







































 

 
 

 
59 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

FARMERS’ USE OF INDIGENOUS FRUIT TREES TO COPE WITH CLIMATE 
VARIABILITY IN THE LAKE VICTORIA BASIN DISTRICTS OF UGANDA     

 

 John Bosco 
Lamoris Okullo1+ 

 Francis Omujal2 

 Thomas Enuru3 

 Celestin 
Bigirimana4 

 Prossy Isubikalu5 

 Jacob Godfrey 
Agea6 

 Elias Bizuru7  

 Joseph Obua8

  

 

1,3,8Department of Forestry, Biodiversity& Tourism, College of Agricultural 
and Environment Sciences. Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. 
1Email: jbl.okullo@gmail.com   
3Email: tenuru@gmail.com  
8Email: jobua09@gmail.com  
2Natural Chemotherapeutics Research Institute, Ministry of Health, Kampala, 
Uganda. 
2Email: fomujal@gmail.com  
4Department of Rural Development and Agricultural Economics, College of 
Agriculture, Animal Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, University of 
Rwanda, Musanze, Rwanda.  
4Email: celbigirimana@gmail.com  
5,6Department of Extension & Innovation Studies, College of Agricultural 
and Environment Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.  
5Email: isubikalu@gmail.com  
6Email: jgagea@gmail.com  
7Department of Biology, College of Science and Technology, University of 
Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda. 
7Email: ebizuru@gmail.com  

 

 
(+ Corresponding author) 

 ABSTRACT 
 
Article History 
Received: 4 April 2022 
Revised: 20 May 2022 
Accepted: 8 June 2022 
Published: 30 June 2022  
 

Keywords 
Adaptation strategies 
On-farm trees 
Vulnerability 
Weather change effects 
Wild edible fruits. 

 
The escalating extreme weather conditions has forced rural farmers in Africa to rely 
disproportionately on Indigenous Fruit Trees (IFTs) to sustain their household 
food/nutrition security, employment and income generation. This paper analysed 
farmers’ use of IFTs to cope with climate variability in selected Lake Victoria Basin 
Districts of Uganda. Data were collected from farmers using questionnaires, key 
informant interviews and focus group discussions. From 13 most preferred IFTs, focus 
was on the most popular and highly ranked five: Garcinia buchananii, Vangueria 
apiculata, Canarium schweinfurthii, Tamarindus indica and Saba comorensis. Preferences for 
these IFTs were influenced by their uses for food, medicine, timber, compound shade 
provision and marketability. Age, sex, education, occupation, family size, land size, non-
farming activities, period of stay on the same piece of land, and income level 
significantly (P≤0.05) influenced choice of the preferred IFTs. Majority of the 
respondents had IFTs planted on-farms, along the roads to provide various 
goods/services and in marginal lands unsuitable for farming to diversify agriculture as 
a strategy to cope with climate variability. Given that the uses of IFTs in the five LVB 
districts are associated with farmers’ efforts to cope with climate variability, the goal of 
any climate-adaptive farmer-based project should support sustainable use of IFTs, in 
the short-term and foster innovations such as on-farm planting of IFTs and other fast-
growing tree species to meet household demands.  
 

Contribution/Originality: The paper analysed farmers’ use of IFTs to cope with climate variability in selected 

Lake Victoria Basin Districts of Uganda.  Thus, it contributes to an understanding of farmers use of IFTs to cope 

with the effects of climate change and as a strategy for diversifying and sustainably supporting their livelihoods. 

 

 

Current Research in Agricultural Sciences 
2022 Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 59-83. 
ISSN(e): 2312-6418 
ISSN(p): 2313-3716 
DOI: 10.18488/cras.v9i1.3048 
© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4837-8462
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3829-0934
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4339-3399
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2437-7323
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8806-8410
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1673-9320
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9556-8082
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5197-2617
mailto:jbl.okullo@gmail.com
mailto:tenuru@gmail.com
mailto:jobua09@gmail.com
mailto:fomujal@gmail.com
mailto:celbigirimana@gmail.com
mailto:isubikalu@gmail.com
mailto:jgagea@gmail.com
mailto:ebizuru@gmail.com
https://www.doi.org/10.18488/cras.v9i1.3048


Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
60 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

1. INTRODUCTION 

Across sub-Saharan Africa, there are many rural households that use natural resources including a wide variety 

of indigenous plant/wild fruits species and vegetables to meet their daily food and nutrition security as well as 

generate income [1, 2]. This is because forests can combat climate change, contribute to households’ livelihoods 

and create a base for sustainable economic and social development. Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) from 

these indigenous plant species have traditionally sustained the African people’s lives over centuries [3].   

According to Tieminie, et al. [4], rural people in Africa rely on forest resources to cope with climate 

events and NTFPs play a critical role in this regard. NTFPs are products of biological origin from forests, 

wooded land and trees outside forests. Among the most widely used NTFPs, wild edible fruits (WEFs) are 

important sources of nutrition, medicine, and cash income essential for purchasing household goods and services 

[3]. 

In addition to their use as food, WEF species also provide fiber, fuel and a range of processed products. The 

WEF species thrive in diverse environments with agroforestry practices and on urban landscapes, deserts, fallows, 

natural lands and plantations [5]. One of the key WEFs are Indigenous Fruit Trees (IFTs). IFTs are fruit trees 

that are native to an area, where they have originated and evolved over centuries [6]. They  are different from 

exotic fruit trees (which have been imported from other continents), although they may be commonly grown [7]. 

However, IFTs of tropical Africa are not formally traded and are barely acknowledged in research outside Africa 

[8]. 

In spite of the above, reliance upon IFTs as a source of household diet especially during drought when there are 

food shortages is not a new phenomenon in the Lake Victoria Basin (LVB) districts of Uganda [9, 10]. Apart from 

being a source of income a vital component of the household livelihoods in rural areas, IFTs are also sources of vital 

nutrients and essential vitamins needed by children below 10 years who are prone to malnutrition [11]. According 

to CTA [7], IFTs are more resilient to climate change than most exotic crops in Africa. For instance, they 

can also withstand hot-dry conditions [5] and increase farmers’ ability to cope with the negative impacts of climate 

change [12].  

Although Africa is rich in indigenous plant species whose products have traditionally provided employment, 

income and sustained rural people’s lives for centuries [2, 3, 9], climate change and variability present a formidable 

challenge for rural communities in Africa and other developing countries [13]. The production of IFTs has been 

ignored by the commercial sectors [2, 5], yet  commercialisation of IFTs is central to many livelihood strategies 

[14] and could be leveraged to improve food and nutrition security, alleviate poverty, reduce inequality and curb 

environmental degradation in the face of climate variability/change [15]. 

Climate change results in climate variability, frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration and timing of 

extreme weather and climate events [16]. It is a threat to sustainable development due to its grave impact on socio-

economic development, particularly in the Global South [17]. The United Nations Framework Convention on 

Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines climate change as “a an alteration of climate (a long-term shift in temperatures 

and weather patterns) attributed to human activities that modify the composition of the global atmosphere over 

comparable time periods” [18]. According to IPCC [19], climate variability is variations in the mean state and 

other statistics of the climate on all temporal and spatial scales beyond that of individual weather events. It is also 

the decadal or yearly or seasonal fluctuation of climate elements (e.g., rainfall, temperature, humidity, etc.) above or 

below a long-term average [16]. 

Adaptation to climate change and variability is the process of adjustment to actual, experienced or expected 

climate change /its effects and seeks to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities in human systems. Coping 

measures, on the other hand, refers to short-term strategies employed by households to lessen the negative 

repercussions of climate and ecological change on well-being and livelihoods over short period of time normally less 

than one calendar year [20]. According to Alemayehu and Bewket [21], coping and adaptation to climate change 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
61 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

and variability are closely related and interchangeably used in the context of disaster response except that they have 

different time spans. Coping strategies are autonomous, short-term, location-specific actions and adjustments 

targeted against a certain hazard and activities that take place within existing structures.  

Due to continued decreasing rainfall, higher frequency and severity of droughts [2], mechanisms need to be 

put in place to enable farmers cope with climate risks such as reduced crop productivity, reduced household 

livelihoods and food security  [20].  This is imperative as IFTs play a crucial role in enhancing societal adaptation 

to climate variability [3, 22]. Undeniably, the existence of IFTs in the LVB districts - which is now prone to the 

effects of climate variability [23] is an indication that farmers use IFTs to cope with climate variability.  

With a current population of about 45 million people living in the LVB districts of East Africa [24] and the 

escalating extreme weather conditions (high winds, hailstorms, excessive precipitation, prolonged drought, flooding 

and wildfires), rural households are being forced to rely disproportionately on IFTs to enhance their coping efforts 

and adaptation to climate variability [11]. Furthermore, ways in which IFTs help farmers to sustain household 

food security, nutrition, health and income as a means of coping with and adapting to climate variability have not 

been investigated in the LVB districts of Uganda. The recurrent crop failures and livestock losses justify the 

integration of IFTs in the farming systems for food security and income generation. in the LVB districts. 

Apart from the above, the continued worsening of the effects of climate change in Uganda [25] and the 

expansion of agriculture to supply food within the LVB districts is expected to influence the use and conservation of 

IFTs [26]. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that most research organizations viewed IFTs in the context of 

multipurpose trees within agroforestry systems [27]. Since climate change is a major environmental and socio-

economic challenge in East Africa-the LVB study site inclusive [26], understanding how farmers use IFTs to adapt 

and cope with the effects of climate variability is crucial to developing and implementing adaptation strategies that 

can alleviate the adverse effects of climate change in the area . 

Bearing in mind that use of particular IFT is influenced by factors such as its abundance, scarcity, ownership 

and availability, assessing how farmers’ socio-economic factors determine availability of IFTs and household 

decision in using the trees to cope with climate variability becomes paramount. To date, ways in which socio-

economic factors shape farmers’ use of IFTs to cope with the effects of climate variability in the LVB districts is 

unknown. More importantly, the need to assess how socio-economic factors shape farmers’ use of IFTs to cope with 

climate variability is based on the fact that many traditional mechanisms to cope with drought have been diminished 

in Africa where social and economic change: knowledge of famine foods, as well as of food conservation techniques, 

is progressively disappearing [28]. Since understanding local community perceptions of the impacts, causes and 

responses to climate change is vital for promotion of community resilience towards climate change [29], it was 

imperative to analyse farmers’ use of IFTs to cope with climate variability. Specifically, the study documented 

perceived niches/availability of IFTs, assessed farmers’ perception of the use and contribution of IFTs to their 

livelihoods and the socio-economic factors that influence the preferred uses of IFTs among farmers in the LVB 

Districts of Uganda. The following questions guided the study:  

What local knowledge do farming communities have on availability status and preference of IFTs in the LVB? 

What are the local uses of IFTs, particularly for enhancing communities’ adaptation to weather variability?  How 

do IFTs contribute to the enhancing climate change adaptation strategies of rural community in the LVB? How do 

LVB communities perceive the use of IFTs in enhancing their adaptation to climate change effects? What factors 

influence community knowledge on the local uses and the contribution of IFTs to climate change adaptation. 

 

2. STUDY AREA AND METHODS 

2.1. Study Area  

The study was carried out in LVB districts of Uganda covering Buikwe, Busia, Kamuli, Masaka and 

Namutumba districts Figure 1. Uganda (1° 00' N and 32° 00' E); is one of the LVB landlocked country lying astride 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
62 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

the equator. It lies on the north-western shores of Lake Victoria, extending from 1 South to 4 North latitude and 

30 to 35 East longitude. Uganda is bordered by Tanzania and Rwanda to the South, Democratic Republic of 

Congo (DRC) to the West, South Sudan to the North, and Kenya to the East. 

 

Figure 1. Location of study sites in the Lake Victoria Basin Districts, Uganda. 

 

LVB was chosen because (a) of rapid population growth, urbanization, and industrialization which have stepped 

up deforestation and (b) it is experiencing a higher magnitude of climate variability effects [24]. The five districts 

were selected due the high concentration of the most popular IFTs, and high dependence of the population on 

natural resources for their livelihoods [11].  

LVB (68,000 square kilometers) is home to around 40 million people distributed as follows: 51% Kenya, 6% 

Tanzania and 43% Uganda [30]. With the LVB population growing rate of 3.5 percent each year (which is among 

the highest in the world), the LVB’s population has grown from 35 million in 2006 to about 45 million in 2017. The 

population density is among the highest in the world averaging more than 500 persons/km2 and exceeding 1,200 

person/km2 in some parts [26]. 

https://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/lakevictoria.htm


Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
63 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

LVB has a diverse and dynamic environment. The vegetation consists of variations in a savanna ecosystem 

dominated by forest-thicket and forest-savanna mosaic, with smaller areas of grassland and tree savanna. The 

exploitation of natural resource in the LVB is closely defined by the livelihood system, cultural practices and 

property rights [24], agricultural expansion into forests, unsustainable extraction of forest products and clearing of 

forests for non-agricultural uses [23]. 

There is high dependence of the poor on natural resources for livelihoods and the dense population increase 

pressure on land, forests, catchments and the lake itself. The dense population and low levels of development also 

drive unsustainable use of natural resources and negatively impact on the basin [23, 24]. LVB was formed by the 

geological shifts that created the rift valley, thus, its climate is naturally variable and susceptible to flood and 

drought. agriculture is the most important sector of the economy, employing over 80% of the workforce in the LVB 

areas of East Africa (Mwaura and Okoboi [27]).   

 

2.2. Research Design 

This study employed a mixed-methods approach to gather data in two phases, each phase was a triangulation of 

quantitative and qualitative methods meant to understand how the socio-economic characteristics influenced the use 

of specific IFTs. To get a diverse community with high interest in IFTs to work with, the districts were first 

stratified according to availability of common IFTs and the National Agricultural Zonation in the country [31]. 

 

2.3. Data Collection Methods/Procedure 

Key Informant Interview (KII), Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and Interviewer-administered questionnaire 

were used to collect data in the local language [32]. To ensure data validity and reliability, research assistants with 

tertiary education were recruited and trained in data collection techniques. To identify districts with diversity of 

IFTs, diagnostic studies and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) were carried out in Masaka, Buikwe, Kamuli, 

Namutumba, Kaliro, Iganga, Mpigi, Rakai, Sembabule, Busia and Kayunga districts. Based on prior information 

collected on available IFTs from the key informants, Buikwe, Busia, Kamuli, Masaka and Namutumba districts were 

purposively selected. A total of 400 households (80 households per district) were interviewed using a semi-

structured questionnaire to document local knowledge and perceptions about IFTs. The questionnaire was pre-

tested to refine the questions and clarity before final administration [29]. To ensure triangulation of findings, focus 

group discussions (FGDs) were held to share, validate and explore the findings of the household survey [10]. Key 

informant interviews and informal discussions were held with farmers to refine the questions [29].  

After the IFTs were listed, each respondent was asked to rank and prioritise them as first, second and third 

based on attributes such as food, taste, medicine, juice, sauce, food preservative, food additive and timber [33, 34]. A 

species was prioritized by a total number of people raising the hands. The two best IFTs were further discussed for 

preferences as food, medicine, income generation and adaptation to climate variability. Other information collected 

included availability, propagation techniques and local growing niches of IFTs. Ecosystem services provided by the 

fruit trees reflect how trees in agricultural landscapes can empower societies to cope with the effects of climate 

variability. 

The challenges and opportunities for sustainable use and management of IFTs were discussed [29]. The 

scientific names of the IFTs were confirmed by a taxonomist while pressed samples were taken to Makerere 

University Herbarium for further identification [33]. Availability of IFTs were categorised as abundant, few and 

scarce/rare following a modification from [35].  

 

2.4. Statistical Data Analysis  

Household survey data were coded, entered in SPSS software and analysed in STATA to generate descriptive 

statistics (percentages and frequencies) on abundance, reasons for farmers’ preferences and use of IFTs to enhance 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
64 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

farmers’ coping strategies to climate change effects [36]. The percentage of respondents’ preference for an IFT was 

calculated as follows [9]. 

Xi (%) =  

Where:  

Xi: The percentage of groups having ranked the species i as priority IFT. 

Ni: The total number of groups having selected the species i as priority IFT. 

N: The total number of groups surveyed. 

For each IFT, Xi was calculated for the overall value, food, medicinal and commercial values. Only the overall 

value was considered in the selection of priority IFT, as it integrated food, medicine and economic/commercial 

values. IFTs with the highest percentage of respondents’ preference were selected as a priority. For each district, a 

short list of three priority IFTs was generated [12].  

Both qualitative and quantitative techniques were used to analyse data. Before processing the responses, the 

completed copes of the questionnaire were edited for completeness and consistency in responses. Qualitative data 

were summarized using text analyses [37] while information obtained from the PRA group interviews was 

analysed on the spot by recording consensus conclusions from the participants [10]. Data from the FGD, KIIs and 

informal discussions were subjected to content analysis to generate emerging themes [38].  

Quantitative data were tabulated and analysed using descriptive statistics and OLS regression analysis in 

Microsoft Excel and STATA version-13 [39]. Data were summarized into frequencies, percentages, mean and 

standard deviation and quantitative variables were presented in tables and graphs [40]. Descriptive statistics were 

used because they enabled the research to meaningfully describe the distribution of scores using a few indices. 

Growing niches for each IFT were determined and data subjected to logistic regression analysis to examine factors 

influencing farmers’ knowledge of abundance, availability, propagation techniques and use of IFTs for climate 

change adaptation [1, 29]. 

 

3. RESULTS 

3.1. Socio-Economic and Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents   

Buikwe and Masaka districts had more females while Masaka district had the highest number of widowed 

respondents Table 1. Namutumba and Busia districts had the youngest respondents. All respondents in Kamuli and 

Namutumba districts owned land and carried out farming as an economic activity whereas respondents in Buikwe 

and Masaka districts had the smallest family size and high monthly incomes Table 1. In general, 60% of the 

respondents were males and 77% were married. Seventy one percent did not have formal education or stopped in 

primary school, 90% were peasant farmers and 99% owned farm land. The average land holding was six acres while 

the household size was eight members Table 1. 

 

3.2. IFTs Commonly Found in the LVB Districts 

A total of 13 IFTs belonging to 10 families were recorded in the five LVB districts.  Two indigenous fruit 

species belonged the family apocynaceae and anacardiaceae while Burseraceae, Sapotaceae, Flacourtiaceae, 

Moraceae, Clusiaceae, Fabaceae, Rubiaceae and Arecaceae had one species each.  

 

 

 

 

 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
65 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Table 1. Socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the respondents (N=400). 

Variables Districts (Uganda) 

Variables & their 
Descriptions 

B
u

ik
w

e
 

(N
=

8
0
) 

B
u

si
a
 

(N
=

8
0
) 

M
a
sa

k
a
 

(N
=

8
0
) 

K
a
m

u
li

 

(N
=

8
0
) 

N
a
m

u
tu

m
b

a
 

(N
=

8
0
) 

P
≤

0
.0

5
 

T
o

ta
l 

(N
=

4
0

0
) 

Age (Years) 
Mean  54(16) 47(15) 50(15) 52(15) 46(9) 0.008 50(16) 
Min 20-102 23-85 23-92 24-90 20-88  20-102 
Max 102 85 92 90 88  102 
Median 52 49 50 52 43  50 
Sex (%) 
Male 41.3 78.9 41.7 76.2 60.5  59.72 
Female 58.7 21.1 58.3 23.8 39.5  40.28 
Marital status (%) 
Single 06.2 05.1 07.5 02.5 05.1  05.30 
Married 67.5 76.2 72.5 84.3 83.5  76.76 
Divorced 03.8 02.5 08.8 05.5 03.8  04.88 
Widowed  22.5 16.2 11.2 07.7 07.6  13.06 
Level of Education (%) 
None 27.4 17.7 15.0 17.5 32.2  22.2 
Primary 51.3 59.5 56.2 35.0 41.8  48.8 
Secondary 20.0 17.7 17.5 42.5 17.7  23.2 
College 01.3 05.1 11.3 05.0 08.3  05.8 
Main occupation (%) 
Farming 90 97.5 94.5 100 98.7  96.00 
Civil service 04.5 01.3 03.8 0.00 01.3  02.00 
Others (Petty 
business, etc) 

05.5 01.2 01.3 0.00 00.0  02.00 

Family size 
Mean (SD) 07(4) 10(6) 06(2) 10(8) 09(5) 0.000 08(06) 
Range 01-120 03-35 01-12 01-65 01-25  01 
Min 01 03 01 01 01  01 
Max 20 35 12 67 25  67 
Median 06 09 05 08 08  07 
Household land ownership 
Owned land  96.3 98.8 98.8 100.0 100.0  98.8 
Type of land ownership 
Freehold 13.8 60.3 00.0 08.3 30.0  22.5 
Customary/inherited 52.5 22.6 17.5 88.9 70.0  50.3 
Hired/rented 03.7 17.1 05.0 00.0 00.0-  05.2 
Mailo 00.0 00.0- 05.0 00.0 00.0  01.0 
Tenancy  30.0 00.0 72.5 00.0 00.0-  20.5 
Given 00.0 00.0 00.0 02.8 00.0  00.6 
Period spent in the area (years) 
Mean (SD) 32(19) 38(17) 33(18) 43(20) 34(22) 0.003 36(19) 
Min 02 06 02 09 01  01 
Max 70 85 90 88 88  90 
Median 30 36 30 41 30  35 
Approximate monthly income (‘000) UGX  
Mean (SD) 211(652) 60(101) 223.0(274) 191(194) 123(243) 0.012 159(331) 
Min 03 05 05 25 05  03 
Max 5,000 700 2,000 1,000 1,700  5,000 
Median 90 30 150 100 50  80 

 

Among the fruit tree species, Rhus vulgaris (anacardiaceae) was recorded in all the districts while C. 

schweinfurthii (Burseraceae) and T. indica (Fabaceae) were reported in four districts except Busia and Masaka 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
66 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

districts, respectively. With the exception of T. indica, Buikwe and Masaka district had the same IFTs Table 2. The 

five most common IFT species were T. indica, C. schweinfurthii, Garcinia buchananii, Saba comorensis and Carisa edulis 

reported by 52.25%, 35.75%, 26%, 25% and 20.75% of the respondents respectively Table 2.  

 

Table 2. IFTs found in the five LVB districts. 

Common and Available IFTs N= 400 Districts 

Scientific name and 
(Family) 

Local name (dialect) % Buikwe Busia Masaka Kamuli Namutumba 

Tamarindus indica 
(Fabaceae) 

Enkoge (LUG)/ Nkoge 
(LUS) Omuhuwa (SAM) 

52.25 * * - * * 

Canarium schweinfurthii 
Burseraceae 

Embafu /mbafu 
(LUG)/Mpafu (LUS) 

35.75 * - * * * 

Garcinia buchannanii 
(Clusiaceae) 

Ensaali (LUG)/ nsaali 
(LUS) 

26.00 * - * * - 

Saba comorensis 
(Apocynaceae) 

Amachawungo (SAM) 25.00 - * - - * 

Carisa edulis 
(Apocynaceae) 

Enyonza (LUG)/ Ntooga 
(LUS) 

20.75 * - * - * 

Rhus vulgaris 
(Anacardiaceae) 

Akonsonkonso (LUG)/ 
Owayo 
(SAM)/Busogyole (LUS) 

18.00 * * * * * 

Vangueria apiculata 
(Rubiaceae) 

Matungunda (LUG) 17.75 * - * * - 

Dovyalis macrocalyx 
(Flacourtiaceae) 

Osongola (SAM) 16.00 - * - - - 

Chrysophyllum albidum 
(Sapotaceae) 

Amahuu (SAM), Malulu 
(LUS) 

14.50 - * - - * 

Pseudospondias 
microcarpa 
(Anacardiaceae) 

Ensiru (LUG) 13.75 *  * - - 

Ficus sur (Moraceae) Amahuyu 
(SAM)/Omukunyu 
(LUG) 

03.75 - * - - - 

Phoenix reclinata 
(Arecaceae) 

Empiruvuma (LUG) 00.75 * - * * - 

Vitex doniana 
(Verbenacea) 

Amafudu (SAM) 00.50 - * - - - 

Note: LUG = Luganda, LUS = Lusoga, SAM = Samia. 
* = Fruit Tree Present. 
- = Fruit Tree Absent. 

 

3.3. Perceived Availability of IFTS in the LVB Districts  

The perceived availability status of IFTs in the five LVB districts of Uganda is presented in Table 3. In Busia 

district, T. indica was reported by 59.5% and S. comorensis by 56.1% of the respondents as the most abundant and 

occasionally abundant, respectively. Rhus vulgaris, D. macrocalyx, F. sur, C. albidum and V. doniana were reported  by 

60.0%, 45.5%, 87.5%, 66.7% and 100.0% of the respondents respectively as rare in Busia district. In Buikwe district, 

C. schweinfurthii, G. buchananii, T. Indica,, C. edulis and V. apiculata were reported by 43.8%, 36.6%, 44.1%, 40.0% and 

47.4% of the respondents respectively as occasionally occurring while Rhus vulgaris and Phoenix reclinata were 

reported by 37.5% and 100% of the respondents respectively as rare.  

In Masaka district, C. schweinfurthii, G. buchananii, C. edulis, V. apiculata, R. vulgaris and P.reclinata were reported 

by 72.0%, 73.3%, 54.5%, 51.6%, 55.6% and 100% of the respondents respectively as scarce. Although in Namutumba 

district T. indica was reported by 44.8% of the farmers as abundant, C. schweinfurthii and C. edulis were reported by 

50% and 48.9% of the farmers respectively as occasionally available while R. vulgaris and S. comorensis were reported 

by 42.9% and 38.1% of the farmers respectively as  scarce Table 3 

 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
67 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Table 3. Perceived availability of IFTs.  

District  IFT species Respondents 
(%) 

Availability Status (%) 

Abundant Few (less abundant) Scarce/Rare 

Busia R.vulgaris 15.0 00.0 00.0 100.0 

S. comorensis 51.0 02.4 56.1 41.5 

T.indica 53.0 59.5 28.6 11.9 

D.macrocalyx 33.0 03.0 12.1 84.9 

Ficus sur 08.0 00.0 12.8 87.5 

C.albidum 27.0 03.7 14.8 81.5 

V.doniana 01.0 00.0 00.0 100.0 

Buikwe R.vulgaris 14.0 00.0 28.6 71.4 

C. schweinfurthii 32.0 31.3 43.8 25.0 

P. reclinata 02.0 00.0 00.0 100.0 

T.indica 34.0 29.4 44.1 26.5 

G. buchananii. 51.0 14.6 36.6 48.7 

C.edulis 05.0 00.0 40.0 60.0 

V.apiculata 38.0 23.7 47.4 29.0 

Kamuli R.vulgaris 02.0 00.0 50.0 50.0- 

C.schweinfurthii 75.0 10.7 52.0 37.4 

T.indica 95.0 34.2 56.6 09.2 

G.buchananii 13.0 00.0 15.4 84.6 

C. edulis 02.0 00.0 00.0 100.0 

C.albidum 13.0 07.7 07.7 84.6 

Masaka R.vulgaris 18.0 00.0 27.8 72.3 

C. schweinfurthii 25.0 00.0 8.0 92.0 

P.reclinata 03.0 00.0 00.0 100.0 

G.buchananii. 45.0 02.2 11.1 86.6 

C.edulis 11.0 09.1 00.0 90.9 

V.apiculata 31.0 12.9 29.0 52.1 

Namutu
mba 

R. vulgaris 28.0 17.9 21.4 60.8 

C. schweinfurthii 10.0 30.0 50.0 20.0 

T.indica 29.0 44.8 41.4 13.8 

G.buchananii. 05.0 20.0 00.0 80.0 

C.edulis 47.0 23.4 48.9 27.7 

S.comorensis 21.0 00.0 09.5 90.5 

 

3.4. Perceived niches of IFTs in the Five LVB District s  

Respondents knew of the IFTs growing niches such as wilderness, crop fields and agricultural land. In Busia 

district, T. indica was mentioned by 54.3% of the respondents as growing on home compounds while S. comorensis, 

R. vulgaris, D. macrocalyx, F. sur, C. albidum and V. doniana were reported respectively by 74.3%, 88.9%, 80.9%, 60%, 

80.9% and 50% of the respondents as most available in crop fields and boundaries Table 4. 

In Buikwe district, R. vulgaris, T. indica, C. schweinfurthii and V. apiculata were reported by 50%, 62.5%, 46.4% 

and 66.7% of the respondents respectively as mostly found on home compounds while C. edulis were reported by 

66.7% of the respondents as growing in the crop fields and boundaries. In Masaka district, R. vulgaris, G. buchananii, 

C. schweinfurthii, P. reclinata and C. edulis were reported respectively by 100%, 61.1%, 80% and 100% of the 

respondents to be present in the crop fields and boundaries except V. apiculata that was reported by 53.8% to be 

present in the home compounds Table 4. 

 

3.5. Preferences and Use of IFTS to Enhance Respondents’ Coping Strategies against Climate Variability  

Preferences for and use of IFTs to enhance respondents’ coping strategies against climate variability differed in 

the districts. The IFTs were preferred and eaten as snacks in all the districts Table 5.   

 

 

 

 

 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
68 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Table 4. Growing niches of the IFTs. 

District IFT species Respondents 
(N) 

Location niches (%) 

Homestead 
compounds 

Wilderness Garden 
boundaries 

Others 
niches* 

Busia R.vulgaris 18 05.6 05.6 88.9 00.0 

S.comorensis 69 07.1 15.7 74.3 00.0 

T.indica 80 54.3 22.9 21.0 01.8 

D.macrocalyx 31 06.5 12.9 80.6 00.0 

F.sur 05 40.0 00.0 60.0 00.0 

C. albidum 20 00.0 09.5 80.9 00.0 

V.doniana 02 50.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 

Buikwe R.vulgaris 10 50.0 10.0 40.0 00.0 

C.schweinfurthii 29 46.4 46.4 07.2 00.0 

P. reclinata 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

T.indica 32 62.5 28.1 09.4 00.0 

G.buchananii. 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C. edulis 03 33.3 00.0 66.7 00.0 

V.apiculata 30 66.7 20.0 06.7 06.7 

Kamuli R.vulgaris 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C.schweinfurthii 69 13.7 44.2 42.1 00.0 

T. indica 00 37.3 34.3 28.5 00.0 

G. buchananii. 07 00.0 00.0 100.0 00.0 

C.edulis 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C.albidum 03 33.3 66.7 00.0 00.0 

Masaka R.vulgaris 14 00.0 00.0 100.0 00.0 

C.schweinfurthii 21 09.5 23.8 66.7 00.0 

P.reclinata 05 00.0 20.0 80.0 00.0 

G.buchananii. 36 25.0 13.9 61.1 00.0 

C.edulis 15 00.0 00.0 100.0 00.0 

V.apiculata 26 53.8 07.7 38.5 00.0 

Namutumba R.vulgaris 14 00.0 00.0 100.0 00.0 

C.schweinfurthii 07 85.7 00.0 14.3 00.0 

T.indica 23 47.8 17.4 34.8 00.0 

G.buchananii. 11 63.6 00.0 36.4 00.0 

C.edulis 37 00.0 16.4 83.8 00.0 

S.comorensis 07 00.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 
Note: * Others include Swamps, Road sides and Orchards. 

 

The preference for and use of IFTs as snacks was exceptionally high for T. indica in Busia, Namutumba and 

Kamuli districts. The preference for and use of C. schweinfurthii as a snack was higher in Kamuli than in Masaka, 

Buikwe and Namutumba districts.  

Although G. buchananii was the most preferred and ranked first in Buikwe and third in Masaka districts 

respectively, its preference and use as snack was higher in Masaka than Buikwe district. There were similar 

preferences for T. indica as a snack in Namumba and Busia districts respectively. The preference for G. buchananii 

and C. schweinfurthii; as snack or medicine were the same in Buikwe and Masaka districts respectively. C. edulis was 

the most preferred as a source of herbal medicine in Namutumba district Table 5. 

In Buikwe district, G. buchananii, V. apiculata and C. schweinfurthii were the most preferred and reported by 52%, 

48.8% and 45% of the respective respondents while in Busia district; T. indica, S. comorensis and C. albidum were the 

most preferred and reported by 95%, 87.5% and 82.5% of the respondents respectively. In Masaka district, V. 

apiculata, C. schweinfurthii and G. buchananii were reported by 76.2%, 57.5% and 41.2% as the most preferred for 

enhancing farmers coping strategies against climate variability as they were eaten as snacks, used as medicine and 

sold.  Tamarindus indica, S. comorensis and C. schweinfurthii were the most preferred because of their market values 

and shielded respondents against the effects of climate variability  Table 5. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
69 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

In Busia district, T. indica was the most preferred IFT species followed by S. comorensis and C. albidum as a food 

additive while in Namutumba district, the most preferred IFT species was C. schweinfurthii followed by T. indica. In 

Kamuli district, C. schweinfurthii was ranked higher than other IFTs while G. buchananii and V. apiculata were the 

most preferred in Buikwe district. V. apiculata and C. schweinfurthii were the most preferred species in Masaka 

district Table 5.  
Logit and probit analyses showed that age, sex, education, occupation, income and period of stay on the land 

influenced the respondents’ preference for IFTs and were ranked first, second or third Table 6.  

Age with a negative coefficient and marital status plus period stayed on same piece of land significantly 

influenced (P≤0.05) the preference and ranking of S. comorensis as third most important in Busia district. Number of 

members in a household and education positively and significantly influenced (P≤0.05) the preference for and 

ranking of C. albidum as the third most important IFT in Busia district. Although the type of non-farming activity 

had a significant negative coefficient effect (P≤0.05) on the ranking of T. indica as the most preferred in Busia 

district; sex, occupation, land size and income positively influenced its ranking as the most preferred in Kamuli 

district.  

The younger respondents were 0.938 times and 0.881 times more likely to prefer T. indica and S. comorensis as 

second and third most preferred IFTs in Busia district.  The older respondent were 1.178 times more likely to 

prefer C. albidum as third most important in Busia district, 1.051 times more likely to prefer T. indica as third most 

important in Kamuli and 1.091 times more likely to prefer C. edulis as third most important in Masaka district.  

The study also revealed that low level of education was 0.210 times more likely to influence choice of C. albidum 

as the third most important IFT whereas those with higher level of education were 7.520 times more likely to 

prefer V. apiculata as the fourth most important and those with tertiary education were 6.80 times more likely to 

rank V. apiculata as second most important IFT. At te same time, respondents who were involved in crop farming 

were 0.302 times, 1.701 times and 38.424 times more likely to rank C. schweinfurthii, G. buchananii and C. albidum as 

first, second and third most important IFTs respectively Table 6. 

In terms of marriage, the results show that single respondents were 0.129 times more likely to rank T. indica as 

most important IFT in Namutumba district while married respondents were 8.116 times more likely to rank S. 

comorensis as the third most important in Busia district. In regard to gender, female respondents were 0.145 times 

more likely to rank T. indica as second choice in Kamuli district while male respondents were 416.923 times and 

11.152 times more likely to rank it as first and third most important in Kamuli and Buikwe districts respectively  

The respondents with high incomes (UGX ≥ 385,000/=) were 1.000 times more likely to rank C. schweinfurthii 

and T. indica as most important in Kamuli district while those with low incomes (UGX ≤ 123,000/=.) were 1.000 

times more likely to rank C. edulis as the third most important IFT in Namutumba district. Respondents who had 

stayed longer on the same piece of land were 1.120 times more likely to rank S. comorensis as third most important 

in Busia district while those who had stayed for a short period on the same piece of land were 0.957 times and 0.937 

times more likely to rank C. schweinfurthii as third and fourth most important IFTs in Kamuli and Buikwe districts 

respectively Table 6. 

With regard to marital status, single respondents were 0.129 times more likely to prefer T. indica as the most 

important in Namutumba district while married respondents were 8.116 times more likely to rank S. comorensis as 

third most important choice in Busia district. On the other hand, female respondents were 0.145 times more likely 

to rank T. indica as the second choice in Kamuli district while male respondents were 416.923 times and 11.152 

times more likely to rank T. indica as first and third most important IFTs in Kamuli and Buikwe districts 

respectively Table 6.  

 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
70 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Table 5. Preferences and use of IFTs to enhance coping strategies. 

District 
Scientific 

name 

% 
Response 
(N=80) 

Preference 
(Ranking) 

Reason for use Preferences (%) 

As snacks 
As 

medicine 
Market 

potential 
As food 
additive 

Its 
taste 

As 
timber 

More fruit 
yield 

Shade 
provision 

Buikwe 

G. buchananii 52.5 1st 39.1 30.4 00.0 00.0 39.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

V. apiculata 48.8 2nd 45.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 25.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C. schweinfurthii 45.0 3rd 40.0 15.5 12.5 00.0 03.8 00.0 00.0 00.0 

Busia 

T. indica 95.0 1st 81.1 18.9 05.4 37.8 02.8 04.1 00.0 00.0 

S. comorensis 87.5 2nd 63.4 30.0 05.1 11.6 15.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C. albidum 82.5 3rd 57.9 15.8 00.0 10.6 00.0 05.3 05.3 00.0 

Masaka 

V. apiculata 76.2 1st 82.4 11.8 00.0 00.0 23.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C. schweinfurthii 57.5 2nd 44.4 38.9 05.6 00.0 22.3 00.0 00.0 00.0 

G. buchananii 41.2 3rd 55.9 23.5 00.0 00.0 02.9 00.0 02.9 02.9 

Namutumba 
C. edulis 80.2 1st 89.1 56.5 00.0 00.0 06.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 

T. indica 76.3 2nd 89.5 26.3 05.3 00.0 05.3 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C. schweinfurthii 57.1 3rd 57.1 28.6 28.6 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 

Kamuli 
C. schweinfurthii 78.8 1st 69.1 07.4 27.9 00.0 11.8 00.0 00.0 00.0 

T. indica 57.5 2nd 87.4 45.5 01.5 00.0 01.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 

C. albidum 53.6 3rd 100 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 
 

 

Table 6. Socio-demographic variables that influenced choice, preferences and use of IFTS to enhance coping with climate variability. 

  
IFTs 

  
Variables 

  
District 

  
N 

  
Preference Ranks 

Logit Probit 

Coefficient p-Value Odd ratio dF/dx Coefficient 

S.comorensis Age Busia 80 3rd choice -0.1267 0.030 0.8809 -0.0084 0.033 
Marital status Busia 80 3rd choice 2.0937 0.012 8.1156 0.1438 0.013 
Period stayed on land Busia 80 3rd choice 0.1131 0.060 1.1197 0.0086 0.044 

C. albidum Age Busia 80 3rd choice 0.1637 0.011 1.1777 0.0039 0.007 
No. of members in a household Busia 80 3rd choice -0.3171 0.017 0.7283 -0.0076 0.013 
Education Busia 80 3rd choice -1.5587 0.039 0.2104 0.0358 0.042 
Occupation Busia 80 3rd choice 3.6487 0.010 38.4243 0.1319 0.013 

T.indica Non farming activity Busia 80 1st choice -0.1480 0.020 0.8624 -0.0335 0.020 
Age Busia 80 2nd choice -0.0633 0.039 0.9387 -0.0140 0.037 
Sex Buikwe 80 3rd choice 2.4112 0.039 11.1522 0.1983 0.038 
Sex Kamuli 80 1st choice 6.0329 0.047 416.9229 0.0004 0.044 
Occupation Kamuli 80 1st choice 5.8958 0.048 363.5148 0.0004 0.048 
Land size Kamuli 80 1st choice 1.1984 0.039 3.3148 0.0001 0.037 
Income Kamuli 80 1st choice 0.0000 0.050 1.0000 -0.0000 0.045 
Sex Kamuli 80 2nd choice -1.9319 0.011 0.1449 -0.3187 0.007 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
71 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Occupation Kamuli 80 2nd choice -1.4896 0.019 0.2255 -0.2405 0.015 
Age Kamuli 80 3rd choice 0.0497 0.027 1.0509 0.0108 0.023 

G.buchannanii Occupation Buikwe 80 2nd choice 0.5311 0.038 1.7001 0.0325 0.035 

C.schweinfurthii Income Kamuli 80 1st Choice 0.0000 0.028 1.0000 0.0000 0.024 
Period of stay on the land Buikwe 80 4th Choice -0.0652 0.050 0.9368 -0.0011 0.036 
Period of stay on the land Kamuli 80 3rd choice -0.0437 0.040 0.9572 -0.0051 0.039 
Occupation Kamuli 80 1st Choice -1.1980 0.042 0.3017 -0.2467 0.034 

C.edulis Age Masaka 79 3rd choice 0.0875 0.028 1.0914 0.0043 0.033 
Marital status Namutumba 80 1st Choice -2.0471 0.032 0.1291 -0.0500 0.031 
Income Namutumba 80 3rd Choice -0.0000 0.047 1.0000 -0.0000 0.054 

V. apiculata  Education Masaka 80 4th Choice 2.0175 0.040 7.5197 0.1081 0.040 
Qualification Masaka 80 2nd choice 1.9161 0.035 6.7999 0.2099 0.027 

 
 

 

 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
72 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

3.6. Effects of climate variability in the five LVB Districts  

All respondents reported that climate variability and climate change had affected their livelihoods in one way 

or another and the indicators are presented in Table 7. 

 

Table 7. Effects of climate variability in the five LVB districts (N=400). 

Effects of climate variability % Response  

Pre-mature drying of crops 55.5 
Poor crop harvest yields 53.5 
Increased drought months 46.5 
Increased pest/disease incidences  43.8 
Frequent climate related hazards 43.5 
Increased occurrences of wind and soil erosion 30.0 
Increased famine 29.5 
Increased soil compaction 27.8 

 

Table 7 shows that 55.5% of the respondents mentioned pre-mature drying of  crop/crop failure as the primary 

indicator of the effects of climate change/variability, followed by poor yields and increase in the number of dry 

months reported by 53.5% and 46.5% of the respondents respectively. Increased pests and diseases incidences, 

frequent climate related hazards, increased occurrences of wind and soil erosion, increased famine and soil 

compaction were linked to climate change by 43.8%, 43.5%, 30%, 29.5% and 27.8% .4 of the respondents 

respectively Table 7. 

 

3.7. Strategies to cope with climate variability 

To minimize the effects of climate variability, farmers reported that they practiced water harvesting, 

diversification of agriculture through incorporation of IFs, practicing conservation agriculture/conservation tillage; 

on-farm soil-water management; and engagement in off-farm activities reported by more than 50% of the 

respondents Table 8.  

 

Table 8. Strategies to cope with climate variability. 

Coping strategies against climate variability % Response 

Water Harvesting/management 60.0 
Diversification of agricultural crops  56.3 
Practicing conservation agriculture 52.5 
Engagement in off-farm activities as income source diversification  50.6 
Use of IFTs for fruits/firewood etc. 31.8 
Using IFTs as medicine  31.3 
Distribution of seedlings to the communities 30.5 
Proper timing/adjustment of planting season  29.8 
Selling of some household items  27.3 
Wetlands farming 26.5 
Buying food/borrowing food from others. 19.5 
Planting disease resistant crops 12.0 
Seeking information on seasonal climate forecasts 10.8 
Minimize cutting of trees 07.5 
Applying Pesticides/fertilizers 05.8 

 

More than 30% of the respondents reported use of branches of trees (IFTs inclusive) for firewood/construction 

materials for granaries and engagement in off-farm activities as their major coping strategies with climate 

variability and over 20% reported proper timing of planting season, using IFTs as medicinal plants to manage pests 

and diseases incidences, selling of some household items, borrowing food from others and farming in wetlands and 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
73 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

at valley bottom/flood recession cultivation (e.g. land drainage interventions) respectively as their major strategies 

for coping with climate variability Table 8.   

Other practices included used of mixed farming, early and late planting (changing sowing periods), application 

of pesticides, construction of trenches, establishment of tree nursery for distribution of seeds to the community, 

using IFTs to manage prevalent diseases such as malaria, diarrhoea, cough and skin disease infections that are 

associated with effects of changes in climate. Further measures included use of plant phenology such as shading of 

leaves by Ficus sur to predict on-set of dry spell and leaf flush to predict the on-set of rains. 

 

4. DISCUSSION 

4.1. Niches and availability of IFTs 

The 13 IFTs documented in the five LVB districts of Uganda is a rather low number given that Uganda and 

other African countries have rich diversity of IFTs [33, 41]. Although a total of 105, 700 and 400 wild fruit plants 

were inventoried in Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya respectively [9], the few reported IFTs in this study could be 

due to few study districts covered or mixing up of naturalized with indigenous fruit trees [10]. To most 

respondents, naturalised fruit trees like mangoes, oranges and jack fruit are regarded as truly indigenous. A similar 

study in Malawi and Zimbabwe also revealed that most farmers could not differentiate some exotic from indigenous 

fruit trees [42]. This implies that future studies on IFTs could borrow and incorporate community perceived 

definitions of IFTs, especially when conducting on-farm trials of the prioritized IFTs.  

Availability of IFTs differed greatly by districts. T. indica, for instance, was reported to be abundant in Busia 

district and few in Kamuli district. This implies that more abundant species are either more likely to be prioritized 

[42] or are chosen based on their multiple-use values [9].Variations in abundance of IFTs in the LVB districts 

could also be attributed to increased clearance of natural vegetation for settlement/crop farming and increased 

human population in some districts compared to others [43] because communal areas with forests are viewed as 

common property with free access that results in over exploitation. Over exploitation of IFTs adversely affects the 

livelihoods of the rural poor who  depend on them [4, 44].  

The high abundance of some IFTs (e.g., T. indica and C. schweinfurthii) reported in certain districts could be as a 

result of increased retention and demand for their uses as food, medicine and income  [45]. Apart from on-farm 

maintenance of landraces and integration of IFTs in agricultural production systems [29], in situ conservation 

ought to be promoted to reduce the risks inherent to monocultures of staple food crops [36]. 

Having C. schweinfurthii, T. indica and G. buchananii in farmers’ crop gardens indicates that farmers are making 

extra efforts to grow IFTs in a bid to enhance their adaptation strategies to climate variability [1]. Since the IFTs 

mostly grow in the wild [18]; extension workers need to sensitize farmers in the LVB districts to domesticate 

them. This effort should be preceded by training on propagation and management techniques of the preferred IFTs 

[19] including provision of proper planting materials [42]. Farmers in the LVB districts of Uganda also protect 

IFTs on their home compounds Figure 2 to cope with climate variability.  

Unlike domesticated fruit trees, well protected IFTs have become scarcer due to unsustainable harvesting for 

various products/purposes [29]. Reduction of IFTs has led to negative effects on the farmers who benefit from 

such IFT products [3]. The disappearance of IFTs can lead to loss of indigenous technical knowledge of preferred 

IFTs and their roles in enabling communities to cope with the effects of climate variability. Continued destruction 

of natural resources have similarly led to reduced dietary use of IFTs among LVB communities [43]. This has 

resulted in incidences of nutrition-related disorders; and disrupted coexistence of people and IFTs [44]. Such 

disruptions cuase loss of traditional knowledge desired for sustainable use/management of IFTs [45]. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
74 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

 
Figure 2. T. indica growing on a home compound. 

 

4.2. Preferences and use of IFTs to cope with climate variability  

Preferences for and use of IFTs such as T. indica and C. albidum to enhance farmers’ coping strategies against 

climate variability varied in the LVB districts perhaps due to differences in socio-cultural backgrounds of the local 

communities [11]. Much as farmers are able to prioritize IFTs, such ranking would vary with ethnic groups and 

availability of IFTs [10]. Consequently, species that are not locally available would get low ranking even though 

the same could be highly ranked in the areas where they are abundant [46]. 

IFTs occurring across East and Central Africa [9, 47] can be promoted through on-far growing, processing 

and marketing to increase income for improved livelihoods [3]. Prioritization of IFTs with potential to contribute 

to food security can expedite their domestication [8], thereby halting their overexploitation. To enhance on-farm 

domestication of IFTs [11], the preferred IFTs should be tried on-farm together with naturalized species  [45]. 

Some similarities in preferences for IFTs among respondents could be due to their socio-cultural backgrounds. 

For example, in Buikwe and Masaka districts (inhabited mostly by the Baganda ethnic group), the respondents 

preferred G. buchananii and V. apiculata while in Namutumba and Kamuli districts (inhabited mostly by the Basoga 

ethnic group), the respondents preferred T. indica.  As reported by Kugedera [47], the IFTs are preferred by the 

ethnic groups for spiritual inspiration, cultural identity and recreation. 

Apart from T. indica and C. schweinfurthii, preferred for learning and support experiences that uphold moral, 

religious and aesthetic values by many communities in the LVB districts, the trees also provide shade and shelter.  

The ecosystem services provided by the IFTs reflect how trees in agricultural landscapes can enable societies 

realize cultural needs [29] while at the same time empowering them to cope with the effects of climate variability 

[3]. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
75 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

IFTs can also enhance household income  [14, 46] for instance, in Buikwe district, C. schweinfurthii fruits are 

sold n the local markets and also eaten as snacks  Figure 3.   

 

 
Figure 3. Fruits of C. schweinfurthii eaten as sauce and sold for cash income. 

 

To reinforce the marketability of C. schweinfurthii, middle sales men usually book the fruits when still on the 

tree before ripening. Apart from income being used by households to pay for school fees, buy scholastic materials 

for children and agricultural crop planting materials, retention of C. schweinfurthii  and other IFTs can also improve 

biodiversity, reduce soil erosion, and enhance the capacity of soil to hold water [33]. This means that integrating 

IFTs on-farms can be beneficial for farmers, especially those struggling to cope with the impacts of climate change 

[3]. 

While preferences and uses of IFTs for medicines can have beneficial effects, it can also result into negative 

effects especially when the method of extraction is destructive. In this study, destructive extraction of various parts 

of G. buchananii, T. indica, Saba comorensis and C. schweinfurthii to treat many illnesses make them face the risk of 

disappearance. For instance, harvesting the bark of C. schweinfurthii for incense (Kibani in Luganda dialect) and the 

bark of G. buchananii for cough and stomach ache medication can lead to their mortality Figure 4.  

 

 
Figure 4. G. buchananii debarked for medicine. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
76 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Garcina buchananii trees are often debarked and pounded into powder before administering to pregnant women, 

using as a remedy for stomach disorder, asthma, intestinal worms and measles as well as for casting out evil spirits. 

Since such IFTs with multiple uses will face the risk of rapid destruction and loss, they should be targeted for on-

farm domestication [3, 47]. Such incorporation of IFTs in an agroforestry system also increases carbon storage and 

improves agricultural productivity [8] 

Given the future prospect of carbon trading and payments through the implementation of payment for 

environmental services (PES) and REDD+ programs [29], local communities may be incentivized to maintain 

IFTs in indigenous agroforestry systems as large carbon sinks for mitigating climate change effects [33]. Such 

adaptation strategies are centred on the needs of peasant farmers who are encouraged to diversify to other economic 

activities inclusive of crop/livelihood diversification as a way of strengthening household’s adaptive capacity [48]. 

 

4.3. Socio-Demographic Influence on Choice, Preferences and Use of IFTS to Enhance Coping Strategies against Climate 

Variability in the Five LVB Districts, Uganda 

Since majority of the respondents had attained only primary level of education, it is probable that the knowledge 

on use of most IFTs could have been passed from generation to generation through verbal communication. This 

confirmation of farmers’ use of both indigenous knowledge (IK) and scientific knowledge suggests that neither is 

currently accurate and sufficiently reliable in informing farmers’ decision making on the preference for and use of 

IFTs. It also suggests that total reliance on only IK to promote use of IFTs to enable farmers cope with climate 

variability may not be effective as access to IK is now a problem for younger people [29]. Accordingly, 

development and incorporation of any climate change policy on the use of IFTs to enable farmers cope with effects 

of climate variability in the LVB districts should also recognize the applicability of IK and its values in crafting of 

adaptive frameworks related to climate change [18]. 

Preference for and use of IFTs is also influenced by gender. While men dominated decision making on the use 

of IFTs for timber and fuelwood and could plant or retain them in and around homes [14], women had a strong 

attachment to use of IFTs for food and medicine (Table 6). Women in the study area are culturally bound, and as 

such are responsible for fire wood collection and harvesting of fruits such as that of T. indica for household 

consumption and sale in local markets. In terms of coping with climate variability, this confirms the roles of women 

in Sub-Saharan countries as key food and health care providers [2].  

Tamarindus indica is also reported to be among the marketable IFTs in LVB districts and the best choice for 

male respondents who are the major providers of household income. The above scenario illustrates that both men 

and women may have separate rights to different parts of the tree and any benefits from their harvesting, sale or use 

[49]. This is an issue which should always be taken into account when targeting or promoting IFTs with ability to 

enable farmers cope with effects of climate variability.  

In this study, respondents with high household income tend to prefer those IFTs presumably with high 

economic potential such as T. indica, C. schweinfurthii and C. edulis. The implication is that such IFTs could be easily 

promoted and accepted for commercialization in the LVB districts [3]. As some of these preferred IFTs have 

become one of the reliable sources of income for most of the poor households within the LVB districts, promoting 

sustainable use/management of IFTs is one way of ensuring eradication of extreme poverty and hunger in addition 

to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all ages [11] as is stipulated in the Sustainable 

Development Goals (SDGs) 1 and 3 respectively  

The contribution of IFTs towards meeting the basic needs and incomes of households has also been reported 

by Baana, et al. [36] in Uganda and Leakey, et al. [3] in parts of East and Central Africa and in Indonesia by 

Suwardi, et al.[14]. Since IFTs such as T. indica potentially augment household income with good management 

and marketing, farmers would aim for income generation early enough to implement practices that give marketable 

products such as fruits, firewood, construction materials [45] and on-farm carbon accumulation [44]. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
77 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Commercialization of IFTs should, thus, be considered a priority when promoting on-farm planting and 

management of IFTs in the LVB districts of Uganda, in particular and of East Africa in general. This would also 

enable farming households to benefit from a wide range of opportunities related to use of on-farm IFTs to cope with 

climate variability [29]. 

Deliberate retention of IFTs on-farms would also help a lot in soil and water conservation while reducing the 

risk of soil exhaustion to which annually cropped and harvested systems are prone.  A case in point is C. 

schweinfurthii whose fallen leaves (during the dry spells) is reported to enrich soil nutrients. Shaded leaves from such 

trees retained on-farms have also been reported to help in trapping moisture from the soil and retarding 

evaporation during dry seasons. In addition to improving cropping practices with greater numbers of trees on-

farms, cultivated lands significantly contribute to farmers’ efforts in coping with climate variability [50]. Such 

diversification of adaptive strategies is also vital for sustaining livelihoods in a changing climate [4]. 

Period of stay on land, likewise, had influence on respondents’ choices of and preferences for IFTs (Table 7). It 

was clear that, the longer the period stayed by households on same piece of land, the more likely they were to rank 

certain IFTs such as S. comorensis among their preferred choices. According to Leakey, et al. [3], as respondents 

stay longer on the land, they usually get a better understanding of the abundance status and economic importance 

of IFTs therein. Again, scarcity and rarity of IFTs (such as C. schweinfurthii) which most people are always on the 

lookout for its fruits in some districts could have been the reason it was reported as being highly preferred by those 

who had stayed on same piece of land for a short time.  

Even if IFTs such as T. indica, G. buchananii and V. apiculata are now retained to diversify total farm output as a 

climate change risk management strategy Kugedera [47], women may not have control over tree planting and 

management. This could be due to differential access to and control of land/IFTs and its influences on preferences 

and retention of IFTs in the LVB districts. According to Leakey and Akinnifesi [46], farmers who always retain 

such IFTs have a belief that a mixture of IFTs maturing at different times, demanding different growing conditions 

and producing a variety of products with different market niches are a blessing in boosting farmers’ struggle to 

cope with climate variability. Such mixtures of trees also often supplement each other in case of seasonal 

climatic/market failures while also reducing on the spread of pests and diseases. Ideally, such benefits from IFTs 

can make the system less susceptible to drastic productivity fluctuations and also make farmers less dependent on 

commercial agro-chemicals [50]. 

 

4.4. Use of IFTS to Enhance Farmers’ Coping Strategies against Climate Variability in the Five LVB Districts, Uganda 

Majority of the respondents in the five LVB districts also had IFTs planted on-farms and along roads to 

provide various good/services Table 8. While S. comorensis is planted to provide fruit and worthy construction 

materials for granaries, T. indica, C. albidum and C. schweinfurthii are highly valued and planted/retained for the 

provision of fruits and as alternative source of fuelwood to communities for domestic use and sale. There are also 

assertions that IFTs such as T. indica. C. albidum and C. schweinfurthii could moderate microclimate within their 

vicinity and also protect crops as windbreaks. Such positive ability of IFTs that include maintaining/regulating 

relative humidity have also been reported elsewhere [51]. Just like in other areas, some of these IFTs are now 

planted in marginal lands where arable farming is not a stable enterprise to diversify agriculture as a strategy to 

cope with effects of climate change [44].  

The use of parts of some IFTs to manage certain ailments and diseases such as malaria, diarrhoea, cough and 

skin infection are also prevalent among families within LVB districts [52]. An example is the use of parts of T. 

indica, C. albidum, and S. comorensis to treat malaria, C. schweinfurthii to treat cough and R. vulgaris to treat diarrhoea. 

The fact that some of these IFTs have already been tested for bioactive phytochemical properties and evaluated 

pharmacologically for their effectiveness is a proof of the significant role IFTs can play in enhancing primary health 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
78 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

care [5, 11, 38]; which are either directly or indirectly associated with their abilities to enable farmers cope with 

climate variability.  

Since managing IFTs on-farms has been reported by majority of the respondents in this study, it could be 

promoted widely as an effective cheap system for carbon sequestration [53]. While trees on-farms will rarely be 

planted for their carbon value alone, up-front financial provisions could reduce some of the barriers to introducing 

IFT and other trees into agricultural systems [54]. Payments would cover labour, costs of planting and nurturing 

trees to help smallholder farmers adapt to the multiple threats epitomised by a changing climate [10].  

Although expansion of fruit crop gardens can lead to high carbon sequestration thereby contributing to 

mitigation of climate change effects, the establishment of a fruit tree cropping system is not an easy task [53], 

[55]. Besides requiring a substantial investment of resources, carbon sequestration potential in a fruit tree cropping 

system might also depend on the soil where the crop is grown. Thus, to both manage impacts and mitigate climate 

change effects, adequate fruit crops have to be grown in the areas where each of them will have high yield and 

carbon sequestration potential [5]. Consequently, integrating trees in agroforestry have benefits from both the 

climate and farmers’ point of view of simultaneously mitigating climate change effects and improving livelihoods 

[21]. 

As has also been reported by Leakey, et al. [3], part of the efforts to promote cultivation of IFTs among 

farming households would be to engage model farmers, Community-Based organizations (CBOs) and NGOs whose 

work relate to agriculture. Apart from creating awareness on fruit growing, the CBOs and NGOs would also serve 

as frontline extension agents who can advise farmers to include IFTs along the entire agricultural production value 

chain in their areas [56].  

Notwithstanding the above, farmers’ interest and willingness to participate in sustainable use/management of 

IFTs can only be successful if the selected species are fast growing with the ability to yield large quantities of fruits 

while also improving soil fertility. Since by their nature IFTs take long to mature/yield fruits [7], there is need to 

step up breeding programme that can reduce their time to maturity and fruit yields. In addition, knowledge that 

farmers have about uses of IFTs to enhance their coping strategies to climate variability can be strengthened by 

having in place appropriate bye-laws on fruit growing. Such bye-laws should also incorporate ways of improving 

networks among farmers and CBOs as a strategy for boosting sustainable use/management of IFTs in the face of 

worsening effects of climate variability; thereby ensuring environmental sustainability [29]. 

Aside from these coping strategies that involve use of IFTs, other coping strategies such as distress selling of 

assets, borrowing from others, cutting expenditures on non-essential items that are also being practiced by some 

households should be promoted to minimize livelihood adverse effects of climatic shocks and variability [15].  

 

5. CONCLUSIONS 

Consumption of indigenous fruits as a coping strategy was ranked highest and the most frequently used 

strategy in coping with food shortage. The contribution of IFTs was significant in assisting households to cope 

with food insecurity/shortage thereby providing safety or emergency net when food availability is threatened in the 

households. 

Since all LVB districts frequently experience climate variability and food shortage, wild harvesting of IFT 

products can contribute to food security, poverty reduction and enhance coping strategies against climate 

variability.  Much as the value of IFTs in the livelihoods of communities living in LVB districts is critical, IFTs 

have become scarce due to unsustainable harvesting thus negatively affecting adaptation to the effects of climate 

variability.  Continued destructions of IFTs have reduced collection and dietary use of IFTs among LVB 

communities, increased incidences of nutrition-related disorders; and disruptive coexistence of people and IFTs. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
79 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Farmers’ interest and willingness to participate in sustainable use/management of IFTs can only be successful 

if the selected species are fast growing with the ability to yield large quantities of fruits while also improving soil 

fertility. 

As some coping strategies (such as diversification into off-farm activities), are applicable to most smallholder 

farmers, new options and innovations that integrate production of IFTs on-farms are needed to enhance the 

resilience of agricultural production and reduced vulnerability of communities in the LVB districts to climate 

variability. 

 

6. RECOMMENDATIONS 

Given that the uses of IFTs in the five LVB districts are associated with farmers’ efforts to cope with climate 

variability, the goal of any climate-adaptive farmer-based project should support sustainable use of IFTs, in the 

short-term and foster innovations such as on-farm planting of IFTs and other fast-growing tree species to meet 

household demands. 

The challenges to conserving IFTs and their ecosystem services can be met at a local/community-based level 

in a variety of creative ways (like promoting on-farm tree planting, beekeeping) where people depend directly on 

these services to meet their daily needs. 

Policies that will increase volumes of indigenous fruit trees such as promoting on-farm domestication and 

stepping-up appropriate tree breeding and improvement programs of IFTs are required in the area since by their 

nature IFTs take long to mature/yield fruits. Such policies and legislations should be developed by involving all 

stakeholders in order to encourage economic growth of the rural communities in the LVB districts. 

In order to improve management of natural resources and ensure sustainable extraction of not only IFTs but 

other Non-Timber Forest Products for improved community livelihoods, appropriate agricultural/forestry 

extension services ought to be redesigned in the LVB districts. 

The uptake of IFTs and in country businesses for processing and value-addition in the IFTs value chain would 

also give a much-needed boost to the local economy in ways not achieved by dependence on international 

commodity crops for export.  

Development and incorporation of any climate change policy on the use of IFTs to enable farmers cope with 

effects of climate variability in the LVB districts should also recognize the applicability of Indigenous Knowledge 

(IK) and its values in crafting of adaptive frameworks related to climate change.  

Commercialization of IFTs should be considered a priority when promoting on-farm planting and management 

of IFTs in the LVB districts of Uganda, in particular and of East Africa in general. This is expected to enable 

farming households’ benefit from a wide range of opportunities related to use of on-farm IFTs to cope with climate 

variability. 

 

Funding: This research is supported by SIDA through the Inter University Council of East Africa–Lake 
Victoria Research Initiative (Grant number: NR06-2010). 
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.  
Authors’ Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the conception and design of the study. 

 

REFERENCES 

[1] G. O. Ibe and J. Amikuzuno, "Effect of climate variability on the contribution of non-timber forest products to the 

livelihood of rural dwellers In Ohafia Abia State Nigeria: The Peoples' Perception," Ethiopian Journal of Environmental 

Studies & Management, vol. 11, pp. 587 – 607, 2018. 

[2] C. Bvenura and D. Sivakumar, "The role of wild fruits and vegetables in delivering a balanced and healthy diet," Food 

Research International, vol. 99, pp. 15-30, 2017.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.06.046. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
80 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[3] R. R. Leakey, T. Mabhaudhi, and A. Gurib-Fakim, "African Lives Matter: Wild food plants matter for livelihoods, 

justice, and the environment—a policy brief for agricultural reform and new crops," Sustainability, vol. 13, p. 7252, 

2021.Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137252. 

[4] R. N. Tieminie, C. E. Loh, J. C. Tieguhong, M. F. Nghobuoche, P. S. Mandiefe, and M. R. Tieguhong, "Non-timber 

forest products and climate change adaptation among forest dependent communities in Bamboko forest reserve, 

Southwest region of Cameroon," Environmental Systems Research, vol. 10, pp. 1-13, 2021.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-020-00215-z. 

[5] M. Sardeshpande and C. Shackleton, "Wild edible fruits: A systematic review of an under-researched multifunctional 

NTFP (non-timber forest product)," Forests, vol. 10, pp. 1-24, 2019.Available at: 

https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/f10060467. 

[6] D. Mithöfer and H. Waibel, "Income and labour productivity of collection and use of indigenous fruit tree products in 

Zimbabwe," Agroforestry Systems, vol. 59, pp. 295–305, 2003.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000005230.09714.b4. 

[7] CTA, "“Indigenous fruits”, The technical centre for agricultural and rural cooperation, (CTA)," Rural Radio Resource 

Pack (RRRP 2007/5. No 07/52007. 

[8] A. M. E. Sulieman and A. A. Mariod, Domestication of indigenous fruit trees. In: Mariod A. (eds) wild fruits: Composition, 

nutritional value and products. Cham: Springer, 2019. 

[9] B. O. Muok, "Potentials and utilization of indigenous fruit trees for food and nutrition security in East Africa," Global 

Advanced Research Journal of Agricultural Science, vol. 8, pp. 40-49, 2019. 

[10] C. Bigirimana, F. Omujal, P. Isubikalu, E. Bizuru, B. Obaa, M. Malinga, J. G. Agea, and J. B. Lamoris, "Utilisation of 

indigenous fruit tree species within the Lake Victoria Basin, Rwanda," Agricultural Science International Journal, vol. 1, 

pp. 1-3, 2016. 

[11] A. O. Omotayo and A. O. Aremu, "Underutilized African indigenous fruit trees and food–nutrition security: 

Opportunities, challenges, and prospects," Food and Energy Security, vol. 9, p. e220, 2020.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.220. 

[12] E. Assan, M. Suvedi, L. Schmitt Olabisi, and A. Allen, "Coping with and adapting to climate change: A gender 

perspective from smallholder farming in Ghana," Environments, vol. 5, p. 86, 2018.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.3390/environments5080086. 

[13] P. Dorward, H. Osbahr, C. Sutcliffe, and R. Mbeche, "Supporting climate change adaptation using historical climate 

analysis," Climate and Development, vol. 12, pp. 469-480, 2020.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2019.1642177. 

[14] A. B. Suwardi, Z. I. Navia, T. Harmawan, S. Syamsuardi, and E. Mukhtar, "Wild edible fruits generate substantial 

income for local people of the Gunung Leuser National Park, Aceh Tamiang Region," Ethnobotany Research and 

Applications, vol. 20, pp. 1-13, 2020.Available at: https://doi.org/10.32859/era.20.11.1-13. 

[15] W. Berhanu and F. Beyene, "Climate variability and household adaptation strategies in Southern Ethiopia," 

Sustainability, vol. 7, pp. 6353-6375, 2015.Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su7066353. 

[16] IPCC, Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. In: A Special Report of Working 

Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change”.  (Eds. CB Field, V Barros, TF Stocker et al.). Cambridge, 

NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 

[17] IPCC, Summary for policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 

1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global 

response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, 

H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. 

Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Geneva, Switzerland: 

World Meteorological Organization, 2018. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
81 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[18] UNFCC, "Fact sheet: Climate change science—the status of climate change science today. In United Nations 

Framework Convention on Climate Change; Bonn, Germany. Retrieved: 

https://unfccc.int/files/press/backgrounders/application/pdf/press_factsh_science.pdf. [Accessed 2March 2022]," 

2011. 

[19] IPCC, Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts,Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral 

Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

[Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. 

Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.White (eds.)]. Cambridge, United 

Kingdom and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2014. 

[20] IPCC, Annex II: Glossary [Mach, K.J., S. Planton and C. von Stechow (eds.)]. In: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. 

Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth.  Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

[Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC. Geneva, Switzerland,: Cambridge University Press, 

2014. 

[21] A. Alemayehu and W. Bewket, "Smallholder farmers’ coping and adaptation strategies to climate change and 

variability in the central highlands of Ethiopia," Local Environment, vol. 22, pp. 825-839, 2017.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2017.1290058. 

[22] R. D. Lasco, R. J. P. Delfino, D. C. Catacutan, E. S. Simelton, and D. M. Wilson, "Climate risk adaptation by 

smallholder farmers: The roles of trees and agroforestry," Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, vol. 6, pp. 83-

88, 2014.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.013. 

[23] D. Waiswa, M. J. Stern, and S. P. Prisley, "Drivers of deforestation in the Lake Victoria crescent, Uganda," Journal of 

Sustainable Forestry, vol. 34, pp. 259-275, 2015.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2014.1003565. 

[24] World Bank, The world bank lake victoria environmental management project III (P165352), Project Information 

Document/Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (PID/ISDS). Concept Stage | Date Prepared/Updated: 05-Oct-2018|Report No: 

PIDISDSC23414. Washing ton DC: World Bank, 2018. 

[25] F. W. Nsubuga and H. Rautenbach, "Climate change and variability: A review of what is known and ought to be 

known for Uganda," International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, vol. 10, pp. 752-771, 

2018.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-04-2017-0090. 

[26] L. A. Olaka, J. O. Ogutu, M. Y. Said, and C. Oludhe, "Projected climatic and hydrologic changes to Lake Victoria Basin 

Rivers under three RCP emission scenarios for 2015–2100 and impacts on the water sector," Water, vol. 11, pp. 1-27, 

2019.Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/w11071449. 

[27] F. M. Mwaura and G. Okoboi, "Climate variability and crop production in Uganda," Journal of Sustainable Development, 

vol. 7, pp. 1-14, 2014.Available at: https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v7n2p159. 

[28] M. Endris Ahmed and M. Ahmed Bihi, "Indigenous knowledge for resilience and adaptation in pastoral production 

system of Somali Regional State in Ethiopia," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems: INDECS, vol. 17, pp. 723-

737, 2019.Available at: https://doi.org/10.7906/indecs.17.4.4. 

[29] O. L. Kupika, E. Gandiwa, G. Nhamo, and S. Kativu, "Local ecological knowledge on climate change and ecosystem-

based adaptation strategies promote resilience in the Middle Zambezi Biosphere Reserve, Zimbabwe," Scientifica, vol. 

2019, p. 15, 2019.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3069254. 

[30] D. Agol, H. Reid, F. Crick, and H. Wendo, "Ecosystem-based adaptation in Lake Victoria Basin; Synergies and trade-

offs," Royal Society Open Science, vol. 8, p. 201847, 2021.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201847. 

[31] J. W. Mulumba, "A risk-minimizing argument for traditional crop varietal diversity use to reduce pest and disease 

damage in agricultural ecosystems of Uganda," Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 157, pp. 70-86, 

2012.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2012.02.012. 



Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
82 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[32] B. F. Nero, N. A. Kwapong, R. Jatta, and O. Fatunbi, "Tree species diversity and socioeconomic perspectives of the 

urban (food) forest of Accra, Ghana," Sustainability, vol. 10, pp. 1-19, 2018.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103417. 

[33] M. Ashagre, Z. Asfaw, and E. Kelbessa, "Ethnobotanical study of wild edible plants in Burji District, Segan area zone 

of southern nations, nationalities and peoples region (SNNPR), Ethiopia," Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 

vol. 12, pp. 1-15, 2016.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-016-0103-1. 

[34] P. Tugume, "Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plant species used by communities around Mabira Central Forest 

Reserve, Uganda," Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, vol. 12, pp. 1-28, 2016.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-015-0077-4. 

[35] J. C. Ordonez, "Constraints and opportunities for tree diversity management along the forest transition curve to 

achieve multifunctional agriculture," Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, vol. 6, pp. 54–60, 2014. 

[36] K. Baana, H. Angwech, and G. M. Malinga, "Ethnobotanical survey of plants used as repellents against housefly, 

Musca domestica L.(Diptera: Muscidae) in Budondo Subcounty, Jinja District, Uganda," Journal of Ethnobiology and 

Ethnomedicine, vol. 14, pp. 1-8, 2018.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-018-0235-6. 

[37] W. N. Aye, Y. Wen, K. Marin, S. Thapa, and A. W. Tun, "Contribution of mangrove forest to the livelihood of local 

communities in Ayeyarwaddy region, Myanmar," Forests, vol. 10, pp. 1-13, 2019.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.3390/f10050414. 

[38] M. Bengtsson, "How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis," Nursing Plus Open, vol. 2, pp. 8–

14, 2016. 

[39] C. Bigirimana, F. Omujal, P. Isubikalu, E. Bizuru, B. B. Obaa, M. Malinga, J. G. Agea, and J. B. Okullo, "Perceived 

availability and management of Garcinia buchananii Fruit tree species in the Lake Victoria Basin Districts of Rwanda 

and Uganda," Journal of Agricultural Research 2016, vol. 4, pp. 230-238, 2016.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.13189/ujar.2016.040602. 

[40] J. B. L. Okullo, "Ethno-medicinal uses of selected indigenous fruit trees from the Lake Victoria Basin Districts in 

Uganda," Journal of Medicinal Plants Studies, vol. 2, pp. 78-88, 2014. 

[41] K. Kehlenbeck, M. Wiehle, and A. Sennhenn, "Exotic and indigenous fruit tree diversity on farm and the conservation 

of tree genetic resources: case studies from Sub-Saharan Africa. InTropical Fruit Tree Diversity." vol. 12, 1st ed 

London: Routledge, 2016, pp. 140-149. 

[42] R. O. Awodoyin, O. S. Olubode, J. U. Ogbu, R. B. Balogun, J. U. Nwawuisi, and K. O. Orji, "Indigenous fruit trees of 

tropical Africa: Status, opportunity for development and biodiversity management," Agricultural Sciences, vol. 6, pp. 31-

41, 2015.Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.61004. 

[43] S. P. Bos, T. Pagella, R. Kindt, A. J. Russell, and E. Luedeling, "Climate analogs for agricultural impact projection and 

adaptation—a reliability test," Frontiers in Environmental Science, vol. 3, p. 65, 2015.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2015.00065. 

[44] H. T. Duguma, "Wild edible plant nutritional contribution and consumer perception in Ethiopia," International Journal 

of Food Science, pp. 1-16, 2020.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2958623. 

[45] E. Chivandi, N. Mukonowenzou, T. Nyakudya, and K. H. Erlwanger, "Potential of indigenous fruit-bearing trees to 

curb malnutrition, improve household food security, income and community health in Sub-Saharan Africa: A review," 

Food Research International, vol. 76, pp. 980-985, 2015.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.06.015. 

[46] R. R. B. Leakey and F. K. Akinnifesi, "Towards a domestication strategy for indigenous fruit trees in the tropics. In 

Leaky, R.R.B (Editor): Multifunctional Agriculture: Achieving Sustainable Development Goals in Africa". Chapter." 

vol. 16, ed: Academic Press, 2017, pp. 165-176. 

[47] A. T. Kugedera, "Domestication of indigenous trees as a sustainable way of improving rural livelihoods," International 

Journal of Agriculture & Agribusiness, vol. 2, pp. 72 – 77, 2019. 

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.61004


Current Research in Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 9(2): 59-83 

 

 
83 

© 2022 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[48] D. O. Appiah and S. E. Gbeddy, "A synthesis of the implementation ambivalence of REDD+ in Sub-Saharan Africa and 

Southeast Asia," Forest and Society, vol. 2, pp. 92-111, 2018.Available at: https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v2i1.2918. 

[49] T. Abebe and D. Mulu, "The role of women in the management and utilization of home garden: The case of Dale 

District, in southern Ethiopia," Asian Journal of Plant Science and Research, vol. 7, pp. 41-54, 2017. 

[50] S. Kuyah, I. Öborn, M. Jonsson, A. S. Dahlin, E. Barrios, C. Muthuri, A. Malmer, J. Nyaga, C. Magaju, and S. 

Namirembe, "Trees in agricultural landscapes enhance provision of ecosystem services in Sub-Saharan Africa," 

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, vol. 12, pp. 255-273, 2016. 

[51] S. Reppin, S. Kuyah, A. de Neergaard, M. Oelofse, and T. S. Rosenstock, "Contribution of agroforestry to climate 

change mitigation and livelihoods in Western Kenya," Agroforestry Systems, vol. 94, pp. 203-220, 2020.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00383-7. 

[52] R. Nieminen, M. Sørensen, and I. Theilade, "Identification of indigenous fruits with export potential from Mukono 

district, Uganda: An assessment of two methods," Agroforestry Systems, vol. 91, pp. 967-979, 2017.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-9971-6. 

[53] H. Tschora and F. Cherubini, "Co-benefits and trade-offs of agroforestry for climate change mitigation and other 

sustainability goals in West Africa," Global Ecology and Conservation, vol. 22, p. e00919, 2020.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e00919. 

[54] T. A. Melketo, E. Geta, and S. Sieber, "Understanding livelihood diversification patterns among smallholder farm 

households in Southern Ethiopia," Sustainable Agriculture Research, vol. 9, pp. 26-41, 2020.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.5539/sar.v9n1p26. 

[55] R. Reid, "Developing farmer and community capacity in Agroforestry: Is the Australian Master TreeGrower program 

transferable to other countries?," Agroforestry Systems, vol. 91, pp. 847-865, 2017.Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-0039-4. 

[56] H. Bang, L. Miles, and R. Gordon, "Enhancing local livelihoods resilience and food security in the face of frequent 

flooding in Africa: A disaster management perspective," Journal of African Studies and Development, vol. 10, pp. 85-100, 

2018.Available at: https://doi.org/10.5897/jasd2018.0510. 

 

 

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

Views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the author(s), Current Research in Agricultural Sciences shall not be responsible or 
answerable for any loss, damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. 

 


