Uganda, Africa Strengthening skills and training capacity in the horticulture sector in Uganda

As in most African countries, agriculture is the main economic activity in Uganda, with a significant contribution to GDP and employment for about 70% of the population. Yet 83% of the population is minimally food insecure, yields are very low, and the agriculture sector suffers from numerous structural problems (poor agronomic practices, poor extension services, poor market and marketing infrastructure, weak producer groups, poor coordination in value chains, limited access to land and production capital, and lack of business skills) and is unable to actively engage the youth in agriculture. The 14 agro-ecological zones (AEZs) have varying degrees of vulnerability to climate-related hazards such as drought, floods, storms, pests and diseases. International climate risk reports label Uganda as one of the most unprepared and vulnerable countries in the world.

Most labour in the horticulture sector is performed by women in rural areas, which are already characterised by more marginalised groups in society. There is a lack of agricultural training targeting lower levels of education and women.

The horticulture sector, and thus the labour market (formal and informal), focuses mainly on production rather than value addition and commodities, which is also reflected in training, research and outreach programmes. Agricultural commodity quality standards related to national and international requirements are in many cases insufficiently addressed.

Currently, training institutes are mainly focused on teaching theory, rather than practical skills needed in the horticulture sector, based on job profiles. Most training institutes still lack adequate facilities for practical training.

A fundamental weakness in agricultural education is the lack of appropriate and systematic training of vocational trainers. Moreover, vocational teachers have little or no industrial experience or pedagogical training. There are hardly any programmes available for under- or unqualified TVET teachers and trainers and the current teacher training capacity is not sufficient to meet the huge demand for in-service training at revamped TVET institutions. Public-private partnerships in horticultural training and collaborative learning between TVET and universities should be enhanced.

While the qualifications of KYU staff are adequate, more training, technical horticultural expertise, public-private partnerships and the use of modern, hands-on agricultural training methods are required at the individual level.

Collaboration and structural interaction with horticulture programmes (at the KYU and at TVETs) on value addition, nutritional aspects, phytosanitary and quality control measures for horticultural products should be developed (integration of programmes, sharing of research/innovations).

For BAC, there is a need for practical training of staff on technical topics such as climate-smart agriculture, value addition, quality control and non-technical topics such as agribusiness, value chain management, education of staff as innovators, networkers and collaborators.

The curricula of both KYU and BAC need to be modernised in terms of labour market needs, modern teaching methods and public-private partnerships for practical training. For instance, at the education level, there is a need for more follow-up programmes in education and training, namely short courses and/or postgraduate qualifications.