BISHOP STUART UNIVERSITY

NAME: TUHIRIRWE LILIAN

REGN. NO: 17/BSU/DPA/021

FACULTY: BUSINESS AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

DEPARTMENT: PSYCHOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

PROGRAM: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

COURSE: STATE AND LOCAL POLITICS

LECTURER’S NAME: MR. JOSHUA NAMANYA

DATE OF SUBMISSION:

QUESTION

Research, read and make notes about the following:

a) Social policy formulation in Uganda.
b) Social problems, their types and characteristics.
c) Poverty and unemployment levels in Uganda.
a) Social Policy Formulation in Uganda
Several writers in the social policy tradition have assigned different definitions to the concept of
social policy. Since Hill’s (1996) works on social policy, where he so beautifully defined social
policy as the study of the role of the state in relation to the welfare of its citizens, other writers
have concurred with his thesis. Social policy consists of guidelines, principles, legislation and
activities that affect the living conditions conducive to human welfare, such as a person's quality
of life.

Illustration showing social policy formulation

Social policies are perceived as the outcomes of national and local decisions in response to
human development. They consist of formal and informal rules which are embedded in the
organised efforts of society to meet identified personal needs as well as within the wider context
(Gil, 1993). The ultimate aim of such organized efforts is to enhance the well-being of societal
members in their respective environments.

Social policy is not a recent phenomenon to be associated with the onset of colonialism in
Uganda. The traditional welfare system provided collective efforts through which communities
looked after their members. With colonialism, how- ever, existing social arrangements were
either seen as of little significance or as standing in the way of modem administration and social
policies.
The limitations of the traditional welfare system notwithstanding, social needs and social
problems were experienced by societal members, but with increasing urbanisation, traditional
societies became increasingly inadequate to handle the new. Problems created by rural-urban
movements and technological changes (Asingwire, 1992). A more formal system of services
became inevitable.

It was in this regard that during colonial period, the question of state provision arose. Times of
change transformed not only traditional economics but also their associated social institutions
and social relations. The traditional organisations in which there was assured social provisions
not just for individuals but for the whole community became altered. This was the state of affairs
in the social policy domain that prevailed in Uganda at the time of independence in 1962.

The first decade of Uganda political independence was characterized by active state involvement
in the area of social policy development and implementation. The state focused on major fields
of social policy such as health, income, maintenance/employment, housing and education. All
this began to change in the early 1970s when the regime in power developed a non-pragmatic
approach towards addressing socioeconomic issues. The process of social policy fell prey to the
unconventional style introduced in the social policy domain whereby military decrees replaced
legislated laws (eg, Amin's era). At present, the kind of social policy obtaining in Uganda is
dictated by the changes occurring in what Bennett (1990) refers to as “post welfare agenda.” The
state is limiting its role in the social sector and instead creating an “enabling environment” where
policy beneficiaries become active participants.

Social policy is perceived in terms of the institutions involved in the making and delivery of
social services. As a result, the key social policy players in Uganda include various Government
Ministries/Departments, local and international Nongovernmental Organisations, including
churches and mosques; Bilateral and multi-lateral agencies; and of recent, local community
initiatives through Community- Based Organisations (CBOs). Most of the social
policies/interventions initiated by the above players are either residual, institutional or
community-based. In certain aspects, all these elements exist in certain social interventions,
albeit in varying degrees.

Parliamentary committees are the venue chosen involved in social policy formulation. In
democracies parliamentary committees are perceived as crucial components in the policy process
(Jann & Wegrich, 2007). They play a central role in the legislative and policy-formulation
process (Wehner, 2006; McAllister & Stirbu, 2007). Researchers claim that the tasks common to
committees in different national settings can be grouped into two comprehensive categories
(Hazan, 2001b). The first focuses on legislative functions, whereas the second emphasises
oversight functions of the committees (Longley & Davidson, 1998). These oversight functions
relate to ongoing activities aimed at the examination, review and scrutiny of the policies of the
government and of the parliament and the challenging of these actions (Mattson & Strøm, 1995).

Once social policies are developed/formulated, they may be translated into programmes. Funding
of most programmes in Uganda is externally generated in the form of loans, aid and donations.
Policies which receive external funding are rather dictated by international policies rather than
local circumstances and concerns which can aggravate the local adverse social situation. Due to
failure of financing the implementation of locally-formulated policies, a large proportion of the
process of policy formulation and development has been “hijacked” by the funders. Although the
local decision-makers can be involved in the process, their participation tends to end with
problem identification.

Stages of Social Policy Formulation in Uganda

The policy management process involves a number of phases, each of which poses particular
management challenges. The common phases of the policy-making process include:

Policy initiation/identification: To develop a policy, it is important to accurately identify and

understand what the social, economic or political issue. It is easy to think that a problem and its
solutions are obvious, thinking in greater depth about the outcome to be achieved and what is
preventing it happening can often reveal that the issue is much more complex. The process of
policy identification helps one not to confuse the symptoms with the problem.

Policy analysis: Policy analysis is the process of determining which of various alternative
policies will most achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies and
the goals. Policy analysis can be divided into two major fields: analytical and descriptive.
Analysis of policy is analytical and descriptive -- i.e., it attempts to explain policies and their
development. Analysis for policy is prescriptive- i.e., it is involved with formulating policies and
proposals (e.g., to improve social welfare).
Policy analysis is methodologically diverse using both qualitative methods and quantitative
methods, including case studies, survey research, statistical analysis, and model building among
others. One common methodology is to define the problem and evaluation criteria; identify all
alternatives; evaluate them; and recommend the best policy agenda for adoption.

Decision-making: Decisions are made in the context of a set of needs, preferences an individual
or organization has and values they seek. The decision making process must be regarded as a
continuous process integrated in the interaction with the environment. Yet, at another level, it
might be regarded as a problem solving activity which is terminated when a satisfactory solution
is found. Therefore, decision making is a reasoning or emotional process which can be rational or
irrational, can be based on explicit assumptions or tacit assumptions. In policy development
decision making is a logical process where government officials apply their knowledge in a
given area to making informed decisions. As part of the policy making process, decision making
is the effective balance of political; realities and public policy objectives without causing any
negative impacts on some stakeholders. It involves the determination of policy options and
impacts resource allocation to provide desired public services.

Implementation: Implementation is the execution of public policy by public servants working in

bureaucratic agencies. This process consists of rule-making, rule-administration and rule-
adjudication. Factors impacting implementation include the legislative intent, the administrative
capacity of the implementing bureaucracy, interest group activity and opposition, and
presidential or executive support.

Monitoring and evaluation: This is an important element of any good policy; indeed every
policy should be monitored and evaluated. Monitoring and evaluation allows government to
determine whether a policy is serving its original purpose in the most cost effective and efficient
manner. Policies need to be periodically reviewed and kept up to date to avoid wastage and
misallocation of scarce resources. This may involve consulting stakeholders on how the
implementation is going and whether there have been unintended consequences.

It is crucial that policy decisions should be based on sound evidence. Good quality policy-
making depends on high quality information, derived from a variety of sources - expert
knowledge; existing local, national and international research; existing statistics; stakeholder
consultation; evaluation of previous policies; new research, if appropriate; or secondary sources,
including the internet. To be as effective as possible, evidence needs to be provided by, and/or be
interpreted by, experts in the field working closely with policy makers. The first port of call is
likely to be technical staff within the Public Service: for example, statisticians, economists,
policy analysts, administrative officers, medical officers, inspectors, scientists, and social
researchers. These professionals should know what relevant statistics (published or not
published) are available and be in touch with the latest research evidence and best practice
internationally in the relevant policy areas. They can also advise on commissioning new research
and generally point policy-makers in the right direction.

It is helpful to use international comparisons as part of the wider evidence base. This can
contribute very positively to the policy-making process, in particular helping to guide policy-
makers to new solutions to problems and new mechanisms for implementing policy and
improving public service delivery. It can also provide useful evidence of what works in practice
and what does not work. It is of course important to take account of social, economic and
institutional differences which may require adjustment to policy solutions that work elsewhere to
meet Uganda’s circumstances.

There are countries or regions elsewhere from which to learn: for example, regions which have
successfully addressed similar social or economic issues, or which have geographical similarities
to Uganda. International and inter-regional comparisons are also important for benchmarking
Uganda’s performance against that of other regions.

Past experience shows that delivery of policy is rarely a one-off task. It is best understood not as
a linear process - leading from policy ideas through implementation to change on the ground -
but rather as a more circular process involving continuous learning, adaptation and improvement,
with policy changing in response to implementation as well as vice versa. It is therefore
important to undertake effective appraisal of policy options initially, and to build ongoing
monitoring and review mechanisms into the delivery of policy from the start.

b) Social problems, Types and Characteristics

i) Social problems
Social problems are the general factors that affect and damage society. A social problem is
normally a term used to describe problems with a particular area or group of people in the world.
Social problems often involve problems that affect the real world. It also affects how people
react to certain situations. Examples can include:
 Anti-social behavior
 Poverty

 Drug abuse

 Prostitution

 Alcohol abuse

 Economic Deprivation

 Unemployment

 Sexual abuse

o Rape

o Early pregnancy

o Female genital mutilation

 Animal abuse

The main cause of social problems is because of unemployment, which is also a social problem
itself. This problem is apparently among the leading challenges facing the country as more
almost three quarters are below the age of 30, educated with no employment or under employed.

ii) Types of social problems

Norm Violations: Norm violations assume that a standard of behaviour exists. People who study
norm violations are interested in society's failures like the criminal, the mentally ill, or the school
dropout. Eitzen et al. (2009:10) contend, however, that norm violations are symptoms of social
problems rather that the problem itself. Deviants, for example, are victims and should not be
blamed entirely.

Economic issues: Economic issues compose is one of the types of social which is itself a social
problem. Under the economic issues, the most pressing issue is unemployment which has made
the largest proportion of the youth in the developing world unproductive. Unemployment rates
vary by region, gender, educational attainment, and ethnic group. In most countries (including
the developed countries), many people are poor and depend on welfare.

Social disorganization: This is also called problem neighborhoods. These neighbourhoods tend
to have a high drop-out rate from secondary school, and children growing up in these
neighbourhoods have a low probability of going to college compared to children who grow up in
other neighbourhoods. Abuse of alcohol and drugs is common in these neighbourhoods. Often
these neighbourhoods were founded out of best intentions. In Uganda, youth who grow up slum
areas tend to suffer this type of social problem as they tend to engage in drug addiction, drop out
of school, engage in dubious activities like betting among others.

Public health: Widespread health conditions (often characterized as epidemics or pandemics)

are of concern to society as a whole. They can harm quality of life and the ability of people to
contribute to society and to work, and most problematically result in death. Infectious diseases
are often public health concerns because they can spread quickly and easily, affecting large
numbers of members. The World Health Organization has an acute interest in combatting
infectious disease outbreaks by minimizing their geographic and numerical spread and treating
the affected. Other conditions for which there is not yet a cure or even effective treatment, such
as dementia, can be viewed as public health concerns in the long run.

Age and the life course: Throughout the life course, there are social problems associated with
different ages. One such social problem is age discrimination. An example of age discrimination
is when a particular person is not allowed to do something or is treated differently based on age.

Social inequality: Social inequality is "the state or quality of being unequal". Inequality is the
root of a number of social problems that occur when things such as gender, disability, race, and
age may affect the way a person is treated.

Education and public schools: Education is arguably the most important factor in a person's
success in society. As a result, social problems can be raised by the unequal distribution of
funding between public schools, such as that seen in the United States. The weak organizational
policy in the place and the lack of communication between public schools and the federal
government has begun to have major effects on the future generation. Public schools that do not
receive high standardized test scores are not being funded sufficiently to actually reach the
maximum level of education their students should be receiving.

Work and occupations: Social problems in the workplace include occupational stress, theft,
sexual harassment, wage inequality, gender inequality, racial inequality, health care disparities,
and many more.

Environmental racism: Environmental racism exists when a particular place or town is subject
to problematic environmental practices due to the racial and class components of that space. In
general, the place or town is representative of lower income and minority groups. Often, there is
more pollution, factories, dumping, etc. that produce environmental hazards and health risks
which are not seen in more affluent cities.

Social stratification: This is a kind of social differentiation whereby a society groups people
into socioeconomic strata, based upon their occupation and income, wealth and social status, or
derived power (social and political). As such, stratification is the relative social position of
persons within a social group, category, geographic region, or social unit.

iii) Characteristics of Social Problems

 All social problems are situations which have injurious consequences for society.
 All social problems are deviations from the “ideal” situation.
 All social problems have some common basis of origin.
 All social problems are social and political in origin.
 All social problems are caused by pathological social conditions.
 All social problems are interconnected.
 All social problems are social in their results – they affect all sections of society.
 The responsibility for social problems is social – they require a collective approach for
their solution.
 Social problems occur in all societies (Ahuja 2002: 5).

c) Poverty and Unemployment Levels in Uganda

i) Poverty levels in Uganda
Poverty is the lack or insufficiency of money to meet basic needs, including food, clothing and
shelter. Poverty can be measured in monetary terms based on the monthly (or annual)
expenditure of a given individual. That expenditure is then compared to a threshold called the
poverty line. However, poverty is much more than the mere lack of money. It is also about
deprivation in other important areas of wellbeing such as education, health, water, and housing.

According to the 2016 Poverty Assessment, Uganda has reduced monetary poverty at a very
rapid rate. The proportion of the Ugandan population living below the national poverty line
declined from 31.1% in 2006 to 19.7% in 2013. Similarly, the country was one of the fastest in
Sub-Saharan Africa to reduce the share of its population living on $1.90 PPP per day or less,
from 53.2% in 2006 to 34.6% in 2013. Nonetheless, the country is lagging behind in several
important non-monetary areas, notably improved sanitation, access to electricity, education
(completion and progression), and child malnutrition.

Households in Uganda remain vulnerable. In fact between 2005 and 2009, for every three
Ugandans who were lifted out of poverty, two fell back. Because of the limited availability of
safety net programs (total spending on social security was 1% of GDP in 2013, compared to an
average of 2.8% for Sub-Saharan Africa), households cope with these shocks in suboptimal
ways. Only 5% of households received support from the government, instead 35% relied on
savings and 25% on family. While total fertility rates have been falling in Uganda (from 6.6 in
2005 and 5.9 in 2013), they remain high compared to Sub-Saharan Africa (5 in 2013). Further
reductions can have positive effects on household living standards in both the short and longer
run.

The national poverty level increased from 19.7% in the financial year 2012/13 to 21.4% in
2016/2017 (Uganda Bureau of Statistics, 2018). The current figure now puts the total number of
poor Ugandans who cannot afford three meals a day to eight million. The eastern region had the
highest poverty incidence at 35.7% up in 2016/2017 from 24.5% in 2012/13. UBOS findings
also show that poverty incidence remains higher in rural areas (31 per cent) compared to urban
areas (15 per cent). The rural areas contributed 86 per cent of the national poverty.

The increase in number of poor people also means that the rate at which poverty is being reduced
is lower than the rate of population growth. Uganda like the African continent is yet to undergo
demographic transition in terms of low fertility and dependency. Uganda’s population growth
remains at 3.03percent per annum compared to the 2020 target of 2.9 percent. Juxtaposing the
income pyramid and population, suggests that the poor bear more children and few babies are
born as you move up the income pyramid. An average poor household is larger than national
average of 4.7. This tends to perpetuate the culture of poverty at risk of it becoming chronic and
transient poverty.

Uganda’s high population growth has implications for most macro-economic indicators and
social transformation. Agriculture sector growth has been outpaced by the population growth in
recent years at the risk of sustained food insecurity. Food insecurity across all regions in Uganda
has been on the increase over the last couple of years. According to the National Food Security
Assessment in January 2017, 10.9 million Ugandans were experiencing an Acute Food Insecurity
situation, of which 1.6 million are in a crisis situation (unable to meet basic dietary needs without
engaging in unsustainable strategies to access food and income, including any reliance on
humanitarian assistance). The findings are consistent with the UNHS 2016/17 results that show
37 percent of households in Ugandans were food poor with the highest cases recorded in
Karamoja (70 percent) and Bukedi sub-regions (58 percent) while Ankole (14 percent) had the
fewest.

Poverty is a structural problem and will require structural reforms on the basic factors of
production (land, Labour, entrepreneurship, capital). Land mapping, registration and titling
remains an imminent reform. Land conflicts are believed to account for a sizeable reduction in
agricultural output. An efficient reform approach on the “4 Is” (Individuals, Institutions,
Infrastructure and Integration in that order) remains warranted. There is also need to focus more
on per-person metrics and reforms.

ii) Unemployment levels in Uganda

The unemployment rate for young people ages 15–24 is 83% (World Bank, 2014). This rate is
even higher for those who have formal degrees and live in the urban area (DFID, 2010). This is
due to the disconnect between the degree achieved and the vocational skills needed for the jobs
that are in demand for workers. Those without a degree are also not able to obtain jobs because
they lack the skills needed for the position or they don’t have the resources such as land or
capital. Some youth also have negative views on certain jobs so they are unwilling to take them
if offered a position. Youth unemployment poses a serious political, economic, and social
challenge to the country and its leadership. The cycle is making it increasingly difficult for
Uganda to break out of poverty. Young women also more often have to stay at home in a
maternal role from a very young age which limits their ability to work.

Youth unemployment remains a serious policy challenge in many sub-Saharan African countries,
including Uganda. In 2013, youth (aged 15 to 24) in sub-Saharan Africa were twice likely to be
unemployed compared to any other age cohort. For Uganda, in 2012, the Uganda Bureau of
Statistics revealed that the share of unemployed youth (national definition, 18-30 years) among
the total unemployed persons in the country was 64 percent. Given the rapid growth of the
Ugandan population—three-quarters of the population are below the age of 30 years—coupled
with the fact that the youth are getting better educated through higher access to primary and
secondary education, a stronger focus on job creation for this cohort of people cannot be
overemphasized.

The World Bank had at the same time put youth unemployment in Kampala alone at 32.2 per
cent and unemployment among university graduates in Kampala at 36 per cent. While medium
and large scale private sector firms are the biggest employers of graduates outside the public
sector, they constitute but a small share of the national economy. A Census of Business
Establishments that was conducted in 2010 indicates that they employ only 3.3 per cent of the
total number of workers in Uganda, including professionals and university graduates.

As of 2012, youth unemployment in Uganda was said to be the highest on the African continent.
Findings of a study, “Lost opportunity? Gaps in youth policy and programming in Uganda”
conducted by ActionAid and published in 2012 put youth unemployment at 62 per cent, but that
was much lower than figures from the Netherlands-based nonprofit International development
organisation, SNV, which put the figure at 80 per cent and the African Development Bank, which
put it at 83 per cent.

Figures from the 2014 national census showed that 58 per cent of the population in the
productive age bracket of between 14 and 64 years, about 10.4 million people, is unemployed.
The report adds that 47 per cent of Ugandan males between the age group of 14 and 64 years are
unemployed and there is nothing to suggest that the situation has improved. The World Bank’s
World Development Indicator and the International Monetary Fund’s World Economic Outlook
show that while unemployment figures have been on the drop since 2011 when the promise was
first made, coming down from 8.9 per cent in 2011 to 7.4 per cent in 2013 and 4.9 per cent in
2016, unemployment remains a big problem.

Most social issues are hardly placed on the policy agenda. The little that has been achieved in
relation to human development is basically attributed to the intervention of non-governmental
agencies. The state is not only in a “spectating” position, but is also steadily curtailing its
involvement in the social sector. The influence of external agencies on the social policy process
renders the state quite un-authoritative in matters of human development Policies that are
externally funded comply as much as possible with the interests of funding agencies. Rather than
addressing the social policy process.
References
Bennett, R J (1990). Decentralization, Local Governments and Markets. Towards a Post Welfare
Agenda, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 1-26.
Burr, V. (1995). An Introduction to Social Constructionism, London, Routledge.
Henry Manyire & Narathius Asingwire (1998). The State of Dynamics of Social Policy Practice
& Research in Uganda. Journal of Social Development in Africa (1998), 13. 2, 75-83.
The Uganda National Household Survey 2016/17.
Umofped (2012). Poverty Status Report: Poverty Reduction and the National Development
Process, Kampala.