (Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development). (2023). Uganda Economic Outlook 2023. Government of Uganda. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Namatovu, R. et al. (2020). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: Uganda Report. Makerere University Business School. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ndiwalana, A., & Popov, O. (2014). Entrepreneurship and development: The role of small and medium enterprises in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of African Business, 15(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228916.2014.883745 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. OECD (2015). The Future of Productivity. OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2022). Digital Economy Outlook 2022: Leveraging Technology for Development. OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Ricardo, D. (1817). The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. London: John Murray. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71–S102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. W. Strahan and T. Cadell. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Todaro, M., & Smith, S. (2015). Economic Development (12th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. UBOS (Uganda Bureau of Statistics). (2023). Statistical Abstract 2023. Government of Uganda. https://www.ubos.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. UBOS (Uganda Bureau of Statistics). (2024). Labour Force Survey Report 2024. Government of Uganda. https://www.ubos.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. UNCTAD (2022). Technology and Innovation for Development Report. United Nations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. World Bank (2021). Human Capital and Innovation Indicators Report. World Bank Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. World Bank. (2022). Uganda Economic Update: Skills Development for Inclusive Growth. World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Financial Development, Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Productivity Nexus in Nigeria
• Symbolic Regression for Approximating Analytic Solutions to Differential Equations
• Micro-Credentials in TVET: An Analysis of Trainers’ Perceptions, Challenges, and Benefits in Bridging Skill Gaps in Tertiary Education
• Moneyge It: A Mobile Application for Shared Expense Tracking
• Revisiting the Inflation–Growth Nexus: Evidence from Malaysia Using OLS Estimation