Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate
change in Uganda: Key results

November 2015

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate
change in Uganda: Key results

 

November 2015

About this paper
This paper is based on a study commissioned by the Climate and Development Knowledge
Network (CDKN) at the request of the Government of Uganda. It was funded jointly by CDKN
and the UK Department for International Development (DFID), Uganda office. The work was
coordinated locally and owned by the Climate Change Department (CCD) of the Ministry of
Water and Environment. The study team was led by Le Groupe-conseil Baastel sprl (Baastel) and
included a team of experts from Makerere University (Uganda), Metroeconomica (UK) and the
University of Wolverhampton Centre for International Development and Training (CIDT) (UK). The
study was highly participatory, and benefitted from valuable contributions from many people and
organisations inside and outside of Government, from Uganda but also from Rwanda, Kenya and
Tanzania. The Baastel consortium’s full report ‘Economic Assessment of the Impacts of Climate
Change in Uganda’ is available in full on www.cdkn.org. Its main authors were Anil Markandya
(Metroeconomica), Courtenay Cabot-Venton (Baastel) and Olivier Beucher (Baastel).

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Introduction
Uganda will need to manage the impacts of climate change carefully. Within the next 50 years,
scientists expect average temperatures in Uganda to rise by around 2°C. Climate change is likely
to cause an increase in extreme weather events such as floods, heat and droughts. While rainfall is
expected to decrease slightly across the country, most significantly over Lake Victoria, the west and
northwest – mainly highlands – are likely to become slightly wetter. In addition, rainfall is expected
to be more erratic, unpredictable and intense, with shorter rainy seasons.
Uganda is already experiencing the impacts of climate variability and associated economic losses.
For example, a drought in 2008 caused losses of approximately 3% of the value of all food and cash
crops that year.1 Two years later, the country suffered economic losses of US$470 m in food crops,
cash crops and livestock as a result of the 2010/11 drought.2 This equates to about 16% of the total
annual value of these crops in 2011.
Uganda’s First National Development Plan (2010–2015) recognises that climate change will affect
most of its key economic sectors and that action on climate change is crucial if the country is to
meet its goal to become a competitive, upper middle-income country by 2040 (Vision 2040). The
Plan also recognises that, for development to be economically and socially sustainable, climate
resilience must be at the heart of policies for growth and development, energy access and security,
increased agricultural production, education and health. The National Climate Change Policy (NCCP)
was completed at the end of 2013 (approved by Cabinet in April 2015). Priorities in the policy have
been mainstreamed into the Second National Development Plan (2015–2020).
Against this backdrop, the Government of Uganda commissioned the Economic Assessment of
the Impacts of Climate Change study. Its purpose is to provide the Government with economic
evidence on the current and future costs associated with climate variability and predicted climate
change, and the necessary adaptation measures for different sectors at both national and local
scales. This evidence is intended to help policy-makers mainstream climate change and resilience
into national and sectoral policies and develop the case for investing in adaptation. The study team
engaged with around 200 stakeholders from the Government of Uganda and around 300 people
from districts and civil society through face-to-face meetings, workshops, interviews and field
missions.
Evidence from the study has already informed Uganda’s Intended Nationally Determined
Contribution (INDC) to the 21st Conference of Parties (COP 21) to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Paris, France, in late 2015. The INDC outlines Uganda’s
commitment to climate adaptation and the mitigation of greenhouse gases as part of a new,
universal global climate agreement that will be decided at the summit.

1

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

The 18-month study analysed the impact of climate change on four sectors at the national level:
yy water
yy infrastructure (transport and human settlements)
yy agriculture, including livestock
yy energy.
The study also examined the economic case for investing in climate adaptation for five local case
studies across different regions of Uganda:
yy Kampala urban area: infrastructure
yy Bududa district in the region of Mount Elgon: coffee production
yy three villages across different agro-ecological zones of the Karamoja region: agriculture
yy the Mpanga river catchment: water and hydropower
yy Kabale and Tororo districts: malaria prevalence.
The study assessed the impacts of climate change under two scenarios, both derived from the
work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The first scenario represents
medium-to-low concentrations of greenhouse
gas emissions and associated levels of warming
Figure 1. Four scenarios for global
greenhouse gas emissions from CDKN’s
(known as the Representative Concentration
guide
Pathway or RCP 4.5, see Figure 1). While this
is not the lowest scenario produced by the
5
IPCC, this is a more ambitious trajectory than
5
suggested by the collective pledges submitted
4
by governments to the UNFCCC in 2015. The
4
second scenario assessed by the study looks at
3
3
a high emissions scenario (known as RCP 8.5,
2
see Figure 1). For more about the science of
2
climate change impacts on natural and human
1
1
systems across Africa under these different
0
scenarios, please see CDKN’s guide The IPCC’s
0
Fifth Assessment Report: What’s in it for Africa? 3

Global mean temperature change (ºC relative to
1850–1900, as an approximation of pre-industrial levels)

Global mean temperature change (ºC relative to 1986–2005)

2

°C

Although studies of this nature have limitations
due to the availability of data and the
modelling approaches used, the study makes
a significant contribution to the economic
evidence available in support of climate change
adaptation. It reinforces the need for urgent
action on many measures that are already listed
in Uganda’s National Climate Change Costed
Implementation Strategy.

°C

1900

1950

Historical
RCP8.5 (a highemissions scenario)
RCP6.0

2000
Year

2050

2100

RCP4.5
RCP2.6 (a lowemissions scenario)

Source:  CDKN (2014)3
The graph maps Representative Concentration Pathways
or RCPs of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere against
projected global temperature change.

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Key messages
1.  Development prospects will only be reached if the impacts of climate change
on Uganda are mitigated.
2.  The impacts of climate change are expected to be felt across all the sectors and
local areas studied, to varying degrees.
3.  The cost of adaptation is high: estimated at around US$406 m over the next
five years (2015–2020). On an annual basis, this amounts to about 5% of net official
development assistance received and 3.2% of total government revenues (excluding
grants).
4.  The cost of inaction is 20 times greater than the cost of adaptation: inaction is
estimated at between US$3.1 bn and 5.9 bn per year by 2025, which is more than 20
times the proposed adaptation budget.
5.  The economic case for adaptation is clear: many of the adaptation measures
proposed in the study are ‘no regrets’ investments, in that they are valid even in the
absence of climate change.
6.  Considering the co-benefits strengthens the case for adaptation further, for example
improved livelihoods, health and access to energy; these represent strong investments
in the development of Uganda’s future.

The results of the study will support the development of a Climate Change Law for Uganda in
2016, the integration of climate change into sectoral policy and development plans, and the
implementation of the Second National Development Plan (2015–2020). The results will also
support the integration of climate change into Local and District Development Plans. All these
actions will be essential to the delivery of Uganda’s international climate change commitments and
to achieving Vision 2040.

3

 4

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Water
Uganda’s growing population and its rising need for food, water and energy
are likely to increase water demand almost ten-fold by 2050. At the same time,
an increasing incidence of drought will reduce water availability. As a result,
Uganda is likely to face severe water shortages during most months of the
year. There are many benefits associated with taking action through additional
investments in climate adaptation in the water sector.
Climate change is already affecting water availability in Uganda and the trend towards increasing
water scarcity is expected to continue. This will affect households, agriculture, fisheries, forestry and
tourism as well as the production of energy, water transport, sanitation and health.
Between 2010 and 2050, the demand for water is expected to increase almost ten-fold, from
408 million cubic metres per year to 3,963 million cubic metres per year.4 Under current investment
plans, the demand will not be met, and the economic loss reflected by the unmet demand is
calculated by the study to be US$5.5 bn per year. This is a conservative estimate and the losses
could be even greater, depending on people’s willingness to pay.
The study also examined the economic effects of drought on the water sector. Each drought lasts
for around three years, and the damage per drought cost around US$237 m per year during the
past decade. About three-quarters of the costs arise from a shortage of water for irrigation. The
next largest costs relate to water use by livestock, followed by domestic consumption and industry
requirements.
The largest overall economic losses are anticipated to be in the Lake Victoria, Albert Nile and
Lake Kyoga watersheds. These values underline the need for further investment in water supply
infrastructure in Uganda; with or without climate change the economic losses are of a significant
magnitude.
Droughts are set to become more frequent in the decades ahead, meaning that adaptation action
to safeguard Uganda’s water supplies should be a top priority. Adaptation measures include:
yy improving the efficiency of water use, to reduce demand
yy improving water storage, to increase supply
yy reducing water losses during extreme weather events.

 Adaptation priorities
The study concludes that significant benefits will
accrue from taking action on adaptation in the
water sector. There is a strong economic rationale for
pursuing the water programmes laid out in Uganda’s
National Climate Change Costed Implementation
Strategy.
The study found that three main programmes in
the Government’s Costed Implementation Strategy5
would reduce the unmet demand for water and/or
reduce economic losses from drought, and generate
at least a 10% rate of return while doing so:
yy Programme A, which focuses on improvements in
water use efficiency
yy Programme B, which addresses water supply issues
for agriculture and industry
yy Programme C, which sets up an integrated water
resources management system that would help
reduce losses from droughts and floods.
Together, these account for 92% of the
implementation strategy. Investing in these
programmes makes economic sense.

5

Water

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

 6

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Agriculture
Climate change will have a major impact on the production of Uganda’s leading
export crops. By 2050, the value of the coffee crop could fall by half due to
contraction of the area that can support its production. By contrast, climate
change impacts on food crops and livestock are projected to be relatively small
– although the specific impacts will vary from crop to crop.
The costed activities already suggested for Uganda’s agriculture sector
represent sound investments that will help to deal with current climate
variability. New measures to deal with future climate change should be tested
right away.
Agricultural exports are a key area of concern. Significant impacts on the Arabica coffee-growing
area are predicted due to climate change. Production of Arabica and Robusta coffee may fall by
50% by 2050; an illustrative estimate of the cost of these losses is around US$1,235 m. Estimates
of impacts on tea-growing areas indicate significant loss of value, while some potential loss of
cotton production is also projected. Together these results indicate that, if no action is taken on
climate adaptation, Uganda’s agricultural exports and their value may be strongly affected by
climate change in the period to 2050. The total costs are in the range of US$134–196 m by 2025 and
US$641–938 m by 2050.
Economic losses for food crops predicted by 2050 are somewhat less and are not likely to be more
than US$1.5 bn. Using Government projections for assumed economic growth, this would be less
than 0.2% of GDP in that year; however, different crops are affected in different ways.
Estimated impacts on livestock production are quite small in all cases (1 or 2%). However, this
modelling is only for yield and area, whereas the key impacts on livestock may come from other
climate change factors, in particular droughts, floods and diseases.
Looking at extreme events, droughts and floods appear to affect crop yields to a greater extent than
does slow-onset climate change. Reducing the risks associated with extreme events needs urgent
action, making it a priority in terms of adaptation. It should also be stressed that the increased risk of
flooding and droughts both now and in the future will occur in areas of poverty and therefore these
events have serious consequences for local economies and food security. The Karamoja case study
(see page 13) demonstrates this quite clearly.

 Adaptation priorities
The highest priority is to address immediate threats to the agriculture sector caused
by droughts and floods.
The Government of Uganda, in its National Climate Change Costed Implementation
Strategy, has identified eight areas of adaptation action in the agriculture sector,
with a proposed budget over the next 15 years of around US$297 m. These
strategic measures will deal with current climate variability and can be justified
in economic terms on these grounds. They are ‘no regrets’ investments that will
provide benefits today, irrespective of future climate change.
Evidence about effective adaptation measures from other studies and other
countries does not guarantee that implementing the measures in Uganda will
be cost-effective and successful. The implementation strategy will need to be
evaluated at national level, with costs and benefits being assessed at the local level.
A further challenge is to start piloting and testing adaptation actions that will make
Uganda’s agriculture sector resilient to future changes in climate. It will take time to
develop cost-effective programmes that are suitably tailored to specific regions and
crops.

7

Agriculture

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

 8

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Energy
Uganda relies largely on biomass energy and, by 2050, this is likely to be
in short supply. There will also probably be less potential for hydropower
development due to a reduction in rainfall and water availability. The country
will need to develop alternative energy sources to meet future demand and
there is a major opportunity to develop low-carbon and climate-resilient
energy.
Energy in Uganda is supplied largely by traditional biomass, with electricity and other fuels playing
a very small role. The current balance between supply and demand for biomass, however, is very
fragile and the study predicts a large deficit in biomass in the 2020s and beyond. Not only will
demand for fuel increase, but climate change itself will almost certainly reduce the availability of
biomass – even though it is hard to quantify by how much. Business as usual is not an option, and
the country will need to seek alternative energy sources.
In the case of energy, the main costs arise from unmet biomass demand, which is expected to
grow significantly even without climate change (with no climate change, the deficit of biomass is
estimated at 1,710 million tonnes over the period 2010–2050). Climate change will add a plausible
loss of 5 to 10% of domestic wood between 2020 and 2050, which would increase the costs of
inaction from US$123.6 bn to between US$130 bn and 136 bn.
In addition, there is a possibility that hydropower potential will decrease due to a reduction
in rainfall. The decline is estimated to be around 26% by 2050. The Government has a current
programme of hydropower expansion, which may keep supply ahead of demand under such a
scenario, although it is a very ambitious and resource-intensive programme associated with a high
risk of complications and delays.
The estimated additional capital investment in hydro, nuclear and other electricity generation from
now to 2050 is around US$83 bn. To meet these ambitions, the country will need to invest around
US$1 bn in power, or around US$200 m per year, equal to about 1% of its GDP, in the first five years.
In future years, the amounts increase very sharply.

 Adaptation priorities
The Government of Uganda’s National Climate Change Costed Implementation Strategy focuses
heavily on reducing dependence on biomass. This should be implemented effectively and urgently.
The strategy also suggests promoting energy conservation and improved efficiency to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. These strategies are similar to those adopted in other developing
countries, which typically show a high level of cost-effectiveness.
Uganda’s energy efficiency and conservation programmes should draw on best practices from
other countries and ensure that standards for efficient electric devices are in place; this may be
supported by subsidies.
The Government’s current strategy does not contain measures at sufficiently large scale to switch
households from traditional biomass to modern forms of climate-resilient, low-carbon energy. The
study’s initial analysis suggests that it is well worth investing in an alternative fuel programme, since
the benefits are likely to far outstrip the costs.

9

Energy

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

 10

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Infrastructure
Uganda’s infrastructure needs to become more resilient to the effects of
the weather and climate, both current and future. Residential buildings are
most at risk, but transport systems are also likely to be affected. The costs of
measures to mitigate and adapt to climate risks in the infrastructure sector
are small compared to those required to repair damage, therefore investing
in adaptation has a strong economic rationale and climate-proofing public
buildings and developing standards for transport and infrastructure planning
should be an urgent priority for the Government.
Uganda’s infrastructure is already suffering from the effects of extreme weather events; this includes
residential and other private buildings; public buildings such as schools, hospitals and government
offices; and facilities such as ports, airports, roads, railways and bridges. Since climate variability
is likely to increase in the future, this is an urgent issue that should be addressed now. There are
two impacts from climate change on infrastructure: one is through lost resilience to increased
temperature and rainfall; and the other is through damage caused by extreme events.
On the first, the study found that major costs arise from loss of resilience in residential buildings,
followed by public buildings and non-residential buildings. Together these account for 96%
of the costs of lost resilience. Estimated costs could reach US$60–76 m in 2025, rising to
US$347–621 m in 2050.
Damages caused by extreme events include loss of life and injury, damage to property, costs
related to dislocation and inconvenience, and disaster relief. The study found that a doubling in the
frequency of extreme events every 25 years under climate change would result in damages
of between US$68–429 m by 2025 and up to US$938–3,236 m by 2050. This is equivalent to
0.1–0.4% of GDP in 2050. These are figures for average expected damages. An extreme event similar
to the El Niño floods in 2007 would cost significantly more.

 Adaptation priorities
The study concludes that immediate steps must be taken to increase the climate resilience of Uganda’s
existing and new infrastructure. These should include:
yy climate-proofing public buildings
yy developing standards for transport and infrastructure planning
yy integrating climate resilience standards into existing infrastructure risk assessment guidelines.
The Government’s National Climate Change Policy Costed Implementation Strategy outlines a range of
measures for climate adaptation in new infrastructure. The economic assessment places these in order of
priority as follows:
Very high -- Integrate climate change into the existing infrastructure risk assessment guidelines and
priority
methodology
-- Establish and enforce climate-resilient standards for transport and infrastructure planning
and development through monitoring and reporting systems
-- Climate-proof public buildings
High
-- Private non-residential buildings
priority -- Residential buildings
-- Paved roads
-- Railroads
-- Climate-proof existing and future infrastructure by conducting geotechnical site
investigations to determine whether or not areas are appropriate for infrastructure
development
Medium -- Promote and encourage water catchment protection in transport infrastructure
priority
development and maintenance
Investing in disaster risk reduction against extreme weather events is cost-effective. The study concluded
that even under the most conservative assumptions, and implementing measures that reduce damages
by only a small amount (e.g. 7%), investments can generate a rate of return of at least 10%.

11

Infrastructure

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

 12

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Evidence from the case studies
Action that is good for climate adaptation and resilience in the future is also
good for development today.
These case studies from across Uganda highlight some of the sectoral themes developed at
national level in the economic assessment. In most cases, further analysis is needed to reach robust
conclusions on the economic justification for adaptation actions in these demonstration areas.
However, the case studies show that many ‘no regrets’ measures are available and how these may
help Uganda to adapt to climate change and advance its development.

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Karamoja and Mount Elgon regions: agriculture
The Karamoja region is highly dependent on agriculture and this makes its residents particularly vulnerable to climate
impacts. Recent droughts have wiped out 50–100% of crop yields for affected households, while some villages have also
experienced serious flooding. The exact future impacts of climate change are uncertain, but extreme events could result
in losses to the agriculture sector of between 9 and 32% by 2050.
The Karamoja study scrutinised agricultural practices and climate vulnerabilities in three different agro-ecological zones:
Abim district (arable zone: mixed crop farming); Napak district (arable and pastoral zone: sorghum and livestock) and
Amudat district (pastoral zone). The study team estimated the total impact of recent droughts on the value of crop yields
and livestock sales. They found that livestock production and incomes can be hit badly by drought when water supplies
dry up, and when there is an increased incidence of disease. However, the overall impacts are
generally less wide-ranging compared with crop production.
The study found some evidence for the importance of holding livestock to provide greater
resilience to extreme weather events. Modellers at the International Food Policy Research
Institute (IFPRI) found that, by 2050, the value of current crops in the Karamoja region could be
significantly affected by climate change. For example, maize could suffer up to 12% reduction
in yield and beans up to 20%. This highlights the risks to investment in agriculture in the light
of plans to expand crop production in the region. Large losses in recently introduced crops
in Lopedot indicate the high risks attached to such plans. There should be more research at
district level to assess the risks to investment in crops from climate impacts and the level of
support needed to boost resilience in both the arable and livestock sectors in affected villages.
The Mount Elgon region is heavily dependent on coffee production and is one of the most
vulnerable in Uganda to climate variability. Yields and quality of coffee crops have been
declining over the last 30 years, partly due to poor management practices and partly because
of an increase in the frequency of droughts, landslides and floods. Climate change is expected
to result in higher temperatures, changes in rainfall, more extreme weather events and
lower coffee yields. An analysis compared the costs and benefits of ‘business as usual’ and
‘climate-smart agriculture’ scenarios under current conditions and under changing climate
conditions. The analysis demonstrates that there is an economic case for investing in climatesmart agriculture – defined as tree-planting, mulching and trench conservation – and an
accompanying programme of institutional support, even in the absence of expected climate
change. These are preliminary findings that should be interrogated through further research.

13

 14

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Mpanga river basin: water and hydropower
The Mpanga river basin is a
good example showing how
the effects of climate change
could lead to greater tensions
over the access to scarce water
for different uses. Climate
models show that rainfall may
decrease and temperature may
rise significantly by the middle
of the century. This could
lead to conflict in the river
basin over the use of water for
hydroelectricity generation or
water supply to homes and
businesses.
The study tried to put an economic value on the impact of climate change on energy and water supply. It found that
the most significant impacts on water supply are likely to fall in the Rushango area of the river catchment due to water
demand in the area and the expected impacts of climate change. Annual losses to the water sector in Rushango could
amount to between US$45,000 and 79,000 by 2035 or could be twice this, based on the population’s willingness to pay.
However, this is dwarfed by the foreseeable economic losses to the hydroelectricity sector in the river basin under a
changing climate. Based on calculations of lost load from a study in Kenya, the Uganda economic assessment finds an
annual cost to the energy supply sector of US$25–98 m by 2030–2035.
The costs of adaptation are uncertain and more research is needed to develop robust cost estimates. Further, additional
data on river flows are needed throughout the catchment. Thus, the following recommendations are preliminary and
subject to further assessment. The study team ranked the cost-effectiveness of adaptation actions in order as follows,
beginning with the ‘low hanging fruit’:
yy Promote and participate in water resource regulation among users to ensure the availability of water for hydropower
production.
yy Conduct further research to determine the potential impacts of climate change elements on the country’s power
supply chain and act on the findings.
yy Diversify energy sources by promoting the use of alternative renewable energy (e.g. solar, biomass, mini-hydropower,
geothermal and wind) that is less sensitive to climate change (and concurrently provides climate mitigation benefits,
contributing to sustainable development).
yy Promote and participate in water catchment protection as part of hydroelectric infrastructure development, including
through such measures as soil conservation, agroforestry, etc.

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Kampala: urban infrastructure
Uganda’s capital city, Kampala, is home to the majority of the country’s
built infrastructure. Scientific projections of future climate in the city
are imprecise, but suggest there will be a higher incidence of rainfall,
putting Kampala at risk of flooding. The cost of inaction is high, with
estimates for the cost of flooding alone suggesting annual damages
rising from US$1–7 m in 2013 to US$33–102 m by 2050. Adaptation
measures would mitigate some of these costs considerably.
Policies, plans and regulations must be designed to mainstream climate
change adaptation. Specifically, plans developed under Kampala’s
Physical Development Plan (2012) must be revised in light of the
climate projections provided in this study in order to increase Kampala’s
resilience. Building codes should be revised urgently in light of climate
projections, promoting bio-climatic designs and the use of appropriate
materials.
There is an opportunity to mainstream adaptation into Kampala’s
Low Carbon Development and Climate Resilient (LCDCR) strategy. It
is critical that adaptation is considered fully, and that consideration
of low carbon development does not leave behind the impacts of
unavoidable climate change. The LCDCR strategy should also guide
public investment and incentivise significant and appropriate private
investment in adaptation.
Kampala should urgently climate-proof its infrastructure (in line with
the overall findings regarding infrastructure resilience, see page 10).
Land use plans and building codes, the enforcement systems and
the investments for climate-proofing infrastructure need to take into
account the particular characteristics of the city, especially the fact that
about 60% of its inhabitants live in informal settlements. Furthermore,
there are significant opportunities to strengthen the application and
enforcement of such tools as environmental impact assessments,
especially regarding the protection of wetlands.

15

 16

Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

Kabale and Tororo districts: malaria prevalence
Malaria is endemic in 95% of Uganda and poses significant economic and social costs.
In both districts studied, the costs associated with malaria could more than double as a
result of population increase and predicted changes in the climate, when these two factors
are considered together. In Tororo, the economic cost of malaria may rise from a range of
US$8.7–221 m annually at present to a range of US$20.1–560.5 m in 2050. In Kabale, the
costs associated with increased malaria infections are expected to increase from between
US$0.7–15.8 m annually in the current period to between US$1.55–41.7 m in 2050.
Any policy to respond to malaria in Uganda will face both climate and socioeconomic
changes (and other changes not addressed in this report, including behaviour change). The
strength of the policy effect depends on whether the climate impact on malaria is low or
high. For Tororo, the climate change-associated costs range from US$0.66–65.9 m in 2050;
for Kabale, the climate change-associated costs range from US$0.04–6.2 m in 2050. The
numbers depend on the climate scenarios and values used. In many areas, investment in
further preventative measures against malaria will be worth the investment on the basis of
the future population-related impacts alone.
Adaptation options such as longlasting insecticide nets, indoor
residential spraying, clearing of
breeding sites and proper treatment
have been shown to have benefits
that far outweigh the costs
when they are properly targeted.
Additional cost-effective adaptation
actions include information
dissemination, particularly to highrisk areas, revised planning regimes
to help control malaria prevalence,
and measures for early warning. The
spatial differentiation in malaria risk
suggests there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’
policy for malaria, and hence there
is a need for comprehensive disease
vulnerability assessments and action
planning across districts.

 Economic assessment of the impacts of climate change in Uganda: Key results

References
1.   NEMA (2008) State of Environment Report for Uganda 2008. Kampala: National Environment
Management Authority (http://www.nemaug.org/reports/n_s_o_e_r_2008.pdf ).
2.   OPM (2012) Office of the Prime Minister: The 2010–2011 Integrated Rainfall Variability Impacts, Needs
Assessment and Drought Risk Management Strategy. Kampala: Office of the Prime Minister (http://
gfdrr.org/sites/gfdrr/files/UGANDA_PDNA_Report_2012.pdf ).
3.   CDKN (2014) The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report: What’s in it for Africa? London: CDKN
(http://cdkn.org/ar5-toolkit).
4.   Authors’ own modelling, with Water Evaluation and Planning System (WEAP) data from
Aquastat Baastel (2015).
5.   Government of Uganda (2013) Uganda Climate Change Costed Implementation Strategy
(http://ccd.go.ug/index.php/accordion-b/level-2/2-uncategorised/120-uganda-cc-costedimplementation-strategy-final-version-for-approval-14-10-2013).

17

 www.cdkn.org

e: enquiries@cdkn.org

t: +44 (0) 207 212 4111

This document is an output from a project commissioned through the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN). CDKN is a
programme funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Directorate-General for International
Cooperation (DGIS) for the benefit of developing countries. The views expressed and information contained in it are not necessarily those of or
endorsed by DFID, DGIS or the entities managing the delivery of CDKN, which can accept no responsibility or liability for such views, completeness
or accuracy of the information or for any reliance placed on them. This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest
only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining
specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information
contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, the entities managing the delivery of CDKN do not accept or assume any
liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information
contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. Management of the delivery of CDKN is undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP, and an alliance of organisations including Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano, LEAD Pakistan, the Overseas Development Institute, and
SouthSouthNorth.
© Climate and Development Knowledge Network, 2015.

 Photo credits:
Cover page, p.1: Neil Palmer/CIAT; p.2, p.3, p.4, p.7, p.9, p.12, p.13, p.17: Anna Little/CDKN; p.5: Pecold/Shutterstock.com;
p.6, p.8: Claudiad/istockphoto.com; p.10: YasmineV/istockphoto.com; p.11 Lingbeek/istockphoto.com; p.14: poco_bw/istockphoto.com;
p.15: Ryan Faas/istockphoto.com; p.16: stevecoleimages/istockphoto.com
Editing, design and layout: Green Ink (www.greenink.co.uk)

 CDKN Africa team
SouthSouthNorth
55 Salt River Road
Cape Town 7925
South Africa
Tel: +27 21 447 0211
Email: africa@cdkn.org

Revocatus Twinomuhangi, CDKN Uganda
Department of Geography, Geo-Informatics and Climatic Sciences
School of Forestry, Environmental and Geographical Sciences
College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Makerere University
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: +256 772 418660
Email: rtwinomuhangi@gmail.com

Claire Monkhouse, CDKN Global
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
7 More London Riverside
London SE1 2RT
Tel: +44 (0)207 212 1752
Email: enquiries@cdkn.org