As Uganda marks 64 years of independence, cotton remains one of the country’s traditional cash crops, but production and export earnings have fallen far short of its former position in the economy. Uganda was once among sub-Saharan Africa’s leading cotton producers. Production reached 84,000 tonnes in 1969, according to John Baffes’ World Bank study, The Cotton Sector of Uganda, published in March 2009.
The industry later collapsed during years of political and economic turmoil. Production recovered after reforms in the 1990s, but the recovery did not restore the industry to its former strength. The question today is whether farmers can earn enough from cotton to compete with other crops, and whether Uganda can rebuild the processing and marketing systems that once supported the industry.
The issue was in focus on October 7, when the world marked World Cotton Day. Two international reports published in 2026, alongside Uganda’s own experience, point to opportunities for the crop but also the challenges facing farmers and processors.
Cotton was once supported by a network of farmers’ cooperatives, ginneries, spinning mills and textile factories. These institutions linked cotton growing areas to the domestic manufacturing industry and export markets. Cooperatives played a major role in organising farmers and marketing their produce.
Historical accounts of Uganda’s cooperative movement indicate that, by 1971, cooperatives operated 53 cotton ginneries, handling a reported 440,000 bales. The textile industry provided a market for the lint produced by these ginneries. Firms included Southern Range Nyanza Textile Industries, African Textile Mill in Mbale and the Goustar Lira Spinning Mill.
The industry provided a route for cotton to move beyond raw fibre into yarn, fabric and finished products.But the system weakened as political instability, economic disruption and the collapse of cooperative operations affected production and marketing.
The decline in cotton growing was accompanied by the deterioration of the institutions that had connected farmers to processors and buyers. Baffes’ 2009 World Bank study records that output fell from 78,000 tonnes in 1972 to 14,000 tonnes in 1976 and just 2,000 tonnes in 1987.
The sector recovered during the 1990s, helped by economic reforms and improved prices, but cotton did not regain its earlier economic importance. Baffes noted that “The fundamental problem of Uganda’s cotton sector is its low profitability.”
Farmers need dependable buyers and timely payment. Ginners need enough seed cotton to operate efficiently, while spinning mills need reliable supplies of lint at competitive prices. When those connections break down, farmers have fewer reasons to plant cotton and processors struggle to operate at capacity.
In December 2025, cotton farmers in Omoro District told Uganda Radio Network that the price they received had fallen to about 1,500 shillings per kilogramme, from 2,500 shillings the previous year.
Beatrice Aciro, who planted cotton on one and a half acres, reported that her earnings had fallen from 1.75 million shillings to 1.2 million shillings.
Other farmers said delays by buyers and a lack of nearby storage forced some to sell to middlemen for as little as 1,200 shillings per kilogramme.
These accounts illustrate why farmers may turn to other crops when cotton prices fall or payment is delayed.
According to the African Development Bank, Cotton is critical to the local economies of Northern Uganda, but many farming communities struggle with low productivity, limited access to quality inputs, weak market links, and outdated processing facilities.
A UNCTAD report, Analysis of Cotton By-Products Survey in Uganda, published in July 2018, explained that “The allocation of smallholder resources to cotton thus depends on the comparative returns from cotton compared with the returns from competing crops.”
It added that farmers must weigh the expected income from cotton against labour costs, the time spent waiting for buyers and the returns they could earn from food crops or other cash crops.
The World Bank study similarly found that farmers responded to changes in the prices they received. When higher international prices were reflected in farm-gate prices, farmers planted more cotton.
That relationship remains important. Encouraging farmers to plant more cotton will have limited effect if the price they receive does not justify the cost and effort of production.
Cotton has lost market share to synthetic fibres, particularly polyester, but it remains an important raw material for clothing, household textiles and other products.
The OECD and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, in their OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2026–2035, published in June 2026, project that global cotton production will reach about 29.7 million tonnes by 2035.
Cotton mill use is also projected to grow, supported by expanding textile industries, particularly in Asia.
The outlook indicates that cotton will continue to compete in a market shaped by production costs, demand from textile manufacturers and the availability of alternative fibres.
Brazil and the United States are expected to remain major exporters, while sub-Saharan Africa will continue to supply international markets.
But the outlook also points to pressure on prices as production increases and cotton competes with synthetic and recycled fibres.
Uganda must produce cotton at competitive cost, maintain quality and supply buyers reliably.
Cotton’s continued importance also makes the decline of Uganda’s domestic spinning and textile industries significant.
A country that exports raw lint but imports finished textiles misses opportunities to create jobs and earn income from processing the same crop.
UNCTAD’s 2017 report, Cotton and its By-Products Sector in Uganda, described the difficulties facing domestic textile manufacturers.
By the 2015/16 season, only two major integrated textile firms were operating, and they were not using their full capacity.
The report identified high production costs, obsolete machinery, expensive and unreliable electricity, and competition from imported textiles and second-hand clothing as major constraints.
Restoring domestic processing would require investment and a reliable supply of cotton, as well as measures that allow Ugandan manufacturers to compete. It would also provide ginners with a larger domestic market for their lint.
Can better seed improve returns? Kenya offers a nearby example of efforts to improve cotton productivity through new seed technology. Kenya approved commercial cultivation of genetically modified Bt cotton in 2019.
The variety is engineered to resist the African bollworm, a pest that can cause substantial damage to cotton crops. Reports from Kenya have described improved yields among farmers using the technology, although the cost of seed remains a concern.
The experience is relevant to Uganda because low productivity and production costs have constrained the sector for years. Improved seed, effective pest management and extension support could help farmers obtain more cotton from their land.
However, Bt cotton is not a complete solution. Its benefits depend on local pest conditions, the price of seed, farming practices, access to buyers and the price farmers receive for their harvest.
Any decision on its use in Uganda would need to be based on local evidence and the country’s regulatory requirements.
A report released by the Better Cotton Initiative on October 7, 2026, also offers evidence on the relationship between farming practices and returns.Its Global Impact Report 2026 draws on nine years of field-level data from farmers participating in its sustainability programme.
The report says 59 per cent of participating smallholder farmers improved their net income from cotton after joining the programme.
It also reports reductions in synthetic nitrogen use, pesticide use and carbon footprints among participating farmers.
These findings concern farmers in the Better Cotton programme internationally; they are not measurements of Uganda’s cotton sector.
But they highlight issues that are relevant locally: production costs, farming practices and the income farmers retain from their crop.
For Ugandan farmers, improved yields will make a difference only if the additional income is not swallowed by the cost of seed and other inputs. Equally, reducing input use will help only if it does not undermine production.
The question is how to make cotton a more profitable crop under Uganda’s own farming conditions.
Cotton can generate income beyond the sale of raw fibre. Cottonseed can be processed into edible oil and animal feed, while other by-products can be used in different industries.
UNCTAD’s 2018 survey examined the potential of cotton by-products as additional sources of income. Developing these markets could provide more business opportunities for processors and reduce dependence on lint exports alone.
But such industries need a dependable supply of raw material, investment in processing equipment and access to markets.
The same applies to spinning mills and textile factories: they cannot operate efficiently if cotton supplies are irregular or the cost of electricity and other inputs makes production uncompetitive.
The Cotton Development Organisation ceased operations in January 2025 following the Cotton Development (Amendment) Act, 2024, with its functions transferred to the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
The challenge is to translate those responsibilities into practical support for the sector, including quality seed, extension services, reliable buying arrangements and timely payment.
What would bring farmers back?
Uganda’s cotton industry once connected farmers, cooperatives, ginneries and textile factories in a system that supported both agricultural production and manufacturing.
The collapse of that system helps explain why the recovery in cotton growing has not restored the crop’s former importance.
The OECD-FAO outlook projects continued growth in cotton production and mill use, while the Better Cotton report points to the potential for improving farmers’ incomes through changes in farming practices.
Kenya’s experience with Bt cotton adds another question for Uganda: whether improved seed technology can raise yields at a cost farmers can afford. In Kenya, cotton farmers also have access to fertilizer subsidies to enhance yield and productivity.
None of these developments removes the need to address the basics of the cotton business. Farmers need a competitive price and dependable buyers. Ginners need reliable supplies, and domestic manufacturers need the conditions to process cotton competitively.
Cotton helped build Uganda’s export economy, but restoring its contribution will depend on whether the crop pays farmers and whether the country can once again connect production to processing and markets. For the farmer, the decision remains straightforward: cotton must earn enough to justify the land, labour and time it requires-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
