Author
Listed:
- Irene Nakamatte
- John Ilukor
- Jackline Bonabana
Abstract
Tobacco is grown on more than 4 million hectares of global agricultural land in at least 124 countries. As a member state to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) international treaty, Uganda seeks to support economically viable alternative activities as a means to tobacco control because previous efforts with tobacco control that focused on the demand side have failed to control tobacco supply. This study employed the Tradeoff Analysis-Minimum Data (TOA-MD) model to assess tradeoffs and associated economic impacts of switching from tobacco to alternative crops in smallholder cropping systems. Results revealed that switching from tobacco to alternative crops is economically feasible for most of the farms owing to the higher net economic returns. The proportion of farms that expect higher returns from alternative crops is highest for cassava (97%) followed by maize (87%), rice (83%) and the least for beans (74%). Cassava is the best alternative for both small and large farms because of the highest gains in farm net returns, per capita income and poverty reduction. The next feasible crop alternatives for large farms are maize and rice. Despite their economic feasibility, alternative crops are typical of uncertain markets with unorganised structures for production. Since these are important incentives for tobacco farmers, the study recommends development of institutions that foster value chain development for alternative crops. Supporting agro-processors is likely to guarantee markets and provide for lump-sum payments, input credit for production and a reliable extension service system as way of incentivizing a sustainable switch to alternative cropping systems.
Suggested Citation
Irene Nakamatte & John Ilukor & Jackline Bonabana, 2025.
"Economic feasibility and impacts of replacing tobacco with alternative crops in smallholder cropping systems: evidence from Uganda,"
Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(1), pages 50-71, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:ragrxx:v:64:y:2025:i:1:p:50-71
DOI: 10.1080/03031853.2024.2441129
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ragrxx:v:64:y:2025:i:1:p:50-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ragr20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.