Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38826721›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Comparative performance assessment of pilot irrigation schemes in Uganda.

Joshua Wanyama, Erion Bwambale, Prossie Nakawuka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Joshua WanyamaDepartment of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Makerere University, P. O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda.
Erion BwambaleDepartment of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Makerere University, P. O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda.
Prossie NakawukaDepartment of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Makerere University, P. O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Comparative indicatorsIrrigation scheme performancePerformance assessmentSmallholder irrigationSustainability

Identifiers

PMID38826721
PMCPMC11141451

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.