Kampala, Uganda | URN | Uganda has received only 5.7 per cent of the US$28.1 billion required to implement its climate commitments by 2030, leaving a US$26.5 billion financing gap that threatens efforts to protect farmers and communities from increasingly unpredictable weather patterns.
The shortfall raises concerns about the country’s ability to invest in irrigation, agricultural extension services, improved soil management and reliable markets, even as farmers face growing threats from droughts, floods and changing rainfall patterns. The financing challenge was among the issues discussed at a Climate Media Café organised by ActionAid and the Media for Environment, Science, Health and Agriculture (MESHA) on October 29, where experts examined Uganda’s climate commitments, agroecology and the impact of mounting public debt on climate action.
Uganda’s 2022 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) estimates that the country needs US$28.1 billion by 2030 to implement its climate commitments. Of this amount, US$17.7 billion is required for adaptation, US$10.3 billion for mitigation, and US$100 million for cross-cutting interventions. However, a Ministry of Finance presentation to the United Nations climate convention in June 2026 indicated that only US$1.6 billion had been disbursed since 2022, representing 5.7 per cent of the required financing.
The Ministry of Water and Environment has previously acknowledged the challenge. In the foreword to Uganda’s NDC Action Project final report in August 2024, Permanent Secretary Alfred Okot Okidi said the financing gap required mobilisation of adequate, accessible, innovative and sustainable resources from public and private sectors, including domestic and multilateral financial institutions. The concern is whether the financing can translate into tangible support for farmers and communities whose livelihoods are increasingly exposed to climate shocks.
Agroecology offers economic opportunities
Beyond the financing gap, research presented at the meeting suggested that agroecology could improve agricultural productivity and profitability while strengthening farmers’ resilience. Presenting ActionAid’s multi-country research, Bavon Christopher, ActionAid Tanzania Country Director, said the study covered Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Ghana, The Gambia and Malawi, with field research conducted in Kenya, Nigeria and Zimbabwe.
Findings from Kenya showed that households practising agroecology recorded productivity valued at KSh926,932 per hectare, compared with KSh672,213 among conventional farming households, representing a difference of 37.8 per cent. A separate multi-year organic farming trial found that long-term profitability was 53 per cent higher where farmers accessed premium markets offering price advantages of between 25 and 50 per cent.
In Nigeria, agroecological farms recorded maize yields of 3.6 tonnes per hectare, compared with 2.9 tonnes under conventional farming. Cassava production stood at 18 tonnes against 14 tonnes, while vegetable yields reached 7.3 tonnes compared with 5.2 tonnes. The presentation put the productivity increases at 24 per cent for maize, 28 per cent for cassava and 40 per cent for vegetables.
Other findings showed that pigeon pea and sorghum yields in Tanzania almost tripled, while cereal production in Ghana increased by 41 per cent when farmers incorporated legumes into crop rotations. In Zambia, maize yields on demonstration plots practising agroecology reached up to twice those of comparison plots. Although Uganda was among the ten countries covered by the research, the presentation did not provide equivalent Uganda-specific yield or profitability figures.
Christopher identified several barriers preventing farmers from adopting agroecological practices, including underfunded agricultural budgets, subsidies favouring synthetic fertilisers and chemical inputs, weak research and extension services, the cost of transitioning to new farming systems and limited market access.
He called for multi-year transition grants, farmer training, local production of biological agricultural inputs, labour-saving technologies and investments in storage and processing facilities. He challenged policymakers to assess climate and agricultural financing beyond announcements by examining how much money reaches farmers, when it is disbursed, and how smallholder farmers benefit.
Debt burden threatens climate investment
The financing challenge is further complicated by mounting public debt, which is placing additional pressure on government resources needed for climate adaptation and other public services. ActionAid International Climate Justice Lead Teresa Anderson described the relationship between debt and climate change as a “toxic relationship”, arguing that highly indebted countries were struggling to finance climate interventions despite being among the most vulnerable to its effects.
ActionAid’s analysis found that 93.5 per cent of the most climate-vulnerable countries were either in debt distress or at risk of it. The countries were spending approximately 65 per cent of their national revenue on debt servicing and nearly 25 times more on debt repayments than on climate action. The report cited Malawi, where debt repayments amounted to 129 per cent of tax revenue, while Zambia spent more than 60 per cent of its budget and 70 per cent of revenue servicing debt, allocating only 0.32 per cent of government expenditure to climate activities.
Senegal reportedly spent about 600 times more on debt servicing than climate action, while Mozambique spent 117 times more. Nigeria, meanwhile, used nearly half of its revenue to repay debt, while almost 40 per cent of its population lacked access to electricity. Uganda is also experiencing rising debt obligations. Ministry of Finance figures show that public debt stood at US$37.12 billion at the end of June 2026, while external debt servicing reached US$1.42 billion in the 2025/26 financial year.
Although these figures are not directly comparable with the debt-to-climate spending ratios cited by ActionAid for other countries, they illustrate the competing demands on public resources. Anderson also highlighted the disproportionate impact of climate change and public spending pressures on women and girls. She said climate shocks often force women to walk longer distances in search of water, skip meals, and struggle to keep girls in school.
Cuts in health, education and other public services arising from debt pressures can further increase women’s unpaid care responsibilities. Yet women remain central to food production and community-level climate adaptation. ActionAid called for debt cancellation, grant-based climate financing and increased direct support to farmer-led and women-led organisations, arguing that vulnerable countries should not have to choose between servicing debt and protecting their populations from climate change.
Uganda seeks climate investment
Uganda has also signalled the need to attract more investment to implement its climate commitments. Speaking during the launch of the NDC 3.0 process in July 2025, Okidi said the government wanted to develop an investment-ready climate plan that could be implemented and monitored.
“We aim to develop an investment-grade NDC that is implementable and trackable. Our focus is on adaptation, creation of green jobs, and security for the future of the next generation,” he said. For farmers, however, the success of these commitments will ultimately depend on access to irrigation, agricultural extension officers, improved soil management, affordable inputs, and reliable markets.
