ArticleHeliyon2024
Comparative performance assessment of pilot irrigation schemes in Uganda.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stochastic human exposure-risk modelling and environmental health implications of potentially toxic elements in the Mubuku irrigation scheme, Uganda.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- From the field to the pot: phenological, agronomic, and cookability traits of common beans (Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Irrigation schemes across sub-Saharan Africa are constructed with the intention of increasing agricultural production to increase food security, reduce poverty and improve economic growth. However, most of these schemes are not performing as expected. This study therefore, diagnosed performance gaps in the pilot irrigation schemes of Mubuku and Doho in Uganda and analysed sustainable improvement options. Data was collected through systematic review of literature and scheme data, direct measurements at the schemes, field surveys, inspections, and key informant interviews. For each scheme, data for climate, irrigation, flow measurements, crop yields and farm gate prices were collected. Comparative indicators of agricultural output, water supply, financial and physical sustainability were used to assess scheme performance using standard approaches by International Water Management Institute (IWMI). The findings showed that the schemes were not performing optimally with crop yields being far below the attainable potential. The major contributing factors to the low performance were low water use efficiency and low agricultural output. Poor flow control, poor water distribution, and poor on-farm water application contributed to low water use efficiency. Low agricultural production was attributed to poor crop yields resulting from poor agronomic practices, poor irrigation scheduling and low produce prices. The financial self-sufficiency indicator pointed to farmers' inability to operate and maintain irrigation schemes effectively. Improving the irrigation schemes performance requires a multidisciplinary approach targeting the improvement water use efficiency and agricultural output.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.