































   Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 6, Issue 2, 2025 
  agdevresearch.org 

 

1. David Agole, Senior Lecturer, Mountains of the Moon University, P.O Box 837 Fort Port, Uganda, david.agole@mmu.ac.ug, 

 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1297-983X 
2. Mark A. Brennan, Professor, Pennsylvania State University, 204 Ferguson Building, University Park, PA 16802, 

unescochair@psu.edu, mab187@psu.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-3948 
3. Connie D. Baggett, Associate Professor Emeritus, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, bbc@psu.edu, 

 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-3948 
4. John C. Ewing, Associate Professor Emeritus, Pennsylvania State University, 215 Ferguson Building, University Park, PA 

16802, jce122@psu.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9189-1106  
5. Amanda Crump, Associate Professor, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 USA, acrump@ucdavis.edu,  

 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9710-2956 
6. Cosmas Wacal, Lecturer, Mountains of The Moon University, P.O Box 837 Fort Port, Uganda, cosmas.wacal@mmu.ac.ug, 

 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4831-3191 
 

1 

 

Determinants of Food Security Status among Young Farmers 
with and without Disabilities 

 
D. Agole1, M. A. Brennan2, C. D. Baggett3, J. C. Ewing4, A. Crump5, C. Wacal5 

 
 

Article History 
Received: November 11, 2024 
Accepted: March 10, 2025 
Published: April 1, 2025 
 
 
Keywords 
agricultural extension;  
SDG 2: Zero Hunger; participation; 
policy; Uganda   

Abstract 
Food is a basic need; thus, food security status is key to well-being of 
young farmers. This study examined factors that influence food security 
status of young farmers with and without disabilities in Uganda. 
Specifically, the study examined the influence of disability status, region 
of location, gender, social exclusion, participation in agricultural 
programs, and social capital on food security of young farmers. The study 
utilized a comparative and cross-sectional research designs that involved 
774 young farmers; 388 with disabilities and 386 who had no disabilities. 
The sample selection involved the use of stratified, random, and criterion 
purposive sampling. This research utilized an interviewer-administered 
paper survey in collecting data. Descriptive statistics and regression 
analyses were used in analysing data. The findings indicated disability as 
a factor of social exclusion as the most curtailing to food security, 
especially in Eastern Uganda. Participation in training programs and social 
capital development were most likely to increase food security status of 
young farmers. Therefore, disability-inclusive provision of agricultural 
extension services targeting young farmers, disability-inclusive 
awareness raising, and effective implementation of existing disability 
policies could create an enabling environment to make young farmers 
food secure.  

 

mailto:david.agole@mmu.ac.ug
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1297-983X
mailto:unescochair@psu.edu
mailto:mab187@psu.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-3948
mailto:bbc@psu.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-3948
mailto:jce122@psu.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9189-1106
mailto:acrump@ucdavis.edu
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9710-2956
mailto:cosmas.wacal@mmu.ac.ug
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4831-3191


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   2 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
Currently, Uganda's population is 45.9 million, with young people under 30 years of age 
constituting 72.3%, as the largest demographics (Uganda Bureau of Statistics [UBOS], 2024).  
According to Uganda’s Constitution, youth demographic is that category of people between 18 
and 35 years of age, which makes up 24.8% of the country’s total population (UBOS, 2024). The 
African Youth Charter refers youth as individuals between 15 and 35 years of age (African Youth 
Commission, 2006; Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2015). 
While Uganda Bureau of Statistics defines the active working age in Uganda as between 15 and 
64 years of age as 57.4% of the total population, this study focuses on young farmers between 
15 and 45 years of age, representing 43.5% of the active working population (UBOS, 2024).  
 
Despite Uganda’s commitment to SDG 2; end hunger, achieve food security and improved 
nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture, food insecurity is still rampant among young 
farmers in Uganda (Adeyanju et al., 2023; Moore et al., 2021 Schwartz et al., 2019). This is further 
justified by the 2024 Global Hunger Index that ranked Uganda as 105th out 127 countries 
globally with a score of 27.3 (severe), against the 18.3 score for the world considered moderate 
(Global Hunger Index, 2024). While the Global Hunger Index for Uganda is 27.3, food security 
situation for people with disability that constitute 12.4% of Uganda’s population (UBOS, 2024), 
experience a double disadvantage against attaining food security because of social exclusion as 
a youth and having a disability (Agole et al., 2021).  
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
Disability refers to as a limitation in participation in daily living, work, or leisure activities 
resulting from physical or mental health condition. The study is informed by the social model of 
disability (Burton, 1993) and interactional theory (Wilkinson, 1991). The social model, which is 
mostly used in disability studies in the global South; as a disadvantage society imposes on 
people with disabilities that impedes them from accessing existing social and economic 
opportunities, rendering them dependent on other people for support services (Ikendi et al., 
2023; Lamino et al., 2024). While most disability studies in the global North prefer the medical 
model (Eide et al., 2021), which views disability as pathological condition– an individual 
affected can be diagnosed and treated (Agole et al., 2019).  
 
Therefore, the social model of disability seeks to explain how social structural barriers in society 
disadvantage people with disability from accessing benefits meant for the public like 
participating in agricultural extension capacity building programs. Most often people with 
disability are either directly or indirectly deprived from participating in public programs by 
outrightly being told to wait for programs that specifically target them that never come or are 
denied information (Agole, 2021). This deprives people with disability the right to participate in 
public programs that are meant to benefit the public, a factor that keeps constrains people with 
disabilities from developing capacities that would enhance agricultural productivity to assure 
food security.  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   3 
 

This study used the interactional theory to understand the influence of interactions of people 
with disability with other members of community to assure food security. The theory posits 
that a community is comprised of social fields that emanate from individual community 
members that allow people to connect and interact with one another to form community fields 
(Pigg, 1999; Wilkinson,1991). From this perspective, creation of social fields tends to develop 
wider interactions of community members, which in turn allows individuals to access resources 
like information on existing capacity building programs a factor that would promote 
participation of people with disabilities in capacity building programs meant for the public 
(Agole, 2021). Therefore, the individuals with strength social fields tend to access community 
benefits as opposed to individuals that experience weak social fields.  
 
The conceptual framework (Figure 1) is derived from the social model of disability and 
interactional theory. This study conceptualized food security to be influenced broadly by 
disability status, region of location, stigma of social exclusion, participation in capacity-building 
programs, and social capital.  
 
Figure 1 
 
Conceptual Framework 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Purpose 
 
The primary purpose of this paper was to examine factors that influence food security situation 
among young farmers with and without disability in Uganda. The specific objectives of this 
study were to assess the influence of disability status, region of location, social exclusion, 
participation in training programs, and social capital on food security status of young farmers 
with and without disability. 
 

Methods 
 
This study was conducted in the Northern and Eastern regions of Uganda because they have 
the highest disability rates in Uganda, with 14.5% in Northern and 14% in Eastern (Uganda 
Bureau of Statistic, 2024). The study employed a comparative and cross-sectional research 
designs. The sample size of 774 young farmers, 388 with and 386 without disability of 16 to 45 
years of age, was determined using sampling a table of 95% confidence, with a 5% margin of 

Individuals’ 
Characteristics 

• Disability status  
• Gender  
• Region of location  

•  

Institutional Factors 

• Participation in capacity 
building programs  

• Social capital  
• Stigma of social exclusion  

 

Food security 
• Number of meals 

eaten in a day  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   4 
 

error. The sample composed of 493 selected from Northern Uganda (258 with disability and 
235 without disability) and 281 from Eastern Uganda (130 with disabilities and 151 without 
disabilities). Young farmers with disabilities were in the categories of: speaking, hearing, 
walking, handling, and visual disabilities. 
 
The study employed a mixture of stratified, simple random, and purposive criterion sampling 
techniques (Table 1). Northern and Eastern regions were purposively selected to participate in 
the study. The regions were stratified into districts. With the district level, as a point of entry to 
respondents, a list of all people with disabilities was obtained from the National Union of 
Disabled Persons of Uganda (NUDIPU) district offices, which served as the sampling frame for 
individuals. The unit of analysis for enumeration was the individual young farmer with or 
without disability. The sample scheme is summarized in Table 1. 
 
Table 1 
 
Sampling Scheme for 774 Young Farmers with and without Disabilities 
 

Stratified Purposive  

Random  
With Disability 

(N = 388) 
With out Disability 

(N = 386) 
 

Reason 
Region  Northern   258  235 Have highest 

disability rates  Eastern   130  151 
       
Sub region  Acholi  Gulu District 111 Gulu District 85 Protracted civil 

was between 
1986 and 2004 

  Nwoya District 70 Nwoya District 34 
  Omoro District 52 Omoro District 107 
  Amuru District 20 Amuru District 06 
  Agago District 05 Agago District 03 
 Teso Kumi District 103 Kumi District 83 
  Bukedea District   27 Bukedea District 22  
    Ngora District 46  

 
 
The interviewer-administered paper survey, only differentiated by the disability demographic, 
was used for collecting quantitative data from young farmers with or without disabilities. Social 
exclusion and social capital were measured on five-point Likert scale responses consisting of 
most often = 5, often = 4, sometimes = 3, rarely = 2, and not at all = 1. Item on young farmers 
participation in training programs were rated on a scale of very high = 5, high = 4, neither high 
nor low = 3, low = 2, and very low = 1. Food security was rated on a four-point response scale 
consisting of once = 1, two times = 2, three times = 3, and four times = 4, because four is the 
highest number of meals eaten in a day Eastern and Northern regions of Uganda. Cronbach 
Alpha (α) was used for testing internal consistency of the summated scales and ranged between 
α = .76 and α = .94. The reliability analysis for participation α = .94, social capital α = .76, food 
security α = .86, social exclusion α = .87. Data were collected in 2017 by research enumerators 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   5 
 

that included social workers with disability organizations, youth with disabilities, and sign 
language interpreters in accordance with standards approved by Penn State University 
Institutional Research Board.  
 
Data for young farmers with or without disabilities were entered in SPSS as separate data files, 
cleaned, then two data sets were merged with identifier variables created regarding disability 
status and region. The study employed basic descriptive univariate statistics, bivariate 
correlations and regression analysis to identify factors that influenced (explain) food security 
situation of young farmers with and without disabilities. Factors with significance p = or < 0.05 
were considered to be statistically significant. 
 

Findings 
 
The findings of the influence of social exclusion, region of location, gender, participation in 
training programs, and social capital on food security status of young farmers are summarized 
in descriptive statistics in Table 2, and empirical findings in Tables 3, 4, 5, and 6.  
 
Descriptive Statistics 
There were more young farmers with disabilities in Northern Uganda (33.3%) than Eastern 
Uganda (18.8%). Also, there were more young farmers without disabilities in Northern region 
(30.4%) than in Eastern region (19.5%). Also, in Table 2, generally very few young farmers with 
disabilities in Northern region have worked with extension workers on issues related with 
agriculture (7.7%) and Eastern Uganda (10.7%) and young farmers without disabilities in 
without in Eastern region (9.3%) and Northern region (8.5%). Both young farmers with disability 
in Eastern region (27.8%) and Northern region (24.1%) and those without disabilities in Eastern 
(25.6%) and Northern (21.2%) regions are members of farmer groups in their communities.  
 
  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   6 
 

Table 2  
 
Descriptive Statistics of the Variables Used in the Study (N = 774) 
 

 
Variables used in the study 

With Disability (N = 388) Without Disability (N = 386)  
Eastern 
Region 

(N = 130) 

Northern 
Region 

(N = 258) 

Eastern 
Region 

(N = 151) 

Northern 
Region 

(N = 235) 
% % % % 

Disability status (N = 774) 16.80 33.30 19.50 30.40 
Region of Uganda (N = 774)    

   Eastern (N = 281) 16.80  19.50  
   Northern (N = 493)  33.30  30.40 

Gender      
   Female (N = 247) 12.10 20.30 16.70 13.40 
   Male (N = 527) 34.20 32.00 37.00 34.30 

    
Participation in extension programs 
Have you worked with any extension worker on   issues related with agriculture?  

   Yes (N = 136) 10.70 7.70 9.30 8.50 
   No (N = 638) 35.60 44.60 44.50 39.10 

Have you been contacted to participate in any community training programs?  
Yes (N = 136) 10.70 7.70 9.30 8.50 
No (N = 638) 35.60 44.60 44.50 39.10 

     
Stigma of exclusion     
Are you a member of any social group in your community? 

Yes (N = 372) 27.80 24.10 25.60 21.20 
No (N = 399) 18.50 28.60 28.10 26.10 

     
Social capital M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) 
Interact with people outside of 

your community (N = 773) 
3.42(0.931) 3.74(1.069) 3.60(1.053) 3.82(1.094) 

Travel to places outside of your 
community (N = 773) 

2.50(1.087) 3.00(1.248) 3.09(1.061 3.68(1.188) 

     
Food security     
How many times do eat a meal 

in a day (N = 767) 
1.79(0.764) 2.10(0.618) 2.09(0.653) 2.56(0.690) 

 
Correlation Results 
The factors of social exclusion, region of location, gender, participation in capacity building 
programs, social capital and food security status of young farmers were correlated to 
determine the relationship among factors with food security as summarized in Table 3. 
There is a statistically significant positive relationship between region of Uganda (r = .25, p < 
.01), working with any extension worker on agriculture (r = .15, p < .01), interact with people 
outside of your community (r = .14, p < .01), traveling to places outside of your community (r = 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   7 
 

.35, p < .01) and food security status of young farmers. There is a statistically significant 
negative relationship between disability status (r = -.26, p < .01) and food security.  
 
Table 3 
 
Correlation Coefficient of the Factors 
 

Note. **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 
1. Disability 

status  1 
.06 

(p<.11, 
n = 774) 

.01 
(p<.97, 

n = 774) 

-.42** 
(p<.00, 

n = 562) 

-.05 
(p<.21, 

n = 771) 

.06 
(p<.12,  

n = 774) 

-.05 
(p<.21, 

n = 773) 

-.25** 
(p<.00, 
n =773) 

-.26** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 
2. Region of 

Uganda  
.06 

(p<.11, 
n = 774) 

1 
.05 

(p<.20, 
n = 774) 

-.08 
(p<.06, 

n = 562) 

.08* 
(p<.03, 
n=771) 

.05 
(p<.17, 

n = 774) 

.12** 
(p<.01, 

n = 773) 

.20** 
(p<.00, 

n = 773) 

.25** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 
3. Have you 

worked with 
any extension 
worker?  

.01 
(p<.97, 

n = 774) 

.057 
(p<.19, 

n = 774) 
1 

.38** 
(p<.00, 

n = 562) 

.24** 
(p<.00, 
n=771) 

.05 
(p<.13, 

n = 774) 

-.01 
(p<.79, 

n = 773) 

-.05** 
(p<.17, 

n = 773) 

.15** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 

4. Have you 
been 
contacted to 
participate in 
any training? 

-.42** 
(p<.00, 

n = 562) 

-.08 
(p<.07,  

n = 562) 

.38** 
(p<.00, 

n = 562) 
1 

.33** 
(p<.00, 

n = 559) 

-.01 
(p<.90, 

n = 562) 

-.03 
(p<.56, 

n = 561) 

-.02 
(p<.69, 

n = 561) 

.09* 
(p<.03, 

n = 555) 

5. Are you a 
member of 
any social 
group? 

-.05 
(p<.21, 

n = 771) 

.08* 
(p<.03, 

n = 771) 

.24** 
(p<.00, 

n = 771) 

.33** 
(p<.00, 

n = 559) 
1 

-.10** 
(p<.01, 

n = 771) 

-.25** 
(p<.00, 
n =771) 

-.16** 
(p<.00, 

n = 771) 

-.07 
(p<.12, 

n = 766) 

6. Gender  .06 
(p<.12, 

n = 774) 

.05 
(p<.165, 
n = 774) 

.05 
(p<.13, 

n = 774) 

-.01 
(p<.90, 

n = 562) 

-.10** 
(p<.01, 

n = 771) 
1 

.02 
(p<.63, 

n = 773) 

-.03 
(p<.39, 

n = 773) 

-.00 
(p<.93, 

n = 767) 
7. Interact with 

people 
outside of 
your 
community 

-.045 
(p<.209, 
n = 773) 

.12** 
(p<.01, 

n = 773) 

-.01 
(p<.80, 
n = 773) 

-.03 
(p<.56, 

n = 561) 

-.25** 
(p<.00, 

n = 771) 

.08 
(p<.63, 

n = 773) 
1 

.42** 
(p<.00, 

n = 773) 

.14** 
(P<.00, 
n = 767) 

8. Travel outside 
of your 
community  

-.25** 
(p<.00, 

n = 773) 

.20** 
(p<.00, 

n = 773) 

-.05 
(p<.17,  
n =773) 

-.08 
(p<.69,  

n = 561) 

-.16** 
(p<.00, 

n = 771) 

-.03 
(p<.37, 

n = 773) 

.42** 
(p<.00, 

n = 773) 
1 

.35** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 
9. Number of 

meals eaten in 
a day 

-.26** 
(p<.00,  

n = 767) 

.25** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 

.15** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 

.09* 
(p<.03,  

n = 555) 

-.06 
(p<.12, 

n = 766) 

-.00 
(p<.93, 

n = 767) 

.14** 
(p<.00,  

n = 767) 

.35** 
(p<.00, 

n = 767) 
1 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   8 
 

Table 4 
 
Correlation Coefficients of the Variables 
Model  R R Square Adjusted R Squared Std. Error of the Estimate 
     
1 0.52s 0.28 0.26 0.61 

Note.  The predictors (constant) were disability status, region of Uganda, working with 
extension workers on agricultural issues, being a member of any social group in a community, 
gender, interacting with people outside your family, and traveling to places outside your 
community. The dependent variable was the measure of food security, which is the number of 
meals eaten in a day. 
 
F Values 
The F value with the number of meals eaten in a day as the dependent variable and the 
independent variables are disability status, region of Uganda, working with extension workers 
on agricultural issues, being a member of any social group in a community, gender, interacting 
with people outside your family, and traveling to places outside your community. The large F 
value (F = 25.84, p < 0.05) reveals that the independent variables influence the outcomes of the 
dependent variable.  
 
Table 5 
 
F Values 
 
Model  Sum of Squares  df Mean Squares F Values p 
      
1 Regression 76.77 8 9.60 25.84 <0.05b 
  Residual  202.36 545 0.37   
  Total 279.12 553    

Note. a Predictors (constant) disability status, region of Uganda, working with extension workers 
on agricultural issues, being a member of any social group in a community, gender, interacting 
with people outside your family, and traveling to places outside your community. Dependent 
variable how many meals do you eat in a day. bThe b-superscript on the p-value of <0.05 implies 
that the F-value of 25.84 significantly improves the estimation of food security using some of 
the predictor variables in a-superscript. 
 
Food Security Regressed on Disability, Regions of Uganda, Gender, Social Exclusion, 
Participation in Training Programs, and Social Capital  
The study conceptualised social inclusion (disability status, gender, membership to social 
groups), region of Uganda, participation in community programs (working with agricultural 
extension workers, being contacted to engage in community trainings), social capital 
(interaction with people outside of your community, travel to places out of your community), as 
factors that influence food security status of young farmers with and without disability in 
Uganda (Table 6). 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   9 
 

 
Northern region of Uganda has a significant positive influence on food security (beta = 0.31, p < 
0.05) of young farmers. Further, working with extension worker on issues related with 
agriculture (beta = 0.15, p < 0.05), or travelling to places outside their communities of residence 
(beta = 0.25, p < 0.05) have positive significant influence on food security of young farmers.  
 
Contrary, disability status has a significant negative influence (beta = -0.27, p < 0.05) on food 
security. In addition, being contacted to participate in community training programs (beta = -
0.03, p = 0.54), membership to a social group (beta = -0.08, p = 0.10), or interaction with people 
outside of your community (beta = -0.04, p = 0.29), or gender (beta = -0.03, p = 0.49) have 
negative influence on food security status of young farmers.  
Reduced Regression Equation:  

Y (food security) = 1.04 – -0.27 (disability status) + 0.31 (region) + 0.15 (working with any 
extension worker on agriculture) + 0.25 (travel to places outside your community) 

 
Table 6 
 
Food Security Regressed against Social Exclusion, and Participation in Programs 

 
 
Model  

Unstandardized 
Coefficient 

Standardized 
Coefficient 

  

Β SE of B Beta t P 
Constant 1.05 0.20  5.25 <0.05 

Disability status (1 = With) -0.41 0.07 -0.27 -6.23 <0.05 
Region of Uganda (0 =Eastern) 0.47 0.06 0.31 7.83 <0.05 
Have you worked with any 

extension worker on issues 
related with agriculture?  

0.26 0.07 0.15 3.72 <0.05 

Have you been contacted to 
participate in any community 
training programs? 

-0.04 0.06 -0.03 -0.62 >0.05 

Are you a member of any social 
group in your community? 

-0.10 0.06 -0.07 -1.66 >0.05 

Gender  -0.04 0.06 -0.03 -0.69 >0.05 
Interact with people outside of 

your community 
-0.03 0.03 -0.05 -1.06 >0.05 

Travel to places outside of your 
community  

0.14 0.03 0.25 5.80 <0.05 

F = 25.844      
df = 8/545      
p = <.005      
R Square = .28      
Adjusted R Square = .26      
Std. Error of the Estimate = 0.61 

Note. Dependent variable: Number of meals eaten in a day. 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   10 
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
The more the young farmers live in a given region of Uganda, work with extension workers on 
agriculture, interact with people outside of the community, travel to places out of their 
community, young farmers tend to become food secure and vice versa. Northern Uganda is 
more likely to be food secure than Eastern Uganda. Disability is the most curtailing factor in 
young farmers’ food security status. Therefore, young farmers with disabilities are more likely 
to experience food insecurity than their counterparts because the culture and traditions of the 
community greatly influence the social life of young farmers with disabilities. Usually, young 
farmers with disabilities tend to experience more difficulties to travel to places outside their 
communities because of the nature of disability a person possesses and absence of assistive 
devices such as white cane and wheel chairs. This is because most of the farmer capacity 
building activities are usually conducted in demonstration sites outside their communities of 
residence and others in form of exchange visits to other farmers, yet young farmers with 
disabilities tend to require additional assistance in form of sign language interpreters, wheel 
chair and pushers, and guides that are often lacking.  Also, many public community agricultural 
programs meant to improve food security status of community members are likely to exclude 
and discriminate against participation of young farmers with disabilities. Young farmers with 
disabilities have a lower chance of interacting with people outside their families and 
communities, and therefore less opportunity to access information and build social capital 
compared to young farmers without disabilities.  
 
During the 1986 to 2004 civil war in Northern Uganda, people of the region lived in camps. All 
the people regardless of their social status lived in the same socioeconomic situations and faced 
similar challenges such as loss of assets, loss of lives, and displacement from their communities 
of residence. Facing similar challenges and living close to one another, created social cohesion 
between people with and without disabilities, resulting to improved food security.  
 
Moreover, young farmers in Eastern Uganda are more likely to experience food insecurity 
because community structures like the Uganda National Union of Persons with Disability that 
tend to be avenues for capacity building programs that would benefit young farmers with 
disabilities are less developed in Eastern Uganda. therefore, existence of weak community 
structures that would facilitate participation of young farmers in capacity building programs 
tend to disadvantage and exclude participation of young farmers in program meant for the 
public. It is, especially, worsened by participation in programs that is based on social ties and 
relatives, thus young farmers with and without disabilities with less social capital tend to miss 
out participating in community programs. 
 
Much as both young farmers with and without disability experience food insecurity, it is 
important to note that having a disability, social exclusion tend to deflect a young farmers food 
security status, especially in Eastern Uganda. Building social capital, especially through 
travelling to places outside community of residence, and participating in community programs 
through working with agricultural extension workers are more likely to improve food security of 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   11 
 

young farmers. These findings could inform development agencies and organizations for the 
need for a concerted to build the capacity of young farmers with or/and without disability a 
fundamental driver to assure food security. Also, critical is reorienting agricultural extension 
educators and institutional development programs for young farmers towards building 
structures and programming mechanisms that directly target and accommodate young farmers’ 
interests to attain food security. In addition, alleviation of the antecedents of social exclusion of 
young farmers with disabilities through disability-inclusive awareness raising and effective 
implementation of disability policies could create an enabling environment for food security of 
young farmers with disability. It is therefore, important to conduct research on the appropriate 
livelihood strategies that could assure food security in young farmers with and without 
disability. 
 

Acknowledgments 
 
This work was supported by the Fulbright Junior Program Scholarship 2015, AgrAbility Project 
for Pennsylvanians 2017, and UNESCO-Community Leadership and Youth Development at 
Pennsylvania State University 2017. https://agsci.psu.edu/unesco/initiatives  
 
This article was a component of the doctoral dissertation for Agole, D. (2018). Participation in 
capacity-building programs and the implications for the livelihood and well-being of young 
farmers with and without disabilities in Uganda. 
https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/15300dja5368 
 
Author Contributions: D. Agole – conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, writing-
original draft; M. A Brennan – supervision, formal analysis, investigation, writing-review and 
editing, funding acquisition; C. D. Baggett – supervision, formal analysis, investigation, writing-
review and editing, funding acquisition; J. C. Ewing – writing-review and editing; A. Crump – 
writing-review and editing; C. Wacal – writing-review and editing. 
 

References 
 
Adeyanju, D., Mburu, J., Gituro, W., Chumo, C., Mignouna, D., Ogunniyi, A., Akomolafe, J. K., & 

Ejima, J. (2023). Assessing food security among young farmers in Africa: Evidence from 
Kenya, Nigeria, and Uganda. Agricultural and Food Economics, 11(4), 1–20. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-023-00246-x. 

 
African Youth Commission. (2006). African Youth Charter. 

https://www.youthpolicy.org/uploads/documents/2006_African_Youth_Charter_Eng.pd
f.  

 
Agole, D., Baggett, C. D., Brennan, M. A., Ewing, J. C., Yoder, E. P., Makoni, S. B., Beckman, M. 

D., Epeju, W. F. (2021). Determinants of participation of young farmers with and without 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567
https://agsci.psu.edu/unesco/initiatives
https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/15300dja5368
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-023-00246-x
https://www.youthpolicy.org/uploads/documents/2006_African_Youth_Charter_Eng.pdf
https://www.youthpolicy.org/uploads/documents/2006_African_Youth_Charter_Eng.pdf


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   12 
 

disability in agricultural capacity-building programs designed for the public in Uganda. 
Sustainable Agriculture Research, 10(2), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.5539/sar.v10n2p74. 

 
Agole, D., Ewing, J. C., Baggett, C. D., Wester, N. (2019). A review of theories related to 

inclusive-capacity building of people with disabilities. Workforce Education Forum 39(1), 
52-63.  
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/psu/wef/2019/00000039/00000001/art000
06.  

Burton, L. (1993). The struggle for citizenship: The case of disabled people. Disability & Society, 
8, 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/02674649366780251. 

 
Eide, A. H., Nanono, N., & Omona, J. (2021). Living conditions among persons with disabilities in 

Uganda. Research Gate. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11513.70242. 
 
Global Hunger Index. (2024). Global hunger index website. https://www.globalhungerindex.org.   
 
Ikendi, S., Owusu, F., Masinde, D., Oberhauser, A., & Bain, C. (2023). Does participation in 

livelihood education programs impact household food security? A comparative study in 
rural Uganda. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 13(1), 
235–265. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.131.009. 

 
Lamino, P., Millares-Forno, C., Landaverde, R., Boren-Alpízar, A. E. (2024).  Rural youth 

migration intentions in Ecuador: The role of agricultural education programs. 
Advancements in Agricultural Development, 5(3), 2024. 25–38. 
https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i3.433. 

 
Moore, R., Dada, S., Emmambux, M. N., & Samuels, A. (2021). Food and nutrition security in 

persons with disabilities. A scoping review. Global Food Security, 31. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100581. 

 
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. (2015). Evidence-based policy making 

for youth well-being: Toolkit. 
https://www.youthpolicy.org/uploads/documents/2017_OECD_Policy_Making_for_You
th_Well_being_Eng.pdf. 

 
Pigg, K. E. (1999). Community leadership and community theory: A practical synthesis. 

Community Development Society Journal, 30(2), 196–212. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15575339909489721. 

 
Schuler, M. T. (2022). The food is not enough: Disability and food aid technologies in a Ugandan 

refugee settlement. Journal of the International African Institute, 92, 449–466. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001972022000390. 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567
https://doi.org/10.5539/sar.v10n2p74
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/psu/wef/2019/00000039/00000001/art00006
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/psu/wef/2019/00000039/00000001/art00006
https://doi.org/10.1080/02674649366780251
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11513.70242
https://www.globalhungerindex.org/
https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2023.131.009
https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i3.433
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100581
https://www.youthpolicy.org/uploads/documents/2017_OECD_Policy_Making_for_Youth_Well_being_Eng.pdf
https://www.youthpolicy.org/uploads/documents/2017_OECD_Policy_Making_for_Youth_Well_being_Eng.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1080/15575339909489721
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001972022000390


Agole et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567   13 
 

Schwartz, N., Buliung, R., & Wilson, K. (2019). Disability and food access and insecurity: A 
scoping review of the literature. Health & Place, 57, 107–121. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.03.011. 

 
Uganda Bureau of Statistics. (2024). National population and housing census 2024: Final report. 

https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/National-Population-and-Housing-
Census-2024-Final-Report-Volume-1-Main.pdf.  

 
Wilkinson, K. (1991). The community in rural America. Greenwood Press. 
 
 
© 2025 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i2.567
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.03.011
https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/National-Population-and-Housing-Census-2024-Final-Report-Volume-1-Main.pdf
https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/National-Population-and-Housing-Census-2024-Final-Report-Volume-1-Main.pdf

