A Comprehensive Scoping and Assessment Study of

Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) Policies in Kenya

30 April 2014

BY

STEPHEN K. WAMBUGU

Commissioned by

The Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis

Network (FANRPAN)

2

Table of Contents

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………….....3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………….6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………….7

1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………….9

1.1 Definition of Climate Change and Climate Smart Agriculture…………………..9

1.2 About FARNPAN and this study………………………………………………..9

1.3 An Overview………………………………..……………………………………10

1.3.1 Land Issues……………………………………………..………….....10

1.3.2 Agriculture and food security issues in Kenya…………………….....11

1.4 Objectives……………………………………..………………………………….12

1.5 Methodology……………………………………………………..………………13

2.0 Farming systems and CSA Technologies and Practices…………………………………14

2.1 CSA Practices and technologies: Adoption and Implementation………...…..….14

2.2 Key CSA Policies and Institutions relevant to CSA in Kenya…………………..16

2.3 Key CSA Programmes and Projects Implemented in Kenya……………...…….16

2.4 Stakeholders in CSA activities………………………………...…………………19

2.4.1 Government ministries and departments……………..………………19

2.4.2 National and international NGOs…………………….………………21

2.4.3 Kenyan Private Sector Organization…………………………………22

2.4.4 International Development Agencies and Donors………………....…22

2.4.5 International and National Research Organizations………………….23

2.5 Reasons for Successful Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices………………..23

2.6 Constraints to Efficient Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices………....……..24

2.7 Opportunities in Implementation of CSA policies and Practices…………….…..28

2.8 Drivers for Successful Adoption…………………...…………………………….29

3.0 CSA Policy framework in the country………………………..………………………….29

3.1 Effectiveness of CSA Activities and Policies…………………………..………..30

3.2 Impact of CSA Practices and Policies on Gender Equity and Social Equity…....30

4.0 Conclusions and recommendations…………...………………………………………….32

4.1 Key Challenges to Implementation of CSA in Kenya………...……………..…..32

4.2 Untapped Opportunities……………….....………………………………………33

4.3 Recommendations…………………..……………………………………………34

REFERENCES…………………………………………...………………………………….36

5.0 Annexes…………………………………………………………………………………..37

Annex 1 National CC Blue Prints…………………………………………………….….37

Annex 2 Descriptive Summary of CSA Related Policies, Programmes and Activities….40

Other CC Related Policies and Blue Prints………………………...…………………….41

Annex 3 Institutions and Stakeholders Consulted during the Study……………………..45

3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ALFFA: Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Food Authority

ASALs: Arid and Semi-Arid Lands

ASARECA: Association for strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and

Central Africa

ASCU: Agricultural Sector Coordination Unit

ASDSP: Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme

AU: African Union

CAADP: Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

CCAFS: Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security

CCU: Climate Change Unit

CDM: Clean Development Mechanisms

CIAT: International Center for Tropical Agriculture

COMESA: Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

CSA: Climate Smart Agriculture

DFID: Department for Foreign International Development

DNA: Designated National Authority

DRSRS: Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing

EAC: East Africa Community

EMCA: Environmental Management and Coordination Act

ESP: Economic Stimulus Project

FANRPAN: Food Agriculture and Natural Resource Policy Analysis Network

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations

FITs: Feed in Tariff

GHG: Green House Gases

GIZ: German Society for International Cooperation

ICIPE: International Centre for Insect Physiology and Ecology

4

ICRAF: World Agro-forestry Centre

IDRC: International Development Research Consortium

IFAD: International Fund for Agriculture and Development

IFPRI: International Food Policy Research Institute

ILRI: International Livestock Research Institute

IPAR: Institute of Policy analysis and Research

KACCAL: Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change in Arid Lands

KARLO: Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization

KEFRI: Kenya Forestry Research Institute

KENFAP: Kenya National Federation of Agricultural Producers

KEPHIS Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service

KIPPRA Kenya Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis

KMD: Kenya Meteorological Department

MDGs: Millennium Development Goals

MoALF: Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries

MTP: Medium Term Plan

MTIP: Medium Term Investment Plan

MEWNR: Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources

NAAIAP: National Accelerated Agricultural Input Access Programme

NAMAs: National Appropriate Mitigation Actions

NAPs: National Adaptation Plans

NCCAP: National Climate Change Action Plan

NCCRS: National Climate Change Response Strategy

NDMA: National Drought Management Authority

NDMP: National Disaster and Management Policy

NEAP: National Environment Action Plan

NEMA: National Environment Management Authority

5

NEPAD: New Partnership for Africa's Development

NGO: Non-Governmental Organization

NIB: National Irrigation Board

NIE: National Implementing Entity

NLP: National Land Policy

NSWCP: National Soil and Water Conservation Project

PACJA: Pan African Climate Justice Alliance

RECs Regional Economic Communities

ReSAKSS: Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System

SIDA: Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency

UN: United Nations

UNDP: United Nations Development Programme

UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

YEF: Youth Enterprise Fund

6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

FANRPAN wishes to thank everyone who contributed to the preparation of this report either

by setting aside time for interviews or consultations at all stages of this assignment. This

includes staff of the institutions mentioned in the Appendix 3, Kenyatta University

Consultants (Dr. Stephen Wambugu, Mr. James Wanjaiya and Ms. Jane Chege),

Development Partner Organizations, participants in the validation workshop, Farmer

Organizations, Non-Governmental Organizations and Research Institutions. Their

contributions were invaluable.

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The overall aim of this study was to review the CSA policies in Kenya with a view to

assessing their performance. The study also sought to analyze the existing policy frameworks

and to offer policy recommendations to ensure that CSA policies are improved in terms of

relevance, equity and effectiveness.

The study found out that Kenya has no explicit CSA policies. However, there are a number of

national blueprints addressing CC issues in addition to a multiplicity of related bills and

policies. These include: NCCRS (2010), NCCAP (2013-2017), Kenya CC Authority Bill

(2012), The Kenya Vision 2030, The National Policy for Sustainable Development of

Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands (2013), EMCA (1999), Second NEAP (2009-2013),

Draft catchment management policy, Draft National Environment Policy 2012, NLP, Energy

policy 2004 and Energy Act 2006, Draft Energy Policy 2012, Draft National Water Policy

2012, The irrigation Act Cap 345, NDMP 2012 and the Integrated National Transport policy

(INTP) 2010.

The study also identified a number of development and research programs pertinent to CSA.

These include inter alia Fisheries Project,NAAIAP, Index based livestock insurance project

in northern Kenya, KACCAL Project, Kenya Agricultural Carbon Market Programme,

Strengthening capacity for CC Adaptation in Land and Water management Project,

Agricultural productivity and climatic change in the arid and semi-arid lands of Ijara, Trans

Mara and Tana delta Project, Green houses pilot project under CAADP, Promotion of

traditional high value crops, Promotion of livelihood diversification, Research into and

dissemination of superior drought, salt, pest and disease resistant crops, Biogas projects, Agro

forestry projects and Construction of dams.

A number of institutions and stakeholders are involved in activities related to CSA. These

include: MWEMR, Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, KARI, NIB, KIPPRA, Tegemeo

Institute of Agricultural Policy and Development, Kenya CC Working Group, CARE Kenya,

PACJA and KENFAP.

After holding interviews and discussions with key CSA stakeholders in the country the study

found out that the effectiveness and impact (especially on gender and social equity) of

policies pertinent to CSA face a number of challenges chief among them being: Inadequate

funds for rapid expansion of area covered by the activities, Shortage of water to expand area

under irrigation, Limited alternative options for livelihood for forest and rangeland

communities who suffer most from the impacts of CC; Disease challenges especially after

expanding irrigation, Markets for surplus produce, Social issues especially when introducing

crop agriculture among pastoralists, Inappropriate technologies for adoption and their high

costs especially for small holder farmers, Poor knowledge on CC and CSA; There is Limited

understanding on the amount of global funding and opportunities available and how it can be

accessed. Currently it is difficult to identify and track the total amount of money coming into

Kenya for CC related activities and what activities they are being applied to, Low and slow

participation by the private sector, High costs of change into new production systems and

technologies, Misconception that CSA is an environmental issue and Cost of Implementation

of the laid out policy actions is high (compare cost of adaptation and implementation with the

government budgetary allocation).

8

The study noted a number of interventions that are necessary to enhance CSA policies and

activities. These include: Data surveys and analyses to establish the requirements of the target

groups in the country and identifying the resulting priority requirements into the CSA

policies and activities, Continued research to develop appropriate low cost technologies to

address the requirements, Continued capacity building among the target groups and the state

actors to ensure the technologies are passed on, Appropriate design and mainstreaming CSA

policies and activities in all programmes, Investment in weather information systems and

capacity building to strengthen the KMD to enhance disaster preparedness and reliable

information synthesis and predictions, Central CC Projects/ activities and provision of funds

for employment, tracking, monitoring and impact assessments and communications,

Streamlining and designing additional finance mechanisms to support climate smart

agriculture, Combine climate adaptation, mitigation measures and sustainable agriculture and

food security goals, Improve on monitoring impact measurement, reporting and result

demonstration to ensure continuous funding for climate smart agriculture.

The study arrived at the following conclusions and recommendations aimed at enhancing

CSA policies and activities in Kenya.

Policy makers should harmonize and bring together the various scattered CSA related

policies, projects and programmes into one which is comprehensive and accessible by

all stakeholders.

Governments and policy makers should craft county specific CSA policies that can

help farmers cope with the adverse effects of CC. Farmers need policies that remove

obstacles to implementing CSA and create synergies with alternative technologies and

practices.

Apart from (ii) above, governments and policy makers should promote and

disseminate policies that promote CSA which integrates food security, CC adaptation

and mitigation.

Governments and policy makers should also adopt a multi-sectoral approach in

drafting CSA policies in order to effectively tackle the impact of CC on food systems

and NR management

Governments and policy makers should promote financial incentives that encourage

CSA. Considerable policy support and capacity enhancement is needed for climate

risk management including insurance and safety nets as well as improved access to

weather information adapted to farmers needs.

They should also encourage research and dissemination of the best ways of helping

farmers reduce GHG emissions and consequently adapt to CC.

At the national and county levels, agriculture should be at the centre stage of CC

agenda, negotiations and discussions.

9

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Definition of Climate Change and Climate Smart Agriculture

According to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),

Climate Change means an alteration of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to

human activity that changes the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in

addition to natural climate variability is observable over considerable time periods. Climate

Change is considered one of the most serious threats to sustainable development globally.

Studies have shown that about 90 percent of all natural disasters afflicting the world are

related to severe weather and extreme climate events. Impacts of climate change are felt

globally in many sectors such as environment, human health, food security, physical

infrastructure, etc. However, agriculture and food security are the hardest hit sectors. This is

particularly so in Sub-Saharan Africa where majority of the population depend on agriculture

(mostly rain-fed) as a means of livelihood. Adopting the FAO definition, Climate Smart

Agriculture (CSA) is agriculture that sustainably increases productivity, resilience

(adaptation), reduces/removes greenhouse gases (mitigation), and enhances achievement of

national food security and development goals. CSA promotes agricultural best practices,

particularly integrated crop management, conservation agriculture, intercropping, improved

seeds and fertilizer management practices, as well as supporting increased investment in

agricultural research. CSA encourages the use of all available and applicable climate change

solutions in a pragmatic and impact-focused manner. While resilience is key, CSA is broader

and calls for more innovation and pro-activeness in changing the way farming is done in

order to adapt and mitigate, while sustainably increasing productivity. CSA practices propose

the transformation of agricultural policies and agricultural systems to increase food

productivity and enhance food security, while preserving the environment and ensuring

resilience to a changing climate.

1.2 About FARNPAN and this Study

The Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN) is a

regional multi-stakeholder policy research and advocacy network that has an Africa-wide

mandate with physical presence in 17 countries. FANRPAN works across five thematic

areas; 1) Food systems, 2) Agriculture productivity and markets, 3) Natural resources,

environment and climate change, 4) Social protection and livelihoods and 5) Institutional

strengthening, and capacity building.

FANRPAN is implementing a number of climate smart agriculture (CSA) projects, and the

overall objective is to increase agricultural productivity and strengthen the resilience of

vulnerable smallholder farmers to the impact of climate change. FANRPAN CSA

programme currently covers 16 member countries: Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic

of the Congo, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia,

South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Under the programme,

FANRPAN sought to conduct a comprehensive review of the existing CSA policy context in

each country, analyse gaps in the existing policy frameworks, identify relevant policy

recommendations, and develop and share policy recommendations at national and regional

levels. As part of the project activities, FANRPAN commissioned CSA scoping studies on

existing national policy frameworks and analysis of policy gaps in these 16 African countries,

including Kenya.

10

1.3 An Overview of Land, Agriculture, and Food Security Issues in Kenya.

1.3.1 Land Issues in Kenya

Land is a key resource for the people of Kenya. It is both the basis of livelihoods for the vast

majority of rural Kenyans and the foundation of economic development for the country. As a

result, managing land sustainably and in an equitable manner is critical for livelihood

security, peace and development. It is difficult to exhaustively cover the issues surrounding

land but according to NLP (2007) the key issues on land revolve around the following:

Land tenure issues: Currently, the categories of land tenure in Kenya are

government land, trust land, and private land. The tenure system has emphasized

individual ownership of land at the expense of communal or group rights. In the

process, traditional systems and institutions of land management have been

weakened and their effectiveness undermined, leading to uncertainty about land

rights especially among pastoral communities. Successive governments have

failed to secure government land and trust land against abuse.

Land use management issues: Land use challenges have increased in both urban

and rural areas as a result of rapid urbanization, inadequate land use planning,

unsustainable production methods and poor environmental management.

Land administration issues: These issues include actions to improve the existing

land administration system which is bureaucratic, expensive, undemocratic

and prone to abuse, resulting in long delays and hardship to landowners.

The land rights delivery system is concerned with creating certainty in

land transactions and rights through ascertainment and registration. It has not

been efficient, cost effective or affordable

Land issues that require special intervention: These include inter alia: Historical

injustices that cover grievances dating back to colonial times and arising from

mass disinheritance of communities of their land, Pastoral land issues, Coastal

land issues, Land rights of vulnerable groups, Settlement of refugees and

Internally Displaced Persons, Informal settlements, Land rights of minority

communities and disaster management.

Cross cutting land issues requiring special intervention: These include poverty,

HIV/AIDS, youth and gender.

Issues pertaining to the existing institutional framework: These issues revolve

around setting up the framework for implementation of the National Land Policy,

capacity building for ministerial staff and mobilisation of financial resources for

implementation of the policy.

11

1.3.2 Agriculture and Food Security Issues in Kenya

It is difficult to make generalizations about the issues of agricultural development and

national food security over such a heterogeneous country such as Kenya, but according to

ASCU (2005) certain challenges stand out. These include:

High costs of doing business: The expense and risk of doing business in the

country has slowed the growth of private sector investment in key sectors,

particularly agricultural production, storage, transport, processing and marketing.

A World Bank study found out that poor roads and inadequate transport and other

infrastructure, non-tariff barriers and complex, inconsistent policies and

regulations contribute to high transport and marketing costs. (World Bank Group,

2010).

Barriers to intra-regional trade: Residual tariffs, unpredictable export and import

restrictions, and a wide range of non-tariff barriers keep the volume of intra-

regional trade, particularly in staple crops, well below its potential. East African

governments, through their RECs, have committed themselves to regional

integration as a broad policy agenda, opening up free trade areas and more

efficient common markets. Much remains to be done to implement harmonized

policies and regulations, improve the infrastructure, and build the support services

to make this vision of regional integration a reality.

Low productivity and inadequate access to markets: Agriculture, which employs

the majority of the national workforce, suffers from low productivity. Yields are

low, sometimes as much as 70 percent below global best practice, and post-

harvest losses are estimated at $8/ton (large scale farmers) to $15/ton for the small

scale farmers (World Bank, AFTAR, 2009). Many smallholder farmers,

particularly women, do not have secure tenure rights, and rapid population growth

puts constant pressure on the land and other available resources. Many farmers

lack access to improved crop varieties, seeds, fertilizers as well as crop, soil, water

and animal management practices that have proved their worth in many African

trials, and which have transformed agriculture in other parts of the world, most

recently in Asia under the Asian Green Revolution. Successful examples of

African Agricultural Research and Development have been documented in

different environments, but the scope and scale of the impact of most of them

have been relatively small (Haggblade and Hazel, 2010). The scaling up of

successes has been slow, in large part because the markets accessible to most

smallholder farmers are small, fragmented and risky. Reliable information is not

widely available about prices in wider markets, or about the grades and quality

standards they demand. Investments by smallholder farmers in increased output

and quality are very risky and uncertain-effective incentives are low.

Low competitiveness: For the reasons outlined above, the competitiveness of

Kenyan-grown staple food commodities in regional markets are low.

High rates of poverty and malnutrition: Across the country, poverty rates are high,

and the country is not on track to achieve the MDG goal of halving poverty by

2015. Malnutrition rates according to the standard metrics of underweight,

stunting and wasting are also very high. Causal factors include inadequate access

to food linked to low incomes and poverty, exacerbated by large family sizes and

12

closely spaced births, as well as cultural practices that affect the utilization of

food, particularly by children under two years of age and their mothers.

Micronutrient malnutrition rates are very high, with significant adverse impact on

the growth and development of young children.

Chronic food insecurity and emergency food assistance: Food insecurity plagues

much of the country. Emergency food assistance has become a common

phenomenon in the arid regions of Kenya. (ReSAKSS, 2011). Ironically, many

areas of food surplus lie adjacent to areas of food deficit, but for precisely the

challenges listed above- low productivity, lack of secure land rights, high costs of

doing business, low competitiveness and barriers to intra-regional trade- food does

not move efficiently or reliably from surplus areas to deficit areas, limiting the

potential market-based response to national food insecurity.

Gender inequalities: In Kenya, as in most of the African continent, women

provide approximately 70 percent of the agricultural labour, 90 percent of the

hoeing and weeding work, 60 percent of harvesting and marketing activities, 80

percent of food storage and transport from farm to village, as well as 90 percent of

household water and fuel wood and nearly 100 percent of household food

preparation, (ASARECA, 2009). Nevertheless they have little control over farm

decision-making bodies. Specific gender-based constraints to increased

productivity of women farmers include insecurity of tenure and access to

resources, low levels of literacy, limited resources to purchase inputs, and social

restrictions on meeting with extension agents and accessing other sources of

information. Women traders and other businesswomen face difficulties obtaining

permits, financing and services, (Rubin et al, 2009).

Variability and heterogeneity across the country: Kenya is not a homogenous

region, and single, one size-fits-all interventions will not achieve the impact. The

percentage of the population living on less than $1.25/day ranges from a low of 20

percent in some areas of Kenya to close to 80 percent in some other areas.

(ReSAKSS, 2011). Agro-ecological zones form a complex patchwork of high and

low potential areas, including productive highlands, broad savannas, sparsely

populated arid and semi-arid lands, and rapidly developing urban centres. In

almost any given year, some areas in much of the country are food secure and

generate food surpluses for sale, while other areas suffer moderate to severe

shortages. Year-to-year fluctuations in rainfall over short distances mean that

these patterns are highly variable in time and location. Both the frequency and the

amplitude of variation in food security, supplies, and prices in local areas are very

likely to increase even more as a result of global CC.

1.4 Objectives of the Study.

This study was guided by the following objectives:

To conduct a comprehensive review of the existing CSA policy context in Kenya.

To analyze data and identify gaps in the existing policy frameworks,

To come up with relevant policy recommendations,

13

To develop and share policy recommendations (briefs) at national and regional levels.

The study identified the next steps necessary to entrench CSA practices in agriculture in the

country and the region as a whole by documenting:

i) What is known on CSA and what gaps based on national, regional and international CSA

literature exist,

ii) The existing current CSA related policies in the country (including environmental

policies, water policies, agricultural policies, land policies and developmental policies),

iii) The current ongoing CSA development and research programme initiatives in the

Country,

iv) The national CSA institutional arrangements, and how the different stakeholders are

involved,

v) The performance of the current CSA policies and their major gaps,

vi) The necessary information and actions needed to ensure that CSA policies are improved

in terms of relevance, equity and effectiveness.

1.5 Methodology

The data and information pertinent to this study were collected through a highly consultative

process in the months of October 2013 to the month of February 2014. The methods used

included the following:

i) Review of Pertinent Literature: The Consultants reviewed Policies, Strategies,

programmes/projects plans, documents and reports obtained from respondent institutions

and ministries. These documents were reviewed over the entire period of the study and

key issues identified for further study and consideration. Information from the review also

informed the development of the data collection tool (questionnaire).

ii) Use of a Discussion Guide: A checklist was developed for purposes of collection and

standardization of interviews and discussions with key informants. These were held with

ministry officials and other stakeholders with a view to finding out their individual and

institutional knowledge on CSA and the institutional, policy and legal set up put in place

to implement CC Activities. The interview questions were developed in line with those

given in the ToR by FANRPAN in order to standardize the research outputs from the

various countries. In general the discussions revolved around identification of the

following:

Key CSA policies and Acts in the country and when such policies were developed

and became operational or effective,

Who the main stakeholders are and how they are involved in CSA activities, and

how such activities are initiated,

How effective the activities have been in meeting CSA criteria requirements,

The impact of such policies and activities on gender and on social equality,

What key challenges have been experienced in implementing CSA activities,

What opportunities remain untapped and how these can be tapped.

14

iii) Use of the Internet: Internet searches were also carried out to enrich the information

collected and to provide more data and literature. Websites with relevant information on

CSA were visited and pertinent information retrieved.

While the review of relevant literature was conducted continuously even after the submission

of the first draft of this report, interviews with stakeholders were conducted in the period

between November 2013 and February 2014 where a total number of 25 individuals from 15

different organizations (annex 3) were interviewed.

2.0 FARMING SYSTEMS AND CSA TECHNOLOGIES AND PRACTICES.

Farming Systems in Kenya fall under four distinct categories:

a) Small scale mixed farming: Kenya’s agriculture is predominantly small-scale farming,

mainly in the high and medium potential (rainfall) areas. The sector accounts for 75% of the

total agricultural output and 70% of the marketed agricultural produce.

b) Large scale farming is rapidly dying out except for the horticultural sector where large

scale farms are converting from rain-fed production of coffee, grains and livestock to

intensive horticultural production especially under greenhouse conditions. These farms

account for over 80% of the exported horticultural produce.

c) Pastoralism is the main production system in the arid zone. Farmer produces cattle, goats,

sheep and camels. They experience droughts, water shortages and high livestock mortality

due to rain failure in approximately 3 out of five years.

d) Irrigation farming: Production under irrigation is a relatively limited system only used in

a few areas. It is mainly developed in the form of schemes and large-scale irrigation of crops

like rice, coffee, floriculture, pineapples and other horticultural crops. Large commercial

farms account for over 40% of irrigated land, while the smallholder farmers and government

managed schemes account for 42% and 18% of irrigated land respectively, (MTIP 2012-17,

Farm Management Hand Book of Kenya, 2012).

2.1 CSA Practices and Technologies: Adoption and Implementation.

Kenya ratified the United Nation Framework Convention on CC in 1994 as well as the Kyoto

Protocol in 2005. It is a signatory to the major regional and international CC policies and

agreements thereby signifying her determination to join the international community in

combating the problem of CC. At the national level efforts have been made to address CC

and its impact. CCUs have been established in Government ministries to ensure

implementation of CC mitigation activities. Research programmes have also been established

to develop response measures. In the field of agriculture the research response measures have

focused on development of new crop varieties resistant to drought and new technologies for

increasing productivity in the face of deteriorating growing conditions. Programmes for the

promotion of productivity increases and provision of funds have also been instituted. These

have cushioned the affected populations against the impact of declining rainfall trends or the

increasing frequency of flash floods.

Kenya has been integrating climate considerations into various legal and governance

instruments for some time. Notably, there has been progress made in planning and

15

implementing policies, projects, and programmes in key economic sectors in order to align

Kenya with the international community’s approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions

and promoting climate resilience. It is with regard to the above that the Kenyan government

has put in place policies to revitalize the agriculture sector, and which should cushion the

sector against vagaries of CC.

Kenya has developed and promoted some response measures though these have not been

coordinated between sectors. This has resulted in duplication of effort and less than optimal

utilization of resources. For instance the Department of Forestry has promoted planting of

trees in the forest zones while the MoALF has promoted planting of farm forestry trees and

fuel wood lots. However these efforts have not been linked to the carbon credit program nor

have they covered hill areas that are not classified as private land or forest zones. It is on such

land where most of the land destruction activities such as cutting of vegetative cover and

overgrazing takes place and flood waters pick speed and gain destructive force. Programmes

have also been promoted with the single idea of attaining one result without linking it to the

resultant economic gains that would be associated with attainment of its objectives. For

example the nationwide soil and water conservation programme promoted the establishment

of physical barriers to soil erosion on sloping grounds (terracing) and planting of trees on

such terraces. Little effort was made to select appropriate crops and cropping patterns or tree

types on such terraced land. In the final analysis it became more of a landscaping exercise

than an agronomic practice. In another example pastoralists with large herds were encouraged

to reduce their herd sizes without a corresponding programme to promote other production

systems that increase productivity and incomes for the pastoralists. The pastoralists have

tended to go back to their old production systems.

Other efforts promoted by government include interalia:

Rehabilitation and protection of indigenous forests in the five water towers or highlands,

Promotion of traditional high value crops. Apart from being a traditional CSA

programme, the promotion of high value crops is also being done for health reasons.

Promotion of livelihood diversification: This encompasses agricultural practices such as

beekeeping and honey production and awareness campaigns of the importance of

balancing stocking rates with the available land resources as a way of ensuring

sustainable Pastoralism.

Research into and dissemination of superior drought, salt, pest and disease resistant crops:

This is being implemented and popularized by KARI, NGOs and other research

organizations.

Biogas projects: These are being implemented by a number of research and

developmental organizations such as GIZ for proper management of agricultural waste

and for renewable energy generation.

Agro forestry projects: These are being implemented by a number of organizations such

as the Ministry of Environment, MoALF, KEFRI, a number of NGOs, etc.

Construction of dams: Big and small dams with linings for water harvesting are being

constructed especially in the arid and semi-arid areas by the Ministry of Water and

Irrigation, research organizations, NGOs, etc.

Promotion of appropriate use of mechanization,

Promotion of irrigated agriculture, tree crops and farm forestry,

Promotion of soil and water conservation,

Training, research and development of new technologies

Financing and funding of programmes and projects and also funding provision of credit,

16

Provision of irrigation and activity designs to promote appropriate use of inputs and

funds,

Development of operational guidelines in irrigation in order to promote participation of

all stakeholders and appropriate use of the irrigation facilities.

Promotion of appropriate range management practices and livestock marketing to reduce

negative impacts of Pastoralism and drought on livestock production.

The promotion and use of improved planting seeds and materials.

Research for development of improved seeds and technologies.

Provision of quality extension services.

Provision of funds for credit to producers,

Provision of processing and marketing services,

Promotion of farm forestry,

Promotion of water harvesting either by appropriate agronomic practices such as storage

in lined dams and conveyance systems,

Promotion of alternative farm enterprises by diversification into pond fishing, keeping of

quails, guinea fowls and ostriches, beekeeping, agro forestry, fodder and hay production,

etc.

Promotion of soil and water conservation practices.

The programmes may also include introduction of new enterprises, crops, livestock or

irrigation.

The CSA activities and technologies would be integrated during the research stages and in the

design or implementation of the above programmes. This made them climate smart in terms

of adaptation, mitigation and focus on household and national food security. For instance the

NSWCP promoted the digging of bench terraces on sloppy ground, planting of fodder trees

and grasses on the benches and planting of improved crops and keeping of high yielding

livestock to utilize the fodder.

2.2 Key CSA policies and institutions relevant to CSA in Kenya

The key CSA related policies and institutions in the country are: Draft National Irrigation

Policy; NEMA-Greenhouse gas emissions management policy which is trans-boundary;

Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources: Water Resources Management

Authority (WARMA), Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries and Ministry of East

African Cooperation, Tourism and Trade. Others are aligned with the region and regional

bodies like Tana and Athi Rivers Development Authority (TARDA), Kerio Valley

Development Authority (KVDA), Lake Basin Development Authority (LBDA), and the

Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA) which has CSA component in the tea sector.

2.3 Key CSA Programmes and Projects Implemented in Kenya.

There are several CC research and development projects in the country that are implemented

by different stakeholders both governmental and nongovernmental. However, there is no

coordination whatsoever. No comprehensive information exists on the number projects

formulated and the level of funding undertaken, actual expenditures, nature of projects, the

extent to which these projects are informed by research/ scientific findings, implementation

area and other details. There is need for a coordination centre countrywide to avoid

unnecessary overlaps, duplication and ensure optimal coverage. The following represent just

but examples of the many CSA programmes that are under implementation in Kenya:

17

Fisheries Project: this project aims at increasing fish production among the small holder

areas by assisting the farmers and especially the youths to develop fish ponds, harvest

water from runoff or rivers and provides them with fingerlings and feeds. The

government produces the fingerling stocks from fisheries research centers while the

private sector manufacturers the feeds. The producers receive training on fish production,

consumption and marketing. They then continue on their own. This has resulted in

increases in fish on the market even in non-traditional fishing areas. Funds for this project

are availed through the ESP and the YEF.

National Accelerated Agricultural Input Access Programme (NAAIAP) is promoting

the use of fertilizers and quality seed among food deficit farmers. Each farmer receives

50kg of planting fertilizer, 50kg top dressing fertilizer and 10kg hybrid seed. They are

expected to obtain high yields and therefore open up less land for crop production. Other

farmers under the same programme receive improved planting cassava and sweet potato

cuttings. In the case of fisheries the farmers receive assistance in the development and

stocking of fishponds and purchase of feeds for the fish. Under the NAAIAP and fisheries

programmes the farmers also get access to credit through local banks with funding

leveraged by government. These are clear CSA projects aimed at improving food

security.

Index based livestock insurance project in northern Kenya: This project is being

implemented in collaboration with some commercial partners which include; Equity Bank

of Kenya, UAP Insurance and Swiss-Re. The project provides livestock insurance to over

2000 households in Marsabit Sub County to help livestock herders sustain their livestock-

dependent livelihoods during drought. The project was initiated by ILRI in collaboration

with partners from Cornell University, the BASIS I4 project at the University of

California – Davis and Syracuse University. The program uses satellite imagery to

determine and predict potential losses of livestock forage and issue insurance payouts to

participating members when incidences of drought occur. Being first-of-its-kind initiative

in Africa the project is said to hold enormous potential for benefitting livestock keepers in

the region and across the continent. The impact of this pilot project is currently under

assessment to find out its benefits before it can be scaled up to other sub counties in the

country.

Kenya Adaptation to CC in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (KACCAL) Project: This is a

World Bank designed project aimed at improving the ability of participating sub counties

and communities in the arid and semi-arid lands to plan and implement CC adaptation

measures.

Kenya Agricultural Carbon Market Programme: This is being implemented in Western

Kenya and parts of the Rift Valley with assistance from the World Bank. It is aimed at

facilitating farmers to adopt sustainable land management practices.

Strengthening capacity for CC Adaptation in Land and Water management Project:

Implemented by KALRO (formerly KARI) and covering approximately 12,000

households, the project is funded by SIDA and the Kenyan government. The project

objective is to reduce the impact of CC and variability on smallholder agriculture through

sustainable land and water management technologies and contribute to improvement of

food security and ecosystem resilience in the selected watersheds and sub counties of

Kenya. The project promotes livelihood strategic practices that will enhance carbon

18

storage, ecosystem resilience and sustainable livelihood options. These include; crop

diversification, adoption of drought tolerant crop varieties, traditional high value crops,

minimum tillage, water harvesting and conservation among others.

Agricultural productivity and climatic change in the arid and semi-arid lands of Ijara,

Trans Mara and Tana delta Project: This is a research project funded by IDRC and the

Kenya government. The project is implemented by KARLO in partnership with

KENFAP, KMD, Moi University, MoALF and MEWNR. The objectives are to: (i)

Assess and document climatic risks and vulnerabilities of the communities and agro-

systems and establish coping strategies in the project area; (ii) Identify, pilot-test

innovations/options/strategies that would work best through participatory approaches; (iii)

Develop information sharing initiatives on CC and variability and best bet adaptation

strategies; (iv) Build capacity of KARLO scientists and stakeholders to address

challenges of CC and variability; (v) Inform and influence the CC adaptation

policy/decision-making process through scientific action research based results.

Green houses pilot project under the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development

Programme (CAADP): The programme was launched by NEPAD. The Green Houses

pilot project” in Kwale, Kakamega and Trans Nzoia counties supported by COMESA CC

Initiative.

The Vi Carbon Project: This is a carbon credit project in Siaya County of Kenya

implemented by the WB.

Sustainable Agriculture for Rural Development (SARD): This is a project designed to

introduce Conservation Agriculture as a relatively new agricultural technology to smallholder

farming systems in selected districts of Kenya and Tanzania with the aim of raising agricultural

productivity and using scarce natural resources in a more sustainable and efficient way. The

project promotes of Conservation Agriculture with three key principles: i) minimum soil

disturbance, ii) soil cover (with mulch, or cover crops, preferably legumes) and iii) crop rotation or

association. It also support to farmer groups via Farmer Field Schools (FFS).

The Sustainable Intensification of Maize Legume systems for food Security in Eastern

and South Africa (SIMLESA). The program is a collaboration between the national

agricultural systems in Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, and Tanzania, and the

International Center for the Improvement of Maize and Wheat (CIMMYT), the International

Center for Research in the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), the Association for Strengthening

Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA), the Queensland Alliance

for Agriculture and Food Innovation - University of Queensland (QAAFI-UQ), Murdoch

University, the Agricultural Research Council (ARC), and the Australian Government via the

Australian Center for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR). Through participatory

research and development with farmers, extension agencies, non-governmental organizations,

universities, and agribusinesses along the value chain, the program aims to improve maize

and legume productivity by 30 percent and to reduce the expected downside yield risk by 30

percent on approximately 500,000 farms within ten years

Africa Climate-Smart Agriculture Alliance: this is a project designed to support the

rapid scaling-up of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) across Africa, through the

collaborative efforts and practical, on-the-ground experience of Alliance members in

agricultural research and implementation. The Alliance aims to support the uptake of

CSA practices and approaches by at least 6 million farming households by 2021,

contributing to the African Union’s broader goal of supporting 25 million farm

19

households by 2025. It is comprised of 10 core members representing government,

research institutes and civil society organizations. The New Partnership for Africa’s

Development (NEPAD), via the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development

Program (CAADP), is the convener of the Alliance, which will directly support

CAADP’s goals of increased agricultural performance and inclusive socioeconomic

development. Five INGO partners serve as the core implementing agencies for the

Alliance: CARE, Catholic Relief Services, Concern Worldwide, Oxfam and World

Vision. Two technical partners are represented by the Food and Agricultural Organization

(FAO) and the African policy and advocacy NGO known as the Food, Agriculture and

Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN)

Galana-Kulalu Project; A million-acre irrigation project by the government worth

Ksh250 billion ($2.9 billion) in Galana/ Kulalu in Hola to improve food security in the

country. The scheme is expected to unlock the potential of the country’s arid and semi-

arid lands, bringing 500,000 acres under maize and adding 40 million bags to the annual

maize harvest effectively doubling the country’s maize production. Other crops and

enterprises will be sugarcane, beef ranching, dairy farming, fruit, vegetables and flower

farming.

Conservation Agriculture with Trees (CAWT): Implemented by World Agro forestry

center; it harnesses and combines the synergies of rapid improvement of livelihoods from

conservation agriculture with the longer-term but sustained crop productivity and

environmental resilience derived from “fertilizer and high value trees”. CAWT derives its

strength from the complimentary principles of Conservation Agriculture and Agro

forestry. Conservation Agriculture with trees is poised to revolutionalize the way farming

is practiced in Africa and other parts of the world. CAWT is based on five important

principles; i) minimizing soil disturbance, ii) maintaining land/soil cover, iii) practicing

crop rotation, iv) good agronomic management practices, v) incorporating nitrogen

fixing trees and high value trees (e.g. fruit, medicinal and timber)

Mitigation of Climate Change in Agriculture (MICCA) Programme implemented by

FAO which has contributed to making agriculture more climate smart. MICCA is a

multidisciplinary programme funded by Finland, Germany and Norway. The

programme complements other FAO and United Nations efforts to address climate

change and collaborates with the UN-REDD Programme in the reduction of deforestation.

The technical information generated by the MICCA programme supports negotiation

processes undertaken through the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC).

2.4 Stakeholders in CSA Activities.

The stakeholders and institutions involved in CC activities and policy formulations in the

country are rather uncoordinated in terms of both functions and implementation of climate

related projects and activities. However, the highly consultative and participatory process of

compiling and development of the recently launched NCCAP can be expected to reverse this

trend in the future. These stakeholders and institutions can be broadly classified into the

following categories.

2.4.1 Government Ministries and Departments

These are currently undergoing major changes in structure, functions and roles that they play

due to the transitional status occasioned by devolution and implementation of the new

20

constitution not to mention the ministries reorganizations whose departments are currently

unclear. However, the major institutions and their CSA related roles include:

i) Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources: Under this ministry we

have the NEMA, KMD and DRSRS. The ministry is mandated to formulate and

review policies on Environmental conservation, Water, Natural and Mineral

Resources management, develop geo-database, conducting and dissemination of

research findings in land resources, promotion and coordination of environmental

activities and enforcing compliance of environmental regulations and guidelines. It

provides meteorological and climatological services to agriculture, forestry, civil

aviation, private sector and others through the KMD and Coordinates statutory

environmental committees through NEMA. The Ministry has acts of parliament for

each of the services (Water Act 2002, EMCA, Mines Act and several other policies

and strategies. The institutions within the Ministry provide weather forecast data and

rainfall records to the country. The DRSRS provides time series data on remotely

sensed data such as vegetation resources, water availability, etc. to the country.

ii) MoALF: The ministry is entrusted with the provision of irrigation services, agro

forestry services, soil and water management, conservation agriculture, land

reclamation, promotion of drought tolerant crops, water harvesting and storage using

small and medium sized dams to expand the potential for irrigation, increased

agricultural production and livestock development particularly in the ASALs among

other roles. Other activities undertaken by the ministry include promotion of

conservation agriculture and minimum tillage, water harvesting, agro-forestry, use of

improved inputs such as fertilizers and manures, promotion of energy saving

technologies such as lined stoves, promotion of new crop varieties/types (pulses,

sorghums, millets), animals and birds which are adapted to drier environments

(ostrich, quails, bees, guinea fowl, etc). The ministry also has several policies and acts

(and some under preparation e.g. ALFFA, Irrigation and Water Policies and Acts,

various commodities Acts) covering various aspects of crops, livestock and fisheries

production, marketing, appropriate use of insecticides and pesticides, tillage and trade.

iii) Ministry of Energy: The Ministry is responsible for Energy policy development,

hydropower development, geothermal energy and renewable energy exploration and

development, promotion of alternative energy sources for domestic use such as

biogas, solar lighting, etc.

iv) Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation (KARLO); It has a CCU.

Its functions include strengthening biotechnological research in crop and livestock

varieties that are resistant to drought, pests and disease and are high yielding and

improve nutrition. KARI also has the mandate of strengthening research on good

agricultural practices. The other cardinal roles of KARI include development of; a)

production of new technologies for the various agro-ecological zones and especially

targeting those that have an impact on water and soil conservation, b) new

technologies for crop and livestock production for the drier environments. It

undertakes country wide assessments to determine regional vulnerability of the

agricultural sector to CC elements.

v) National Irrigation Board (NIB): The NIB was established with the primary

objective of developing large scale irrigation schemes primarily to provide settlement

21

land to the landless. It did so by providing water and irrigation advisory services to

the settler farmers on its 6 settlement schemes which were primarily located in the

low rainfall areas. Irrigation was then and is now driven by the demand for increased

productivity of food and raw materials of agricultural origin). The NIB is taking

measures to accelerate irrigation development in the country with the hope that

increased productivity from irrigated agriculture would obviate the need for rapid

opening up of land (clearing of forest land) for expansion of agriculture under rain-fed

conditions. The irrigation measures would result in the transformation of agricultural

production from primarily rain-fed to irrigated one. Currently the Government

through the NIB is developing irrigation schemes such as the Galana Scheme and the

Tana Delta Million Acre scheme. The Government also aims at increasing water

availability by promoting water harvesting in large-scale dams and night storage dams

at schemes level and water storage in pans, dams and tanks at farm level. This will

ensure steady and sufficient water supply for irrigation.

vi) Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA): This institute

carries out research and policy analysis in all sectors of the Kenyan Economy.

Another main mandate of KIPPRA is establishment of a data base of stakeholders in

policy research and advocacy to build CC resilience that equips communities with the

ability to plan for, survive, recover from, and even thrive in changing climatic

conditions.

vii) Kenya Forest Research institute (KEFRI): the institute carries out research on

appropriate forestry production systems and preservation of suitable natural forest

resources. Part of the research targets the areas that are frequently affected by drought

and food shortages.

viii) Kenya Water Towers Agency: A State Corporation established to co-ordinate and

oversees restoration, protection, resource mobilization, community livelihoods support

and ecosystem monitoring in all 18 Water. It is a one stop shop, which enables the

country deal with the conservation, protection and management of all the country's

Water Towers to ensure a harmonized, effective and efficient management system of

Kenya's Water Towers, and henceforth help the country achieve its vision 2030

projection of 10 percent forest cover.

2.4.2 National and International NGOs

i) Kenya CC working Group: This is a forum that brings together Civil Society

Organizations, donor parties, government departments and agencies working on CC.

It advocates for positive policy and legislative framework that puts into account the

effects of CC on development. It supports and coordinates CC debates at the local,

national, regional and international levels. It also supports reduced CC vulnerability

of poor communities through awareness and strengthening local communities and

civil society to implement community based adaptation projects.

ii) CARE Kenya: It strives to make carbon markets work for the poor by developing

carbon finance for agricultural projects through identification of appropriate carbon

accounting methodology and on farm tree planting. It also Promotes sustainable

agriculture in a changing climate through provision of information, seedlings and

22

training farmers to introduce agro-forestry and wood lot management practices with

a view to increasing availability of energy, food and enhancing income and reducing

carbon emissions.

iii) Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA): It unites civil society efforts on

CC advocacy and coordination in Africa. It encourages strategic alliances with

international partners, national governments and regional governmental bodies as

well as individuals to ensure that African Voice is amplified in International CC

Dialogue process.

iv) Kijabe Environment Volunteers (KENVO): This is a voluntary community-based

organization engaged in developing sustainable nature conservation programs in the

Kikuyu Escarpment Forest. KENVO was formed in 1994 and officially registered in

1996. The major goal of KENVO is to promote conservation of the Kikuyu

Escarpment ecosystems, while at the same time supporting community livelihoods.

KENVO works in a number of key areas including capacity building, forest

restoration, youth empowerment, promoting ecotourism, and research. KENVO has

helped improve the livelihood of communities, reduce threats on biodiversity and

develop youth leadership. It collaborates with key stakeholders such as government

departments, research institutions, private sector, and other development agencies to

inform, educate and build the capacity of communities to embrace appropriate

conservation practices in a sustainable way. KENVO’s major programs are: Forest

rehabilitation, Youth empowerment and Eco tourism:

2.4.3 Kenyan Private Sector Organizations

Kenya National Federation of Agricultural Producers (KENFAP): It promotes unity,

cooperation and dialogue among its members and between other actors in the agricultural

sector. It also ensures timely interventions in the resolution of issues affecting agriculture

sector and effective representation of the farming community and expression of its views to

the government and the public at large.

Other organizations include Mumias Sugar Company, Bamburi Cement Company; Orion

East Africa limited which are pursuing pure mitigation projects by taking advantage of Clean

Development Mechanism. East African Breweries and other companies are also involved in

CC mitigation and adaptation projects through corporate social responsibility.

2.4.4 International Development Agencies and Donors

International organizations have also made great efforts at addressing the effects of CC. The

efforts have included organization of international and regional conferences to raise

awareness on CC, its effects and mitigation measures at the national and higher levels. The

international organizations have also supported research and capacity building programmes in

order to develop informed CC response measures for each region or specific CC aspect. The

UN and its agencies or specialized organizations, FAO, IFAD, Word Bank and international

research bodies have increased their efforts at assisting Kenya to internally develop policies,

programmes and projects aimed at addressing or responding to the effects of CC.

Organizations such as IDRC, UNDP, Rockefeller Foundation DFID, GIZ, World Bank and

others have co-partnered with the Kenyan government in financing government projects or to

23

implement their own CC and adaptation programmes and projects in the country. They

support research in CC and integration of CC mitigation in projects design to ensure evidence

based project implementation and policy formulation.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and Conservation Agriculture with Tree

(CAWT) have been involved in CSA activities, in addition to those that are mentioned above.

2.4.5 International and National Research Organizations

These include KIPPRA, IPAR, TEGEMEO, ILRI, IFPRI, ASARECA, CCAFS, ICRAF,

ICIPE, CIP, ReSAKSS and CIAT. These organizations conduct research and disseminate

findings on identifying and addressing the most important interactions, synergies and trade-

offs between CC, agriculture and food security. They also promote and sponsor uptake of

sustainable agricultural practices and CC adaptation and mitigation measures through

promoting programmes and activities to the farming community. These projects involve farm

forestry, soil and water conservation practices, improved planting seeds and materials,

promotion of traditional high value crops among others.

2.5 Reasons for Successful Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices.

The Agriculture sector Ministries and institutions have inherent strengths that facilitate

implementation of CC policies and practices in the sector. They include the following:

A strong base of (fairly distributed) human capital including extension workers who

work directly with the farmers in implementing Ministry’s policies;

A well developed and distributed research infrastructure covering all agro-ecological

zones,

Many Parastatals responsible for various agricultural activities – Research (KARI,

KEVEVAPI), regulatory (KEPHIS), production (Coffee Board of Kenya, Tea Board

of Kenya, Kenya Dairy Board, Kenya Sugar Board, National Irrigation Board etc.),

financial (Agricultural Finance Cooperation); These Parastatals also have their

enabling legislation and human and substantial financial resources,

Well-equipped training and demonstration facilities and centres well distributed in the

country. These include:

27 Agricultural Training Centres (ATC);

25 Agricultural Mechanization Stations (AMS) for dam construction and soil

conservation issues; and

Agricultural Technology Development Centre (ATDC) for production of

farmer-friendly technologies.

Establishment of CCUs responsible for the coordination and implementation of CC

activities. The Ministries of Fisheries, Livestock Development and National Irrigation

Board had their own units. With the merger of these into one large ministry it is

expected that an appropriate institutional set up will be formed to address all CC

matters in the agricultural sector.

The MoALF and its stakeholders are currently developing a Strategic Plan to

implement the NAdP through its recently constituted CCU and KARI’s CCU. The

Strategic Plan will also take into consideration the proposed activities of the ASDS

(2010) that are directed towards CC adaptation in the Agriculture sector, in order to

24

avoiding duplication in the proposed strategies and also to complement the on-going

CC adaptation and mitigation programmes and projects at the MoALF

Establishment of KARI’s CCUs to address research issues for CC mitigation and

adaptation.

2.6 Constraints to Efficient Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices.

i) Lack of streamlining in the institutional setup occasioned by the transitional state

in the country stemming from;

Devolution as a result of the promulgation of the new constitution which

transferred the implementation functions to the counties while retaining the

policy functions with the ministry headquarters. A very weak linkage exists

between the county staff and the ministry headquarters staff and information

does not flow from one level to the other in either direction.

Government reorganization which has transferred functions that were carried

out in many ministries (42) to a few ministries (18) and in the process they

have lost institutional memory.

The development and finalization of policies initiated before the new

constitution and re-organized government have been affected. For instance the

finalization of the Irrigation Policy and Bill have been affected by the transfer

of these functions from the Ministry of Water and Irrigation to the MoALF,

Livestock and Fisheries, while similar functions have remained with the

Regional Authorities and the National Youth Service in their new

locations/ministries.

The current reorganization of the Parastatals in government and in the MoALF

(under ALFFA) may further affect the institutional setup and their functions.

ii) The goodwill from stakeholders especially the politicians have not been translated

into action as there is insufficient fiscal support on the implementation of the

policies by government, development partners and non-state actors, and there are

delays in fast-tracking the adoption of the CC bill into law

iii) The current programme for creation of awareness on CC in the country is not well

maintained or expanded

iv) Slow or delayed uptake of research proven adaptation and mitigation measures

and technologies by farmers due to farmer related social economic constraints still

remains as one of the greatest challenges in dealing with CC adaptation and

mitigation in the agricultural sector and low diffusion levels of modern

agricultural technologies. These challenges include among others;

Lack of financial capital and high poverty levels. Relevant technology

adoption and other adaptive solutions require the use of purchased inputs

beneficial to increase yields, but can only be accessible to those who can

afford them. The majority of people in the rural areas have low purchasing

power and thus low levels of inputs to combat CC.

25

Lack of awareness on the causes, adaptation and mitigation options of CC

amongst communities makes them vulnerable to climate variability and

reduces their adaptive capacity. There is thus a need for innovative and

proactive strategies for awareness creation which will empower the rural

communities, especially the smallholder farmers, in coping with increasing

livelihood vulnerabilities.

Land fragmentation into uneconomic units for agricultural use remains a major

barrier to adoption of climate smart agriculture for instance agro-forestry.

Additionally, these discrete small units of land cannot support projects such as

small farm level dams for water harvesting and micro irrigation projects at the

farm level. The challenge however is the increasing land subdivision as a

result of population increases leading to shortage of land that can be put under

forest cover

Top-down approach in development of technology. Farmers need to be

engaged while developing the technologies so as to increase adoption rates.

Education system: The curriculum does not have CSA issues addressed which

has led to low awareness.

Land use change: Changing agricultural land to real estate is a challenge to

CSA implementation in the country.

v) Cost of Implementation of the laid out policy actions is high (for instance the

adoption of animal ploughing in areas where the farms are too small or the

incidence of livestock diseases is high) coupled with the lack of proper finance

monitoring and tracking system.

vi) Currently it is difficult to identify and track the total amount of money coming

into Kenya for CC related activities and what activities they are being applied to.

vii) The UNFCCC logic emphasizes development of strategies for adaptation and

mitigation on different tracks, adaptation programs and mitigation programs. They

are also created and financed through different process. Countries are thus

expected to prepare NAMAs as well as NAPs. This can lead to inefficiencies

within the MoALFCC efforts as it works to coordinate a wide array of climate and

agriculture related programmes. These programmes frequently promote similar

activities, including those traditionally known as sustainable land management

practices that provide adaptation and mitigation. This complicates policy and

program implementation for climate smart agriculture. While government

financing does not earmark funding to the agricultural sector for CC activities,

donor funding off the budget are earmarked for CC making tracking difficult.

However, farmers face a number of constraints in using the various techniques that are being

promoted. These include:

Shortage of water to expand area under irrigation,

Limited alternative options for livelihood for forest and rangeland communities who

suffer most from the impacts of CC. Relocating them is expensive and there may be

unavailable land to resettle them.

Disease challenges especially after expanding irrigation,

Markets for surplus produce,

26

Social issues especially when introducing crop agriculture among pastoralists,

Inappropriate technologies for adoption and their high costs especially for small

holder farmers,

Poor knowledge on CC and CSA; There is limited understanding on the amount of

global funding and opportunities available and how it can be accessed.

Inadequate technical expertise and capacity in implementing research activities and on

addressing CC impacts and improving adaptive capacity which requires precise data,

and enhanced data collection capacity most especially in order to take advantage of

the existing carbon credit markets.

There is insufficient and inaccurate local data on weather variability due to low

investment in weather stations whose locations are irregularly and unevenly

distributed throughout the country. Vast areas still remain unmonitored. These leads

to lack of important meteorological data that is necessary for early warning and food

security surveillance not to mention the upcoming weather based insurance products.

CSA projects and programmes especially those on carbon credits have not been overly

successful due to the following:

i. Top-down approach; the projects impose practices that are not necessarily

acceptable in the society while ignoring farmers’ local knowledge and

preferences.

ii. The projects over-emphasize the mitigation aspect of CSA through agro-forestry

and promise carbon money which turns out to be very little thus making the

farmers disillusioned. Farmers fail to focus on improving productivity and

adaptation aspects which could be more beneficial.

iii. Inability to look at the projects in an integrated approach that takes into account

all the network of relations, synergies, trade-offs and impacts of the projects’

activities and other livelihood activities and sectors.

iv. Short project period; most projects are funded for only a short period (5yrs) while

long term (20yrs) financial support is necessary.

v. Land tenure; users of rented/leased land are less motivated to adopt CSA

practices.

vi. Complexity of CSA terminology and unclear implementation structure does not

help either. Passing the CSA terminology, practice and benefits through extension

is a tall order especially with the low extension worker: farmer ratio.

vii. Unclear institutional roles leading to duplication

viii. Over-dependence on rain-fed agriculture due to lack of access to water for

irrigation leaves farmers vulnerable even in the face of adoption of CSA

technologies.

27

ix. Use of shared resources by farmers and pastoralists. Pastoralists graze on farm

residuals as a common practice in most areas hence use materials that can be used

as mulch to feed livestock.

x. Gender disparities in access of productive resources and gender rights lead to

household disagreements as women are the adopters of CSA practices while the

men who are the land owners want to benefit from the carbon credit money.

Though the existence of the global carbon market is an opportunity that if well

exploited can yield benefits for the smallholder farmers, participating in the carbon

markets poses huge challenges to smallholder farmers. The primary challenge facing

farmers wishing to benefit from carbon offsets is the cost of measurement and

verification of the change in carbon emissions. Other challenges that hinder

smallholder farmers from benefiting from carbon markets include the following:-

i) The amount of money a small scale farmer would receive from the carbon s/he

sequesters per year is likely to be very minute, considering the fact that most

farmers have less than 1 hectare farmlands.

ii) Adopting technologies that increase soil carbon storage is quite costly. In

addition, due to the disaggregated nature of smallholder farms, measuring or

verifying soil carbon on thousands of farms and aggregating this information will

cost huge amounts. Much of the funds generated from these projects will be used

to defray costs of project management and technical support and very little will

remain for the farmers who are the real producers of carbon;

iii) Agricultural carbon sequestration, especially from the soils, requires long term

commitment and often will involve biding farmers to certain types of agricultural

practices and land use patterns that diverge from local practices known to be

effective. This is likely to negatively affect the adaptive capacity of poor farmers,

who may need to change their production systems to adapt to new climate

conditions and economic fluctuations;

iv) Biasness towards smallholder farmers by the large scale farmers. Better land will

sequester more carbon as soil fertility enhances the production of organic material

that can be incorporated into the soil. Well to do farmers, who in most cases are

not the peasant farmers, are likely to be on better quality land hence stand to

benefit from soil carbon markets than their smallholder counterparts.; Issues such

as lack of education and access to information are also likely to impede the

effectiveness of projects resulting in obstacles, abuse and even conflicts in

extreme cases; and

v) Other issues include poor infrastructural and institutional weaknesses, poor

systems of governance, and political representation

The above also present some enormous opportunities that remain untapped in order to

effectively implement CSA related policies and consequently increase productivity.

Insecurity, especially in ASAL areas, lack of political good will, illiteracy and

inadequate finances are the major constraints to full utilization of CSA principles.

28

Land ownership issues, sharing of proceeds from harvests and access to finances are

the other challenges to Youth involvement in agriculture.

2.7 Opportunities in the Implementation of CSA Policies and Practices.

These include:

Existence of local knowledge and coping strategies at the grassroots level that are

being used by farmers that can be built upon and strengthened

The fact that CC phenomenon is real and already unmistakable and intensifying at an

alarming rate as evidenced from the countrywide temperature increases and rainfall

irregularity, frequency of floods, landslides, droughts and dwindling agricultural

productivity, has increased the sense of urgency in tackling CC. Consequently there

is a growing public desire for governments and global community to act on CC. This

presents a perfect environment for reassembling support from grassroots

communities, national, regional to international level. However the extent to which

the government goodwill is translated to actual action on the ground is questionable

since most of the relevant policies, legislations documents and strategies are still in

draft form, there is inadequate budgetary allocation to ensure fiscal support on the

implementation of the policies and fast-tracking the adoption of the CC bill into law.

Rain fed agriculture is one of the most vulnerable economic activities. It remains the

most relied on livelihood options by the majority of smallholder farmers. The country

has however a huge unexploited irrigation potential. There is in still low and

inadequate investment in water harvesting and irrigation in both amongst smallholder

farmers and in construction of mega dams in drought prone areas. Most of the rainfall

is thus lost through runoff. This compromises agricultural productivity and

exacerbates food insecurity, incomes and ultimately livelihoods.

There is a wide range of developed agricultural technologies especially by KALRO

which can counter droughts, floods, disease and pest but have not been used by the

farmers. Either due to lack of funds or lack of planning on how to translate actual

research results to be used by farmers. The existing extension network in the country

is far below the required level.

Carbon trading especially for the small holder producers some of whom grow tree

crops such as coffee, tea, sisal and bananas. Carbon trade regulations should be

modified to include the tree crops farmers are planting (coffee, tea, mangoes, etc) or

to encourage groups of farmers to establish joint woodlots,

Promotion of green technology - which could result in increased jobs and

employment. These would include production of conservation tillage equipment and

technologies through training of local youths as artisans

Expansion of production under intensive systems such as irrigation, green house

systems and deep litter or cage systems with a view to increasing productivity per unit

and obviate the need for opening up of large tracts for production under rain-fed

conditions. Intensive systems will require water conservation.

Expansion of biogas technology among livestock farmers to reduce demand on fuel

wood and production of methane into the air

29

Promotion of beekeeping which would in turn increase demand for forage tree cover

for production of nectar.

Promotion of pasture and forages production to protect the lands against excess

heating and erosion. These would reduce temperatures and emissions of greenhouse

gases.

There are also opportunities for further research into CSA activities and technologies

as this is a new field and very little is known. There are also opportunities to revisit

past research programmes and findings/technologies and review them in light of CCs

that have occurred. A recent example is the continued research on coffee that has

developed new varieties that are adapted to low rainfall areas of the country and thus

leading to increases in coffee production. Similar examples also exist in maize,

pulses, sorghum, poultry and other enterprises.

Long term data to facilitate comparison of the impact of the CSA policies at the

beginning and end of a policy or activities is deficient or lacking. There exists

opportunities for collection and maintenance of such data and development of

measurement formulae and continuous research.

A huge potential in the youth also exists as most are now picking up high value and

commercialized farming.

Modern communication channels i.e. use of social media and other media to pass

information on climate change to a wider audience can be tapped.

There is an increase in donor willingness to support climate change initiatives.

2.8 Drivers for Successful Adoption

Availability of financial support, willingness of farmers to uptake CSA activities, availability

of technical support, negative impacts of climate change, and economic benefits are the key

drivers for successful adoption of CSA technologies in Kenya.

3.0 CSA POLICY FRAMEWORK IN THE COUNTRY

At the moment Kenya has no explicit Climate Smart Agriculture policy. A Climate Change

policy is in the drafting stage which deals with the whole economy. This policy has no

mention of climate smart agriculture. However, there are other national blue prints addressing

the CC menace as well as a multiplicity of related bills and policies. To start with, the

Constitution of Kenya, 2010 guarantees the right to a clean and healthy environment under

the bill of rights by providing ground for formulation of adaptation and mitigation legislation,

policies and strategies. The vision 2030 Medium Term Investment II states that Kenya will

adopt climate-smart agriculture such as harnessing farm waste as source of organic fertilizer,

and use of bio-fertilizer that does not contribute to harmful emissions, better weather

forecasting/early warning systems, growing resilient food crops, managing post-harvest

losses and crop insurance. Kenya is also a signatory to CC policies by regional bodies such as

the African CC Strategy 2011 by the AU and EAC and Policy and Strategy on CC 2011 by

the EAC. These provide priority actions in the country and region and shape national CC

policies and strategies in member countries. Annex 2 provides in detail description of the CC

related policies in the country.

30

3.1 Effectiveness of CSA Activities and Policies.

Kenya individually and as a member of regional blocks have formulated policies in tackling

the challenge that CC poses to agriculture and other sectors of the economy but the extent to

which these policies are being implemented and/ or will be implemented in future and

translated into actual investments and actions remains largely unknown. Moreover, despite

agriculture being the backbone of the Kenyan economy and being severely affected by CC,

currently there exist no explicit sectoral CC action plan, policy or strategy. Even in the

current CC strategy and action plan agriculture is given such a low priority both in policy

content, details and budgetary allocation. The lion’s share of attention is given to the energy

sector.

Response measures that has developed and promoted have not been coordinated among

various sectors in the government. This has resulted in duplication of effort and less than

optimal utilization of resources. For instance the Department of Forestry has promoted

planting of trees in the forest zones while the MoALF has promoted planting of farm forestry

trees and fuel wood lots. However these efforts have not been linked to the carbon credit

program nor have they covered hill areas that are not classified as private land or forest

zones. It is on such land where most of land destruction activities such of cutting of

vegetative cover and overgrazing takes place and flood waters pick speed and gain

destructive force. Programmes have also been promoted with the single idea of attaining one

result without linking it to the resultant economic gains that would be associated with

attainment of its objectives. For example the nationwide soil and water conservation

programme promoted the establishment of physical barriers to soil erosion on sloping

grounds (terracing) and planting of trees on such terraces. Little effort was made to select

appropriate crops and cropping patterns or tree types on such terraced land. In the final

analysis it became more of a landscaping exercise than an agronomic practice. In another

example pastoralists with large herds were encouraged to reduce their herd sizes without a

corresponding programme to promote other production systems that increase productivity and

incomes for the pastoralists. The pastoralists have tended to go back to their old production

systems.

Lack of coordination and relevant legislative framework and consultations on CC related

activities, project, research programmes and responses that are currently undertaken by the

various stakeholders especially between the government NGOs and donor agencies. This

may lead to duplication of efforts and inefficiencies in project implementation.

3.2 Impact of CSA Practices and Policies on Gender Equity and Social Equity

(i) Impact on Gender and Social Equity

It is widely acknowledged that CC vulnerability is differentiated by gender, age, physical

disabilities, geographical location or income levels all of which affect one’s ability to

contribute to the development agenda. Women disproportionately suffer climate related

impacts. This is as a result of lack of economic empowerment and participation in decision

making. There has been an increasing recognition of the need to ensure gender equality in all

spheres of life. Many legal instruments and agreement across the world including the

UNFCCC integrate texts that promote gender equality and women’s rights.

It is in this cognition that Kenya, in principle and text has made great strides in coming up

with measures to address gender, disability, marginalized, special interest groups and

31

minority to ensure social equity. However, the greatest challenge and question is whether the

provisions of gender related policies and laws are implemented to the letter. Since intended

impact can only be realized following effective implementation of policies in programmes

and projects. This is to say that the gender and social impact of different projects on gender

and social equity is highly determined by the design and effective implementation of the

particular program and the extent to which social and gender equity was paid attention to.

By and large individual projects implemented by various stakeholders and institutions have

been effective in meeting individual project goals and objectives. This includes the gender

and social inclusiveness goal that has been well adopted across the countries development

initiatives, both governmental and non- governmental. These activities implemented in the

past may be said to have had a positive impact as intended on both the target groups and the

environment in general. It is worth noting that the activities may not initially be designed as

CSA programmes but rather as technologically appropriate interventions that have had a

desirable impact on small holder farmers’ productivity and general welfare.

Many of the activities have had direct positive impact on gender. The production increases on

the small holder farms have enhanced food resources and incomes especially for women who

are the main operators. The recent expansion of small scale irrigation has resulted in

increased farm productivity, food security, trade between rural and urban areas and

employment opportunities for farmers, traders/transporters and farm labour. Some of the

farmers have also diversified their enterprises by opening up small rural inputs supply shops

that are operated by some of the family members.

For instance activities that promote the use of quality inputs and appropriate and timely

agronomic principles such as land preparation and planting have led to significant increases

in yields and incomes for the farmers. Those programmes that also included farm forestry in

their design have also had a positive impact on increases of the forest cover on farms and

greening of the farmlands. The challenge however is the increasing land subdivision as a

result of population increases leading to shortage of land that can be put under forest cover.

Other specific examples include;

The establishment of UWEZO fund to support women and youth especially rural

women to engage in the development agenda. It is hoped that the fund will ensure that

women access resources to enable adaptation to challenges of CC.

The Government also provides funding for the support to the poor and vulnerable

members of the society. They receive a bimonthly transfer of KShs 2000 through their

mobile phones.

The currently ongoing ASDSP that emphasize gender inclusivity and equity in

developing and promoting value chains.

(ii) Impact of Rapid Development of the Electronic Platforms

Kenya has promoted a rapid expansion of the electronic platform with far reaching

positive impact in mitigating CC. Some of the actions include:

The introduction of the use of laptops in schools which will result in a drastic

reduction in the use of paper-books for writing and reading. This will translate

into a rapid reduction of harvesting of trees to provide the large volumes of paper

currently being used and which is projected to increase rapidly with the increase

32

in school going children. The reduction in the demand for paper will result in a

decline in the cutting of trees for manufacture of paper.

The introduction of electronic or paperless banking and money transfer will also

result in significant reduction in the demand for paper and the need to cut trees.

The introduction of the mobile phone has resulted in a near 100% reduction in the

use of wooden poles for transmission.

(iii) Impact of Rapid Changes in Construction practices

There has been a rapid change in the construction industry and power and telephone

transmission systems that have resulted in an increase in the use of concrete, steel and plastic

products for building and furniture. This has reduced the demand for timber products, a

decline in harvesting of trees for timber and therefore a reduction in loss of forest cover with

positive impact on the environment.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Key challenges to Implementation of CSA in Kenya.

i) The Impact of Devolution: The Country has promulgated a new constitution

(Constitution of Kenya 2010) which transferred the implementation functions of most

sectors to the counties while retaining the policy functions with the Ministry

Headquarters. The counties make their own plans and receive funding direct from the

Exchequer. Some of the staff that was in the ministries headquarters has been sent to

counties while some counties have hired their own staff to implement County level

activities. They report to the County administrators. This has resulted in:

Development of a very weak linkage between the county and the ministry

headquarters staff and information does not flow from one level to the other in

either direction easily.

Change in priorities in programmes under the new constitutional dispensation/

system and some programmes have been abandoned as Counties make their own

plans.

Dissolution of some offices e.g. dissolution of the former office of the Prime

Minister which hosted CCU and the Inter-ministerial Consultative Forum on CC

Taskforce for accelerated development of green energy.

ii) Government reorganization: which has transferred functions that were carried out in

many ministries (42) to a few ministries (18) and in the process they have lost

institutional memory.

iii) Incomplete Policies: The development and finalization of policies initiated before the

new constitution and re-organized government have been affected. Most have been

shelved as the functions have been transferred to a different/lower level of the

government. For instance the finalization of the Irrigation Policy and Bill have been

affected by the transfer of these functions from the Ministry of Water and Irrigation to the

MoALF, Livestock and Fisheries, while similar functions have remained with the

33

Regional Authorities and the National Youth Service in their new locations/ministries.

This may lead to duplication of some of the policies/programmes.

iv) Transfer of Staff: The transfer of staff from the ministry headquarters to counties and in

other instances the retrenchment of staff has the impact of loss of institutional memory. It

was therefore difficult to access some of the staff as they had moved.

v) Reorganization of Ministries and Parastatals: The current reorganization of the

Parastatals in government and in the MoALF (under ALFFA Bill) may further affect the

institutional setup and their functions. As such members of staff were not sure of the

future setup and institutional priorities under a unified ministry and in the counties.

4.2 Untapped Opportunities

There are enormous opportunities that remain untapped in order to effectively implement

CSA related policies and consequently increase productivity. These include:

Existence of local knowledge and coping strategies at the grassroots level that are

being used by farmers that can be built upon and strengthened

The fact that CC phenomenon is real and already unmistakable and intensifying at an

alarming rate as evidenced from the countrywide temperature increases and rainfall

irregularity, frequency of floods, landslides, droughts and dwindling agricultural

productivity, has increased the sense of urgency in tackling CC. Consequently there

is a growing public desire for governments and global community to act on CC. This

presents a perfect environment for reassembling support from grassroots

communities, national, regional to international level. However the extent to which

the government goodwill is translated to actual action on the ground is questionable

since most of the relevant policies, legislations documents and strategies are still in

draft form, there is inadequate budgetary allocation to ensure fiscal support on the

implementation of the policies and fast-tracking the adoption of the CC bill into law.

Rain fed agriculture is one of the most vulnerable economic activities it remains the

most relied livelihood options of the majority of smallholder farmers. The country has

however a huge unexploited irrigation potential. There is in still low and adequate

investment in water harvesting and irrigation in both amongst smallholder farmers

and in construction of mega dams in drought prone areas. Most of the rainfall is thus

lost through runoff. This compromise agricultural productivity and exacerbate food

insecurity, incomes and ultimately livelihoods.

There is a wide range of developed agricultural technologies that have been developed

especially by KARI which can counter droughts, floods, disease and pest but have not

been used by the farmers. Either due to lack of funds or lack of planning on how to

translate actual research results to be used by farmers. The existing extension network

in the country is far below the required level.

Carbon trading especially for the small holder producers some of whom grow tree

crops such as coffee, tea, sisal and bananas. Carbon trade regulations should be

modified to include the tree crops farmers are planting (coffee, tea, mangoes) or to

encourage groups of farmers to establish joint woodlots

34

Promotion of green technology - which could result in increased jobs and

employment. These would include production of conservation tillage equipment and

technologies through training of local youths as artisans,

Expansion of production under intensive systems such as irrigation, green house

systems and deep litter or cage systems with a view to increasing productivity per unit

and obviate the need for opening up of large tracts for production under rain-fed

conditions. Intensive systems will require water conservation.

Expansion of biogas technology among livestock farmers to reduce demand on fuel

wood and production of methane into the air,

Promotion of beekeeping which would in turn increase demand for forage tree cover

for production of nectar,

Promotion of pasture and forages production to protect the lands against excess

heating and erosion. These would reduce temperatures and emissions of GHG

There are also opportunities for further research into CSA activities and technologies

as this is a new field and very little is known. There are also opportunities to revisit

past research programmes and findings/technologies and review them in light of CCs

that have occurred. A recent example is the continued research on coffee that has

developed new varieties that are adapted to low rainfall areas of the country and thus

leading to increases in coffee production. Similar examples also exist in maize,

pulses, sorghum, poultry and other enterprises.

Long term data to facilitate comparison of the impact of the CSA policies at the

beginning and end of a policy or activities is deficient or lacking. There exists

opportunities for collection and maintenance of such data and development of

measurement formulae and continuous research.

The use of the media technology to pass information on climate change to a wider

audience has not been tapped. The use of media presents a great opportunity to pass

valuable information on CSA to stakeholders.

4.3 Recommendations

The study noted a number of interventions that are necessary to enhance CSA policies and

activities. These include:

Data surveys and analyses to establish the requirements of the target groups in the

country and identifying the resulting priority requirements into the CSA policies and

activities

Continued research to develop appropriate low cost technologies to address the

requirements, coupled with continued capacity building among the target groups and

the state actors to ensure the technologies are passed on,

Appropriate design and mainstreaming CSA policies and activities in all

programmes, Investment in weather information systems and capacity building to

strengthen the KMD to enhance disaster preparedness and reliable information

synthesis and predictions,

35

Central CC Projects/ activities and provision of funds for employment, tracking,

monitoring and impact assessments and communications, Streamlining and designing

additional finance mechanisms to support CSA, Combine climate adaptation,

mitigation measures and sustainable agriculture and food security goals, Improve on

monitoring impact measurement, reporting and result demonstration to ensure

continuous funding for climate smart agriculture.

Policy makers should harmonize and bring together the various scattered CSA

policies, projects and programmes into one which is comprehensive and accessible by

all stakeholders.

Governments and policy makers should draft country specific CSA policies that can

help farmers cope with the adverse effects of CC. Farmers need policies that remove

obstacles to implementing CSA and create synergies with alternative technologies and

practices.

Governments and policy makers should promote and disseminate policies that

promote CSA which integrates food security, CC adaptation and mitigation.

Governments and policy makers should also adopt a multi-sectoral approach in

drafting CSA policies in order to effectively tackle the impact of CC on food systems

and NR management

Governments and policy makers should promote financial incentives that encourage

CSA. Considerable policy support and capacity enhancement is needed for climate

risk management including insurance and safety nets as well as improved access to

weather information adapted to farmers needs.

They should also encourage research and dissemination of the best ways of helping

farmers reduce GHG emissions and consequently adapt to CC.

At the international, regional, national and county levels, agriculture should be at the

centre stage of CC agenda, negotiations and discussions.

Effective means of communicating climate related research findings among

researchers and stakeholders should be established

Investment in weather information systems and capacity building to strengthen the

KMD to enhance disaster preparedness and reliable information synthesis and

predictions.

Central CC Projects/ activities and funds employment tracking, monitoring and

impact assessments and communications

Streamlining and additional finance mechanisms to support climate smart agriculture.

Combine climate adaptation, mitigation measures and sustainable agriculture and food

security goals.

36

REFERENCES

African Union and East African Community.(2011). African Climate Change Strategy.

ASARECA.(2009). Gender Mainstreaming Strategic Plan. Entebbe, Uganda.

ASCU.(2005). Report of the National Conference on Revitalizing the Agricultural Sector for

Economic Growth. Nairobi. Kenya

East African Community.(2011). Policy and Strategy on Climate Change.

Government of Kenya.(2012) Medium Term Investment Plan 2012-2017 (Farm Management

Handbook).Nairobi. Government Printer

Government of Kenya.(2007). National land Policy. Nairobi. Government Printer

Haggblade, S. & Hazel, P. (2010).Successes in African Agriculture: Lessons for the future.

Baltimore. IFPRI and Johns Hopkins University Press

Kenya Land Alliance (Undated).Land use in Kenya: The Case on Land use policy in Kenya.

Nairobi. Government Printer.

ReSAKSS. (2010). Trends in Key Agricultural and Rural Development Indicators in the

COMESA Region. Nairobi

Republic of Kenya.(2010). Agricultural Sector Development Strategy 2010- 2020. Nairobi.

Government Printer.

…......................... (2010). The Constitution of Kenya. Nairobi. Government printer.

Rubin et al. (2009).Promoting Gender Equitable Opportunities in Agricultural Value

Chains.Washington D.C. USAID

World Bank, AFTAR.(2009). East Africa: A study of the Regional Maize Market and

Marketing Costs. Washington D.C P. Xiv

World Bank Group. (2010). Doing Business in the EAC: Comparing Regulations in the 5

Economies. Washington D.C.

37

5.0 ANNEXES

Annex 1: National CC Blue Prints

POLICY

SECTOR

NAME OF

THE POLICY

YEAR

APPR

OVED

OF IN

FORC

E

RESPONSIBLE

MINISTRIES

CONTACT

PERSON

( NAME TEL,

AND email)

UPDATED

OR UPDATE

PLANNED

HYPERLINK

CC National CC

response

strategy

National CC

Action Plan

CC Authority

Bill

2010

2013

Ministry Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

Ministry Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

Ministry Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

updated

Updated

Updated

http://www.enviro

nment.go.ke

http://www.enviro

nment.go.ke

http://www.enviro

nment.go.ke

Land National Land

policy

2007 Ministry of

Land

info@kenyala

ndalliance.or.k

e

updated www.kenyalandal

liance.or.ke

Forest Forestry policy

2007

Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

Water

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

Updated

http://www.enviro

nment.go.ke

38

Kenya forestry

Master plan

1995

Environment

and Natural

Resources

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

Updated

ttp://www.environ

ment.go.ke

Energy Energy policy Draft Ministry of

Energy

Permanent

Secretary

Ministry of

Energy

Update

Ongoing

Developm

ent

Kenya Vision

2030

National Policy

for sustainable

Development

of Northern

Kenya and

Other Arid

Lands

2008

2013

Planning

Ministry of

devolution

vision2030@k

enya.go.ke

Permanent

Secretary

Ministry of

Devolution

Updated

Updated

www.nesc.go.ke

Agricultur

e

Agriculture

sector

development

strategy

2009

MoALF

Permanent

Secretary

MoALF

Updated

Environm

ent

Environment

Management

and

Coordination

Act

National

Wetlands

Conservation

and

Management

policy

1999

Draft

Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

Water

Environment

and Natural

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

psoffice@envi

Updated is

Ongoing

Ongoing

ttp://www.environ

ment.go.ke

www.environment

.go.ke/.../DRAFT-

39

National

Environment

policy

National water

Policy

Water Act

Draft

Draft

2002

Resources

Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

Water

Environment

and Natural

Resources

ronment.go.ke

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

psoffice@envi

ronment.go.ke

Update Going

on

Update Going

on

Updated

WETLANDS-

POLICY-June-

2013.

ttp://www.environ

ment.go.ke

ttp://www.environ

ment.go.ke

ttp://www.environ

ment.go.ke

Energy Energy policy

and Act

Draft Energy

policy

2004

2012

Ministry of

Energy

Ministry of

Energy

Permanent

Secretary

MoALF

Permanent

Secretary

MoALF

Updated

Update

Ongoing

40

41

Annex 2: Descriptive Summary of CSA related policies, programmes and

activities

i) National CC Response Strategy (NCCRS) 2010: This was the first national policy

document to fully acknowledge the reality of CC. It was developed through a

participatory process through stakeholder consultation workshops held throughout the

country. The process was spearheaded by the Ministry of Environment, Water and

Mineral Resources (MEWMR) in the year 2009/2010. It provides the evidence of CC

impacts on different economic sectors and proposes adaptation and mitigation

strategies. The strategy outlines the budgets and plans for government line ministries.

ii) National CC Action Plan (NCCAP 2013-2017): Kenya CC action plan was as a

result of a year-long participatory process involving the public sector, the private

sector, academia and the civil society, under the leadership of the Ministry of

Environment Water and Mineral Resources. A multi-stakeholder- multidisciplinary

taskforce was involved, informed by the global and regional commitments and

obligations. The plan was developed with the aim of implementing the NCCRS,

through an all-inclusive process with ownership across stakeholders. The plan will

enable Kenya to reduce vulnerability to CC and to improve the country’s ability to

take advantage of the opportunities that CC offers. It will inform national

development and policy decisions in all sectors of the economy and also to a wide

range of actors including government agencies, private sector and civil society

organisations who will in turn contribute to its implementation. The plan sets out a

low carbon climate resilient development pathway that can help meet Vision 2030

goals through actions that address both sustainable development and CC. This will

help to achieve the MDGs without compromising the environment and natural

resource base. It provides recommendations for an enabling policy and regulatory

framework, adaptation analysis and priority actions, mitigation options,

considerations for technology, recommendations for knowledge management and

capacity development and a climate financial mechanism. As CC is a cross cutting

and dynamic process, it is anticipated that the recommended actions be

tracked/monitored continuously and the plan be revised and updated on a five year

cycle in line with the national planning and budgetary processes.

iii) Kenya CC Authority Bill, 2012: The bill was gazetted in 2012 and it is in the

process of being enacted to support the mainstreaming of CC within the national

policy. The bill drafting process was spearheaded by a taskforce drawn from the civil

society, the Kenya CC Working Group, the former office of the prime Minister, Land

and Natural Resources Committee and Kenya Law Reform Commission. In line with

Kenya’s Vision 2030, the law is expected to promote a greener economy. It proposes

formation of the CC Authority that will coordinate activities across government

sectors and non-state actors and guide the implementation of the NCCRS. The

authority will have the power of monitoring and investigation, including the power to

enter the premises of any public or private entity and make an enquiry on adherence

to requirements Act. The authority will come up with programs on adaptation,

mitigation, emission levels and trends, education and creation of awareness, including

integration in the educational curricula, assessment of CC vulnerability, CC threats,

capacity building in strategic climate sectors, research, development and technology

transfer among others. It will also advise the national and county governments on

measures necessary for mitigating and adapting to the effects of CC. It will also guide

42

in the implementation of regional and international conventions to which Kenya is

party to and report regularly on the country’s adherence to its international obligations

relating to CC. The Bill will integrate issues of CC into the national schooling

curriculum to create more awareness and a pool of CC champions at a younger age.

Other CC Related Policies and Blue Prints

i) Development policies

The Kenya Vision 2030: This is the national development blue print that

encapsulates flagship programmes and projects with aspects of CC adaptation and

mitigation. Though CC adaptation and mitigation responses are not explicitly

addressed in this long term development plan or in its first Medium Term Plan (MTP

2008-2012), it is made clear in it that Kenya aims to be a nation with clean, secure

and sustainable environment. The set environment related goals are closely tied to CC

adaptation and mitigation strategies as identified in the National CC Response

Strategy and the CC Action Plan. These goals are; to increase forest cover, reducing

pollution and proper waste management and to implement different strategies that

promote environmental conservation. The nation also aims to enhance disaster

preparedness in all disaster prone areas and improve the capacity for adaptation to

global climatic change. It is also indicated that the nation will harmonize environment

related laws for better environmental planning and governance. However, the second

MTP (2013-2017) provides an opportunity to incorporate CC into the national

development plans and builds on the NCCRS and the action plan. According to this

MTP (2013-2017), broader development goals are to be pursued in cognizant of the

need for securing the environment and enhancing CC resilience. Threats emanating

from CC are also identified as an emerging challenge that need to be addressed

through curbing human induced CC with use of sustainable energy. It also provides

for a fund, Kenya Climate Adaptation Fund (KCAF) that is to be a vehicle for

mobilizing and allocating resources from international development partners towards

CC related activities and will be used for allocating domestic public resources toward

responses to adverse impacts of CC. Enhancing drought resilience and CC adaptation

has also been identified as a strategic objective with different implementing agencies

across all sectors of the economy.

The National Policy for sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and Other

Arid Lands (2013): This focuses on climate resilience of the resident communities,

requiring Government to find solutions to address climate challenges and to come up

with measure to manage drought and strengthen livelihoods. The policy also focuses

on an enabling environment for accelerated investments to reduce poverty and build

resilience and growth. The establishment of the National Drought Management

Authority (NDMA), the National Disaster Contingency Fund (NDCF) and the

Council of Pastoralists education (CPE) are provided for in the policy. This will

ensure timely activation of contingency plans, mainstream CC foresight and

adaptation into planning, strengthen community strategies for adaptation to CC and

disaster risk reduction and management, and explore opportunities for communities to

benefit from bio carbon initiatives.

ii) Agriculture Policies (Crop, Livestock, Forestry and Fisheries)

43

The Kenya Forestry Master Plan 1995-2020: This plan Provides for an

overarching framework for forestry development in the country for the 25 year

period up to 2020 and was the blue print for reforms in the sector, including the

forestry Act of 2005 and the forest Policy of 2007. It recognizes the environmental

role of forests including water values, biodiversity values, CC values through carbon

sequestration and other environmental services.

Forest Policy 2007: The policy has an objective of contributing to sustainable land

use through soil, water and biodiversity conservation and tree planting through

sustainable management of forests and trees, among others. Although the policy

covers a wide scope of issues concerning forests, it is geared towards environmental

conservation and not directly to CC. A review of the policy in CC mitigation will

ensure that the potential capacity of forestry in mitigation and adaptation against CC

is captured.

Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS 2010- 2020): The ASDS is the

overall and current national policy document for the agricultural sector. The strategy

promotes sustainable food production and agro forestry. There are also broad

implications for the forestry sector that are detailed in one of the six subsectors of the

agriculture sector. The ASDS has mentioned climate adaptation as a priority.

iii) Environmental policies

Environment Management and Coordination Act (EMCA 1999): The act is

currently under review. This is the principal instrument of the government for the

management of the environment and provides for the relevant institutional

framework for the coordination of environmental management including the

establishment of the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) which

is the Designated National Authority (DNA) for Clean Development Mechanism

(CDM) and the National Implementing Entity (NIE) for the CC Adaptation Fund.

Second National Environment Action Plan (NEAP 2009-2013): This action plan

Provides for a broad framework for the coordination of environmental activities by

the private sector and Government to guide the course of development activities,

with a view to integrating environment and development for better management of

resources.

Draft catchment management policy. The policy is being developed. It is expected

to facilitate multi-sector objectives and programmes that could deliver climate smart

agriculture. Agricultural landscapes will be managed to achieve not only agriculture

and watershed management objectives, but also other related goals such as food

security, climate adaptation and biodiversity conservation.

Draft National Environment Policy 2012: This policy treats CC and disaster

management as an emerging environmental issue and states that the government will

adopt two approaches in combating CC i.e. mitigation and adaptation. The policy

acknowledges that CC impacts are increasing and will affect all sectors of the

economy. It thus proposes development of strategies in order to reverse the trends of

environmental degradation, sets out clear visions for ecosystems and development of

appropriate strategies to achieve these visions as well as an appropriate monitoring

framework.

44

iv) Land and Allied Policies

The Land Policy: This new land policy proposes the implementation of principles

that promote conservation of land quality, environmental audit assessment,

productivity targets and guidelines; land size and land use planning. It proposes

among other aspects restoration and conservation of soils through modern and

traditional methods to reclaim and conserve degraded and or otherwise unproductive

land for agriculture and settlement. Although it does not contain provisions dealing

with CC it has provisions for environmental management especially protection of

fragile and critical ecosystems including wetlands, national parks, ASAL, lakes and

drainage basins and protection of water catchment areas such as forests and spring

areas from further degradation.

v) Energy Policies

Energy policy 2004 and Energy Act 2006: They encourage implementation of

indigenous renewable energy sources to enhance the country’s electricity supply

capacity. The policy is implemented through the energy act of 2006 which provides

for mitigation of CC, through energy efficiency and promotion of renewable energy.

In addition Feed in Tariff (FITs) Policy of 2008 which was revised 2012 promotes

the generation of electricity from renewable sources. It targets geothermal, wind,

small hydro, solar and biomass.

Draft Energy Policy 2012:This proposed policy will play an important role in CC

mitigation through encouraging efficient use of energy, energy conservation and

promotion of renewable energy. The policy’s mission is to facilitate provision of

clean, sustainable, affordable and secure energy services at low cost while protecting

the environment. The policy puts a lot of emphasis on renewable energy like

Geothermal, wind, solar and bio-digesters all of which contribute to mitigation

against CC by lowering Green House Gas emissions.

vi) Water and irrigation policies

Draft National Water Policy 2012: The current draft recognizes CC, disaster

management and environmental degradation as challenges that were previously not

well addressed by the preceding policy and legal frameworks. The Water Act 2002 is

under review and is yet to be passed. This act provides for the overall governance of

the water sector. The regulations and strategies following from this Act recognize the

CC implications on health, sanitation and water. It proposes the development of

water management systems which contribute to the protection of the environment

and collaboration in the response to CC initiatives.

The irrigation Act Cap 345: This act is currently under review and a policy is in the

final draft stages. The Irrigation function is under the agriculture and water policies

and is in itself a response to the effects of CC. The policy provides for expanded

irrigation programmes, for intensification and increase in agricultural (food and raw

materials) production, appropriate and efficient land and water uses for production

through application of efficient technologies in irrigation, for instance drip

irrigation, water storage and other support services (power, transport, marketing,

processing). The policy and legal framework also promotes appropriate irrigation

45

designs especially for disposal of excess flood and exit waters and prevention of

chemical pollution.

vii) Others National Policies

The National Disaster and Management Policy 2012: This policy institutionalizes

disaster management and mainstreams disaster risk reduction in the country’s

development initiatives. The policy aims to increase and sustain resilience of

vulnerable communities to hazards.

Integrated National Transport policy 2010: It provides for transport solutions that

have relevance to CC mitigation.

46

Annex 3: Institutions and Stakeholders Consulted During the Study

Name Rank Institution e- mail

1. Eng. Njoroge Deputy

General

Manager

National

Irrigation

Board

2. Eng. Onchoke Director

Irrigation

MoALF

3. Mr. Mbae Deputy

Director

Department of

Livestock

4. Dr. Obola Head CCU Ministry of

Livestock

5. Lucy Kamande Senior

Assistant

Director

Ministry of

Environment

6. Michael Okoti Senior

Research

Scientist

KARI michaeldominion@gmail.com

7. J.T Karugia Coordinator

ReSAKSS-

ECA

ReSAKSS j.karugia@cgiar.org

8. C.A Shisanya Professor of

Agro-

climatology

Kenyatta

University

shisanya@yahoo.com or

shisanya.chris@ku.ac.ke

9. Beth Mburu Senior

Associate

Eed Advisory

10. Jane Simiyu Agriculture

Project

Manager

KFW Jane.simiyu@kfw.de

11. Daniel Gichuhi Project

Manager

KENFAP producers@kenfap.org

Daniel@kenfap.or.ke

12. Josephine

Thome

Head of

Project

Welthungerhilf

e/ German

Josephine.thome@welthungerhilf

e.de

47

Agro Action

13. Paul Obunde Planning

Officer,

Drought

Managemen

t Authority

Drought

Management

Authority

Obundepaulo@yahoo.com

14. Lucy M.

Kamande

Ministry of

Environmen

t and

Natural

Resources

Senior

assistant

director

lkmumbi@ymail.com

15. John Retcha CCAFS Participatory

action research

specialist

j.retcha@cgiar .org

16. John Osumba GIZ National

program

coordinator

ACCI

jiosumba@gmail.com

17. Kennedy

Oyugi

African

biotechnolo

gy

stakeholders

forum

Program

Officer

Koyugi@absfafrica.org

18. KeziaNgure SEKU

University

Lecturer chayvo@yahoo.com

19. W.O.Onchoke MoALF Deputy

Director

Irrigation

woonchoke@yahoo.co.uk

20. Nelson

Mutanda

Drought

Managemen

t Authority

National

Database

management

officer

nelson.mutanda@ndma.go.ke

21. Eng J. Nkanya MoALF Chief

Enginner

nkanya2000@yahoo.com

22. Patrick

MacMullin

MoALF Technical

Advisor

Patrick.mcmullin@gopa.de

23. A.O Eshmail Drought

Managemen

t Authority

Advisor aoeshmail@gmail.com

48

24. Robin M.

Mbae

MoALF Deputy

Director

robinmbae@yahoo.com

25. Dr. M. Obola MoALF Head CCU michaelobola@yahoo.com