assessment report on the extractive industries for ......assessment report on the extractive...
TRANSCRIPT
EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN KENYA
FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
September 2014
Prepared by
Dr John Obiri
For
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
Nairobi, KENYA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT .............................................................. 4
2.1 SYNOPSIS OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................... 4
2.2 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................... 5
3.0 OIL AND MINERAL POTENTIAL IN KENYA ................................................................. 5
3.1 HISTORICAL OUTLINE AND POTENTIAL OF OIL AND MINERALS IN KENYA ..................................... 5
4.0 INSTITUTIONAL, LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORKS REGARDING OIL AND
MINERAL EXTRACTION IN KENYA ............................................................................................. 6
4.1 INSTITUTIONAL, LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK ON OIL EXTRACTION IN KENYA ......................... 6
4.1.1 Legal and Policy Framework on Oil Extraction .......................................................... 6
4.1.2 Institutional Framework on Oil Extraction ........................................................... 76
4.2 INSTITUTIONAL, LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK ON MINES AND MINERAL EXTRACTION IN KENYA . 7
4.2.1 Legal and Policy Framework on Mines and Mineral Extraction ............................. 7
4.2.2 Institutional Framework on Mineral Extraction ..................................................... 8
4.2.3 Issues Regarding Provision of Mining Rights.......................................................... 8
4.3 ANCILLARY POLICIES ASSOCIATED WITH OIL AND MINERAL EXTRACTION ..................................... 8
4.3.1 The Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) 1999 .................... 9
4.3.2 The Water Act, 2002 ............................................................................................... 9
4.3.3 The Public Health Act.............................................................................................. 9
4.3.4 The Land Planning Act ............................................................................................ 9
4.3.5 Physical Planning Act, 1999 .................................................................................. 10
5.0 METHODOLOGY AND FIELD WORK SURVEY APPROACHES .............................. 10
5.1 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 10
5.1.1 Baseline studies on natural resources. ................................................................. 10
5.1.2 Conflict analysis on existing nature resource. ...................................................... 10
5.1.3 Stakeholder analysis to profile critical actors in the natural resource-based conflicts............................................................................................................................. 11
5.1.4 Documenting conflict prevention strategies and peace building ......................... 11
Baseline studies on natural resources. ............................................................................. 11
5.2 FIELD WORK SURVEYS ................................................................................................. 1211
6.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 12
6.1 LAYOUT OF RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 12
6.2 EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES AND NATURE OF CONFLICTS IN TURKANA COUNTY .............................. 12
6.2.1 Current Conflicts in Turkana County ..................................................................... 13
6.2.2 Causes of the Conflicts ...................................................................................... 1615
6.2.3 Conflict Timelines and stakeholders in Turkana County .................................. 1716
6.2.4 Initiatives / Interventions undertaken to Prevent Conflicts Turkana County ... 1716
6.2.5 Strategies of managing the conflicts ................................................................ 1817 6.2.5.1 Future / Anticipated Conflicts in Turkana County..................................................................................... 1817
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
2
6.3 EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES AND NATURE OF CONFLICTS IN KITUI COUNTY ................................ 1918
6.3.1 Current Conflicts in Kitui County ....................................................................... 2019
6.3.2 Causes of the Conflicts ...................................................................................... 2120
6.3.3 Conflict timelines in Kitui County ...................................................................... 2221
6.3.4 Initiatives / Interventions undertaken to Prevent Conflicts in Kitui County ..... 2322
6.3.5 Strategies of managing the conflicts ................................................................ 2322 6.3.5.1 Future / Anticipated Conflicts in Kitui County ................................................................................. 2422
6.4 EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES AND NATURE OF CONFLICTS IN TAITA TAVETA COUNTY .................... 2523
6.4.1 Current Conflicts in Taita Taveta County .......................................................... 2624
6.4.2 Causes of Conflicts ............................................................................................ 2725
6.4.3 Conflict Timeline in Taita Taveta County .......................................................... 2826
6.4.4 Initiatives / Interventions Undertaken to Prevent Conflict in Taita Taveta County 2927
6.4.5 Strategies of Managing Conflicts in Taita Taveta County ................................ 2927 6.4.5.1 Future / anticipated conflicts in Taita Taveta County ...................................................................... 2927
6.5 EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES AND NATURE OF CONFLICTS IN KWALE COUNTY .............................. 3028
6.5.1 Current Conflicts in Taita Taveta County .......................................................... 3129
6.5.2 Causes of Conflicts ............................................................................................ 3230
6.5.3 Conflict Timeline in Kwale County .................................................................... 3331
6.5.4 Initiatives / Interventions Undertaken to Prevent Conflict in Kwale County .... 3331
6.5.5 Strategies of Managing Conflicts in Kwale County .......................................... 3331 6.5.5.1 Future / Anticipated Conflicts in Kwale County ............................................................................... 3533
7.0 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS, CRITICAL ACTORS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP
3634
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................................. 3937
9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 4038
APPENDIX 1: THE EXISTING OIL BASINS IN KENYA ........................................................ 4139
APPENDIX 2: THE OIL EXPLORATION BLOCKS IN KENYA ........................................... 4240
APPENDIX 3 - INTERVIEWED KEY PERSONS, ORGANISATIONS AND COMMUNITIES
........................................................................................................................................................... 4341
APPENDIX 4: THE MINERAL RICH MOZAMBIQUE BELT STRETCHING FROM
SOUTHERN TO EASTERN AFRICA ......................................................................................... 4644
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
3
ABBREVIATIONS
CANCO Community Action for Nature Conservation
CLOs Community Liaison Officers
CSOs Civil Society Organizations
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EMCA Environmental Management Coordination Act
ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIS Geographical Information System
KCSPOG Kenya Civil Society Platform on Oil and Gas
KOGA Kenya Oil and Gas Association
MCA Member of County Assembly
MEWNR Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources
MOEP Ministry of Energy and Petroleum
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTP2 Mid Term Plan II
NAFFAC National Fossil Fuels Advisory Committee
NEMA National Environmental Management Authority
NGO Non Governmental Organisation
NLC National Lands Commission
NOCK National Oil Corporation of Kenya
PIEA Petroleum Institute of East Africa
PSCs Production Sharing Contracts
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
RCA Rapid Conflict Analysis
SRM Stakeholder Relationship Map
SWOT Strengths Weakness Opportunities and Treats
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
4
1.0 Introduction
Developing countries face a major challenge in the management of land and natural resources.
More often than not, exploitation of resources such as oil, gas and minerals has led to conflicts.
Such conflicts largely arise over issues such as who should have access and control of these
resources, who can influence decisions regarding their allocation etc.. These factors are
particularly important in Kenya today as the country has recently made several discoveries in
oil and minerals. Alongside this, Kenya ushered in a new constitution whose implementation
touches on many challenges such as citizenry participation in national issues, equity in resource
participation and development that enhances social livelihoods.
If the natural resources of Kenya are well managed, this will adequately address the Mid Term
Plan II (MTP2) of 2013-2017 that aims to transform its pathway to devolution, socio-economic
development, equity and national cohension. Ultimately this will strongly boost the long term
plan of Vision 2030. Alternatively, if the resources are poorly managed, Kenya could follow
the unfortunate resource abuse that has plagued many developing countries. In order to prevent
the latter, UNDP under its Corporate Strategic Plan of 2014-2017, seeks to ensure that the
natural endowments of Kenya benefit all Kenyans in terms of inclusivity and sustained socio-
economic development.
In this regard, this inception report seeks to:
Collect relevant data on the status of natural resources (Oil, gas and other minerals) and
conflicts (actual or potential, real or perceived) in Kenya
Assess the nature and extent of natural resources based disputes and conflicts in selected
localities / counties in Kenya
Interact and profile critical actors (communities, multi-national and local corporations,
Government, activists, CSOs etc) in the natural resources-based conflicts, the powers
and influences
Understand and document various local and national level initiatives, strategies, plans
etc. for preventing natural resources driven conflicts (mediation, negotiations, peace
committees etc) and peace building in conflict regions.
2.0 Purpose and Scope of the Assessment
2.1 Synopsis of the Terms of Reference
In order to meet the above objectives, the consultant, in conjunction with UNDP guidance will
perform the following tasks:
Undertake a desk review of background information, literature and data on natural
resources in Kenya focusing on extractive industry
Collect relevant data on the status of natural resources (Oil, gas and other minerals) and
conflicts ( actual or potential, real or perceived) in the country
Embark on field studies to assess the nature and extent of natural resources based
disputes and conflicts in selected localities / counties in Kenya.
Undertake stakeholder-analysis in the extractives industry and in the conflict prevention
and peace building sector i.e. identify, interact with and profile the goals, powers and
influences of critical actors (communities, multi-national and local corporations,
Government, activists, CSOs etc)
Understand and document various local and national level initiatives, strategies, plans
toward prevention of natural resources driven conflicts (mediation, negotiations, peace
committees etc) and peace building in those particular regions.
Present the research findings to UNDP management and critical stakeholders
Submit a final report on the status of natural resources and conflicts in Kenya
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
5
2.2 Scope of the Assessment
The assignment will take a total of 30 days. This assignment will be covered in various areas
in four counties in Kenya: Turkana, Kitui, Taveta and Kwale. These are rural counties that are
plagued with poverty, limited and almost neglected development in the past. The assessment
will be based on the natural non-renewable sources. The field work will be augmented with
meetings and presentations in the UNDP Gigiri Office in Nairobi.
3.0 Oil and Mineral Potential in Kenya
Revenue from mining activities in Kenya currently contributes about one per cent of GDP.
However in the near future this will drastically increase as new vast reserves of oil, coal, natural
gas and other minerals are discovered and explorations extended. The country is endowed with
over 120 types of minerals that are categorized into seven groups as outlined in the First
Schedule of the Mineral Bill 2014. These are;
construction and industrial minerals (53),
precious stones (5),
precious metals group (8),
semi-precious stone group (22),
base and rare metal group (35),
gaseous mineral (3),
fuel mineral group 3 (e.g. coal and uranium).
The petroleum potential is enormous and best depicted by the existing reserves in four large-
sized sedimentary basins that span the country. These are the Lamu, Anza, Mandera, and
Tertiary Rift basins (see Appendix 1). The latter is comprised of the Turkana and Lokichar
Basins that have yielded positive amounts of exploitable oil reserves. Similarly a large potential
exist with coal and natural gas. These form a major part of the plan by the Ministry of Energy
and Petroleum (MOEP) to increase power generation from the current 1,660MW to 5,000MW
by 2016.
3.1 Historical Outline and Potential of Oil and Minerals in Kenya
Historically, the earliest forms of exploitation in the extractive industry were minerals, largely
gold. Until recently, mineral extraction and regulation was under the Department of Mines and
Geology that started its work in 1930s through the Mining Ordinance of 1933. The current
Mining Act commenced in October 1940 and was revised twice in 1972 and 1987. This has
now evolved into the Mining Bill of 2014 which is currently being reviewed in Parliament. The first oil exploration in Kenya started in the 1950’s with British Petroleum (BP) and Shell
exploring along the Lamu coast in 1954. Although many wells were drilled, they were not fully
evaluated or completed for production despite several indications of oil staining and untested
zones showing gas. Over the next fifty years, following the 1950s initial explorations, many
companies e.g. Chevron, Esso, Amoco, Total, Petro-Canada undertook numerous tests in all
the oil basins without much success.
In 1986, the petroleum exploration and production legislation in Kenya was revised to provide
suitable incentives and flexibility to attract international exploration interest in the country. This
spurred more exploration in the late 1980s into the 1990s. Although fluorescence and gas were
reported in some wells, none of these wells encountered commercial reserves. Biostratigraphic
studies suggest that these wells may not have penetrated deep to test the Neocomian-Lower
Albian sediments which comprise the source reservoir.
In 1991, National Oil Corporation initiated a new long-term strategy to re-evaluate the existing
geological, geophysical and geochemical data on the the sedimentary basins in Kenya. This
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
6
initiative invigorated oil exploration into the early 2000s that led to the signing of new
Production Sharing Contracts in numerous blocks particularly the Lamu Basin.
In August 2000 the Corporation commissioned the Tertiary Rift Study, which was completed
in March 2001. Tertiary rift study led to quantification of potential oil resource and reservoir
rock units in the study area as well as the petroleum system at play in the sub-basins. In 2012,
commercially exploitable quantities of oil were found in the Tertiary Rift Basin around the
Lokichar and Turkana Basin and this has spurred the current oil interests in Kenya. Inevitably
these interests carry along with them both positive and negative factors of significance to the
Kenyan society. Among the negative factors are conflicts on equity distribution of the oil
resource and re-allocation of pastoralist communities from traditional grazing lands. While
these conflicts may not be critical currently, it is prudent to proactively anticipate them and plan
ahead in case of their emergence.
4.0 Institutional, Legal and Policy Frameworks Regarding Oil and Mineral
Extraction in Kenya
The recent decade has seen a huge interest in the oil, gas and mineral mining industry in Kenya.
For instance the mining bill of 2013 is the first major review of the 1940 mining Act. This bill
has inbuilt stipulations that aim at safeguarding the interest of Kenyan citizens1. Further, the
bill has been drafted after months of strong lobbying pitting local mining interests against the
foreign interests. Similar interests are in the oil industry whose policies regarding exploitation
continues to undergo drastic changes particularly since Tullow Oil, Africa Oil and Centric
Energy announced oil discoveries in 2012.
4.1 Institutional, Legal and Policy Framework on Oil Extraction in Kenya
4.1.1 Legal and Policy Framework on Oil Extraction
The legal framework for oil and gas in Kenya is currently the Petroleum (Exploration and
Production) Act CAP 308 of 1986. This is currently being reviewed to be replaced by the
Petroleum Bill 2014. The bill will upgrade the old Petroleum Act of 1986 to meet the ideals of
the new constitution. For instance it will review the distribution of oil, gas and coal proceeds
between the national Government, county Government and the local communities which have
tentatively been placed at 80%, 15% and 5% respectively. Despite the goodwill of this 5% share
addressing local needs in terms of their economic expectations, it could also be a bone of
contention if distribution within the community is not done equitably. Furthermore, the new bill
will determine exactly how the local communities are to be paid this fund, and how its use will
differ from the similar fund also given to the county goverment - that the same communities
live in.
A draft Energy Policy and draft Energy Bill have also been prepared that will in due course
replace parts of the existing energy framework with regards to downstream petroleum issues,
electric power generation, renewable energies and coal fuel. Currently the Ministry of Energy
and Petroleum (MOEP) offers the grants and rights on the exploration and production of oil.
Under the exisiting Petroleum Act (1986), the Cabinet Secretary (CS) grants non-exclusive
exploration permits to carry out geological and geophysical surveys in respect to any open
block. The CS may grant more than one exploration permit for any block.
1 However some stakeholders like the Kenya African Miners Association still feel it does not adequately cover the
local interests
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
7
4.1.2 Institutional Framework on Oil Extraction
The Ministry of Energy and Petroleum (MOEP) is the main institution regulating both upstream
oil and gas, downstream petroleum, electric power (including renewable energy and
geothermal), as well as the coal sector. MOEP’s powers include establishing agreements on
petroleum exploration and production with companies on behalf of the Government. These
agreements largely involve Producting Sharing Contracts (PSCs)2 that the Ministry administers
through competitive bidding process or through bilateral negotiations.
Closely linked to MOEP is the National Oil Corporation of Kenya (NOCK) which acts as an
instrument of Government policy in matters related to oil and gas and gives advice to Kenyan
energy policymakers. It is also involved in oil exploration and currently explores 3 of the 46
oil blocks (Appendix 2) in Kenya. In addition it compiles national energy data, runs petroleum
laboratories and leads efforts in the development of alternative fuels. There has been an inter-
ministerial body known as the National Fossil Fuels Advisory Committee (NAFFAC) that used
to oversee the oil and gas sector. This has been the licensing review body for oil and gas in
Kenya that advises the Cabinet Secretary on matters of oil and coal operations. However,
NAFFAC has been restructured to fit within the new Petroleum Bill.
Other institutions in the oil industry include the Petroleum Institute of East Africa (PIEA) which
has been the main professional body for the oil industry in the region. PIEA runs School of
Petroleum Studies. More recently, the Kenya Oil and Gas Association (KOGA) has been
established to support private sector interests specifically in the upstream sector. With regards
to civil society, the Community Action for Nature Conservation (CANCO) has pioneered oil
and gas community, stakeholder engagement and advocacy since 2009. More recently the
Kenya Civil Society Platform on Oil and Gas (KCSPOG) has been formed to support awareness
and advocacy among CSOs in oil-affected regions. These civil organizations have raised
various disputes and conflicts, with regards to the extractive industry, which will be reviewed
in this assignment.
4.2 Institutional, Legal and Policy Framework on Mines and Mineral Extraction in Kenya
4.2.1 Legal and Policy Framework on Mines and Mineral Extraction
Until recently mining activities in the country were handled by the Ministry of Environment,
Water and Natural Resources (MEWNR) through the Department of Mines and Geology. The
latter started on 1st January, 1933 through the Mining Ordinance of 1933. For over a long,
period mining was controlled under the Mining Act of 1940. This Act was only revised on two
occasions 1972 and 1987 but recently it was replaced by the Mining Bill 2014. In its preamble,
the Mining Bill 2014 declares that all minerals within the Kenyan territory are the property of
the Republic of Kenya and vested in the Government in trust for the people of Kenya. The
Cabinet Secretary administers this act with regards to provision of licenses, setting agreements
between the Government and miners etc. The Mining Bill 2014 deals with the minerals
indicated in the first schedule and also recognises different types of licenses and permits. These
include the prospecting license, retention license and mining license for large scale miners with
prospecting permits and mining permits offered to small-scale operators. The 2014 Bill makes
two recommendations with regards to capital outlay in mining. First, it puts the royalty charges
2 PSC is an agreement between the Government and the oil exploration contractor stating the conditions of oil
exploration and production and particularly how the profits from the oil will be shared between the parties. Under
the Kenya Petroleum Act, a PSC has an implied term that the contractor will give preference to the employment
and training of Kenyan nationals in petroleum operations and give preference to the use of products, equipment
and services locally available. This is one strategy that helps to handle local expectations in the resource and hence
remove any tension or conflicts.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
8
on mining companies between 5-11% depending on the type of mineral extracted. Secondly it
puts a mandatory Kenya Government holding in mining companies at 35%. These two articles
in the bill are a current contention to the mining companies including the Kenya Chamber of
Mines who contest the percentage figures charged are high and need to be lowered. Further to
this, the bill proposes that the division of financial resources from minerals be divided in the
ratios of 75%, 20% and 5% for the National Government, County Government and the local
communities.
4.2.2 Institutional Framework on Mineral Extraction
The Ministry of Mines has two directorates that regulate mines and mining activities: the
Directorate of Mining and the Directorate of Geological Surveys. The Constitution provides for
the establishment of the National Mining Corporation3 which is the investment arm of the
Government in respect to minerals. To be established also is the Minerals and Metals
Commodity Exchange that shall facilitate efficiency and security in mineral trade transactions.
An important part of this act with regards to conflict resolution is the establishment of the
Mining tribunal that will act on ad hoc basis to hear and determine matters regarding mining
rights.
4.2.3 Issues Regarding Provision of Mining Rights
The Cabinet Secretary in the Ministry of Mines may grant, deny or revoke a mineral right.
Rights may be offered via licenses or permits in the form of certificates. Prospecting and
retention licenses last 3 years while mining licenses for 25 years. Small scale operators are
offered prospecting permits that last for 5 year and mining permits extend to 10 years. These
time allocations have been sources of contention to the various stakeholders and issues
regarding this will be covered in draft assessment report of this assignment.
In addition to obtaining the mining rights, prospective miners need to seek the consent of the
National Land Commission (NLC4) and the relevant state agencies in regions or areas where
the mines are found. They include the County Governments, Ministry of Environmental and
Natural Resources, the Wildlife and Forestry conservation bodies. In this regard compliance
with the Wildlife Act, Forests Act 2007, Water Act 2002, and the Environmental Management
Coordination Act (EMCA5) of 1999 have to be met. These acts are outlined in detail under the
next section.
Mineral rights on private and community lands cannot be granted without the express consent
of the private owner or community. Owners of private land or the community (or NLC for weak
communities that need presentation) may enter into agreement with the Government and
applicants of mineral rights with regards to compensation payments.
4.3 Ancillary Policies Associated with Oil and Mineral Extraction
These are policies that provide necessary support to the Petroleum Act, the Energy Bill (2013)
and Mineral Bill (2014) by ensuring that the extractive activities are undertaken in a sound
manner that does not impinge the environment but strengthens sustainable development. The
policies are largely stipulated in the following Acts:
3 This is akin to the National Oil Corporation of Kenya under the oil industry 4 The National Land Commission of Kenya is an independent Government commission established under the
Constitution of Kenya to manage public land on behalf of the national and county Governments. 5 The EMCA 1999 act stipulates that no prospecting may proceed before a mineral right applicant obtains an EIA
report, a social heritage assessment report and an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which ensure that the
environment is not compromised by the mining.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
9
4.3.1 The Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) 1999
The act provides a coordination mechanism for various sectoral laws dealing with elements of
the environment. Section 58 of the Act provides for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
for all projects, programmes or policies likely to have adverse environmental impact. The
projects that must undergo a mandatory EIA as outlined in the second schedule of the Act. This
is the case with all the project activities of the extractive industry starting from prospecting,
exploration, mining to the actual downstream production of the refined natural resource. Under
the EMCA 1999:
A project proponent shall not implement a project likely to have negative environmental
impact, or for which an EIA is required, unless an EIA has been concluded and approved
in accordance with the law.
No licensing authority under any law in Kenya shall issue a trading, commercial or
development permit or license for any project for which an EIA is required unless the
applicant produces an EIA license issued by the National Environmental Management
Authority (NEMA).
The Act also deals with pollution prevention and waste management both whichare associated
with the extractive industry as it generates different categories of waste during operation. These
waste is often a bone of contention and source of conflict in communities; and these will be
investigated in this assignment.
4.3.2 The Water Act, 2002
This Act is concerned with sustainable management of water resources. It prohibits activities
that may cause pollution of water sources for domestic, industrial, agricultural or recreational
use. Water polluted from mining, and particularly gold, has frequently resulted to disputes
between miners and downstream water users in Kenya. Section 25 of the Act requires a permit
to be obtained for any individual drawing large amounts of water from a water resource or
discharging any form of pollutant in a water resource.
4.3.3 The Public Health Act
This Act seeks to secure and maintain public health. Some of its provisions relevant to the
extractive industry include prohibition of destructive activities such as oil spillage, dust and air
pollution or any other condition deemed injurious or dangerous to human health. According to
Part IX Section 115, no person will be allowed to cause any nuisance or condition liable to be
injurious or dangerous to human health. Section 116 requires local authorities to take all lawful,
necessary and reasonably practicable measures to maintain their jurisdictions clean and sanitary
to prevent conflicts that may lead to any injurious condition to human health.
4.3.4 The Land Planning Act
This Act is the overall planning law for land on both agricultural and constructed environments.
Under this Act, all development or changes to land use must be approved by a planning
authority. Increasingly, this is anticipated in Kenya as vast amounts of pastoral grazing lands
are converted to mining zones particularly in Kwale, Turkana and Kitui Counties. Section 9 of
the subsidiary legislation (the development and use of land legislation 1961) stipulates that
before any plans are submitted to the Cabinet Secretary for approval, steps should be taken to
acquaint the owners of any land affected by such plans and that public views should be obtained
and considered in decision making. This is meant to reduce conflict between or among
competing interests.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
10
4.3.5 Physical Planning Act, 1999
This act provides for the preparation of a physical development plan for the purpose of
improving the land and providing proper physical development of the land. It also includes
other necessities such as ideal transportation, public utilities, commercial, industrial, residential
and recreational areas, including parks. It also makes provision for future land use for buildings
or any other purposes. The Physical Planning Act provides for the control of development and
use of land in particular areas, especially where a project may involve sub-divisions or
amalgamations of land parcels or located in an area otherwise reserved for other use. In other
words, this Act renders harmony in land use issues so as to avoid any type of conflict. This Act
will come into play in all the four counties where heavy mining and oil extraction is envisaged
as these counties are rural based, with little previous development, and therefore will require
substantial physical planning.
5.0 Methodology and field work survey approaches
The assessment was conducted through four main tasks linked to the TOR objectives and each
with its set of methods as outlined below.
5.1 Methodology
Different methodological designs were employed across the four key tasks that were
investigated in this assignment.
5.1.1 Baseline studies on natural resources.
This involved compiling relevant baseline information on extractive natural resources. Kenya
is endowed with oil, gas and numerous minerals whose current status with regard to quantity
was investigated. These natural resources include gold, coal, titanium, iron ore, zircon, niobium,
chromate, silica sand, gemstones, manganese, diatomite gypsum and fluorspar. Desk top
literature reviews particularly online portals on issues concerning the natural resource base, the
resource area, extraction potential and conflict issues was explored.
5.1.2 Conflict analysis on existing nature resource.
This involved identifying and describing the conflict, its boundaries and interrelationships. The
tasks included determining:
(1) Conflict timeline the origins or history and chronology of events. This was done using the
Focus Group Discussions and. unstructuredinterviews . The history of a conflict was examined
to enahnce understanding of the sequence of events that led to the conflict and the envisaged
solutions.
(2) The types of issues of conflict were investigated using Rapid Conflict Assessment (RCA)
tool alongside a open-ended questionaire and an analysis strategy design table developed.
(3) The causes and effects of conflicts was be explored via the Conflict tree and Root Cause
Analysis technique in conjunction with a closed-ended questionaire.
(4) Mapping conflict over resource use. To map geographically the natural resources and the
conflict over resource use that exist or may exist in the future. This was be done using
Geographical Information System (GIS) techniques in conjunction with research tools (e.g.
sketch maps, transect profiles) literature review, key informant interviews and existing
Government reports.
A literature review of various case studies, Government reports on mines and social livelihoods
was also conducted. In addition field studies that used rural appraisal methods with tools such
as web diagrams, time lines, various mapping, techniques and matrices were employed.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
11
5.1.3 Stakeholder analysis to profile critical actors in the natural resource-based conflicts.
This process involved an analysis to determine:
(a) the stakeholders
(b) the relationship amongst the stakeholders (stakeholder matrix and stakeholder
relationship map),
(c) stakeholders’ positions and interests,
(d) an analysis of the 3Rs and production of a 3Rs matrix,
(e) power and influence analysis.
The proposed methods in stakeholder analysis involved research tools that included; venn
diagrams, sketch maps, conflict time lines and role plays, drawing up simple lists and analysing
other activities that outlined the causes of the conflict.
5.1.4 Documenting conflict prevention strategies and peace building
The existence of any initiative or strategies of conflict prevention was documented. Among the
common strategies that were checked included:
(a) the use of force and coercion to obtain certain interests over others,
(b) withdrawal or avoidance of conflict,
(c) accommodating the interest of others over self interests,
(d) compromising and making sacrifices to arrive at a mutually agreeable outcome and
(e) collaboration that seeks a solution of mutual gain.
These involved the use of research via tools such as conflict time lines, focus group discussion,
key informant interviews and questionaires administering.
Table 1: Summary of methodology showing the research design and data collection tool used
for the set tasks
Task/Activity Research Design Data collection tool
Baseline studies on
natural resources.
Evaluation /
Descriptive
Literature reviews
(various reports e.g.
international, national
& County CSOs.)
Conflict analysis on
existing nature
resource
Evaluation /
Descriptive
Questionnaires, FGD,
Field survey
Stakeholder
analysis to profile
critical actors in the
natural resource-
based conflicts.
Participatory, Cross
sectional surveys and
Correlation designs
PRA6, Key informants,
Questionnaires, FGD,
Field survey
Documenting
conflict prevention
strategies and peace
building
Evaluation,
Participatory designs
Questionnaires,
SWOT7, FGD, Field
survey
6 PRA – Participatory Rural Appraisal methods 7 SWOT – Strengths Weakness Opportunities and Threats analysis
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
12
5.2 Field work surveys
Reconnaissance surveys were done in various locations in the four designated counties studied.
In Turkana, field survey covered regions with the Turkana and Lokichar basins and include the
communities close to the wells at Ngamia, Ekales and Twiga. Mui Basin in Kitui County
visited; particularly the areas of Zombe and Tseikuru in Mwingi. In Taveta County the areas
included Mwatate, Kishushe and Wanjala. During the field survey questionnaires were
administered, focus group discussions held including key informant interviews. The conflict
actors and their affiliations are interviewed are indicated in Appendix 3. The work done by
County Peace Committees was also be examined with regard to natural resource use, their
resolution of past conflicts and role in future nature-based conflicts.
6.0 Results
6.1 Layout of Results
This section represents the analysis of data from baseline survey, field survey, and questionnaire
interviews including those from key informants. The results are divided into four broad sections
categorised by the four counties of Turkana, Kitui, Taveta and Kwale. For each county the
results outline the nature of conflicts, their causes, the interventions undertaken and the
strategies of managing them. This first draft assessment report gives an in-depth analysis of two
Counties - Turkana and Kitui. The entire analysis of the four counties will be given in the final
assessment report.
6.2 Extractive Industries and Nature of Conflicts in Turkana County
Turkana County is endowed with both oil and mineral ores. The minerals include gold, copper,
zinc, mercury, rubies and green gemstones. The geographical positions of these resources are
indicated in Figure 1 below.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
13
Figure 1: Extractive natural resources and their distribution in Turkana County
6.2.1 Current Conflict in Turkana County
All stakeholders in the oil industry stated a total of 19 conflict issues that were linked to the oil
exploration and exploitation in Turkana. These conflict issues and their ranking, in terms of the
percentage of stakeholders who identified them as a issue of concern or problem, are indicated
in Figure 2. The most mentioned issue is the disagreement between communities and Tullow
Oil company. This disagreement was mentioned by 87% of the stakeholders who largely stated
that there is limited information given to the locals by the Tullow Oil company. As such the
locals feel neglected / ignored or undermined. Another conflict of importance is land disputes
between individuals. This conflict was mentioned by 70% of the stakeholders who stated that
the oil exploration activities had attracted many people from other counties to whom the local
Turkana villagers (and clan elders) had sold land and later reclaimed the same land from the
buyers on the premise that they (the locals) did not know the consequences of the selling. This
is a serious issue that is escalating and is particularly prevalent in Lokichar area where the area
Member of County Assembly (MCA) alluded to weekly new cases on land conflict. Most of
the land under conflict, is the land runing alongside the main road between Lodwar and
Lokichar where in many places plots have been marked. A further key conflict, mentioned by
52% of the stakeholders, is the lack of security in the villages. Most security personel have been
deployed in the oil fields. This has posed a serious security risk to the local communities
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
14
because they have been left vulnerable to outside raiders and criminals in general. Similarly
52% of stakeholders stated that the declining grazing land is an issue of conflict since livestock
are now confined to smaller regions that cannot meet the normadic spread. A map indicating
declined grazing areas particularly in south Turkana is shown in Figure 3
There were six other conflict issues each of which was mentioned by less than 20% of the
stakeholders. These issues include declining fishing ground along the lake shores, child labour
in comunities around oil fields, blocked migration of livestock and air pollution. Although these
are currently considered a minor problem, in future, they are likely to increase or escalate as
exploration increases and moves to production.
The 19 areas of conflict can be categorised into three key issues: substantitve issues,
relationship issues and procedural issues as as indictated in Figure 4. The substantive issues are
driven by differences in the use, distribution or accessibility to the natural resources. This is
further coupled with divergent interests or needs. Procedural issues are largely about the way
decisions are made such that they cause poor stakeholder consultantion (leading to resentment),
poor / inadequate information sharing (that results in mistrust) and limited cross-sectoral
planning/coordination which results to overlapping roles and competing goals. Relationship
issues are about status, power and influence coupled with distorted perception and negative
attitudes to other parties. Of particular interest is the relationship between the Turkana and local
investors from outside Turkana County – particularly the neighbouring Pokot; that between the
Tullow Oil and the county Government and also the future intra-Turkana conflict (based on the
South – North Turkana alignments).
Figure 2: The conflict issues and the percentages of stakeholders concerned with the issues.
0102030405060708090
100
Co
mm
vs
Tullo
w O
il…
Lan
d d
isp
ute
s
Po
or
secu
rity
Re
du
ced
gra
zin
g la
nd
Turk
ana
vs P
oko
t
Ch
iefs
& C
LO v
s C
om
m
Nat
. Go
vt v
s C
ou
nty
…
Low
Jo
b q
uo
tas
at T
O
Lan
dle
ssn
ess
Po
or
po
licie
s an
d la
ws
Intr
a-Tu
rkan
a
Loss
of
cust
om
& t
rad
s.
Un
fair
TO
pro
cure
me
nt
Fish
erie
s lo
ss
Fam
ily b
reak
/Pro
sti.
Ch
ild la
bo
ur
TO v
s C
ou
nty
Go
vt
Blo
cked
mig
rati
on
Po
lluti
on
%o
f re
spo
nd
ants
Types of Conflicts
What are the current conflicts in Turkana County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
15
Figure 3: Turkana County showing areas under oil exploration that subsequently limit grazing
land.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
16
Figure 4: The oil based issues in Turkana as catergorised along substantial, relational and
procedural issues.
6.2.2 Causes of the Conflicts
A total of nine factors were mentioned as the causes of conflict. The two key factors mentioned
by the stakeholders were the lack of community participation in the initial deliberations on the
matter regarding the oil resource (stated by 76% of the stakeholders) and misinformation
reaching the local communities as stated by 47% of the stakeholders. An outline of the entire
causes is indicated in Figure 5.
Substantive Issues
land dispute
Declining grazing land / landlessness
Low job offers &Unfair procurement for locals
Insecurity
Child labour
Blocked animal migration
Pollution
Procedural Issues
Poor policy & law
Tullow Oil's poor transparency to communities
Poor coordinatin of Chiefs , CLOs and Communities
dsdsd
Relationship Issues
Turkana Vs Pokot
South vs North (Intra-Turkana),
National vs County Gov
Family breaks/Prostitution
Tullow Oil vs County Gov
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
17
Figure 5: The causes of oil-based conflicts in Turkana County
6.2.3 Conflict Timelines and stakeholders in Turkana County
Over 80% of the stakeholders stated that the oil-based conflicts in Turkana began as soon as
Tullow Oil started their exploration work in 2010. Since then other events have increased the
conflicts either directly or indirectly. A conflict timeline outlining the significant times when
key confict or conflict driving issues occurred is indicated in Table 1.
Table 1: Conflict timeline indicating the key periods of conflict or events triggering conflicts
6.2.4 Initiatives / Interventions undertaken to Prevent Conflicts Turkana County
Conflict prevention initiatives in natural resource extraction in Turkana are not as yet fully
explored. 55% of the stakeholders stated that they were aware of conflict prevention initiatives.
01020304050607080
Co
mm
no
t in
volv
ed
Loca
ls n
ot
info
rmed
/mis
info
rmed
Infl
ux
of
no
n lo
cals
Loca
ls ig
no
red
by
TO
No
Tit
le d
eed
s
Un
fullf
illed
Pro
mis
es
Fore
ign
ers
we
re f
irst
use
d
Cla
ns
clai
m s
om
e la
nd
Co
mm
un
itie
s in
sin
cere
% o
f R
esp
on
dan
ts
Causes of conflicts
What are the causes of conflicts in Turkana County?
Year / Time Key Event Linked to Conflict or Conflict Trigger
2010 Jan-June Mine exploration begins
2010 Jul- Dec Oil exploration mast erected and local expectations rise
2011 Jan-June Land sales start around Lokichar
region
2012 March President Kibaki announces oil discovery in Ngamia 1 expectations heighten
2012 Jul- Dec Land plot demarcation along Lodwar - Lokichar road increase
2013 October Communities block roads protesting against Tullow Oil for
missing out on jobs & tenders
2013 Jul- Dec Community Liasion Officers
established
2014 Jan-June First Intra-Turkana divergence (North vs South variations)
2014 Jul-Dec Local demand for more information and participation in oil
issues
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
18
For instance at the onset of oil exploration there was no office dealing with community issues
however a community liaison office was set up in Lodwar. This was followed by employment
of Community Liaison Officers (CLOs) to deal with community grievances. Even though 55%
of the stakeholders were aware of conflict prevention initiatives, 95% were not happy with these
initiatives.
Figure 6: Different types of conflict prevention initiatives and percentages of stakeholders
suggesting the initiatives
6.2.5 Strategies of managing the conflicts
Most of the stakeholders were not satisfied with the interventions of conflict prevention and
suggested other interventions that are outlined in Figure 6. Most of them emphasised
enhancement of community participation in the oil resource deliberations and increasing clarity
on the decisions undertaken, particularly those on oil sharing.
6.2.5.1 Future / Anticipated Conflicts in Turkana County
Stakeholders had various views regarding the future conflicts in the oil industry in Turkana
County. Current conflicts such as land and resource distribution are envisaged to continue in
the future. In future, conflict most foreseen by most stakeholders, is that of a displaced Turkana
community with space scarcity and degraded pastoral-cultural norms. Other new conflicts such
as pollution, armed oil cartels, intra-Turkana class issues, environmental degradation including
terrorism are also envisaged as outlined in Figure 7
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Incr
eas
e C
om
m.
Invo
lve
me
nt
Cla
rity
/Op
en
ess(
Pu
blic
Bar
aza)
Cla
rity
on
Oil
ben
efit
shar
ing
Sen
siti
zati
on
Be
tter
MO
U/C
SR
Co
mm
on
Pro
per
tyR
eso
urc
e M
gmt.
Pro
per
Oil
Exp
loit
atio
nP
olic
y
Enac
t C
om
mu
nit
y La
nd
Law
% R
esp
on
se
Types of resolutions
How can the conflicts in Turkana County be resolved?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
19
Figure 7: Oil-based conflicts envisaged in the future of Turkana County
6.3 Extractive Industries and Nature of Conflicts in Kitui County
Two main extractive natural resources occur in vast quantities in Kitui County – limestone and
coal (Figure 8). Over 180 km2 of land is endowed with limestone particularly areas like Ngaaie
in Mwingi North. An even larger area covering over 500km2 is known to have coal deposits
particularly in the Mui Basin. The latter was originally subdivided into four blocks (A, B, C
and D) for exploration purpose. Two of these blocks (C and D) have been extensively explored
and there is an estimated 400 million tonnes of coal reserves valued at KShs 3.5Trillion ($40
billion). A further 31 new blocks have been created that are expected to have even greater
deposits and higher value coal.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Dis
pla
ced
co
mm
Lan
d C
on
flic
ts
Po
lluti
on
Spac
e s
carc
ity
Cu
ltu
r/Tr
ad lo
ss
Agg
ress
ion
to
go
vt.
Arm
ed lo
cal o
il C
arte
ls
Incr
eas
e v
uln
erab
ility
/p
ove
rty
Be
nef
it s
har
ing
issu
es
Intr
a-Tu
rkan
a cl
ass
con
flic
ts
Terr
ori
sm
ille
gal a
rms
& c
on
flic
t
Bio
div
ersi
ty d
egr
ad.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
20
Figure 8: Kitui County and the positions of the key minerals
6.3.1 Current Conflicts in Kitui County
A total of ten conflicts were identified in Kitui County, the most mentioned (67%) being
conflicts resulting from poor or lack of land compensation for communities removed from areas
having coal (Figure 9). This was followed by the conflict resulting from poor resettlement of
people, which was mentioned by 58% of stakeholders. Another 50% of the stakeholders felt the
Chinese Fenxi Mining Industry Company (that is to mine the coal) was secretive about their
deals and ignored community participation in their mining activities.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
21
Figure 9: Coal-based conflict issues in Kitui County and the percentages of responses raised
per conflict issues
6.3.2 Causes of the Conflicts
Six main reasons were given as the cause of conflicts. The main one given by 63% of the
stakeholders was lack of proper compensation for the displaced communities. Non or poor
involvement of the communities was mentioned by 50 % of stakeholders while the poor land
adjudication and lack of title deeds was by 50% stakeholders. Other causes were unclear benefit
sharing formula, lack of proper communication with communities, poor sensitization including
politics and differences among various interests in the County as outlined in Figure 10.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Co
mp
ensa
tio
n
Re
sett
lem
ent
Lan
d
Co
mm
vs
Fen
xi
Be
nef
it s
har
ing
Fen
xi -
Job
Nat
. vs
Co
un
ty
Lan
dle
ssn
ess
Po
or
infr
astr
uct
ure
Envi
ron
men
t D
egra
dat
ion
Lack
of
po
licy
fram
ewo
rk
% o
f re
spo
nd
ants
pe
r co
nfl
ict
Types of Conflicts
What are the current conflicts in Kitui County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
22
Figure 10: The causes of coal-based conflicts in Kitui County
6.3.3 Conflict timelines in Kitui County
Coal based conflicts in Kitui County can be traced to the early 2000 after the first confirmation
of vast deposit in the then Kitui and Mwingi Districts. Although the conflict was initially among
politicians, these conflict issues have gradually filtered into the local communities and been
bolstered by non-governmental organisations particularly those dealing with civil rights. A
conflict timeline outlining the significant times when key conflict or conflict driving issues
occurred is indicated in Table 2.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Po
or
com
pe
nsa
tio
n
Co
mm
no
t in
volv
ed
No
lan
d a
dju
dic
atio
n
Un
clea
r B
en
efi
t sh
arin
g
No
se
nsi
tiza
tio
n
Po
litic
s
% o
f re
spo
nd
ent
per
co
nfl
ict
Type of Conflict
What are the causes of conflict in coal mining in Kitui County
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
23
Table 2: Conflict timeline indicating the key periods of conflict or events triggering conflicts in
Kitui County
Year / Time Key Event Linked to Conflict or Conflict Trigger
1999 Jan –
June
Coal exploration starts in Mwingi and Kitui Districts covering around
500km2
1999 July- Dec Mui Basin was divided into four coal blocks, A, B, C and D; political
interests and jostling starts
2000 Coal presence is ascertained and local expectations for boom income
begin
2008
September
The Government speeds up exploration in the Mui basin and contracts a
private company (Foundation Piling Ltd) to assess commercial viability
of coal deposits
2008 Oct - Dec Commercial viability of coal confirmed and local expectations rise
2010 Jan - June Government decides to concession all four blocks in Kitui to private
companies through a competitive international bidding process. Political
interests rise
2010 July Dec Seven companies submit bids and China’s Fenxi Mining Group wins the
rights to develop coal mines for block C and block D. Local feel left out
in this decision making that affects their land.
2013 December Chinese Fenxi Companies contract is signed. Locals complain and go to
court stating the contract inadequately addresses their interests prompting
selection of a technical committee to re-look it and propose amendments.
2014 June July An agreement between the community, Fenxi Company, the national and
county Governments amends the original contract. Fenxi adopts more
than 90 per cent of the proposed amendments.
2014 August Fenxi contracts a consultant to start local resettlement plan and strategic
environment assessment however, without the notification of the
community. Suspicions of mistrust rise again
6.3.4 Initiatives / Interventions undertaken to Prevent Conflicts in Kitui County
Like in Turkana County, conflict prevention initiatives in natural resource extraction in Kitui
County remain unexplored. A half or 50% of the stakeholders said they were aware of conflict
prevention interventions. Despite half of the stakeholders being aware of these conflict
prevention initiatives, 90% were not happy with them. The next section discusses some
initiatives as suggested by stakeholders.
6.3.5 Strategies of managing the conflicts
Interventions for managing conflicts that were suggested by stakeholders are indicated in Figure
11. Most of these rotate around increased community involvement and sensitization on the coal
mining activities. Solving land issues particularly issuance of title deeds was mentioned as an
important factor in conflict resolution. Also mentioned was setting up a future investment fund
that the communities would turn to after the coal mines run out. A percentage of the revenue
from the mining would be deposited into this fund akin to the Norwegian sovereign investment
fund raised from oil exploration.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
24
Figure 11: The types of conflict prevention initiatives in Kitui coal mining and percentages of
stakeholders suggesting the initiatives
6.3.5.1 Future / Anticipated Conflicts in Kitui County
The stakeholders envisage nine key conflict issues in future with the most being space or land
scarcity following large land area surrendered for mining as mentioned by 64% of stakeholders.
Coupled with this is increased land degradation and land conflict that was mentioned by 45%
and 36% of the stakeholders respectively. Stakeholders also envisage loss of culture and
traditons, displaced communities and increased water and air pollution from the mines as shown
in Figure 12.
Figure 12: Coal-based conflicts envisaged in the future of Kitui County
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Co
mm
un
ity
Invo
lve
me
nt-
Jo
bs
Co
al b
en
efi
t sh
arin
g
Sen
siti
zati
on
Lan
d A
dju
nd
icat
ion
Co
mm
Lia
sio
nC
om
mit
tees
Set
Futu
reIn
vest
men
t fu
nd
(P
ost
coal
) Be
tter
CSR
What are the solutions to the conflicts of Kitui coal mining?
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%
Spac
e s
carc
ity
Cu
ltu
re/T
rad
itio
nal
loss
De
grad
eden
viro
nm
en
t
Lan
d C
on
flic
ts
Dis
pla
ced
com
mu
nit
y
Incr
eas
evu
lne
rab
ility
/p
ove
rty
Air
& w
ate
r P
ollu
tio
n
Be
nef
it s
har
ing
issu
es
Agg
ress
ion
to
go
vt.
Future coal mining conflict issues envisaged in Kitui County
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
25
6.4 Extractive Industries and Nature of Conflicts in Taita Taveta County
Taita Taveta County is endowed with mineral deposits whose origin is geologically linked to
the rich proterozoic rocks forming the Mozambique Belt that runs from south to eastern Africa
region (Appendix 4). Minerals found here are both gemstones and industrial minerals that
include iron ore and building sand. Recent exploration has also indicated the presence of copper,
cobalt and manganese. The precious gemstones include ruby, tsavorite sapphire, emerald,
tourmalines and many types of garnets that are mined in areas such as Voi, Mwatate, Kasighau,
Kishushe, Bura, Chungaunga, Kamtonga, Wanjala and other parts of Taita (Figure 13). These
minerals are of enormous wealth. The mining prospectors and investors in the area are currently
estimated at over 100.
Figure 13: Map of Taita Taveta showing the key mining areas
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
26
6.4.1 Current Conflicts in Taita Taveta County
Respondents indicated a total of 12 conflict arenas in Taita Taveta County. The three most
mentioned were conflicts between large and smaller miners (67%), conflict between miners and
communities (67%) and a poor mining policy / law framework (58%) (See Figure 14). Poor
working conditions in the mines were mentioned (by 50% respondents) as a conflict issue that
compromised workers health and safety standards. This has drawn the interest of the federation
of workers union and human rights groups who are interested in improving the collective
bargaining agreements of miners. However, such groups are viewed by mining companies as
an impediment to their operations. A common feature in Taita Taveta mines are people known
as Mazurura. These people (mentioned by 42% of respondents) have no legal mining licenses
and many are vagabonds with no homes in the county but move from mine to another mine
looking for gemstones and often involved in mineral thefts. Mazurura are comprised of various
ethnic groups of Kenya and many are people who have escaped prison or the justice system to
look for quick money while taking refuge in the vast wilderness of Taita Taveta County. Their
mineral scavenging activities put them in conflict with the mine owners since they deal with
gemstones stolen from mines. Furthermore, they are at odds with the Government authorities
as they deal in goods worth thousands of shillings yet they don’t pay any form of tax.
Boundaries in mining areas are constant issues mentioned by 42% of the respondents. Among
the recent conflict issue that occurred in mid 2014 between the Kishushe Cooperative Society
and the Wanjala Mining Company was because of boundaries. Mining as a livelihood is in
conflict (as mentioned by 33% stakeholders) with other livelihoods such as irrigation
agriculture, ecotourism, ranching etc. because people wholly depend on, and want to be
engaged in mining activities only to the chagrin of the other livelihoods. Thus, this conflict
subjects the communities to economic vulnerability. Although mentioned by only 25% of the
respondents, environmental degradation and low Government tax / revenue charged by
Government were seen as conflicts. Improperly done Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA)
has affected,for instance, the elephant migratory patterns. These meansthat mine workers
occasionally clash with wildlife and many plants are also destroyed without restoration being
done. The low taxes charged encourage conflict of interest as some Government workers, who
despite being the overseers of mining, get involved in mining activities. This is largely due to
the ease of entering into the business and the small prospecting fees charged in comparison to
the profits raked in billions of shillings.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
27
Figure 14: Causes of conflicts in Taita Taveta County
6.4.2 Causes of Conflicts
Conflicts in Taita Taveta were associated with six factors as indicated in Figure 15. The three
key factors are lack of title deeds, lack of mine boundaries and poor policies on land and mining.
Illegal mining, politics and heavy dependence on mining economy were other triggers of
conflicts.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Larg
e v
s sm
all s
cale
min
ers
Min
ers
vs
com
mu
nit
y
Lack
of
po
licy
fram
ewo
rk
Co
mm
ign
ore
d /
dis
em
po
we
red
Po
or
wo
rkin
g co
nd
itio
n (
cam
ps)
Ille
gal m
ine
rs-
maz
uru
ra
Bo
un
dar
y is
sue
s
Lan
dle
ssn
ess
Min
ing
neg
ate
s o
ther
live
liho
od
s
Po
litic
s e.
g. li
cen
sin
g &
pe
rmit
s
Envi
ron
men
t D
egra
dat
ion
(Wild
life
)
Tax-
Go
v re
ven
ue
low
% o
f re
spo
nd
an
tsp
er c
on
flic
t
Types of Conflicts
What are the current conflicts in Taita Taveta County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
28
Figure 15: The causes of conflicts in Taita Taveta County
6.4.3 Conflict Timeline in Taita Taveta County
Table 3: Conflict timeline indicating the key conflict or events triggering conflicts in Taita
Taveta County
Year / Time Key Event Linked to Conflict or Conflict Trigger
1960s
1990s
Mid 2000s
23 Oct 2010
Between 2000
and 2010
Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth century production of iron
implements was a normal practise until the early 1960s. Fall of traditional
iron smelting culture was first linked to conflicts between the locals and then
colonial Government that discouraged smelting.
After many years, awareness of the value of iron-ore among the local people
started to rise in the 1990s particularly in Kishushe and Wanjala
The scramble for iron ore in Kishushe and Wanjala region intensified.
Conflict started to surface between communities and mining companies
such as Wanjala and Sanghani Mining.
A massive demonstration of the local people of Kishushe and Wanjala
occurred, led by local leaders, against the mining company that was
apparently operating illegally. Police clashed with demonstrators, arrested
and detained their leaders.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
No title deeds MineBoundaries
Poorpolicy/law
Politics Illegal miners Miningdependance
% o
f R
esp
on
da
nts
per
co
nfl
ict
Causes of conflicts
What are the causes of conflicts in Taita Taveta County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
29
2010 to 2014
From Early
2014
Conflicts occurred between small-scale gemstone miners and large- scale-
miners at Kasighau, Chungaunga, Kamtonga over prospecting and mining
rights.
From 2010 to 2014 competition for prospecting rights, pegging, claims over
mining areas was widespread in Kishushe.
From early 2014 to date conflict occurred between Kishushe Cooperative
Society and the Wanjala Mining Company over boundaries.
6.4.4 Initiatives / Interventions Undertaken to Prevent Conflict in Taita Taveta County
About 33% of the respondents were aware that conflict prevention initiatives were being
undertaken. However 58% of the respondents were not happy with these interventions. The
interventions suggested by the respondents are indicated in the next section.
6.4.5 Strategies of Managing Conflicts in Taita Taveta County
Figure 16: The types of conflict prevention initiatives in Taita Taveta and percentages of
stakeholders suggesting the initiatives
6.4.5.1 Future / anticipated conflicts in Taita Taveta County
The three main conflicts envisaged in future are; an influx of outsiders prospecting for mining
profits, enhanced environmental degradation and increased economic vulnerability. Neglect of
the environment, largely through poor EIA and environmental audits (EA), is predicted to rise
as mining increases. Concomitant to this over reliance on mining industry and the neglect of
other livelihoods by communities is a conflict that is also envisaged to rise.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Allo
cate
tit
le d
eed
s
Sort
bo
un
dar
ies
Enh
ance
live
liho
od
s
Co
mm
u. E
mp
ow
erm
ent
via
fun
ds
Imp
rove
wo
rker
CB
A
Op
en f
orm
al m
ine
ral
mar
kets
fo
r SM
Es
Pro
vid
e la
nd
fo
r ill
egal
min
ers
% R
esp
on
se p
er c
on
flic
t
Types of resolutions
How can the conflicts in Taita Taveta County be resolved?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
30
Figure 17: The future conflicts envisaged in Taita Taveta County
6.5 Extractive Industries and Nature of Conflicts in Kwale County
Kwale County is endowed with various types of industrial minerals (Figure 18). Key among
these is titanium mineral sands (comprised of ilmenite, rutile and zircon) and niobium. Titanium
is mined at two areas in Msambweni sub-county. Originally it was to be mined by a Canadian
Company called Tiomin which later sold the mining rights to Jinchuan (a Chinese company).
The latter subsequently sold off the mining rights to an Australian company - Base Titanium.
An estimated annual extraction of 410 000 tons of ilmenite, plus rutile and zircon (over a 13-
year mine life) is expected to yield $200 million (Sh17 billion) annually. This project will earn
Kenya over $2 billion (Sh170 billion) over its mine life.
Niobium, a material used to strengthen steel and estimated to have a potential in-ground value
of KShs 5.4 Trillion is mined at Mrima Hill in South Kwale. Mining is done by Western Pacific
Wildcat Resource Corporation that is linked to Cortec mining company.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Infl
ux
of
ou
tsid
ers
En
han
ced
en
vir
on
men
t
dam
age
Incr
ease
vu
lner
abil
ity /
pov
erty
Dis
pla
ce c
om
mun
itie
s
Po
liti
cal
man
ipu
lati
on
Incr
ease
d m
azu
rura
Sp
ace
scar
city%
Res
po
nd
ent
per
co
nfl
ict
Type of Conflict
What are the future conflicts anticipated in Taita Taveta County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
31
Figure 18: Kwale County and key areas of mining.
6.5.1 Current Conflicts in Taita Taveta County
Eleven conflict issues were mentioned in Kwale County with a good number being
environnmentally based (Figure 19). For instance water pollution, loss of landscape (sense of
place), biodiversity loss, environmental degradation. Conflicts unique to this county, and raised
by the mining companies, were those linked to the extra levy charged by the Kwale County
Government. Further, the delay by the Government to provide the export permit to Base
Titatium to ship their produce has been a conflict issue raised by the company as this delay
results in a drop of the company share on the stock market.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
32
Figure 19: The types of conflict that are prevalent in Kwale County.
6.5.2 Causes of Conflicts
In Kwale County, stakeholders of the extractive industry outlined five key causes of conflict as
indicated in Figure 20. Most causes were due to improper engagement of the community with
the investor company and the Government. Poor implementation of the environmental impact
assessment was a conflict issue between the environmentalists and communities, on one side,
pitted against the Government and the investor on the other side. At stake are the endangered
birdlife, endangered plants and water pollution arising from the mining.
0102030405060708090
100
Loss
of
lan
dsc
ape
/se
nse
of
pla
ce
Wat
er p
ollu
tio
n
Co
mm
Invo
l lim
ited
Loss
of
trad
itio
nal
pra
ctic
es
Bio
div
ersi
tylo
ss/d
eve
geta
tio
n
Lan
dle
ssn
ess
Envi
ron
men
tD
egr
adat
ion
Lack
of
po
licy
fram
ewo
rk
Form
atio
n o
fU
nio
ns/
CB
A
De
laye
d e
xpo
rt p
erm
its
Un
war
ran
ted
Co
un
tyle
vy
% r
esp
on
de
nts
pe
r co
nfl
ict
Type of Conflicts
What are the conflicts in Kwale County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
33
Figure 20: Causes of conflicts in Kwale County (*Environmental and Social Impact
Assessment)
6.5.3 Conflict Timeline in Kwale County
Conflict with regard to titanium mining in Kwale have its roots in the late 1990s at the onset of
the exploration. For close to a decade there were various conflicts that existed between the
investor (Canadian Tiomin), the communities and the Government with regards to
compensation, land degradation and pollution issues. Although these have eased with time,
there are still issues which are outlined in Table 4a and 4b for Mrima Hill niobium mines and
Msambweni titanium mines respectively.
6.5.4 Initiatives / Interventions Undertaken to Prevent Conflict in Kwale County
Slightly over one third or 36% of the stakeholders were aware of the initiatives taken to prevent
conflicts in Kwale County. Notwithstanding the initiatives, 82% of them were not satisfied with
these initiatives and made suggestions which are outlined in the next section (6.5.5).
6.5.5 Strategies of Managing Conflicts in Kwale County
Kwale stakeholders in the extractive industry suggested four avenues of resolving their mining
conflicts (Figure 21). These were enhancing community involvement, undertaking continuous
environmental rehabilitation, increasing clarity or openness on the mining activities and having
a proactive corporate social responsibility; where the investor is ahead in addressing critical
issues in the communities.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Communitiesignored
Low landcompensation
Misinformation /No clarity(openess)
Poor landpolicies
Improper ESIA*
% o
f R
esp
on
ses
per
co
nfl
ict
Causes of conflicts
What are the causes of conflicts in Kwale County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
34
Table 4a: Conflict timeline indicating the key periods of conflict in Mrima Hill, Kwale County
Table 4b: Conflict timeline indicating the key periods of conflict in Titanium mining in Kwale
County
Time / Year Key Event Linked to Conflict or Conflict Trigger
February
2012
Cortec Mining company’s EIA submitted to NEMA was rejected because
Nature Kenya and the Kenya Forest Working Group (KFWG) objection as
Mrima hill was declared a Nature Reserve & National Monument for its
rich culture. A further detailed EIA was requested.
Early 2013 A redone EIA was approved despite concerns by Nature Kenya, KFWG
and WWF to the effect that important bird areas would be lost.
August 2013 License to Cortec Mining was revoked, and was to be reviewed in 60 days,
on the basis of an earlier irregular allocation
Dec 2013 Pacific Wildcat Resource Corp (PWRC) acquires 70% of Cortec and puts
additional metallurgical work to boost the original weakness of the
economic study assessment
Early 2014 Given its estimated potential of Kshs 5.4 trillion, the Kenya Government
supports the Cortex project. The battle for environmental justice gets more
difficult and the conflict of economic gains versus environmental costs
remains
Time Year Key Event Linked to Conflict or Conflict Trigger
1998
Government approved the project by the Canadian company Tiomin
Resources Inc. for the exploitation of titanium deposits located in the Kwale
region
1998 A coalition of local communities and human rights organizations called Coast
Mining Rights Forum opposed the Tiomin-project, as it displaces 5,000 Digo
and Kamba people and would contaminate soil and aquifers with heavy metals
March 2003 The High court stops NEMA from issuing an EIA license to Tiomin following
the environmental conflict raised by the Centre for Environmental Legal
Research and Education (Creel) that the communities did not participate in
the Environmental Management Plans
2007 Several litigations lodged by farmers protesting at what they said was poor
compensation for their land
Jan-April
2014
Conflict over Government delay in providing the export permit for Base
Resources to ship their mineral products
June 2014 Base Resource disputes a levy on exports from its mineral sands project, and
it is disputing the matter with the relevant authorities.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
35
Figure 21: The types of conflict prevention initiatives in Kwale and percentages of stakeholders
suggesting the initiatives
6.5.5.1 Future / Anticipated Conflicts in Kwale County
With continued mining in Kwale County the conflicts indicated in Figure 22 are envisaged to
occur in future. The most stated conflicts are dealing with the environment i.e. soil degradation
and water pollution. Coupled with these are conflicts that will raise health risks from toxic
emissions of the mines and biodiversity loss in this region that has a rich natural ecosystem and
cultural heritage. Other anticipated conflicts are labour / union disputes and increased
vulnerability and thus poverty.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Enhance Comm.Involvement
ContinuousEnvironmenalRestoration
Increaseclarity/openess
Proactive CSR
% R
esp
on
ses
per
co
nfl
ict
Types of resolutions
How can the conflicts in Kwale County be resolved?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
36
Figure 22: The anticipated conflicts in the future of Kwale County’s extractive industry.
7.0 Stakeholder analysis, critical actors and their relationship
The key critical actors in the four counties and their relationships are shown in the stakeholder
matrix for Turkana (Table 5a), Kitui (Table 5b), Taita Taveta (Table 5c) and Kwale (Table 5d).
In Turkana County the key conflict is seen between the Turkana local people and Tullow Oil
Company together withTullow’s community liason officers. There is also the perennial conflict
between the Turkana and the Pokot with regards to boundaries in South Turkana. Minor
conflicts, though of concern, exist between the local Turkana and the investors that are non-
Turkana. There are also conflicts between the NGOs and Tullow Oil together with the Tullow
employed community liasion officers. Positive relationships exist between different
stakeholders in Turkana’s extractive industry but the most positive is that between the national
Government and Tullow Oil.
In Kitui County, conflict was noted between the Fenxi coal company with the following actors
– the Mui coal basin residents, the local NGOs and the Mui community liasion committee.
Similarly, there was conflict between the Mui residents and the National Government largely
driven by the lack of information and clarity on various issues by the Government.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Soil
de
grad
atio
n
Wat
er P
ollu
tio
n
Incr
eas
e v
uln
erab
ility
/p
ove
rty
Hea
lth
ris
ks f
rom
emis
sio
ns/
po
lluti
on
Lab
ou
r d
isp
ute
s &
Un
ion
s
Bio
div
ersi
ty lo
ss
Cu
ltu
re/T
rad
. lo
ss
% r
esp
on
ses
per
co
nn
flic
t
Types of Conflicts
What are the envisaged future conflicts in Kwale County?
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
37
Table 5a: Matrix showing the stakeholder relationship between the various actors in the
extractive industry in Turkana County (-minor conflict, --high conflict, +positive relationship,
++ very positive relationship).
Turkana
locals
National
Govt
Turkana
County
govt.
Tullow
Oil
Community
Liaison
Officers
NGOs Local
investors
(Non
Turkana)
Pokot
locals
Turkana locals
+ + − − − + − − −
National Govt.
+ ++ + + + +
Turkana County
govt.
+ + + + _
Tullow Oil C
++ − + +
Community
Liaison Officers
− + +
NGOs
+ +
Local investors
(Non Turkana)
+
Pokot Locals
Table 5b: Matrix showing the stakeholder relationship between the various actors in the
extractive industry in Kitui County (- minor conflict, -- high conflict, + positive relationship,
++ very positive relationship).
Kitui
locals
National
Govt
Kitui
County
govt.
Fenxi
Coal
company
Mui Coal
Basin
Residents
NGOs Community
Liaison
Committee
Kitui locals + + + + + +
National Govt. + ++
− +
−
Kitui County govt. + + + +
Fenxi coal
company
− − −
Mui Coal Basin
Residents + ++
NGOs ++
Community
Liaison Committee
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
38
Table 5c: Matrix showing the stakeholder relationship between the various actors in the
extractive industry in Taita Taveta County (- minor conflict, -- high conflict, + positive
relationship, ++ very positive relationship).
Taita Taveta
local
communities
National
Govt
Taita
Taveta
County
govt.
Large-
scale
minors
Small-
scale
miners
Mazurura Gemstones
traders /
Middle
men
Taita Taveta local
communities + +
− −
+ + +
National Govt.
+ ++
− −
+
Taita Taveta
County govt. + + + +
Large-scale miners
− − −
+
Small-scale miners
+ +
Mazurura
+
Gemstones traders
/ Middle men )
Table 5d: Matrix showing the stakeholder relationship between the various actors in the
extractive industry in Kwale County (- minor conflict, -- high conflict, + positive relationship,
++ very positive relationship).
Kwale local
communities
National
Govt
Kwale
County
govt.
Base
Resources
Company
WPWRC-
Cortec
Company
Environmental
NGOs
Kwale local
communities + + + + +
National Govt.
+
−
+ +
Kwale County govt.
− − −
+
Base Resources
Company + +
WPWRC-Cortec
Company +
Environmental NGOs
In Taveta County the conflict of concern is that between the local communities and the large
scale miners and also between large-scale miners and small-scale miners. These conflicts are
all driven by competition for mining land. Unlike other counties, in Kwale, the conflict of most
concern is that between the mining companies and both the National and County Governments.
Here the companies feel aggrieved largely due to the delayed deliverance of export permits by
the National Government and the new levy demanded by the County Government.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
39
Subsequently these conflicts have sent doubts to foreign investors with concomitant dropping
of the companies share capital on the foreign stock market.
8.0 Conclusions and Recommendation
Despite the differences in the types and nature of the extractive industry in the four Counties,
there were still significant similarities in the types of conflicts, their causes and intervention
strategies across Counties. There were also some similarities across the Counties, with regards
to the types of conflicts envisaged in future. Conflicts common to the four Counties were: the
unclear benefit sharing agreement on the extracted resources, unclear policies/law,
environmental (biodiversity) degradation, perishing cultures/traditions and poor compensation
of communities’ displaced from land. Declining grazing and fishing grounds were conflicts
specific to Turkana County while tax/levy and issuance of export permit conflicts were unique
to Kwale County.
The causes of conflicts were also common across the Counties. These included misinformation
or lack of information on issues such as benefit sharing, lack of land title deeds, little involvment
of the community in projects, poor policies and divisive politics.
The suggested conflict interventions mechanism were to a large extent similar across the
Counties. These comprised enhanced community sensitization, setting better CSR and MOU,
increasing clarity / community participation (empowerment), providing title deeds, enhancing
the social livelihoods and undertaking environmental restoration. All these interventions can be
undertaken via mediation and negotiation initiatives between the conflicting parties.
Given that the extractive industry in Kenya is still in its infancy stages, this report recommends
that:
A National sovereign fund to be established that will anchor Kenyans against vagaries
of future conflicts
Thorough environmental impact assessment be done and after the project begins, the
evaluation and audits should be closely monitored under prescribed environmental
management plans
The currrent policy frameworks and laws on mining and oil industry should be hastened
so as to be at pace with the quickly evolving Kenyan extractive industry
These laws be clearly sensitized to the the communities particular in the regions under
oil and mineral exploitation
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
40
9.0 References
Borrini-Feyerabend, G. 1996. Collaborative management of protected areas: tailoring
the approach to the context. Gland, Switzerland, IUCN. 67pp.
Deutsch, M. & Coleman, P.T. 2000. The handbook of conflict resolution: theory and
practice. San Francisco, California, USA, Jossey-Bass.
Fisher, S., Abdi, D.I., Ludin, J., Smith, R., Williams, S. & Williams, S. 2000. Working
with conflict: skills and strategies for action. London, Zed Books. 224 pp.
Keller, P.C. 1992. Gemstones of East Africa, Geoscience Press, Phoenix.
Matiru, V. 2000. Conflict and natural resource management. Rome, FAO.
Mwandawiro Mghanga 2010. The wealth in the underground that is elusive to the local
people. Mining in Taita Taveta County – Prospects and Problems. Henrich Boll Stitung
Publisher.
The Energy Bill 2013. Kenya Gazette Supplement. Government Printer, Nairobi.
The Mining Bill 2013. Kenya Gazette Supplement No 28. Government Printer, Nairobi.
The Kenya Gazette Supplement number 56. Environmental Impact Assessment and
Audit Regulation 2003. Government Printer, Nairobi
The Kenya Gazette Supplement Acts 2000. Environmental Management Coordination
Act (EMCA) 1999. Government Printer, Nairobi
Warner, M. 2001. Complex problems, negotiated solutions: tools to reduce conflict in
community development. London, UK, ITDG Publishing.
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
41
APPENDIX 1: The Existing Oil Basins in Kenya
Source: Vanoil Energy Ltd
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
42
APPENDIX 2: The Oil Exploration Blocks in Kenya
Source: The National Oil Corporation of Kenya.
APPENDIX 3 - Interviewed Key Persons, Organisations and Communities
Name of organization Key Actor or informant
interviewed/contacted Contact person Email Address
International Organization for Migration Turkana County Augustine Lambert [email protected]
World Food Programme Turkana County Josephat Wafula [email protected]
Ministry of Water Turkana East Sub County Sub County Water officer [email protected]
Ministry of Livestock Turkana Central Sub County
DLPO - Sub county Livestock
officer [email protected]
Kenya Red Cross Society Turkana County Nicodemus Okango [email protected]
Ministry of Education Loima sub county
Benard Owuor - DEO Turkna
Loima [email protected]
International Rescue Committee Turkana West Sub County Patrick Gatembo -Field coord
United Nations for Food and Agriculture
Organization Turkana County Maina Kibata [email protected]
Catholic Diocese of Lodwar Loima & Turkana Central Sub County Bishop Dominic Kimengich [email protected]
Catholic Diocese of Lodwar Loima & Turkana Central Sub County Ekidor Linus Namoe [email protected]
Ministry of Agriculture Turkana Central Sub County [email protected]
Ministry of Interior and Cordination of
National Government Turkana County County Commisioner [email protected]
United Nations Development Organization Turkana County - Peace Programme
Lucas Echuchuka - Peace
coordinator [email protected]
United Nations Development Organization Turkana County - Livelihood Program Johnstone Moru - Field coordinator [email protected]
United Nations Development Organization Turkana County - Livelihood Program Francis Matheka [email protected]
Turkana County Government Turkana County Peter Ekai - Deputy Governor [email protected]
Turkana County Government
Minister of Environment & Natural
Resources Ms Rhoda Loyor [email protected]
National Youth Council Turkana County Youth Director Turkana County [email protected]
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
44
Meteorological Service Turkana County [email protected]
Tullow Oil - Kenya B.V Community Liasion Officer –Lodwar Lynette Lokuruka 0715593534
Tullow Oil - Kenya B.V
Chief Communication officer –
Lokichar Huma Kaseu Kaoga [email protected]
Danish Demining Group Loima, Turkana South and Turkana East Mads Frielander [email protected]
Danish Demining Group Loima, Turkana South and Turkana East
Raphael Locham- Community
Facilitator [email protected]
TUPADO Turkana County Sammy Ekal - Program Manager [email protected]
National Environment Management Authority Turkana County [email protected]
SAPCONE Turkana County
Hamphery Amoni- Program
Manager [email protected]
Agency for Pastoral Development (APaD) Director ApaD Davis Wafula 0703235025
Ward Administrator - Lokichar Lokichar - Turkana County Koloi Simon 0710514833
Kenya Land Alliance Director KLA Odenda Lumumba
Oil News Kenya Kenya - Nairobi Hqs Samuel Kamau Mbote [email protected]
Ministry of Energy and Petroleum
Ministry Headquarter - Nyayo House
Nairobi
James Mbugua Nganga-Snr Supt.
Geologist [email protected]
Ministry of Energy and Petroleum
Ministry Headquarter - Nyayo House
Nairobi
Hudson K Andambi-Snr Principal
Oil Geologist [email protected]
Kenya Chamber of Mines Nairobi Hqs Mr Mwakesi 0723229117
Mui Community Association Kitui County Mr Kilonzo - Community leader
Mui Basin Mining Co. Ltd. Kitui County Mr. Kimani Wainaina [email protected]
Ministry of Minining Kitui County Joseph Makaa [email protected]
Kitui County Government Kitui County -Ministry of Environment Dominic Mumbu
Ministry of Mining Kitui County Mr Kirembu 0722622376
Kitui Catholic Diocese Kitui County Mike Chenze 0720693336
Ministry of Mining Kitui County Mr Ndolo 0722771470
Gath Mineral Resources Ltd. Kitui County Gathecha [email protected]
Community Action for Nature Conservation Kitui County Handley Becha
Assessment Report on the Extractive Industries for Sustainable Development in Kenya
45
Community Action for Nature Conservation Kitui County Pauline Tatua [email protected]
R.K. Sanghani Taita Taveta County Babu Sanghani [email protected]
Rockland Kenya Ltd Taita Taveta County Alice Muthama [email protected]
Mawa Geological Consultants Taita Taveta County Malebe [email protected]
David Vishram Mining Taita Taveta County David Vishram [email protected]
E.A.P. & Miners Taita Taveta County James Muguoko [email protected]
Editha Samree lewela Taita Taveta County Editha Samree lewela [email protected]
Equator Gemstones (K) Ltd Taita Taveta County Kalinzoya [email protected]
Nadan Mining Taita Taveta County Immah Kimuyu [email protected]
Rubylite Mining Taita Taveta County Mbiriri [email protected]
Ronald Mdawida Taita Taveta County Ronald Mdawida [email protected]
Ministry of Mining Taita Taveta County - County Geologist Mr Omito
Taveta University - Mining Department Taita Taveta County Prof Cecillia Onyango [email protected]
Base Titanium Kwale County Cecilia Floren [email protected]
Bridges Exploration Ltd Kwale County [email protected]
Ministry of Mining Kwale County - County Geologist Wafula 0726201051
Nature Kenya Kwale County Ecologist
Kwale Human Rights Network Kwale County Jaramba George [email protected]
District Development Officer Kwale County Rama Kalama [email protected]
Minister fo Environment Kwale County
Community Action for Nature Conservation Kwale County
Nature Kenya Kwale County
APPENDIX 4: The mineral rich Mozambique Belt stretching from southern to eastern
Africa
Source: Keller 1992