Production
As I implemented a top down approach, the first stage of my analysis entailed looking at the different characteristics of the community gardens grown collectively in each of the villages of Nnindye. Overall, 11 interviews were conducted with each of the 11 community garden teams over the course of 5 weeks. Specifically, interviews were conducted with Bukibira, kankobe-Bugabo, Kankobe-Senero, Kayunga, Kikoota, Lubanda A, Lubanda B, Lubanda C, Luteete, Nnindye A and Nnindye B. A multitude of information was collected relating to the community garden team dynamics, the selling prices of matoke, the inputs required and much more. I have included below a lengthy description of the items I discovered.
The community gardens had fairly similar demographics with nearly all of the participants being women or old men. By contrast, at least half of all the highest leaders (i.e. chairmen, treasurer, vice chairmen) were men indicating that the idea of gender equity has been slow to catch on. On average, the gardens had 30 members with the maximum number of members being 35 members in kikoota and the minimum number being 11 in Luteete. Additionally, in one village, Kankobe Sanero, the labor was divided into two groups with two different half acre plots of land. Each group had 10 members.
The occupation of nearly everyone interviewed was that of farming It should be noted however that there was a common theme of all the women saying that their primary profession was farming, while the main household profession was something else. For instance, in the lake-side town of Bukibira, nearly all of the men are fishermen earning far more than the potential profits that could be earned through farming. This meant that the main household profession was something other than farming. In the cases of most villages, a minority percentage of people were actually members of the community garden. From the 8 villages whose population statistics were taken, the participation percentages ranged from 37 percent in Lubanda B to 11 percent in Bukibira. The reasons for not participating in the community gardens were varied. The most prevalent reason was that many of the people, specifically men, had other occupations to which they must attend. This could be a result of an actual lack of time and resources to devote towards the community gardens or just a perceived notion that it wasn't worth their time, regardless of time constraints. This is just what some of the people, specifically in Bukibira, said. This participation issue has been an issue from the beginning as a lot of members simply never showed up to meetings. There were a few cases where the entire village originally thought they were members. In these cases, the majority of the community was forcibly dropped because they did not work. Furthermore, nearly all of the community gardens reported losing at least 1 or 2 members since their inception.
While there is a certain unpopularity surrounding the gardens, there are still people wanting to join who, in many cases, face barriers to re-entry or entry, depending on their circumstances. In one case in particular, Kankobe-Senero, this issue of late entry into the group arose. The premium paid depended on the time that had been put into the crop so far during that harvest cycle as well as the size and yield of the matoke garden for that period. The late entry fee ended up being 15 thousand Ugandan Shillings (“shs”).
The structure and management was fairly standard across all villages. The gardens, for the most part, performed the same basic tasks of weeding, pruning, terracing, mulching, harvesting, sales, planting, holding earnings, and mobilizing. In one case, one of Kankobe-Senero’s two half acre plots was not functioning very well. The group was unable to be found, but one of the other half acre’s leaders pointed out several flaws with the garden. There were weeds sparsely scattered throughout the garden in addition to beans in one area. The man also said that, in general, that group had been uncooperative with working and that this was the reason for the exceptionally low matoke yields. To this end, the plants were in general one half to three quarters the height of normal matoke plants and were yielding miniature fingers and smaller bunches.
With regard to the bylaws, one of the first questions asked was who handled the proceeds of the garden and if there were any problems to date. Overall, most villages had a 3 to 4 person committee made up of community officials including the treasurer, secretary, Upford Chairperson, village chair person, community garden chair person, or chairperson of distribution. In the case of Kikoota, they simply responded by saying the cultivation committee and marketing committee handled the proceeds. Regardless of which individuals were involved in the proceeds, the same cash handling positions seemed constant across all villages. Each cash box was made of fairly sturdy metal and secured shut by three locks. One person would hold the cash box while the other three people would hold a key to one of the three locks insuring that no one person could gain access to the cash without the other three.
While only a few meetings were attended, each village counted the money up and recorded the amounts down in a notebook kept by the secretary. Generalizing from these meetings, each village did have a notebook implying that all villages accounted for the money in their possession each week. Additionally, these same villages recorded, in detail, how much matoke was planted, harvested, or wasted for any given reason. Overall, no problems were encountered were money had been stolen or misused. Additionally, no members had been caught or accused of stealing matoke, although matoke theft had occurred before with no one convicted.
Overall, the villages had mixed reactions to the bylaws which guided community garden activity. Nearly all of them valued the bylaws, but said they needed changes of some sort. The most common problem with each community garden related to attendance. Five of the eleven villages surveyed site late or no attendance to meetings by certain members as a key issue. These same villages wished that they could change the bylaws to more directly and clearly deal with these attendance issues. In the case of Kakone, members were actually forced out after 3 missed meetings. However, in most other villages, there was no clear penalty. In the occasion of Luteete, members were wishing that someone more knowledgeable could explain the bylaws to them. In Lubanda A, they wanted to more clearly document the bylaws so that they could not be broken as easily in the future. For the most part though, villages clearly understood the bylaws and stated that they had the power to make adjustments wherever they saw fit. Overall then, the bylaws themselves do not seem to be a problem that needs to be addressed as the people, in general, realize they have the authority to change and enforce them.
Each village had their own sales committee usually consisting of 3 or 4 members. All of the villages sold directly out of the gardens, cutting bunches of matoke down off the plant when needed for sale. While the exact statistics were not taken, it seemed as though the proportion of men in the sales committee was above the proportion of men in all of the community gardens. Before any bunches were sold, a percentage was typically given to the landowner. This percentage was usually somewhere between 5 and 10 percent of the matoke produced. After this allocation, 1 or 2 bunches were usually given to each garden member for their work. While some gave out bunches whenever harvest time came around, many gave out bunches on certain religious holidays. In Kakone which had particular success growing matoke, the 35 members took 150 bunches total. Finally, in the case of Nnindye B, bunches were given out to the old and vulnerable.
Each villages’ selling techniques were very simple. The village gardens sold in bunch increments, nothing less. They engaged in no form of advertising and directly negotiated prices with the buyers. Bulk prices were not offered either as the vast majority of buyers bought, on average, 1 to 3 bunches, with a few people buying as many as 5 bunches. The vast majority of these “average” buyers came from the village in which the matoke was grown and the few surrounding villages. A small proportion of buyers came from neighboring parishes. On Two occasions, buyers came from the area’s largest city, Kyabwe. These traders bought 18 and 30 bunches of matoke to be resold in Kyabwe. Finally, the largest transaction occurred with a trader from Kampala who bought 72 bunches. In general, it seemed as though the garden members were not happy with these people as they were usually able to bargain for lower prices than they would be able to garner by selling in smaller amounts to people in the Nnindye area. It is also important to note that special occasions seem to create increased demand. Specifically, Bukibira sold 9 bunches to someone for a funeral. If funerals are anything like weddings, anyone and everyone is welcome to attend, even the average passer-bye, thus an equivalently large amount of food is required.
The determinants for the prices of matoke were consistently four factors across villages. First, the demand for matoke in the area at the time set the range of prices for matoke. Next, the size of fingers, the number of fingers in a bunch, and the color of the fingers set the prices within that given range of prices. Given the number of bunches produced in all of Nnindye, more transactions might have occurred if not for the makeup of the bunches. In general, traders cited the small size of the fingers and the fewer number of fingers in bunches as key reasons for why they did not purchase matoke from Nnindye. Additonally, in the case of Kankobe-Bugabo, the cost of the inputs for growing the matooke was considered in determining the selling price. While price might also otherwise be determined in part by the supply of matoke in Nnindye, most people surveyed said that the supply in each of the villages was still too low to where inter-village competition could be seen as a major problem.
Overall, prices reported ranged from 2,000 shs to 10,000 shs. A more reasonable set of price ranges seems to be between 3 to 8 thousand shs depending on the size and quality of the bunches. In a rare case in Lubanda A, two bunches were actually sold for 15,000 shillings. While price discounts were generally not allowed, in the case of Kankobe Senero, members were allowed a 1000 shs discount from the normal price. Overall, the average range of prices was 4 thousand Shs to 7.857 shillings with an average of 6,500 shs. The average amount sold was 262. See the graph below for the reported prices and quantities.
The community gardens had fairly similar demographics with nearly all of the participants being women or old men. By contrast, at least half of all the highest leaders (i.e. chairmen, treasurer, vice chairmen) were men indicating that the idea of gender equity has been slow to catch on. On average, the gardens had 30 members with the maximum number of members being 35 members in kikoota and the minimum number being 11 in Luteete. Additionally, in one village, Kankobe Sanero, the labor was divided into two groups with two different half acre plots of land. Each group had 10 members.
The occupation of nearly everyone interviewed was that of farming It should be noted however that there was a common theme of all the women saying that their primary profession was farming, while the main household profession was something else. For instance, in the lake-side town of Bukibira, nearly all of the men are fishermen earning far more than the potential profits that could be earned through farming. This meant that the main household profession was something other than farming. In the cases of most villages, a minority percentage of people were actually members of the community garden. From the 8 villages whose population statistics were taken, the participation percentages ranged from 37 percent in Lubanda B to 11 percent in Bukibira. The reasons for not participating in the community gardens were varied. The most prevalent reason was that many of the people, specifically men, had other occupations to which they must attend. This could be a result of an actual lack of time and resources to devote towards the community gardens or just a perceived notion that it wasn't worth their time, regardless of time constraints. This is just what some of the people, specifically in Bukibira, said. This participation issue has been an issue from the beginning as a lot of members simply never showed up to meetings. There were a few cases where the entire village originally thought they were members. In these cases, the majority of the community was forcibly dropped because they did not work. Furthermore, nearly all of the community gardens reported losing at least 1 or 2 members since their inception.
While there is a certain unpopularity surrounding the gardens, there are still people wanting to join who, in many cases, face barriers to re-entry or entry, depending on their circumstances. In one case in particular, Kankobe-Senero, this issue of late entry into the group arose. The premium paid depended on the time that had been put into the crop so far during that harvest cycle as well as the size and yield of the matoke garden for that period. The late entry fee ended up being 15 thousand Ugandan Shillings (“shs”).
The structure and management was fairly standard across all villages. The gardens, for the most part, performed the same basic tasks of weeding, pruning, terracing, mulching, harvesting, sales, planting, holding earnings, and mobilizing. In one case, one of Kankobe-Senero’s two half acre plots was not functioning very well. The group was unable to be found, but one of the other half acre’s leaders pointed out several flaws with the garden. There were weeds sparsely scattered throughout the garden in addition to beans in one area. The man also said that, in general, that group had been uncooperative with working and that this was the reason for the exceptionally low matoke yields. To this end, the plants were in general one half to three quarters the height of normal matoke plants and were yielding miniature fingers and smaller bunches.
With regard to the bylaws, one of the first questions asked was who handled the proceeds of the garden and if there were any problems to date. Overall, most villages had a 3 to 4 person committee made up of community officials including the treasurer, secretary, Upford Chairperson, village chair person, community garden chair person, or chairperson of distribution. In the case of Kikoota, they simply responded by saying the cultivation committee and marketing committee handled the proceeds. Regardless of which individuals were involved in the proceeds, the same cash handling positions seemed constant across all villages. Each cash box was made of fairly sturdy metal and secured shut by three locks. One person would hold the cash box while the other three people would hold a key to one of the three locks insuring that no one person could gain access to the cash without the other three.
While only a few meetings were attended, each village counted the money up and recorded the amounts down in a notebook kept by the secretary. Generalizing from these meetings, each village did have a notebook implying that all villages accounted for the money in their possession each week. Additionally, these same villages recorded, in detail, how much matoke was planted, harvested, or wasted for any given reason. Overall, no problems were encountered were money had been stolen or misused. Additionally, no members had been caught or accused of stealing matoke, although matoke theft had occurred before with no one convicted.
Overall, the villages had mixed reactions to the bylaws which guided community garden activity. Nearly all of them valued the bylaws, but said they needed changes of some sort. The most common problem with each community garden related to attendance. Five of the eleven villages surveyed site late or no attendance to meetings by certain members as a key issue. These same villages wished that they could change the bylaws to more directly and clearly deal with these attendance issues. In the case of Kakone, members were actually forced out after 3 missed meetings. However, in most other villages, there was no clear penalty. In the occasion of Luteete, members were wishing that someone more knowledgeable could explain the bylaws to them. In Lubanda A, they wanted to more clearly document the bylaws so that they could not be broken as easily in the future. For the most part though, villages clearly understood the bylaws and stated that they had the power to make adjustments wherever they saw fit. Overall then, the bylaws themselves do not seem to be a problem that needs to be addressed as the people, in general, realize they have the authority to change and enforce them.
Each village had their own sales committee usually consisting of 3 or 4 members. All of the villages sold directly out of the gardens, cutting bunches of matoke down off the plant when needed for sale. While the exact statistics were not taken, it seemed as though the proportion of men in the sales committee was above the proportion of men in all of the community gardens. Before any bunches were sold, a percentage was typically given to the landowner. This percentage was usually somewhere between 5 and 10 percent of the matoke produced. After this allocation, 1 or 2 bunches were usually given to each garden member for their work. While some gave out bunches whenever harvest time came around, many gave out bunches on certain religious holidays. In Kakone which had particular success growing matoke, the 35 members took 150 bunches total. Finally, in the case of Nnindye B, bunches were given out to the old and vulnerable.
Each villages’ selling techniques were very simple. The village gardens sold in bunch increments, nothing less. They engaged in no form of advertising and directly negotiated prices with the buyers. Bulk prices were not offered either as the vast majority of buyers bought, on average, 1 to 3 bunches, with a few people buying as many as 5 bunches. The vast majority of these “average” buyers came from the village in which the matoke was grown and the few surrounding villages. A small proportion of buyers came from neighboring parishes. On Two occasions, buyers came from the area’s largest city, Kyabwe. These traders bought 18 and 30 bunches of matoke to be resold in Kyabwe. Finally, the largest transaction occurred with a trader from Kampala who bought 72 bunches. In general, it seemed as though the garden members were not happy with these people as they were usually able to bargain for lower prices than they would be able to garner by selling in smaller amounts to people in the Nnindye area. It is also important to note that special occasions seem to create increased demand. Specifically, Bukibira sold 9 bunches to someone for a funeral. If funerals are anything like weddings, anyone and everyone is welcome to attend, even the average passer-bye, thus an equivalently large amount of food is required.
The determinants for the prices of matoke were consistently four factors across villages. First, the demand for matoke in the area at the time set the range of prices for matoke. Next, the size of fingers, the number of fingers in a bunch, and the color of the fingers set the prices within that given range of prices. Given the number of bunches produced in all of Nnindye, more transactions might have occurred if not for the makeup of the bunches. In general, traders cited the small size of the fingers and the fewer number of fingers in bunches as key reasons for why they did not purchase matoke from Nnindye. Additonally, in the case of Kankobe-Bugabo, the cost of the inputs for growing the matooke was considered in determining the selling price. While price might also otherwise be determined in part by the supply of matoke in Nnindye, most people surveyed said that the supply in each of the villages was still too low to where inter-village competition could be seen as a major problem.
Overall, prices reported ranged from 2,000 shs to 10,000 shs. A more reasonable set of price ranges seems to be between 3 to 8 thousand shs depending on the size and quality of the bunches. In a rare case in Lubanda A, two bunches were actually sold for 15,000 shillings. While price discounts were generally not allowed, in the case of Kankobe Senero, members were allowed a 1000 shs discount from the normal price. Overall, the average range of prices was 4 thousand Shs to 7.857 shillings with an average of 6,500 shs. The average amount sold was 262. See the graph below for the reported prices and quantities.