In an article that our team of Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis at Karamoja Anti-Corruption Coalition published on 14th September 2026 in Watchdog concerning “An Unromantic Look at Karamoja Development Approaches,” we are again here to explain or justify why we are Questioning Development Approaches in Karamoja.
First, let us begin our argument by informing the readers that evidence from the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, including donor agencies and individuals, shows that they have been pumping money into Karamoja using different intermediaries. But the critical question here is: why is Karamoja the way it is in terms of development indicators?
When we question development approaches for Karamoja, we are questioning the methodologies used by NGOs, CSOs, and government agencies. Through observation method by the Department for Critical Thinking at KACC, we became concerned that the methodologies and approaches used in the development of Karamoja have issues, and this could explain why Karamoja is still struggling in Uganda.
To justify more of our reasoning and make our readers understand the real problem, let us cite an OCHA report of April 2008, as cited by Powell (2010), which stated that Karamoja, by that time, had a total population of 1,107,308, but with poverty levels at 82%. Still, the Uganda Bureau of Statistics in May 2025 showed that 74.2% of the population lives below the poverty line (earning less than about $1.04 or Shs 3,800 per day), compared to a much lower national average. Then OXFAM, in its report titled “Resilience, Inclusiveness, Sustainability and Empowerment of Communities in Karamoja” (2026), argues that Karamoja experiences the highest rate of multidimensional poverty (76%) compared to the national average, and more people experience monetary poverty than in the rest of the country.
Let us now examine the situation and ask some questions. Given the large amount of money that the Government of Uganda and donors have invested in Karamoja, which has a population of fewer than 1.5 million people, why are there still significant development challenges? Could the problem be the methods being used and the approaches taken to development?
As one Karamojong PhD candidate stated in one of our articles, a lot of money is wasted in boardrooms, workshops, allowances, and trainings. In fact, even our team has concerns about these trainings, which are sometimes overly theoretical and have limited empirical value. They are also sometimes conducted by people who are referred to as consultants but who may not have sufficient knowledge of the subjects they are delivering.
Ayub Mukisa, PhD, writes from the Department for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis at the Karamoja Anti-Corruption Coalition (KACC).
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article