The Future of Smallholder Farming in Eastern Africa - Uganda ...

shillings (§37-38). Every landowner, occupier or user who is adjacent or contiguous with a
wetland is charged with the duty of maintaining the ecology of the wetland and is guilty of an
offence if he refuses or neglects this responsibility (§17).
The classification of wetlands for management purposes stresses the extent to which that wetland
provides vital environmental services and the extent to which it is currently under threat
(National Wetlands Conservation and Management Programme, 1999). This classification is
supposed to be the basis for regulatory decisions by local authorities. The criterion is presented
in full in Appendix 1 and the restrictions for each classification are presented in Appendix 2.
Unfortunately, it is not easy for local committees, who are non-technical people, to determine the
classification to which a particular wetland belongs. Since 1993 the NWP has been undertaking
an on-going National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) under which all Uganda wetlands are to be
surveyed, described, quantified and mapped. Interestingly, even the District Inventory Reports,
which are prepared by technical staff, do not specify the classification of each of the inventoried
wetlands. Current uses and threats are simply described in general terms with no clear guidelines
as to the extent to which various activities should be specifically allowed or controlled. The
Inventory, therefore, does not provide communities with the information they need to set and
enforce local policy guidelines.
Muhereza and Bledsoe note that a booklet of guidelines for smallholder paddy rice cultivation in
seasonal wetlands was prepared in 2001 and that a similar guide for general wetland edge
cultivation was in preparation. These guidelines are “a strong tool for establishing and informing
the public.” The guidelines, however, appear not to be enforceable “regulations”, as indicated by
repeated references to “recommendations” (Ibid. p. 41).
Despite the extensive legal framework for wetlands regulation in Uganda, the reality on the
ground is far different from that depicted by law. The nature of property rights in Uganda’s
wetlands remains very unclear in people’s minds, despite government’s insistence that all
wetlands are government property. Historically wetlands have been allocated to individuals
under various mechanisms, including mailo, leasehold (after the 1975 Land Reform Decree) and
customary tenure arrangements. Because the 1995 Constitution stated that, “the land belongs to
the people” these “land owners” believe the wetlands to be part of their property. Yet the
Constitution also entrusts all natural resources, including wetlands, to the state, which holds them
for all the citizens of Uganda. This contradiction is far from resolved. Because ownership is
unclear, landowners and wetland users have little incentive to invest in wetland reclamation and
generally continue to pass on externalities arising from wetland use, to the detriment of nearby
communities. In many places, wetlands that were traditionally use by cattle keepers for dry
season grazing have become points of serious contention between cultivators and grazers.
In practical terms, enforcement of wetland regulations remains extremely limited. The National
Wetlands Department has only four staff members, and relies on the districts to implement
wetland regulations. District staffs have limited capacity for enforcement. The Environment
Department in each district is really a single officer. The Wetland Programme itself has noted
with concern the widespread problem of political interference in the enforcement of wetland
regulations. As appointees, the District Environment Officers are answerable to elected district
council members who are hesitant to make themselves unpopular by preventing their constituents
from developing wetlands. At the local level “the wetland supervisor and the wetland user are
one and the same person” (National Wetland Programme 2000b).