Abstract
This paper uses a unique decade-long panel data with lab-tested soil measures from farmers in Uganda to examine the relationship between transfer rights and soil quality. We find that transfer rights are associated with better soil. This possibly has to do with the ways farmers with transfer rights manage their land compared to farmers without transfer rights. We find strong positive correlation between transfer rights and use of chemical fertilizers. Although we find no strong correlation between transfer rights and agricultural intensification in terms of manure use, the strong positive relationship found between transfer rights and soil quality may suggest that farmers with transfer rights may be investing in soil improvement through other means such as use of compost, crop residues, and fallowing.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Although land tenure security is generally defined as “the certainty that a person’s rights to land will be recognized by others and protected in cases of challenges” (FAO 2002), one of its dimensions is whether the plot manager believes that he or she has complete transfer rights (Bambio and Bouayad 2018; Hayes et al. 1997; Place and Hazell 1993). In this paper, we focus on this dimension of tenure security.
Due to data limitations, we only look at the use of manure and chemical fertilizer.
Chemical fertilizers are short-term investments—they last in the soil for only one cropping season. Manure is a long-term investment—it lasts in the soil for more than one cropping season; thus, has long-lasting benefits for soil.
However, the effect of inorganic and organic fertilizers on soil quality can be complicated. Although chemical fertilizers are high in nutrient content and are used rapidly by crops and the use of chemical fertilizers increase the fertility of soil and crop productivity especially in short-term (Chen et al. 2010), long-term, excessive and inappropriate use of chemical fertilizers may pose risk to soil quality (Dong et al. 2012; Guo et al. 2010). Conversely, although organic fertilizers release nutrients in a more sustainable way, they are comparatively low in nutrient content, and the nutrient release rate is too slow to meet crop requirements in a short time. Nevertheless, long-term application of organic manure improve the quality of soil organic matters (SOM) (Chen et al. 2010). Due to these complexities, studies suggest an appropriate combination (Chen et al. 2010; Liu et al. 2017).
In Uganda, communal land includes gardens, pastures, grazing areas, burial grounds, and hunting areas commonly known as common property regimes. Communal land is mainly found in Northern Uganda. It is mainly utilized by the pastoralist communities in Northern Uganda and parts of the cattle belt in the West. User rights are guaranteed in form of farming, seasonal grazing, pasture, and other community activities. No specific ownership rights of control are conferred on users. Control and ownership are through the family, clan or the community. Similarly, under individual/family or clan customary tenure, emphasis is also in use rather than ownership. Male elders are the custodians of customary land in most communities and determine distribution of the land. However, the family has more control in the land utilization rather than the community (Busingye 2002).
However, in the 2003 data, for some households we have missing information on soil parcel identification. More on this is given in Section Estimation strategies.
Responses from recall back question on soil parcel identification asked in 2012 survey suggest that soil samples were collected from 763 households in 2003 and 841 households in 2012. The fact that we observe few households with soil samples in the data is evidence that many samples got spoiled during the process.
Thus, the first attrition related to soil sample households is about 27% (409 out 559). When we treat households with missing values of soil samples as attrite cases, the attrition is also not random (Table 8, column 3). As a robustness check, we also weight the estimations by attrition weights estimated from this type of attrition. The results (not reported to economize space) remain unaffected.
The 2012 survey asked a recall back question to identify the soil parcel for the 2003 survey. Moreover, the 2012 survey identifies the soil sample parcels. This allows us to match the parcels.
For example, although rainfall is important for moisture availability, which is important for soil health; excessive rainfall may lead to substantial leaching and depletion of soil nutrients through soil erosion. Conversely, drought may negatively affect nitrogen-fixation.
In the analysis, we also examine how each individual soil variable correlates with land rights.
For the remaining five soil variables, generally more is better.
Soil indicators from different year samples were obtained by calibration; the calibration was done year by year separately.
Respondents to this question are household heads who are also the decision-makers on land uses, investments and agricultural production activities.
One may be concerned that the change of crops may also affect soil quality results. However, since soil samples were taken from maize plots or non-maize cereal (millet, sorghum or wheat) plots if the household did not cultivate maize, we do not think that the change of crops in this case may affect soil quality because all these cereal crops have similar characteristics.
A further exploration of the data revealed that 21.1% of the 313 households (parcels) changed their perception on transfer rights from perceiving to have full transfer rights to perceiving having partial or no transfer rights, 13.4% changed from perceiving to have partial or no transfer rights to perceiving to have full transfer rights and 65.5% did not change.
Because we have one parcel per household, it could also be considered as parcel fixed effects and control any parcel level heterogeneity that are invariant overtime.
We also examine those observations that changed their transfer rights more closely (Tables 12, 13). We isolate those households to exploit this variation to see how soil quality is related to farmers who changed their perception on transfer rights. Put differently, is the move from not perceiving to have full transfer rights to perceiving to have full transfer rights associated with an improvement in soil quality? We find that moving from not perceiving to have full transfer rights to perceiving to have full transfer rights is associated with an improvement in soil quality (Tables 5, 6). Conversely, moving from perceiving to have full transfer rights to not perceiving to have full transfer rights is not associated with improvement in soil quality (Tables 14, 15). This provides further supportive evidence of our argument.
In Eq. (2), we use the more accurate attrition weights (313 out 940) because the first attrition level (779 out of 940) may be misleading here.
Transferability of land rights is likely to evolve with commercialization. Similarly, fertilizer is likely to rise with commercialization. Failure to control for commercialization may lead to endogeneity problem arising from omitted variable. In \(V_{jt}\), we also control for distance to the nearest district town (a proxy for commercialization).
Here we use the full sample i.e., regardless of whether the soil sample was collected from the parcel or not. We also run the regressions with partial samples (soil samples) to see how the results match up. The results not reported to economize space are largely similar.
References
Abdulai A, Owusu V, Goetz R (2011) Land tenure differences and investment in land improvement measures: theoretical and empirical analyses. J Dev Econ 96(1):66–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2010.08.002
Amone C, Lakwo C (2014) Customary land ownership and underdevelopment in Northern Uganda. Int J Social Sci Human Res 2(3):117–125
Bambio Y, Bouayad AS (2018) Land tenure security and investment: does strength of land right really matter in rural Burkina Faso. World Dev 111:130–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.06.026
Bellemare MF (2013) The productivity impacts of formal and informal land rights: evidence from Madagascar. Land Econ 89(2):272–290. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.89.2.272
Besley T (1995) Property rights and investment incentives: theory and evidence from Ghana. J Political Econ 103(5):903–937. https://doi.org/10.1086/262008
Brasselle AS, Gaspart F, Platteau JP (2002) Land tenure security and investment incentives: puzzling evidence from Burkina Faso. J Dev Econ 67(2):373–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3878(01)00190-0
Busingye H (2002) Customary land tenure reform in Uganda: Lessons for South Africa. International Symposium on Communal Tenure Reform. Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), Johannesburg. https://mokoro.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/customary_land_tenure_reform_uganda.pdf. Accessed 14 November 2021
Chen Y, Xudong Z, Hongbo H, Hongtu X, Ying Y, Ping Z, Lichun W (2010) Carbon and nitrogen pools in different aggregates of a Chinese Mollisol as influenced by long-term fertilization. J Soils Sediment 10:1018–1026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-009-0123-8
Chenery EM (1960) An Introduction to the soils of the Uganda protectorate. Memoirs of the Research Division, Series 1- Soils, Number 1, Department of Agriculture, Kawanda Research Station, Uganda
Deininger K, Ali DA (2008) Do overlapping land rights reduce agricultural investment? Evidence from Uganda. Am J Agric Econ 90(4):869–882. https://doi.org/10.2307/20492341
Deininger K, Ali DA, Alemu T (2011) Impacts of land certification on tenure security, investment, and land market participation: evidence from Ethiopia. Land Econ 87(2):312–334. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.87.2.312
Deininger K, Ali DA, Yamano T (2008) Legal knowledge and economic development: the case of land rights in Uganda. Land Econ 84(4):593–619. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.84.4.593
Deininger K, Castagnini R (2006) Incidence and impact of land conflict in Uganda. J Econ Behav Organ 60(3):321–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2004.04.008
Deininger K, Jin S (2006) Tenure security and land-related investment: Evidence from Ethiopia. Eur Econ Rev 50(5):1245–1277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2005.02.001
Dong W, Zhang X, Wang H, Dai X, Sun X, Qiu W, Yang F (2012) Effect of different fertilizer application on the soil fertility of paddy soils in Red Soil Region of Southern China. PLoS ONE 7(9):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044504
FAO (2002) Land tenure and rural development. FAO Land Tenure Studies No.3. https://fao.org/3/y4307e/y4307e.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2021
FAO (2015) The state of food and agriculture:Social protection and agriculture—Breaking the cycle of rural poverty. Acra. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4910e.pdf5d80-c277-4f12-be11-fb4b384cee35/. Accessed 26 June 2017
Feder G, Feeny D (1991) Land tenure and property rights: theory and implications for development policy. World Bank Econ Rev 135–154. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/5.1.135
Fenske J (2011) Land tenure and investment incentives: evidence from West Africa. J Dev Econ 95(2):137–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2010.05.001
Fitzgerald J, Gottschalk P, Moffitt R (1998) An analysis of sample attrition in panel data: the Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics. J Hum Resour 33(2):251. https://doi.org/10.3386/t0220
Gavian S, Fafchamps M (1996) Land tenure and allocative efficiency in Niger. Am J Agric Econ 78(2):460. https://doi.org/10.2307/1243717
Goldstein M, Udry C (2008) The profits of power: land rights and agricultural investment in Ghana. J Political Econ 116(6):981–1022. https://doi.org/10.1086/595561
Gray CL (2011) Soil quality and human migration in Kenya and Uganda. Glob Environ Change 21(2):421–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.02.004
Guo J, Liu XJ, Zhang Y, Shen J, Han W, Zhang W, Zhang FS (2010) Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands. Science 327(5968):1008–1010. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182570
Hayes J, Roth M, Zepeda L (1997) Tenure security, investment and productivity in Gambian agriculture: a generalized Probit analysis. Am J Agric Econ 79:369–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/1244136
Henao J, Baanante CA (2006) Agricultural production and soil nutrient mining in Africa: implications for resource conservation and policy development. IFCD. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/68832. Accessed 2 January 2017
Jacoby HG, Li G, Rozelle S (2002) Hazards of expropriation: tenure insecurity and investment in Rural China. Am Economic Rev 92(5):1420–1447. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282802762024575
Jenny H (1995) Factors of soil formation. A system of quantitative pedology. Dover Publications, Inc. New York
Kabubo-Mariara J (2007) Land conservation and tenure security in Kenya: Boserup’s hypothesis revisited. Ecol Econ 64:25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.007
Lal R (2006) Enhancing crop yields in the developing countries through restoration of the soil organic carbon pool in agricultural lands. Land Degrad Dev 17:197–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.696
Liu Z, Rong Q, Zhou W, Liang G (2017) Effects of inorganic and organic amendment on soil chemical properties, enzyme activities, microbial community and soil quality in yellow clayey soil. PLoS ONE, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172767
Loveland P, Webb J (2003) Is there a critical level of organic matter in the agricultural soils of temperate regions: a review. Soil Tillage Res 70(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(02)00139-3
Mallarino P, Blackmer AM (1992) Comparison of methods for determining critical concentrations of soil test phosphorus for corn. Agron J 84(5):850. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1992.00021962008400050017x
Marenya PP, Barrett CB (2009) State-conditional fertilizer yield response on Western Kenyan farms. Am J Agric Econ 91(4):991–1006. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01313.x
Matsumoto T, Yamano T (2009) Soil fertility, fertilizer, and the maize Green Revolution in East Africa. World Bank. Policy Research Working Paper;No. 5158. World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/19960. Accessed 2 February 2017
Michelson H, Muniz M, DeRosa K (2013) Measuring socio-economic status in the millennium villages: the role of asset index choice. J Dev Stud 49(7):917–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2013.785525
Morris M, Kelly VA, Kopicki RJ, Byerlee D (2007) Fertilizer use in African agriculture: Lessons learned and good practice guidelines. Directions in Development; Agriculture and Rural Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/6650 .Accessed 14 March 2017
Mugizi FMP, Matsumoto T (2021) From conflict to conflicts: War-induced displacement, land disputes, and agricultural productivity in post-war Northern Uganda. Land Use Policy, Volume 101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105149
Mugizi FMP, Matsumoto T (2021) A curse or a blessing? Population pressure, and soil quality in Sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from Rural Uganda. Ecol Econ Volume 179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106851
Mugizi FMP, Matsumoto T (2020) Population pressure and soil quality in Sub-Saharan Africa: panel evidence from Kenya. Land Use Policy, Volume 94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104499
Musinguzi P, Ebanyat P, Tenywa JS, Basamba TA, Tenywa MM, Mubiru DN (2016) Critical soil organic carbon range for optimal crop response to mineral fertiliser nitrogen on a Ferralsol. Exp Agric 52(4):635–653. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0014479715000307
Musinguzi P, Tenywa JS, Ebanyat P, Tenywa MM, Mubiru DN, Basamba TA, Leip A (2013) Soil organic carbon thresholds and nitrogen management in tropical agroecosystems: concepts and prospects. J Sustain Dev 6(12):31–43. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v6n12p31
Mwesigye F, Barungi M (2021) Land tenure insecurity, fragmentation and crop choice: Evidence from Uganda. AERC Research Paper 419. https://africaportal.org/documents/Research-Paper-419.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2021
Mwesigye F, Matsumoto T, Otsuka K (2017) Population pressure, rural-to-rural migration and evolution of land tenure institutions: the case of Uganda. Land Use Policy, 65, 1–14. Mwesigye, Francis; Matsumoto, Tomoya; Otsuka, Keijiro (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.03.020
Namubiru-Mwaura E, Place F (2013) Securing land for agricultural production. In: Africa Agriculture Status Report: Focus on Staple Crops.Nairobi, Kenya:Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa. https://agra.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/agra_africa_agriculture_status_report_2013.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2021
Nkonya E, Kaizzi C, Pender J (2005) Determinants of nutrient balances in a maize farming system in eastern Uganda. Agric Syst 85:155–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2004.04.004
Otsuka K, Place F (ed) (2001) Land Tenure and Natural Resource Management: a Comparative Study of Agrarian Communities in Asia and Africa. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Pender J, Nkonya E, Jagger P, Sserunkuuma D, Ssali H (2004) Strategies to increase agricultural productivity and reduce land degradation: Evidence from Uganda. Agric Econ 31:181–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agecon.2004.09.006
Place F, Barrett CB, Freeman HA, Ramisch JJ, Vanlauwe B (2003) Prospects for integrated soil fertility management using organic and inorganic inputs: Evidence from smallholder African agricultural systems. Food Policy 28:365–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2003.08.009
Place F, Hazell P (1993) Productivity effects of indigenous land tenure systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. Am J Agric Econ 75:10–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/1242949
Place F, Otsuka K (2002) Land tenure systems and their impacts on agricultural investments and productivity in Uganda. J Dev Stud 38(6):105–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380412331322601
Sanchez PA, Shepherd KD, Soule MJ, Place FM, Buresh RJ, Izac AMN, Mokwunye AU, Kwesiga FR, Ndiritu CG, Woomer PL (1996) Soil fertility replenishment in Africa: An investment in natural resource capital. Replenishing Soil Fertil Afr 6:1. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaspecpub51.c1
Sanchez PA (2002) Soil fertility and hunger in Africa. Science, 64–66. https://doi.org/10.2307/3076259
Shepherd KD, Walsh MG (2002) Development of reflectance spectral libraries for characterization of soil properties. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66(3):988–998. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2002.9880
Srivastava S, Subba Rao A, Alivelu K, Singh KN, Raju NS, Rathore A, (2006) Evaluation of crop responses to applied fertilizer phosphorus and derivation of optimum recommendations using the Mitscherlich-Bray equation. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 37(5–6):847–858. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620600564182
Tully K, Sullivan C, Weil R, Sanchez P (2015) The state of soil degradation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Baselines, trajectories, and solutions. Sustainability 7:6523–6552. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8HM5894
West H (1965) The mailo system in Buganda. The Government Printer, Uganda, Entebbe
Wooldridge JM (2010) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel data. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Yamano T, Kijima Y (2010) The associations of soil fertility and market access with household income: Evidence from rural Uganda. Food Policy 35(1):51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.09.005
Yamano T, Sserunkuuma D, Otsuka K, Omiat G, Ainembabazi JH, Shimamura Y (2004) The 2003 REPEAT survey in Uganda: Results. FASID Development Database. https://www3.grips.ac.jp/~yamanota/REPEATinUgandaReport.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2017
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Prof. Tomoya Matsumoto, Prof. Yoko Kijima, Prof. Yamauchi Chikako, participants of the GRIPS Policy Analysis Workshops and four anonymous reviewers for their useful comments. This paper was presented at the Western Economic Association International’s (WEAI) Annual Conference, San Francisco, California, USA, 28th June–2nd July 2019. The author is appreciative of the financial support provided by the University of Dar es Salaam-Swedish International Development Agency Programme to attend the conference. Comments given by the conference participants were very useful.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The author declares no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mugizi, F.M.P. Soil Quality in Uganda: Do Transfer Rights Really Matter?. Environmental Management 69, 492–513 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-022-01596-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-022-01596-w