The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

What Ugandan Farmers Teach Us About Politics Under Repression

A man picking coffee.
Coffee bean harvesting in Mityana, Uganda. Photo: Denis kasozi/Wikimedia Commons

A new study on agricultural development in Uganda suggests that it is possible to influence policy without alienating the country's notoriously volatile authorities. The findings challenge assumptions about mobilisation under repression and offer lessons for groups seeking social change in politically restrictive environments.

Sustainability researcher Ronald Byaruhanga examined how farmers and civil society organisations (CSOs) in Uganda mobilise against unfavourable policies. Environmental degradation, rising inequalities, and declining soil fertility are pushing smallholder farmers to adopt ecological farming practices that strengthen biodiversity and food security. Yet state policies and market incentives favour industrial agriculture, often marginalising alternative practices deemed less efficient and profitable.

In his 2025 doctoral thesis, Toward the Promised Land: Politicisation as a Pathway to Emancipatory Agricultural Transformation in Uganda, Byaruhanga argues that transforming agriculture requires confronting and disrupting the structural and political obstacles impeding change. The Ugandan government, on the other hand, dislikes uncomfortable feedback. Open protests meet state-sanctioned violence, and critical advocacy groups are routinely excluded from the political sphere. Under such conditions, a common assumption is that mobilisation either escalates into open confrontation or is neutralised altogether.

But Byaruhanga's research reveals a different pattern. Rather than engaging in confrontation, smallholder farmers and CSOs negotiate incremental policy reforms while simultaneously strengthening farmer autonomy through grassroots initiatives such as community seed banks, farmer field schools, and village savings and loan associations. With these strategies, farmers build resilience without directly challenging the state's authority.

Such efforts reflect what Byaruhanga describes as politicisation: a process through which groups challenge dominant assumptions and expand the boundaries of what is politically possible. He argues that this politicisation often unfolds through subtle, everyday practices rather than visible protest. These strategies, he notes, are "anchored in adaptive, often non-confrontational practices that balance resistance with collaboration,"  enabling actors to navigate political constraints while advancing alternative visions.

The findings challenge the understanding that grassroots organisations become depoliticised or co-opted when participating in decision-making on a repressive state's terms. They show how farmer groups can simultaneously engage with authorities while cultivating alternative systems from below, thereby strengthening their collective agency and expanding opportunities for change.

"These quieter forms of action can unsettle dominant power relations and sustain alternative ideas, while reducing the risks of repression or exclusion," Byaruhanga says. "At a time of ecological degradation and growing inequality, these struggles speak to global debates about how societies can pursue sustainable, just and more resilient food systems."

He finds that in societies characterised by political closure and crises, non-governmental organisations tend to drive social change rather than mass movements, emphasising the importance of recognising quieter, adaptive forms of mobilisation as meaningful expressions of politics, while remaining mindful of their limitations and vulnerabilities.

"These findings point to alternative ways of pursuing social transformation. They show that even under repression, political mobilisation does not disappear. It evolves into quieter, adaptive forms that enable actors to contest dominant systems, strengthen autonomy, and gradually reshape the possibilities for more just and sustainable agricultural development."

 

Read and download Ronald Byaruhanga's doctoral thesis, Toward the Promised Land: Politicisation as a Pathway to Emancipatory Agricultural Transformation in Uganda, in the Lund University Research Portal (PDF, 6.47 MB, new tab).

A man pictured outside, Ronald. Photo.

Ronald Byaruhanga earned his doctoral degree in sustainability science at LUCSUS in November 2025. He has a Bachelor's degree in Social Work and Social Administration and a double Master's degree, one in International Social Work and Human Rights and one in Global Studies, both from the University of Gothenburg. Ronald has previously worked as a research associate at a research and evaluation (REEV) consultancy firm in Uganda.