Uganda
Please download the PEI Country fact sheet on Uganda (PDF)


Basic facts of the PEI in Uganda
  • Phase I started in March 2005, first workplan was completed early 2007.
  • Phase II commenced in May 2007 and is expected to run until December 2008.
  • The Government of Uganda (GoU), through the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), is responsible for the implementation and coordination of the project.
  • The main national partners are: NEMA and the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MFPED) and Local Government in the focus districts.
  • Donors: Belgium and Norway (through UNEP). Funds are distributed through NEMA. UNDP Uganda is increasingly involved in the PEI in Uganda;
  • Total budget for Phase I (2005-2006) was USD 220,401. The budget for Phase II (2007-2008) is USD 369,086. In addition, a P-E Officer has been recruited via UNDP to support PEI implementation at NEMA.

The context of mainstreaming of environment in Uganda

  • The policy and legal framework for addressing environmental issues in Uganda has been evolving particularly after its National Environment Action Plan (NEAP) process in 1990-1995.
  • The first Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) was developed in 1997. It was reviewed in 2000 and again in 2004.
  • The 2004-08 PEAP includes environment related priority actions in all five pillars. However, the PEAP has failed to attract public and private sector resources to implement programmes for sustainable development, and hence has not been able to reduce the rampant environment and natural resource degradation in the country.
  • In 2007 the GoU embarked on a major PEAP revision process which will lead to the adoption of a new 5-year National Development Plan for Uganda.
  • Phase II of the PEI in Uganda focuses on mainstreaming environment into the PEAP revision process with the aim of including poverty-environment linkages into the new National Development Plan. PEI also supports environmental mainstreaming in the budgeting process and in the PEAP implementation at sectoral and district levels.
Main activities of the PEI

Phase I:

  • Review of the existing poverty reduction policies, plans and programmes and projects for their adequacy in addressing environmental concerns, identifying gaps and suggesting recommendations for improved environmental mainstreaming
  • Country report on ecosystems, their services and linkages to human well-being
  • An integrated ecosystem assessment (using the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment methodology) in Lake Kyogo catchment;
  • Training of civil society organizations on poverty and environment linkages;
  • Micro projects at the local level demonstrating the importance of the poverty-environment linkages for poverty reduction and human wellbeing have been identified and supported.

Phase II:

  • Engagement in the PEAP revision process with a view to integrating environment into the new 5-year National Development Plan for Uganda.
  • Engagement in the budgeting process to achieve increased budgets for environmental interventions for various sectors and supporting health, agriculture, tourism, trade and industry sectors to integrate environmental concerns into sectoral policies and plans.
  • Facilitation of formulation of district environment policies and integration of environmental concerns into district development plans and related budgets in six pilot districts;
  • Support to local level innovative activities demonstrating poverty-environment linkages and communication of best practices to influence policy and decision making;
  • Public-awareness raising activities, e.g. TV and radio programmes.
What has been achieved to date?
  • Reviews done under the PEI helped to highlight the gap between mainstreaming of environment in policies and the lack of implementation, especially at the sub-national level;
  • General awareness on poverty and environment linkages has been increased;
  • Partnerships have been created with CSOs and CBOs at local and national levels in raising awareness on poverty environment linkages and the implementation of micro level activities.
  • Thirteen districts through their LCV Chairmen, Councilors and Technical planning committees made commitments to address environmental issues by developing and implementing district environmental ordinances and by-laws;
  • Members of the Parliamentary committee on Natural Resources have committed themselves to advocate for increase in budget allocation to the environment;
  • Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development has included a clause/paragraph and manual on mainstreaming environmental issues into budget framework papers in the budget call circular;
  • Environment and sustainable use of natural resources has been identified as one of the six main objectives and Pillars/thematic areas of the new National Development Plan (NDP), and NEMA through PEI’s support is leading the environment sector’s engagement in the NDP formulation process.
Lessons learned
  • Risk of duplication of studies and activities (“consultant culture”). An impressive amount of information, analysis and guidelines is available but implementation lags behind;
  • Importance of active support of several partners, including Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, CSOs and UNDP Uganda;
  • Uganda has a reasonably good policy, legal and institutional framework for environmental mainstreaming, but to what extent is environment considered and budgeted for when PEAP is being implemented at the district and sub-county level?
  • Link to on-going processes (f.ex., PEAP revision process and the budget cycle) will help to provide an entry point and focus;
  • Need for the Government of Uganda to strengthen and harmonise the PEI with the activities of implementing institutions such that it does not look like an outside or additional activity but part of their day-to-day schedules.
Key documents for PEI Uganda Way forward
  • Secure programmatic involvement and active staff support from the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development and the National Planning Authority;
  • Develop a joint programme for poverty-environment mainstreaming with UNDP;
  • Explore opportunities for additional financial support from other donors, possibly merging programmes.


Copyright