By Nelson Mandela Muhoozi
Uganda’s coffee sector has found itself at the center of a heated debate, as the government proposes merging the Uganda Coffee Development Authority (UCDA) with the Ministry of Agriculture.
Civic frustration and suspicion have emerged, rooted in Uganda’s history with similar mergers and the perceived risk of weakening UCDA’s mandate to support coffee production and exports.
At the heart of this debate is a lingering fear that the proposed merger could replay the failures seen with the dissolution of the Coffee Marketing Board (CMB) years ago.
CMB once boasted state-of-the-art machinery for processing and adding value to Ugandan coffee, including advanced equipment for sorting, grading, and packaging.
However, after the CMB’s closure, much of its infrastructure reportedly disappeared, raising public doubts about the stewardship of coffee assets.
This history looms over the current proposal, with coffee enthusiasts questioning if the UCDA’s valuable assets and specialized role could similarly vanish or be diluted under the Ministry’s broader mandate.
The question is: Is the public rightfully skeptical, especially given that Uganda recently invested taxpayer money in new equipment for a private coffee enterprise, which was aimed at boosting the country’s coffee value chain.
Well! Critics argue that if the government had preserved and modernized CMB’s facilities at Bugolobi, Uganda’s coffee processing industry might be much further along.
The perceived inconsistency in managing past investments has left many questioning the government’s long-term strategy for the coffee sector.
Dr Michael Mugabira, the leader of Devoted Coffee Initiatives Uganda (DCIU), argued that this merger could lead Uganda to lose its competitive edge in the global coffee market.
While Uganda ranks among the top ten coffee producers worldwide, it has yet to secure a spot in the elite “Club of 10,” which requires a production threshold of 4 million bags.
For Uganda, he said coffee is more than a commodity; it is a strategic asset that bolsters the country’s global recognition and economic strength.
Dr Mugabira emphasized that any policy shifts must prioritize coffee’s role as Uganda’s top export commodity.
Dr Gerald Kyalo, the Director of Development Services at UCDA, opines that UCDA remains vital to the development of Uganda’s coffee sector, which contributes significantly to the national economy.
According to Kyalo, rationalizing UCDA under RAPEX will have far-reaching consequences, not only for the coffee sector but for the entire economy.
“We have seen an unprecedented increase in coffee planting over the last three years. The country is on track to produce over 20 million 60-kilogram bags of coffee, and our work is essential in ensuring the sector continues to grow,” Kyalo said, emphasizing that UCDA’s role in supporting the coffee industry is unique and should not be absorbed into the ministry.
Lessons from Brazil, Vietnam
As Uganda eyes competitors like Brazil and Vietnam, which have both achieved massive production growth, the government’s recent moves have prompted questions.
Brazil, the world leader in coffee, operates a free-market system with private sector self-regulation, ensuring standards through certification programs.
Vietnam, which transformed its coffee sector in the 1980s, has become the second-largest coffee producer through government investments in infrastructure and high-quality seedlings, learning from countries like Uganda in its formative years. Vietnam’s remarkable growth is a testament to the benefits of a focused coffee development strategy.
In contrast, Uganda’s approach to coffee regulation is now at a crossroads. The Uganda Coffee Act of 2021, which has only been in force for three years, has outlined critical roles for the UCDA.
Supporters of the UCDA argue that it should be given time to implement this roadmap and boost coffee production, with potential outputs projected to reach 20 million bags by 2030.
The agency’s independence, they say, allows it to be responsive and proactive, disseminating information quickly and providing essential technical support to stakeholders across the coffee value chain.
Yet, the government’s push for “value addition” has raised eyebrows. President Yoweri Museveni’s emphasis on this goal has met with mixed reactions, as it mirrors past promises that critics argue were never fully realized.
Without accountability for lost public assets like the CMB’s equipment, many Ugandans fear that this merger might simply repackage old promises without addressing underlying inefficiencies or ensuring the continuity of strategic investments.
Observers point to other examples, such as Ethiopia and Peru, where government agencies specific to coffee production have been re-established after negative outcomes from broader integration with ministries.
Uganda’s tea industry, which remains under ministry control, is often cited as a cautionary tale, struggling with low production and quality.
Opponents of the UCDA merger worry that coffee could suffer a similar fate if the government does not recognize the need for a specialized, independent agency.
Amid these concerns, experts are calling for a transparent review of the UCDA’s recent performance and a careful analysis of potential risks and benefits before any merger proceeds.
Citizens, activists, and stakeholders are united in their demand for a clear government plan that demonstrates both accountability for past decisions and a concrete strategy for supporting Uganda’s coffee sector into the future.
