Profitability Analysis of Animal Traction for Smallholder Farmers in Eastern Uganda: A Case of Busoga Sub-region
Samuel Okurut
*
National Agricultural Research Laboratories (NARL), National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), P. O. Box 7065, Kampala, Uganda.
Ronald Walozi
National Agricultural Research Laboratories (NARL), National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), P. O. Box 7065, Kampala, Uganda.
Richard A. Saasa
National Agricultural Research Laboratories (NARL), National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), P. O. Box 7065, Kampala, Uganda.
Alphonse Candia
National Agricultural Research Laboratories (NARL), National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), P. O. Box 7065, Kampala, Uganda.
Robooni Tumuhimbise
National Agricultural Research Laboratories (NARL), National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), P. O. Box 7065, Kampala, Uganda.
Robert Gidoi
Buginyanya Zonal Agricultural Research and Development Institute (BugZARDI)-Bulambuli, National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), P. O. Box 1356, Mbale, Uganda.
Arnold B. Oule
Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST), Science, Technology & Innovation Secretariat, P. O. Box 6884, Kampala, Uganda
Ronald Balibuzani
Department of Production and Marketing, Kamuli District Local Government, P. O. Box 88, Kamuli, Uganda.
Ibrahim Mbadhi
Livelihood Support Organization, Kamuli District, Uganda.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Animal Traction (AT) remains a critical intermediate mechanization pathway for smallholder farmers in Eastern Uganda, yet empirical evidence on its economic performance remains limited. This study evaluated the profitability and investment viability of two enterprise models, namely Basic Animal Traction (BAT) and Advanced Animal Traction (AAT), among smallholder farmers in the Busoga sub-region. A mixed-methods research design was used, comprising a household survey of 664 households, 23 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and 68 key informant interviews across five districts. Financial viability was evaluated over a six-year investment period using Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Gross Margin (GM), and Payback Period metrics, along with sensitivity analysis. The results indicated that AT systems are integrated within smallholder production systems characterized by small landholdings (average 1.66 ha), mixed crop-livestock enterprises, and dependence on family labour. Cost structure analysis showed significant initial capital requirements, with fixed costs accounting for about 55% of total investment for both BAT (UGX 5.88 million) and AAT (UGX 9.50 million), posing a major adoption barrier. Despite this, both models performed strongly financially under baseline conditions. For maize and bean production, BAT achieved IRRs of 57-76%, NPVs of UGX 22.2-29.8 million, and payback periods of less than 1.1 years. AAT reached higher IRRs (73-82%), NPVs (UGX 41.6-47.0 million), and gross margins (36.4-38.6%), due to additional income from planting and weeding hire services. Sensitivity analysis indicated that profitability is sensitive to 15-25% reductions in output and to excessive reinvestment of hire-service revenues, underscoring the need for risk management and careful capital planning. While AAT offers greater income-growth potential, BAT offers a lower-capital, lower-risk entry pathway. Overall, AT offers a profitable, suitable, and expandable mechanization option. Policy support should focus on affordable financing, technical skills development, service diversification, and gender-sensitive approaches to encourage inclusive mechanization.
Keywords: Profitability, viability, animal traction, smallholder farmers, mechanization, Busoga-sub-region