a b s t r a c tNatural and human induced disasters are a threat to food security, economic progress and livelihoods in Uganda. However, we have limited knowledge regarding the putative role of the human rights dimension to the impact and management of such tragedies. In this article we assessed the present policies, legislation and institutional capabilities to ascertain whether they could assure the right to adequate food during disaster situations in Uganda.Using purposive sampling, 52 duty bearers working in institutions deemed relevant to food security, nutrition and disaster management were interviewed using a semi-structured guide. Relevant provisions from policy, legislation, institutional budgets and records of Parliament provided the context for analysis.The most important concern coming from the analyses of the information retrieved were inadequate preparedness mechanisms and capabilities. Whereas Uganda's Constitution proclaims the right to adequate food, and the need to establish a contingencies fund and commission responsible for disaster preparedness and management, they had not been instituted. Implementation of relevant policies appeared slow, especially with regard to assuring adequate relief food as a State obligation. Legislation to guarantee funding and institutionalisation of necessary disaster preparedness and management capabilities was not in place. An ambitious 5-year Uganda Nutrition Action Plan adopted in 2011 had not yet been funded by mid-2013, implying a reality gap in nutrition programming. Budget architecture and financing to disaster management have in effect fallen short of assuring adequate relief food as a human right.Due to capacity constraints, an approach of humanitarian relief may be entrenched in contradiction of State obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights. To stay ahead of the potential threats, the Government with support of the Parliament and relevant partners need to enact legislation to appropriate budget resources needed to institute a mechanism of capabilities to implement the constitutional and policy provisions on the right to adequate food and disaster management.

In 2010, a landslide in Bududa, Eastern Uganda, killed about 350 people and nearly 1000 affected households were resettled in Kiryandongo, Western Uganda. A cross-sectional survey assessed household food insecurity and diet diversity among 1078 affected and controls. In Bududa, the affected had a lower adjusted mean score of food insecurity than controls – 9·2 (se 0·4) v. 12·3 (se 0·4) (P<0·01) – but higher diet diversity score (DDS) – 7·1 (se 0·1) v. 5·9 (se 0·1) (P<0·01). On controlling for disaster and covariates, recipients of relief food had higher food insecurity – 12·0 (se 0·6) v. 10·4 (se 0·3) (P=0·02) – whereas farmers had higher DDS – 6·6 (se 0·2) v. 5·6 (se 0·3) (P<0·01). Household size increased the likelihood of food insecurity (OR 1·15; 95 % CI 1·00, 1·32; P<0·05) but reduced DDS (OR 0·93; 95 % CI 0·87, <1·00; P=0·04). Low DDS was more likely in disaster affected (OR 4·22; 95 % CI 2·65, 6·72; P<0·01) and farmers (OR 2·52; 95 % CI 1·37, 4·64; P<0·01). In Kiryandongo, affected households had higher food insecurity – 12·3 (se 0·8) v. 2·6 (se 0·8) (P<0·01) – but lower DDS – 5·8 (se 0·3) v. 7·0 (se 0·3) (P=0·02). The latter reduced with increased age (OR 0·99; 95 % CI 0·97, 1·00; P<0·05), lowest education (OR 0·54; 95 % CI 0·31, 0·93; P=0·03), farmers (OR 0·59; 95 % CI 0·35, 0·98; P=0·04) and asset ownership (OR 0·56; 95 % CI 0·39, 0·81; P<0·01). Addressing social protection could mitigate food insecurity.

BackgroundDespite the instruments on the right to adequate food adopted by the United Nations, there exists limited information on how this right is perceived. Following a major 2010 landslide disaster in the Bududa district of Eastern Uganda and the resettlement of some affected households into the Kiryandongo district in Western Uganda, we surveyed both districts to explore perceptions about the right to adequate food among households with different experiences; disaster-affected and controls.MethodsWe deployed qualitative and quantitative techniques to a cross-sectional survey. The index respondent was the head of each randomly selected household from the landslide affected communities and controls from a bordering sub-county. Data was collected by interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs). Structured entries were tested statistically to report associations using Pearson’s Chi-square at the 95% CI. Information from FGDs was transcribed, coded, sequenced and patterned. Findings from both techniques were triangulated to facilitate interpretations.ResultsAnalysis included 1,078 interview entries and 12 FGDs. Significant differences between the affected and control households (P < 0.05) were observed with: age; education level; religious affiliation; existence of assets that complement food source; and having received relief food. Analysis between groups showed differences in responses on: whether everyone has a right to adequate food; who was supposed to supply relief food; whether relief food was adequate; and preferred choice on the means to ensure the right to adequate food. FGDs emphasized that access to land was the most important means to food and income. Affected households desired remedial interventions especially alternative land for livelihood. Despite the provision of adequate relief food being a state’s obligation, there was no opportunity to exercise choice and preference. Comprehension and awareness of accountability and transparency issues was also low.ConclusionThough a significant proportion of participants affirmed they have a right to adequate food, relief food was largely perceived as insufficient. Given the high regard for land as a preferred remedy, a resettlement policy is of the essence to streamline post-landslide displacement and resettlement. Information materials need to be assembled and disseminated to stimulate awareness and debate on the right to adequate food.

No abstract

BackgroundMore than 14 % of Ugandan children are orphaned and many live in children’s homes. Ugandan authorities have targeted adolescent girls as a priority group for nutrition interventions as safeguarding nutritional health before pregnancy can reduce the chance of passing on malnutrition to the offspring and thus future generations. Ugandan authorities have obligations under international human rights law to progressively realise the rights to adequate food, health and care for all Ugandan children. Two objectives guided this study in children’s homes: (a) To examine female adolescent residents’ experiences, attitudes and views regarding: (i) eating patterns and food, (ii) health conditions, and (iii) care practices; and (b) to consider if the conditions in the homes comply with human rights standards and principles for the promotion of the rights to adequate food, health and care.MethodsA human rights-based approach guided the planning and conduct of this study. Five children’s homes in Kampala were included where focus group discussions were held with girls aged 12-14 and 15-17 years. These discussions were analysed through a phenomenological approach. The conditions of food, health and care as experienced by the girls, were compared with international standards for the realisation of the human rights to adequate food, health and care.ResultsFood, health and care conditions varied greatly across the five homes. In some of these the girls consumed only one meal per day and had no access to clean drinking water, soap, toilet paper and sanitary napkins. The realisation of the right to adequate food for the girls was not met in three homes, the realisation of the right to health was not met in two homes, and the realisation of the right to care was not met in one home.ConclusionsIn three of the selected children’s homes human rights standards for food, health or care were not met. Care in the children’s homes was an important contributing factor for whether standards for the rights to adequate food and health were met.