Cows for the poor: Museveni discovers 'bovine economics'

After months during which Ugandans have endured endless bickering among their politicians about stolen elections; whether some of them can walk to work or not; who wants to steal the country’s as-yet-to-flow oil or who has already starting eating from it; who stole the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting money and who did not — now finally, some potentially good news:

The government is cooking up something exciting; in a move one might christen “cows for all,” it is planning to give six cows to every homestead.

Yes, every household. And the cows it has in mind are not your usual dwarfish zebu breed common in most areas of the country, or even the famous long-horned Ankole breed, each of which produces only a few drops of milk per milking session.

What President Yoweri Museveni, Uganda’s anti-poverty warrior par excellence, and his government have on offer is the milk-laden Friesian breed. Announcing the initiative, while commissioning a fruit-processing plant, Museveni was his usual ebullient self: He had already given orders to the Ministry of Agriculture to get going.

In his estimation, the scheme will achieve two objectives: Boost milk production and keep the country’s milk plants well supplied, and also raise family incomes. Well, exciting though it is, the idea is hardly Museveni’s own.

When he paid his Rwandan counterpart Paul Kagame a visit a few weeks ago, Ugandans who have heard of or witnessed the rapid transformation of their small neighbour to the southwest hoped he would return with some fresh ideas for application back home.

'Girinka munyarwanda'

Well, it is some years now since the government of Rwanda drafted cows into its anti-poverty strategies. Its girinka munyarwanda or one-cow-per-family initiative involves giving a cow each, not to every homestead or household, but only to people who have been identified as poor by members of the communities in which they live.

Each poor family that receives a cow is obliged to pass on its progeny to another family in similar circumstances. In that way, it is expected, larger numbers of poor people will come to own cattle. And why is this in itself important?

Well, the big idea is that a cow serves a number of purposes. Not only can its milk be sold, it is also a potent weapon against child malnutrition and related illnesses so common in poor households. And its dung can serve as fertiliser which, if used properly, promises to raise the productivity of the miniscule pieces of land on which poor people live and farm, in one of Africa’s most densely populated countries.

Although it is the brainchild of the government, girinka munyarwanda has catalysed the formation of a broad coalition of actors keen to lend a hand. Contributors of cows for distribution include UN agencies, local and international NGOs, business associations, individual business enterprises, national and local leaders, army veterans’ associations, and wealthy individuals.

And here, as in other aspects of public life, corruption and malfeasance invited the heavy hand of the law, and Rwanda’s is especially heavy when it comes to matters of accountability. As an illustration, in 2010, hundreds of cows were seized and their beneficiaries re-evaluated for suitability before they could have them back.

This was in reaction to a single, publicly aired complaint by one man who claimed the “one-cow-per-family” initiative had, thanks to corruption, become “one-cow-per-leader” (girinka muyobozi). He alleged that local leaders had developed a habit of simply sharing the cows among themselves rather than giving them to the poor and deserving.

Friesian cattle

Well, if indeed the government of Uganda is following in the footsteps of that of Rwanda, these aspects of the Rwanda initiative offer useful lessons in terms of approach. Specifically, the issue of targeting is critical.

The idea of giving cows, and not one but six, to “every homestead” regardless of circumstances does not sound clever, whichever way one looks at it. Also important is the practical one of choosing the right breeds for the right location.

The idea of giving out Friesians in a context where cattle diseases are rampant sounds rather reckless.

Not too long ago, a frustrated veterinary officer in one remote district told me of how it is years since veterinary extension services in Uganda have been virtually non-existent. He added that even animal diseases that the colonial government — using veterinary assistants without formal qualifications — had wiped out, have re-emerged with a vengeance in several parts of the country.

Now, anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of the vulnerability of exotic cattle breeds to tropical diseases, especially tick-borne ones, must wonder why the government would waste money loading poor people with Friesians in a context where even the most elementary of veterinary extension tools such as community cattle dips no longer exist.

Obviously, in choosing to pursue what on paper sounds like a winning strategy, President Museveni is thinking big as he has done in the past on matters of poverty and its eradication.

However, as in the past when initiatives such as the multi-million dollar “prosperity for all” caught the popular imagination only to crash and burn, “cows for all” is a potentially slippery slope to avoidable failure.

Fortunately, it is not too late to adopt a more practical approach, and avoid another round of political bickering in the future.

Frederick Golooba-Mutebi is a senior research fellow at the Institute of Social Research, Makerere University