Click here to go to the following issues:

Economic Aspects | Natural Resource Aspects | Institutional Aspects | Social Aspects |Kenya

ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN KENYA

Click here to go to these sections:

• International Cooperation
• Trade
• Changing Consumption Patterns
• Financing
• Technology
• Industry
• Transport
• Sustainable Tourism

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION 

No information is available.

* * *

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

TRADE 

No information is available.

* * *

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

CHANGING CONSUMPTION PATTERNS

No information is available.

* * *

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

FINANCING

Not yet. However, in 1994, a Finance Bill was tabled in Parliament allowing tax rebates on environmental conservation equipment importation.

Decision-Making: Legislation and Regulations 

No information available.

Decision-Making: Strategies, Policies and Plans  

No comprehensive analysis has been done in this regard.  However, the Ministry of Finance and Planning is reviewing its taxation policy and has invited all ministries to make submissions over possible areas of review. Environmental taxes will be reviewed then .

Not yet.  However, the investment particularly after the passing of the Environmental Management and Coordination Act to ensure that foreign direct investment meets certain Environmental Standards.  However, this will only be realised once the Environmental Management and Coordination Act is fully operational particularly after standards and guidelines have been developed.

Decision-Making: Major Groups Involvement  

No information available.

Programmes and Projects 

No information available.

Status 

The Government of Kenya has shifted its budget theme to wholly address poverty alleviation.  The process of linking resources within the overriding objective of poverty alleviation is now being addressed under the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and its financing mechanism – Mid Term Expenditure Frame (MTEF).

 1.      There is need to establish a national sustainable development commission.  This needs to be allocated funds to harmonise the uncoordinated national development agenda presently in place . The commission will also develop and monitor annual indicators for sustainable development.

 2.      The country development the National Environmental Action Plan in 1994 through a World Bank Grant.  Funds have not been available to implement it.  These need to be solicited for if any meaningful achievement is to be realised.

 3.      Due to the underdeveloped nature of  Environmental Economics, Accounting and Audit in Kenya, the integration of environmental concerns into planning has proved very elusive. Capacity building in this area is critical.  The budget as a tool for environmental management can be utilised only if adequate capacity in Environmental Economics  Accounting and Audit is built.

Challenges

No information available.

Capacity-building, Education, Training and Awareness-raising  

No information available.

Information

No information available.

Research and Technologies  

No information available.

Financing

No information available.

Cooperation

No information available.

* * * 

This information was provided by the Government of Kenya to the 9th Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. Last Update: November 2001.

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

TECHNOLOGY

No information is available

* * *

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

INDUSTRY

No information is available.

* * *

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

TRANSPORT

No information is available.

Decision-Making: Legislation and Regulations 

• Petroleum Act;
• Kenya Traffic Act;
•  Electric Power Act; and
•  Environmental Management & Co-ordination Act.
• Lower taxes on diesel and kerosene for transport and agricultural sectors and domestic lighting.  Higher taxes on gasoline to discourage wasteful and conspicuous consumption.
• Exemption of duty of solar panels.

Decision-Making: Strategies, Policies and Plans  

• Promotion of Renewable Energy exploration
• Promotion of energy conservation for various end-users
• Pre-investment Environment Impact Assessments

Kenya's short-term (2-3 years and long-term (5-10 years) goals concerning:

• Accelerating the share of Renewable energy sources in overall energy supply;
• Promoting Energy Conservation;
•  Thermal power generation through Independent Power Producers (IPPS); and
• Hydro and Geothermal resource development (Long-term).

Decision-Making: Major Groups Involvement  

No information is available.

Programmes and Projects 

No information is available.

Status 

No information is available.

Challenges

No information is available.

Capacity-building, Education, Training and Awareness-raising  

No information is available.

Information

No information is available.

Research and Technologies  

No information is available.

Financing

No information is available.

Cooperation

No information is available.

* * *

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |

SUSTAINABLE TOURISM

Kenya Wildlife Service

Decision-Making: Legislation and Regulations 

No information is available.

Decision-Making: Strategies, Policies and Plans  

KWS' mission is to conserve and manage the nation's wildlife resources.   In the recent past, KWS has identified three primary goals that must be met in order to effectively fulfill this mission.   One of these goals is: To promote sustainable nature tourism that will ensure maximum economic benefits to the nation while minimizing environmental and cultural damage .

The KWS land use and planning co-ordination study of 1995 recommended several policy proposals and strategies that can be considered essential for proper land use planning and co-ordination which is consistent with wildlife conservation.   Although KWS has not implemented all of these, it has made considerable headway in this direction.   The proposals and strategies are in the following seven areas presented below:

Land Tenure Regimes Policy

Realising the negative impact of subdivision and the subsequent developments of group ranches on wildlife conservation, and whilst appreciating that the general government policy is the registration of group ranches and other lands under communal use regimes into individual ownership, KWS should, with the assistance of other relevant GOK and NGO organization, find ways of discouraging subdivision of such lands that are major wildlife dispersal areas where the subdivision processes has not yet taken place.

• The general approach of achieving this should be guided by the need to improve the economic welfare of the landowners and should therefore include a process of negotiations and trade-offs.

• Appreciating that land subdivision has already taken place in some major dispersal areas, and that in some instances such subdivision has resulted to economically non viable individual parcels, KWS in collaboration with other GOK and NGO agencies should encourage a collective approach to the use of such areas.  The onus of demonstrating and proving the economic viability of multiple land usage in such areas will be on KWS.

• In realizing the importance of, and the threats posed to wetland areas, and appreciating the fact that there exists confusion on the property rights of most of Kenya's wetlands, and further, noting that KWS is the institution mandated to implement the Ramsar convention in Kenya, KWS should take a leading role in advocating for and directing conservation efforts for wetland areas of national and international importance.

In the short term, KWS should:

1. identify and zone key dispersal areas under group ranch and other communal management regimes;
2. initiate policy discussions at all levels on the impacts of subdivision to the sustainable utilization of marginal lands;
3. initiate negotiations with the landowners and other stakeholders on options other than subdivision of such lands under communal management regimes.   These options should include wildlife related enterprise development programs;
4. supplement (c) above with educating land owners on benefits of wildlife conservation through wildlife extension programmes;
5. strengthen land owners capacity to manage biodiversity through extension, research and wise use of wildlife resources;
6. strengthen grassroots institutional involvement in biodiversity conservation and utilization (e.g. local wildlife associations, NGOs, women's groups);
7. support enterprise development based on wildlife utilization in group ranches and on Trust Lands;
8. extend the base of its MoUs to include local communities, e.g. group ranches and other land owners;
9. at national level, initiate and support policy discussions on possible land use/management systems that encourage sharing of resources in pastoral areas;
10. support local initiatives in sharing resources between individual land owners in already subdivided former communal lands.

  In the medium and long term, KWS should:

a)    advocate, first for the formulation of a national land use planning and co-ordination policy with an adequate legal, financial and political support and second for the establishment of an independent Land Use Planning and Co-ordination body;

b)      streamline property rights over key wetlands by developing legal, policy and institutional instruments that define and control use and ownership of wetland areas;

 c)   initiate development of action plans that promote sustainable biodiversity conservation, based on land suitability; and

d)      strengthen linkage with other government bodies and NGOs involved in land based development activities.

 Expansion of Agriculture into Sensitive Ecosystems

Policy

• Appreciating that Kenya's human population will continue to grow at an ever increasing rate, and noting that a large proportion of the Kenyan people are dependent on agriculture for their subsistence, KWS recognizes that marginal lands now used by wildlife, will increasingly be under pressure from agriculture.   KWS should therefore develop strategic measures to counteract these threats.
•  
• KWS recognizes that lack of co-ordination in the implementation and enforcement of legal and policy instruments geared towards land use planning is lack of inter-governmental agency co-ordination.   Having realized this weakness, KWS should initiate dialogue with other relevant GOK departments and NGOs on the formation of a co-ordinating organ which will be charged with the task of coordinating land use planning and harmonizing the legislature on land tenure and land-use.

In the short-term KWS should:

        a.       identify and map out critical biodiversity areas threatened by agricultural expansion, noting the nature and degree of threat and proposing appropriate actions;

        b.      over and above (a), and in collaboration with other agencies should come up with land-use zones based on land suitability and potential, specifically elaborating on zones which should be used for multiple land uses which includes wildlife;

       c.       assist land  owners formulate local level land-use plans that highlight land-use options including wildlife utilization; and

       d.      advocate and assist in the promotion of alternative economic activities that reduce pressure on land including wildlife based enterprises.

In the medium and long term KWS should:

    a.   advocate for a co-ordinated land-use planning through the establishment of a National Land Use Co-ordinating body, by articulating the weaknesses and gaps within current land use policies and legislation;

    b.  Develop elaborate wildlife-livestock management measures especially around protected areas prone to pressure from livestock.  Such measures should develop rules and guidelines that spell out the rights and obligation of both KWS and the landowners.   The measures should strive to maintain good relationships between the two parties without antagonizing conservation goals to KWS;

    c.  Define the various livestock-wildlife land management regimes given differences in biophysical and socio-cultural and political set-up of the country; and

        d.  Design and promote ways of reducing costs from wildlife by increasing benefits from the same (e.g. wildlife utilization, support for better management of livestock).

Livestock-Wildlife Interface

• Acknowledging that the majority of wildlife is found in non-protected area, and realizing the ecological functions of pastoral land management system in the evolution, development and maintenance of savannah landscapes, and further, appreciating the function of some protected areas as the only dry season grazing and watering sources, KWS appreciates the role of trading-off as a public relations tool.  It should therefore explore modalities of allowing livestock limited access to some specific protected areas in some specified time of the year.

• Noting and accepting that wildlife is currently a menace and a cost to some landowners, KWS realizes the need to resolve wildlife-livestock conflicts.
• Recognizing the role played by wildlife conservation in the national economy, and the potential for economic gain from multiple use of pastoral lands, it is vital for KWS to establish mechanisms that ensure that wildlife is seen as a premium within the livestock economy of the country.   Only then will the two compete with crop agriculture based activities.

• It is the aim of the government to develop water resources especially in ASAL areas of the country.   This is bound to change the ASAL landscape drastically as water availability will change the potential of the land and consequently present new opportunities to land owners.   It is therefore imperative for KWS to generate ideas in the form of scenarios, to forestall these changes and use them as opportunities for enhancing wildlife value in these areas.

In the short term, KWS should:

    a.  develop elaborate wildlife-livestock management measures especially around protected areas prone to pressure from livestock.  Such measures should develop rules and guidelines that spell out the rights and obligation of both KWS and the landowners.   The measures should strive to maintain good relationships between the two parties without antagonizing conservation goals to KWS;

    b.      define the various livestock-wildlife land management regimes given differences in biophysical and socio-cultural and political set-up of the country; and

    c.       design and promote ways of reducing costs from wildlife by increasing benefits from the same (e.g. wildlife utilization, support for better management of livestock).

In the medium and long term KWS should:

    a.  endeavour to improve linkages with other organizations (GOK, NGOs) involved in the livestock sector.

 Biodiversity Conservation

Policy

    a.       KWS recognizes the broader values of certain areas/habitats that help in sustaining ecosystem processes necessary for recognized important biological assemblages, but which, in themselves, are not rich in biodiversity.

    b.      Recognizing that there is important biodiversity not represented in the protected areas system e.g. Kayas, and realizing that it is not always possible nor (sometimes) advisable to incorporate areas with such biodiversity in the PAS; KWS notes the need to nevertheless conserve such areas of high biodiversity.

    c.       KWS recognizes that there exists an untapped potential of indigenous knowledge (IK) for biodiversity conservation inherent in many rural communities.

    d.      Now that KWS embraces wildlife utilization, it should develop criteria for determining different levels of management and utilization in both protected and non-protected areas.

In the short term, KWS should:

    a.      acknowledge the value of and build upon indigenous knowledge in it community-based conservation programmes.   KWS should work with other institutions interested in the same e.g., the National Museums of Kenya to document and make use of IK.

 In the medium and long term, KWS should:

    a.       find ways of creating a 'radical' conservation category, i.e., community conservation area.   There should be an explicit assurance to the landowners that such areas are not under the mandates of KWS.  Benefits accruing from such areas should go directly to landowners.

Research and Monitoring

Policy

§         The KWS recognizes the complexity of the biodiversity-human nexus and appreciate that, these relationships are not fully understood especially the interplay between conservation and land related socio-economic activities in pastoral ecosystems.   To be able to plan for the future therefore, it is imperative that KWS develop some amount of predictive (simulation and modelling) capability in wildlife-human interactions.   KWS then must develop research, monitoring and planning capability to predict and to plan, especially for high value conservation areas.

  §         Noting the increasing role of land owners and other stake holders in the conservation of biodiversity in general and wildlife in particular, KWS should play a pivotal role in increasing local level planning and monitoring capability for biodiversity resources.  KWS should develop collaborative research, planning and monitoring programmes with bigger wildlife and livestock operations e.g. big ranches already having some research and planning activities.

 §         Recognizing that there is important biodiversity not represented in the protected areas, and noting the need to conserve such biodiversity, there is need to inventorize, plan for and continuously monitor these biodiversity, and human activities impacting on it.

In the short term KWS should:

    a.       ensure that the Research and Planning Department provides back-up for the Community Wildlife Services' (CWS) activities such as PRA, Community Action Planning, and wildlife utilization as currently the linkage between the two is weak;

    b.      in collaboration with other conservation agencies, e.g. IUCN and NMK create a database of biodiversity not represented in the protected areas system, noting its status and human activities affecting it.   Action plans should be developed and implemented for such biodiversity;

    c.       strengthen linkages with other national research institutions: (e.g.  KARI, NMK, KEMFRI, KEFRI); and

    d.      broaden scope of research to include issues on conservation outside the protected areas and adopt a holistic approach (as opposed to a species approach).

In the medium to long term KWS should:

    a.       develop/acquire specialized capability in land use planning and policy analysis, within which simulation/modelling using GIS and other decision support systems (DSS) such as ecosystem/population viability analysis will be applied; and

    b.        promote use of local people as barefoot researchers and planners in monitoring biodiversity through provision of resources and information to landowners for developing conservation strategies.

Marine Resources

Policy

§         Noting the high values of marine biodiversity, and realizing the serious threat posed to this resource by lack of, or poor land use planning especially in urban areas, KWS should seek ways of influencing development within the coastline especially in areas of high marine biodiversity.

  §         One of the greatest threats to marine resources is the over-harvesting in the reef areas that are also the areas rich in biodiversity.   Recognizing this, KWS advocates for sustainable exploitation of marine resources.

The KWS should:

    a.       articulate the need for integrated planning along the beaches especially in the development of tourism facilities to ensure such development does not impact negatively on the marine ecosystems.   In this regard KWS should forge partnerships with development and research oriented agencies such as Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KEMFRI) and the Coast Development Authority; and

    b.      forge partnerships with the local resource users, mainly the local fishermen, tourist operations, mangrove harvesters in order to establish sustainable use of marine resources.

Political Landscape

Policy

§         KWS should participate in relevant national and local policy debates touching on the issues of land its use.   KWS should articulate its interest while taking into consideration other stakeholder interests.

Decision-Making: Major Groups Involvement  

No information is available.

Programmes and Projects 

KWS has a forestry conservation programme.  It also manages the forests in WPAs.  In addition, there is an MOU with Forestry Department for the management and conservation of indigenous forest reserves.

KWS is charged with the conservation and management of the nation's wildlife resources.  This basically represents all the biodiversity that is contained in Kenya's wildlife protected areas that occupy about 8% of Kenya's total land area.

Status 

Livestock-Wildlife Interface

• Acknowledging that the majority of wildlife is found in non-protected area, and realizing the ecological functions of pastoral land management system in the evolution, development and maintenance of savannah landscapes, and further, appreciating the function of some protected areas as the only dry season grazing and watering sources, KWS appreciates the role of trading-off as a public relations tool.  It should therefore explore modalities of allowing livestock limited access to some specific protected areas in some specified time of the year.

• Noting and accepting that wildlife is currently a menace and a cost to some landowners, KWS realizes the need to resolve wildlife-livestock conflicts.

• Recognizing the role played by wildlife conservation in the national economy, and the potential for economic gain from multiple use of pastoral lands, it is vital for KWS to establish mechanisms that ensure that wildlife is seen as a premium within the livestock economy of the country.   Only then will the two compete with crop agriculture based activities

• It is the aim of the government to develop water resources especially in ASAL areas of the country.   This is bound to change the ASAL landscape drastically as water availability will change the potential of the land and consequently present new opportunities to land owners.   It is therefore imperative for KWS to generate ideas in the form of scenarios, to forestall these changes and use them as opportunities for enhancing wildlife value in these areas.

Find ways of creating a 'radical' conservation category, i.e., community conservation area.   There should be an explicit assurance to the landowners that such areas are not under the mandates of KWS.  Benefits accruing from such areas should go directly to landowners.

• Noting the increasing role of land owners and other stake holders in the conservation of biodiversity in general and wildlife in particular, KWS should play a pivotal role in increasing local level planning and monitoring capability for biodiversity resources.  KWS should develop collaborative research, planning and monitoring programmes with bigger wildlife and livestock operations e.g. big ranches already having some research and planning activities.

• Recognizing that there is important biodiversity not represented in the protected areas, and noting the need to conserve such biodiversity, there is need to inventorize, plan for and continuously monitor these biodiversity, and human activities impacting on it.

Challenges

According to a land use planning and co-ordination study conducted by KWS in 1995 "Overall, the results emanating from this study have established that there exists no comprehensive land use policy in Kenya.  Instead, there exists numerous policies and legislative statutes relating to land use and the environment that are: not integrated, highly sectoral and often conflicting, outdated and to a greater extent have not been enforced due to conflicting sectoral interests.  This has led to inadequate land use planning and co-ordination in the country".

Capacity-building, Education, Training and Awareness-raising  

No information is available.

Information

Acknowledge the value of and build upon indigenous knowledge in it community-based conservation programmes.   KWS should work with other institutions interested in the same e.g., the National Museums of Kenya to document and make use of IK.

According to a land use planning and co-ordination study conducted by KWS in 1995 "Overall, the results emanating from this study have established that there exists no comprehensive land use policy in Kenya.  Instead, there exists numerous policies and legislative statutes relating to land use and the environment that are: not integrated, highly sectoral and often conflicting, outdated and to a greater extent have not been enforced due to conflicting sectoral interests.  This has led to inadequate land use planning and co-ordination in the country".

Research and Technologies  

The KWS recognizes the complexity of the biodiversity-human nexus and appreciate that, these relationships are not fully understood especially the interplay between conservation and land related socio-economic activities in pastoral ecosystems.   To be able to plan for the future therefore, it is imperative that KWS develop some amount of predictive (simulation and modelling) capability in wildlife-human interactions.   KWS then must develop research, monitoring and planning capability to predict and to plan, especially for high value conservation areas.

In the short term KWS should:

a.       ensure that the Research and Planning Department provides back-up for the Community Wildlife Services' (CWS) activities such as PRA, Community Action Planning, and wildlife utilization as currently the linkage between the two is weak;

b.      in collaboration with other conservation agencies, e.g. IUCN and NMK create a database of biodiversity not represented in the protected areas system, noting its status and human activities affecting it.   Action plans should be developed and implemented for such biodiversity;

c.       strengthen linkages with other national research institutions: (e.g.  KARI, NMK, KEMFRI, KEFRI); and

d.      broaden scope of research to include issues on conservation outside the protected areas and adopt a holistic approach (as opposed to a species approach).

 In the medium to long term KWS should:  

a    develop/acquire specialized capability in land use planning and policy analysis, within which simulation/modelling using GIS and other decision support systems (DSS) such as ecosystem/population viability analysis will be applied; and

b.  promote use of local people as barefoot researchers and planners in monitoring biodiversity through provision of resources and information to landowners for developing concern

c.  Noting the high values of marine biodiversity, and realizing the serious threat posed to this resource by lack of, or poor land use planning especially in urban areas, KWS should seek ways of influencing development within the coastline especially in areas of high marine biodiversity.

d.  One of the greatest threats to marine resources is the over-harvesting in the reef areas that are also the areas rich in biodiversity.   Recognizing this, KWS advocates for sustainable exploitation of marine resources.

 The KWS should:

a.       articulate the need for integrated planning along the beaches especially in the development of tourism facilities to ensure such development does not impact negatively on the marine ecosystems.   In this regard KWS should forge partnerships with development and research oriented agencies such as Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KEMFRI) and the Coast Development Authority; and

b.      forge partnerships with the local resource users, mainly the local fishermen, tourist operations, mangrove harvesters in order to establish sustainable use of marine resources.

Financing

No information is available.

Cooperation

No information is available.

* * * 

This information was provided by the Government of Kenya to the 9th Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. Last Update: November 2001.

| Natural Resource Aspects | Institutional Aspects | Social Aspects |

| Kenya | All Countries | Home |