Does Uganda’s Parish Development Model Address Structural Barriers to Rural Transformation? A Systematic Review of Evidence

Rural transformation remains a central development objective in Uganda, yet progress has been persistently constrained by structural barriers that shape rural livelihood trajectories. In this review, structural barriers are understood as enduring constraints related to agricultural productivity, market integration, access to finance, land governance, climate vulnerability, and institutional capacity that condition households’ ability to transition out of subsistence livelihoods. In response to these challenges, the Government of Uganda introduced the Parish Development Model (PDM) in 2021 as a flagship decentralised reform intended to transition subsistence households into the money economy through parish-level planning, financing, and coordination. Despite its prominence in national development discourse, systematic evidence assessing whether the PDM meaningfully addresses these structural constraints remains limited. This study conducts a qualitative systematic review of literature published between 2020 and 2025 to examine the extent to which the design and early implementation of the PDM align with the structural barriers to rural transformation in Uganda, and how governance and institutional capacity shape its effectiveness. The review focuses on policy design coherence and early implementation evidence rather than long-term impact outcomes. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, evidence from 31 studies was synthesised, drawing on peer-reviewed research, government evaluations, development partner reports, and civil society analyses. The findings indicate that the PDM aligns most strongly with structural barriers related to household identification, administrative coordination, and financial inclusion, particularly through parish-level planning and the Parish Revolving Fund. However, engagement with deeper constraints essential for sustained rural transformation remains partial. Limitations in institutional capacity, coordination, and local implementation further condition programme effectiveness, contributing to uneven outcomes across contexts. Overall, the review concludes that the PDM represents a meaningful but incomplete reform whose transformative potential depends on complementary investments beyond the parish level, particularly in extension systems, rural market integration, and climate resilience, if decentralised reforms are to translate into durable livelihood transitions.