The recent expansion of coffee growing into Teso sub-region has generated optimism among millions of families seeking a pathway out of poverty. For several decades, Iteso people have endured cycles of socioeconomic hardships caused by cattle raids, insecurity, displacement, climate shocks, the unbundling of Lint Marketing Board – Teso Cooperative Union, following years of liberalisation and the collapse of government-promoted citrus (orange) farming schemes that once promised prosperity but failed to deliver sustainable socioeconomic transformation.
During his presidential campaigns 2025/26, Hon Nandala Mafabi correctly identified coffee production as a strategic opportunity for lifting millions of Iteso households out of poverty. He encouraged the people of Teso to emulate the Bugisu model, where coffee became not merely a crop but a community-driven socioeconomic institution anchored by cooperative structure; the Bugisu Cooperative Union (BCU).
This was an important political and economic insight. Bugisu did not succeed because people simply planted coffee trees. It succeeded because coffee production was supported by farmer mobilization, cooperative marketing, quality control systems, extension services, storage systems, and collective bargaining structures that protected farmers from exploitation.
Unfortunately, much of Uganda’s current coffee expansion strategy focuses heavily on distributing seedlings while paying insufficient attention to the supply chain systems required for long-term success. In regions like Teso, where many farmers are first-generation coffee growers, this omission could become costly.
Research already shows that government coffee programs have unintentionally encouraged expansion of acreage rather than replacement of aging coffee trees (Nalunga, 2022). Farmers continue opening new land while older trees remain unproductive. Without strong extension services, many farmers do not know when trees should be replaced or how productivity can be improved using existing land resources.
The challenge becomes even greater and extremely concerning in new coffee-growing areas where institutional knowledge about coffee farming is still limited. Coffee is not simply planted and harvested. Quality is determined at every stage; planting, harvesting, drying, storage, transportation, and marketing. Mistakes at any stage reduce value and income.
Uganda’s coffee sector already faces serious quality control problems. Some farmers harvest immature coffee cherries because they need quick cash. Poor drying methods, inadequate storage, and adulteration by middlemen reduce quality further. Once coffee quality declines, farmers lose bargaining power in international markets.
This raises an important question: can the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), as a national political organization with structures across the country, move beyond campaign promises and help build the institutional framework necessary for coffee success in Teso?
The short answer is YES; if the party chooses to treat coffee not merely as a political slogan but as a long-term rural transformation project.
FDC already possesses some of the ingredients necessary for mobilization: local leaders, grassroots networks, youth structures, and political influence within parts of eastern Uganda particularly Tesoland. The party could work with local institutional frameworks; farmer groups, churches, cultural institutions, and agricultural experts to organize coffee farmer cooperatives modelled on the Bugisu experience.
Such an initiative would not necessarily require waiting for the central government. Community-based extension systems can be developed through partnerships with local universities (Busitema, Arapai campus), NGOs like Soroti Catholic Dioceses’ Development Organisation (SOCADIDO), Teso Rural Development Organisation (TERUDO), retired agricultural officers, and experienced farmers from Bugisu. Exchange visits between Iteso farmers and successful coffee cooperatives in Mbale could help transfer practical knowledge and strengthen confidence among new farmers.
Most importantly, farmer education must become central. Nalunga (2022) in her wide-ranging PhD studies, highlighted that improving labor quality through training significantly increases agricultural productivity. Countries such as Indonesia improved coffee productivity partly through higher education and skills among farming populations. Teso can learn from this experience.
If coffee is to become a genuine poverty reduction strategy, the region will need disciplined farmer organizations, quality assurance systems, collective marketing structures, access to credit, and strong extension services. Otherwise, farmers may end up trapped in low-productivity production systems controlled by middlemen who capture most of the value.
The future of coffee in Teso therefore depends not only on seedlings distributed by government, but on whether local institutions can be built to sustain the industry for generations.
The lesson from Bugisu is clear: coffee succeeds where communities organize themselves economically, politically, and institutionally around the crop. Teso now faces the same historic opportunity, but success will require more than planting trees.
The author is an academic, holds a PhD in poverty reduction, and completed a post doctorate on policy, Aid and poverty.
Constructive feedback can be emailed to; samuel.ariong@torrens.edu.au
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
