Improving Government’s Approach to Community Transformation through Agriculture-Driven Initiatives: A Case Study of NAADS in Uganda 2001 – 2025

Improving Government’s Approach to Community Transformation through Agriculture-Driven Initiatives: A Case Study of NAADS in Uganda 2001 – 2025

Mpirirwe Jedras, Abel Mucunguzi, Nabimanya Boaz

Department of Governance, Kabale University, P.O. Box 317, Kabale, Uganda

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.907000451

Received: 11 July 2025; Accepted: 19 July 2025; Published: 22 August 2025

ABSTRACT

Agriculture remains a cornerstone for economic growth and community transformation, particularly in developing countries like Uganda. This study explores how the government can improve its approach to community transformation through agriculture-driven initiatives, using the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) as a case study. While NAADS was established to empower farmers through advisory services, input provision, and market linkages, its implementation has faced challenges that have hindered its transformative potential—most notably inadequate infrastructure, limited financing, low levels of industrialization, poor market access, and weak regulatory frameworks. The study employed a descriptive research design using both quantitative and qualitative methods by collecting data from key stakeholders including NAADS officials, district technocrats, and tea factory/SME owners in the Greater Bushenyi region. Findings reveal that neither the government nor the private sector can independently address the multifaceted challenges facing agriculture-based SMEs. A strong consensus among respondents supports a public-private partnership model, where government provides enabling infrastructure and regulatory frameworks, while the private sector contributes capital, innovation, and market access. The study also emphasizes the need for improved access to finance, infrastructure development, and policy enforcement to meet international standards. The study concludes that a harmonized, collaborative approach between the government and private sector is essential for enhancing SME performance, particularly value addition SMEs in the tea sector and achieving long-term community transformation in the tea growing regions of Uganda. These enterprises are critical for improving rural livelihoods through processing, packaging, and marketing of agricultural products such as tea. The study recommends strengthening public-private partnerships, improving access to affordable financing, expanding market linkages, and investing in infrastructure and capacity building. These measures will help unlock the full potential of agriculture-driven initiatives like NAADS, support the growth of value addition SMEs, and foster inclusive and sustainable community transformation.

Keywords: Agriculture, Community transformation, public-private partnerships, NAADS, Uganda.

INTRODUCTION

Globally, agriculture is recognized as a key engine for economic development and community transformation. Massive labor forces and financial resources have been invested in agriculture-driven initiatives with the goal of improving livelihoods and fostering long-term development (Pan et al., 2021). Community transformation involves holistic and sustainable strategies aimed at improving economic, social, and environmental conditions of communities. This includes empowering individuals, building local capacities, expanding access to essential services, and promoting inclusive participation to break the cycle of poverty (Rainboth, 2023; Thomas, 2018; UNDP, 2009). By creating an enabling environment, especially for the poor, community transformation emphasizes participatory approaches that strengthen local capacities and enhance social capital (Thomas, 2018).

In Uganda, agriculture remains the cornerstone of rural livelihoods and national development. It provides employment to nearly 80% of Ugandans and serves as the primary economic activity for over 90% of the rural population (Mellor, 2017; FAO, 2016; Delgado, 2018; Kwizera et al., 2023). The sector significantly contributes to national GDP and plays a central role in fostering socio-economic development and community transformation (Mukasa et al., 2017). One of the critical expectations of agriculture-driven initiatives is the stimulation of rural-based small and medium enterprises (SMEs), particularly in key value chains such as tea production. Tea SMEs hold substantial potential for improving citizen livelihoods through job creation, increased household incomes, and value addition, especially in tea-growing regions of Uganda (Katongole, 2021).

To leverage agriculture’s transformative potential, the Government of Uganda has introduced several agriculture-driven initiatives, with the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program being among the most prominent. Launched in 2001, NAADS aims to empower farmers through advisory services, provision of agricultural inputs, market linkages, and demand-driven monitoring and evaluation (Benin et al., 2011). Its overarching goal is to increase household incomes and quality of life through improved adoption of profitable agricultural enterprises, enhanced technologies, and increased market-oriented production. By supporting farmers with inputs and grants, the program seeks to drive agricultural productivity and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) such as those in the tea sub-sector—mainly through value addition and community transformation, particularly in rural areas (Katongole, 2021).

However, despite the government’s sustained efforts, the implementation of NAADS has faced numerous challenges that limit its transformative impact. These include inadequate infrastructure, insufficient financing, limited market access, weak regulatory frameworks, and lack of coordination among stakeholders. Such issues have impeded the effective execution of agriculture-based projects like tea small and medium enterprises (SMEs), leading to reduced farmer motivation, persistent, low incomes, and market saturation (Saghaian et al., 2022; Vidickiene et al., 2018). For instance, SME owners have limited access to loans to uplift their businesses due to lack of access to information and structural related challenges (Lee et al, 2015). It is further believed that finances pose great influence on the establishment and growth of SMEs (Ibidunni et al. 2018).

This study, therefore, explores alternative approaches for improving the government’s role in community transformation through agriculture-driven initiatives, with a particular focus on the NAADS program. It aims to provide insights that can inform policymakers, agricultural SMEs, and farmers on more effective strategies for enhancing the performance and impact of NAADS in Uganda.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Agriculture remains a foundational pillar of socio-economic development and community transformation in many developing countries, particularly Uganda. It plays a critical role in employment creation and economic growth stimulation (Ssanyu and Mubiru, 2021). In rural contexts, agriculture dominates livelihoods, prompting governments to prioritize agriculture-led development strategies as instruments for poverty reduction and community transformation. According to World Bank (2025), over 75% of Uganda’s population are employed by the agricultural sector while contributing more than 20% of the GDP. Due to such state of affairs, it therefore necessitates that governments like Uganda need to develop a comprehensive package of strategies to position agriculture development at the heart of their development planning.

De Clercq et al. (2018) propose a range of strategic interventions that governments can adopt to bolster agriculture-based enterprises. Central to these is the need to foster multi-stakeholder collaboration to improve access to markets—particularly in regions with small domestic markets and fragmented SME sectors. Governments are also urged to facilitate the creation of business consortia and strategic partnerships that can strengthen the competitiveness of SMEs at both domestic and global levels.

Nonetheless, these SMEs in rural settings frequently encounter structural barriers that constrain their growth, including limited access to finance, inadequate infrastructure, and restricted market linkages. Bateyo et al. (2022) highlight the necessity for tailored financial interventions and policy frameworks that address these constraints to foster SME scalability in rural areas.

According to Buwule (2021), it is further argued that agriculture-based SME owners require access to and sharing of research and innovation information to enable them venture into the current market opportunities. Czarnitzki & Delanote (2015) notes that SMEs with access to research output tend to be more innovative than those without access to such information. However, it is important to note that without government involvement, it is difficult to generate reliable means of accessing such vital information.

Collectively, the literature affirms that agriculture can serve as a powerful engine for community transformation when supported by coordinated efforts involving the state, private sector, and local communities. The success of agriculture-driven initiatives depends not only on the design of supportive policy frameworks but also on the operational capacity of SMEs and the establishment of inclusive, participatory development processes. A strategic shift toward robust public-private partnerships and institutional reform is imperative for unlocking the full potential of agricultural development in Uganda and other developing contexts.

The agricultural sector has a multitude of processes that need to be factored in any government development policy making. Such processes include crop growing, maintenance, harvesting, manufacturing, marketing and many others. It thus follows that governments development approach in agriculture requires a holistic policy making dimension. Mucunguzi (2024) notes as follows:

“In a predominantly agriculture-based economy like that of Uganda, a holistic policy approach becomes even more imperative for agriculture-based households in which the biggest portion of poor people falls. Therefore, a holistic policy approach would, among other macroeconomic reforms, integrate agriculture policies that increase returns to the products of poor people. This presupposes that the policy must not only focus at increasing agricultural production and productivity, but also at ensuring that value is added to the products and that markets are found for these products. As a consequence, establishing processing industries to increase the value and life span of agricultural products would have to be part of the poverty eradication policy agenda”.

The tea sector in Uganda has demonstrated that government’s uncoordinated development initiatives cannot yield tangible community transformation outcomes. The government’s efforts of transforming tea growing communities through supply of tea seedlings through the National Agriculture and Advisory Services (NAADS) from 2010 did not yield the expected results due lack of a holistic development approach. Mucunguzi el al (2025) note that its only through coordinated, well-financed, and strategically implemented efforts that Uganda can realize the full transformative potential of its tea sector and agriculture more broadly. They further recommend that:

“The upcoming Fourth National Development Plan (NDP IV, 2025/2026 – 2030/2031), which prioritizes sustainable industrialization, full economic monetization and private sector growth should operationalize agro-industrialization through practical support, not just policy statements; provide affordable financing, tax incentives, and technical assistance for local entrepreneurs establishing tea-based SMEs; develop robust market linkages for finished tea products locally and internationally; and ensure coordinated planning and implementation across ministries and agencies”.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopted a descriptive research design, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative approaches to obtain a comprehensive understanding of how agriculture-driven initiatives, particularly the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS), contribute to community transformation.

The quantitative component focused on collecting data from key government stakeholders, specifically technocrats at the NAADS Secretariat and district-level technical and political staff responsible for overseeing the tea sector at the local levels, and tea farmers. This data provided insights into the structural and operational challenges within NAADS and its influence on agriculture-based SMEs.

The qualitative component involved in-depth interactions with directors and staff of farmers’ organizations and SMEs, particularly those engaged in tea production and value addition within the Greater Bushenyi sub-region. The Greater Bushenyi sub-region, comprises five districts namely Bushenyi, Rubirizi, Mitooma, Sheema, and Buhweju. These participants offered valuable perspectives on alternative strategies for enhancing the transformative capacity of agriculture-driven initiatives like NAADS.

While selecting respondents on the basis of their positions and relevancy to the study, total of 300 respondents were selected through a purposive sampling technique and data was collected using structured questionnaires and interview guides.

To provide broader context and comparative insights, the study also conducted a literature review of global value chain initiatives and SME development models. This enabled an assessment of best practices that could inform improvements in Uganda’s tea sector.

This research approach offered critical insights into both the challenges and opportunities for strengthening NAADS and any future government related agricultural driven initiatives for community development.

Presentation of the findings

Alternative approaches by which the government and partners of NAADS assistance should have used in order to encourage more transformative community projects/SMEs to spring up and grow in Greater Bushenyi.

The study explored stakeholder perceptions regarding the capacity of various actors; government, private investors, or a combination of both to address the challenges facing tea-based SMEs in the Greater Bushenyi sub-region. The results indicate a strong consensus around the need for a collaborative approach involving both public and private sector actors.

Perception on whether private sector alone can solve the challenges in the tea sector (without government intervention)

The study reveals a strong consensus that the private sector alone cannot adequately address the complex challenges facing tea-based industries and SMEs. An overwhelming 78.3% of respondents disagreed with the idea that the challenges in the tea sector can be resolved without government involvement. This significant level of disagreement highlights a shared understanding among stakeholders that private investment, while vital, is insufficient on its own to overcome the systemic and structural barriers within the tea sector.

Qualitative insights further reinforce this viewpoint. One SME owner interviewed during the study stressed the indispensable role of government in creating an enabling environment through supportive infrastructure and policy:

“We have invested a lot of resources in establishing this tea processing factory. While the potential for the tea sector to contribute to national development is enormous, we have often faced challenges beyond our control such as interruptive power blackouts, poor road networks to transport green tea leaves from the farmers, high interest rate on loans, lack of government regulation on proper tea farming and harvesting standards and lack of locally created international auction market for the processed tea”. “Without government intervention in solving these challenges, the tea sector will continue to struggle in fulfilling the potential of being one of the sectors to transform the country”.

Another player in the tea industry in Greater Bushenyi suggested as follows:

“While the private sector is attracted to invest in agriculture in Uganda, the lack of sound policies and effective regulatory frameworks will continue to scupper investors if government does not wake up soon”. “Such government interventions are seen as critical complements to private sector efforts, ensuring a stable and conducive landscape for sustainable investment and economic growth”.

These findings collectively underscore the need for a collaborative public-private approach. While the private sector brings capital, innovation, and operational agility, government involvement remains essential for establishing the foundational conditions necessary for long-term investments in the tea industry.

Perception on whether Government alone can solve challenges in the tea sector (without private sector involvement)

The findings strongly indicate that government intervention alone is not sufficient to tackle the complex challenges confronting tea-related small and medium enterprises (SMEs). A significant majority (78.3%) of respondents disagreed with the notion that the government can resolve these issues without private sector involvement. This sentiment was underscored by a statistically significant mean score of 1.9 and a standard deviation of 0.8, reflecting a strong consensus among respondents.

The qualitative findings support the quantitative results. A respondent from the SME sector had this to say:

“The private sector has its role while the government also has its role”. “For example, the private sector cannot make policies for agriculture regulation and development and neither can it regulate taxes, tariffs, incentives and interest rates”. This remains the work of government that cannot be delegated to the private sector”.

Another respondent intimated as below:

“The government has since the inception of NAADS injected colossal sums of funds to support tea growing in Greater Bushenyi and this situation would have played out much more profitably for both government, private investors and the communities in this tea growing area if government had thought further about working hand in hand with private sector investors in form of providing financial and non-financial incentives”. “We have clamored for these incentives many times to no avail”.

Bothe the quantitative and qualitative responses further reinforce the perspective of public-private partnerships. Participants emphasized that the role of government should not be viewed in isolation but rather as part of a synergistic framework involving multiple stakeholders. There is a clear recognition that sustainable solutions require both robust government support and active private sector engagement. Respondents highlighted the value of private investment, innovation, and efficiency in complementing public efforts.

Perception on private sector and government working in tandem to make the tea sector more vibrant

The study highlights strong stakeholder support for a collaborative approach to resolving the challenges facing tea-based SMEs. A majority of respondents (69.3%) agreed that the most effective solution lies in a model where government and private sectors work together. This finding was statistically significant, with a mean score of 3.9 and a standard deviation of 1.1, indicating a consistent endorsement of joint efforts. Respondents pointed to the strengths of a public-private partnership (PPP) model, noting its potential to offer a more holistic and sustainable solutions. Such a model leverages the regulatory support, infrastructure development, and policy-making capacity of the government, while drawing on the private sector’s resources, innovation, and market access.

The following expression from one interviewee suffices:

“The socio-economic development of any country requires concerted efforts of both the private sector and public sector players”. “while the private sector is good at pooling resources for investment in profitable ventures, there are certain requirements which it cannot find attractive to invest in due to difficulties in controlling their operations”. “Such investments include road constructions, and power generation and distribution”.

Both quantitative data and qualitative insights converge on the same conclusion: a harmonized public-private approach is critical to addressing the complex and multifaceted challenges in the tea sector particularly in the Greater Bushenyi region. These findings reinforce the study’s broader conclusion that public-private partnerships are not only vital for enhancing SME performance but also for driving long-term community transformation.

DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS

Study findings reveal respondents’ rejection of exclusive public nor private sector monolopy of the tea sector in Uganda with the notion that the challenges affecting SMEs cannot be solved by private investors alone, without government involvement. This demonstrates a strong consensus that government intervention is indispensable. This perception is likely grounded in the realities of structural and systemic barriers that have afflicted the tea sector in Uganda such as inadequate infrastructure, lack of regulatory frameworks, and limited access to finance, issues that the private sector may struggle to address independently. The qualitative data from investor interviews further supports this, with respondents emphasizing the role of government in providing enabling infrastructure and policy guidance. These findings align with those of Munyambonera et al. (2014), who argue that the private sector alone lacks the capacity to address the complex and multifaceted challenges within Uganda’s tea sector. They emphasize the need for a coordinated public–private partnership as a critical strategy for improving the sector’s performance and ensuring long-term sustainability.

This perspective is further reinforced by the work of Thomas (2018) and Rainboth (2023), who advocate for inclusive and participatory development approaches. They contend that enhancing grassroots engagement, strengthening local capacities, and integrating inclusive planning mechanisms into broader rural development frameworks can significantly improve outcomes in agriculture. These approaches are most effective when agriculture is positioned as a central pathway to livelihood transformation and community development.

The study further reveals that government alone cannot tackle the multifaceted challenges affecting SMEs, highlighting the need to work in partnership with the private sector. This finding reinforces the view that while government support is vital, it is not entirely sufficient. Private sector actors must bring essential resources such as capital, innovation, market access, and entrepreneurship, factors that are critical for scaling production and diversifying agricultural products. The respondents’ stance highlights an appreciation for synergistic solutions that tap into the strengths of both public and private sectors. These findings are in line with FAO’s report (2015) which highlights the need to engage the private sector in identifying effective solutions to the challenges affecting agribusiness. The report further states that “government alone cannot generate the innovation, investment, and operational efficiency required for competitive and sustainable agribusiness”.

Furthermore, findings indicate that a strong support for public-private collaborative approach between the private sector and government is the most effective strategy for resolving the current challenges affecting the SMEs in the tea industry. This view is grounded in a realistic understanding of the complexity of the challenges. While the government can provide infrastructure, favorable policies, and regulatory oversight, the private sector is better positioned to deliver investment, innovation, and market competitiveness. Together, their coordinated efforts can create a harmonized system for SME growth leading to community transformation in the long-term.   These findings are further vindicated by the work of Amarathunga et al (2024) who state “neither the public nor the private sector can single‑handedly meet smallholders’ needs in the tea sector”. They advocate for coordinated public–private approach (PPP) models such as factory‑based and input‑supplier‑based partnerships to address structural issues such as high input costs, infrastructure loopholes and extension staffing gaps.

The research by Mucunguzi et al (2025) established that the support of NAADs in the tea sector in Greater Bushenyi from 2015 had a huge potential for accelerated industrialization and setting up of SMEs that were expected to take advantage of increased green tea leaves and processed black tea powder as raw materials in the manufacture of new products. They further established that this potential was not realized due to the absence of government direction and support in establishing processing industries/SMEs to take up this opportunity. They established that:

“Before the intensification of tea growing through the supply of free tea seedlings in Greater Bushenyi districts from 2015, there were only four (4) tea processing factories namely Mcleod Russel tea factory formerly known as Ankole tea factory (1960), Igara tea factory (1969), Buhweju tea factory (2006) and Kyamuhunga tea factory (2013)”. “With the increased tea growing in the region and the resultant high volumes of green tea leaves produced from 2015, many people expected a leap in the establishment of more tea processing factories to produce black tea powder for export and other industrial purposes but this wasn’t the case”. “However, from 2015, only 3 tea processing industries were added to the already established ones namely Swazi Highland Tea Factory (2016), Global Village Tea Factory (2018) and Tea Maria Factory (2022) but this was a drop into the ocean”.  “During peak harvesting seasons, many farmers remained with unsold green tea leaves due to a lack of absorption capacity by the existing processing factories”.

The above finding points to the failure of government to exploit the opportunity presented in the tea sector at the time. If government had identified and supported investors in the tea sector to establish more processing industries through public-private partnership model, we would have realized more community transformation indicators in Greater Bushenyi and other tea growing regions of Uganda. Such transformation would have accrued directly and indirectly through backward and forward economic linkages.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion

The findings of the study highlight the critical need for a collaborative approach between the government and the private sector in addressing the complex challenges facing SMEs, particularly those in the tea industry in the Greater Bushenyi area. Respondents overwhelmingly rejected the notion that neither government nor private sector can independently resolve these challenges singlehandedly. Instead, there is strong consensus that sustainable solutions require synergistic partnerships, where the government provides enabling infrastructure, regulatory frameworks, and access to finance, while the private sector contributes capital, innovation, and market access.

This partnership model is not only viewed as effective but also necessary for promoting transformative community projects through the growth of SMEs. The study highlights that without access to adequate financial resources and supportive infrastructure, many SMEs will continue to struggle to thrive, often leading to business closures. Therefore, targeted government support in these areas is essential to unlock the full potential of private sector investments.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are proposed based on the study findings to foster vibrant tea sector operations and community transformation:

1. Develop policy framework for strengthening public-private partnerships

The government should collaborate closely with private sector investors to jointly address the multifaceted challenges affecting SMEs. Such partnerships will promote shared responsibility in policy formulation and implementation, financial support, and capacity development of the investors.

2. Facilitate access to affordable financing

Government should create and strengthen financial support mechanisms such as grants, low-interest loans, and guarantee schemes to enable investors to access the capital necessary for SME growth. This will reduce the risk of business decline due to inadequate funding.

3. Enhancing both internal and external market access

Government and relevant stakeholders should create linkages to domestic and international markets through trade fairs, export facilitation programs, and digital platforms. This will help investors access a wider customer base and reduce business losses due to limited market access.

4. Improve infrastructure especially in remote areas

Investments should target infrastructure development, particularly in road networks and electricity access in rural areas where most SMEs are located. This will ease transportation of raw materials and finished goods, and promote the establishment of more SMEs in the tea growing areas.

5. Development and enforcement of regulatory frameworks to meet international market standards

The government should establish clear policies to regulate both farming and SME operations that can maintain product quality standards. These regulations should be supported by routine monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance while enhancing competitiveness in the international market.

6. Capacity building and skills development for SME owners

Continuous training and mentorship programs should be provided to SME owners and managers to enhance their skills in business planning, quality control, and market positioning, which are critical for business growth and sustainability.

Ultimately, a harmonized and coordinated strategy that leverages the strengths of both sectors holds the greatest promise for fostering SME growth, enhancing value addition in tea-based products, and driving long-term community transformation

REFERENCES

1. Amarathunga, M. K. S. L. D., & Jayasinghe, D. (2024). Appraising the Effectiveness of Value Chain Models of Public-Private Partnership Extension Services on the Productivity Improvement and Livelihood Development of Tea Smallholding Sector in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(7), 2677-2693.
2. Bateyo, A., Lydia, E., Tumwesigye, G., & Aluonzi, B. Evaluation of the Relationship between Renewal and Organizational Effectiveness in Igara Growers Tea Factory in Bushenyi District South Western Uganda IAA Journal of Communication, 8(1), 66–93. ISSN 2636‑7262
3. Benin, S., Nkonya, E., Okecho, G., Randriamamonjy, J., Kato, E., Lubade, G., & Kyotalimye, M. (2012). Impact of the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) program of Uganda: Considering different levels of likely contamination with the treatment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 94(2), 386-392.
4. Buwule, R. S. (2021). Building dynamic business financing information for enhanced agricultural SME innovations in Uganda. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 10(2), 219-235.
5. Czarnitzki, D., & Delanote, J. (2015). R&D policies for young SMEs: input and output effects. Small Business Economics, 45, 465-485.
6. De Clercq, M., Vats, A., & Biel, A. (2018). Agriculture 4.0: The future of farming technology. Proceedings of the world government summit, Dubai, UAE, 11-13.
7. Delgado, c. (2018), Uganda: A Reform Agenda for More and Better Jobs through Agriculture World Bank Group. https://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/345311589176733823/pdf/Uganda-A-Reform-Agenda-for-More-and-Better-Jobs-through-Agriculture.pdf
8. FAO. (2016). The state of food and agriculture 2016: Climate change, agriculture and food security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/publications
9. FAO. (2015). Public–private partnerships for agribusiness development: A review of international experiences. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/3/i2749e/i2749e.pdf
10. Ibidunni, A. S., Kehinde, O. J., Ibidunni, O. M., Olokundun, M. A., Olubusayo, F. H., Salau, O. P., … & Fred, P. (2018). Data on the relationships between financing strategies, entrepreneurial competencies and business growth of technology-based SMEs in Nigeria. Data in brief, 18, 988..
11. Katongole, G. (2021). Add value to tea and earn more. Daily Monitor. https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/magazines/farming/add-value-to-tea-and-earn-more–3617008
12. Lee, N., Sameen, H., & Cowling, M. (2015). Access to finance for innovative SMEs since the financial crisis. Research policy, 44(2), 370-380.
13. Kwizera, G., Mwirumubi, R., & Asiimwe, S. M. (2023). Contribution of agricultural transformation on poverty reduction in rural areas of Uganda: A case of Kisoro District. International Journal of Agriculture, 8(2), 22–53. https://ir.umu.ac.ug/handle/20.500.12280/3151
14. Mellor, J. W. (2017). Agriculture on the road to industrialization. In Agricultural development and economic transformation: Promoting growth with poverty reduction (pp. 37–54). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65259-7_3
15. Mucunguzi, A. (2024), Holistic Policy Making and Good Governance Practices as a Development Model for Poverty Eradication Success in Uganda 1986 – 2020, International Journal of Advanced Research, 13(3), http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/18513
16. Mucunguzi, A., Boaz, N., Jedras, M. & Edgar, N. (2025). Correlating NAADS Agricultural Initiatives in the Tea Sector and the Industrialisation Potential for Community Transformation and Poverty Reduction in South-Western Uganda (2015–2025). East African Journal of Agriculture and Biotechnology, 8(1), 435-447. https://doi.org/10.37284/eajab.8.1.3182
17. Mukasa, A. N., Simpasa, A., & Salami, A. O. (2017). Enhancing productivity and competitiveness of the African agriculture sector: The role of value chains. African Development Bank Group. https://www.afdb.org
18. Munyambonera, F. E., Lakuma, P. C., & Guloba, M. (2014). Uganda’s tea sub‑sector: A comparative review of trends, challenges and coordination failures (Research Series No. 206133). Economic Policy Research Centre. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/206133
19. Pan, L., Li, X., & Ma, Q. (2021). Agricultural investments and poverty alleviation: Evidence from rural development programs. World Development, 144, 105470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105470
20. Rainboth, W. (2023). Community transformation through participatory development models. Journal of Community Development Studies, 10(2), 45–60.
21. Saghaian, S., Onyango, B., & Apedaile, R. (2022). Value chain financing and barriers for agricultural SMEs in East Africa. Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development, 63(4), 121–136.
22. Ssanyu, R. and Mubiru, J-B., 2021. Strengthening decent rural employment opportunities for youth across different processes in the forestry value chain in Uganda. Forestry Working Paper No. 23. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb3331en
23. Thomas, L. (2018). Inclusive development and public-private partnerships in Africa. Development in Practice, 28(4), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2018.1433815
24. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2009). Community empowerment and poverty reduction: Lessons from Uganda. United Nations Development Programme. https://www.undp.org
25. Vidickiene, D., Gedminaitė-Raudonė, Ž. & Žalimaitė, A. (2018). Barriers to effective policy implementation in agricultural SMEs. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, 40(4), 486–494. https://doi.org/10.15544/mts.2018.45
26. World Bank. (2025), Employment in agriculture (% of total employment) (modeled ILO estimate) Retrieved July 3, 2025, from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.AGR.EMPL.ZS