potential cotton output of 70,426,704 kg, the result would be USD 28 million if sold at the local markets or USD 85 million if exported.<sup>34</sup> The potential value of these crops is compared to the road maintenance allocation of district in Uganda in Figures 5 and 6. Potential output in international and local prices is presented on the left vertical axis and the amount of road maintenance grant on the right vertical access. Note that the agriculture potential is in millions of dollars, while road maintenance is in thousands of dollars. Again, only a subsample is provided, including the five largest and smallest potential producing districts. The Nakapiripirit district has the potential to generate almost USD1 billion from coffee at international prices, but receives less than half the road allocation that Jina, a district that has little potential to produce one of Uganda’s largest exports, receives. Figure 5 shows that even though Kotido has the potential to produce three times the maize of Arua, they are allocated almost the same amount in road maintenance grants.

34 The differences in output between districts may appear drastic and unreasonable, but these differences are related to a number of factors. Firstly, the calculations are based on the average potential yield per hectare multiplied by the sum of the total potential area in hectares. Therefore, these graphs are not comparing the output per hectare (yield), but the potential output of a district if every potential hectare was devoted to the production of that single crop. As a result of this, there are large differences between districts, largely due to differences in the size of the district. A simple visual analysis of a district map of Uganda shows many small districts in the central, western and eastern regions, while in the north there are fewer districts that cover much larger areas. For example, Kotido in the north has a much larger potential coffee output than Tororo in the east. The GAEZ calculates the total potential area for coffee production in Kotido at 502,361 hectares, while only 6,054 hectares in Tororo. This is possibly due to the reality that Kotido is more than four times the size of Tororo. Besides differences in size, there exist stark differences in climate across the country. Some areas have two rainy seasons, while others have only one; the western region is characterized by a mountainous terrain while the central region boarders Lake Victoria. The existence of distinct climates results in distinct areas of crop production. High rainfall areas along Lake Victoria’s shore are particularly good for banana and coffee production, and the low/medium rainfall in the north is associated with the growth of annual crops and the raising of cattle (Pender et al. 2004). Additionally, the GAEZ does factor in social or civil elements, specifically, the security issues in the North. Though fighting between the LRA and the Ugandan military has resulted in insecurity of property and person, the GAEZ is only concerned with calculating potential agricultural output with regards to soil, climate, terrain and inputs. Other elements that are excluded include transportation, specifically the ability of farmers to bring their produce to market, and limitations faced by farmers, with regards to inputs, credit, labor, and insurance. Consequently, the agricultural potential presented is limited, but nonetheless offers a glimpse of the agricultural potential of the districts in Uganda.

37