Revisiting Uganda’s Inorganic Fertilizer Supply Chain Swaibu Mbowa MAAIF Agricultural Input Quality in Uganda – New Research, Private Sector Solutions & Policy Directions Protea Hotel, 16 September 2015

Are Farmers in Uganda able to Access & Use inorganic Fertilizer of the Right Quality?

Outline of Presentation Methodology Study Finding Moisture content Re-packaging effects Nutrient content Conclusions Way Forward

Importers/Wholesalers Retailers (Agro-input Dealers) Regions -2 Districts Purposively Selected Based on Level of Fertilizer Use: Central [Kampala; Masaka] Eastern [Mbale; Kapchorwa] Northern [lira; Gulu] Western [Kisoro; Masindi] Importers/Wholesalers Randomly Picked 4 Firms (Kampala) Retailers (Agro-input Dealers) 3 shops per district Category MAAIF Registered UNADA members Unregistered (illicit) Methodology

Targeted Commonly used Fertilizers: Urea DAP NPK MOP CAN Samples procured by disguised research team from each category: MAAIF registered UNADA Members Unregistered (Illicit) Transported to Laboratory at MAK immediately & Stored in safe place awaiting analysis A Follow-up Team visits similar shop(s) for additional information Methodology Cont……

Study Findings - Results

Moisture Content Acceptable Range of 0.5-1.5% [Draft Fertilizer Control Regulations, 2012].

Weight of Bulky Samples (50kg Bag) Permissible ±0.5 kg weight range

Moisture & Weight Compliancy

6 of the 12 bulky Samples from Importers were Compliant

Nutrient Content Value indicated on the Label Compared with Analytical Content

Nitrogen Content in Urea & DAP Acceptable Min Range: Urea - 45-46% DAP - 18%

Nitrogen Content in NPK 17:17:17 & CAN Acceptable Min Range: NPK 17:17:17 – 17% CAN - 26%

Conclusions: A farmer purchasing a 50kg fertilizer bag from an Agro- input dealer across the country is likely to pick a bag: below or above the threshold weight (of 49.5 kg); & with moisture levels above the recommended threshold range (between 0.5-1.5percent). The inconsistencies in nutrient content are more prevalent with DAP, NPK and CAN fertilizers. It is difficult to underpin the most critical level where fertilizer quality is tampered with because deviations in quality were widespread along the entire supply chain. Re-packaging fertiliser is justifiable on grounds that it enables small-holder farmers to access fertiliser. However, the practice leads to Moistening; and loss of nutrient like nitrogen in the fertilizer.

Way Forward Possibility of Re-packaging (1-2kg packs) to be undertaken by fertiliser manufacturer (like sugar)! Has cost implications? The fertiliser inspection department at MAAIF needs to be strengthened enough to impose controls & regulations along the fertiliser supply chain. The three fertiliser policy documents: Fertiliser Policy, Regulations, and Strategy Adopted by MAAIF’s TPM need to be approved & operationalized by government

Summary of Findings Existing gaps in the regulatory and control system inhibit enforcement of proper handling and storage of fertilizers by key players. Key players include: importers, wholesalers, and retailers in the fertilizer supply chain. The effect: farmers are not guaranteed access to fertilizer of the right quality. Fertilizer samples procured from both MAAIF registered Agro-input dealers and illicit trading shops revealed that low quality fertilizers in terms of moisture content and weight are on the Ugandan market. The fertilizer quality inspection department in MAAIF should be strengthened in order to enable it to impose controls and regulations along the entire fertilizer supply chain.

The “Rain-fed revolution” has Failed Let us try the “Green Revolution” Farmers being helped by Men in Uniform need Quality Fertilizer among other key inputs to increase agricultural Productivity in Uganda The “Rain-fed revolution” has Failed Let us try the “Green Revolution” THANK YOU FOR LISTENING