Food Agriculture, Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network F … · 2015-04-21 · Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN) Physical address: 141

F

A Comprehensive Scoping and Assessment Study of Climate Smart

Agriculture (CSA) Policies in Kenya

Report

30 April 2014

By

Stephen K. Wambugu

Food Agriculture, Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network

FANRPAN

Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN) Physical address: 141 Cresswell Road, Weavind Park 0184, Pretoria, South Africa

Postal address: Private Bag X2087, Silverton 0127, Pretoria, South Africa Tel: +27 (0) 12 804 2966 or +27 (0) 12 804 3186

Fax: +27 (0) 12 804 0600 Email: [email protected] URL: www.fanrpan.org

Table of Contents

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................ v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. ix

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... xi

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

1.1.1 Land Issues in Kenya ................................................................................................ xi

1.1.2 Agriculture and Food Security Issues in Kenya ....................................................... xii

1.3 Objectives of the Study. ................................................................................................ xiv

1.4 Methodology ................................................................................................................. xiv

2.0 FARMING SYSTEMS AND CSA TECHNOLOGIES AND PRACTICES........................................ xv

2.1 CSA Practices and Technologies: Adoption and Implementation. ............................... xvi

2.2 Key CSA Programmes and Projects Implemented in Kenya. .......................................xviii

2.3 Stakeholders in CSA Activities. ....................................................................................... xx

2.3.1 Government Ministries and Departments .............................................................. xx

2.3.2 National and International NGOs ......................................................................... xxii

2.3.3 Kenyan Private Sector Organizations .................................................................... xxii

2.3.4 International Development Agencies and Donors ............................................... xxiii

2.3.5 International and National Research Organizations ............................................. xxiii

2.4 Reasons for Successful Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices. ................................. xxiii

2.5 Constraints to Efficient Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices. ................................ xxiv

2.6 Opportunities in the Implementation of CSA Policies and Practices......................... xxviii

3.0 CSA POLICY FRAMEWORK IN THE COUNTRY ................................................................... xxix

3.1 Effectiveness of CSA Activities and Policies. ................................................................. xxx

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

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................... xxxiii

4.1 Key challenges to Implementation of CSA in Kenya. ................................................. xxxiii

4.2 Untapped Opportunities ............................................................................................ xxxiv

4.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... xxxv

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... xxxviii

5.0 ANNEXES ........................................................................................................................ xxxix

Annex 1 National CC Blue Prints ...................................................................................... xxxix

Annex 2: Descriptive Summary of CSA related policies, programmes and activities ......... xlii

Other CC Related Policies and Blue Prints ..................................................................... xliii

Annex 3: Institutions and Stakeholders Consulted During the Study................................xlvii

1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ALFFA: Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Food Authority

ASALs: Arid and Semi-Arid Lands

ASARECA: Association for strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa

ASCU: Agricultural Sector Coordination Unit

ASDSP: Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme

AU: African Union

CAADP: Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

CCAFS: Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security

CCU: Climate Change Unit

CDM: Clean Development Mechanisms

CIAT: International Center for Tropical Agriculture

COMESA: Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

CSA: Climate Smart Agriculture

DFID: Department for Foreign International Development

DNA: Designated National Authority

DRSRS: Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing

EAC: East Africa Community

EMCA: Environmental Management and Coordination Act

ESP: Economic Stimulus Project

FANRPAN: Food Agriculture and Natural Resource Policy Analysis Network

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations

FITs: Feed in Tariff

GHG: Green House Gases

GIZ: German Society for International Cooperation

ICIPE: International Centre for Insect Physiology and Ecology

ICRAF: World Agro-forestry Centre

IDRC: International Development Research Consortium

IFAD: International Fund for Agriculture and Development

IFPRI: International Food Policy Research Institute

ILRI: International Livestock Research Institute

IPAR: Institute of Policy analysis and Research

KACCAL: Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change in Arid Lands

KARI: Kenya Agricultural Research Institute

KEFRI: Kenya Forestry Research Institute

KENFAP: Kenya National Federation of Agricultural Producers

KEPHIS Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service

KIPPRA Kenya Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis

KMD: Kenya Meteorological Department

MDGs: Millennium Development Goals

MENR: Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources

MoA: Ministry of Agriculture

MTP: Medium Term Plan

MTIP: Medium Term Investment Plan

MWEMR: Ministry of Water, Environment and Mineral Resources

NAAIAP: National Accelerated Agricultural Input Access Programme

NAMAs: National Appropriate Mitigation Actions

NAPs: National Adaptation Plans

NCCAP: National Climate Change Action Plan

NCCRS: National Climate Change Response Strategy

NDMA: National Drought Management Authority

NDMP: National Disaster and Management Policy

NEAP: National Environment Action Plan

NEMA: National Environment Management Authority

NEPAD: New Partnership for Africa's Development

NGO: Non-Governmental Organization

NIB: National Irrigation Board

NIE: National Implementing Entity

NLP: National Land Policy

NSWCP: National Soil and Water Conservation Project

PACJA: Pan African Climate Justice Alliance

RECs Regional Economic Communities

ReSAKSS: Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System

SIDA: Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency

UN: United Nations

UNDP: United Nations Development Programme

UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

YEF: Youth Enterprise Fund

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

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

aside time for interviews or consultations at all stages of this assignment. This includes staff of the

institutions mentioned in the Appendix 1, Kenyatta University Consultants (Dr. Stephen Wambugu, Mr.

James Wanjaiya and Ms. Jane Chege), Development Partner Organizations, Farmer Organizations, Non-

Governmental Organizations and Research Institutions. Their contributions were invaluable.

3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

performance. The study also sought to analyze the existing policy frameworks and to offer policy

recommendations to ensure that CSA policies are improved in terms of relevance, equity and

effectiveness.

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

blueprints addressing CC issues in addition to a multiplicity of related bills and policies. These include:

NCCRS (2010), NCCAP (2013-2017), Kenya CC Authority Bill (2012), The Kenya Vision 2030, The National

Policy for Sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands (2013), EMCA (1999),

Second NEAP (2009-2013), Draft catchment management policy, Draft National Environment Policy

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

Policy 2012, The irrigation Act Cap 345, NDMP 2012 and the Integrated National Transport policy (INTP)

2010.

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

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

Kenya, KACCAL Project, Kenya Agricultural Carbon Market Programme, Strengthening capacity for

CC Adaptation in Land and Water management Project, Agricultural productivity and climatic change in

the arid and semi-arid lands of Ijara, Trans Mara and Tana delta Project, Green houses pilot project

under CAADP, Promotion of traditional high value crops, Promotion of livelihood diversification,

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

projects, Agro forestry projects and Construction of dams.

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

MWEMR, Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, KARI, NIB, KIPPRA, Tegemeo Institute of Agricultural Policy

and Development, Kenya CC Working Group, CARE Kenya, PACJA and KENFAP.

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

that the effectiveness and impact (especially on gender and social equity) of policies pertinent to CSA

face a number of challenges chief among them being: Inadequate funds for rapid expansion of area

covered by the activities, Shortage of water to expand area under irrigation, Limited alternative options

for livelihood for forest and rangeland communities who suffer most from the impacts of CC; Disease

challenges especially after expanding irrigation, Markets for surplus produce, Social issues especially

when introducing crop agriculture among pastoralists, Inappropriate technologies for adoption and

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

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

Currently it is difficult to identify and track the total amount of money coming into Kenya for CC related

activities and what activities they are being applied to, Low and slow participation by the private sector,

High costs of change into new production systems and technologies, Misconception that CSA is an

environmental issue and Cost of Implementation of the laid out policy actions is high (compare cost of

adaptation and implementation with the government budgetary allocation).

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

These include: Data surveys and analyses to establish the requirements of the target groups in the

country and identifying the resulting priority requirements into the CSA policies and activities,

Continued research to develop appropriate low cost technologies to address the requirements,

Continued capacity building among the target groups and the state actors to ensure the technologies

are passed on, Appropriate design and mainstreaming CSA policies and activities in all programmes,

Investment in weather information systems and capacity building to strengthen the KMD to enhance

disaster preparedness and reliable information synthesis and predictions, Central CC Projects/ activities

and provision of funds for employment, tracking, monitoring and impact assessments and

communications, Streamlining and designing additional finance mechanisms to support climate smart

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

security goals, Improve on monitoring impact measurement, reporting and result demonstration to

ensure continuous funding for climate smart agriculture.

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

and activities in Kenya.

Policy makers should harmonize and bring together the various scattered CSA policies, projects and programmes into one which is comprehensive and accessible by all stakeholders.

Governments and policy makers should craft county specific CSA policies that can help farmers cope with the adverse effects of CC. Farmers need policies that remove obstacles to implementing CSA and create synergies with alternative technologies and practices.

Apart from (ii) above, governments and policy makers should promote and disseminate policies that promote CSA which integrates food security, CC adaptation and mitigation.

Governments and policy makers should also adopt a multi-sectoral approach in drafting CSA policies in order to effectively tackle the impact of CC on food systems and NR management

Governments and policy makers should promote financial incentives that encourage CSA. Considerable policy support and capacity enhancement is needed for climate risk management including insurance and safety nets as well as improved access to weather information adapted to farmers needs.

They should also encourage research and dissemination of the best ways of helping farmers reduce GHG emissions and consequently adapt to CC.

At the national and county levels, agriculture should be at the centre stage of CC agenda, negotiations and discussions.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1. 1.1 An Overview of Land, Agriculture, and Food Security Issues in Kenya.

1.1.1. 1.1.1 Land Issues in Kenya

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

rural Kenyans and the foundation of economic development for the country. As a result, managing land

sustainably and in an equitable manner is critical for livelihood security, peace and development. It is

difficult to exhaustively cover the issues surrounding land but according to NLP (2007) the key issues on

land revolve around the following:

Land tenure issues: Currently, the categories of land tenure in Kenya are government land, trust land, and private land. The tenure system has emphasized individual ownership of land at the expense of communal or group rights. In the process, traditional systems and institutions of land management have been weakened and their effectiveness undermined, leading to uncertainty about land rights especially among pastoral communities. Successive governments have failed to secure government land and trust land against abuse.

Land use management issues: Land use challenges have increased in both urban and rural areas as a result of rapid urbanization, inadequate land use planning, unsustainable production methods and poor environmental management.

Land administration issues: These issues include actions to improve the existing land administration system which is bureaucratic, expensive, undemocratic and prone to abuse, resulting in long delays and hardship to landowners. The land rights delivery system is concerned with creating certainty in land transactions and rights through ascertainment and registration. It has not been efficient, cost effective or affordable

Land issues that require special intervention: These include inter alia: Historical injustices that cover grievances dating back to colonial times and arising from mass disinheritance of communities of their land, Pastoral land issues, Coastal land issues, Land rights of vulnerable groups, Settlement of refugees and Internally Displaced Persons, Informal settlements, Land rights of minority communities and disaster management.

Cross cutting land issues requiring special intervention: These include poverty, HIV/AIDS, youth and gender.

Issues pertaining to the existing institutional framework: These issues revolve around setting up the framework for implementation of the National Land Policy, capacity building for ministerial staff and mobilisation of financial resources for implementation of the policy.

1.1.2 Agriculture and Food Security Issues in Kenya

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

security over such a heterogeneous country such as Kenya, but according to ASCU (2005) certain

challenges stand out. These include:

High costs of doing business: The expense and risk of doing business in the country has slowed the growth of private sector investment in key sectors, particularly agricultural production, and storage, transport, processing and marketing. A World Bank study found out that poor roads and inadequate transport and other infrastructure, non-tariff barriers and complex, inconsistent policies and regulations contribute to high transport and marketing costs. (World Bank Group, 2010).

Barriers to intra-regional trade: Residual tariffs, unpredictable export and import restrictions, and a wide range of non-tariff barriers keep the volume of intra-regional trade, particularly in staple crops, well below its potential. East African governments, through their RECs, have committed themselves to regional integration as a broad policy agenda, opening up free trade areas and more efficient common markets. Much remains to be done to implement harmonized policies and regulations, improve the infrastructure, and build the support services to make this vision of regional integration a reality.

Low productivity and inadequate access to markets: Agriculture, which employs the majority of the national workforce, suffers from low productivity. Yields are low, sometimes as much as 70 percent below global best practice, and post-harvest losses are estimated at $8/ton (large scale farmers) to $15/ton for the small scale farmers (World Bank, AFTAR, 2009). Many smallholder farmers, particularly women, do not have secure tenure rights, and rapid population growth puts constant pressure on the land and other resources available. Many farmers lack access to improved varieties, seeds, fertilizers as well as crop, soil, water and animal management practices that have proved their worth in many African trials, and which have transformed agriculture in other parts of the world, most recently in Asia. Successful examples of African Agricultural Research and Development have been documented in different environments, but the scope and scale of the impact

of most of them have been relatively small, (Haggblade and Hazel, 2010). The scaling up of successes has been slow, in large part because the markets accessible to most smallholder farmers are small, fragmented and risky. Reliable information is not widely available about prices in wider markets, or about the grades and quality standards they demand. Investments by smallholder farmers in increased output and quality are very risky and uncertain-effective incentives are low.

Low competitiveness: For the reasons outlined above, the competitiveness of Kenyan-grown staple food commodities in regional markets are low.

High rates of poverty and malnutrition: Across the country, poverty rates are high, and the country is not on track to achieve the MDG goal of halving poverty by 2015. Malnutrition rates according to the standard metrics of underweight, stunting and wasting are also very high. Causal factors include inadequate access to food linked to low incomes and poverty, exacerbated by large family sizes and closely spaced births, as well as cultural practices that affect the utilization of food, particularly by children under two years of age and their mothers. Micronutrient malnutrition rates are very high, with significant adverse impact on the growth and development of young children.

Chronic food insecurity and chronic emergency food assistance: Food insecurity plagues much of the country. Emergency food assistance has become a commonplace in the arid regions of Kenya. (ReSAKSS, 2011). Ironically, many areas of food surplus lie adjacent to areas of food deficit, but for precisely the challenges listed above- low productivity, lack of secure land rights, high costs of doing business, low competitiveness and barriers to intra-regional trade- food does not move efficiently or reliably from surplus areas to deficit areas, limiting the potential market-based response to national food insecurity.

Gender inequalities: In Kenya, as in most of the African continent, women provide approximately 70 percent of the agricultural labour, 90 percent of the hoeing and weeding work, 60 percent of harvesting and marketing activities, 80 percent of food storage and transport from farm to village, as well as 90 percent of household water and fuel wood and nearly 100 percent of household food preparation, (ASARECA, 2009). Nevertheless they have little control over farm decision-making bodies. Specific gender-based constraints to increased productivity of women farmers include insecurity of tenure and access to resources, low levels of literacy, limited resources to purchase inputs, and social restrictions on meeting with extension agents and accessing other sources of information. Women traders and other businesswomen face difficulties obtaining permits, financing and services, (Rubin et al, 2009).

Variability and heterogeneity across the country: Kenya is not a homogenous region, and single, one size-fits-all interventions will not achieve the impact. The percent of the population living on less than $1.25/day ranges from a low of 20 percent in some

areas of Kenya to close to 80 percent in some other areas. (ReSAKSS, 2011). Agro-ecological zones form a complex patchwork of high and low potential areas, including productive highlands, broad savannas, sparsely populated arid and semi-arid lands, and rapidly developing urban centers. In almost any given year, some areas in much of the country are food secure and generate food surpluses for sale, while other areas suffer moderate to severe shortages. Year-to-year fluctuations in rainfall over short distances mean that these patterns are highly variable in time and location. Both the frequency and the amplitude of variation in food security, supplies, and prices in local areas are very likely to increase even more as a result of global CC.

1.3 Objectives of the Study.

This study was guided by the following objectives:

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

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

To come up with relevant policy recommendations,

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

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

the region as a whole by documenting:

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

ii) The existing current CSA related policies in the country (including environmental policies, water policies, agricultural policies, land policies and developmental policies),

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

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

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

vi) The necessary information and actions needed to ensure that CSA policies are improved in terms of relevance, equity and effectiveness.

1.4 Methodology

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

They included the following processes:

i) Review of Pertinent Literature: The Consultants reviewed Policies, Strategies, programmes/projects plans, documents and reports obtained from respondent institutions

and ministries. These documents were reviewed over the entire period of the study and key issues identified for further study and consideration. Information from the review also informed the development of the data collection tool (questionnaire).

ii) Use of a Discussion Guide: A checklist was developed for purposes of collection and standardization of interviews and discussions with key informants. These were held with ministry officials and other stakeholders with a view to finding out their individual and institutional knowledge on CSA and the institutional, policy and legal set up put in place to implement CC Activities. The interview questions were developed in line with those given in the ToR by FANRPAN in order to standardize the research outputs from the various countries. In general the discussions revolved around identification of the following:

Key CSA policies and Acts in the country and when such policies were developed and became operational or effective,

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

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

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

What the key challenges have been experienced in implementing CSA activities,

What opportunities remain untapped and how these can be tapped.

iii) Use of the Internet: Internet searches were also carried out to enrich the information collected and to provide more data and literature. Websites with relevant information on CSA were visited and pertinent information retrieved.

2.0 FARMING SYSTEMS AND CSA TECHNOLOGIES AND PRACTICES.

Farming Systems in Kenya fall under four distinct categories:

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

high and medium potential (rainfall) areas. The sector accounts for 75% of the total agricultural output

and 70% of the marketed agricultural produce.

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

converting from rain-fed production of coffee, grains and livestock to intensive horticultural production

especially under greenhouse conditions. These farms account for over 80% of the exported horticultural

produce.

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

camels. They experience droughts, water shortages and high livestock mortality due to rain failure in

approximately 3 out of five years.

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

It is mainly developed in the form of schemes and large-scale irrigation of crops like rice, coffee,

floriculture, pineapples and other horticultural crops. Large commercial farms account for over 40% of

irrigated land, while the smallholder farmers and government managed schemes account for 42% and

18% of irrigated land respectively, (MTIP 2012-17, Farm Management Hand Book Kenya).

2.1 CSA Practices and Technologies: Adoption and Implementation.

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

2005. It is a signatory to the major regional and international CC policies and agreements thereby

signifying her determination to join the international community in combating the problem of CC. At the

national level efforts have been made to address CC and its impact. CCUs have been established in the

ministries to ensure implementation of CC mitigation activities. Research programmes have also been

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

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

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

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

affected populations against the impact of declining rainfall trends or the increasing frequency of flash

floods.

Kenya has been integrating climate considerations into various legal and governance

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

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

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

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

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

vagaries of CC.

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

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

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

in the forest zones while the MoA has promoted planting of farm forestry trees and fuel wood

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

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

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

place and flood waters pick speed and gain destructive force. Programmes have also been

promoted with the single idea of attaining one result without linking it to the resultant

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

nationwide soil and water conservation programme promoted the establishment of physical

barriers to soil erosion on sloping grounds (terracing) and planting of trees on such terraces.

Little effort was made to select appropriate crops and cropping patterns or tree types on such

terraced land. In the final analysis it became more of a landscaping exercise than an agronomic

practice. In another example pastoralists with large herds were encouraged to reduce their

herd sizes without a corresponding programme to promote other production systems that

increase productivity and incomes for the pastoralists. The pastoralists have tended to go back

to their old production systems.

Other efforts promoted by government include inter alia:

Rehabilitation and protection of indigenous forests in the five water towers or highlands, Promotion of traditional high value crops. Apart from being a traditional CSA programme, the promotion of high value crops is also being done for health reasons.

Promotion of livelihood diversification: This encompasses agricultural practices such as beekeeping and honey production and awareness campaigns of the importance of balancing stocking rates with the available land resources as a way of ensuring sustainable Pastoralism.

Research into and dissemination of superior drought, salt, pest and disease resistant crops: This is being implemented and popularized by KARI, NGOs and other research organizations.

Biogas projects: These are being implemented by a number of research and developmental organizations such as GIZ for proper management of agricultural waste and for renewable energy generation.

Agro forestry projects: These are being implemented by a number of organizations such as the Ministry of Environment, MoA, KEFRI, a number of NGOs, etc.

Construction of dams: Big and small dams with linings for water harvesting are being constructed especially in the arid and semi-arid areas by the Ministry of Water and Irrigation, research organizations, NGOs, etc.

Promotion of appropriate use of mechanization,

Promotion of irrigated agriculture, tree crops and farm forestry,

Promotion of soil and water conservation,

Training, research and development of new technologies

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

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

Development of operational guidelines in irrigation in order to promote participation of all stakeholders and appropriate use of the irrigation facilities.

Promotion of appropriate range management practices and livestock marketing to reduce negative impacts of Pastoralism and drought on livestock production.

The promotion and use of improved planting seeds and materials.

Research for development of improved seeds and technologies.

Provision of quality extension services.

Provision of funds for credit to producers,

Provision of processing and marketing services,

Promotion of farm forestry,

Promotion of water harvesting either by appropriate agronomic practices such as storage in lined dams and conveyance systems,

Promotion of alternative farm enterprises by diversification into pond fishing, keeping of quails, guinea fowls and ostriches, beekeeping, agro forestry, fodder and hay production, etc.

Promotion of soil and water conservation practices.

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

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

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

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

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

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

utilize the fodder.

2.2 Key CSA Programmes and Projects Implemented in Kenya.

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

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

whatsoever. No comprehensive information exists on the number projects formulated and the level of

funding undertaken, actual expenditures, nature of projects, the extent to which these projects are

informed by research/ scientific findings, implementation area and other details. There is need for a

coordination centre countrywide to avoid unnecessary overlaps, duplication and ensure optimal

coverage. The following represent just but examples of the many CSA programmes that are under

implementation in Kenya:

Fisheries Project: this project aims at increasing fish production among the small holder areas by assisting the farmers and especially the youths to develop fish ponds, harvest water from runoff or rivers and provides them with fingerlings and feeds. The government produces the fingerling stocks from fisheries research centers while the private sector manufacturers the feeds. The producers receive training on fish production, consumption and marketing. They then continue on their own. This has resulted in increases in fish on the market even in non-traditional fishing areas. Funds for this project are availed through the ESP and the YEF.

National Accelerated Agricultural Input Access Programme (NAAIAP) is promoting the use of fertilizers and quality seed among food deficit farmers. Each farmer receives 50kg of planting fertilizer, 50kg top dressing fertilizer and 10kg hybrid seed. They are expected to obtain high yields and therefore open up less land for crop production. Other farmers under the same programme receive improved planting cassava and sweet potato cuttings. In the case of fisheries the farmers receive assistance in the development and stocking of fishponds and purchase of feeds for the fish. Under the NAAIAP and fisheries programmes

the farmers also get access to credit through local banks with funding leveraged by government. These are clear CSA projects aimed at improving food security.

Index based livestock insurance project in northern Kenya: This project is being implemented in collaboration with some commercial partners which include; Equity Bank of Kenya, UAP Insurance and Swiss-Re. The project provides livestock insurance to over 2000 households in Marsabit Sub County to help livestock herders sustain their livestock-dependent livelihoods during drought. The project was initiated by ILRI in collaboration with partners from Cornell University, the BASIS I4 project at the University of California – Davis and Syracuse University. The program uses satellite imagery to determine and predict potential losses of livestock forage and issue insurance payouts to participating members when incidences of drought occur. Being first-of-its-kind initiative in Africa the project is said to hold enormous potential for benefitting livestock keepers in the region and across the continent. The impact of this pilot project is currently under assessment to find out its benefits before it can be scaled up to other sub counties in the country.

Kenya Adaptation to CC in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (KACCAL) Project: This is a World Bank designed project aimed at improving the ability of participating sub counties and communities in the arid and semi-arid lands to plan and implement CC adaptation measures.

Kenya Agricultural Carbon Market Programme: This is being implemented in Western Kenya and parts of the Rift Valley with assistance from the World Bank. It is aimed at facilitating farmers to adopt sustainable land management practices.

Strengthening capacity for CC Adaptation in Land and Water management Project: Implemented by KARI and covering approximately 12,000 households, the project is funded by SIDA and the Kenyan government. The project objective is to reduce the impact of CC and variability on smallholder agriculture through sustainable land and water management technologies and contribute to improvement of food security and ecosystem resilience in the selected watersheds and sub counties of Kenya. The project promotes livelihood strategic practices that will enhance carbon storage, ecosystem resilience and sustainable livelihood options. These include; crop diversification, adoption of drought tolerant crop varieties, traditional high value crops, minimum tillage, water harvesting and conservation among others.

Agricultural productivity and climatic change in the arid and semi-arid lands of Ijara, Trans Mara and Tana delta Project: This is a research project funded by IDRC and the Kenya government. The project is implemented by KARI in partnership with KENFAP, KMD, Moi University, MoA and MENR. The objectives are to: (i) Assess and document climatic risks and vulnerabilities of the communities and agro-systems and establish coping strategies in the project area; (ii) Identify, pilot-test innovations/options/strategies that would work best through participatory approaches; (iii) Develop information sharing

initiatives on CC and variability and best bet adaptation strategies; (iv) Build capacity of KARI scientists and stakeholders to address challenges of CC and variability; (v) Inform and influence the CC adaptation policy/decision-making process through scientific action research based results.

Green houses pilot project under the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP): The programme was launched by NEPAD. The Green Houses pilot project” in Kwale, Kakamega and Trans Nzoia counties supported by COMESA CC Initiative

The Vi Carbon Project: This is a carbon credit project in Siaya County of Kenya implemented by the WB.

2.3 Stakeholders in CSA Activities.

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

rather uncoordinated in terms of both functions and implementation of climate related projects and

activities. However, the highly consultative and participatory process of compiling and development of

the recently launched NCCAP can be expected to reverse this trend in the future. These stakeholders

and institutions can be broadly classified into the following categories.

2.3.1 Government Ministries and Departments

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

transitional status occasioned by devolution and implementation of the new constitution not to mention

the ministries reorganizations whose departments are currently unclear. However, the major

institutions and their CSA related roles include:

i) Ministry of Water, Environment and Mineral Resources: Under this ministry we have the NEMA, KMD and DRSRS. The ministry is mandated to formulate and review policies on Environmental conservation, Water, Natural and Mineral Resources management, develop geo-database, conducting and dissemination of research findings in land resources, promotion and coordination of environmental activities and enforcing compliance of environmental regulations and guidelines. It provides meteorological and climatological services to agriculture, forestry, civil aviation, private sector and others through the KMD and Coordinates statutory environmental committees through NEMA. The Ministry has acts of parliament for each of the services (Water Act 2002, EMCA, Mines Act and several other policies and strategies. The institutions within the Ministry provide weather forecast data and rainfall records to the country. The DRSRS provides time series data on remotely sensed data such as vegetation resources, water availability, etc. to the country.

ii) MoA, Livestock, fisheries and Cooperative Development: The ministry is entrusted with the provision of irrigation services, agro forestry services, soil and water management,

conservation agriculture, land reclamation, promotion of drought tolerant crops, water harvesting and storage using small and medium sized dams to expand the potential for irrigation, increased agricultural production and livestock development particularly in the ASALs among other roles. Other activities undertaken by the ministry include promotion of conservation agriculture and minimum tillage, water harvesting, agro-forestry, use of improved inputs such as fertilizers and manures, promotion of energy saving technologies such as lined stoves, promotion of new crop varieties/types (pulses, sorghums, millets), animals and birds which are adapted to drier environments (ostrich, quails, bees, guinea fowl, etc). The ministry also has several policies and acts (and some under preparation e.g. ALFFA, Irrigation and Water Policies and Acts, various commodities Acts) covering various aspects of crops, livestock and fisheries production, marketing, appropriate use of insecticides and pesticides, tillage and trade.

iii) Ministry of Energy and petroleum: The Ministry is responsible for Energy policy development, hydropower development, geothermal energy and renewable energy exploration and development, promotion of alternative energy sources for domestic use such as biogas, solar lighting, etc.

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute; It has a CCU. Its functions include strengthening biotechnological research in crop and livestock varieties that are resistant to drought, pests and disease and are high yielding and improve nutrition. KARI also has the mandate of strengthening research on good agricultural practices. The other cardinal roles of KARI include development of; a) production of new technologies for the various agro-ecological zones and especially targeting those that have an impact on water and soil conservation, b) new technologies for crop and livestock production for the drier environments. It undertakes country wide assessments to determine regional vulnerability of the agricultural sector to CC elements.

National Irrigation Board (NIB): The NIB was established with the primary objective of developing large scale irrigation schemes primarily to provide settlement land to the landless. It did so by providing water and irrigation advisory services to the settler farmers on its 6 settlement schemes which were primarily located in the low rainfall areas. Irrigation was then and is now driven by the demand for increased productivity of food and raw materials of agricultural origin). The NIB is taking measures to accelerate irrigation development in the country with the hope that increased productivity from irrigated agriculture would obviate the need for rapid opening up of land (clearing of forest land) for expansion of agriculture under rain-fed conditions. The irrigation measures would result in the transformation of agricultural production from primarily rain-fed to irrigated one. Currently the Government through the NIB is developing irrigation schemes such as the Galana Scheme and the Tana Delta Million Acre scheme. The Government also aims at increasing water availability by promoting water harvesting in large-scale dams and night storage dams at schemes level and water storage in pans, dams and tanks at farm level. This will ensure steady and sufficient water supply for irrigation.

iv) Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA): This institute carries out research and policy analysis in all sectors of the Kenyan Economy. Another main mandate of KIPPRA is establishment of a data base of stakeholders in policy research and advocacy to build CC resilience that equips communities with the ability to plan for, survive, recover from, and even thrive in changing climatic conditions.

2.3.2 National and International NGOs

i) Kenya CC working Group: This is a forum that brings together Civil Society Organizations, donor parties, government departments and agencies working on CC. It advocates for positive policy and legislative framework that puts into account the effects of CC on development. It supports and coordinates CC debates at the local, national, regional and international levels. It also supports reduced CC vulnerability of poor communities through awareness and strengthening local communities and civil society to implement community based adaptation projects.

ii) CARE Kenya: It strives to make carbon markets work for the poor by developing carbon finance for agricultural projects through identification of appropriate carbon accounting methodology and on farm tree planting. It also Promotes sustainable agriculture in a changing climate through provision of information, seedlings and training farmers to introduce agro-forestry and wood lot management practices with a view to increasing availability of energy, food and enhancing income and reducing carbon emissions.

iii) Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA): It unites civil society efforts on CC advocacy and coordination in Africa. It encourages strategic alliances with international partners, national governments and regional governmental bodies as well as individuals to ensure that African Voice is amplified in International CC Dialogue process.

2.3.3 Kenyan Private Sector Organizations

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

dialogue among its members and between other actors in the agricultural sector. It also ensures timely

interventions in the resolution of issues affecting agriculture sector and effective representation of the

farming community and expression of its views to the government and the public at large.

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

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

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

adaptation projects through corporate social responsibility.

2.3.4 International Development Agencies and Donors

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

included organization of international and regional conferences to raise awareness on CC, its effects and

mitigation measures at the national and higher levels. The international organizations have also

supported research and capacity building programmes in order to develop informed CC response

measures for each region or specific CC aspect. The UN and its agencies or specialized organizations,

FAO, IFAD, Word Bank and international research bodies have increased their efforts at assisting Kenya

to internally develop policies, programmes and projects aimed at addressing or responding to the

effects of CC.

Organizations such as IDRC, UNDP, Rockefeller Foundation DFID, GIZ, World Bank and others have co-

partnered with the Kenyan government in financing government projects or to implement their own CC

and adaptation programmes and projects in the country. They support research in CC and integration of

CC mitigation in projects design to ensure evidence based project implementation and policy

formulation.

2.3.5 International and National Research Organizations

These include KIPPRA, IPAR, TEGEMEO, ILRI, IFPRI, ASARECA, CCAFS, ICRAF, ICIPE, CIP, ReSAKSS and

CIAT. These organizations conduct research and disseminate findings on identifying and addressing the

most important interactions, synergies and tradeoffs between CC, agriculture and food security. They

also promote and sponsor uptake of sustainable agricultural practices and CC adaptation and mitigation

measures through promoting programmes and activities to the farming community. These projects

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

promotion of traditional high value crops among others.

2.4 Reasons for Successful Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices.

The Agriculture sector Ministries and institutions have inherent strengths that facilitate implementation

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

A strong base of (fairly distributed) human capital including extension workers who work directly with the farmers in implementing Ministry’s policies;

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

Many Parastatals responsible for various agricultural activities – Research (KARI, KEVEVAPI), regulatory (KEPHIS), production (Coffee Board of Kenya, Tea Board of Kenya, Kenya Dairy Board, Kenya Sugar Board, National Irrigation Board etc.), financial (Agricultural Finance Cooperation); These Parastatals also have their enabling legislation and human and substantial financial resources,

Well-equipped training and demonstration facilities and centres well distributed in the country. These include:

27 Agricultural Training Centres (ATC); 25 Agricultural Mechanization Stations (AMS) for dam construction and soil

conservation issues; and Agricultural Technology Development Centre (ATDC) for production of farmer-

friendly technologies.

Establishment of CCUs responsible for the coordination and implementation of CC activities. The Ministries of Fisheries, Livestock Development and National Irrigation Board had their own units. With the merger of these into one large ministry it is expected that an appropriate institutional set up will be formed to address all CC matters in the agricultural sector.

The MoA and its stakeholders are currently developing a Strategic Plan to implement the NAdP through its recently constituted CCU and KARI’s CCU. The Strategic Plan will also take into consideration the proposed activities of the ASDS (2010) that are directed towards CC adaptation in the Agriculture sector, in order to avoiding duplication in the proposed strategies and also to complement the on-going CC adaptation and mitigation programmes and projects at the MoA.

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

2.5 Constraints to Efficient Adoption of CSA Policies and Practices.

i) Lack of streamlining in the institutional setup occasioned by the transitional state in the country stemming from;

Devolution as a result of the promulgation of the new constitution which transferred the implementation functions to the counties while retaining the policy functions with the ministry headquarters. A very weak linkage exists between the county staff and the ministry headquarters staff and information does not flow from one level to the other in either direction.

Government reorganization which has transferred functions that were carried out in many ministries (42) to a few ministries (18) and in the process they have lost institutional memory.

The development and finalization of policies initiated before the new constitution and re-organized government have been affected. For instance the finalization of the Irrigation Policy and Bill have been affected by the transfer of these functions from the Ministry of Water and Irrigation to the MoA, Livestock and Fisheries, while similar functions have remained with the Regional Authorities and the National Youth Service in their new locations/ministries.

The current reorganization of the Parastatals in government and in the MoA (under ALFFA) may further affect the institutional setup and their functions.

ii) The goodwill from stakeholders especially the politicians have not been translated into action as there is insufficient fiscal support on the implementation of the policies by government, development partners and non-state actors, and there are delays in fast-tracking the adoption of the CC bill into law

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

iv) Slow or delayed uptake of research proven adaptation and mitigation measures and technologies by farmers due to farmer related social economic constraints still remains as one of the greatest challenges in dealing with CC adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural sector and low diffusion levels of modern agricultural technologies. These challenges include among others;

Lack of financial capital and high poverty levels. Relevant technology adoption and other adaptive solutions require the use of purchased inputs beneficial to increase yields, but can only be accessible to those who can afford them. The majority of people in the rural areas have low purchasing power and thus low levels of inputs to combat CC.

Lack of awareness on the causes, adaptation and mitigation options of CC amongst communities makes them vulnerable to climate variability and reduces their adaptive capacity. There is thus a need for innovative and proactive strategies for awareness creation which will empower the rural communities, especially the smallholder farmers, in coping with increasing livelihood vulnerabilities.

Land fragmentation into uneconomic units for agricultural use remains a major barrier to adoption of climate smart agriculture for instance agro-forestry. Additionally, these discrete small units of land cannot support projects such as small farm level dams for water harvesting and micro irrigation projects at the farm level. The challenge however is the increasing land subdivision as a result of population increases leading to shortage of land that can be put under forest cover

v) Cost of Implementation of the laid out policy actions is high (for instance the adoption of animal ploughing in areas where the farms are too small or the incidence of livestock diseases is high) coupled with the lack of proper finance monitoring and tracking system.

vi) Currently it is difficult to identify and track the total amount of money coming into Kenya for CC related activities and what activities they are being applied to.

vii) The UNFCCC logic emphasizes development of strategies for adaptation and mitigation on different tracks, adaptation programs and mitigation programs. They are also created and financed through different process. Countries are thus expected to prepare NAMAs as well as NAPs. This can lead to inefficiencies within

the MoA CC efforts as it works to coordinate a wide array of climate and agriculture related programmes. These programmes frequently promote similar activities, including those traditionally known as sustainable land management practices that provide adaptation and mitigation. This complicates policy and program implementation for climate smart agriculture. While government financing does not earmark funding to the agricultural sector for CC activities, donor funding off the budget are earmarked for CC making tracking difficult.

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

promoted. These include:

Shortage of water to expand area under irrigation,

Limited alternative options for livelihood for forest and rangeland communities who suffer most from the impacts of CC. Relocating them is expensive and there may be unavailable land to resettle them.

Disease challenges especially after expanding irrigation,

Markets for surplus produce,

Social issues especially when introducing crop agriculture among pastoralists,

Inappropriate technologies for adoption and their high costs especially for small holder farmers,

Poor knowledge on CC and CSA; There is limited understanding on the amount of global funding and opportunities available and how it can be accessed.

Inadequate technical expertise and capacity in implementing research activities and on addressing CC impacts and improving adaptive capacity which requires precise data, and enhanced data collection capacity most especially in order to take advantage of the existing carbon credit markets.

There is insufficient and inaccurate local data on weather variability due to low investment in weather stations whose locations are irregularly and unevenly distributed throughout the country. Vast areas still remain unmonitored. These leads to lack of important meteorological data that is necessary for early warning and food security surveillance not to mention the upcoming weather based insurance products.

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

due to the following:

i. Top-down approach; the projects impose practices that are not necessarily acceptable in the society while ignoring farmers’ local knowledge and preferences.

ii. The projects over-emphasize the mitigation aspect of CSA through agro-forestry and promise carbon money which turns out to be very little thus making the farmers disillusioned. Farmers fail to focus on improving productivity and adaptation aspects which could be more beneficial.

iii. Inability to look at the projects in an integrated approach that takes into account all the network of relations, synergies, tradeoffs and impacts of the projects’ activities and other livelihood activities and sectors.

iv. Short project period; most projects are funded for only a short period (5yrs) while long term (20yrs) financial support is necessary.

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

vi. Complexity of CSA terminology and unclear implementation structure does not help either. Passing the CSA terminology, practice and benefits through extension is a tall order especially with the low extension worker: farmer ratio.

vii. Unclear institutional roles leading to duplication

viii. Over-dependence on rain-fed agriculture due to lack of access to water for irrigation leaves farmers vulnerable even in the face of adoption of CSA technologies.

ix. Use of shared resources by farmers and pastoralists. Pastoralists graze on farm residuals as a common practice in most areas hence use materials that can be used as mulch to feed livestock.

x. Gender disparities in access of productive resources and gender rights lead to household disagreements as women are the adopters of CSA practices while the men who are the land owners want to benefit from the carbon credit money.

Though the existence of the global carbon market is an opportunity that if well exploited can yield benefits for the smallholder farmers, participating in the carbon markets poses huge challenges to smallholder farmers. The primary challenge facing farmers wishing to benefit from carbon offsets is the cost of measurement and verification of the change in carbon emissions. Other challenges that hinder smallholder farmers from benefiting from carbon markets include the following:-

i) The amount of money a small scale farmer would receive from the carbon s/he sequesters per year is likely to be very minute, considering the fact that most farmers have less than 1 hectare farmlands.

ii) Adopting technologies that increase soil carbon storage is quite costly. In addition, due to the disaggregated nature of smallholder farms, measuring or verifying soil carbon on thousands of farms and aggregating this information will cost huge amounts. Much of the funds generated from these projects will be used to defray

costs of project management and technical support and very little will remain for the farmers who are the real producers of carbon;

iii) Agricultural carbon sequestration, especially from the soils, requires long term commitment and often will involve biding farmers to certain types of agricultural practices and land use patterns that diverge from local practices known to be effective. This is likely to negatively affect the adaptive capacity of poor farmers, who may need to change their production systems to adapt to new climate conditions and economic fluctuations;

iv) Biasness towards smallholder farmers by the large scale farmers. Better land will sequester more carbon as soil fertility enhances the production of organic material that can be incorporated into the soil. Well to do farmers, who in most cases are not the peasant farmers, are likely to be on better quality land hence stand to benefit from soil carbon markets than their smallholder counterparts.; Issues such as lack of education and access to information are also likely to impede the effectiveness of projects resulting in obstacles, abuse and even conflicts in extreme cases; and

v) Other issues include poor infrastructural and institutional weaknesses, poor systems of governance, and political representation

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

implement CSA related policies and consequently increase productivity.

2.6 Opportunities in the Implementation of CSA Policies and Practices.

These include:

Existence of local knowledge and coping strategies at the grassroots level that are being used by farmers that can be built upon and strengthened

The fact that CC phenomenon is real and already unmistakable and intensifying at an alarming rate as evidenced from the countrywide temperature increases and rainfall irregularity, frequency of floods, landslides, droughts and dwindling agricultural productivity, has increased the sense of urgency in tackling CC. Consequently there is a growing public desire for governments and global community to act on CC. This presents a perfect environment for reassembling support from grassroots communities, national, regional to international level. However the extent to which the government goodwill is translated to actual action on the ground is questionable since most of the relevant policies, legislations documents and strategies are still in draft form, there is inadequate budgetary allocation to ensure fiscal support on the implementation of the policies and fast-tracking the adoption of the CC bill into law.

Rain fed agriculture is one of the most vulnerable economic activities. It remains the most relied on livelihood options by the majority of smallholder farmers. The country has however a huge unexploited irrigation potential. There is in still low and inadequate investment in water harvesting and irrigation in both amongst smallholder farmers and in construction of mega dams in drought prone areas. Most of the rainfall is thus lost

through runoff. This compromises agricultural productivity and exacerbates food insecurity, incomes and ultimately livelihoods.

There is a wide range of developed agricultural technologies especially by KARI which can counter droughts, floods, disease and pest but have not been used by the farmers. Either due to lack of funds or lack of planning on how to translate actual research results to be used by farmers. The existing extension network in the country is far below the required level.

Carbon trading especially for the small holder producers some of whom grow tree crops such as coffee, tea, sisal and bananas. Carbon trade regulations should be modified to include the tree crops farmers are planting (coffee, tea, mangoes, etc) or to encourage groups of farmers to establish joint woodlots,

Promotion of green technology - which could result in increased jobs and employment. These would include production of conservation tillage equipment and technologies through training of local youths as artisans

Expansion of production under intensive systems such as irrigation, green house systems and deep litter or cage systems with a view to increasing productivity per unit and obviate the need for opening up of large tracts for production under rain-fed conditions. Intensive systems will require water conservation.

Expansion of biogas technology among livestock farmers to reduce demand on fuel wood and production of methane into the air

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

Promotion of pasture and forages production to protect the lands against excess heating and erosion. These would reduce temperatures and emissions of greenhouse gases.

There are also opportunities for further research into CSA activities and technologies as this is a new field and very little is known. There are also opportunities to revisit past research programmes and findings/technologies and review them in light of CCs that have occurred. A recent example is the continued research on coffee that has developed new varieties that are adapted to low rainfall areas of the country and thus leading to increases in coffee production. Similar examples also exist in maize, pulses, sorghum, poultry and other enterprises.

Long term data to facilitate comparison of the impact of the CSA policies at the beginning and end of a policy or activities is deficient or lacking. There exists opportunities for collection and maintenance of such data and development of measurement formulae and continuous research.

3.0 CSA POLICY FRAMEWORK IN THE COUNTRY

What are the key policies and institutions relevant to CSA in the country? Please be specific about the

instruments and incentives used by these policies, so that we can learn lessons about how exactly they

work.

At the moment Kenya has no explicit CC policy. However, there are national blue prints addressing the

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

2010 guarantees the right to a clean and healthy environment under the bill of rights by providing

ground for formulation of adaptation and mitigation legislation, policies and strategies. Kenya is also a

signatory to CC policies by regional bodies such as the African CC Strategy 2011 by the AU and EAC and

Policy and Strategy on CC 2011 by the EAC. These provide priority actions in the country and region and

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

the CC related policies in the country.

3.1 Effectiveness of CSA Activities and Policies.

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

that CC poses to agriculture and other sectors of the economy but the extent to which these policies are

being implemented and/ or will be implemented in future and translated into actual investments and

actions remains largely unknown. Moreover, despite agriculture being the backbone of the Kenyan

economy and being severely affected by CC, currently there exist no explicit sectoral CC action plan,

policy or strategy. Even in the current CC strategy and action plan agriculture is given such a low priority

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

energy sector.

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

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

resources. For instance the Department of Forestry has promoted planting of trees in the forest zones

while the MoA has promoted planting of farm forestry trees and fuel wood lots. However these efforts

have not been linked to the carbon credit program nor have they covered hill areas that are not

classified as private land or forest zones. It is on such land where most of land destruction activities such

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

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

without linking it to the resultant economic gains that would be associated with attainment of its

objectives. For example the nationwide soil and water conservation programme promoted the

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

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

such terraced land. In the final analysis it became more of a landscaping exercise than an agronomic

practice. In another example pastoralists with large herds were encouraged to reduce their herd sizes

without a corresponding programme to promote other production systems that increase productivity

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

systems.

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

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

especially between the government NGOs and donor agencies. This may lead to duplication of efforts

and inefficiencies in project implementation.

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

(i) Impact on Gender and Social Equity

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

geographical location or income levels all of which affect one’s ability to contribute to the development

agenda. Women disproportionately suffer climate related impacts. This is as a result of lack of economic

empowerment and participation in decision making. There has been an increasing recognition of the

need to ensure gender equality in all spheres of life. Many legal instruments and agreement across the

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

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

measures to address gender, disability, marginalized, special interest groups and minority to ensure

social equity. However, the greatest challenge and question is whether the provisions of gender related

policies and laws are implemented to the letter. Since intended impact can only be realized following

effective implementation of policies in programmes and projects. This is to say that the gender and

social impact of different projects on gender and social equity is highly determined by the design and

effective implementation of the particular program and the extent to which social and gender equity

was paid attention to.

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

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

inclusiveness goal that has been well adopted across the countries development initiatives, both

governmental and non- governmental. These activities implemented in the past may be said to have

had a positive impact as intended on both the target groups and the environment in general. It is worth

noting that the activities may not initially be designed as CSA programmes but rather as technologically

appropriate interventions that have had a desirable impact on small holder farmers’ productivity and

general welfare.

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

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

operators. The recent expansion of small scale irrigation has resulted in increased farm productivity,

food security, trade between rural and urban areas and employment opportunities for farmers,

traders/transporters and farm labour. Some of the farmers have also diversified their enterprises by

opening up small rural inputs supply shops that are operated by some of the family members.

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

principles such as land preparation and planting have led to significant increases in yields and incomes

for the farmers. Those programmes that also included farm forestry in their design have also had a

positive impact on increases of the forest cover on farms and greening of the farmlands. The challenge

however is the increasing land subdivision as a result of population increases leading to shortage of land

that can be put under forest cover.

Other specific examples include;

The establishment of UWEZO fund to support women and youth especially rural women to engage in the development agenda. It is hoped that the fund will ensure that women access resources to enable adaptation to challenges of CC.

The Government also provides funding for the support to the poor and vulnerable members of the society. They receive a bimonthly transfer of KShs 2000 through their mobile phones.

The currently ongoing ASDSP.

(ii) Impact of Rapid Development of the Electronic Platforms

Kenya has promoted a rapid expansion of the electronic platform with far reaching positive impact in mitigating CC. Some of the actions include:

The introduction of the use of laptops in schools which will result in a drastic reduction in the use of paper-books for writing and reading. This will translate into a rapid reduction of harvesting of trees to provide the large volumes of paper currently being used and which is projected to increase rapidly with the increase in school going children. The reduction in the demand for paper will result in a decline in the cutting of trees for manufacture of paper.

The introduction of electronic or paperless banking and money transfer will also result in significant reduction in the demand for paper and the need to cut trees.

The introduction of the mobile phone has resulted in a near 100% reduction in the use of wooden poles for transmission.

(iii) Impact of Rapid Changes in Construction practices

There has been a rapid change in the construction industry and power and telephone transmission

systems that have resulted in an increase in the use of concrete, steel and plastic products for building

and furniture. This has reduced the demand for timber products, a decline in harvesting of trees for

timber and therefore a reduction in loss of forest cover with positive impact on the environment.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Key challenges to Implementation of CSA in Kenya.

i) The Impact of Devolution: The Country has promulgated a new constitution (Constitution of Kenya 2010) which transferred the implementation functions of most sectors to the counties while retaining the policy functions with the Ministry Headquarters. The counties make their own plans and receive funding direct from the Exchequer. Some of the staff that was in the ministries headquarters has been sent to counties while some counties have hired their own staff to implement County level activities. They report to the County administrators. This has resulted in:

Development of a very weak linkage between the county and the ministry headquarters staff and information does not flow from one level to the other in either direction easily.

Change in priorities in programmes under the new constitutional dispensation/ system and some programmes have been abandoned as Counties make their own plans.

Dissolution of some offices e.g. dissolution of the former office of the Prime Minister which hosted CCU and the Inter-ministerial Consultative Forum on CC Taskforce for accelerated development of green energy.

ii) Government reorganization: which has transferred functions that were carried out in many ministries (42) to a few ministries (18) and in the process they have lost institutional memory.

iii) Incomplete Policies: The development and finalization of policies initiated before the new constitution and re-organized government have been affected. Most have been shelved as the functions have been transferred to a different/lower level of the government. For instance the finalization of the Irrigation Policy and Bill have been affected by the transfer of these functions from the Ministry of Water and Irrigation to the MoA, Livestock and Fisheries, while similar functions have remained with the Regional Authorities and the National Youth Service in their new locations/ministries. This may lead to duplication of some of the policies/programmes.

iv) Transfer of Staff: The transfer of staff from the ministry headquarters to counties and in other instances the retrenchment of staff has the impact of loss of institutional memory. It was therefore difficult to access some of the staff as they had moved.

v) Reorganization of Ministries and Parastatals: The current reorganization of the Parastatals in government and in the MoA (under ALFFA Bill) may further affect the institutional setup

and their functions. As such members of staff were not sure of the future setup and institutional priorities under a unified ministry and in the counties.

4.2 Untapped Opportunities

There are enormous opportunities that remain untapped in order to effectively implement CSA related

policies and consequently increase productivity. These include:

Existence of local knowledge and coping strategies at the grassroots level that are being used by farmers that can be built upon and strengthened

The fact that CC phenomenon is real and already unmistakable and intensifying at an alarming rate as evidenced from the countrywide temperature increases and rainfall irregularity, frequency of floods, landslides, draughts and dwindling agricultural productivity, has increased the sense of urgency in tackling CC. Consequently there is a growing public desire for governments and global community to act on CC. This presents a perfect environment for reassembling support from grassroots communities, national, regional to international level. However the extent to which the government goodwill is translated to actual action on the ground is questionable since most of the relevant policies, legislations documents and strategies are still in draft form, there is inadequate budgetary allocation to ensure fiscal support on the implementation of the policies and fast-tracking the adoption of the CC bill into law.

Rain fed agriculture is one of the most vulnerable economic activities it remains the most relied livelihood options of the majority of smallholder farmers. The country has however a huge unexploited irrigation potential. There is in still low and adequate investment in water harvesting and irrigation in both amongst smallholder farmers and in construction of mega dams in drought prone areas. Most of the rainfall is thus lost through runoff. This compromise agricultural productivity and exacerbate food insecurity, incomes and ultimately livelihoods.

There is a wide range of developed agricultural technologies that have been developed especially by KARI which can counter droughts, floods, disease and pest but have not been used by the farmers. Either due to lack of funds or lack of planning on how to translate actual research results to be used by farmers. The existing extension network in the country is far below the required level.

Carbon trading especially for the small holder producers some of whom grow tree crops such as coffee, tea, sisal and bananas. Carbon trade regulations should be modified to include the tree crops farmers are planting (coffee, tea, mangoes) or to encourage groups of farmers to establish joint woodlots

Promotion of green technology - which could result in increased jobs and employment. These would include production of conservation tillage equipment and technologies through training of local youths as artisans,

Expansion of production under intensive systems such as irrigation, green house systems and deep litter or cage systems with a view to increasing productivity per unit and obviate the need for opening up of large tracts for production under rain-fed conditions. Intensive systems will require water conservation.

Expansion of biogas technology among livestock farmers to reduce demand on fuel wood and production of methane into the air,

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

Promotion of pasture and forages production to protect the lands against excess heating and erosion. These would reduce temperatures and emissions of GHG

There are also opportunities for further research into CSA activities and technologies as this is a new field and very little is known. There are also opportunities to revisit past research programmes and findings/technologies and review them in light of CCs that have occurred. A recent example is the continued research on coffee that has developed new varieties that are adapted to low rainfall areas of the country and thus leading to increases in coffee production. Similar examples also exist in maize, pulses, sorghum, poultry and other enterprises.

Long term data to facilitate comparison of the impact of the CSA policies at the beginning and end of a policy or activities is deficient or lacking. There exists opportunities for collection and maintenance of such data and development of measurement formulae and continuous research.

4.3 Recommendations

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

These include:

Data surveys and analyses to establish the requirements of the target groups in the country and identifying the resulting priority requirements into the CSA policies and activities

Continued research to develop appropriate low cost technologies to address the requirements, coupled with continued capacity building among the target groups and the state actors to ensure the technologies are passed on,

Appropriate design and mainstreaming CSA policies and activities in all programmes, Investment in weather information systems and capacity building to strengthen the

KMD to enhance disaster preparedness and reliable information synthesis and predictions,

Central CC Projects/ activities and provision of funds for employment, tracking, monitoring and impact assessments and communications, Streamlining and designing additional finance mechanisms to support CSA, Combine climate adaptation, mitigation measures and sustainable agriculture and food security goals, Improve on monitoring impact measurement, reporting and result demonstration to ensure continuous funding for climate smart agriculture.

Policy makers should harmonize and bring together the various scattered CSA policies, projects and programmes into one which is comprehensive and accessible by all stakeholders.

Governments and policy makers should draft country specific CSA policies that can help farmers cope with the adverse effects of CC. Farmers need policies that remove obstacles to implementing CSA and create synergies with alternative technologies and practices.

Governments and policy makers should promote and disseminate policies that promote CSA which integrates food security, CC adaptation and mitigation.

Governments and policy makers should also adopt a multi-sectoral approach in drafting CSA policies in order to effectively tackle the impact of CC on food systems and NR management

Governments and policy makers should promote financial incentives that encourage CSA. Considerable policy support and capacity enhancement is needed for climate risk management including insurance and safety nets as well as improved access to weather information adapted to farmers needs.

They should also encourage research and dissemination of the best ways of helping farmers reduce GHG emissions and consequently adapt to CC.

At the international, regional, national and county levels, agriculture should be at the centre stage of CC agenda, negotiations and discussions.

Effective means of communicating climate related research findings among researchers and stakeholders should be established

Investment in weather information systems and capacity building to strengthen the KMD to enhance disaster preparedness and reliable information synthesis and predictions.

Central CC Projects/ activities and funds employment tracking, monitoring and impact assessments and communications

Streamlining and additional finance mechanisms to support climate smart agriculture.

Combine climate adaptation, mitigation measures and sustainable agriculture and food security goals.

4. REFERENCES

African Union and East African Community. (2011). African Climate Change Strategy.

ASARECA. (2009). Gender Mainstreaming Strategic Plan. Entebbe, Uganda.

ASCU. (2005). Report of the National Conference on Revitalizing the Agricultural Sector for Economic

Growth. Nairobi. Kenya

East African Community. (2011). Policy and Strategy on Climate Change.

Government of Kenya. (2012) Medium Term Investment Plan 2012-2017 (Farm Management

Handbook). Nairobi. Government Printer

Government of Kenya. (2007). National land Policy. Nairobi. Government Printer

Haggblade, S. & Hazel, P. (2010). Successes in African Agriculture: Lessons for the future. Baltimore. IFPRI

and Johns Hopkins University Press

Kenya Land Alliance (Undated). Land use in Kenya: The Case on Land use policy in Kenya. Nairobi.

Author.

ReSAKSS. (2010). Trends in Key Agricultural and Rural Development Indicators in the COMESA

Region. Nairobi

Republic of Kenya. (2010). Agricultural Sector Development Strategy 2010- 2020. Nairobi. Government

Printer.

… (2010). The Constitution of Kenya. Nairobi. Government printer.

Rubin et al. (2009). Promoting Gender Equitable Opportunities in Agricultural Value Chains. Washington

D.C. USAID

World Bank, AFTAR. (2009). East Africa: A study of the Regional Maize Market and Marketing

Costs. Washington D.C P. Xiv

World Bank Group. (2010). Doing Business in the EAC: Comparing Regulations in the 5 Economies.

Washington D.C.

5.0 ANNEXES

2.1. Annex 1 National CC Blue Prints

3.1.

POLICY SECTOR

NAME OF THE POLICY

YEAR APPROVED OF IN FORCE

RESPONSIBLE MINISTRIES

CONTACT PERSON

( NAME TEL, AND email)

UPDATED OR UPDATE PLANNED

HYPERLINK

CC National CC response strategy

National CC Action Plan

CC Authority Bill

2010

2013

Ministry Water Environment and Natural Resources

Ministry Water Environment and Natural Resources

Ministry Water Environment and Natural Resources

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

updated

Updated

Updated

http://www.environment.go.ke

http://www.environment.go.ke

http://www.environment.go.ke

Land National Land policy

2007 Ministry of Land [email protected]

updated www.kenyalandalliance.or.ke

Forest Forestry policy

2007

Water Environment and Natural Resources

[email protected]

Updated

http://www.environment.go.ke

Kenya forestry Master plan

1995

Water Environment and Natural Resources

[email protected]

Updated

ttp://www.environment.go.ke

Energy Energy policy Draft Ministry of Energy Permanent Secretary Ministry of Energy

Update Ongoing

Development

Kenya Vision 2030

National Policy for sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands

2008

2013

Planning

Ministry of devolution

[email protected]

Permanent Secretary Ministry of Devolution

Updated

Updated

www.nesc.go.ke

Agriculture Agriculture sector development strategy

2009

MoA

Permanent Secretary MoA

Updated

Environment

Environment Management and Coordination Act

National Wetlands Conservation and Management

1999

Water Environment and Natural Resources

Water

[email protected]

Updated is Ongoing

ttp://www.environment.go.ke

policy

National Environment policy

National water Policy

Water Act

Draft

Draft

Draft

2002

Environment and Natural Resources

Water Environment and Natural Resources

Water Environment and Natural Resources

Water Environment and Natural Resources

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Ongoing

Update Going on

Update Going on

Updated

www.environment.go.ke/.../DRAFT-WETLANDS-POLICY-June-2013.

ttp://www.environment.go.ke

ttp://www.environment.go.ke

ttp://www.environment.go.ke

Energy Energy policy and Act

Draft Energy policy

2004

2012

Ministry of Energy

Ministry of Energy

Permanent Secretary MoA

Permanent Secretary MoA

Updated

Update Ongoing

4.1. Annex 2: Descriptive Summary of CSA related policies, programmes and

activities

i) National CC Response Strategy (NCCRS) 2010: This was the first national policy document to fully acknowledge the reality of CC. It was developed through a participatory process through stakeholder consultation workshops held throughout the country. The process was spearheaded by the Ministry of Environment, Water and Mineral Resources (MEWMR) in the year 2009/2010. It provides the evidence of CC impacts on different economic sectors and proposes adaptation and mitigation strategies. The strategy outlines the budgets and plans for government line ministries.

ii) National CC Action Plan (NCCAP 2013-2017): Kenya CC action plan was as a result of a year-long participatory process involving the public sector, the private sector, academia and the civil society, under the leadership of the Ministry of Environment Water and Mineral Resources. A multi-stakeholder- multidisciplinary taskforce was involved, informed by the global and regional commitments and obligations. The plan was developed with the aim of implementing the NCCRS, through an all-inclusive process with ownership across stakeholders. The plan will enable Kenya to reduce vulnerability to CC and to improve the country’s ability to take advantage of the opportunities that CC offers. It will inform national development and policy decisions in all sectors of the economy and also to a wide range of actors including government agencies, private sector and civil society organisations who will in turn contribute to its implementation. The plan sets out a low carbon climate resilient development pathway that can help meet Vision 2030 goals through actions that address both sustainable development and CC. This will help to achieve the MDGs without compromising the environment and natural resource base. It provides recommendations for an enabling policy and regulatory framework, adaptation analysis and priority actions, mitigation options, considerations for technology, recommendations for knowledge management and capacity development and a climate financial mechanism. As CC is a cross cutting and dynamic process, it is anticipated that the recommended actions be tracked/monitored continuously and the plan be revised and updated on a five year cycle in line with the national planning and budgetary processes.

iii) Kenya CC Authority Bill, 2012: The bill was gazetted in 2012 and it is in the process of being enacted to support the mainstreaming of CC within the national policy. The bill drafting process was spearheaded by a taskforce drawn from the civil society, the Kenya CC Working Group, the former office of the prime Minister, Land and Natural Resources Committee and Kenya Law Reform Commission. In line with Kenya’s Vision 2030, the law is expected to promote a greener economy. It proposes formation of the CC Authority that will coordinate activities across government sectors and non-state actors and guide the implementation of the NCCRS. The authority will have the power of monitoring and investigation, including the power to enter the premises of any public or

private entity and make an enquiry on adherence to requirements Act. The authority will come up with programs on adaptation, mitigation, emission levels and trends, education and creation of awareness, including integration in the educational curricula, assessment of CC vulnerability, CC threats, capacity building in strategic climate sectors, research, development and technology transfer among others. It will also advise the national and county governments on measures necessary for mitigating and adapting to the effects of CC. It will also guide in the implementation of regional and international conventions to which Kenya is party to and report regularly on the country’s adherence to its international obligations relating to CC. The Bill will integrate issues of CC into the national schooling curriculum to create more awareness and a pool of CC champions at a younger age.

2.1.1. Other CC Related Policies and Blue Prints

i) Development policies

The Kenya Vision 2030: This is the national development blue print that encapsulates flagship programmes and projects with aspects of CC adaptation and mitigation. Though CC adaptation and mitigation responses are not explicitly addressed in this long term development plan or in its first Medium Term Plan (MTP 2008-2012), it is made clear in it that Kenya aims to be a nation with clean, secure and sustainable environment. The set environment related goals are closely tied to CC adaptation and mitigation strategies as identified in the National CC Response Strategy and the CC Action Plan. These goals are; to increase forest cover, reducing pollution and proper waste management and to implement different strategies that promote environmental conservation. The nation also aims to enhance disaster preparedness in all disaster prone areas and improve the capacity for adaptation to global climatic change. It is also indicated that the nation will harmonize environment related laws for better environmental planning and governance. However, the second MTP (2013-2017) provides an opportunity to incorporate CC into the national development plans and builds on the NCCRS and the action plan. According to this MTP (2013-2017), broader development goals are to be pursued in cognizant of the need for securing the environment and enhancing CC resilience. Threats emanating from CC are also identified as an emerging challenge that need to be addressed through curbing human induced CC with use of sustainable energy. It also provides for a fund, Kenya Climate Adaptation Fund (KCAF) that is to be a vehicle for mobilizing and allocating resources from international development partners towards CC related activities and will be used for allocating domestic public resources toward responses to adverse impacts of CC. Enhancing drought resilience and CC adaptation has also been identified as a strategic objective with different implementing agencies across all sectors of the economy.

The National Policy for sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands (2013): This focuses on climate resilience of the resident communities, requiring Government to find solutions to address climate challenges and to come up with

measure to manage drought and strengthen livelihoods. The policy also focuses on an enabling environment for accelerated investments to reduce poverty and build resilience and growth. The establishment of the National Drought Management Authority (NDMA), the National Disaster Contingency Fund (NDCF) and the Council of Pastoralists education (CPE) are provided for in the policy. This will ensure timely activation of contingency plans, mainstream CC foresight and adaptation into planning, strengthen community strategies for adaptation to CC and disaster risk reduction and management, and explore opportunities for communities to benefit from bio carbon initiatives.

ii) Agriculture Policies (Crop, Livestock, Forestry and Fisheries)

The Kenya Forestry Master Plan 1995-2020: This plan Provides for an overarching framework for forestry development in the country for the 25 year period up to 2020 and was the blue print for reforms in the sector, including the forestry Act of 2005 and the forest Policy of 2007. It recognizes the environmental role of forests including water values, biodiversity values, CC values through carbon sequestration and other environmental services.

Forest Policy 2007: The policy has an objective of contributing to sustainable land use through soil, water and biodiversity conservation and tree planting through sustainable management of forests and trees, among others. Although the policy covers a wide scope of issues concerning forests, it is geared towards environmental conservation and not directly to CC. A review of the policy in CC mitigation will ensure that the potential capacity of forestry in mitigation and adaptation against CC is captured.

Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS 2010- 2020): The ASDS is the overall and current national policy document for the agricultural sector. The strategy promotes sustainable food production and agro forestry. There are also broad implications for the forestry sector that are detailed in one of the six subsectors of the agriculture sector. The ASDS has mentioned climate adaptation as a priority.

iii) Environmental policies

Environment Management and Coordination Act (EMCA 1999): The act is currently under review. This is the principal instrument of the government for the management of the environment and provides for the relevant institutional framework for the coordination of environmental management including the establishment of the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) which is the Designated National Authority (DNA) for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the National Implementing Entity (NIE) for the CC Adaptation Fund.

Second National Environment Action Plan (NEAP 2009-2013): This action plan Provides for a broad framework for the coordination of environmental activities by the private sector and Government to guide the course of development activities, with a

view to integrating environment and development for better management of resources.

Draft catchment management policy. The policy is being developed. It is expected to facilitate multi-sector objectives and programmes that could deliver climate smart agriculture. Agricultural landscapes will be managed to achieve not only agriculture and watershed management objectives, but also other related goals such as food security, climate adaptation and biodiversity conservation.

Draft National Environment Policy 2012: This policy treats CC and disaster management as an emerging environmental issue and states that the government will adopt two approaches in combating CC i.e. mitigation and adaptation. The policy acknowledges that CC impacts are increasing and will affect all sectors of the economy. It thus proposes development of strategies in order to reverse the trends of environmental degradation, sets out clear visions for ecosystems and development of appropriate strategies to achieve these visions as well as an appropriate monitoring framework.

iv) Land and Allied Policies

The Land Policy: This new land policy proposes the implementation of principles that promote conservation of land quality, environmental audit assessment, productivity targets and guidelines; land size and land use planning. It proposes among other aspects restoration and conservation of soils through modern and traditional methods to reclaim and conserve degraded and or otherwise unproductive land for agriculture and settlement. Although it does not contain provisions dealing with CC it has provisions for environmental management especially protection of fragile and critical ecosystems including wetlands, national parks, ASAL, lakes and drainage basins and protection of water catchment areas such as forests and spring areas from further degradation.

v) Energy Policies

Energy policy 2004 and Energy Act 2006: They encourage implementation of indigenous renewable energy sources to enhance the country’s electricity supply capacity. The policy is implemented through the energy act of 2006 which provides for mitigation of CC, through energy efficiency and promotion of renewable energy. In addition Feed in Tariff (FITs) Policy of 2008 which was revised 2012 promotes the generation of electricity from renewable sources. It targets geothermal, wind, small hydro, solar and biomass.

Draft Energy Policy 2012: This proposed policy will play an important role in CC mitigation through encouraging efficient use of energy, energy conservation and promotion of renewable energy. The policy’s mission is to facilitate provision of clean, sustainable, affordable and secure energy services at low cost while protecting the

environment. The policy puts a lot of emphasis on renewable energy like Geothermal, wind, solar and bio-digesters all of which contribute to mitigation against CC by lowering Green House Gas emissions.

vi) Water and irrigation policies

Draft National Water Policy 2012: The current draft recognizes CC, disaster management and environmental degradation as challenges that were previously not well addressed by the preceding policy and legal frameworks. The Water Act 2002 is under review and is yet to be passed. This act provides for the overall governance of the water sector. The regulations and strategies following from this Act recognize the CC implications on health, sanitation and water. It proposes the development of water management systems which contribute to the protection of the environment and collaboration in the response to CC initiatives.

The irrigation Act Cap 345: This act is currently under review and a policy is in the final draft stages. The Irrigation function is under the agriculture and water policies and is in itself a response to the effects of CC. The policy provides for expanded irrigation programmes, for intensification and increase in agricultural (food and raw materials) production, appropriate and efficient land and water uses for production through application of efficient technologies in irrigation, for instance drip irrigation, water storage and other support services (power, transport, marketing, processing). The policy and legal framework also promotes appropriate irrigation designs especially for disposal of excess flood and exit waters and prevention of chemical pollution.

vii) Others National Policies

The National Disaster and Management Policy 2012: This policy institutionalizes disaster management and mainstreams disaster risk reduction in the country’s development initiatives. The policy aims to increase and sustain resilience of vulnerable communities to hazards.

Integrated National Transport policy 2010: It provides for transport solutions that have relevance to CC mitigation.

Annex 3: Institutions and Stakeholders Consulted During the Study

Name Rank Institution e- mail

1. Eng. Njoroge

Deputy General Manager

National Irrigation Board

2. Eng. Onchoke

Director Irrigation MoA

3. Mr. Mbae Deputy Director Department of Livestock

4. Dr. Obola Head CCU Ministry of Livestock

5. Lucy Kamande

Senior Assistant Director

Ministry of Environment

6. Michael Okoti

Senior Research Scientist

KARI [email protected]

7. J.T Karugia Coordinator ReSAKSS-ECA

ReSAKSS [email protected]

8. C.A Shisanya

Professor of Agro-climatology

Kenyatta University [email protected] or [email protected]

9. Beth Mburu

Senior Associate Eed Advisory

10. Jane Simiyu

Agriculture Project Manager

KFW [email protected]

11. Daniel Gichuhi

Project Manager KENFAP [email protected] [email protected]

12. Josephine Thome

Head of Project Welthungerhilfe/ German Agro Action

[email protected]

13. Paul Obunde

Planning Officer, Drought Management Authority

Drought Management Authority

[email protected]

14. Lucy M. Ministry of Environment and

Senior assistant [email protected]

Kamande Natural Resources

director

15. John Retcha

CCAFS Participatory action research specialist

j.retcha@cgiar .org

16. John Osumba

GIZ National program coordinator ACCI

[email protected]

17. Kennedy Oyugi

African biotechnology stakeholders forum

Program Officer [email protected]

18. KeziaNgure

SEKU University Lecturer [email protected]

19. W.O.Onchoke

MoA Deputy Director Irrigation

[email protected]

20. Nelson Mutanda

Drought Management Authority

National Database management officer

[email protected]

21. Eng J. Nkanya

MoA Chief Enginner [email protected]

22. Patrick MacMullin

MoA Technical Advisor [email protected]

23. A.O Eshmail

Drought Management Authority

Advisor [email protected]

24. Robin M. Mbae

MoA Deputy Director [email protected]

25. Dr. M. Obola

MoA Head CCU [email protected]