Lessons Learned from Fast Start Climate Change Program .../media/Kenya/NRM report/Final FSCCP...
Transcript of Lessons Learned from Fast Start Climate Change Program .../media/Kenya/NRM report/Final FSCCP...
Royal Danish Embassy (Kenya)
Lessons Learned from
Fast Start Climate Change Program
(FSCCP) in Kenya, (2011-2014)
November 26, 2014
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
i
List of Contents
List of Contents................................................................................................................................................................................. i
Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................................................................................iii
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... v
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 The Danida Fast Start Climate Change Programme (FSSCCP) ................................................................. 1
1.2 About the FSCCP Lessons Learned report ....................................................................................................... 1
2. The intervention logic of the FSCCP .............................................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Steps in developing the intervention logic ....................................................................................................... 2
2.2 The intervention logic of FSCCP ........................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Linkage with the Danida country program in Kenya ................................................................................... 4
2.4 Kenya climate change policy and regulation context .................................................................................. 5
2.5 Danida FSCCP components ..................................................................................................................................... 6
3. Renewable Energy and Adaptation to Climate Technologies (REACT) window of AECF ...................... 7
3.1 REACT Intervention logic ........................................................................................................................................ 7
3.2 REACT design approach and implementation modality............................................................................. 7
3.3 REACT Main results ................................................................................................................................................... 8
3.4 REACT Funding status .............................................................................................................................................. 9
3.5 REACT findings and main lessons learned ....................................................................................................... 9
3.6 REACT Case ................................................................................................................................................................ 10
3.7 Summary of REACT status and progress ....................................................................................................... 12
4. Centre for Energy Efficiency and Conservation (CEEC) at Kenyan Association of Manufacturers
(KAM) ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 15
4.1 CEEC/KAM Intervention logic ............................................................................................................................ 15
4.2 CEEC/KAM Design approach and implementation modality ................................................................ 15
4.3 CEEC/KAM main results ....................................................................................................................................... 16
4.4 CEEC/KAM overall assessment of progress ................................................................................................. 17
4.5 CEEC/KAM funding status ................................................................................................................................... 17
4.6 CEEC/KAM findings and main lessons learned ........................................................................................... 17
4.7 CEEC/KAM testimonials ...................................................................................................................................... 18
4.8 Summary of CEEC/KAM status and progress .............................................................................................. 19
5. Community driven projects to reduce climate change risks with the Community Environment
Facility (CEF) at CDTF ............................................................................................................................................................... 23
5.1 CEF intervention logic............................................................................................................................................ 23
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
ii
5.2 CEF design approach and implementation modality ................................................................................ 23
5.3 CEF main results ...................................................................................................................................................... 23
5.4 CEF overall assessment of progress ................................................................................................................. 24
5.5 CEF funding status ................................................................................................................................................... 24
5.6 CEF findings and main lessons learned .......................................................................................................... 24
5.7 CEF Case Studies ...................................................................................................................................................... 25
5.8 Summary of CEF/CDTF status and progress ................................................................................................ 29
6. Resilience to climate change in pastoral communities in the arid lands of Northern Kenya ............ 32
6.1 NRT intervention logic .......................................................................................................................................... 32
6.2 NRT design approach and implementation modality ............................................................................... 32
6.3 NRT main results ..................................................................................................................................................... 33
6.4 NRT overall assessment of progress ................................................................................................................ 33
6.5 NRT funding status.................................................................................................................................................. 33
6.6 NRT findings and main lessons learned ......................................................................................................... 34
6.7 NRT Case ..................................................................................................................................................................... 35
6.8 Summary of NRT status and progress ............................................................................................................. 37
7. Monitoring and assessment of FSCCP progress .................................................................................................... 43
8. FSCCP financial status ...................................................................................................................................................... 45
9. Main Findings and Lessons Learned.......................................................................................................................... 46
9.1 FSCCP Main findings ............................................................................................................................................... 46
9.2 FSCCP Lessons Learned ........................................................................................................................................ 48
Annex 1: Financial Status ......................................................................................................................................................... 50
Annex 2: Links and flows between logical framework, monitoring and evaluation and lessons learned
............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 51
Annex 3: Kenya Climate Change Policy and Regulation Overview ......................................................................... 52
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
iii
Abbreviations
ABD : Agricultural Business Development
AECF : African Enterprise Challenge Fund
Afd : Agence Française de Développement
AGRA : Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa
AMG : Aid Management Guidelines
ASAL : Arid and Semi-Arid Lands
BMO : Business Membership Organizations
BOT : Board of Trustees (of CEF/CDTF)
BSPS II : Business Sector Programme Support (2nd phase)
CCCU : Climate Change Coordination Unit
CDM : Clean Development Mechanism
CDTF : Community Development Trust Fund
CEEC : Centre for Energy Efficiency and Conservation (KAM)
CEF : Community Environment Facility
CIC : Climate Innovation Center
CIDP : County Integrated Development Plans
COP : Conference of the Parties
Danida : Danish International Development Assistance
DCED : Donor Committee for Enterprise Development
DfID : Department for International Development
DKK : Danish Kroner
EC : European Commission
EE : Energy Efficiency
EU : European Union
FSCCP : Fast Start Climate Change Program (of Danida in Kenya)
GHG : Green-House Gases
GoK : Government of Kenya
GRV : Green Growth Department (of Danida)
IGA : Investment Grade Audits
KAM : Kenya Association of Manufacturers
KCCAP : Kenya Climate Change Action Plan
KCCWG : Kenya Climate Change Working Group
KSH : Kenya Shillings
LFA : Logical Framework Analysis
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
iv
M&E : Monitoring and Evaluation
MFA : Ministry of Foreign Affairs (of Denmark)
MoEP : Ministry of Energy and Petroleum
MoU : Memorandum of Understanding
MTAP : Medium Term Arid Lands Program
NCCRS : National Climate Change Response Strategy
NEMA : National Environmental Management Authority
NRMP : Natural Resource Management Programme
NRT : Northern Rangeland Trust
ODA : Official Development Assistance
PELIS : Plantation Establishment and Livelihood Improvement Scheme
PS : Permanent Secretary
PSC : Programme Steering Committee
RDE : Royal Danish Embassy
RE : Renewable Energy
RE&EE : Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency
REACT : Renewable Energy and Adaptation to Climate Technologies (of AECF)
SME : Small and Medium Enterprises
USD : United States Dollars
Exchange rate: 1,000 DKK ~ 15,6300 KSH
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
v
Executive Summary
The Danida Fast Start Climate Change Programme in Kenya is one of Denmark’s funding of additional
climate support to developing countries that was committed after the COP15 in 2009. Kenya has
received DKK 110 million (2010: DKK 10 million, 2011: DKK 50 million, 2012: DKK 50 million) in fast
start climate change funding. The Kenya FSCCP makes up about 10% of the Danida committed and
delivered global funding of DKK 1,200 million for fast start climate change. The Fast Start Climate
Change Programme (FSCCP) is additional to the existing and planned Danish ODA to Kenya.
The FSCCP has been developed to stimulate the interest of the business sector in Kenya to take
advantage of emerging business opportunities related to clean technology and efficient resource use.
The FSCCP also addresses the specific vulnerability that is particularly faced in the arid and semi-arid
lands with further extreme and unpredictable weather events in a context where climate variability is
already a determining factor for livelihoods.
The aim of FSCCP was to ensure an added value and mainstreaming of climate change, to enhance the
overall impact of the Danida support, to reduce additional administrative burdens taking into
consideration the available staff resources at the Embassy, and to prepare for further inclusion of
climate change measures in the next phases of the development programme. While there is a separate
FSCCP document in the short term the climate change fund would be further integrated in the
development programs after 2015, e.g. as part of the Green Growth agenda.
The Danida FSCCP in Kenya aimed at catalyzing private sector innovation and business development
in addition to improve community resilience to reduce the risk and impacts of climate change (climate
change adaptation) and development of energy efficiency and renewable energy options contributing
to a low carbon development path (climate change mitigation).
Component 1: REACT /AECF- Private sector investment and innovation in low cost, clean energy and
adaptation to climate change technologies bringing innovative climate change products and services to
rural people in Kenya (only 2011 FSCCP).
Component 2: CEEC / KAM - Increased efficiency in energy and resource use in the manufacturing
sector in Kenya.
Component 3: CEF/CDTF – Community-driven initiatives reduce threats and conflicts related to
natural resource use and climate change risk.
Component 4: NRT – Resilience to climate change in pastoral communities in the arid lands of
Northern Kenya (only 2012 FSCCP).
The FSCCP is aligned with the Government of Kenya policies and strategies including the National
Climate Change Response Strategy and the resultant Kenya Climate Change Action Plan, which is under
implementation through Vision 2030 Medium Term Plans (MTP II 2013-2017).
The Components all delivered satisfactory results: 1) REACT in the first and second call for proposals
in 2011 and 2012 selected and funded 17 projects in Kenya. The progress and results according to the
targets in the FSCCP log-frame is included below, 2) CEEC/KAM carried out more than 200 additional
energy audits were carried out – 118 general energy audits and 87 investment grade audits – with
FSCCP support, 3) CEF funded an additional 24 projects with FSCCP support in addition to the 40 CEF
projects supported by the Danida NRM programme and 43 by EC and a tool to assess for climate
change mainstreaming of all CEF projects was developed, and 4) NRT has developed grazing plans in
14 conservancies reaching 12,000 households with 40,000 livestock on 1,9 million ha.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
vi
Expected outputs were mostly delivered as expected. The emphasis was on core activities while
additional added value activities were delayed or omitted (e.g. DCE M&E for REACT, comprehensive
audits for KAM/CEEC, implementation of mainstreaming for CEF, and land-use plans for NRT).
The overall effect on mitigation of and adaptation to climate change as direct impacts of FSCCP is
limited in the short term. There are potential longer term larger impacts, but it remains an assumption
unless there is continuous follow up. The reason is that it has been a relative short-term intervention
addressing a long term challenge.
There was more progress in developing mitigation projects mainly on renewable energy and energy
savings. These included measures of indirect adaptation. But the inclusion of direct adaptation
activities was more difficult partly because it is difficult to define and communicate what specific
adaptation projects are, i.e. how they differ for development oriented projects for example on water
resource management.
The reduction in GHG missions as a result of FSCCP is limited so far. While funding is for climate
change there is no policy objective that the FSCCP had reduction emission as the main target. The
benefits of reducing emission are globally shared and not kept in Kenya only. Although additional
funding from fast start is to support developing countries this also includes enhancing resilience to
climate change risks where the gains are kept in Kenya.
There is overall a weak M&E capacity to address outcomes and impacts. The M&E of activities and
outputs is partly satisfactory with room for improvements. There is a good level of tracking of
activities but little linkage to the derived effects. The improved M&E is not only for the sake of
reporting to the donor, but also to develop and track internal knowledge to extract best practices,
bench-marks and progress.
Although it was originally anticipated by Danida that the FSCCP would be implemented in a rather
short time horizon it was already decided in the design phase that at least 1 or 2 additional years for
implementation was required. Progress in implementation has been good but there is still the
requirement for no-cost extensions.
The design succeeded in achieving activities and outputs over a short period because support was
provided to established entities that were operational and able to quickly enter into an agreement or
just make use of an existing agreement.
The close linkage to the country programme has limited the administrative burden of the programme.
The additional work load due to the FSCCP for the RDE has been kept a minimum and integrated as
feasible with other processes, e.g. the annual programme review.
The FSCCP has in several ways made initial progress for the development of the Green Growth and
Employment intervention in the forthcoming Danida country programme for Kenya. Increased
attention to Green Growth topics (in particular to renewable energy and other energy efficiency and
energy access issues) have emerged as part of FSCCP.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
1
1. Introduction
1.1 The Danida Fast Start Climate Change Programme (FSSCCP)
The fast start climate change is additional funding pledged at the COP15 in 2009 in Copenhagen by
developed countries for climate change finance in developed countries. The non-binding agreement
reached at COP15 included provisions for further ‘accelerated’ financing for mitigation and adaptation
to climate change. The statement in the final document, the ‘Copenhagen Accord’, 1 emphasizes the
urgent need of additional funding: “scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as
well as improved access shall be provided to developing countries, in accordance with the relevant
provisions of the Convention, to enable and support enhanced action on mitigation, including substantial
finance to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+), adaptation, technology
development and transfer, and capacity building”.
The pledged funding was USD 30.0 billion from 2010 to 2012. The fast start was a beginning to reach
the longer term goal of USD 100 million annually from 2020. Denmark established The Climate
Envelope in 2008 before the Copenhagen Accord. The commitments from the Climate Envelope from
2010 to 2012 were equal to the Danish fast start climate change finance. The Climate Envelope has
continued after the Fast Start period with an annual grant of DKK 500 million. Both adaptation and
mitigation had implicitly and explicitly been part of the Official Development Assistance (ODA)
sometimes referred to as climate change assistance but more often also just included like it was, e.g.
water resource management for adaptation and clean energy for mitigation. The specific tagging of
climate change funding has made it possible to track the direct funding for climate change finance.
One of the countries targeted with the additional fast start climate change funding was Kenya. Kenya
has received DKK 110 million (2010: DKK 10 million, 2011: DKK 50 million, 2012: DKK 50 million) in
fast start climate change funding. The Kenya FSCCP has been about 10% of the Danida committed and
delivered global funding of DKK 1,200 million for fast start climate change. The Fast Start Climate
Change Programme (FSCCP) is additional to the existing and planned Danish ODA to Kenya. The
content and design of the Kenyan FSCCP is further detailed in the next sections.
1.2 About the FSCCP Lessons Learned report 2
The purpose of this report is to prepare an end-of-programme status of the results of the FSCCP and
extract the main lessons learned. This will be used as a completion report of the FSCCP support to
Kenya. The report includes the Fast Start support of DKK 100 million in 2011 and 2012 and
implemented until the expected completion end of year 2014. The report does not include the initial
2010 Fast Start support (DKK 10 million) that has been reported separately.
The FSCCP lessons learned report will also be used as an input for the independent evaluation of the
Danish climate change funding to developing countries. Kenya is one of the case countries selected for
the evaluation. Furthermore, there are lessons of relevance for the forthcoming Danida country
programme for Kenya where one of the thematic areas is Green Growth and Employment. The FSCCP
lessons are also used for designing the forthcoming funding from the Climate Envelope for Kenya in
2015.
1 http://tinyurl.com/y9suq9b
2 The report is prepared by external consultants to Danida Michael Linddal and Stephen Mutimba in September and October
2014.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
2
2. The intervention logic of the FSCCP3
2.1 Steps in developing the intervention logic
The purpose of this section is to outline the intervention logic for the FSCCP (the 2011 and 2012
grants) and how it was determined. A more detailed discussion of the intervention logic for each of the
components is included in the following chapters.
Preceding the FSCCP in Kenya were a few other developments that already had included climate
change issues in the Danida country programme. In 2007 a climate change screening4 of the Danida
portfolio was carried out. The purpose was to assess the climate risks of the Danida portfolio and to
‘climate proof’ the development programme. In the design of the Natural Resource Management
Programme (NRMP) during 2009 support to climate change was included mainly to develop national
level strategies and capacity development. The Business Sector Programme Support (BSPSII) designed
during 2009 also included climate change related interventions mainly related to mitigation.5 There
have already been some good lessons bringing the NRMP and BSPSII closer, for example in the joint
Agricultural Business Development (ABD) component, and the FSCCP provided further opportunities.
The fast start climate finance from Danida to Kenya has come in three tranches. The first grant of 10.0
million DKK came in late 2010 was used to support smaller projects that already were identified by
RDE, e.g. proposals that had already been submitted from different partners to RDE for potential
funding. After a screening five projects were selected. There was no certainty whether the 2010 FSCCP
would be followed by an additional funding or be a one-time grant, so the funding was made to smaller
stand-alone projects. Although the supported projects were relative small a fund manager was
appointed to oversee the implementation and provide monitoring because the RDE did not have the
additional capacity. This was an initial lesson of FSCCP that the administration of FSCCP was to be
done within the existing capacity at the RDE.
In late 2010 it was decided by Danida to allocate 75.0 million DKK (later reduced to 50 million DKK
during the design phase) in 2011 for the FSCCP in Kenya as part of the Danida Fast Start commitment.
It was a considerable larger amount than for the 2010 FSCCP and the same project based approach
was thus not immediately feasible. None of the 2010 FSCCP projects were completed when the 2011
FSCCP was designed and they were neither ready for, nor relevant for scaling up. It would furthermore
take additional time to develop an expanded portfolio of smaller projects.
The 2011 FSCCP was also a one-year grant that had to be designed and all funding committed during
2011. The design and approval was completed in May 2011 and funding was released thereafter until
end of the year. It was agreed during the design to allow the actual implementation to continue until
2013 after an initial front loading of funds during 2011. It was at the time of the design of the 2011
FSCCP likely but not certain that there would be a similar grant for a 2012 FSCCP. It was requested by
Danida Copenhagen (GRV) not to contemplate an additional grant in 2012 in the design of the 2011
FSCCP.
It had been decided by RDE and agreed by GRV to focus the 2011 FSCCP on the private sector and civil
society with support to both adaptation and mitigation. Through other programs in Kenya including
3 ‘Intervention logic’ is here partly synonymous with the more recently and now widely used ‘theory of change’. The
structured intervention logic for the FSCCP is outlined in the logical framework.
4 Danida carried out climate change screenings of the portfolio in all partner countries as part of the implementation of the
Climate Change and Development Action Programme (2005).
5 It has been noted that in Kenya that Danida business development programme (BSPSII) was striving to become greener
while the environment programme (NRMP) was trying to engage more with private sector. This become even more evident
with the 2011 FSCPP thus making it an early case of a Danida support to elements of a green growth programme. In the
forthcoming Danida country programme for Kenya (2015-2020) the two programmes are in principle merged into a Green
Growth and Employment programme based on the past experiences including the FSCCP.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
3
the Natural Resource Management Programme (NRMP) assistance to climate change initiatives in the
public sector was already provided with Danida funding. The 2011 FSCCP was developed in
consultation and in full transparency with GoK, i.e. the Climate Change Secretariat of the then Ministry
of Environment and Minerals Resources (MEMR) and the Climate Change Coordination Unit (CCCU) of
the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) as well as the PS of the Ministry of Planning. Consultations were
also held with the MEMR and OPM for the preparation of the 2012 FSCCP.
The scoping and design of the 2011 FSCCP began early 2011 with the development of the intervention
logic. It included mapping of ongoing and planned climate change support in Kenya by Danida and
other development partners. The purpose was to identify any potential gaps and scope for
interventions but also to ensure harmonization with other development partners also providing
climate change support to Kenya. It emerged from the mapping that there were a number of ongoing
activities and rather few opportunities if any ready for a larger stand-alone funding from Danida with
the 2011 FSCCP.
The next step was the development of a list of potential interventions. There were ten options
identified that were each scrutinized according to a number of criteria. The primary criterion was
relevance for the climate change objectives. Since there was no strategy or overall intervention logic
for the Danida FSCCP the scope was rather broad for both mitigation and in particular for adaptation.
Both the NRMP and BSPSII were designed few years earlier and these programmes already included
relevant climate change elements but without detailing how much of the budget was for climate
change. A lesson from the NRMP was that it had not been possible within the scope of that programme
to develop an intervention with emphasis on renewable energy although it had been part of the
intended focus in the NRMP concept note.
The next criterion included the feasibility for immediately launch and ability to develop results within
a short time frame. A challenge when it is considered that addressing climate change would be a long
term endeavor. This meant that working with already operational structures would be a priority in
order to deliver immediate results. The option to develop a Danida specific climate change funding
facility continuing the approach of the 2010 FSCCP was dropped for the very same reason. Moreover, it
was not relevant to develop an implementation structure like a grant mechanism for a grant that might
be used just once.
Harmonization also became the guidance in the intervention logic. By coincidence it was possible to
work closely with Dfid and the team preparing the UK fast start climate change support to Kenya
(STaRCK). That resulted in a coordinated effort in the support to civil society, e.g. by agreeing not to
have overlapping efforts (i.e. Danida supported CEF and Dfid supported a Sida established fund with
PACT, now ACT). In another case the support (i.e. with REACT) was coordinated and the two design
teams shared meeting schedules and had joint meetings with the partner (i.e. AECF).
A strategic choice made by RDE was to direct the 2011 FSCCP towards activities within or at least
potentially within the Danida country programme in Kenya. This made it possible to build on existing
relationships and agreements. It further helped moving faster from design to implementation although
there was a risk to exceed to implementation capacity of the partners. Secondly, as a result of the
FSCCP funding it would be possible further to mainstream climate change in the Danida country
programme in Kenya, i.e. having similar objectives whether funding was from the regular ODA or from
the climate envelope. Finally, but not least it was an administratively preferred option since no
additional staff time would be available for RDE to manage the FSCCP. Unlike for 2010 FSCCP no
external manager would be engaged for the 2011 and 2012 FSCCP.
2.2 The intervention logic of FSCCP
The FSCCP has been developed to stimulate the interest of the business sector in Kenya to take
advantage of emerging business opportunities related to clean technology and efficient resource use.
The FSCCP also addresses the specific vulnerability that is particular faced in the arid and semi-arid
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
4
lands with further extreme and unpredictable weather events in a context where climate variability is
already a determining factor for livelihoods. Finally the FSCCP takes direct opportunity of the
forthcoming devolution of the public sector to the counties as a result of the new Kenya constitution
and the expected also further growth and ‘decentralization’ of the private sector in the counties.
Danida and other development partners have provided substantial grant support to the Government
of Kenya towards responding to climate change. The Danida FSCCP in Kenya aimed at catalyzing
private sector innovation and business development in addition to improve community resilience to
reduce the risk and impacts of climate change (climate change adaptation) and development of energy
efficiency and renewable energy options contributing to a low carbon development path (climate
change mitigation).
The FSCCP was designed to reach community level development options involving innovations and
resource management that can be scaled up. In addition the FSCCP target was also the more high-end
business models that would have systemic market impacts and addressing climate change through
private sector development. The development objective to support this purpose under the FSCCP is:
‘Communities and the private sector in Kenya use technology innovation to reduce vulnerability to
climate change and contribute to a low carbon development path’.
The 2012 FSCCP was combined with the 2011 FSCCP grant. With a short term implementation period
up to the end 2014 and emphasis on innovation projects, investments in energy efficiency and
community support the full impacts and change is expected to be in progress but not immediately
detectable. The immediate objectives for the components are:
Component 1: REACT /AECF - Private sector investment and innovation in low cost, clean energy and
adaptation to climate change technologies bringing innovative climate change products and services to
rural people in Kenya (only 2011 FSCCP).
Component 2: CEEC / KAM - Increased efficiency in energy and resource use in the manufacturing
sector in Kenya.
Component 3: CEF/CDTF – Community-driven initiatives reduce threats and conflicts related to
natural resource use and climate change risk.
Component 4: NRT – Resilience to climate change in pastoral communities in the arid lands of
Northern Kenya (only 2012 FSCCP).
The FSCCP is aligned with the Government of Kenya policies and strategies including the National
Climate Change Response Strategy and the resultant Kenya Climate Change Action Plan.
2.3 Linkage with the Danida country program in
Kenya
The FSCCP is aligned with the existing Danida
country programme to ensure mainstreaming of
climate change, immediate opportunities to achieve
results, and to ensure efficiency in the
administration of the FSCCP. The FSCCP is integrated
with the existing and planned development
cooperation between the two countries and made
use of existing implementation modalities of the
Business Sector Program Support (BSPS II) and the
Natural Resource Management Program (NRMP).
The more detailed results of the FSCCP are outlined
in the next sections in the components. The linkage
Figure 1: Overview of the FSCCP and linkage with
Danida programmes
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
5
between the FSCCP and the country programme is outlined in the figure.
The FSCCP is additional to the existing and planned Danida official development assistance to Kenya.
The aim is to ensure an added value and mainstreaming of climate change, to enhance the overall
impact of the Danida support, to reduce additional administrative burdens taking into consideration
the available staff resources at the Embassy, and to prepare for further inclusion of climate change
measures in the next phases of the development programme. While there is a separate FSCCP
document in the short term the climate change fund could be further integrated in the development
programs after 2015, e.g. as part of the Green Growth agenda.
2.4 Kenya climate change policy and regulation context
All economic sectors and private households in Kenya are facing the risks of climate change. The
climate change risks and the avoidance of those are costs burden on development that can be avoided.
Access to water, energy and resources are potential risks. Kenya also has the opportunity to explore a
low carbon growth and otherwise ensure that the contribution to climate change and exposure to the
risk are minimized. The FSCCP is supporting actions that reduce climate change risks and vulnerability
for communities and also makes the Kenyan economy less vulnerable to climate change risks. The new
Climate Change Bill includes an overview of the climate risks for Kenya.
The FSCCP is aligned to the National Climate Change Response Strategy (NCCRS), the follow up Kenya
Climate Change Action Plan (KCCAP), and the Climate Change Policy (in progress of promulgation).
Annex 3 includes an overview of the relevant climate change policy and regulations in Kenya. There
are few specific private sector targets or priorities, but the private sector is recognized by Vision 2030
and other government and related documents as a critical partner for low carbon development and for
economic growth to increase resilience to climate change risks. Danida through NRMP supported a
private sector sensitization project by the former OPM Climate Change Unit. The aim of the project was
to come up with a private sector climate change network or climate change business council, which
will articulate climate risks, challenges and opportunities inherent in climate change
The regulatory framework and incentives are essential for innovation and investments for addressing
climate change. It is not well implemented. The regulation, policy and institutions relevant for
addressing climate change are well developed in Kenya (not least with support from development
partners including Danida NRMP).
The FSSCP partners and activities are guided by the national policy and regulatory framework on
climate change. There is a wide range of possible actions and it is not possible to track specific
interventions to the climate change framework. One example is the mandatory requirements for
energy audits in the manufacturing sectors that have created a demand. According to the Climate
Change Secretariat the best contribution is to report on activities and results in order to build up the
knowledge base in Kenya on climate change adaptation and mitigation. The information can be
forwarded to [email protected]
The private sector and civil society have had a role in forming and implementing public sector
initiatives for addressing climate change risks. For example, KAM held the co-chair for the recent
development of the Climate Change Policy. In most case the influence from practical implementations
on public sector regulation by stakeholders is indirect and not formalized.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
6
2.5 Danida FSCCP components
Components Rationale Inputs and Targets Expected Scope and Impacts Implementation 2011 2012
1. Renewable Energy
and Adaptation
Climate Technologies
(REACT-Kenya)
High-end private sector
market development in
Kenya for renewable energy
and adaptation to climate
technologies. Within BSPS II
innovation component. Both
mitigation (renewable
energy) and adaptation in
REACT.
2011: 20.0 million DKK for:
15.0 mio DKK for 5-7 additional
projects in Kenya identified in 2nd
competition in 2012. 5.0 million
DKK for M&E (in 2012). Up to 50%
co-financing by REACT-Kenya.
Management fee (20%) for service
delivery by AECF (16%) and AGRA
(4%).
Contribute to the overall REACT
targets. On average five additional
projects will reach 25,000
households, 7,500 rural SMEs in
poor rural areas will have access to
low cost, clean energy and 50,000
smallholder farmers will have
access to climate resilient products
and services.
Only 2011 FSCCP.
Included in the BSPS II
MoU between AGRA/AECF
and RDE.
BSPS II provides 50
million DKK to REACT.
The FSCCP increased the
Danida grant to REACT by
40%.
�
2. Energy and
comprehensive
resource audits and
other Energy
Efficiency (EE)
measures
implemented by
CEEC/KAM
Developing and expanding
the capacity of KAM to meet
the demand for energy
audits and investment grade
audits in the manufacturing
sector. Develop business
cases, information and
support for improved
energy efficiency. Piloting
comprehensive resource
audits.
2011: 15.0 million DKK and
2012: 15.0 million DKK for:
Support to scale-up of existing
capacity of energy audits
(Information on EE and
communication strategy) and
comprehensive resource audits.
Pilot testing. Contribution to AFD
revolving fund for pre-feasibility
and feasibility studies in 2011.
Additional 50 Energy Audits and 25
Investment Grade Audits annually
until 2014. 10 comprehensive
resource audits annually.
Resulting in investments in energy
efficiency and resource
conservation. Focus on SMEs.
Piloting comprehensive resource
audits, e.g. water use and waste,
and EE of buildings.
MoU between KAM and
RDE in June 2011. MoU
Addendum added for
2012 FSCCP.
Inclusion of KAM as a new
implementation partner in
addition to BSPS II
partners is justified by the
additional FSCCP grants.
� �
3. Community
projects implemented
by CEF/CDTF
Community based
adaptation to climate
change and contribution to
reduced emissions.
Development of community
based approaches that can
be scaled-up. Both
adaptation and mitigation.
2011: 15.0 million DKK and
2012: 25.0 million DKK for:
Support to additional 14 projects in
2011/12 (10 was the target) plus at
least 15 additional in a new call in
2012. Mainstreaming of climate
change in CEF projects.
Increase in total EC and Danida CEF
budget by about 10 % sufficient for
at least 29 additional CEF projects.
The additional support will reach
up to 10,000 end-users. Inclusion of
private sector as service providers
and in a potential scaling up of
community owned nature based
enterprises.
Addendum to the NRM
program component 3.1.
In the NRM programme
Danida provides 85.0
million DKK to CDTF of
which 68.5 million DKK is
for project grants.
� �
4. Adaptation to
climate change in dry
land pastoral
communities in
northern Kenya.
Implemented by NRT.
Building rangeland health
and resilient livelihoods in
Northern Kenya. Planned
grazing based on a holistic
management approach
expanded from current pilot
sites to additional
conservancies.
2012: 7.5 million DKK for:
Support to implementation and
capacity development of planned
grazing and improved rangeland
management. Development of
improved rangeland health,
livelihoods, and vegetation and soil
carbon storage.
Planned grazing in communities in
at least 11 conservancies.
Monitoring of rangeland health
including soil carbon. Covering at
least 15,000 ha with at least 5,000
cattle and reaching at least 3,000
pastoralist households.
A component document
developed in October
2012 and agreement
entered.
�
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
7
3. Renewable Energy and Adaptation to Climate Technologies (REACT)
window of AECF
The Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund (AECF) holds more than USD 200 million (2014) and operates
through several windows. One window is Renewable Energy and Adaptation to Climate Technologies
(REACT).6 REACT had calls for proposals in 2011 and 2012 and the third call was recent (Deadline was
on October 23, 2014).
3.1 REACT Intervention logic
The REACT component of FSCCP aimed at further catalysing the private sector investment and
innovation in low cost, clean energy7 and climate change technologies by bringing innovative climate
change products and services to rural people in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. The REACT addresses
both the supply side of provision of energy services (mitigation) but also access to finance and
reduction of climate change risks (adaptation).
The key features of the REACT/AECF is that it differs from the traditional venture capital fund
approach of ‘picking winners’ but rather seeks to ‘start races’ by, for example, supporting more than
one project within a given business opportunity and market segment. As a result it is not expected that
all projects will succeed and those succeeding will require additional time to mature into commercial
businesses.
The 2011 FSCCP was designed in close collaboration with DfID. DfID is a key partner for REACT. In the
design of FSCCP the meetings with AECP included both the Danida FSCCP and DfID climate programme
(STARCK) design teams.
3.2 REACT design approach and implementation modality
Support to AECF / REACT was already developed as a component of the BSPSII in 2009. The BSPSII
budget for REACT was DKK 50.0 million. The FSCCP grant was initially DKK 15.0 million in 2011 for
projects with the possibility of an additional DKK 5.0 million allocated in 2012 for M&E including
DCED8 compliance. The FSCCP was expected to result in the support to an additional five projects in
Kenya. The expected short term results are included in the log frame and progress is assessed below.
The FSCCP grant of DKK 15.0 million was added to existing Danida BSPSII grant existing to use the
same implementation modality as BSPSII. It included a 20% management fee (16% for the AECF fund
manager and 4% for AGRA). The FSCCP has been supervised by RDE as part of the BSPSII, and for
example included as part of the Danida reviews of BSPSII.
The FSCCP log-frame was based on the REACT log-frame. During the impementation it was realised
that the REACT log-frame required a revision to address both the demand from potential projects and
also other learnings, e.g. on the communication of business cases. It might have been an oversight that
the FSCCP (and possibly the BSPSII) log frames were not revised accordingly as several outputs
changes and some results indicators become obsolete. The fund manager noted that it had been
attempted to convene the donors and agree on the log frame revisions. It has not happened. Some of
the changed outputs were also those expected to justify the fee for the fund manager, e.g. on
6 For additional information on AECF and REACT: http://www.aecfafrica.org/windows/react-window
7 ‘Clean energy’ is defined as renewable energy, meaning technologies using renewable sources such as solar,
wind, biomass, biogas, geothermal, micro-and small-hydro, including energy efficiency measures that improve
the proportion of useful heat or power derived from renewable sources.
8 DCED: http://www.enterprise-development.org/page/measuring-and-reporting-results
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
8
dissemination of results. According to the fund manger the division of work and expected deliveries by
REACT and AGRA is not clear.
Although REACT is regional for East Africa, the Danida funding was in theory ring-fenced for Kenya.
The Danida funding of DKK 70.0 million was 86% of the funding used for Kenya while the remaining
share was covered by DfiD. The FSCCP pro rata share of the Kenya window of REACT is around a
quarter (86% *DKK 15 million/DKK 65 million = 23%). This will be used in assessing the attribution of
results to FSCCP in Kenya.
3.3 REACT Main results
REACT in the first and second call for proposals in 2011 and 2012 selected and funded 17 projects in
Kenya. The progress and results according to the targets in the FSCCP log-frame is included below.
There has been a satisfactiry result on a number of projects and also projects dealing with renewable
energy technologies. Almost all projects (15) included renewable energy technologies with some
autonomous or indirect adaptation while other (2) emphasized other technologies (planned or direct
adaptation). Some (5) projects in addition also included elements of financial services.
The 2013 REACT portfolio report includes assessment of development impacts. These are mainly
presented as the aggregated regional impacts and not disaggregated at country level. Results based on
data provided by the fund manager are summarized in the table below.
Table: Overview of results and impacts of REACT in Kenya
REACT KENYA (2013 status) REACT Total Danida Danida FSCCP
100% ~85% ~25%
Investments
No. of projects funded 17 ~ 14 ~ 4
Funding committed (USD million) 10.7 9.2 2.6
Matching grants (leverage) (USD million) 19.9 17.0 5.0
Development Impact
Number of rural people benefitting from products
and services that help them adapt to climate change 3,520 ~ 3,000 ~ 900
Number of rural people served by low cost clean
energy products and services provided by REACT
projects (people / households)
237,390 /
48,000
205,000 /
40,000
60,000 /
12,000
Number of private sector jobs directly created in
REACT companies 261 225 65
Number of REACT companies and rural businesses
providing low cost, clean energy products and
services through REACT projects 750 650 200
Environmental Impact
Installed off-grid clean electricity capacity (MW
equivalent) 0.177 0.15 0.045
Part of the matching grants is from other donor support. For example, in one project (Cummings)
supporting gasification of the invasive Prosopis in Baringo the community involvement is a FSCCP
Community Development Trust Fund / Community Environment Facility (CDTF / CEF) project. In this
example the CDTF/CEF grant is included as a matching grant for REACT.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
9
The estimated impact of REACT is in the short run from the aggregated results of the projects
supported. This is overall rather modest compared to the investment, e.g. the resulting reduction in
emissions is so far insignificant. The real impact of REACT in Kenya will be the potential from a few of
the supported projects for a longer term scaling up on commercial terms (in the best case like an M-
PESA equivalent for renewable energy technologies). The main approach of REACT is the systematic
change to a specific market or sub-sector. One such emerging topic is the pay-as-you-go for energy
services where the financial services and technologies are integrated (see case).
3.4 REACT Funding status
The committed grant to the 17 projects in Kenya is USD 10.7 mio. USD (~ DKK 62 million) of which
USD 5.76 million USD (53%) was disbursed by June 2014. An estimated DKK 15.5 million is added for
the fund management fee. The FSCCP share of the budget for projects is DKK 15.0 million. This amount
has been disbursed by RDE. An estimated 53% (DKK 8.0 million) has been recorded as REACT
expenditures while the remaining is committed as grants to projects.
The DKK 5.0 million for M&E development and DCED compliance decided in May 2012 has not yet
been claimed by REACT. This amount has not been disbursed by RDE.
3.5 REACT findings and main lessons learned
Investing in innovation to address climate change is long term endeavor and it would not be necessary
be expected to have immediate and substantial results to be recorded after a few years. The real
impacts of REACT will take time to mature, which also places additional demands on the outcome and
impact monitoring system of REACT.
The DCED monitoring standard could have been more integrated at the onset of each project support.
It is planned only to have a full DCED certification of those projects that are likely to mature into
sustainable business models. Moreover, it is only recently that the DCED standard for challenge funds
was developed.9
A fund with repeated calls like REACT offers opportunities for adjusting calls based on lessons learned.
For example, the challenge of identifying direct adaptation projects has resulted in an adjusted focus
on addressing risks. Similarly it has revealed that there are emerging sub-sectors within renewable
technologies such as integrated payment systems. REACT has used lessons to adjust the log-frame.
Unfortunately the log-frame adjustment was not revised for FSCCP as well and has thus lead to a
rather weak monitoring framework for FSCCP with fewer measurable results. There is also
uncertainty of the exact division of work between AECF and AGRA on the REACT knowledge
management that has resulted in a delay in some outputs.
The linkage to an existing programme (BSPSII) has reduced transaction costs for RDE and increased
the scope of impact from the Danida grants. However, ideally a more efficient approach would be to
fund the same intervention through one single rather than several funding channels. At the initial calls
there was also a case of FSCCP funding unintentionally crowding out the BSPSII because of the
perceived urgency of using the fast start grants.
9 DCED for challenge funds: http://www.enterprise-development.org/page/download?id=2272
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
10
3.6 REACT Case
PAYGO - Solar distribution through pay as you go business models in East Africa.
The Pay as you go-technology (PAYGO) is an emerging concept in solar energy companies in the
AECF REACT portfolio. Six REACT grantees (Mkopa, Mobisol, Offgrid Electrics, Fenix, BBOXX and
Suntransfer) have implemented this technology in their products (two of these are in Kenya).
The technology has been around for a long time, for example in the telecom industry; however,
utilizing it for applications such as energy distribution is a new and innovative approach. In the
ambience of the solar energy sector, the technology allows the end-user of the PAYGO to pay for
the system when used, through scratch cards or GSM technology. The threshold for access to clean
modern energy for the rural poor is lowered and a lower risk for the distributing companies is also
ensured.
During 2013, the six companies provided access to clean modern energy for 52,000 households in
Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, equalling roughly 260,000 people. The products that are being fitted
with this technology are solar home systems. These consist of a small solar panel, which is
connected to a unit with a battery and control panel. To this unit, a number of lights are connected
and often there is a possibility to charge cell phones and connecting appliances.
The PAYGO business models are built around the concept of payments through mobile money and
an automatic switch off when customers do not pay for the product. Some of the companies have
chosen to manage this switch-off through built in timers while other turn off the systems remotely
via communicating with integrated SIM cards.
The cost for accessing daily electricity is less than the equivalent price for kerosene and provides
better lighting as well as access to appliances such as cell phone charging and radio. The set up and
the affordability enable the customer to access energy when they need it and can afford it, similar
to a top up in the telecom industry.
The benefits of these solar projects can be found in not only decreased expenditure on kerosene,
candles and batteries but also in improved health, improved lighting for homework, in decreased
emissions of CO2 equivalents from kerosene and reduced risk of accidental fires. On top of the
technology, the repayment period which varies from 12-24 months creates a continuous
relationship between the customer and the provider. The reputation of the solar PV sector has
previously been tarnished by cheap products and the REACT grantees are therefore investing in
after-sales service and customer care to ensure full customer satisfaction.
The main motivation for developing the PAYGO-technology has been risk management. The
technology has enabled the grantees to sell products on credit while lowering the risks associated
with defaults when providing products on credit. In a case of a default, the grantee can simply
repossess the system and reinstall it somewhere else. Through agreements with the mobile money
service providers, the mobile payments also allow for an integration of payment systems with the
companies’ management information systems (MIS). This allows for a fully digitalized process,
which facilitates the information management process and reduces risk further.
The funding provided to the grantees by AECF has had both direct and indirect consequences. First
off, the main usages of the funds have been product development, either with the actual product or
with the company’s MIS. One company used also the funds for scaling up the distribution network.
The REACT grantees claim to have had an easier time to attract the capital necessary for the
subsequent scale up after receiving the initial approval by the funding from AECF.
The potential of the PAYGO-technology is thus not limited to solar, or even to energy provision.
The technology can be integrated in anything electric and can facilitate to increase the affordability
of other products as well. Furthermore, an emerging trend is the third party providers, who will
develop a PAYGO platform for a company, customized to the needs and context of the country of
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
11
operations.
The REACT PAYGO companies report that the possibility to remotely monitor the systems for
usage patterns, energy consumption, payment patterns significantly reduces costs of operations
and service costs. Furthermore, the possibility of maintaining a constant communication with their
customers further facilitates cost reduction. This is vital as the companies have to keep up
payment rates and keep the number of defaults as low as possible.
Overall, this emerging business model has a great potential to change the lives of poor people in
rural East Africa. The technology is well developed, tested and together with a powerful
information management system, the main parts of the PAYGO model are in place. Now the
companies are showing how to handle the operational and financial part of running businesses
where customers pay in small instalments and where the full cost recovery is within 12-24
months.
Solar home system and solar powered barber shop using PAYGO
Case and pictures by AECF
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
12
3.7 Summary of REACT status and progress
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Comments on Progress
Component 1: REACT
Immediate Objective:
REACT will catalyse
private sector investment
and innovation in low cost,
clean energy and
adaptation climate change
technologies through
bringing innovative
climate change products
and services to rural
people in Kenya.
By 201310, USD 6 million
investment in low cost clean
energy and climate change
adaptation technologies catalysed
by the programme.
Businesses supplying clean
energy and adaptation services
report a significant improvement
in the environment to invest
(30% of businesses surveyed)
17 projects funded in Kenya in the 1st (2011)
and 2nd (2012) call for proposals. The
assumption in the REACT Log-Frame was
that 20 projects would be implemented in
Kenya.
The FSCCP share is ~ 4 projects (the target
was 5 projects). USD 19.89 million was
catalysed as investments by project
developers. The FSCCP share is ~ USD 5
million.
The target is satisfactory achieved on
leveraged investments and number of
projects supported by FSCCP.
It took USD 2.5 million (DKK 15.0 million) in
grants to leverage USD 5.0 million in
matching grants. 1 USD could leverage 2
USD.
AGRA is surveying the business community.
It has not been done for 2014.
10 The REACT targets are based on the milestones as set out in the REACT Log-Frame at the time of design. The REACT log frame was revised but the FSCCP log frame and
targets were not updated. The additional targets are for projects supported by the additional fast start climate change programme based on an estimated five projects. The pro
rata share of the REACT Kenya portfolio is 25% equal to the FSCCP share of allocated support in Kenya.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
13
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 1.1:
Clean energy products and
services providing lower
cost and more reliable
energy supply to rural
businesses and households
in off-grid areas
By 2013, 25,000 rural households
served by low cost, clean energy
products and services provided
by REACT projects.
By 2013, 3,750 rural businesses
served by lower cost, clean
energy products and services
provided by REACT projects
It is estimated that about 48,182 households
are served by REACT in Kenya. The FSCCP
share is about 12,000 households. Each
household gained about USD 20 as a result
of REACT, i.e. a net gain of around USD 1.0
million.
Number or business served is not monitored
(difficult to monitor downstream in the
value chain). The number of suppliers etc
(upstream in the value chain) is estimated at
750. The FSCCP share is about 200.
The scale of outreach is partly satisfactory,
i.e. about 50% of target for households.
With a grant of USD 2.5 million (DKK 15
million) the households gained an additional
USD 1.0 million. The full potential of the
investments when further scaled up is not
reached.
The generated capacity of energy production
is 0.177 MW as a result of the REACT
projects in Kenya. This is so far
insigninficant. The full portential has not
been reached. The energy produced and CO2
replaced has not been assessed in detail but
it is limited so far (a rought estimate is that
ist can be up to around 2,000 tCO2e p.a.).
Output 1.2:
Small-holder farmers
benefit from products and
services that help them to
adapt to climate change.
By 2013, 15,000 small holder
farmers benefiting from private
sector innovation in supply of
seed and other inputs and
investment in developing
markets for climate resilient
agriculture.
By 2013, 10,000 smallholder
farmers benefiting from
investment by large
agribusinesses in afforestation,
water capture and storage, and
irrigation.
By 2013, 25,000 smallholder
farmers with improved access to
knowledge of climate change
adaptation.
The indicators are not specifically assessed.
The initial assumption that adaptation
would concern mainly adaptation in
agriculture did not hold.
Increased access to energy has been assessed
to 3,520 persons or about 700 households.
The FSCCP share is about 175 households.
REACT has not succeeded in getting and
selecting direct adaptation projects.
It has been difficult to communicate what an
adaptation project might be. It was also
realised that it should not only be related to
agriculture (i.e. weather and water) projects.
In Kenya there are two adaptation projects
(crop insurance and solar powered
irrigation pump). Other projects have
elements of indirect adaptation, i.e. by
providing access to energy or otherwise
reduce risks to climate change exposure.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
14
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 1.3:
Financial service providers
facilitate greater
investment in lower cost,
clean energy and climate
change technologies and
help the rural poor access
them.
By 2013, USD 1.25 Million
increased lending by commercial
banks and existing micro finance
institutions to households and
SMEs that wish to invest in
renewable energy products and
adaptation technologies.
By 2013, 7,500 small holder
farmers with protected incomes
through climate related
insurance services.
One project (ECOSMART) has contributed to
lending of USD 311,791. The FSCCP share
would be around USD 80,000.
REAC has been partly satisfactory in
identifying and funding projects resulting in
financial services for renewable energy and
adaptation technologies.
There has been innovation with projects
integrating pay-as-you-go energy services,
e.g. solar home systems.
Output 1.4:
Communication helps to
spread successful business
models and advocacy helps
to improve policies
increasing the incentive to
invest and innovate.
By 2013, 25,000 poor people
benefiting from initiatives that
replicate business models and
technologies supported by REACT
through effective communication.
By 2013, at least one policy
process influenced by evidence
provided by REACT.
By 2013, 50% of REACT projects
are commercially viable.
Not assessed and removed from the revised
REACT log-frame.
No progress recorded as these activities are
no longer included in the REACT log-frame.
According to the ACEF fund manager this is
an output where the responsibility between
AGRA and AECF is not clear.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
15
4. Centre for Energy Efficiency and Conservation (CEEC) at Kenyan
Association of Manufacturers (KAM)
Kenyan Association of Manufacturers (KAM) is a Business Member Organization (BMO) of private
sector manufacturing companies in Kenya with 800 members. KAM provides subsidized services to
members and non-members including services to save energy and reduce costs. The Centre for Energy
Efficiency and Conservation (CEEC) was established by KAM in 2006. 11 It provides services to both
members and non-members of KAM for identifying potential reduction in energy consumption and
costs. This is mainly done through energy audits including general energy audits and investment grade
audits. The Ministry of Energy & Petroleum (MoEP), formerly Ministry of Energy, has a public-private
partnership with KAM to deliver energy services including to non-KAM members. MoEP provides an
annual grant of KES 30 million (~ DKK 2.0 million). The FSCCP provided an opportunity to expand the
level of energy services provided by CEEC.
4.1 CEEC/KAM Intervention logic
The support to CEEC would significantly expand the number of energy audits and increase
investments in energy efficiency in the manufacturing sector in Kenya. This would address a demand
side measure to reduce energy consumption and contribute to lower emissions compared to the
business-as-usual. CEEC would develop the demand for energy audits through promotion campaigns.
The education of energy auditors would ensure the capacity to meet the demand for energy audits.
The expanded energy audit scheme at CEEC would complement the Agence Française de Développement
(AfD) supported regional Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (RE&EE) programme based in
KAM, i.e. by supporting a pipeline of potential investments.
CEEC would develop capacity for comprehensive resource audits to include other productions factors
in addition to energy, e.g. water and raw materials, and waste. The aim would be for manufacturers to
reduce costs through resource efficiency expanding on the lessons from the energy audits. CEEC would
promote new technology including alternative energy production and consumption, e.g. biogas and
solar PV. This would for example be through exchange visits to pilot projects and demonstrations sites.
4.2 CEEC/KAM Design approach and implementation modality
KAM is a stakeholder in BSPSII and with participation in some of the components (eg. With EPS/ABD).
KAM was considered as a component in BSPSII but the collaboration did not materialise because only
three componenst could be supported in BSPSII. The FSCCP provided an opportunity to forge closer
links with BSPSII by supporting CEEC/KAM, and it was thought to be beneficial for BSPSII to be
engaged with the KAM as a memberbased association of private companies.
The support to CEEC was based on the FSCCP 2011 and FSCCP 2012 documents, and an MoU between
KAM and RDE. There was no separate component document and there was no detailled strategic or
work plan for CEEC available for the design of FSCCP. The targets and indicators were agreed as part of
the design of the 2011 FSCCP and revisited in the 2012 FSCCP.
The implementation of the component was done by CEEC. The implementation of the energy audits
was a scaling up of the audits already funded by Ministry of Energy (MoE). Between 2007 and 2013
there were 171 general enery audits and 45 investment grade audits with a subdisy from the MOE
support.
11 For additional information on CEEC and KAM: http://www.kam.co.ke/index.php/kam-services/energy-services
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
16
The FSCCP followed the same approach as the audits supported with the MoE grants where 75% of the
costs for the general energy audits were covered as a subsidy and 100% of the more detailed
investment grade audits.
During the design good dialogue was established with AFD. AFD at the same time as the FSCCP
estalished a regional credit line for renewable energy and energy efficiency in KAM.12 The credit line
was € 30 million for Kenya. The credit line has provided an opportunity to finance relevant investment
while the FSCCP could contribute to develop a pipeline of potential investment grade projects. The link
was enforced by adding DKK 1.0 million into a revolving fund under the AFD programme. DKK 1.0
million is sufficient for one feasibility study with a repayment every six months, i.e. support to two
feasibility studies annually. The revolving fund would support feasibility studies and only those
funded are required to refund the support.
4.3 CEEC/KAM main results
More than 200 additional energy audits were carried out – 118 general energy audits and 87
investment grade audits – with FSCCP support. In addition to the increased access to fund energy
audits and expertise available it has also been a driving factor that since 2012 it has been mandatory
for larger energy users to have an energy audit carried out. All manufacturers using more than
180,000 kWh annually are required to carry out an energy audit by a licensed auditor and repeat this
every three years. The companies audited are required to implement at least 50% of the
recommendations.
Based on experience it is the assessment by CEEC that companies usually can save 15-30% in the
energy bill. The pay-back period for the proposed adjustments and investments is usually short
around 1-2 years. But the uptake of the proposed investments is rather modest, i.e. the proposed
investments/changes are not followed. The assessment after six month is that between 5% for the
larger investments, 15% of the medium investment and 30% of the smaller investments proposed are
actually carried out.
The table below summarizes all FSCCP supported energy audits from the 2011 to 2014 what the
annual potential savings are, what the required investment is, the simple pay-back period, and
estimated energy savings (i.e. replaced capacity). Actual investments based on the assessment of
uptake could be as low as 20% six months after the audit.
Overview of CEEC energy audits in FSCCP
Potential savings
p.a.
(mio KES)
Investment
required
(mio KES)
Simple Payback
Period (SPP)
(Yrs)
Energy
savings
(Mw eq.)
General audits (118) 631 1,535 2.4 4.9
IGA (87) 3,267 2,939 0.9 22.8
Sum (205) 3,898 4,474 1,1 27.7
There was limited progress with the comprehensive resource audits bringing in other production
factors than energy as well as the potential economic value of waste reduction or commercialization.
There was good progress on awareness of alternative energy production, e.g. mini-hydropower and
biogas. There are further technological, market and regulatory constraints to be addressed. A first step
has been to share information through exchange visits to pilot sites. The exchange visits were well
12 http://www.kam.co.ke/index.php/kam-services/energy-services/regional-techical-assistance-programme
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
17
attended. No progress was made on piloting new technologies, and CEEC/KAM has concluded it is not
its role to initiate or fund piloting of new technology.
Biannual progress reports were forwarded to RDE. The progress reports provided some evidence of
activities but lacked details on progress on results and financial status.
4.4 CEEC/KAM overall assessment of progress
The overall progress on energy audits is satisfactory. The documentation of outcomes and impacts is
limited so far, but it is expected to be included in the forthcoming impact analysis (not yet made
available). The impact analysis includes the energy audits carried out from 2009 to 2012, i.e. including
about half (105 energy audits) supported by FSCCP in 2011 and 2012.
Progress on other activities has been limited. This includes the additional activities beyond the energy
audits such as piloting new energy technologies and developing comprehensive resource audits. KAM
has resolved that the role of CEEC is not to be engaged in piloting technologies or support such
activities. There was no progress in the M&E system. CEEC lacks a functional result based M&E system
that can track activities and managed relevant data. Without an M&E system the assessment of results
and progress is difficult.
The main constraint on the comprehensive resource audits has been the challenge of finding a
qualified consultant. This has recently been resolved and CEEC/KAM has contracted the Indian
Chamber of Commerce. It is expected some comprehensive resource audits will be prepared before the
end of 2014.
4.5 CEEC/KAM funding status
The total grant to CEEC / KAM was DKK 30.0 million. To date DKK 22.5 million has been disbursed
from Danida to KAM, and the expected expenditure by KAM will also be around DKK 22.5 million by
end of 2014. CEEC/KAM has requested a no-cost extension until mid-2015.
4.6 CEEC/KAM findings and main lessons learned
The energy and other resource related services of CEEC have the potential of becoming an important
element of a green growth agenda for the Kenyan manufacturing industry. While there has been a
good beginning and increase in the demand for energy audits the potential for energy and resource
use efficiency might be far from fully explored. With the FSCCP and MoE supported audits around 25%
of the KAM members had an energy audit carried out.
A key lesson is that the full potential of the energy audit mainly are achieved only if the companies
establishes relevant management structures. For example, by nominating energy managers and
establishing an energy task force or similar to monitor energy consumption and follow up on energy
savings measures is essential.
The management of data and M&E needs improvements. In addition to providing better reporting to
development partners this information will also be of internal value to CEEC for promotions, bench
marking and identification of good practices. One constraint is the companies are reluctant to share
process data. An approach may have to be developed to obtain and use data confidentially and without
the ability to track back to individually firms.
The FSCCP has facilitated CEEC to better understand its role as a broker between available
technologies and good practices and the demand of their members and non-members to reduce costs
through efficient resource use and also become more resilient towards potential climate related risks
for their production.
The FSCCP has also provided CEEC / KAM with additional experiences that are used to influence new
policies and regulation in particular in the energy sector but also in climate change. As noted earlier
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
18
KAM was a co-chair the development of a climate policy. KAM has also played a significant role in
developing energy regulations and new standards for solar PV and biogas. Regulation that requires
energy audits was an effective driver for the demand for the energy audit services.
4.7 CEEC/KAM testimonials
CEEC testimonials from 2013 promotion campaign
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
19
4.8 Summary of CEEC/KAM status and progress
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Assessment of progress
Component 2: Energy Efficiency, KAM
Immediate Objective: The efficiency in
energy and resource use in the
manufacturing sector in Kenya increased.
Implementation by companies of
recommendations of energy and resource
audits. 50% of recommended short term
measures implemented by the end of 2014.
The estimate made by CEEC of
the uptake is:
30% of low cost measures are
implemented.
15% of medium cost measures
are implemented.
5% long term cost measures
are implemented.
There is a follow up done with
each firm six months after the
audit. Data is available but not
compiled. Also data on barriers
to implementation is available
but not compiled. The reason
for a relative low uptake needs
to be explored.
More precise information is
expected in the Impact
Assessment on the uptake.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
20
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Assessment of progress
Output 2.1:
A substantial increased number of
comprehensive energy audits and
investment grade audits.
50 additional general energy audits and 25
investment grade audits carried out per
calender year (2012, 2013, 2014)
General energy audits: 118.
2011 (10), 2012 (61), 2013
(32), and 2014 (15)
Investment grade audits: 87
2011 (5), 2012 (29), 2013 (38),
and 2014 (15).
These are the additional
Danida funded. With MoE
support between 2007-2013,
171 general audits and
investment grade audits were
carried out.
Satisfactory outcome but
slightly below target for
general energy audits and
higher for investment grade
audits:
Total of 205 energy audits (118
general energy audits and 87
investment grade audits).
Lately the general energy audit
were in some cases merged
into the investment grade
audits.
Output 2.2:
Effective promotion towards both KAM and
non-KAM members of the benefit of
introducing EE measures.
One promotional campaign with national
coverage conducted annually, especially
targeting SMEs.
Three regional (Nairobi, Mombassa and
Western Kenya) promotional campaigns
carried out per year (2011, 2012, 2013,
2014).
Annual promotional campaigns
were carried out.
2011: 59 inequiries
2012: 78 inquiries
Satisfactory progress. No sub-
regional campaign carried out.
The national campaign targets
locations where industries are
concentrated.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
21
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Assessment of progress
Output 2.3:
Demonstration/ piloting to other
companies of the benefit of EE investments.
2011: 5 exchange visits carried out
annually in 2012 and 2013.
Cost sharing of 10 annual pilot projects to
test new technology and approaches.
2012: Year 2014 added.
Exchange visits: 15 exchange
visits carried out in 2012, 2013
and 2014. Emphasis on
renewable energy, e.g. biogas
and mini-hydro, than energy
efficiency.
No cost sharing of pilot
projects.
Exchange visits satisfactory.
Good interest from relevant
companies seeking, for
example inspiration renewable
energy solutions.
Limited progress with pilot
projects. Investments in pilot
activies did not take off. The
available budget considered
too small. Moreover it was
considered to be beyond the
scope of KAM to implement
pilot projects or provide due
diligence of such.
Output 2.4:
Facility for providing non-financial
assistance to companies for
implementation of recommendations of
energy audits established.
On an annual basis 10 companies use this
matching grant facility.
2012: Year 2014 added (but not additional
funding)
None
Output 2.5:
Comprehensive resource audits piloted
with a number of companies.
2011: 10 companies undergo a
comprehensive resource audit per calender
year.
2012: 10 more comprehensive audits
added for 2014.
Comprehensive resource
audits: None
No progress. No
comprehensive audits carried
out. The reason according to
KAM was that no qualified
consultant could be indentified
in Kenya. KAM has now
contracted Indian Chamber of
Commerce as a consultant. The
plan is to develop some
resource audits by end 2014
and the remaining up to 10 in
2015.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
22
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Assessment of progress
Output 2.6:
CEEC capacity increased to carry out audits. 2011: KAM employs sufficient additional
professional staff to manage the energy
efficiency scheme.
2012: Additional 30 auditors certified.
Staffing of CEEC: about 6
permanent staff of CEEC.
Number of auditors certified.
85 Certified Energy Managers
(CEM) and Certified
Measurement and Verification
Professional (CMVP):
2012: 32 (CEM) + 10 (CMVP)
2013: 15 (CEM) + 5 (CMVP)
2014: 23
The number of staff at CEEC is
assessed to be satisfactory.
Number of trained certified
auditors is satisfactory.
The number of qualified (short
listed) companies for energy
audits has increased from 5-6
to 13.
Output 2.7:
M&E framework and impact assessments. Results based M&E system developed and
implemented.
Impact assessment by year 2014.
No work done on the M&E
system.
An impact assessment is
ongoing covering audits from
2009 to 2012.
No progress on M&E
framework. There is an
opportunity to utitilise data
from energy audits and follow
up for assessing good
practices, barriers to up-take,
and energy savings potential.
Impact assessment – expected
draft report mid-October 2014.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
23
5. Community driven projects to reduce climate change risks with the
Community Environment Facility (CEF) at CDTF
The Community Development Trust Fund (CDTF) is a joint initiative of the Government of Kenya
(GoK), Danida and the European Union (EU). The objective to contribute to poverty alleviation by
offering support, in form of grants, to community-based projects which address social, economic and
environment priorities. The Community Environment Facility (CEF) is a CDTF component. The
objective of the CEF is to support community projects aimed at poverty reduction through improved
livelihood systems and the conservation of community natural resources and initiatives for enhanced
environmental management.13
5.1 CEF intervention logic
The purpose of the support was to develop community based support on renewable energy and other
climate change mitigation, to support community projects addressing adaptation to climate change
risks and to mainstream climate change in the CEF portfolio. In addition to funding concrete
community based projects the support should also enhance the overall capacity, skills and networking
of CDTF/CEF to address climate change adaptation and mitigation.
The interventions of FSCCP are in line with the National Climate Change Response Strategy (NCCRS).
The FSCCP should result in addition 25 CEF projects related to climate change mitigation and
adaptation.
5.2 CEF design approach and implementation modality
The FSCCP was provided as grant support to CEF / CDTF in addition to the existing grant provided
through NRMP. The same modalities would be used and the only difference would be the additional
funding and the emphasis on addressing climate change issues. In addition the provision was made for
two additional technical staff at the CEF PMU.
A log-frame for the FSCCP was developed that showed the expected results in addition to the NRMP
from the FSCCP. The status of FSCCP progress is included below.
An additional call only on the 2012 FSCCP grant was done. For this purpose an online application
system was developed and tested. The previous management of calls had been paper based and
processing of applications was substantial.14 The lesson from the electronic call was that the initial
part of the application process was more efficient. The final stages of the application process could
have involved the CEF PMU technical staff to a larger degree.
5.3 CEF main results
An additional 24 projects were supported by FSCCP in addition to the 40 CEF projects supported by the
Danida NRM programme and 43 by EC. Examples of FSCCP supported CEF projects are included in the
below.
In addition CEF/CDTF developed a tool to assess for climate change mainstreaming of all CEF projects.
But the actual implementation of identified opportunities is delayed. This was in phase II where
projects were only contracted in June 2014.
13 Additional information about CDTF: www.cdtfkenya.org
14 There were 492 applications of which 65 were shortlisted, 20 proposals went into full proposal development and of these
10 were funded, i.e. 2% of the total number of applications.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
24
CEF/CDTF has also managed to develop a new and stronger emphasis on renewable energy as a result
of FSCCP. This is further strengthened by a number of partner agreements and networking. But
funding for actively supported awareness development and partnerships is not yet utilized.
CEF/CDTF in general and in particular as a result of FSCCP has been able to contribute to national
policies with the perspective from the communities. It includes the climate change action plan and
climate change policy. It also includes issues related to renewable energy such as technology standards
for solar and biogas. But it is in particular in relation to the counties CEF/CDTF now plays a role. All
CEF projects are included in the County Integrated Development Plans (CIDP). Selected CEF projects at
county level are also used as demonstration projects to champion enterprise development and value
chains.
5.4 CEF overall assessment of progress
Overall progress is satisfactory. There has been a delay until June 2014 in the contracting of the ten 2nd
phase FSCCP projects. The delay was due to the recruitment of consultants for the on-line assessment
of proposals. The activities for additional mainstreaming of climate change were also delayed. The
delay was due to external factors such as the change in Government in 2013.
Support was provided by the NRMP to develop the M&E system for CEF/CDTF. This is about to be
implemented and it includes a new information management system. This is much needed for
CEF/CDTF to be able to track projects and finances but also be able to collect evidence of impacts and
good practices.
5.5 CEF funding status
The FSCCP grant to CEF/CDTF is DKK 40 million. According to CEF/CDTF the total expenditure to date
is KES 319 million (DKK 20.9 million) or about 50% of the FSCCP grant. Expenditures for support staff
and field verifications were KES 41 million (DKK 2.7 million). The total amount allocated to projects is
KES 523 million (DKK 34.3 million) of which KES 278 million (DKK 18.2 million) (53%) is disbursed to
projects and KES 245 million (DKK 16.0) is outstanding commitments. The outstanding balance not
committed to projects is estimated to be DKK 3.1 million.
CEF has been granted an extension period in NRMP to June 2016. There is also an extension of FSCCP
but that could be shorter until June 2015.
5.6 CEF findings and main lessons learned
CEF/CDTF has made good progress on the renewable energy portfolio addressing and gaining
experiences with all complex issues of implementation, i.e. appropriate technology, access to finance,
market regulation and incentives, and local capacity development. This could be key focus areas for
CEF in the next phase.
According to CEF/CDTF the FSCCP has provided an eye opener on the potential for scaling up lessons
and contribute to local level green growth. CEF/CDTF has also through FSCCP developed skills and
capacity in particular on renewable energy and access to energy as well as using renewable energy
locally for enterprise development. CEF/CDTF has in particular made progress through relevant
partnerships with other private and public institutions like KAM, CIC and MESPT. The networking has
added value to the CEF projects.
There is a technology gap and need for further development and adjustment of appropriate renewable
energy technology addressing various localized needs. There are also constraints in the financing
where renewable energy investments are not acceptable by financial institutions. In addition the
current feed-in tariffs requirements are not favorable for developing an attractive market for
independent power producers.
Lessons were learned and fundamental change in application procedures were facilitated with the
testing of the on-line call for proposals. CEF is moving forward to embrace the system developed under
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
25
FSCCP for future calls. The process of developing an M&E system in NRMP has also brought to light
CEF’s needs for managing project knowledge and present results.
5.7 CEF Case Studies
Renewable Energy for Forest Conservation and Enhanced Livelihoods by Kenya National
Federation of Agriculture Producers (KENFAP based in Kiambu County)
The main goal of the project was to sustainably improve the livelihoods of the community while
conserving the environment. It had three components: Renewable energy, which aimed at promoting
adoption of biogas as a clean and sustainable energy source; Good Agricultural Practices and Climate
Smart Agriculture, which aimed at promoting sustainable and profitable agriculture that conserves
the natural resources under which the agricultural systems exist and which enhances resilience and
mitigation to climate change; and Reforestation, which aimed at providing a sustainable source of
wood and wood products, thus preventing future deforestation.
So far, the project has had the following outcomes;
• 18 youth have been trained on biogas installation and maintenance. This has provided a source of
employment for the youth.
• 200 biogas plants have been installed and operational only a few facing minor challenges.
• 200 farmers trained on bio-slurry management and use and 50 farmers already using the slurry
for farming.
• Over 450,000 tree seedlings planted both on farm and in the forest.
• 20 agricultural groups trained on various agricultural practices.
• 7 farmer groups facilitated to access clean and certified seeds.
Impact of the project so far include:
• Improvement of the general hygiene of the kitchens and reduction in risks associated with indoor
pollution. The beneficiaries have reported reduced incidences of eye irritation and respiratory
complication.
• Use of wood fuel has reduced by over 60%. This has not only saved the costs associated with
wood fuel, but also reduced forest degradation, eased the workload on the women and the
children and also reduced the GHGs emitted from burning of the wood fuel.
• There has been a notable increase in agricultural productivity associated with use of bio-slurry. In
some cases, the change has included fast maturity of the vegetables and increased volumes per
unit of land. The cost of procuring fertilizer has also reduced. All this has translated into higher
incomes for the farmers.
• Farmers have withdrawn their animals from the forest and adopted zero grazing so as to sustain
the biogas. This has not only reduced forest destruction by the animals, but also led to increase in
the milk yield as the animals are no longer wasting energy walking long distances to and from the
forest.
• The farmer groups are more cohesive now and are adopting various technologies in their farming.
Their income is improving as the new technologies adopted are bringing higher returns compared
to what they were used to. Adoption of high value crops and clean seeds has improved
productivity and marketability of their products. Some groups are already organizing themselves
for group marketing, while others have adopted table banking and other saving schemes.
• The soils in the farms are improving. Excess use of fertilizers and chemicals is on the decline.
• Over 400 acres of land is under forest now. Farmers already have woodlots which will satisfy
their future demand for wood products. Over 300 acres of degraded forest land has been
rehabilitated.
• Communities are able to benefit from the forest as they are allowed to farm the forest as they
plant and tender for the trees under the Plantation Establishment and Livelihood Improvement
Scheme (PELIS) programme. This has contributed immensely to food security and increased
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
26
income at household level.
• Groups are now able to produce and sell tree seedlings as an income generating activity. So far,
over 200,000 tree seedlings have been sold from the group nurseries, which is equivalent to over
2.5 million shillings in earning for the groups.
Challenges
Despite these impacts, the use of bio-slurry has still not been adopted fully by the community. In
essence, the benefits of the biogas are proportionately stated as 20% from use of the gas and 80%
from the use of the slurry. The concept of proper slurry management is still lacking, meaning 80% of
the biogas benefits is being lost. In addressing this challenge, the project seeks to promote
economically viable zero grazing systems that rely on full cycle utilization of resources from the
animal production, to biogas use for both energy and farming practices. The project will train and
support the farmers to come up with a breed improvement programme, support local production of
animal feeds and promote proper use of bio-slurry, as a by-product of animal production systems, for
both fodder and food crop production.
With farmers now turning to zero grazing in order to install the biogas, the productivity of the
animals is far below expected capacity. There is a low quality animal breeds in the area and without a
proper breeding system that can improve the quality of the animals. It even becomes difficult to break
even on the cost of production, considering the high cost of production associated with zero grazing
and the low production returned by the animals. It therefore becomes counter-productive saving
wood fuel costs and using the savings to sustain the livestock, if it cannot economically sustain
themselves.
Case prepared by CEF PMU
Photos by CEF PMU
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
27
Harnessing solar energy - Kisauni solar power installation
Kisauni Youth Polytechnic in Mombasa is a public institution that has benefited from CDTF renewable
energy interventions. Through CDTF, the Polytechnic is currently running a state-of-the-art solar PV
system. This off-grid system comprises of 10KW solar system with battery storage of up to 76.8KWh,
converted from DC to AC, thus enabling the Polytechnic to run their operations without changing their
equipment.
The shift to solar electricity has enabled the institution to cut down on electricity cost by 99%. For
future battery replacement, the management has established a savings kitty that will enable them
procure new batteries after three years when the batteries are due for replacement.
The polytechnic has also benefited with borehole drilling which draws water through solar powered
pump. In addition, since the water is salty; the project has installed water purification equipment that
is running on solar power. The water purification is done through reverse osmosis to serve the
polytechnic community and for market. The institution has also benefitted with tanks for roof water
harvesting and environmental conservation through working with environmental groups and schools
to conserve the environment.
Case prepared by CEF PMU
Kisauni Youth Polytechnic solar installation in progress earlier 2014
Photo by CEF PMU
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
28
Public-private partnership for water supply - Ondiri Swamp and Associated Water Systems
Livelihood and Conservation Project
Communities were assisted to develop an institutional framework and negotiate with relevant
stakeholders for a private-public-community partnership for the two water schemes. These are the
Karinde Water Project (a water scheme with two surface in-take weirs within the Thogoto Forest,
gravity pipes to a 25m3 sump and pump house, rising mains to a 225m3 storage tank and a gravity
distribution system to cover the Karinde Village and its environs) and the Kabuthi Water Project (a
borehole at the County Council’s public cemetery, with a 100 m3 storage tank and a 50 m3 distribution
tank and a pipe system to supply the Kiawamagira village, with pipes to be extended to the Dagoretti
Market bio-latrine and water kiosk).
The private partner, the Kikuyu Water Company (KIWACO) has expressed an interest in engaging with
the Karinde and Kabuthi water schemes. Of particular interest is the surface water intake scheme in
Thogoto forest, which presents opportunities for bulk water production. Surface water intakes are
much cheaper to operate than boreholes and their sustainability can be enhanced by the conservation
and rehabilitation of the catchment forests.
Section 57(2) of the Water Act requires WASREB to issue licenses based on technical and commercial
capability for water extractions. The objective of this requirement is to ensure that water service
providers are able to meet routine operation and maintenance costs and ensure sustainability in the
long term. Community based projects have challenges meeting the requirements. To qualify for a
water extraction license, a substantive business plan with a 3 year cash flow projection, using
approved tariffs must be submitted. The application should include the amount of investment injected
into the operation to enable the water scheme sustain its operations during the initial phases. The
community would be required to pay a fee of KES 75,000 if the envisaged production is up to 2,500
m3 per day and would be required to meet the performance threshold laid out by the
regulator.
The option available to the community structure is to negotiate partnership with a private water
company, which can demonstrate ability to meet the requirement of the regulator, and provide the
technical and business skills to enable the efficient and sustainable delivery of water services to the
villages of Karinde and Kiawamagira. The PPP Act 2013, provides different models for contracting
with public sector agencies. Options include lease or concession arrangements or management
contracts for a minimum period of 7 years. In this case a lease agreement was negotiated between
Kenya Forest Service (KFS) and Kiambu County and the community corporate entity, which in turn
contract KIWACO to manage the assets on its behalf for an agreed term. Incentives are negotiated to
community members in exchange for managing the forest under the Payment for Ecosystem Services
(PES).
Case and photos by CEF/CDTF
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
29
5.8 Summary of CEF/CDTF status and progress
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Comments on progress
Component 3: Community
projects by CEF/CDTF
Immediate Objective:
Community-driven initiatives
reduce threats and conflicts
related to natural resource use
and climate change risks.
2011 FSCCP: Additional 100 community
groups representing about 3,000
beneficiaries (10 additional projects each
with 10 groups having an average of 30
members).
2012 FSCCP: Additional 150 community
groups representing about 4,500
beneficiaries (at least 15 additional
projects each with 10 groups having an
average of 30 members).
24 projects supported by FSSCP in
addition to other 83 CEF projects.
At least an additional 25,000
persons are direct and indirect
beneficiares.
14 projects supported under FSCCP
2011. This was 4 more than
planned.
Additional 10 projects supported
on FSCC under phase II. This was 5
less than planned due to insufiicient
number of proposals being
completed for funding.
The 14 FSCCP 2011 are at final stage
of implementation. Phase II projects
are in their early stages of
implementation. The phase II
projects were launched between
June and August 2014.
Output 3.1:
Promote energy saving
technologies that enhance
sustainable utilization of natural
resources
2011 FSCCP: Minimum 5 additional
community projects on innovative
community approaches to develop
renewable energy and energy savings
(minimum 10 in total for all CEF).
2012 FSCCP: Minimum 8 additional
community projects on innovative
community approaches to develop
renewable energy and energy savings.
Around 13 projects promoting
energy saving and renewable
energy:
• Three community based Mini
Hydroelectricity generation
projects are under
construction.
• Three community institution
supported solar electrification.
• Three community projects
supported with biogas
production
• One community project
supported in production of
• Implementation of two
MiniHydros has commenced,
but facing implementation
challenges. Implementation of
the third MiniHydro has slowed
down due to low budgetary
allocation but being addressed.
• All the three solar installations
are complete and functional.
• Development of the biogas
units is at advanced stage of
development and will be
commissioned by the end of the
year.
• Collaboration forged between
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
30
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Comments on progress
biomass gasifiers stoves
• Four projects implementing
energy saving technologies
including institutional cook
stoves, household energy
saving stoves,
the project and KIRDI (a
research institution) for
training artisans and licensing
of gasifier stove production
Output 3.2:
Support community initiatives
that will enhance adaptation to
and reduction of the climate
change effects on local
livelihoods
2011 FSCCP: Minimum 5 additional
projects on innovative community
approaches to adaptation and reduction of
climate change risks (minimum 10 in total
for all CEF).
2012 FSCCP: Minimum 7 additional
community projects on innovative
community approaches to develop
adaptation to climate change and increase
resilience.
Around 11 projects enhancing
adaptation to climate change and
building the communities resilience
to the impact of climate change:
• 9 projects promote access to
sustainable portable water
through construction of sand
dams, earth dams and other
water access structures. Use of
solar energy to pump water
promoted in all 4 projects.
• 1 project developed under
FSCCP in Turkana with strong
commercial intentions that will
create revenue reserves as
resilience measures against the
impact of climate for the
community.
• 1 project developed under
FSCCP in Mandera with
potential to strengthen
community networks for
adaptation to climate change
Implementation of FSCPP phase I at
an advanced stage and FSCCP phase
II just commenced.
All 11 projects promote
rehabilitation of degraded
ecosystems through afforestation,
agroforestry, riverine rehabilitation.
PELIS programme embraced by 4
projects and early impact is food
security and broadened income at
household level.
Early impacts include availability of
water during dry spells & drought
Water for irrigation available thus
resilience to impact of climate
change enhanced
Focus on building resilience to
drought through enhanced food
security, access to water.
Partnership with private sector to
engage in commercial agriculture
To build resilience to climate
change through promotion of best
practice for rangeland management
and provision of sustainable water.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
31
Logical Framework Verifiable indicator and target Status of progress Comments on progress
Output 3.3:
Screening, monitoring and
communication of good practice
and scaling up
2011 FSCCP: Climate change adaptation
and mitigation options are screened for all
CEF projects and options for actions
identified.
All the CEF projects were screened
for climate change adaption and
mitigation and measures taken to
mainstream some during
implementation.
Initial but limited progress. No
expenditure yet. Monitoring and
communication of good practices is
ongoing and informing best
practices in adaptation and
mitigation.
Output 3.4:
Mainstreaming and innovation
of climate change adaptation
and mitigation technology
options in the CEF project
portfolio.
2012 FSCCP: Minimum 30 current and past
CEF projects identify value added
adaptation or mitigation options for
further innovation and investments.
One past (CEF1) and 20 current
(CEF2 and FSCCP) projects are
identified for upscalling. A concept
is developed to facilitate upscalling.
Initial progress. No expenditure yet.
Concept for upscalling projects
developed and presented to the
CDTF Board of Trustees (BoT) for
approval.
Output 3.5:
Awareness and promotion
activities to develop a future
project pipeline on adaptation
technologies and renewable
energy at local level
Climate change adaptation and mitigation
options are screened for all CEF projects
and options for actions identified.
Three partnerships established
between the beneficiaries and the
private sector.
At least seven networks established
between local NGOs and
beneficiaries.
A concept for engaging private
sector and NGOs developed and
under BoT review.
Initial progress. No expenditure yet.
CDTF has developed a concept for
engaging private sector and NGOs
which is under both Danida and BoT
review.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
32
6. Resilience to climate change in pastoral communities in the arid lands
of Northern Kenya
The Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT) is a member-based umbrella organization for Community
Conservancies (community-led conservation initiatives) established in 2004 and located in the arid
and semi-arid lands of Northern Kenya. NRT’s mission is to develop community conservancies that
transform lives, secure peace and conserve natural resources across the rangelands of northern Kenya.
These arid areas are in the front-line of climate change risks and impacts, with increasingly frequent
and severe droughts that are likely to bring hardship and conflict over resources to communities.
NRT has 27 member conservancies covering a population of over 200,000 people over an area of
about 31,400 km2 within 9 counties (Baringo, Garissa, Isiolo, Laikipia, Lamu, Marsabit, Meru, Tana
River, and Samburu). Additional conservancies in Northern Kenya have requested to join NRT as
members. The Northern Rangelands Company Ltd (NRCL) is the registered not-for-profit company
implementing the mandate of NRT, providing the services of facilitation, training, fund-raising and
mentoring for the member conservancies.
6.1 NRT intervention logic
The intervention logic was to support the vision of NRT to build resilient communities that are better
able to cope with an uncertain future of droughts, economic shocks and political change, by
strengthening governance and social development, diversifying economies, improving management of
water, rangelands and wildlife, and building peace and security. The aim is to address mainly the
enhanced resilience among pastoralist in Northern Kenya to cope with more severe and prolonged
drought events through rangeland management.
NRT had carried out pilot activities on rangeland management and the scope was to scale-up these
experiences with rangeland management into a larger scale and eventually covering all member
conservancies. The scaling up of the planned grazing, as envisioned in the NRT strategic plan (2012-
2017) in Goal 4 on Productive Rangelands, is the target of the Danida FSCCP support.
The objective of the Danida support to NRT is: “Resilience to climate change in pastoral communities
in the arid lands of Northern Kenya is enhanced”. The objective is in line with the broader target of the
Goal 4 on Productive Rangelands in the NRT Strategic Plan: “In the next 5 years, all NRT conservancies
will improve the condition of rangelands and other natural resources through development and
implementation of land use plans and practices that ensure the sustainable management of natural
resources”.
As an immediate result of the FSCCP support until end 2014 improved grazing should be established in
11 conservancies covering 400,000 ha.
6.2 NRT design approach and implementation modality
The FSCCP is designed as support to implement the Goal 4 of the Strategic Plan. After the main
principles of the support was agreed in the FSCCP 2012 programme document a brief component
document was prepared in October 2012 together with an Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
between NRT and RDE.
The support was provided to NRT as core support but with the understanding that at least an amount
equal to the FSCCP grant would be used for the rangeland management including achieving the agreed
milestones and expected targets.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
33
NRT already had an established management structure with technical and administrative staff
including conservancy grazing coordinators. Additional grazing coordinators at conservancy level
were required. NRT was not required to provide a detailed project activity plan to Danida but was
instead committed to produce certain agreed results within the Strategic Plan, such as the planned
grazing in 11 conservancies, and progress reporting on agreed milestones and results.
6.3 NRT main results
Towards the expected end of the Danida FSCCP support by December 2014 the NRT Strategic Plan is
only about half-way and most impacts are expected to emerge later. The mid-term results are
intermediate outcomes. The main results were expected to be grazing plans and by-laws in 11
conservancies and the completion of land use plans (LUP). The achieved main results are:
Target December 2014 Status September 2014
Households reached with 3,000 HH 12,000 HH
Grazing plans developed 11 conservancies 14 conservancies
Area in planned grazing (the potential area
is 1.2 million ha)
400,000 ha 1.9 million ha
Grazing committees established 11 14
Awareness on rangeland management in … 11 conservancies 18 conservancies
No of cattle in controlled grazing 15,000 (30%) > 40,000 (90%)
Rehabilitation of degraded land (potential is
500,000 ha)
5,000 ha 2,719 ha
Land use plans 11 plans 2 pilot plans developed,
but 4 expected end of year
2014.
The NRT ensured that staffing was in placed and the M&E tools were developed.
6.4 NRT overall assessment of progress
The overall assessment of progress is very good. Most of the expected results were reached except for
land-use plans and rehabilitation. The delay of the land-use plans was partly due to the need to ensure
a good coordination and collaboration with the counties’ planning.
A key factor for the overall good progress was an increase in the demand for planned grazing. This
stemmed partly from the increase in evidence for established sites and also the promotion of the
concept by the Counties, i.e. in particular the counties of Samburu, Marsabit and Isiolo.
6.5 NRT funding status
The grant to NRT was DKK 7.5 million (KES 110 million). The actual expenditure to date (September
2014) is ~ KES 85 million (~ 75%) and the expected expenditure end of 2014 is ~KES 25.0 million (~
25%). NRT has requested RDE for a no-cost extension up to June 2015.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
34
6.6 NRT findings and main lessons learned
The main findings and lessons by NRT in the implementation of the Danida FSCCP are:
• The stabilization resulting from planned grazing. The planned grazing in the rangeland
management results in increased resilience to changes including climate variability. It also
contributes to reducing and solving conflicts over access to resources.
• The importance of the institutional functions of the conservancies. The conservancies
represent local voices and ensure good linking to other institutions including other
conservancies and county government.
• A proven concept of holistic rangeland management. The effects of planned grazing have been
implemented and shown immediate results even in rehabilitation of degraded land. There are
also spin-offs from increasing grazing opportunities closer to home and bunched herding, e.g.
school attendance, involvement of women and emerging local income opportunities, e.g. from
collection of grass seeds.
• Engagement of youth and outsiders. A key lesson that the stakeholders do not only include
village elders but also the youth (e.g. the herders) and outsiders (e.g. potential visiting
livestock herders searching from grazing options).
• Progress and growth in interest in planned grazing is beyond expectation. The buy-in has been
far better than expected due to good demonstration cases and spreading of word, support by
county governments and NRT awareness to conservancies. The results are also achieved due to
good ownership.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
35
6.7 NRT Case
Rangeland Management in West Gate Community Conservancy
West Gate is a Community Conservancy owned and operated by local Samburu pastoralists along
the banks of the Ewaso Nyiro river of northern Kenya. It was formed to address the increasing
challenges of effective natural resource management in the face of declining effectiveness of local
institutions, fragmentation and land use change, and climate change. Declining rangeland
productivity and risks from droughts are among the key challenges facing West Gate and other
pastoral conservancies in the ASAL region. The general expansion of invasive woody vegetation,
the loss of grass cover, declines in palatable grasses, increased soil erosion, and the expansion of
invasive species have all combined to reduce the productivity of local rangelands with negative
impacts on livestock production, disruptive drought induced movement, declining livelihoods,
insecurity and conflict, and increasing vulnerability to climate change.
Since 2006 West Gate has purposefully built a broad community driven approach to improving
rangeland health based on effective local institutions, respect for local knowledge, the imperative
of local ownership, and the sustainability of local implementation. The West Gate Community
Conservancy sent four community leaders to Zimbabwe for intensive exposure to Holistic
Management with support from Grevy’s Zebra Trust. That inspired community to take ownership
over the management of their natural resources.
The new approach to rangeland management recognizes rangeland health as the foundation of
local livelihoods, peace, conservation, and resilience to climate change. Following the collapse of
livestock herds in 2009 from widespread drought, West Gate has gradually begun the task of not
only rebuilding their herds, but rebuilding the health of the range land on which they depend.
In 2010 West Gate began scaling up their rangeland management activities to include reseeding
and grass seed harvesting, clearing of invasive species, and bunched grazing. From an initial focus
in the core and buffer areas, these activities gradually expanded to include the development of wet
and dry season grazing plans across the entire conservancy as well as the development in 2011 of
a grass bank for concentrating the clearing and reseeding efforts.
Reseeding and the subsequent harvesting and sale of grass seeds has supported an expansion of
the area under increased grass cover within the conservancy, and it has also generated
employment and income through the sale of seeds to neighboring communities. From an initial 13
bags of 90 kg/bag of seed harvested in 2010, production quickly increased to 72 bags in 2012 and
327 bags in 2013.
Bunched grazing to promote rangeland rehabilitation through animal impacts has shown similar
growth since its inception in 2010 with a total of 220 cattle. In 2012 the community contributed
558 cattle to the bunched grazing, and in 2013 the herd consisted of 881 animals. Importantly, in
2012 West Gate experimented with the first herd of bunched small stock in the region with a total
of 6,186 sheep and goat.
While the rangeland management activities in West Gate have already begun to make significant
strides in restoring rangeland productivity locally, more importantly, it has catalyzed support for
effective rangeland management across the community and into neighboring communities. West
Gate has been instrumental as a learning site, increasing awareness and renewing pride in local
resources, and providing the foundation for a larger coordinated multi-conservancy rangeland
management programme across NRT.
In addition to direct benefits to rangeland health, the programme also supports social cohesion,
and provides broad social benefits through reduced conflict associated with improved forage
resources, coordinated management and dialogue. The programme promotes inclusivity through
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
36
active engagement with under-represented groups such as women and youth, promoting
employment, alternative incomes through increased livestock sales associated with the NRT
livestock to markets programme.
The successes at West Gate emphasize the importance of rangeland health as the cornerstone of
livelihoods, peace, and conservation and an essential component of climate resilience not just here
but across the pastoral areas of northern Kenya.
Implementing grassland management at West Gate, Samburu County
Case and photos by NRT
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
37
6.8 Summary of NRT status and progress
Logical Framework Verifiable indicators and targets Status of progress Comments on Progress
Immediate Objective:
Resilience to climate change
impacts in pastoral communities in
the arid lands of Northern Kenya
enhanced. 15
• At least 3,000 pastoralist households have been
reached and are benefitting from improved
rangeland management by December 2014.
• Improved resilience of cattle to climatechange
events.
• Reduced level of incidences of conflict over
access to grazing compared to records of past
years.
• Overall 12,000 households
across 12 conservancies have
benefitted from improved
access to forage, increased
peace, employment, access to
bursaries and health care,
and direct income.
• Drought induced livestock
movement out of the NRT
area was lower than expected
this year despite the failure of
the long rains
• Livestock mortality in 2014
was lower than expected
despite the failure of the long
rains.
• Initial reports of conflict in
2014 are lower than in
previous years, With only
one major conflict reported in
Kom in September 2014.
• Increasingly,
neighbouring
conservancies, and
communities outside of
the conservancy
netword are benefiting
through increased
access to forage,
reduced conflict and
greater mobility.
• While 5 people were
killed in the Kom
conflict (in 2014), it
might have been much
worse without the
intensive efforts by the
NRT and conservancy
grazing coordinators to
reduce tension and
promote peacefull
resolution of forage
based conflicts.
15 NRT Strategic Plan Goal 4 is: “In the next 5 years, all NRT conservancies will improve the condition of rangelands and other natural resources through
development and implementation of land use plans and practices that ensure the sustainable management of natural resource”
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
38
Logical Framework Verifiable indicators and targets Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 1:
Capacity for rangeland
management developed • NRT grazing coordinator and grazing assistant
in place by January 2013.
• 11 grazing zone coordinators nominated by
December 2013. (+19 by December 2017)
• Awareness on RM completed in 11
conservancies by December 2013. (+19 by
December 2014)
• 11 Conservancy grazing committee, with sub-
zones are established by December 2014. (8
established by December 2013; +19 by
December 2017)
• NRT grazing coordinator
recruited and assistant
grazing coordinator was
recruited in 2013.
• 9 conservancies grazing
coordinators recruited in
2013. An additional 7
conservancy grazing
coordinators to be
recruited by the end of
2014.
• 12 Grazing coordinators
trained on holistic
management, vegetation
monitoring, low stress
livestock handling,
holistic decision making
and holistic planned
grazing.
• The core 11
conservancies of the
current rangelands
programme underwent
awareness training as
well as an additional 4
conservancies for a total
of 18.
• Grazing committees and
conservancy
management trained to
provide support to the
grazing coordinators
• Additional NRT
assistant grazing
coordinator to be
recruited in October
2014.
• Conservancy grazing
coordinators have been
recruited for the
following
conservancies: 2013 -
Mpus Kutuk, Lekurruki,
Il Ngwesi, Naibunga,
Meibae, West Gate,
Kalama, Sera, Melako,
2014 -Biliko Bulesa,
Ishaqbin and Namunyak
(x3), Nakuprat-Gotu,
Nasuulu)
• NRT is also reaching out
to the Counties and
boards of County
conservancies to
promote awareness of
rangeland management
issues
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
39
Logical Framework Verifiable indicators and targets Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 1 (cont):
• The grazing coordination units in NRT and the
11 conservancies are fully equipped and
operational. (+19 by December 2017)
• 14 grazing committees
established and trained with
Danida support.
• NRT grazing coordinators
provided with field
equipments (tents, bedrolls,
cameras) laptops, vehicle.
• 12 conservancies grazing
coordinators provided with
tents, cameras and a motor
cycle.
Including, West Gate,
Kalama, Nasuulu, Meibae,
Mpus Kutuk, Sera, Melako,
Biliko Bulesa, Nakuprat-
Gotu, Ishaqbin, Il Ngwesi,
Lekurruki, Naibunga and
Namunyak.
Output 2
Conservancy grazing plans
developed • Land use plans developed in 11 conservancies
by December 2014. (In 8 by December 2013
and in +19 by December 2017).
• Grazing plans developed in 11 conservancies by
December 2014 covering 400,000 ha. (In 8 by
December 2013 and in +19 by December 2017).
• Grazing by-laws established and approved for
11 conservancies by December 2014.
• Review of by-laws and preparation of regional
and harmonized grazing by-laws (Initiated by
December 2014 and completed by December
2017).
• Land use plans for 4
conservancies to be
completed by December
2014.
• Grazing plans have been
developed in 14
conservancies covering an
area of 1,913,722 ha.
• Grazing by-laws developed,
reviewed and approved by 19
conservancies.
• The conservancy grazing by-
laws have been harmonized
across the region, and they
are currently being reviewed
by a legal person prior to
presentation for debate in the
County Assemblies to
promote regional
harmonization.
• NRT has expanded the
conservancy land use
plans to include all
aspects of land use
planning within the
conservancy. These
plans are designed to
provide the central link
with other development
partners and the spatial
planning units of County
governments.
• Initial conservancy
grazing plans focused
on the core and buffer
areas. Now
conservancies are
planning grazing across
the entire conservancy.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
40
Logical Framework Verifiable indicators and targets Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 3:
Grazing plans for 11 conservancies
implemented • At 400,000 ha is under planned and a smaller
area under active grazing management with
improved vegetation cover and dry season
‘grass banks’ by December 2014.
• At least 15,000 cattle heads (30 %) are included
in the conservancy planned grazing herds by
December 2014.
• Unplanned settlements reduced.
• Reduction of degraded lands by at least 5,000
ha (reduction of bare ground exposures,
reduction of erosion gullies, and removal of
invasive species) by December 2014.
• 1,913,722 ha of land under
planned grazing in 14
conservancies.
• 54,941 ha under active
grazing management. This
includes the conservancies’
core, buffer and rehabilitated
areas.
• > 40,000 cattle (90%)
involved in planned grazing.
• There is increased awareness
of the challenges of
unplanned settlements across
the conservancies.
• Detailed mapping of
settlements and key natural
resources is ongoing and
should be complete by end
2014
• Total area rehabilitated:
Kalama = 1,500 ha, West Gate
= 850 ha., Meibae=369 ha.
Progress was more in terms
of area and heads of
livestock than expected in
the design. This was due to a
much higher rate of uptake
of the concepts by the
conservancies partly
because the demand grew
with the evidence from
existig sites.
As a result the area of
rehabilitation is lagging
behind mainly because of
limited resources to
supervise this work with
more emphasis on the
grazing plans. The
rehabilitation of degraded
land is a more demanding
effort both in terms of
planning, work force and
costs.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
41
Logical Framework Verifiable indicators and targets Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 4:
Monitoring and evaluation
developed • Tools developed for M&E:
- COMMS: Wildlife, vegetation, socio-
economics (Developed by December 2013;
baselines developed end 2014)
- Remote sensing of land cover: ICRAF
(baseline) and plan for follow up with 3-4
permant sample plots (By December 2013)
- Climate: Established past records of
meteorological data (By December 2014)
and established protocol for weather data
collection records and potential Early
Warning Systems.
- Carbon: carbon reponse to grazing
managing (200 plots) (Separate support by
TNC and Syracuse Univ.)
• Wildlife CoMMS is currently
active in 19 conservancies
and continues to expand
(rangers from the 3 new
Marsabit conservancies were
trained in September 2014).
• Social CoMMS – In
collaboration with TNC on
track for completion and
deployment by the end of
2014. Initially 4
conservancies will be
targeted – Nakuprat-Gotu, Il
Ngwesi, Kalama, and Melako.
• Vegetation CoMMS –
Currently active in 8
conservancies, database
almost complete with all
historical data entered.
• ICRAF study of carbon
baseline, degradation, and
land cover completed in
March 2014 with additional
analyses and expanded
coverage currently
underway.
• The Vegetation CoMMS
system will be expanded
by the grazing
coordinators in each
conservancy.
• NRT is currently
developing an
integrated reporting
structure and impact
tracking system to
promote near real-time
analysis and
visualization, for
increased access to
information.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
42
Logical Framework Verifiable indicators and targets Status of progress Comments on Progress
Output 4 (cont)
• Data recorded in NRT M&E system (i.e. COMMS
and others) and with regular analysis of
changes and trends.
• Historical climate records
have not been finalized,
working with parterns such
as GiZ to collect current
weather data, exploring
remote sensing tools, and
parternships with UNEP and
others (including Soils for the
Future) to develop local early
warning systems.
• Northern Kenya Carbon
Project well underway –
carbon assessments
complete, biodiversity.
• Conservation leverage tables
are actively used to track
impact for annual review,
donor feedback, board
reports and the State of
Conservancies Report (under
development).
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
43
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
4,5
5,0
FSCCP 1. REACT/AECF 2. CEEC/KAM 3. CEF/CDTF 4. NRT
7. Monitoring and assessment of FSCCP progress
In order to assess progress against expected results end of 2014 an index score has been developed.
The score is from 5 (fully implemented) to 1 (limited implementation) and zero in the situation that no
activity was carried out.
The score was assessed for each of the outputs that were with measurable activities and weighted with
the budget allocations for these. The quality of the assessment of the results was depending on the
quality and mere existence of an M&E system. Each of the scores were discussed with the components
an agreed in principle.
Components Score
(weighted)
Comments M&E system
1. REACT/
AECF
3,1 Good progress with number of
projects. Mainly mitigation projects.
Overall limited emission reduction to
date. A challenge identifying direct
adaptation projects. No progress on
DCED M&E.
Progress on activity and output
monitoring with a SIDA seconded
expert. But no progress on
developing DCED standard M&E
system. Uncertainty on division of
work on M&E between AECF and
AGRA, e.g. on promotion.
2. CEEC/KAM 3,7 Main activity on energy audits and
training of auditors. Limited
progress on M&E system,
comprehensive audits,
communication of good practices
and piloting.
No M&E system to capture outcomes,
impacts and internal learning.
Ongoing impact assessment of the
audits carried out 2009-2012.
3. CEF/CDTF 4,1 Progress on number of projects.
Delay in signing of 2nd round
contracts. Limited progress on
implementation of mainstreaming
activities.
Support to development of M&E
system for CEF/CDTF in the NRMP.
In the process of being implemented
and not yet functional.
4. NRT 4,5 Progress on capacity development
and development of grazing plans.
Implementation of grazing plans in
progress. Some development on
land-use plans.
Systems on community level M&E
developed and in progress of
implementation. Further
development on methods of data
collection and analysis.
FSCCP 3,8 Overall satisfactory progress.
The component partners have all developed good
progress within tight time schedules. The reason
for good progress is that they were selected as
FSCCP component partner based on the ability to
deliver almost immediately based on what was
already in place and operational, linkage with
other Danida programmes, and opportunity to use
existing or quickly enter into new implementation
MoUs.
Figure 2: Index for FSCCP progress
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
44
The components have been assessed against the OECD evaluation criteria.
REACT / AECF CEEC / KAM CEF / CDTF NRT
Relevance Relevant for
addressing supply
side in climate
change mitigation.
Limited linkage to
national climate
change strategies
and policies.
Relevant to national
regulation on energy
audits. Energy
efficiency in the
manufacturing
sector relevant for
mitigation.
Addressing
adaptation and
mitigation at
community level.
Relevant for national
climate change
response strategy.
Targeting adaption
in a climate change
vulnerable context
(the ASAL).
Relevance also to
support devolution
at county level.
Efficiency Relative high
transaction costs
(20%) for project
management only.
Limited emission
reduction so far and
uncertainty about
future reductions.
Not cost-efficient if
the aim is emission
reductions only.
Cost per energy
audit is same as the
audits subsidized by
MoE. About 2/3 of
the grant is used for
subsidies.
The support may not
be efficient if the
subsidy rate is too
high as it may distort
demand for non-
subsidized audits.
Developing of on-
line call added to an
efficient procedure.
Improved M&E may
reduce costs of site
visits. There is not a
good overview of the
CEF/CDTF
transaction costs.
The opportunity in
CEF with FSCCP also
to collaborate with
private sector adds
to efficiency.
Targeted operations
with locally based
coordinators.
Did have some
issues with 2013
audit and finance
management, but
this is now resolved.
Potential carbon
sequestration in the
rangelands.
Effectiveness Results are in
progress.
No progress on M&E
support.
Core function with
energy audits and
training in progress.
Other additional
activities like
comprehensive
audits delayed.
Main project support
on track but delayed.
M&E system needs
to be operational to
capture results.
Good progress with
establishing main
functions with
grazing plans and
grazing committees.
Impacts Potential longer
term impact with the
pay-as-you-go model
for financing of
energy supply.
Energy savings from
investments
recommended by
the audits.
CEEC/KAM is not at
present able to
assess the impact on
avoided emissions.
Impacts mostly on
communities
livelihoods including
access to energy and
reduced
vulnerability to
climate change risks.
None of these are
monitored. Sharing
of good practices
Already some
evidence in conflict
reduction. The real
test of impacts will
be for the next
extended drought
(that could be in
2014).
Sustainability Subject to ability for
some of the projects
to become
commercial. Already
evidence that REACT
support increases
access to additional
commercial finance.
Only commercially
viable investments
are made by the
companies.
Energy audits should
in the future be
potentially self-
financed.
CEF/CDTF is only
sustainable with
donor funding. The
sustainability of
each project is
uncertain. The
linkage to private
sector may ensure
financial
sustainability.
Partly included as
the communities are
able to be able to
respond to droughts,
e.g. with assets and
grass banks. Income
for cattle buy ups.
Potential rangeland
carbon
sequestration and
trade.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
45
8. FSCCP financial status
The disbursement from RDE is DKK 66.8 million out of DKK 100.0 million. Remaining planned budget
disbursement for 2014 is DKK 10.9 million. In addition DKK 16.1 million is allocated to ongoing
projects. Available budget for 2015 is around DKK 10.0 million including the DKK 5.0 million allocated
for REACT for M&E.
It was the expectation when the FSCCP 2011 and 2012 by GRV were launched that the disbursement
and preferably also expenditure would be within the same year. This was already in the design
deemed as not feasible. The period for disbursement was in the design pushed to mid-2014 and for
final expenditures for implementation until end 2014. Even this has been too optimistic since about
20% is estimated to be remaining, i.e. additional about six months were required for implementation.
This is similar or even better than most other development partners in Kenya.
Components Budget Disbursed Expenditure
/committed
Balance Comments
1.
REACT/AECF
20.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 Disbursed grant used and allocated
for projects and management fee.
Grant for M&E (DKK 5.0 million)
allocated in 2012 is outstanding. No
extension expected.
2. CEEC/KAM 30.0 22.7 22.5 7.5 Estimated expenditure by end 2014.
A six months no-cost extension has
been requested.
3. CEF/CDTF 40.0 23.1 36.9 3.1 No-cost extension approved until
mid-2016 for NRMP. FSCCP could be
until mid-2015. Contract for 10
projects signed mid-2014 and
committed grant is DKK 16.1 million.
4. NRT 7.5 5.8 6.1 1.4 Estimated expenditure and balance.
An extension until June 2015 (6
months) requires an additional
budget of about 1.5 million DKK.
RDE 2.5 0.0 0.5 2.0 Estimated expenditure.
FSCCP 100.0 ~81.0 ~19.0
CEEC/KAM and CEF/CDTF are potential partners in the
forthcoming Danida country programme for Kenya and a co-cost
extension is granted to avoid interruptions in the implementation.
NRT is a likely partner in an additional grant from the Danida
climate envelope for Kenya in 2015. A no-cost extension shall
ensure an uninterrupted support from Danida. CEEC/KAM could
also be funded under the climate envelope instead of the country
programme.
It is not likely there will be additional support to REACT/AECF. The
allocated grant of DKK 5.0 million for M&E made in 2012 but not yet
requested could be reallocated for extensions of any of the other
components if funding is short.
Figure 3: FSCCP Budget
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
46
9. Main Findings and Lessons Learned
This section includes the main findings from the interviews with the FSCCP partners and RDE, and
assessment of the FSCCP progress and status.
9.1 FSCCP Main findings
1. The overall effect on mitigation of and adaptation to climate change as direct impacts of FSCCP
is limited in the short term. There are potential longer term larger impacts, but it remains an
assumption unless there is continuous follow up. The reason is that it has been a relative short-
term intervention addressing a long term challenge.
2. Expected outputs were mostly delivered as expected. The emphasis was on core activities
while additional added value activities were delayed or omitted (e.g. DCE M&E for REACT,
comprehensive audits for CEEC, implementation of mainstreaming for CEF, and land-use plans
for NRT).
3. There was more progress in developing mitigation projects mainly on renewable energy and
energy savings. These included measures of indirect adaptation. But the inclusion of direct
adaptation activities was more difficult partly because it was not possible to communicate and
determine what adaptation specific projects are.
4. The reduction in GHG missions as a result of FSCCP is limited so far. While funding is for
climate change there is no policy objective that the FSCCP had reduction emission as the main
target. The benefits of reducing emission are globally shared and not kept in Kenya only.
Although additional funding from fast start is to support developing countries this also
includes enhancing resilience to climate change risks where the gains are kept in Kenya.
5. There is overall a weak M&E capacity to address outcomes and impacts. The M&E of activities
and outputs is partly satisfactory with room for improvements. There is a good level of
tracking of activities but little linkage to the derived effects. The improved M&E is not only for
the sake of reporting to the donor, but also to develop and track internal knowledge to extract
best practices, bench-marks and progress.
6. Although it was originally anticipated by Danida that the FSCCP would be implemented in a
rather short time horizon it was already decided in the design phase that at least 1 or 2
additional years for implementation was required. Progress in implementation has been good
but there is still the requirement for no-cost extensions.
7. The design succeeded in achieving activities and outputs over a short period because support
was provided to established entities that were operational and able to quickly enter into an
agreement or make use of an existing.
8. The close linkage to the country programme has limited the administrative burden of the
programme. The additional work load due to the FSCCP for the RDE has been minimal and
integrated with other processes, e.g. the annual programme review.
9. The FSCCP has in several ways made initial progress for the development of the Green Growth
and Employment intervention in the forthcoming Danida country programme for Kenya.
Increased attention to Green Growth topics (in particular to renewable energy and other
energy efficiency and energy access issues) have emerged as part of FSCCP in particular with
CEF/CDTF. CEF/CDTF is now better positioned to join the forthcoming Danida country
programme for Kenya than it would have been 2-3 years ago.
In the table next page some of the key findings are summarized in a retrospective SWOT analysis.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
47
FSCCP Lessons Learned – a retrospective SWOT
Strenghts Weaknesses
− Building on existing programmes reduced transaction costs
− Danida’s flexible and programmatic support with focus on results
delivered and minimized transaction costs
− Emphasis on innovation (e.g. REACT) and willingness to support
of testing new concepts (e.g. holistic rangeland management).
− A short implementation period with limited scope for achieving
outcomes and change relevant to address and long term challenge.
− A separate grant that is parallel to the development programmes
is sub-optimal and mainly only gain is the ability to account for
the additional climate change finance.
− Addressing direct climate change adaptation is a challenge and
difficult to communicate as being separate from development. A
more efficient approach would be more emphasis on
mainstreaming of climate change in all development programmes.
− Weak monitoring and little scope for assessing reduced emissions
Opportunities (some lost) Threats
− Relevant results that contribute to the green growth and
employment agenda.
− Testing new implementation modalities, e.g. electronic call in
CEF/CDTF and public-private partnerships
− Emerging demand for renewable energy services and improved
knowledge of implementation constraints.
− Scope for scaling up of tested approaches, e.g. business models in
REACT, investment in follow up to energy audits in CEEC,
replication of experiences of CEF projects, and expansion of
planned grazing in NRT.
− Relevant innovation and learning is not documented and
disseminated, e.g. due to lack of longer term funding.
− GoK rules and regulations do not provide the relevant incentives
for innovative approaches to addressing climate change.
− A short implementation period reduces capacity for additional
value-adding activities that can add value to main activities
(grants to projects, energy audits, grazing plans).
− The fast-start climate change finance did not include a specific target on reducing CO2 emissions or just on mitigation. More
recently that has changed and could be used to assess the FSCCP
against targets not used during the design.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
48
9.2 FSCCP Lessons Learned
In short lessons learned are forward looking and about repeating good lessons and cease with the bad
lessons. In practice it is not as simple. Lessons learned for many are an assessment of what went well
or simply was unexpected. Some of the lessons as reported by the partners are included in the
previous section for each of the components and partly above under mains findings. In this section the
main lessons are included based on the lessons learned framework in Annex 2. This framework
combines the ToC and log-frame with the M&E system to explain how different lessons learned
contribute to a pool of good development practice. The lessons learned are structured at three levels:
- From inputs/activities to outputs
- From outputs to outcomes
- From outcomes to impacts / sustainability
An attempt to use these levels has been made, however, the separation should not be viewed as very
rigid.
From inputs/activities to outputs
- When immediate results are required and additional resources for management are few the
best option is to align additional climate funding with ongoing development programmes. The
optimal solution would probably be to mainstream climate change further in development
programmes although the risk here is not to be able to account for how much was used for
climate change.
- Providing support to private sector and civil society organizations is also an effective approach
that contributes to the development of policies and strategies on climate change and related
issues such as energy and water. Through gaining more experiences with implementation and
participating as stakeholders these experiences are also brought into developing policies and
regulation and adding values to those.
From outputs to outcomes
- It is feasible to develop specific climate change mitigation projects which will also have
development (indirect adaptation) benefits, e.g. with renewable energy and energy access. It is
a larger challenge to develop direct adaption projects. It may be more efficient to mainstream
adaptation in development programs or to ensure a large development focus in adaptation
projects.
- In general there is a relative weak M&E system to capture outcomes and potential impacts.
M&E is mainly on output and activity level if operational and there by misses the opportunity
to better capture internal knowledge and lessons to support good practices. It is Danida that in
many cases has attempted to push the development of M&E but with limited progress. Weak
M&E does not imply there are no outcomes but there are certainly missed opportunities
learning from these.
From outcomes to impacts
- Addressing climate change is a long term challenge requiring a long term endeavor. Though
the intention of the fast start finance was to send a signal of commitment the rush to achieve
short term results was futile. The FSCCP has initiated steps that may in the longer run lead to
impacts for both climate change mitigation and adaptation.
- Although developing countries are at risks and need investments it is not always immediately
obvious what the best investments are. One approach is to initially support and invest in
projects that will be relevant even in the current context without climate change risks (no
regrets) and then adjust as more knowledge is gained about the direction of and vulnerability
to climate change risks.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
49
- In developing countries lack of development also results in greater vulnerability of climate
change and therefore investment in good development practices is also good adaptation.
Investing in development is therefore also an investment in reducing the adaptation deficit in
poorer regional of developing countries.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
50
Annex 1: Financial Status
*) Progress is here the score (between 1 and 5) introduced in chapter 7 above.
Financial Balance (DKK) FSCCP 2011 FSCCP 2012 SUM FSCCP
grant
Disbursed
from RDE
Expenditure Committed
expenditure
Balance
(End 2014)
Progress *) Comments
FSCCP 50,0 50,0 100,0 66,8 63,0 17,8 19,2 3,8
1. REACT/AECF 20,0 20,0 15,0 15,0 0,0 5,0 3,1 Change in REACT log frame was not revised for FSCCP
1. Fund for competitions 12,5 12,5 12,5 12,5 0,0 4 Limited progress with adaptation projects
2. Strenthening M&E (in 2012) 5,0 5,0 0,0 0,0 5,0 1 Not initiated. Some progress with SIDA secondment
Management fee (20%) 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 0,0
2. CEEC/KAM 15,0 15,0 30,0 22,7 22,5 7,5 3,7 Good progress with energgy audits. Limited additional
activities
1. Matching grants audits 7,0 5,0 12,0 14,5 -2,5 5 More than 200 audits supported
2. Promotion campaigns 1,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 1,0 5 National campaigns. Not regionally targeted.
3. Piloting cleaner technology resource
audits of industries
3,5 2,0 5,5 0 5,5 2 Exchange visits. Limited budget for pilot not KAM
function.
4. Support to implement
recommendations from energy audits
0,0 0,0 0,0 0 0,0 0 No progres (no budget)
5. Comprehensive resource audits 2,5 2,5 0 2,5 1 Limited progress. Consultant identified.
6. Training of certified auditors 1,0 2,0 3,0 2,5 0,5 5 Expected number of auditors trained
7. M&E and impacts assessment 2,0 2,0 2,0 2 Impact study ongoing. No M&E activities.
Afd revolving fund 1,0 1,0 1,0 0,0 1 Used for feasibility study. One every six months.
KAM management, audits 1,5 0,5 2,0 3,5 -1,5
3. CEF/CDTF 15 25 40,0 23,1 20,9 16,1 3,1 4,1
1. Grants for projects 12,5 16,4 28,9 18,2 16,1 -5,3 5
- additional staff 1,0 1,0 2,1 -1,1
- developing online call 1,0 1,0 0 1,0 Completed (paid by RDE, from NRMP?)
- Field verification, full proposal,
launch, BoT due diligence
0,6 -0,6
2. Mainstreaming and innovation 2,5 5,1 7,6 0 7,6 1
3. Support to NGO and Private
Enterprise
1,5 1,5 0 1,5 2 Informal networking, but no formalised direct support
4. Northern Rangeland Trust 7,5 7,5 5,8 4,4 1,7 1,4 4,5
1. Rangeland management capacity
development and awareness
0,5 0,5 4 Establishing grazing committees. Nominating grazig
coordinators.
2. Development of conservancy grazing
plans for 11 conservancies
5,0 5,0 5 More than 11 grazing plans developed.
3. Implementation of grazing plans for
11 conservancies
1,5 1,5 3 Implementation in progress. Land use plans not initiated.
NRT Management 0,5 0,5
Reviews, etc. (RDE) 2,5 2,5 0,25 0,25 2,3
1 KES / 1 DKK 15,3
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
51
Annex 2: Links and flows between logical framework, monitoring and evaluation and lessons learned
Source: Outline developed by Michael Linddal (2008)
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
52
Annex 3: Kenya Climate Change Policy and Regulation Overview
Kenya has several laws and regulations that shed light on climate change related issues. However, it is
recent Climate Change Bill that is singularly directed to the legal and institutional framework for
climate change mitigation and adaption efforts. Below are some of the national instruments that
support climate change:
Draft Climate Change Policy (2014)
Climate change has been identified as a global challenge requiring international attention and action.
In Kenya various actions have been taken to address the issue of climate change. Kenya ratified the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1994 and the Kyoto Protocol in 2005.
The new Climate Change Policy 2014 has garnered significant political goodwill and has already
passed the first parliament reading.
The 2014 Climate Change Bill is currently waiting on the second parliament sitting is set to provide a
legal and institutional framework for climate change mitigation and adaption efforts. The Bill will
establish a climate change fund to facilitate climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. The
passing of this bill will complement the NCCAP as the action provides for a clear institutional
framework to ensure effective implementation of the recommended actions.
The bill will also establish a Climate Change Council which shall be an independent and autonomous
body and shall draw members from key government sectors, civil society organizations, private sector
and representative from communities. The council shall be attached to the Office of the Deputy
President (Chair of the Council) and shall be the sole policy-making body of the government tasked to
coordinate, monitor and evaluate the programs and action plans of the government
National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) 2013-2017 (2013).
Kenya launched its National Climate Change Action Plan in March 2013 this takes forward the
implementation of the NCCRS. The plan addresses the options for a low-carbon climate resilient
development pathway as Kenya adapts to climate impacts and mitigates growing emissions. The plan
also addresses the enabling aspects of finance, policy and legislation, knowledge management,
capacity development, technology requirements and monitoring and reporting.
The Action Plan is seen as the first step of action in achieving a low carbon climate resilient socio-
economic pathway for the country. and it is expected that the NCCAP will be revised and updated
every five years. The total estimated investment costs required to adapt to climate change impacts and
to implement the low carbon development options presented in this plan is in the range of one trillion
Kenyan Shillings or USD12.76 billion.
National Climate Change Response Strategy (NCCRS) (2010)
The NCCRS was developed after broad national consultation. It includes an analysis of and priorities
on climate change issues such as evidence and impacts, adaptation and mitigation interventions,
communication, education and awareness, vulnerability assessments, research, technology
development and transfer, policy, legislation and institutional framework. The NCCRS has become a
cornerstone for the coordination and prioritization of actions to address climate change.
The Constitution (2010)
Is the supreme legislative instrument in Kenya provides the right of every person to a clean and
healthy environment in Chapter 4, Article 42. The Article confirms the sustainable use of natural
resources .Further on, Article 69 under Chapter Five outlines obligations with regards to the respect of
the environment, which include elimination of processes and activities that are likely to endanger the
environment.
Lessons Learned from the Danida Fast Start Climate Change Program (2011-2014), Kenya
November 26, 2014
53
In line with the constitution as indicated in chapter 11 is devolution of the government, an outline of
the county government’s powers, functions and responsibilities are discussed. The objectives of
devolution include the promotion of social and economic development, as well as the provision of
proximate, easily accessible services throughout Kenya. Currently County Governments are in the
process or have developed County Integrated Development Plans (CIDP) in which some have
streamlined climate change related issues in them. Counties such as Machakos, Makueni have taken a
step forward and have indicated ways climate change mitigation and adaptation mechanisms will be
put in place. Once the proposed Climate Change Council is formed they will also advise the county
governments on measures necessary for climate change mitigation and adapting to the effects of
unavoidable climate change
Kenya Vision 2030 (2007)
Vision 2030 sets out the long term goals for making Kenya a middle income country. The Vision 2030
refers to climate change as a national concern, especially in the arid and semi-arid lands and other
high-risk disaster zones, and proposes that climate change be integrated in national planning. In 2010
the Government developed the National Climate Change Response Strategy to propose a cross-
governmental strategy to respond to climate change challenges and in 2013 launched the National
Climate Change Action Plan. In order to achieve these goals the Government has established the
medium term goals to be achieved every five years (2013-2017). In regards to climate change the
documents emphasizes the challenges that will occur as a result of climate change and the various
mitigation and adaptation strategies to be set. These include
Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) (1999, amendment 2013)
The legal framework for environmental concerns in Kenya is the Environmental Management and
Coordination Act (EMCA) of 1999 amended in 2013 (not yet promulgated). The EMCA had limited
content relating explicitly to either adaptation to or mitigation of climate change, as such Section
57.2(b) of EMCA makes provision for fiscal incentives as “tax rebates to industries and other
establishments that invest in plants, equipment and machinery for pollution control, recycling of waste,
water harvesting and conservation, prevention of floods, and for using other energy sources as substitutes
for hydrocarbons”. The limitation can be explained by the fact that EMCA was enacted more than a
decade ago before the emergence of climate change issues. With the recent Amendments, the Principal
Act was amended by adding a new section 56(A) to read, “The Authority shall in consultation with
relevant lead agencies, issue guidelines and prescribe measures on climate change”, this addressing a
way to mitigate and adapt to Climate Change.
The National Environment Policy (NEP) (2013)
Kenya acknowledges the importance of the environment as it an integral part for its growth and
development. Until now the country has not had a comprehensive environmental policy of which most
environmental imperatives are captured in various development plans. The NEP is not yet
promulgated.
The NEP recognizes that many of the natural disasters in Kenya are climate related, e.g. floods,
drought, occasional landslides, increased disease episodes. It also notes that economic impact of these
disasters cut across the key sectors of the economy. The policy also highlights that Kenya aims have
climate-resilient, low carbon development and is a national priority as it will support Kenya to absorb
disturbances and build capacity to adapt to additional stress and change.
The NEP clearly indicates the Government role in combating Climate Change this includes, e.g. to
develop and implement a comprehensive National Climate Change Policy, strengthen and enhance
early warning and response systems for climate and disaster risk reduction, and put in place a climate
financing mechanism that will help the country take advantage of new and emerging climate change
funds and also include innovative ways to fund climate change actions domestically through
committing a percentage of the GDP.