Reducing chronic poverty
A matter of politics?

How do political actors, processes, debates and institutions affect efforts to reduce chronic poverty in Uganda? Debates on policy and interventions that might challenge chronic poverty currently lack 'political capital', with little institutional or ideological support. Politics in a broader sense than policy-making offers opportunities and threatens attempts to reduce poverty.

Politics plays a strong role in maintaining chronic poverty and in attempts to reduce it. It could be asked, for example, what forms of governance, policy-making, political discussion and action are more or less likely to challenge chronic poverty? To what extent do policy-makers differentiate between 'transitory' and 'chronic' poverty? Will the elite in politics support resources being granted to chronically poor groups?

Ongoing research by the Chronic Poverty Research Centre at the Institute for Development Policy and Management at the University of Manchester and Makerere University, Kampala, into the politics of staying poor in Uganda has begun to develop insight into these and other questions.

Findings

Long-term poverty traps in Uganda have yet to be tackled effectively by policy-makers. Increasingly, discussion on the types of pro-poor policies needed to challenge chronic poverty is making its way into mainstream policy debates. The current review of the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (Uganda's version of a poverty reduction strategy paper) will attempt to integrate social protection - the policy response most regularly recommended for those suffering from persistent poverty - into the next term's Plan. However, arguments for targeting the poorest groups and regions are not currently persuasive as such programmes have tended to become highly politicised.

So far, the research has found that:

• Key policy actors are realising that neoliberal economic policies and a 'catch-all' approach to poverty reduction have yet to challenge long-term poverty traps in Uganda. However, little effort has been made by those involved in development work to come up with an alternative form of 'pro-poor' or 'redistributive' growth.
• Few within policy-making circles distinguish between the 'transient' and 'chronic' poor, although a focus on poverty dynamics in the recent participatory poverty assessment is likely to change this.
• Ugandan elites view rising inequality as a potential threat to them; this threat may secure their support for poverty reduction policies. However, many also perceive the poverty reduction agenda to be externally-led and wasteful.
• There is a 'politics of inclusion' that reaches most of the chronically poor. People with disabilities and women are represented at each level of the elected political system and within Parliament and ministries such as the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development - but these institutions have limited resources and little influence over the policy agenda.
• Ongoing political conflict in northern Uganda and the threat of regional instability are the greatest political threats to the poverty reduction agenda.

The research finds that:

• If chronic poverty in Uganda is to be challenged, then alternative forms of growth and poverty reduction policy are required. Pro-poor growth and social protection offer the best hope here and the ministries and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) currently pushing these measures require further institutional and ideological support.
• The success of interventions that target the chronically poor needs to be made known if social protection is to become a persuasive policy option.
• The targeting of chronically poor groups (such as supplying food to children orphaned by AIDS) could be attempted using existing successful systems such as primary education - which have both presidential and popular support - rather than through separate programming.
• Policies and programmes to challenge chronic poverty can be aligned usefully with the most progressive political actors and policies in Uganda. These include certain civil society actors, participatory poverty assessments, the Local Government Development Programme and social sector ministries.

Sam Hickey
Institute for Development Policy and Management
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9GH
UK

T +44 (0)161 275 2806
sam.hickey@man.ac.uk

See also
'The Politics of Staying Poor in Uganda', paper presented to the CPRC International Conference, 7-9 April 2003, by S. Hickey and K. Nyago (forthcoming)

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Copyright remains with the original authors but (unless stated otherwise) articles may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided id21 and originating author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged. Copyright © 2005 id21. All rights reserved.