land use in kenya

LAND USEIN KENYAThe case for a national

land use policy

Kenya Land AllianceLa

nd R

efor

m

vol.

3

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page i

Published by:Kenya Land AlliancePrinting House RoadPO Box 7150, NakuruTel: +254 37 41203Email: [email protected]

Text by:Consultants for Natural Resources ManagementPO Box 62702, NairobiTel: +254 2 723958; 0733-747677Fax: +254 2 729607Email: [email protected]

Edited By:Ms. Dali MwagorePO Box 30677, Nairobi

Design and Layout:Creative Multimedia Communications LimitedPO Box 56196, NairobiTel: +254 2 230048

ISBN 9966-896-92-2

Printed by:Printfast Kenya LimitedPO Box NairobiTel: 557051

CreditsII

Land Use in Kenya • The case for a national land-use policy

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page ii

Cover iii


Alpine moorland (water catchments)

Humid (intensive agriculture/forestry)

Humid (intensive mixed farming)

Semi-humid (mixed dryland farming)

Semi-arid (pastoralism/wildlife)

Arid (nomadic pastoralism)

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page iii

Contentsiv

Contents

Acknowledgement viPreface viiSummary viiiAcronyms ix

Introduction: Land use in Kenya 2

Chapter One: Land resources in Kenya1.1 Agricultural land potential 51.2 Forest resources 101.3 Savannahs and grasslands 151.4 Water resources 201.5 Fisheries 251.6 Wetlands 271.7 Wildlife resources 291.8 Mineral resources 311.9 Energy 33

Chapter Two: Land abuse in Kenya2.1 Soil erosion 372.2 Pollution 422.3 The polluting agents 442.4 Urban waste 472.4 Driving forces of unsustainable land use 512.5 Impact of unsustainable land use 54

Chapter Three: Emerging trends3.1 Genesis of sectoral policies, laws and institutions 623.2 The benevolence age 633.3 The dark age 64

Chapter Four: Toward a national land-use policy4.1 Justification 654.2 Choices to be made 654.3 Key elements of a national land-use policy 694.4 Assets to build on 73

Conclusion 77


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page iv

List of tables1 Distribution of agro-ecological potential In Kenya 62 Estimated area under major land uses in 1995 73 Land under government irrigation schemes,1978–1995 74 The 60% reliability of first and second rains in western Kenya 85 Forest size and distribution in Kenya 116 Kenya's endangered forests 137 Livestock trends in the rangelands of Kenya 168 Drought incidences in Kenya 189 Food relief requirements in selected districts 1910 Aquifer and abstraction characteristics of the drainage basins in Kenya 2011 Current surface and aquifer status in Kenya 2112 Water deficits in selected provinces in Kenya 2213 Water quality in Kenya, 1963–2000 2214 Marine counts of selected animals 2615 Wildlife conservation sites in Kenya 2916 Areas prone to wildlife conflicts 3017 Geological succession and economic minerals in Kenya 3218 Average energy production and consumption, 1992–1995 3319 Sources of fuelwood in Kenya 3420 Patterns of energy use in Kenya 3521 Trends of wood demand and supply in Kenya 3622 Sand movement potential in Kenya 4023 Reported levels of DDT in fish from Kenyan lakes 4424 Estimated municipal solid waste generated in Nairobi City 4925 Impacts of industrialisation on air, water and land pollution in Kenya 5526 Status of species of fish, amphibians and reptiles in Kenya 5627 Selected economic costs of environmental degradation in Kenya 5728 Changes in land use and projected requirements 67

List of Figures

1 Trends in forest distribution in Kenya 112 Forest area proposed for excision in 2001 123 Land degradation hazard in northern rangeland in Kenya 174 Pollution of Nairobi River 235 Trends in fish exploitation in Kenya 266 Wildlife trends in selected ranches in Nakuru District 307 Average energy consumption by sector in 1992–1995 338 The hazards of water erosion in Kenya 389 Chemical fertilizer use in Kenya 4310 Trends of population increase in Kenya, 1963–1999 5111 Projected land-use trends 66

Contents v


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page v

Acknowledgmentvi

Acknowledgement

The Kenya Land Alliance (KLA) would like to thank the following for theirsupport: Situma Mwichabe and his research team (Bramwel Kisuya, Simon Waswaand Joyce Onyango) at Consultants for Natural Resources Management for theresearch and organisation of the text which constituted this book; OdendaLumumba, the coordinator of KLA, for refining the key ideas for the book; Ms DaliMwagore for editorial support; Creative Multimedia Communications Limited forart direction and graphic design; and members of KLA for support in developingthe concept.

We wish to express our appreciation to the Department for InternationalDevelopment for supporting this important subject, and for enabling us publish ourfindings.

There are many who contributed in different ways but whom we have not named,we express our heartfelt appreciation to them all.

The large body of the text is based on information arising from a social audit byMwichabe and Wafukho in 1999 on the natural resources in Kenya. The audit wascarried out in the context of providing a picture of now; and how this picture canenable us foresee the future of natural resource management in Kenya. The infor-mation has been a building block to the Kenya scenarios project by the institute ofEconomic Affairs.

The information in this book has been collected mainly through sieving data analy-sis of published data in the public domain, international organisations and author-itative articles as well as local publications. Of particular importance were the datasets maintained by the Central Bureau of Statistics, Kenya Wildlife Service,Department of Remote Sensing and Resource Imaging, the Ministry of Agricultureand rural Development and the Department of Forestry. Other useful materialswere sourced from IUCN and UNEP.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page vi

Preface vii

Preface

Since its formation in 1999, the Kenya Land Alliance (KLA) has participated actively in land reformissues at the local, national and global levels.

In response to invitations to the stakeholders’ consultancy meetings held in the Ministry of Lands andSettlement on the preparation of a national land-use policy for Kenya, KLA took up the challenge toundertake a social audit of our natural resources with a view to put up the case for a national land-usepolicy. Although the initiative within the Ministry of Lands and Settlement was subsequentlysuspended, KLA decided to proceed with the audit to completion.

This book argues the case for a national land policy, which spells out in broad terms how land andother natural resources should be used and managed in a sustainable manner. Kenya has a populationof over 28 million people who derive their livelihood from land-based resources. If the full benefits ofthese resources are to be realized then a land-use policy must be put in place urgently. KLA notes thatin the past issues of land use have been taken into account in various circles but there have been notangible results. This is partly because whenever matters concerning land are raised, they evokeemotions and sensitivity among Kenyans.

KLA further appreciates that there has been confusion between land-use policy and land policy. Landpolicy is a broader concept, touching mainly on tenure/ownership and may also include aspects of law.A land-use policy is concerned with the way land and natural resources are used and managed, andissues of ownership/tenure are secondary.

It is hoped that this book will serve as a resource for government, policy makers, planners, researchers,academics, scholars and communities in Kenya and elsewhere to pressure for a policy framework to beput in place to govern land use.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page vii

Summaryviii

Summary

This book exposes the key land use and environmental problems facing Kenya today due to lack of anappropriate national land use policy. The publication details how the air is increasingly being polluted,the water systems are diminishing in quantity and deteriorating in quality. The desertification processthreatens the land and its cover. The soils are being eroded leading to siltation of the ocean and lakes.The forests are being depleted with impunity thus destroying the water catchments. The savannas andgrasslands are undergoing de-vegetation through overgrazing, charcoal burning and other poor land usepractices leading to desertification.

The book also reveals the underlying causes of the deterioration of the life support systems (air, waterand land) through poor land use practices notably de-forestation, inappropriate irrigation techniques,overgrazing, fuel wood harvesting and charcoal burning. Others are pollution from industries, harmfulagricultural practices and improper management of solid and liquid urban wastes. The ever-increasingpopulation exerts pressure on the natural resources and drives the mis-use of the resources, the situationis exacerbated by the cyclic occurrence of disasters such as droughts and floods.

The publication further exposes the emerging conflicts and the consequences of un-sustainable landuse. For example the scarcity of pastures and water fuels conflicts among pastoralists and between smalland large-scale irrigation farmers. Poor air and water quality increases health hazards in human beingsand loss of biodiversity. Destruction of water catchments diminishes stream flow and hence electricitysupply necessitating rationing. Desertificaton reduces the productivity of land leading to foodinsecurity, reduced income and non-accumulation of economic assets. Eventually millions of familiesend up living below the poverty line. Currently, over 5 million households are unable to access basichuman needs such as food, medical care, and education or meet other social obligations.

The book further demonstrates that the current trend of deterioration will lead to a gloomy future forthe populace if the status quo is maintained. As an alternative future scenario, the publication exhortsthe government of Kenya, industrialists, urban dwellers, farmers, fishermen, pastoralists, nomads,hunter/gatherers and other resource users to opt for a rational land use programme - practising wisemanagement of natural resources and protection of the environment. Striking a balance betweensatisfying the human livelihood needs and wise usage of resources to ensure sustainability of the naturalresource base is the biggest challenge. The book has identified the key elements that are needed in orderto put in place a comprehensive and rational national Land use policy that will enable the emergenceof sustainable land use practices in Kenya.

The information in this publication is an analysis of published data in the public domain ofGovernment of Kenya, international organizations and local institutions. Field data analyses andinterviews with a cross-section of professionals, ordinary farmers, pastoralists, fishmongers, huntergatherers among other respondents in some parts of Kenya provided valuable testimonies that haveenriched the text.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page viii

Acronyms ix

Acronyms

AEZ - agro-ecological zone

ASAL - arid and semi-arid lands

CFCs - ChloroFluoride Compounds

DDT - DichloroDimythyleToluene

EMCA - The National Environmental Management and

Coordination Act

FAO - Food and Agricullture Organization of the United Nations

GHG - Green House Gases

GDP - Gross Domestic Product

IGAD - InterGovernmental Authority on Development

IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature

JICA - Japan International Cooperation Agency

KLA - Kenya Land Alliance

KWS - Kenya Wildlife Service

KFMP - Kenya Forestry Master Plan

MRDASW - Ministry of Reclamation and Development of Arid,

Semi-Arid Areas and Wastelands.

NEAP - Natural Environment Action Plan

NEMA - The National Environmental Management Authority

P&D - Peris and Day

POPs - persistent organic pollutants

UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme

UNCHE - United Nations Conference on Human Environment

UNCED - United Nations Conference on Environment

and Development

TLU - Tropical Livestock Unit


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 1

Introduction2

Land in Kenya means differentthings to different people. Tofarmers and pastoralists land is

property to be owned and a source oflivelihood, and access to land andcontrolling it are key concerns. The eliteconsider land as a marketable commodityfrom which to make windfall profitsthrough market speculation mechanisms.As a nation, the public, politicians andadministrators view land as a sovereignentity whose boundaries reflect a social,cultural and political identity.

To development agencies land providesgoods and services required for people's

welfare and prosperity. Conservation-ists technically define land as a fragile,ecological entity resulting from themutual working of living and non-living things on the earth's surface.These perceptions roughly translateinto different, and often competing,interests in land in Kenya. No singledefinition can adequately reflect thedivergent perceptions. Some commonfeatures in the definitions indirectlysuggest that land is an area of theearth's surface embracing thebiosphere, the atmosphere and thelithosphere.

IntroductionLand use in Kenya—perceptions, types and trends

CN

RM

A small scale farmer in Kieni, Nyeri


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 2

Introduction 3

The different perceptions and variedinterests in land translate into interestgroups which influence land policy inthe country. Ultimately, interest groupswith political and economic powerdetermine the shape of the land-usepolicy. For example, the colonialgovernment reserved prime landthroughout the country for Britishsettlers and confined Africans tomarginal reserves. Later, politicalagitation brought the elite, peasants andthe landless into the white highlandsthrough settlement schemes. Afterindependence, the African elite tookover the powerful roles of the settlers.The groups that included peasantfarmers, the urban poor, pastoralistsespecially the nomads, the landless andsquatters—especially those at the CoastProvince—lost out in this game.

Land is currently the most importantresource from which the countrygenerates goods and services for thepeople. The national economy isprimarily agro-based. Ninety percent ofthe population living in rural areasderives its livelihood directly from land.To these people, land resources are themeans to a livelihood determining thelevels of prosperity or poverty, fulfillingsocial obligations, and also conferringsocial status and political power.Sustaining the livelihoods of such ahigh population with limited landresources places a high demand foraccess to resources, making use andownership of land fundamental issues

in the socio-political and economiclandscape of the country.

Natural resources change in quality andquantity over time. The ArabianPeninsula was poor in natural resourcesin the 19th Century until vast reservesof crude oil were discovered in theMiddle East. Similarly raw materialslike jute, once highly prized, are lessvalued today as they compete withsynthetic products. Sustainable use ofnatural resources ensures that the use ofrenewable resources does not exceed

their regenerative rates. Also, the use ofnon-renewable resources should notexceed the rate at which their renewablesubstitutes are created.

The major land-cover types in Kenyaare forests, savannahs, grasslands,wetlands, fresh and saline water bodies,and deserts. These are used foragriculture, pastoralism, watercatchments, nature reserves, urban andrural settlements, industry, mining,transport and communications,tourism, recreation. Other uses includecultural sites, fishing, forestry, energy.

Of the total land cover, about 2.4% isunder indigenous and exotic forests.

Land and its cover is currently the most

important base from which the country

generates goods and services for the

populace.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 3

About 12% of the land has high rainfallsupporting production of tea, coffee,pyrethrum, horticulture and flori-culture, and food crops such as maize,wheat, potatoes, pulses, and dairyfarming. The semi-arid area coveringabout 32% of total land has averagerainfall and supports mixed crop andlivestock rearing. Irrigated flowerfarming has in the recent past emergedas a major type of land use alongsideagropastoralism. Over 50% of the totalland cover is arid with extremely lowand erratic rainfall. The expansive landis used for extensive livestockproduction under nomadic systems.

Specific sites along mountains, rivervalleys, and the unique savannah andgrassland ecosystems have been set-aside for conservation of indigenousforests, wildlife sanctuaries, watercatchments, marine life, monumentsand cultural sites. Most of these

protected areas are tourist attractionpoints.

Interspersed within the diverseagriculturally potential areas aresettlements in rural and urban areas.Some parts of the country have limitedmineral potential. Others have been setaside for urbanization andindustrialization. Fresh and saline waterbodies support the fishing industry.Regrettably, they are also used asdisposal sites for urban and industrialwaste. Rivers are the largest source ofhydropower upstream while the lowerparts of the large rivers have madeirrigated farming possible. Theexpansive savannahs and grasslands arehome to livestock production andwildlife conservation. They are now amajor focus for innovations in dry-landfarming.

CN

RM

Railway line, Webuye.


Introduction4

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 4

The land resource endowment in Kenya 5

1.1 Agriculture

Land is the most important resource inKenya. However, of the total area of 582,646km2, only 17% is suitable for rainfedagriculture. About 2.2% of the arable land iscovered by forest reserves. Arid and semi-aridlands (ASALs) comprising grassland andsavannah rangelands cover the remaining82%. The rangelands are home to 85% oftotal wildlife population, and 14 millionpeople practising dry-land farming andpastoralism (Mwichabe in Kengo, 1996).

Agriculture remains the backbone of thenational economy. The sector contributed24.5% of real Gross Domestic Product(GDP) in 1990–95, 24.4% in 1998 and aprojected 26.0% in 2001. The growth ratedeclined from 1.5% in 1998 to 1.2% in1999 and further dropped to 0.8% in 2000(GoK/UNEP, 2001).

Agriculture supports over 80% of thepopulation. It employs 70% of thecountry's labour force of over 10 millioncompared to only 3 million employed in the

Chapter OneThe land resource endowment

in Kenya

CN

RM

A small scale farmer in Nanyuki, Laikipia


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 5

The land resource endowment in Kenya6


formal sector. It also generates 80% of theexport earnings and supplies over 70% ofraw materials for the agro-industry. Overallthe sector contributes to more than 45% ofthe government revenue (Ogendo andKosura, 1995).

a) The agro-ecological potential

Kenya’s agriculture is determined by factorssuch as climate, hydrology and terrain. Suchagro-ecological factors also determine thesuitability of an area for a particular landuse. Agricultural potential can be classifiedinto high, medium and low. Intensivecultivation is prevalent in the high-potentialhighlands where rainfall is high and soilsrich. The high to medium potential land isestimated at 5.3 million ha (20% of totalland in Kenya) and receives consistentrainfall of above 1200 mm annually.Common crops include tea, coffee,sugarcane, maize and wheat. A lot ofpressure from the fast growing population isexerted on high- and medium-potentialareas (table 1).

Approximately 59% of the soils in Kenyahave moderate to high natural fertilitymaking them suitable for growing a largevariety of crops. Productivity is curtailedbecause only 17% of the country receivesaverage rainfall of more than 800 mm perannum—the minimum requirement forrainfed agriculture.

The ASAL area comprising agro-ecologicalzones IV to VII is approximately 49 millionhectares (ha). It covers most parts of thenorthern, eastern, and southern margins ofthe central Kenya highlands. In some areasthere are true desert conditions. The semi-arid area covers about 20% of the entireland area and is inhabited by 20% of thepopulation. The arid area covering 60% ofthe total land is inhabited by 10% of thepopulation. In the ASAL, incidences of cropfailure are common. The predominant land-use systems are ranching, wildlifeconservation and pastoralism. Table 2 showsa comparison of the spatial extent ofagriculture to other land uses (GoK, 1992).

Agro-ecological Potential land use Area Percent of zones (‘000’ ha) total land

I–III Medium to high: agriculture, livestock 8,600 15(intensive), forestry and water catchment

IV–V Marginal to medium: agriculture (drought- 11,500 20tolerant crops), forestry, livestock (ranching),and wildlife conservation

VI–VII Marginal: livestock (extensive pastrolism) 37,400 65and wildlife conservation

Total 57,500 100

Source: GoK 1992: Development Policy for ASAL: MRDASW.

Table 1. The distribution of the agro-ecological potential in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 6



The changing land-use patterns affect foodproduction. The dynamic marketing ofagro-products is steadily changing land-usepatterns with positive and negative resultson cash and perennial cropland areasrespectively.

b) Irrigation potential

The area of land with irrigation potential isestimated at 539,500 ha. Only 10% of thishas been developed. Approximately 502settlement schemes of about 65,000 ha existin the country. 25,800 ha belong to privatelandholders, 27,200 ha to smallholders, and12,000 ha is under schemes managed by thegovernment (CBS, 1995). Irrigatedagriculture on government land has since

1989 been declining at the rate of 7%annually. An additional 118,000 ha wereproposed for development at the beginningof this decade. Unfortunately most of theschemes have faced problems relating toinadequate water supply, poor management,destruction of crops, collapse of irrigationinfrastructure, and lack of maintenancerendering them moribund (Mwichabe andWafukho, 1999).

The sharp decline in land under irrigationsince 1989 may also be attributed to lack ofincentives to farmers and poor marketing oftheir products. There are efforts to revampthe Ahero irrigation scheme as a slump inproduction in the Mwea irrigation schemeescalates over rice marketing problems.

Land-use category Area (‘000’) Percent of total

Crop (with intensive livestock) production 9,379.1 15.78Livestock production 33,486.2 56.34Forest and woodlands 3,082.7 5.19National parks and reserves (protected areas) 4,389.9 7.31Settlement and associated land uses 46.6 0.08Others (water bodies, sparsely vegetated) 9,099.325 15.31

Total 59,450.8 100

Source: CBS Statistical Abstract, 1995

Table 2. Estimated area under major land uses, 1995

Table 3. Land under government irrigation schemes,1978–1995

Scheme 1978 1980 1982 1984 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Mwea 5648 5757 5782 5820 5818 5820 5802 5815 5846 5882 5878Ahero 1369 1315 1236 1072 827 827 853 857 858 857 860Tana River 872 872 804 831 878 867 0 0 0 0 0Perkera 158 321 210 96 150 237 252 242 297 220 265Bunyala 323 207 213 213 213 213 84 213 211 213 214West Kano 237 1056 1172 450 449 475 734 895 585 898 900Bura 739 2454 1600 1640 1845 840 0 0

Total 8535 9528 9417 9503 10789 10039 9365 9867 8637 8070 8117

Source: CBS Statistical Abstract, 1995

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 7



c) Under-utilization of the agriculturalpotential

Western Kenya, stretching from Kitalethrough to Kisumu, Kuria and Sotik, hasthe most ambient and stable tropical rainfallpattern in the country. Even the semi-aridzones along the lakeshores in Siaya, Busiaand Suba with low rainfall have the leastvariability within seasons compared withASALs in other parts of the country. Theregion has in fact witnessed feweroccurrences of drought since the 18thCentury compared to central, eastern,northern, coastal and northeastern regions.

The reliability of the rainfall in selecteddistricts is summarized in table 4.

In this region, there are 1.6 million ha with apotential of producing 8 t of grain per ha.However, the current production is 0.3 t per haon average (45% less than the potential). InKitale the current average production is 4 t perha on both small- and large-scale farms (a fieldassessment by CNRM, 2001).

It is ironical that with such potential, theUNDP poverty (UNDP, 1998) indicesplace Siaya, Busia and Bungoma as areaswith the largest number of people livingbelow the poverty line in Kenya. There islittle effort by the residents of this region touse technological innovations to grow high-value crops and rear animals to maximiseuse of the climatic conditions. The largerpart of the region is either covered withmaize or low-value cash crops such assugarcane, tea and coffee. The attitude ofthe residents of this region towardsembracing profitable land-use practices willremain a major challenge for a long time.The government’s attempts to maximiseproduction have been ineffective.

Wheat production at Endebes, Kitale.

District First rains (mm) Second rains (mm) Total annual rainfall (mm)

Siaya 350–900 50–800 800–2000Busia 400–900 80–800 900–2000Bungoma 500–800 430–800 1200–1800Kakamega 500–1100 450–850 1200–2100Kisii 550–600 800–1000 1200–2100Homa Bay 250–1000 50–700 700–1800Kisumu 500–700 450–600 1100–1500

Source: Calculations from Jaetzold et al: Farm management handbook 1982.

Table 4. The 60% reliability of first and second rains in western Kenya.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 8



d) Land hoarding

In Kenya, the conditions for ownership ofland have never included compulsoryrequirements to maximise production toattain food security nationally. As a result,the middle class and the elite are hoardingland which could have been used by peoplewho do not own land but have adequateskills and resources to invest in such landand maximise production. The use oftemporary leaseholds of both private,government and syndicate (long lease) landsis not commonly practiced and does notprovide security of the temporaryinvestments by the leasee.

From Kitale through Nakuru to Malindione encounters small and large chunks ofidle land in prime production areas. Theland belongs to absentee land owners—middle and upper class Kenyans—who earntheir living through white collar jobs or

businesses, and only own land for prestige,political considerations or for idiosyncraticpurposes.

Some of the larger tracts of land such asthose held by the Agricultural DevelopmentCorporation or the National IrrigationAuthority belong to the government. Thelist also includes land leased for longperiods to multinational corporations. Someland belongs to special trusts like the Arabownership along the Coast is by specialarrangements. These individuals, corpora-tions or syndicates do not need this land fortheir livelihood. They are unable to put it tomaximum use either because it is not apriority or they own well beyond what theycan manage.

Idle land on Uasin Gishu Plateau.

CN

RM

From Kitale through Nakuru to Malindi

one encounters small and large chunks of

idle land in prime production areas which

belong to absentee land owners.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 9



Kaya forest in Likoni, Kwale district.

1.2 Forest resources

The area under forests in Kenya is estimatedat 2.4 million ha of which 1.64 million haare gazetted. The area of land not gazetted(0.76 million ha) is fragmented into 273forest units. Forty-three percent of the unitsstand on 100 hectares or less. The closedcanopy of indigenous and exotic forestoccupies about 1.22 million ha; plantationscover 0.16 million ha (GoK, 1999). Closed-canopy forests outside the gazetted reservescover approximately 0.18 million ha. Thegovernment has proposed to add a further0.5 million ha through afforestation andgazzettement.

Forest cover has been changing over timeand space. In 1897 the only restricted forestarea was the Akamba Wood Strip running 2

miles on each side of the then Ugandarailway line. The wood strip was establishedunder the Akamba Woods and ForestsRegulations. By 1932, 43 forests had beendesignated government forest areas whichrose to 1.05 million ha in 1940 (IUCN,1998). At independence gazetted forestsstood at 1.8 million ha representing 3.5% ofthe total land area. An aerial survey in 2000shows that these forests have dwindledconsiderably (EAWS/KFWG, 2001).

Most indigenous and exotic forests arefound in the central highlands where rainfallis high, soils are fertile and humansettlement is limited. In the ASALs, forestsare found in isolated mountain ranges andnarrow bands along rivers. Table 5summarizes the size and distribution offorests in Kenya.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:29 AM Page 10



a) Forest depletion

Though the area under open canopy isincreasing as many Kenyans become awareof the environmental, aesthetic andcommercial value of forests, closed-canopyforests have been destroyed.

By 1981 a complete forest inventory showedseveral gazetted and non-gazetted areas indanger of excision. Over a period of 20years, some forest areas decreased by 16%.The list of threatened forests includes theNgong and Karura Forests. Figure 1 showstrends in the rate of forest depletion between1970s and 1990s.

Earlier forest depletion was an attempt bythe first government to create room for cropagriculture and to settle landless people. Asharp decline in the rate of forest depletionin the 1970s from 18% to 6% annually wasrecorded following Kenya’s efforts—supplemented by the internationalcommunity—in conservation.

The depletion rate increased by about 2% inthe late 1970s, stabilized at about 6% in the

1990s, but picked up again putting injeopardy conservation measures done in the1970s. Such deforestation has been aspatially and ecologically differentiatedprocess varying over time and reflecting therelative power and ability of different groupsto gain access into forest resources.

Between 1990 and 1995, forest coverchanged by about 17% with an average lossof 3% per year largely because of settling the

Forest Combination Area (ha)

Mt. Kenya With the protected area 199,500Mt. Kenya Lower/Upper Imenti & Thunguru Hills 213,000Aberdares Kikuyu, Kijabe, Kipipiri, Kirima, Nyamweru 103,000Aberdares Aberdares 148,000South West Mau Transmara, Londiani, Maji Mazuri, Tinderet, 320,000

Timboroa, Nabkoi, Metkei, Lembus, ChemorogokKakamega Forest Kakamega 45,000Others Small less than 100 ha size forests 1,475,250

Total 2,458,750

Source: IUCN, 1995.

Table 5. Forest size and distribution in Kenya.

1972

Per

cent

age

depl

etio

n

Period

1976 1977 1980 1990 1997

1816141210

86420

Figure 1. Trends in forest depletion,1972–1997. Source: Insitute of Economic Affairs, 2000.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 11



landless. However a thorough scrutinyreveals that some of the forest blocks wereacquired illegally by those who alreadyowned land. The decline continues tothreaten the existence of flora and fauna.

The forest area has been declining at analarming rate. Loss of forests throughexcision, population pressures and climatechange is estimated at close to 5,000 ha peryear. Loss through excisions and forest firesis estimated at 15,000 hectares annually(GoK, 1999).

Out of 33 excisions since 1986 only twohave resulted in improved protection. Legalexcisions total 290,000 ha. These wereKakamega (46,944 ha) and Mrima (378 ha)Forest Reserves, among others (GoK,1999). The area transferred to nationalparks and reserves was 115,000 ha. In 2000,the government excised 170,000 ha, with afurther 35,000 ha to be excised in2001/2002. The forests under threat areshown in table 6. Illegal excision around MtKenya are shown in figure 2.

Figure 2. Forest excisions around Mt Kenya.

Source: East African Wildlife Society/ Kenya Forests Working Group, 2001

Mt Kenya Forest Boundaries

Excisions (proposed and announced)

Main roads

Towns

Main cities

Settlements

LegendEMBU

ManyalaKathunguri

Magutuni

Ngeru

Chogoria

Kaongo

Meru

Timau

NANYUKI

Ena

Projection:Universal Transverse MorcatorZone 37WGS84

N

0 5 10

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 12



b) The causes of deforestation

High-value forests found in the wetter zonesare prone to excision more frequently as aresult of high population pressure than thelow-potential forests mainly distributed inthe ASAL. For example, small areas ofKarura, Mt. Kenya, the Aberdares andNgong are continuously excised disregar-ding their significance for catchmentprotection, recreation and moderation ofatmospheric conditions. The single largeblock of Mau Forest is rich in plant andanimal biodiversity but this has not deterredthe government from including it in therecently declared excision of forests.

Various parameters influence the abovetrends. In non-gazetted areas, reliance onshifting cultivation with long fallow periodspreserved the natural fertility of the landand helped forests regenerate naturally. Also,communal custody of the forest resourcesensured equal rights of access and use.Damage to the environment was limited.However, localized effects of populationpressure and land degradation duringdrought or insect ravages could still be

noticed. In the later years, land alienationfor European use introduced forcedsettlements that had serious consequences.The alienation of more than 3 million ha ofhigh-potential land by colonialists made abig impact on the quality and distributionof forest reserves. The slash-and-burnfarming system was no longer feasible asregeneration of burned forests took longand more often gave room to clearing foragriculture and near-permanent settlement.

The increased commercial demand forforest products for construction, paperproduction and medicine among other usesled to a gradual decline in forest area. Todate close to 6,000 ha of forestland havebeen extracted for timber, fuelwood, polesand paper manufacturing. Though thesustainable annual yield from indigenousforests is estimated at 1.6 million m3,pressure on forestland is increasing.

People use large amounts of forest products.For instance, of the 2.9 million people inover 530,000 households living within 5km of the edge of the forest, 71% use theforest for firewood, 32–44% for provision

Forest Name Threat

North Nandi Pressure for agricultural landSouth Nandi Pressure for agricultural landGwasi hills Degrading forest useArabuko Sokoke Degrading forest useKakamega Poaching, encroachment, settlementEndau OvercuttingMau Pressure for settlement and agricultureSiria Plateau EncroachmentKaya forests (all non gazetted) Intense traditional activities

Source: Insitute of Economic Affairs, 2000.

Table 6: Kenya’s endangered forests

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 13



of other wood products, 55% for medicinalpurposes, 33% for honey production, 25%for hunting, and 35% for livestock grazing.Some of these uses are destructive whileothers are not. Overall they led to a declinein the forest quality and eventually the areaunder forests (Meadows, 2001).

In areas such as the South West Mau Forestthere is a permanent population settlementfor 3,800 Dorobo households, while otherareas such as Namanga Hill Forest havesemi-permanent Maasai manyattas. Thesurrounding peoples temporarily orseasonally inhabit other areas. Illegal extrac-tion of poles occurs in 40% of the forests,firewood in 23%, timber in 22% andcharcoal in 20% of the indigenous forests(Meadows, 2001).

The average annual loss as a result of acombination of all these factors isapproximately 1,350 ha. Invasion of forest

for settlement and agricultural land is clearlythe most destructive. People no longer waitfor official allocation but invade forests forsettlement (Meadows, 2001).

c) Consequences of deforestation

Forests store and release water to streamsand rivers that supply water for domestic,livestock and irrigation. Water used forpower generation originates from forestedcatchments. When forests disappear, so dothese water catchment areas. Between 1999and 2000, a severe water shortage wasexperienced leading to rationing ofelectricity supply in urban areas. The maincause was drought exacerbated by gradualdestruction of the catchment areas thatfacilitated more water runoff and seasonalfloods but less recharge of the river flow.Two hydropower generation plants closeddown causing a reduction in the powersupply. To address the short fall, a 305

The shamba system at Burnt Forest, Uasin Gishu.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 14



megawatt thermal generator that utilizes20,000 litres of diesel a day wascommissioned. This means an increasedrelease of hydrocarbons into theatmosphere.

Large ungulates such as buffalo andelephant require woody vegetation asnatural habitats. The declining vegetationcover partly explains the declining trends inlarge ungulates and other consequencessuch as soil erosion, pollution of watersystems, gradual desertification and water-use conflicts following competition for thedeclining resource.

1.3 The savannahs and grasslands

The savannah and grassland ecosystems,collectively referred to as arid and semi-aridlands (ASAL), occupy approximately 80%(464,296 km2) of the total land area. Theseecosystems host all the group ranches and over90% of the network of national parks andreserves. They are also home to about 50% ofthe total livestock population and nearly 80%of the total wildlife population in Kenya.Livestock production is the most extensivesystem in the rangelands (GoK, 1992).

Table 7 shows livestock trends in Kenyanrangelands. The information shows that all

The savannah rangelands in Mwingi.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 15



types of livestock are declining. The greatestdecline, 16%, was recorded for cattle anddonkeys in the early 1990s to the late 1990s.Camels declined by only 11% thanks totheir ability to withstand severe droughtswhile shoats (sheep and goats) fell by 14%.

The decline is partly attributed to thechanges in ecology, weather conditions,socio-cultural and economic orientationand conservation approaches. Thepopulation of cattle, camels, sheep and goats(shoat) was stable in the late 1980s and early1990s. Nevertheless, the ability of thesavannah to hold vast populations of live-stock is constantly threatened by the rapidexpansion of croplands into these regions.

The ASAL ecosystems are currently used assinks for population from the high potentialareas. They are also the largest suppliers offuelwood to the major urban centres in thecountry. Large-scale mining and oilprospecting also occurs in this zone.

In the process desertification occurs mainlywithin dryland ecosystems leading to theloss of its productivity. In Kenyadesertification is extending at the rate of18–40 km/year (GoK, 1992). The mostaffected areas are the arid and semi-arid

lands where close to 50 million hectares areat risk.

An assessment of the land degradationhazard in Kenya in 1997 shows that 12.3%of the northern rangelands in Kenya aresubjected to severe land degradation while52% of the rangelands are vulnerable to“moderate” land degradation. Only 33%faces “slight” vulnerability to degradation(see figure 3) (GoK/UNEP, 1997).

a) The desertification process

Desertificaton can be slow or very rapiddepending on the environment and socio-economic conditions. Climatic variationsand inappropriate human activities are partof the cause. When desertification occurs,the land loses its biodiversity thusweakening the ecological linkages. Theability of the land to raise crops, pasturesand wood is lost and the carrying capacity ofthe land is reduced due to loss of ecosystemfunctions. Economic activities decline orcollapse. The risk of desertification innorthern Kenya is shown in figure 3.

Recurrent droughts (see table 8), increasedhuman and livestock populations, andinappropriate agricultural and settlement

Population estimates Percentage changeSpecies Late 1980s Early 1990sLate 1990s 80s– 90s Early 90s–late 90s

Camel 566,828 579,933 517, 142 2% -11%Cattle (all) 2,898,749 3,074,174 2,595,515 6% -16%Donkey 100,171 80,923 68,062 -19% -16%Sheep & goats 6,385,846 6,211,961 5,315,685 -3% 14%

Total 9,951,594 9,946,991 8,496,403

Source: Githaiga J. Wildlife Population Trends in Kenya, 1998.

Table 7. Livestock trends in the rangelands of Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 16



Figure 3. Land degradation hazards in northern rangelands of Kenya.Source: GoK, 1997: National Land Degradation Assessment and Mapping

practices are the primary causes. Theincreased number of people searching foreconomic security in the ASAL has led tointensified cultivation, expansion ofcultivated land, overgrazing, harvesting oftrees for fuelwood leading to deforestation,acute water shortages, loss of biologicaldiversity and soil erosion.

The ASAL has been singled out as anecosystem whose imminent destruction mayresult in widespread desertification. As thebushes disappear, so do the animals, and theindigenous people who take away knowledgegained from centuries of intimate associationwith their environment.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 17



Date Region affected Effects

1883 Coast Worst famine in 30 years1889–1890 Coast Year long famine1894–1895 Coast Countrywide1896–1900 Countrywide Failure of 3 consecutive rainy seasons,

and human deaths1913–1919 Eastern / Coast provinces Impacts exacerbated by war1921 Coast Record dry year for Coast1925 R. Valley, Coast, Central Local food shortages, crop and livestock

Provinces losses (50% in Baringo) 1938–1939 Northern, R. Valley and Central Heavy loss of livestock. Lorian Swamp dried up.

Provinces Human deaths reported1942–1944 Countrywide Food shortages. About 200 human deaths1947–1950 Central and Coast provinces Very severe in Coast1952–1955 Eastern, Central, Coast and Driest period for Mombasa

R. Valley Provinces Water shortages in Nairobi1960–1961 Eastern, Southern/North Rift Droughts followed by floods. Cattle mortality

70–80% in Maasailand1972 Countrywide Rains reduced to 50% long term mean

water shortages in Nairobi. Wildlife deaths inparks. Human deaths in northern districts

1974–1976 Eastern, Central and Maasai cattle losses up to 80%Northern provinces

1980 Central, Eastern, Crop production paralyzed. Water shortages Western and Coast in towns

1981 Eastern Province Famine1983 Countrywide Water shortages, migration of people

and livestock1984 Central, R. Valley, Eastern Large food deficits

and North Eastern Provinces1987 Eastern and Central Provinces Severe food shortages in Eastern Province.1992–1994 Northern Central, Relief food imported

Eastern Provinces.1999–2000 Countrywide except for 4.7 million people dependent on food relief

Western Province and coastal belt

Source: GoK / UNEP (2001).

Table 8. Drought incidences in Kenya.

The current agricultural land-use practicesin the ASAL are attributed to the absence ofa comprehensive land-use policy. Continuedcultivation of very fragile and ecologicallyunsuitable land will degrade and render theland unproductive. A great threat tosustainable use of the ASAL is emergingthrough subdivisions of land into group and

private ranches for settlement andagriculture, overgrazing and disposal ofwaste, especially municipal and industrialwaste.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 18



b) The impacts of desertification

Loss of productivity

Crop and pasture failures

Nationally, there is evidence that cropproduction is on the decline. After the 2000drought in central and eastern Kenya, maizeyields dropped by 36%. Only 18 millionbags were harvested against a demand for 32million bags. Localized variations are evenmore worrying. In Kirinyaga, especially thelower drier part, maize production droppedfrom 15,000 t to 2,430 t in the same year.Fodder production decreased by 60%.Cattle numbers declined from 27,220 to13,570 head between 1999 and 2000. Milkproduction fell from 60 million to 16million litres. Livestock loses in Kajiado andSamburu were high (30–40%). Drierecosystems like eastern Laikipia recordedtotal crop failure. Nationally, livestock

deaths were high: 19.4% for cattle and 16%for sheep and goats between 1998 and 2000(GoK/UNEP, 2001).

In addition Kenya experiences recurrentminor droughts every 2 to 3 years and majordroughts after 8 to 10 years. Droughtsdecimate 30 to 40% of wildlife andlivestock, 30 to 40% of crop yields, anddestroys riparian and gallery forests. Itdecimates the natural germination capacityof range grassland by 50%. During drought,livestock and wildlife concentration arounda few water points aggravates vegetation andsoil degradation. Millions of hectares offorest are lost due to forest fires, oftencaused by lightning.

When the productivity of land declines,people are threatened with food shortages.Up to 16% (about 5 million) of the popula-tion in Kenya depends on food relief (see

District Total Population in need Percent Population of food relief of population

Turkana 500,000 331,000 66Baringo 365,000 214,000 59Samburu 150,000 130,000 87Wajir 321,000 298,000 93Machakos 915,000 460,000 50Muranga 385,000 85,000 22Nyeri 653,000 80,000 12Meru South 205,252 33,000 16Embu 276,011 90,000 33Kirinyaga 455,000 100,000 22Malindi 282,062 40,000 14Kilifi 550,000 40,000 7Kwale 497,000 90,000 18

Source: GoK / UNEP (2001)

Table 9. Relief food requirements in selected districts in 2001.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 19



table 9). Not only are they unable to get onemeal a day but what is available is of verypoor quality leading to severe malnutrition.In the drier districts of Kenya, malnutritionaffects 25–30% of the population. InBaringo District 35% of the population,mainly children, are malnourished.Consequently relief food must be obtainedprimarily because of drought butdesertification worsens the situation.

Drought also has ecological side effects. Itdecimates 50% of the savannah andgrassland seeds affecting regeneration. Winderosion is accelerated and on the onset of therains, the de-vegetated surface loses soils dueto increased surface runoff (GoK/UNEP,2001).

1.4 Water resources

Water resources in Kenya consist of inlandsaline or fresh water lakes, the IndianOcean, permanent and seasonal rivers,wetlands and ponds.

The water and wetlands resources areestimated at 15 million km2; inland watersurface 11,200 km2; underground abstraction3,115 million m3 per year countrywide with a

mean yield of 5–8 m3/h depending on the rocktype. The five permanent water basins have atotal water flow of over 14,836 millionm3(IEA, 1999).

Average annual rainfall is 567 mm whichconverts to 323 billion m3 per year. It isdistributed in the basins as follows: 7.30 billionm3 in the Lake Victoria basin; 4.7 billion m3 inthe Tana River Basin; 1.39 billion m3 in theAthi–Galana Basin; 0.81 billion m3 in NorthRift Valley; and 0.74 billion m3 in Ewaso NyiroSouth (see table 10) (GoK/UNEP, 2001).

Basin Area Annual Water Water Rest yield Abstraction(km2) rainfall Strike level (m) (m3/hr) (mm3/year)

(mm3/year) level (m)

Lake Victoria 46,229 1,368 51 19 5 9.3Rift Valley 130,452 562 87 55 7 11.7Athi River 66,837 739 84 41 7 27.8Tana River 126,026 697 75 39 7 4.8Ewaso Nyiro 210,226 411 89 53 5 3.7

Source: GoK/UNEP, 1997

Table 10. Aquifer and abstraction characteristics of the drainage basins in Kenya

Lake Victoria from Dunga Beach. Inset: Thewater hyacinth

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 20



However, the water resources are unevenlydistributed. According to the WorldResources Institute report for the year 2000,the internal renewable water resource wasestimated at 20 km3 translating to per capitaper annum of 673 m3. The rankingeffectively puts Kenya in the “chronic watershortage state” category. The 2.9% annualpopulation growth, and over-dependenceon a diminishing water resource, will pushKenya beyond the water barrier of less than5 m3 per capita per annum by the year 2025.

The use of the national water resources varyfrom place to place but is estimated to bedistributed in use as follows: 65% agriculture,18% domestic, 13% industrial and 4% otherfunctions. In rural areas, an average of 49% ofthe population has access to safe drinkingwater compared to 67% in urban areas. Accessto proper sanitation services is 81% in ruraland 69% in urban areas (GoK/UNEP, 2001).

Water abuse

Water resources face threats from pollution,siltation, reclamation, pesticides, fertilizers,weed attack and human-related activities. Themajor threat is contamination from municipaland industrial effluent, and through leakageinto the main water streams. Table 11 gives asummary of such problems.

Degradation of water resources is attributedto inappropriate farming methods thatreduce the land cover, encourage soil erosionand permit heavy siltation of the rivers. Theapplication of poor farming methods is aresult of excess pressure on land resourcesarising from rapid population increase.Pesticide application also pollutes the water.

Secondly, the use of water bodies as dumpingsites for domestic, urban, industrial andagricultural waste pollutes water resources. Theabsence of an effective legal policy and

Table 11. Current surface and aquifer water status in Kenya.

Type of water Approximate Current Threat typeresources area (km2) problems

Lakes 17,500 Hyacinth attack Pollution, siltation, chemicals, weed, population, eutrophication

Rivers 2,500 Varied Pollution, siltation, irrigationSwamps 120 floods Flood water, pollution, siltationEstuaries 20 Silt SiltationMudflats 15 Mud flowsLagoons 10 Silt SiltationMarshes 50 Floods FloodsPonds 40 Silt SiltationBogs 12 Silt SiltationFlood plains 150 floods Floods, pollutionUnderground Aquifers Uncontrolled exploitation

Total 20,400


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 21



institutional framework to provide standardsfor water use, and a lack of incentives for goodpractices are other causes. However, with theenactment of the Environment Managementand Coordination act in 1999, there is apromising future.

Consequences of water abuse

The volume of water in permanent rivers likethe Tana, Mara, Athi and Kerio has reduced byhalf. Over the last 7 years, the Ewaso NgiroRiver has not been flowing continuously belowArchers Post. Studies show that a substantialnumber of streams particularly in ASALs haveceased to flow. Even in high-potential areaspreviously permanent streams have nowbecome seasonal (GoK, 1997).

Kenya had a water deficit of 704,522 m3 inthe year 2000 as shown in table 12.

Declining water volumes have also beenwitnessed on Lakes Turkana and Nakurudirectly affecting the economic lifeline ofthe local people. Whereas tourism wasaffected around Lake Nakuru because ofmigration of flamingo, the fishing industryat Kalokol on Lake Turkana collapsed as thecatch declined and the shoreline moved 6km away from the only cooling and fish-processing plant.

Decline in quality

All the major rivers, lakes and the ocean facea constant danger of siltation followingincreased soil erosion especially during therainy seasons. Tonnes of soil made looseduring the dry season are washed into thestreams decreasing water level and quality.Sub-basins with high sediment yield includeLusumu, Nyando, Luanda, Perkera, Karya,Ndarugu, Athi, Saigon Maragwa and upperEwaso Ngiro. The overall trend issummarized in table 13.

Province Water deficit (m3/day)

North-Eastern 86,020Eastern 281,516Coast 76,241Rift Valley 197,544Central 63,200

Source: GoK 1997.

Table 12. Water deficits in selectedprovinces in Kenya.

Actual levelParameter Desired level 1963 1974 1984 1999 2000Colour colourless colourless colourless slightly coloured highly

coloured turbid colouredTurbidity clear clear clear turbid very turbidSediment Load nil nil slight moderate heavy heavyTotal Dissolved normal normal fair moderate moderate very highSolids increase increase increase

Bacteriological no pathogenic little little little gross gross Contamination bacteria contamin. contamin. contamin. contamin. contamin.Biological oxygen less than 5mg/l 5–20 10–20 20–40 40–60 60+demand

Source: GoK, 1999.

Table 13. Water quality in Kenya, 1963–2000

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 22



Water quality is further degraded by organicand inorganic liquid effluent, gaseous emissionsand solid wastes. Sewage matter and garbage,sediment tailings from mines, from agriculture,urbanization and industry continuously pollutewater resources in Kenya. Intrusion of salinewater at the Coast, leachates from solid-wastedumps such as heavy metals, acids, dyes and oilsand infiltration of fertilizer and pest residuesthreaten ground water sources. Rivers areheavily laden with pathogens and decomposedorganic matter while lakes and reservoirs sufferfrom eutrophication and acidification. Groundwater and some rivers have an additionalproblem of salinization.

The Nairobi, Ngong and Mathare Riversthat flow through the commercial andresidential parts of Nairobi are examples of

those most polluted. Nairobi River receivessewage discharge at Kariobangi, whileNgong River receives oily discharge fromindustrial area. The Rui Ruaka Riverreceives alcoholic effluent. All urban riversat the moment are incapable of dilution byself-purification. The current status ofpolution in Nairobi rivers is shown in figure 4.

Over-pumping of boreholes along the Coastintroduces salt-water into the water. Thesurface water at Bomani and Ngoda damsin Kwale District changed from fresh tosaline water.

A decline in the quality of water directly leadsto loss of biodiversity through deaths of aquaticplants and animals. The aquatic environmentdeteriorates by way of deoxygenating,

Figure 4. Polution status of Nairobi River.Source: Research data by Masibo, 1993.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 23



eutrophication, siltation, habitat modificationand toxicity. Eutrophication leads toimmediate overgrowth of invader life formssuch as the water hyacinth on Lake Victoriaand in Nairobi Dam.

Water-related economic activities likefishing declined or collapse. The scenicbeauty is lost, as is the case for NairobiDam. The cost of supplying water rises dueto expensive treatment of the pollutedsources. There are also health problems withthe emergence of water-borne diseases suchas typhoid and cholera, as well as chemicalpoisoning in humans and animals.

Increase in conflicts

Water use conflicts arising from shortages ofwater for domestic, industrial and irrigationuse abound in Kenya. For example the useof Lake Naivasha for watering Maasailivestock has been curtailed by irrigatedflower farming. In the Ewaso Nyiro RiverBasin, conflicts arise from the expansion ofirrigated horticulture upstream denyingpastoralists and small-scale farmersdownstream sufficient water.

Further, conflicts revolve around extractionand supply of water to urban areas at the

In the Naro Moru area, large-scale farmersand saw millers caused immense economiclosses to the farmers’ downstream of RiversBurguret and Naro Moru. In March 2001,the Tam Trout fish farms in Nyeri District—the only cold-water farming and breedingfirm in Kenya that imports fish fingerlingsfrom South Africa and Denmark—incurredmassive losses of fish. Fresh trout thrives onlyunder 15°C. The water diversion upstreamby horticultural farmers and self-help projectsincreased temperatures as the level of riverwater dropped. Over 50% of trout fish died.According to Francis Mureithi, whereas fishtrout farmers returned 100% of water intothe river, other farmers upstream were usingmore than 190% of harvested water thusleading to rapid decline in water flowingdownstream. The incident resulted in the lossof 26 jobs. He argued for the need to sharethe scarce resource through controlledirrigation activities upstream.

Water-use conflicts on Naro Moru River

In pastoral areas, clashes over water arecommon. The case in point is the Pokomoand Wardei fatal conflicts in July 2001 in theTana River Delta. Conflicts over irrigationwater are a growing threat in high-potentialareas where farmers upstream abstract waterleaving little for users downstream. Thegovernment had to ban irrigation in badlyaffected areas, especially in the upper EwasoNgiro Basin. However, large-scale farmers inNyeri continued irrigating ready to pay thepaltry fine of Kenya Shillings 5.00 stipulatedin the Water Act. In 2000, water-relatedclashes left two people dead in Kirinyaga. Inthe same year, one farmer was prosecuted forover abstraction in the Yatta Canal. Thetension between the big flower farmers andsmall irrigators, ranchers and pastoralistsmight soon explode in Laikipia District.

Pastoral-agrarian clashes on Tana River

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 24



Samwel Kinyua of Wai Wai area nearNanyuki owns a 2.5-hectare farm on whichhe grows Snow peace, French beans, chilliesand Baby corns using irrigation water fromRiver Sirimon. Since 1991 water flowdownstream has declined drastically due toforest destruction that has ruined thecatchment area upstream and overabstraction.

According to Mr. Kinyua, large farms of over3,000 hectares upstream use four-indexsystems for drawing water from Sirimon orthe seasonal Nyarigino Rivers.Consequently, the smallholders down streamhave been forced to invest in drip irrigation

systems and will need a dam to harvest waterto sustain their livelihoods. By 1998 farmerswere using furrow irrigation but demand forwater was higher than supply. The year 2000was particularly dry yet the big farmsdiverted water to reservoirs (dams) upstreamfor irrigating flowers.

Early in 1994, water users in Laikipia andNyeri trekked up the streams and locatedthe farmer who was abstracting water fromthe stream using big 10-inch wide pipes.The district commissioners for Laikipia andNyeri were involved in resolving theconflict.

Water use conflicts along the Sirimon River

expense of the rural people. TheNoolTuresh pipeline from Loitokitok toAthi River is a case in point. Nairobi hasexhausted the potential of the upper Athiand its next supply may be based on the

inter-basin transfer from the Tana Riverwith serious consequences. In the Tana case,critical issues are equity in extraction,supply of water and ecological balance.Damming for hydropower generation hasflattened the flood amplitude and curtailedpaddy rice-farming downstream.

1.5 Fisheries

Fishery in Kenya is a multi-billion shillingindustry. Significant incomes are generatedfrom fishing for local consumption andexport, or as a recreational sport. Manypeople are dependent upon fisheries foremployment. The national trends are shownin figure 5.

Countrywide around 1 million peopledepend on fisheries for their livelihood. Ofthese, 15,000 artisan fishermen are at themarine fishery and 450,000 persons areengaged directly or indirectly in fishprocessing or fish mongering at variouslevels. The level of marine resource use issummarized in table 14.

Water use conflicts arising from shortages

for domestic, industrial and irrigation

use abound in Kenya.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 25

Fishing on Lake Victoria is a decliningenterprise characterized by vicious conflictsamong fishermen, fish processors andfishmongers.

a) Fishing on Lake Victoria

According to the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP), thefishery of Lake Victoria faces at least threefundamental problems:• uncontrolled and rapidly increasing

fishing • uncontrolled spread of the water

hyacinth, and• general degradation of the lake’s

environmentFisheries management concerns fall undertwo broad categories. First, are those thatappear to be generated within the fisherysector itself. The majority of fish species inLake Victoria are restricted in their

movement by habitat-type. With localizedover-fishing, recoloni-zation by the nearestneighbour stocks can be a slow process.Secondly, many fish species are over-fishedat or near breeding grounds during thebreeding season. Furthermore, beach seinesand nets of small mesh sizes (some as smallas 20 mm) are widely used around the lake.

Uncontrolled exploitation of the Nile perchis a major problem. Data show that past



Species Number Total population Main usecounted estimate

Sea turtle 500–600 800–1,000 Hunted for food, ornamental and medicinal (asthma) value

Dudong 8–16 25–30 Food, medicine, lamp fuel, charms, Ornaments and aphrodisiac properties

Whale 0 Humpback group Oil, meat, gelatine, aphrodisiac propertiessighted in deep seasOctober 1994

Dolphin 3,000–4,000 12,000–15,000 Oil, meat, gelatine, aphrodisiac propertiesShark 25–30 60–80 Oil, meat, gelatine, aphrodisiac propertiesWhale shark 60–80 130–230 Oil, meat, gelatine, aphrodisiac propertiesRay 60–100 140–200 Not known

Source: GoK/UNEP, 1997.

Table 14. Marine counts of selected animals.

250

200

150

100

50

0

1989 1991

Period

Vol

ume

(‘000

) to

nnes

1993 1995 1997

Figure 5. Trends in fish exploitation inKenya, 1989–1997.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 26



A dealer in “mgongo wazi” fish remains from processing factories in Kisumu.

high fishing rates cannot be sustained. Itshould be appreciated that problems arisebecause the three East African countrieshave difficulties in enforcing existinglegislation owing to lack of a regionalapproach. It should also be recognized thatthe lake’s fishery which was multispeciesprior to the 1970’s has since the 1980’s beendominated by three species Lates niloticus,Rasstrineobola argentea and Oreochromisniloticus.

“With the revival of the East AfricanCommunity there is now an opportunity forthe development of a regional approach tothe management of such shared resources, asthe fisheries of Lake Victoria. TheCommunity has recognized this as a majorarea for cooperation and one of the majorregional organizations created so far hasresponsibility over Lake Victoria.”

Within the framework of regionalcooperation, the three countries of EastAfrica are implementing a joint programfunded by the World Bank and known asthe Lake Victoria EnvironmentalManagement Program (LVEMP). Thisprogram also provides an opportunity for aregional approach to the management ofLake Victoria and its fisheries.

The water hyacinth, a problematic aquaticweed, invaded the lake and has beenspreading at an alarming rate choking bays,inlets and channels that are breeding areasfor fish. The water hyacinth uses up most ofthe oxygen in the water making the areabelow its mats anaerobic. Fish cannotsurvive under such conditions. The weedalso physically interferes with fishingactivities, transport and recreation. Relatedto the water hyacinth problem aremounting levels of planktonic algae in manyparts of the lake. If blooms of such algae

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 27



occur, the result would be anoxic conditionsin the bottom waters of the lake, whichendangering marine diversity.

Some sound fishery management instrumentsexist. The main challenge is for the regionalcountries to enhance their use.

1.6 Wetlands

Wetlands are areas of marsh, fen, peat landor water. They could be natural or artificialand the water permanent or temporary,static or flowing, fresh, brackish or saline.Wetlands include areas of marine waterwhose depth during low tide must notexceed 6 m.

In Kenya, wetlands cover marine, coastaland inland habitats that consist of deltas,estuaries, mangrove swamps, marinemudflats and marshes, swamps, bogs,floodplains, shallow lakes and edges of deeplakes and rivers. Marine wetlands includesea grass beds and coral reefs as long as theyare not deeper than 6 m.

The most important wetlands in Kenya areswamps, estuaries, floodplains and mangroves.Notable swamps include the papyrus areasaround lakes Naivasha and Victoria and onmajor rivers like Ewaso Ngiro River. Othersare confined to bottomlands within areas likethe Kisii highlands and the Uasin Gishuplateaus. Estuarine wetlands occur at themouth of the Sabaki River that has mangroveforests. The Tana Delta also forms inland ox-bow lakes and marshes besides the mangroveforest. Riverbanks that are frequently floodedform the commonest floodplain wetlands.

The benefits and functions of wetlands includeground-water recharge, flood control,shoreline stabilization, erosion control,sediment and toxicant retention, nutrientretention, biomass export, windbreaks as wellas recreation and tourism spots. They are alsohabitats for fish spawning, forage reserves forlivestock, provide agricultural land, supplywater and are biodiversity reserves.

The major threats to wetlands is reclamationinto farmland (Bunyala, Yala, Tana River) andpollution (Nakuru, Naivasha, Winam Gulf).

Wetland (swamp) on Uasin Gishu Plateau.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 28



1.7 Wildlife resources

Kenya has diverse and abundant wildliferesources. They include national parks,reserves and other protected areas that coverclose to 44,564 km2 or 7.5% of the nationalarea. Table 15 shows the various conservationsites by regions (KWS, 1998).

Most of the parks and reserves are small withcomplete ecosystems. The two TsavoNational Parks form 48% of the totalprotected wildlife conservation areas, 90% ofwhich are located in the ASAL regions where,unfortunately, crop production is expanding(GoK, 1992).

The resurgence of community-basedprivately owned parks is likely to change the

wildlife resources scenario. Private groupranches where wildlife are raised for variousreasons increased to 25 in 1999. Owing todiverse conservation strategies animal densityin different group ranches varies. The numberof wildlife conserved is however increasingbut in diminishing proportions (figure 6).

Between late 1980s and the early 1990s,trends in wildlife showed a decline of 1.14%.A subsequent decline of 6.2% was recordedbetween the early 1990s and the late 1990s. Areport by the Department of ResourceSurveys and Remote Sensing shows thatwildlife populations between 1977 and 1990declined at the rate of 3.2% annually. A 1998report suggested that the decline was 0.7%annually.

Region Conservation site

Coast Diani/Chale, Kisite, Malindi, Mombasa, Mpunguti, Watamu, Arabuko Sokoke, Boni, Dodori, Kiunga, Shimba Hills, Tana River

Western Impala, Mt. Elgon, Nasalot, Ndere Island, Ruma, Saiwa Swamp,South Turkana, Kakamega Forest

Northern Central Island, Malkamari Sibiloi, South Island, Losai, Marsabit

Eastern Meru, Bisaanadi Bufallo Springs, Kora, Mwingi Rahole, Sambu, Shaba

Central Rift Hells Gate, Lake Nakuru, Mt. Longonot, Keio Valley, Lake Bogoria, Lake Kamnarok, Masai Mara

Mountain Aberdare, Mt. Kenya, Mwea

Tsavo Tsavo East, Tsavo West, Chyulu Hills, South Kitui

Southern Amboseli, Nairobi, Ol Donyo Sabuk, Namanga Forest, Ngong Forest

Source: KWS, 1998.

Table 15. Wildlife conservation sites in Kenya.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 29



12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0

Period

1988 1991 19921990 1993 1994 19961995 1997

MarulaSoysambuKongoniKekopeyMaluLaittolia

Figure 6. Wildlife trends in selected ranches in Nakuru District.

Source: KWS, 1998.

a) Human–wildlife conflicts

The human–wildlife conflict is intensewhere croplands border national parks suchas in Imenti, Nyeri, Trans Mara, Kwale,Kimana, Leroghi and Taita Taveta (see table16). Most wildlife–human conflicts occur inareas where land uses are not compatiblewith wildlife conservation.

The broad categories of conflicts involvedamage by wildlife on human beings, crops

and livestock on one hand, while on theother hand, humans causing damage towildlife through poaching and destroyingthe habitat. For example between 1989 and1994 poaching for ivory caused 40% ofelephant mortality. Human settlement leadsto conflicts when wildlife invade farmlands,destroy crops and kill people. In addition,conflicts in the management and ownershipof wildlife resources may lead to loss ofproperty, life and also interest in wildlifeconservation.

Region Area

Coast Shimba hills (Kwale District), Arabuko-Sokoke Forest (Kilifi District)

Amboseli/Tsavo Voi, Mbololo, Bura, Mjukini (Taita Taveta District), Rombo and Kimana (Kajiado District)

Mt. Kenya Abedares, Mt Kenya, Nyeri, Muiga, Imenti, and parts of Laikipia

Narok/Trans Mara entire district but minimal in Mau

Source: KWS, 1998.

Table 16. Areas prone to human–wildlife conflicts

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 30



1.8 Mineral resources

The first records of geology and mineralresources in Kenya were kept towards theend of the 19th Century. Between 1914 and1915 a temporary colonial office wasestablished specifically to investigate aportion of the Northern Frontier District.In 1932 a permanent geological survey wasincorporated in the mines department. Itstill functions to date.

The geological survey and assessment ofminerals revealed that the mining industryin Kenya is small. The endowment ofminerals is varied. It includes metallicminerals such as gold, copper, lead, silverand zinc. Non-metallic minerals includediamonds, gemstone, ruby, sapphire, garnetand other hydrocarbons that occur in traceamounts. Though petroleum energy is notextracted anywhere, geothermal potential isenormous. Industrial minerals such as talc,flouspar, limestone, soda ash, gypsum anddolomite exist. However, mining ishampered by poor accessibility to deposits,legal setups, financial and technicalrequirements, lack of markets and lack oflarge, mineral deposits to warrant majorcapital investments.

Currently, non-metallic minerals dominatethe mining industry. The government doesnearly all the exploratory work. Silica sandfor glass is mined in southern Kenya.Titanium has been discovered at the Coastbut exploitation has generated legalcontroversy over compensation to the localland users. Table 17 summarises theminerals found in different parts of Kenya.

Human-wildlife conflictin MweigaIn Mweiga area, John Njoroge grewTuber Rose flowers, drawing water fromRiver Honi 5 kilometres away. Wildlifehave invaded his farms destroyingcabbages, flowers and beans. He citedKamatongu and Solio areas as notoriousspots for destruction of crops byelephants. He claims that farmers werenever compensated for loss of crops butwhen they reacted against thedestructive animals, the Kenya WildlifeServices personnel rushed to punish themembers of the community. Tocompound the problem farm producesuch as onions and milk do not fetchgood prices. The major market outlet,which was the main milk organizationin the country, collapsed.

Burchel’s Zebra in Tsavo National Park.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 31



32

Geological Representatives Type Approximate Associated economic mineralsAge age in million

of yearsBedded rocks Intrusive rocks Up to 1/40 Recent soils, alluvial, beachsands, Magadi soda tona, salt, kaolin, brickearth, clay,lake, hot spring sand, manganese, gypsum, guano,deposits mineral pigments, meerschaum, cacum,

diamonds, sapphires, ilmenite,monazite, rutile, zircon, nitre

Pleistocene Raise coral reef and Up to 2 Limestone, Diatomite, Gypsum, Pumice,sand stone at the Pozzolana, Bentonitic clays, Manganese,Coast, Rift Valley, & Kaolin (sulphur, cement-stones)other inlandsediments, somevolcanic rocks of thehighlands & Nort-Eastern & EasternProvinces

Tertiary Coastral sediments Alkaline syenites, 2–25 Limestone, Carbon dioxide, buildingand sediments of ijolites etc. of volcanic stone, road stoned ballast, bentoniticNoth-Eastern Kenya centers such as clays, pazzolana, lead, barytes, fluorite,

Mt. Kenya, rural etc. (zinc, cinnaber, nepheline, apatite,Carbonalities of South- pyrochlore, monazite, wollastonite)western Kenya

Cretaceous Coastal sediments & Ijolites & alkaline, 60–120 Managanese, Pyrochlore, rare earthsediments of North- syenites of jombo at mineralsEastern Kenya the Coast & Eastern

Kitui. Alkaline dykes atthe Coast & in EasternKenya Carbonatite atMirima (Coast)

Jurassic Coastal sediments & 120–150 Limestone, shells, (for cement &sediments of North ceramics) gypsum, ballastEastern Kenya

Trassic Sediments of the 150–250 BallastPermian coast hinterland.Carboniferous Sediments of North

Eastern KenyaPrecambrian Kisii series (Bukoban Dolerites Pegmatites in 500–600 Mica, piezo electric, quartz, samarskite,

system) sediments the basement system, columbite, beryl, felspar, amblygoniteand volcanic of Gabbros of Western bismuth, ilmenorutile, amazonite, zinc,south Western Kenya; dunites spinel, flourspar, rare earth mineralsKenya. Embu series chromie, gamierite, magnesite,– metamorphosed ermicusite, corundum, sapphire,sediments, central vcolivine.Kenya Ablun series,Metamorphosedsediments, NorthEastern Kenya

Precambrian Basement system – Norite & allied rocks, 600+ Limestone, marble, wollastonite,gneisses & schists minor peridotites, kyanite, asbestos, magnesite, dolomitic

pyroxenites & granites limestones, garnet, rutile, ilmentinePrecambrian Kavirondian system, Granite, syenitics & 2,2000 Gold, Silver, (Molybdenite)

sediments & doleritesvolcanics of SouthWestern Kenya

Precambrian Nyanzian system Granites, epidorites 2,200+ Gold, copper, zinc, silver, pyrite,sediments & (cobalt, schelite, arsenic, fluorite)volcanics of SouthWestern Kenya

Source: GoK, 1989; Mineral Development Policy in Kenya.

Table 17: Geological succession and economic minerals in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 32

1.9 Energy

Kenya derives much of its energy resourcesfrom biomass which provides about 19% ofthe total energy required by the domesticand industrial sector. Electricity generatedwithin the country contributes nearly 5.1%.Between 1992 and 1995, the averageelectricity production was 20,497Terajoules, of these 403 were imported (UNWorld Energy, 1997). All petroleumproducts derived from crude petroleum areimported. On the other hand use of coaland lignite in industries has remainedconstant (see table 18).

Energy consumption varies between sectors(see figure 7). The household sectorconsumes the highest amount of biomassenergy. Of the total energy imports,petroleum accounts for the highestpercentage. All the imported coal is used inindustry. Most of the electricity generatedlocally is used by industries, which accountfor 64% while households consume lessthan 36%. Light petroleum is mainly usedby both the industrial and transport sectors.

Production of electricity has been increasingsince 1987 following privatization and anincrease of power generating plants by 25%.Despite the increase in electricityproduction, supply has constantly laggedbehind demand. This in effect hinders theachievement of the desired industrializationgoals. Power distribution is in favour ofurban areas. The distribution in the ruralareas is geographically biased and thereforelikely to add to the existing tension andconflicts.



Figure 7. Average energy consumption bysectors, 1992–1995.Source: Insitute of Economic Affairs, 1999.

Energy products ( in Terajoules)

Energy Hardcoal Crude Light Heavy Other Electricity Primary TotalProduction & lignite petroleum petroleum petroleum petroleum biomass& use products

Primary - - - - - 20,497 324,698 344,698production

Imports 3,839 87,950 913 2,372 2,234 403 - 97,737Exports - - -8,319 -15,118 -926 - -

Total Energy 3,839 87,950 -9,998 -19,330 1,308 20,901 324,200 408,851Requirements

Source: UN World Energy, 1997.

Table 18. Average energy production and consumption, 1992–1995.

Industry

Transport

Household& others

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 33



The largest source of energy in Kenya isbiomass particularly from fuelwood, obtainedfrom forests, woodlands, shrubs and on-farmtrees (see table 19). Indigenous forests have apotential sustainable supply of 0.9 m3/haannually. The Kenya Forestry Master Planestimate the average growing stock of thewoodlands, bushlands and wooded grasslandsis about 15.9 m3/ha of woody biomass, anannual increment of 0.115 m3/ha. Fuelwoodproduction from wood-lands and bushlandsis 89%. The sustainable annual fuelwoodproduction is only 2% .

In the rangelands, charcoal production is amajor source of income and increases inintensity among subsistence farmers whenother types of activities fail to providesufficient household income, particularlyduring extended periods of drought.

At least 80% of urban fuel used byhouseholds is from charcoal. Charcoal useamounts to about 1.4 million t annually. Theyields vary from 10% to 14% by weight thusrequiring 10–14 million t of wood. Kenya’scharcoal is mainly produced from trees, onsemi-arid lands and cleared agricultural land.About 90% of Nairobi’s charcoal supplycomes from Eastern and Rift Valley

Provinces. Kisumu’s charcoal comes fromWestern and Rift Valley Provinces, whilemuch of Mombasa’s charcoal comes from theNortheastern and Coast Provinces.

a) Over-reliance on biomass energy

Table 20 shows the heavy reliance onfuelwood as a source of energy in Kenya. Themajority of households and the small- andmedium-scale processing industries heavilyrely on wood fuel.

In 1988, fuelwood provided 63% of thenation’s primary energy requirements. Thetotal gross demand was 19.9 million t made upof 13.4 million t or 69% of fuelwood, 6.1million t of charcoal (29%) and 0.4 million tof industrial feedstock (2%). By 2001, at least80% of urban fuelwood demand byhouseholds is made up of charcoal (1.4 milliont annually) which requires 10–14 million t ofwood to produce (GoK/UNEP, 1997).

In urban areas charcoal is largely for domesticand industrial uses. Urban dwellers have ahigher energy demand than rural householdswho consume about 50% of the charcoalsupply. Kenya’s industry sector—brewing,butcheries, bakeries, brick making,

Source Area Wood stock Sustainable Product(million ha) (m3/ha) harvest

(m3/ha)

Indigenous forest 1.2 176 1.76 fuelwoodWoodlands and shrublands 37.6 16 0.12 charcoalFarmlands and settlements 9.5 8 0.46 charcoalForest plantations 0.17 347 69.4 timber

Source: Institute of Economic Affairs, 1997.

Table 19. Sources of fuelwood in Kenya.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 34



blacksmiths, fish smoking, tobacco curing,food drying—consumes about 20% of thecountry’s fuelwood. Informal industries useabout 11%. Overall, the commercial andinstitutional sector that includes schools,hospitals, hotels, prisons and offices accountfor about 1% of the total wood energy usedin Kenya.

Product Quantity Percentage(tonnes (%)

equivalent)

Coal and coke 79.0 0.9Petroleum 1,809.1 21.7Electricity 661.4 7.8Fuelwood 5,957.8 70.0

Total 8,507.3 99.6

Source: GoK/UNEP 1992.

Table 20. Pattern of energy use in Kenya.

Charcoal production in Kapsaret Forest, Uasin Gishu.

Traditional forest- and farm-based woodsupplies are consumed faster than they arereplaced. The consequence is severeenvironmental degradation. If more woodis harvested from the forests every yearthrough gathering and cutting, charcoalmaking and pulpwood production, orthrough land clearing for agriculture, thenforests will eventually disappear. Clearing ofland for agricultural use, overgrazing andfuelwood collection have aggravated thisprocess.

Fuelwood demand is expected to rise to57.3 million t by the year 2005, while thesupply of fuelwood from these areas willdecline from 14.7 to 12 million t causing adeficit of 27.5 million t. The rise in demandis shown in table 21.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 35



Fuelwood consumption, is considered amajor cause of de-vegetation and degradationof woody resources. Woody biomass conti-nues to be the predominant source of fuel forhouseholds, rural industries, and urbancommercial establishments. Even in drought-prone regions, with relatively small and

scattered human populations, de-vegetationhas outpaced the ability of the system tosufficiently renew wood. Cities in theseregions are pressure points for landdegradation. Very few institutions andhouseholds use biogass energy.

Year 1995 2000 2005 2010

Fuelwood demand 20,107 23,947 27,693 31,720Accessible sustainable supply 1,665.5 1,143.0 1,120.5 1,098.0Indigenous forest 10,585.4 10,507.6 10,429.8 10,353.0Woodlands/bushlands 6,145.8 7,746.2 9,417.7 11,079.4Farmlands/settlements 353.5 415.6 351.9 360.8Forest plantationsTotal fuelwood supply 18,250.2 19,812.4 21,319.9 22,890.2Deficit* 1,856.8 4,134.6 6,373.1 8,829.8


Table 21. Trends in fuelwood demand and supply (million t) in Kenya.

Biogass in Kapsabet, Nandi.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 36

Land abuse issues in Kenya 37


2.1 Soil erosion

Soil erosion is both an ecological and socio-economic problem. Erosion in cultivated landis closely related to rainfall, landform, soiltype, land use and the level of conservationmeasures. The areas with the greatest riskinclude steep slopes, land usually bare beforethe onset of rains, soils with surface sealingproblems that encourage runoff, bad tillagepractices such as cultivating up and downslopes, exposure during periods of heavy rainor wind, and inappropriate land use andcultivation of marginal lands.

Erosion on pasturelands especially in ASALis on the increase because of overgrazing.The major erosion types are rill, gully andriverbank. Areas prone to gullies include bareland, animal tracks, faulty road drainage

structures and neglected rills and furrows. Upto 35% of the sediment load from 61catchments in Kenya originates from roadsidegullies. An equal amount is derived fromfootpaths and cattle tracks. The risk of streambank and bed erosion is high where thestreams and rivers flow through alluvial plainswith little vegetation cover. Where vegetationis lush, there is minimal risk. Where streamsand rivers flow over rocky beds and banks, therisk is similarly minimal. The hazardsassociated with water erosion are summarizedin figure 8.

Chapter TwoLand abuse in Kenya

Soil erosion in Mwingi.

CN

RM

The areas with the greatest risk include

steep slopes, bare land, bad tillage practices

and cultivation of marginal lands.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 37

Land abuse in Kenya38


Figure 8. The hazards of water erosion in Kenya.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 38

Land abuse in Kenya 39


a) Causes of erosion

Two processes drive water and soil erosion.The first is the loosening or detaching of thetopsoil particles when large raindrops fallfollowing splash erosion which occurs whenvegetation cover is removed and the soilsurface is directly exposed to raindropimpact. If this occurs on slopping ground,the splashed soil particles move downhill.

The scouring effect of surface runoff appearsin the form of sheet erosion, whichprogresses unobserved because the wholesurface of the field is gradually erodeduniformly. The only evidence is when theroots of trees or crops or bottoms of fenceposts are exposed. At this stage thelandowner has already lost tonnes of the topproductive soil.

Secondly, the transportation of suchdetached particles by the flowing water ischaracterized by rill erosion, which beginswhen small, shallow surface flow starts toconcentrate in low spots on the soil surface.As the flow changes from sheet to deeperflow in these low areas, the velocity andturbulence of the flow increases thusdetaching and transporting soil particles.This action begins to cut tiny channelscalled rills that are usually a few centimetersdeep. If uncontrolled it could lead to gullyerosion when water runoff cuts rills deeperand wider, or when the flow from severalrills come together and form a largechannel. Also, large chunks of soil can fallfrom a gully headwall in a process calledmass wasting.

Soil erosion occurs when farming practicesprovide a medium for the two processes to

take place. De-vegetation through shiftingcultivation, clearance for land, overstockingand overgrazing provide such a medium.Other malpractices that promote soil lossinclude deep ploughing of land, lack of croprotation, as well as ploughing and plantingdown the contour. In such areas with deepsoils and high rainfall, landslide erosionprevails because rainwater infiltratesvertically into the soil up to the bedrock andthen moves laterally along the bedrockcausing the soil at the outlet to slide. Thisphenomenon is common along the sides ofgullies. It can happen without theintervention of human activity.

In the arid and semi-arid lands, anothercause of water erosion arises from openingup saline and alkaline soils. These soil typesare inherently of poor structural stabilityand when vegetation is cleared and soil isexposed to heavy raindrops, the particlesdetach faster accelerating soil loss and theland rapidly become gullies. The gullies insuch soils are difficult to heal once they aredeveloped. Similarly wind erosion isprevalent in such conditions. It occurswhere the land has loose, dry and fine soil.

Such landscapes also have a smooth surfacedue to sparse or no vegetation. A study ofthe erosivity index in Kenya shows that thehighest risk of wind erosion is to be foundamong some humid and sub-humidclimates within the ASAL. In such places,there is a high load of sand suspended in theatmosphere. Table 22 shows that the highestincidences of wind erosion are most likely tooccur in Marsabit, Moyale, Wajir andGarissa. The lowest risk is found aroundMakindu and Voi.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 39

Land abuse issues in Kenya40


The above scenario has a negative impact onproductivity, causes pollution and reducesthe economic value of land.

b) Consequences of soil erosion

Loss of productivity

The productivity of a piece of land isdemonstrated by the capacity of the soil toproduce crops. When the soil is eroded,there is a general decrease in the reservoir ofexchangeable nutrients absorbed by the

plants for their metabolism and growth.When this reservoir is truncated and washedaway, so is the source of nutrients makingthe remaining sub-soil less fertile and lesssuitable to support optimal plant growth.Loss of topsoil is therefore directly a loss ofthe best reservoir of soil nutrients.

Similarly, when the topsoil is removed, itmeans loss of the soil moisture-storagecapacity. The loss arises from changing thesoil water-holding characteristics of therooting zone (which is reduced in volume

Gully erosion in Nyando area, Kisumu.

Station Lodwar Mandera Moyale Marsabit Makindu Voi Wajir Garissa

Annual potential 99.2 62.1 86.5 828.6 23.2 64.8 104.9 144.9sand movement (m/s)3

Risk rating *mod. mod. mod. high low low mod. mod.

*moderate

Source: GOK/UNEP 1997.

Table 22. Sand movement potential in Kenya.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 40


41

Silt-laden Tana River in the lower course.

via truncation) limiting the water-holdingcapacity. This leads to reduced plantgrowth due to limited moisture. At thesame time, a larger proportion of theprecipitation is lost as runoff causing moreerosion and destructive floods. Plantsgrown on such eroded soils wither due tolack of moisture and nutrients leading tosignificant drops in yields.

With the removal of the topsoil, thestructure of the soil becomes poorerleading to the formation of soil clods. Theclods then facilitate the development ofsurface sealing and crusting limiting plantgermination. The crusts and seals also

reduce water infiltration, promotingrunoff and subsequent flooding.

Polluton of water systems

In 1965, the Tana River and Athi–Galana–Sabaki carried 250,000 and150,000 t per year of sediment respectively.By 1986 Tana River carried 2.5 million tper year while Athi–Galana–Sabaki hadrisen to 2 million t per year (KSS, 1989).This sediment loads have destroyed inlandwater bodies and marine life.

Land abuse issues in Kenya

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 41


42

Loss of economic value of land

Eroded soil is transported in the form of siltby rivers and deposited in the lakes and theocean. Over the years, silt accumulates andchanges the colour of water from clear blueto reddish brown. This is an unattractivecolour for people who organize aestheticactivities such as tourism and exclusivesettlements around water bodies. To thenorth of Sabaki River mouth, the village ofMambrui is being submerged in sand dunesand silt deposits from the river. The siltemptied in the ocean kills coral reefs anddamages marine life. Homes also have beenabandoned.

Some dams and pans have had their lifespanseverely reduced due to the acceleratedsediment deposits through erosion. Thehydro-power dams along the Tana Riverhave been silted on several occasionsreducing their capacity to generate power,leading to power rationing and frequentblackouts.

Frequently, the silt is deposited on the whitecoral beaches turning them into mudbeaches and damaging the scenic beauty.Some hotels in Malindi town have lostbusiness as tourists moved to other whitesandy beaches. Consequently jobs have beenlost and social structures disrupted.

2.2 Pollution

a) Air pollution

Air pollution arises from gaseous emissionsfrom domestic operations, powergeneration, agricultural practices,uncontrolled disposal of solid waste,industrial and vehicular emissions. Themajor sources of air pollution are industriesmanufacturing chemicals, rubber andplastics, paper mills, cement andexcavations, ceramic tiles and glass factories,and leather industries.

Vehicle emissions contain carbon dioxide,greenhouse gase (GHG), that is a cause ofglobal warming. Road and railway transportsystems in Kenya rely on fossil fuels which arelinked to high emissions of GHGs. Roadtransport accounts for 80–90% of thepassenger and freight transport and accountsfor 80% of Co2 emissions.

Air pollution from agricultural practicesinclude emissions of carbon dioxide,methane and nitrous oxide from croppinge.g. rice and sugarcane cultivation, andbagasse production. Methane emitted fromflooded rice fields due to anaerobicdecomposition of organic matter in the soilis the largest source of greenhouse gases inKenya. Others are animal husbandry—dueto enteric fermentation, manuremanagement facilities and anaerobic decay;application of synthetic manure and organicfertilizer; and burning savannah grasslandsand scrubland. Domestic sources includethe use of biomass, pit latrines and waste.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 42


43

Am

ount

(00

0) t

ons

Period

1990/91

80706050403020100

1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/5

Phosphates

Nitrogen

Potash

Figure 9. Chemical fertilizer use in Kenya.

Gaseous emission from poorly maintained vehicle.

Source: FAO, 1996.

b) Land pollution

Chemical fertilizers, pesticides and fungicidesare important in agriculture. However, theirimproper use has poisoned and compacted thesoils. Fertilizer is the dominant farm input inKenya averaging 275,270 metric tons/year.The use of industrial fertilizer is on the increase

(see figure 9). The government, in cooperationwith local non-government ogranisations andother stakeholders, is promoting the use oforganic manure, which is easy to access and isenvironmentally friendly. There are successstories on the use of organic manure amongsmallholder farmers as exemplified by theChanderema Women Group, Vihiga District.


CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 43


44

c) Water pollution

Water resources in Kenya are increasinglybecoming polluted at point and non-pointsources due to agriculture, urbanization,and industry. Intrusion of saline water in thecoastal region, leachates from solid wastedumps and infiltration of fertilizer andpesticide residues threaten ground water.The five principal sources of water pollutionin Kenya include sediments andagrochemical residues (biocides andfertilizers); industrial processing ofagriculture and forestry products whichproduce liquid effluent, gaseous emissionsand solid waste; industrial manufacturing—heavy metals, acids, dyes, oils;domestic/municipal effluents—sewage andgarbage; sedimentation—soil erosion; andmining which produces tailings andeffluents.

d) Noise pollution

Traffic generates noise. With increasingnumber of vehicles and aircraft, most urbanareas are becoming increasingly noisy. Loudmusic in public service vehicles is a publicnuisance. Other sources of noise pollutioninclude noise form factories, ballasting atquarries and mining sites.

2.3 The polluting agents

a) Persistent organic pollutants

Persistant Organic Polutants (POPs) havebecome more concentrated as they move upthe food chain and can travel for thousandsof kilometers from the point of release. The

most notorious chemicals in PoPs includeAldrin, Chlordane, DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin,Heptacle, Hexachlorobenzene, andToxaphene. Despite their worldwide ban,they are illegally used in Kenya as fertilizerand or crop protection chemicals. ThesePoPs can persist in the environment fordecades and accumulate in marine and land-based food chains posing health risks longafter exposure (see table 23).

b) Heavy metals

Heavy metals include lead, copper, zinc andmercury among others. Industrial productsmade from these metals are used in allaspects of life. Lead is used in plumbing,and insecticide and battery manufacturing;mercury is used in the preparation ofcosmetics and is a base in some painkillers.It is also used extensively in gold miningespecially in South Nyanza and Lolgorienarea of Trans Mara District.

Species Residueconcentration

(mg/kg) wet massLake BaringoTilapia nilotica 0.009Clarius mosambicus 0.019Burbus gregorii 0.028Labeo cylindicus 0.400

Lake NaivashaTilapia spirulus nigrax 0.001Micropterus salmoids 0.003

Lake NakuruTilapia grahami 0.015Latesilotica 0.004Source: UNDP/UNEP 1996.

Table 23. Reported levels of DDT residues in fish from Kenyan lakes

Land abuse in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 44


45

c) Gaseous emissions

Air pollution especially from industries is agrowing problem. The public outcry againstKEL Chemicals in Thika in 1991 is symbolicof the problem. Large concentrations areevident at Webuye where the paper and pulpfactory emits sulfur compounds into the airturning trees yellow in the region.

Mzee Moses Luyuku of Nabuyole village inWebuye says that the smoke from the paperfactory causes rusting on iron sheets within ayear of building the house. Local peoplearound Webuye say they suffer from allergiesand respiratory diseases due to gaseousemissions from the factory. Farmers have alsocomplained that crop yields have dropped byover 80% due to chemical pollution from thefactory.

Vehicle emissions contribute significantvolumes of carbon dioxide, one of the

greenhouse gases causing global warming. In1991 there were 159,000 passenger and150,000 commercial vehicles in Kenya(GoK, 1999). This figure has since increasedadding to serious air pollution in urban areas.If these cars use leaded petrol, theycontribute significantly to theaccummulation of lead in the environment.Lead is added to petrol to boost the octanerating and hence increase power. Leadpoisoning affects the brain, kidneys, thereproductive and cardiovascular systems.Also lead has residual effects incontaminating water and land resources inthe long run.

d) Liquid effluent

Chemical discharges from industries andother urban waste have degraded the freshwater sources in rivers, lakes, and other waterbodies. Such pollutants have interfered withthe flora and fauna of these areas.

Gaseous emission from the paper factory in Webuye.


CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 45


46

Sediment yield and discharge of industrialwaste into the major river systems havereduced the volume of fresh water, interferedwith fish species and wetland life forms suchas riparian forests and marshlands. Pollutionof inland fisheries has far-reachingimplications. There is a possibility that someof the health disorders suffered by humanbeings could be linked to eatingcontaminated fish.

The marine resources are prone to not onlyland-based pollution, but also to pollution byships, especially oil tankers. For example in1993, a tanker at the port of Mombasaspilled approximately 80,000 metric t of oil.The impact on the natural resources of suchoil spills is monumental. There is deliberatepollution from ships during de-ballastingand tank washing.

In 1930, scientists synthetically producedchlorofluorocarbon compounds to replacethe use of ammonia and other coolants in

refrigeration, air conditioning, aerosolpropelling and fire depressants. At the timethey were preferred due to their advantageover the leaks and explosions that wereassociated with ammonia products. Thesechemicals are unfortunately responsible forthe depletion of the ozone layer in thestratosphere above the atmosphere. Thedirect impact of reducing the protectiveozone layer has been the increase inultraviolet radiation which raises surfacetemperatures (as a result of the greenhousegas effect) causing changes in weathersystems and bringing about extreme episodesof drought and floods

e) Pesticide and nitrate contamination

Pesticides are valuable agricultural inputsused for protecting crops to increase yields.However, they also have severe effects onhealth due to their toxicity. They can causeheadaches, flues, skin diseases, blurred visionand many neurological disorders. The mostnotorious pesticides causing health problems

Liquid waste disposal into Mtoine River from Kibera/Nyayo High Rise Estate, Nairobi


CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 46


47

are organophosphates and carbamates. Mostof them are banned or restricted in useworldwide.

Together with pesticides, nitrogen fertilizersincrease yields tremendously and theirapplication in Kenya has increased five-foldsince the sixties. The dissolved nitrogen thatis not taken up by plants contaminatessurface and ground water because the excessnitrate is water-soluble and easily washeddown the soil profile by rain or irrigationwater. Water contaminated with nitrates cancause disorders in red blood cells leading toconditions of low oxygen commonly called"Blue-Baby"

2.4 Urban waste

Wastes are solid, liquid or gaseous materialsthat are discarded by people and industries.They are released carelessly into the air, waterand land as though the latter have an infinitecapacity to absorb these wastes.

a) Solid waste

Household and consumer waste are themajor component of solid municipal waste.Per capita municipal waste produc-tion inKenya is 1.2 t per annum. Solid wasteconsists of a mixture of organic materials,paper, plastics, textiles, glass, metals, ash andgrit. Food remains are solid waste. Themoisture content of household waste isgenerally high and is therefore not readilycombustible.

Packaging material, glass and plastic bottles,cans, paper clips, paper and plastic wrappings

are the major constituents of litter. The use ofnon-returnable containers has increased thevolume of litter. Furthermore, theproduction and widespread use of non-biodegradable plastics in packaging materialshas compounded the litter problem. Plasticlitter in marine environments at the Coastarises from fishing gear such as nylon, buoysand nets; packaging bands straps andsynthetic ropes; general litterbags, bottles andplastic sheering. The same litter is also foundin large inland water bodies.

Treatment of domestic and industrialwastewater at the plants yields sewage sludge.This is a type of slurry made up of fineorganic-rich particles with a high chemicalcomposition. Such sludge will require ahighly efficient system to treat and clean.Demolition of old buildings andconstruction sites also generate waste.Currently, contractors in Kenya seem to havea free hand in dumping their waste.Commercial mining sites (for instancerubies, gold, marble, cement, and soda ash)leave behind trailings and spoils. Such wastemay include soil, rock and inert dirt ortrailings from extraction that arecontaminated with metals or chemicals usedfor mining separation.

Solid waste in most urban centres in Kenya isdisposed of in open dumps or crude sanitarylandfills, burned or left to decompose inopen places. In low-income residential areas,collection is very poor and waste is disposedof by simply dumping it along streets,playing fields and in between houses.Burning is practiced in some estates leading


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 47


48 Land abuse in Kenya

to gaseous effluents like carbon dioxide,nitrogen oxide, methane and smoke. The main method used by municipalauthorities to dispose of solid waste is bycrude and unsanitary land-filling mainlybecause it is cheap and there is scarcity ofdisposal sites in most municipalities. Thesegrounds are left open and create dangeroushealth risks to both the public and animals.The collecting efficiency in most towns isvery low leaving waste uncollected at the sites,or is dropped in the wrong place.

A study by the Japan InternationalCooperation Agency reveals that in NairobiCity only 20% of the generated waste iscollected and disposed of. The rest lies alongroadsides or riverbanks. The City Councilhas over time reneged on collecting industrialwaste, which is now done by the individuals.Table 24 summarizes solid waste generationin Nairobi City.

Of the total solid waste generated in Nairobi,the largest quantities by weight are petricibles

(65.5%) followed by paper and cardboard(23%), metals (2.6%), textiles (2.6%),unclassified (3.1%), glass (1.7%) and plastics(1.5%). The per capita solid wasteproduction for Nairobi is 0.5 kg/day—a totalof 1 million t per day for a population of 2.2million (JICA, 1998).

Uncollected and or collected and untreatedsolid waste releases methane gas in to theatmosphere. The gas raises temperatures thatcause climatic change. The average methaneproduction from solid wastes in Kenyanmunicipalities is shown in table 24.

Garbage dumping site in Dandora, Nairobi

CN

RM

The main method used by municipal

authorities to dispose of solid waste is by

crude and unsanitary land-filling mainly

because it is cheap and there is scarcity of

disposal sites in most municipalities.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 48


49Land abuse in Kenya

b) Liquid waste

Liquid waste is generated from industry,service premises and domestic areas. Theycontain a wide range of chemicals andphysical components which whendecomposed generate various amounts ofgreenhouse gases, such as methane.

The amount of methane emitted dependson the organic loading in the wastewaternormally measured as the BiochemicalOxygen Demand, and the extent to whichthe material will decompose underanaerobic conditions. This is the conditionunder which sewage and industrial wastestreams are maintained.

c) Hazardous waste

This is waste whose properties may beradioactive, toxic, explosive, corrosive,flammable or infectious. The waste is likelyto harm people, livestock, crops or theenvironment either on its own or whenmixed.

In Kenya, there are no facilities to store andmove such harmful classified waste. Majortowns such as Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumuand Nakuru have facilities for storing andtransporting clinical waste from the majormedical institutions like hospitals andresearch centres, clinics, pharmaceuticalsfactories. Each medical institution is requiredby law to maintain an incineration plant fordisposing clinical wastes.

Despite the presence of such facilities andguidelines cases of careless disposal of suchclinical waste in Nairobi, like dumping it atDandora dumping site, have beenhighlighted in the print media. Expireddrugs and other waste from pharmaceuticalsis not being incinerated but instead alsodumped in Dandora.

d) The causes of inadequate waste management

The underlying causes for poor, urban wastemanagement include:

Year Population Annual municipal Annual Methane gas(million) solid waste municipal generated

generated waste disposed (tonnes)(tonnes) (tonnes)

1992 1.72 332,734 66,547 2,0501993 1.79 346,276 69,255 2,1331994 1.87 361,752 72,350 2,2291995 1.92 377,228 75,446 2,3241996 2.03 392,704 78,541 2,4191997 2.11 408,179 81,636 2,5141998 2.20 425,590 85,118 2,622

Source: JICA, 1998.

Table 24. Estimated municipal solid waste generated in Nairobi.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:30 AM Page 49



• Weak enforcement of existing laws andregulations due to inadequate humanresources and cumbersome procedures.The municipal councils and qualitycontrol organizations like thegovernment departments in theMinistry of Environment and theKenya Bureau of Standards are not ableto fully implement the provisions of theexisting statutes. Even where they maybe able to do so, the penalties stipulatedin the statutes are unrealistically low tobe a deterrent.

• The policies and laws regulating wastemanagement do not provide incentives

for individuals or companies willing toadopt efficient waste managementtechnologies. Such incentives mayinclude tax reductions, awards, access tocheaper credit facilities as well asinformation and technology. The wastemanagement and sanitation sector doesnot feature as a priority in the develop-ment agenda of the country. As such, itnever receives adequate resources orconsideration when articulatingnational development issues.

• The lack of comprehensive dischargestandards and methods of measuringthe quality and quantity of effluentmakes it difficult for any authority tocontain waste generation. This scenariohas systematically led to a situationwhere industry and urban dwellers havebecome insensitive to legal regulationson the safety of the environment andhealth. The practice of followingstandards for health and safety ofworkers at the work place has long beenignored.

Mzee Lukuyu pointing at the damaged rooffrom contaminated rain next to Webuyepaper factory.

CN

RM

In Kenya, there are no facilities to store

and move such harmful classified waste.

Major towns such as Nairobi, Mombasa,

Kisumu and Nakuru have facilities

for storing and transporting clinical waste

from the major medical institutions

like hospitals and research centres, clinics,

pharmaceuticals factories.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 50



2.5 The driving forcesbehind unsustainableland use

a) Population increase

At independence, Kenya had a totalpopulation of about 7 million people. By1979 the population had risen to 15.5million people. In 1989, it shot to almost21.5 million people. By 1999 thepopulation had reached 29 million (seefigure 9). Over the same period, the Kenyaneconomy performed poorly with noremarkable industrialization to cope withthe demands of the population. Thepopulation trend has inevitably resulted inintense pressure on the available naturalresources.

The pressure in many parts of Kenya hastriggered the cycle of degradation of forests,wildlife, water and mineral resources. The

increased number of people searching foreconomic security has led to intensificationof cultivation, expansion of cultivated land,overgrazing of the range, and harvesting oftrees for fuelwood leading to deforestationand an acute water crisis as well as loss ofbiological diversity and soil erosion.

b) Misapplication of moderntechnological innovations

Technological innovations have had positiveand negative impacts on the management ofnatural resources in Kenya. A good exampleis the National Soil and Water ConservationProgramme that was started in 1974 toconserve soils in cultivated and grazing landwithin permanent settlements. By 1987, theproject had 51 tree nurseries with an outputof 200,000 fruit tree seedlings and 2.5million forest and fodder tree seedlingsannually. These conservation efforts raisedcrop yields by between 50% and 70%. In1982, the programme had put in place2,912 km of cut-off-drains, 3,090 km ofbench terraces, 556 hectares of narrow-baseterrace, 2000 km of grass strips, 283 km ofstone terraces, 1,107 km of trash lines, 81km of artificial waterways. In addition, 714hectares of grass were planted, 1964 gulliesrehabilitated and 1,247 gabbionsconstructed. These efforts are estimated tohave conserved millions of tonnes of topsoiland soil moisture thereby expanding cropagriculture into areas then not utilized.

The second commendable effort intechnological innovations has been theblending of modern and traditionalpractices—a practice called agroforestry—in the last 10–15 years. Within the humid

Pop

ulat

ion

(in m

illio

ns)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Period

1963 1963to

1979

1980to

1989

1990to

1999

Figure 10. Trend of population increasein Kenya, 1963–1999.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 51

Land abuse in Kenya52


and semi-humid zones of Kenya, there hasbeen tremendous increase of tree cover(open-canopy forest) in the cultivated landsthrough an extension campaign based on re-vegetation of lost forests with trees that havedirect economic benefits to the household.Some areas in central Kenya, eastern(Machakos, Meru, Embu) and westernKenya (Maseno) have incorporatedtraditional knowledge and skills with newfarming technologies propagated by theKenya Forestry Research Institute, KenyaAgricultural Research Institute and theInternational Centre for Reseearch inAgroforestry, that have resulted in amazingincreases in yields.

Cases of abuse of technology have also beenreported. The irrigation technologiesadopted in places like the Kimligo–Kamlezairrigation scheme have over time depositedsalt materials on the surface rendering thesoils unproductive. If not checked, theentire scheme will experience serious soildegradation and soon end up as a wasteland.A similar fate may befall the hundreds ofhectares under small-scale and large-scaleirrigation schemes especially in the dry areasat the Coast and along the Tana and EwasoNyiro Rivers.

c) Stifling indigenous skills,technologies, knowledge andpractices

Indigenous knowledge and techniquesabound in Kenya. The Turkana pastoralistsprotect and conserve trees through ownershipof the trees by individuals and families.Pasture land near settlements is guarded bymigrant herders who cannot use the pasture

without prior permission from elders.Amongst the Suba of Nyanza, theirtraditional belief and respect for founder clanshrines has guarded against human activity.These shrines are now thick forestsalternating with farms and homesteads. TheEndo of Elgeyo Marakwet use an ancientirrigation technology that has helped themproduce bumper fruit harvests over years.

Experience shows that disregardingindigenous traditional skills has led todestruction of natural resources. When thegovernment through the Ministry ofLivestock Development introduced the"North America" model of rangemanagement by demarcating the drylandsin Turkana, Marsabit, Isiolo, Garissa, Wajirand Mandera into "Grazing Blocks", thetraditional transhumant system of seasonalmigration in search of water, pasture andthe opportunistic spread of grazing pressurewas ignored. Age old systems developed bythe Rendille, Borana, Somali and Turkanaherdsmen were regulated into designatedterritories in which the governmentundertook to develop water sources and alsodevelop social services such as schools totransform the nomads into sedentarypopulations that could be easy to governand plan for. About 40 years down the line,

The pressure in many parts of Kenya has

triggered the cycle of degradation of forests,

wildlife, water and mineral resources.

The increased number of people searching

for economic security has led to

intensification of cultivation, expansion of

cultivated land and overgrazing of the range

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 52

Land abuse in Kenya 53


this model failed and cases of severe de-vegetation and soil loss were reported overthe period. The centres for water and socialservices instead degenerated into epicentresof desertification and sanitation problemsassociated with urbanization.

By de-emphasizing the links andrelationships between people, their cultureand resources, previous and on-goingdevelopment programmes have unwittinglycontributed to the prevalent insensitivityand apathy of communities towards ‘sound’environmental and natural resourcesmanagement. Furthermore, they haveexacerbated the colonial legacy of separatingpeople from nature.

d) Natural and man-made disasters

Kenya experiences minor droughts every 2to 3 years, and major droughts after 8 to 10years. Drought decimates 30–40% of thewildlife and livestock, 30–40% of cropyields, destroys riparian and gallery forests.It decimates the natural germinationcapacity of grasslands by 50%. Livestockand wildlife concentration around a fewwater points leads to serious vegetation andsoil degradation. Millions of hectares offorest are lost due to forest fires, which moreoften are caused by lightening. After fierceforest fires, as much as 20% of the plant andanimal species are lost and never recurduring the regeneration period that follows.

Lack of alternative sources of goods andservices force people to exploit vulnerableenvironmental resources in order to meetlivelihood needs as seen in the new

settlements for conflict victims in Naivashaand Nakuru suburbs, and in refugee campssuch as Kakuma. Poor people use naturalresources in an unsustainable manner whensurvival strategies are necessary. Moreover,while many communities are aware ofenvironmental concerns, they lack thecapacity to practice sound management.

Subsistence farmers and pastoralists whorank among the poorest in the country areextremely vulnerable in times of prolongeddrought and/or floods. For example, duringthe prolonged drought in 2000, hundredsof pastoralists invaded commercial ranchesin Laikipia District and Mount Kenya forestin search of pasture, and a number ofMaasai herdsmen from Kajiado moved theircattle into Nairobi also in search of pasture.Arguably the drought was the result of anatural disaster rather than human-inducedenvironmental degradation. Nevertheless, itforced people into re-activating a long-standing tradition of moving into thedrought escape areas that are now privateranches and urban centres forcingpastoralists to resort to unsustainablesurvival mechanisms.

e) Poor environment regulation

A concise policy framework from which togenerate holistic and integrated strategiesand actions does not exist. Sectoralpolicies—the technocrat’s view of forests,soils, wildlife and water—have not beeneffective on the ground. The absence of aconcise national land-use policy has had adirect impact on the way natural resourceshave been conserved.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 53


The enactment of the EnvironmentalManagement and Coordination Act is anattempt to address the need for a frameworklegislation on the management of theenvironment. It is too early to judge the efficacyof this legislation. Indeed the institutionalframework envisaged by the legislation is yet to beput in place even though the legislation is now inforce. Nevertheless, the legislation has beenpassed in itself and the role of the governmentand other stakeholders is to ensure that thebenefit of the legislation are realized for thesustainable management of the environment.

2.6 The impact ofunsustainable land-use practices

a) Health hazard and diseases

Almost a quarter of all diseases in Kenya can beattributed to environmental factors. The poor,particularly women and children, are mostaffected. Water-related diseases, such as choleraand diarrhea arise from polluted water. Burningbiomass fuels for cooking and heating causesindoor air pollution in turn contributing toacute respiratory infections and related illnesses.Malaria arises from poor management of watersources where malaria-carrying mosquitoesbreed. Agrochemicals affect poor farmers whouse pesticides without training on how tohandle them or without protective clothing.

Water pollution leads to environmental healtheffects in the form of water-borne diseases, suchas, cholera ad typhoid and chemical poisoning inhuman beings and animals. For example, inMwea area, there is a higher than normalincidence of water-borne diseases among paddy

rice farmers—31% of residents show signs ofbilharzia, 15% of hookworms, and up to 50% ofthe sampled population regularly have malariaparasites in their bodies (GoK/UNEP, 2001).

A survey in major horticultural areas foundthat most farmers experience occasionalpoisoning symptoms after applyingagrochemicals. It estimated that pesticidespoison 7% of the people in Kenya’sagricultural sector every year and that aquarter of the farmers in major horticulturalareas regularly suffer from pesticide-relatedill health. Organophosphates pose an acutedanger because of their relative high toxicity.

About 80% of treated cases between 1987and 1990 at Kiambu District Hospital hadsuffered agrochemical poisoning fromorganophosphates used in coffee, vegetablesand flower production (GoK/UNEP, 2001).One tenth of all illnesses treated at LakeNorth Clinic near Lake Naivasha wereattributed to pesticide poisoning of flowerfarm workers who complained mainly ofrashes, sores and gastro-intestinal problems.High organo-chorine residues, especiallyDDT and Dieldrin, have been found inhuman milk samples taken from mothers inhorticultural and coffee-growing areas.

Further, health risks arise from the ingestionof agrochemicals in contaminated containersused to carry water, or in airborne transfer.Infections can cause skin, eye, and gastro-intestinal and respiratory complications.Long-term health effects includepathogenesis of childhood anapestic anemia,chronic mercury poisoning and possibility ofimpotence. The impacts of pollution areshown in table 25.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 54



Type of industry Air Water Land

Chemicals Emissions of sulfur oxide, organic chemicals, heavy Sludgenitrogen and chlorofluoro- metals, suspended solidscarbons and PCBs

Paper and pulp Emissions of sulfur oxide, Suspended solids, organicmethane, carbon dioxide, matter, chlorinated organichydrogen sulfides, substances, dioxinsmercapptans, dioxins

Cement, glass Dust containing nitrogen and Oils and heavy metals Soils contaminated withand ceramics carbon oxides, chromium and contamination metals and solid wastes

lead. Emission of lead,arsenic, carbon dioxide,hydrofluoric acid, silica andfluorine compounds

Mineral Dust and heavy metals such Discharge of acids (arsenic, Degradation by slag heapsmining as mercury lead and cadmium) and soil erosion

Refineries/ Emission of sulfur, nitrogen HCs, mercaptans, caustics, Harzadous waste, sludges,petroleum and hydrogen fumes, toxic effluent from gas scrubbers spent catalysts.products compounds and ordours.

Risks of explosion high

Leather Leather dust, hydrogen Toxic solutions containing Chromium sludgesand tanning sulfide and chromium suspended solids,

compounds sulphates and chromium

Source: GoK/UNDP 1997.

Table 25. Impact of industries on air, water and land pollution in Kenya.

b) Biodiversity loss

Organic pollution, chemical dischargesfrom industries and urban waste havedegraded fresh water bodies and their biodi-versity. Waste also impacts on water qualityand are manifest through deterioration ofthe quality of the aquatic environment,deoxygenating, eutrophication, siltation,habitat modification and toxicity amongothers. In some places some plant and ani-mal species introduced into some waterbodies have caused disastrous environmen-tal impacts. The hyacinth has interferedwith the hydrological cycle of the lakes andthe breeding points of the key lake fishes.The introduction of the Nile perch, a pred-ator, has eliminated indigenous species.

Sediment deposited into the major riversystems coupled with discharge of industrialwaste has reduced the volume of sea water,interfered with fish species and the wetlandlife forms including riparian forests andmarshlands. Pollution of inland fisheries hasfar reaching implications. There is apossibility that some of the health disorderssuffered by humans could be linked toeating contaminated fish.

Where pesticides are reasonably safe forhumans, they may be acutely toxic to fish,birds, bees and other beneficial non-targetspecies. Uncontrolled development, existingpollution and sedimentation fromagricultural areas upstream increasinglythreaten marine life.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 55


56

Pollution reduces the capacity of soils toproduce crops and leads to food insecurityas is the case around the Webuye paperfactory. The liquid effluent has reduced thehabitats of aquatic life forms such as fish.The fishermen's catch on Lake Victoria forinstance has reduced tremendously in thelast 10 years. According to the 1997–2001National Development Plan, the “… current fish-catch levels in Lake Victoriaare unsustainable and the potential collapse

of the Nile perch fishery is imminent” (table26). Some fish species have been reported tobe now extinct as a result of pollution of thelake and river waters.

Sewage sludge is a concentration of heavymetals and water-soluble synthetic organiccompounds. It also contains grease, oils andbacteria. When such sludge is mixed withirrigation water or agricultural manure, itleads to soil poisoning.

Category Fish Amphibians Reptiles

Total species 683 101 24Endemic in Kenya 54 13 17Known extinction 7 - -Endangered 60 2 11Vulnerable 7 - -Rare 16 1 3Introduced 13 - -

Source: GoK, 1992

Table 26. Status of species of fish, reptiles and amphibians in Kenya

Land abuse in Kenya

De-vegetation of the semi arid savannah through charcoal burning in Mweiga, Nyeri.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 56


57

c) Economic loss

In Kenya there are quantitative estimates ofeconomic costs of environmental degradationbut analysis of cross-sectoral, multi-resourceor multi-species values of our naturalresources are inadequate. However, R.F.Meadows (2001) has attempted an analysisof the relationship between the environment,incomes and livelihoods both at macro andmicro levels with regard to economic costs ofenvironmental degradation. The resultsindicate substantive losses shown in table 27below.

d) Aesthetical/cultural site loss

Aesthetic losses include interfering with thescenic beauty that renders water and

recreation sites unsuitable for recreation. Forexample, the water hyacinth at the NairobiDam has derived the sailing club use of thefacility. This reflects an economic loss.Siltation, which changes vegetation forexample, in the coastal areas of Malindi andMambrui, has rendered settlements andbeach plots for recreation unsuitable.

Litter is an eyesore and spoils the scenic andaesthetic quality of beaches and other touristcentres. The Nairobi Central BusinessDistrict is one such eyesore as it is litteredwith waste from hawking activities of theprevious night, so is litter from residentialestates strewn all over exuding a pungentsmell.

Table 27. Selected economic costs of environmental degradation in Kenya.

Service Estimated loss annually (in US$ millions)

Loss of ecological services, including watershed catchment protection function alone 26

Loss of support to rural household livelihoods, including income and subsistence 94

Loss of the national economy income 4 Loss of foreign exchange earnings 0.22 Loss to commercial and industrial consumers earnings 2 Loss of global wildlife tourism values 350Loss of total government earnings from wildlife tourism 29 Loss of global tourist consumer surpluses 450–700 Loss per forest adjacent to household; 100–350Loss of tourism from Mount Kenya forests 0.3 Loss of farm income (agroforestry, livestock and soil conservation) 330 million/haloss of elephant populations 75–97 Loss of flamingos 3–6 Loss of Amboseli lions 30 Loss of Masai Mara gross revenue 31 Loss on Masai Mara wildebeest 187–225

Source: Data synthesized from Meadows (2001)

Land abuse in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 57


58

The Kaya forests form a natural habitat forfauna and flora, and are important for thetraditional, cultural and medicalrequirements of the local communities(from the Digo’s in the South Coast to theGiriama in the North Coast). The Kayas areused by the elders (Wanatsi) to lead thecommunities in search of their gods forforgiveness or thanksgiving after success.They are also used to appease or pacify godswhen there is evidence of declining harvest,reduced rainfall, absence of peace andharmony, rampant diseases...

These cultural groves now face challengesincluding heavy encroachment due todeclining respect for traditional values andcustoms, rising demand for agricultural landand wood fuel, mining to meet the needs oflocal and international markets. Demandfor construction materials, sand, timber, andcoral blocks and the occurrence of forestfires especially in dry seasons exacerbate theproblem.

e) Land-use conflicts

The department of livestock production inLaikipia District estimates that on average,the grazing capacity varies from 5.2 ha pertropical livestock unit (TLU) in agro-ecological zone (AEZ) IV and 6.5 ha/TLUin AEZ V. Estimates by Flurry (1986) showmore localized variations form 2.8 to 5.2around Ngobit, 2.8 to 4.3 along the NaroMoru Nanyuki Sirimon area and 6.5 ha tothe north of Timau. Central divisionconsisting of most of the plateau wasestimated to have an average grazingcapacity of 4.2 ha /TLU (Mwichabe, 1997).

Studies by the department in West Laikipiashow that the average household of 7persons who are agro-pastoralists in AEZ IVneed at least 2 cows, 1 heifer, 9 sheep and 5goats to survive. This works out to about 3.5TLU/household or a per capita demand of0.5 TLU. If the grazing capacity is at best4.3 ha/TLU then it follows that could bethe minimum land holding size that canenable a family to survive above the foodsecurity line and probably market somesurplus. In order to meet other culturalobligations for example dowry, fines, gifts,etc, the family in AEZ IV would require14.5 ha/family (Mwichabe, 1997).

The optimal farm size based on its ability toprovide self-sufficiency for the CentralDivision in Laikipia is an average of 13.2 haper household for an average family toachieve food self-sufficiency—based on theassumption of substantial contribution fromfarm crop and livestock products.

It is therefore not surprising that on smallscale ranches, the livestock population farexceeds the available grazing by a factor of4.5–7. The problem is however mitigated bythe high numbers of absentee landownerswhose land is subject to pasture poaching.Were these absentees to settle, the currentstocking rates will have to be destocked by70–90%.

Irrigation schemes on smallholder farmsupstream use over 90% of the river waterreducing the flow to similar small irrigationschemes downstream resulting in conflictsin the recent past. This situation prevailsparticularly along the rivers Engare Ngobit,

Land abuse in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 58


59

Suguroi, Salama, Pesi, Lamuria and Kanagoiwithin the Kieni West area (Ngobit areas).

The pastoralist Maasai move with theirlivestock during dry spells over a large areawithout any regard to private property. Thishas resulted in conflicts with large-scaleranchers who despite fencing the ranches,the Maasai still move their cattle onto theranches in search of pasture and water.

f) Increase in poverty

Degradation of the environment leads tolower fertility and productivity of a naturalresource (such as soils) resulting in foodinsecurity. This leads to a decline inhousehold nutritional status, with childrenparticularly being affected. Shortages offood coupled with lack of access to waterand poor sanitation are amongst the factors,which cause malnutrition.

One coping mechanism adopted by poorpeople when food is scarce is to findalternative land for grazing and cultivation.Often this involves the use of "unsuitable"or marginal land, such as wetlands orvulnerable forests, which, in the longerterm, cannot sustain such usage. For manyKenyans, hopes of building or evenaccessing shelter are rapidly diminishingowing to the increasing cost of buildingmaterials and inappropriate shelter policies,technologies, standards and strategies.

Catchment destruction that resulted inlowered flow of water into streams led notonly to water rationing in major towns inKenya but also to rationing of electricity. Two

hydropower generation plants closedreducing the power supply by over 70%. Thecountry undertook expensive emergencymeasures to supply power that cost billions ofshillings in importing equipment andpersonnel. Power consumption bills went upby at least 200%. Almost 40% of jobs werelost in this period. To address the shortfall, a305 megawatt thermal generator that utilizes20,000 litres of diesel a day wascommissioned. The side effects of thisgenerator included health threats to nearbyresidents and increased release ofhydrocarbons into the atmosphere. This time,an ecological mistake nearly grounded thenational economy as industries operated atless than half the capacity.

Households with few assets are mostvulnerable to all kinds of shocks. Resilience ofhouseholds is dependent on financial andsocial capital or rights to exploit naturalcapital. External shocks are an importantcause of asset loss. Households andcommunities are often poor because cruciallivelihood assets, such as livestock or land,have been affected by disease, floods, orconflicts/ethnic clashes. Natural and man-made disasters have a greater impact upon thepoor who may have no choice but to live andwork in locations that are unsuitable and atrisk or more prone to disaster.

g) Disjointed policies, laws andinstitutions

There is no policy framework from whichholistic and integrated strategies for wise useof land can be generated. Instead, there arenumerous sectoral policies laden with

Land abuse in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 59


60

sectoral interests. The translation of thepolicies into practice has not beensuccessful. The absence of a concise,national land-use policy has had a directimpact on the way natural resources areconserved.

Since the late 1970s, ad hoc reviews of thesectoral policies have attempted to graft anintegrated national outlook. The reviews areusually parliamentary sessional papers,national development plans or sectoralaction plans. The first effort at formulatinga macro land-use policy was Sessional PaperNo. 1 of 1986 on Economic Managementfor Renewed Growth, which targetedlimiting misuse of land in the country.Through this, the government expressed theintention to establish a National LandCommission to review land tenure, land-usepractices, and legislation to conform withcurrent development needs.

The best attempt to put in place anintegrated, national policy on land use wascontained in the National EnvironmentalAction plan (NEAP) which culminated inthe enactment of the EnvironmentalManagement and Coordination Act of 1999which has been operationalised, but its fullinstitutional framework is yet to be put inplace.

The development policies for towns inKenya are still modeled along the colonialline, where conservation of natural resourceswithin peri-urban areas is considered atemporary use of the land as opposed tourban activities associated with industrialactivities. The main thrust of the policy oncommerce and industry is the promotion of

import substitution to attract externalinvestors into the country. The policyencourages extractive use of natural resourcebase with minimal investment in itsconservation and sustainable management.

As early as 1930, the colonial government inKenya established laws and institutions suchas the African Land Development Board toreduce soil erosion within the "nativereserves". The post-independence govern-ment elaborated on these and establishedlaws to stem land (natural resources)degradation mainly as sectoral efforts. TheKenya Constitution itself does not havedirect provisions protecting theenvironment and natural resources otherthan under sections dealing with the broadissue of human rights. The laws have beenentrusted within various ministries,parastatals and commissions that have been,and are still instrumental in themanagement of natural resources.

Fortunately an umbrella law was enacted in1999 to rationalize the sectoral acts. Theseinclude more than 50 separate statutes thatrelate to the protection of natural resourcesand the environment in general. Those thatregulate land-use activities include theAgricultural Act (CAP 318), Land Control(CAP 302), The Chief ’s Authority Act(CAP 128), the Mining Act (CAP 306), theLocal Government Act (CAP 268), theTrust Land Act (CAP 208), the LandPlanning Act (CAP 303) and theGovernment Lands Act (CAP 280).

There are separate ministries, departments,corporations, technical institutions, agenciesand organizations for every known

Land abuse in Kenya

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 60


61

biophysical component of the environment.Each of these institutions has its own set ofpolicies, regulations and even lawsgoverning its operations. Quite often, theseinstitutions have no relationship with oneanother. Hence the department dealing withsoil and water conservation is in theMinistry of Agriculture but hardly has anylinks with the Ministry of Water nor that ofLands at the policy and technical levels. Atthe policy level the Ministry ofEnvironment does not have any powers overhow land is alienated and used in thecountry.

Despite the absence of policies and laws,and despite the conflicts, overlaps andoverlooks in the sectoral policies, laws and

institutions, there is some possibility thatwere the government and its agencies toimplement the framework the way it is,some significant benefits would accrue inthe area of natural resources management.Indeed, the period between 1963 and 1980saw a show of goodwill on the part of civilservants who applied the same frameworkand went out of their way to implementprogrammes that did less damage to thenatural resources. The political establish-ment was commited to conserving naturalresources to the point where the worldrewarded them by locating a key naturalresources management institution—theUnited Nations Environment Programme(UNEP)—in Kenya!

The technocrats in government had well-placed zeal in internalizing the concerns andagreements from the global fraternity aswere emerging from the variousinternational protocols. When corruptiontook root and became some kind of nationalpastime, all the policies, laws andinstitutions were rendered irrelevant. Forestshave been destroyed everywhere. Wildlifepoaching and deforestation have reachedalarming levels. Individuals can invadewetlands and water catchment areas withoutretribution despite the existing laws.Individuals who are "politically correct" willpollute the environment and damage thewater and terrestrial resources withoutrestraint.

Land abuse in Kenya

Since the late 1970s, ad hoc reviews

of the sectoral policies have attempted

to graft an integrated national outlook.

The reviews are usually parliamentary

sessional papers, national development

plans or sectoral action plans. The first

effort at formulating a macro land-use

policy was Sessional Paper No. 1 of 1986

on Economic Management for Renewed

Growth, which targeted limiting misuse

of land in the country. Through this,

the government expressed the intention

to establish a National Land Commission

to review land tenure, land-use practices,

and legislation to conform with

current development needs.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 61

The emerging trends62


3.0 The emerging trends

Shifts in policy, legislation and institutionalland-use practices have over the yearsbrought about changes in the way land-based resources have been used in space andtime. Such changes can roughly be groupedin three periods each with unique landmarkchanges.

3.1 The genesis ofsectoral policies,laws and institutions

This period covers the decades between1898 and 1963 when the country was undercolonial rule. Generally the authoritiesmade policies and laws that not only

enhanced production but also preservedforests, wildlife and soils and enforced themwithout persuading the indigenous people.The colonial administration appliedprinciples of conservation according to theletter. Settlers who had the habit ofdestroying natural resources in their bid toexpand their agricultural activities ceased todo so.

Everybody feared the consequences ofbreaking the law and the destruction offorests, wildlife, wetlands, soil loss was at aminor scale. The indigenous Africans, weresubjected to punitive laws. Indeed this wasan era when the laws stated in the variousstatutes were applied and followed to theletter. It was an age of mechanicalapplication of scientific principles without

Chapter ThreeEmerging trends

Fighting desertification in Migwani division of Mwingi district.

CN

RM

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 62

The emerging trends 63


regard to the needs, responsibilities andcapacities of the local communities inmanaging natural resources.

This age could be called the “golden era” fornatural resource conservation in Kenyabecause there was little destruction of theresources. Clearing of indigenous forests wasminimal. Wildlife protection was probablyat its best. There was no economic pressureto reclaim wetlands. But, soil loss within theareas reserved for Africans was significant.

3.2 The benevolenceage

This period spans from 1963 to about 1983.These decades were the "competence test"for the new government after independence.The new government introduced a humanface in the application/enforcement of thesectoral policies and laws on conservation ofthe natural resources, which had been put inplace prior to independence. But thegovernment did not attempt to improve onthem. For instance the forced use of benchterracing for soil erosion was stopped. Forestreserves such as Marmanet, Mt. Elgon, MtKenya, Lamu were de-gazetted andconverted into settlement schemes for thepoor and landless who had been displacedby the white settlers. The punitive fines forfishing and poaching wildlife werediscarded.

Although the politicians were reluctant tostress the colonial conservation policies forfear of being associated with the draconianconduct of the colonial government, thenew government established a central policyposition in Sessional Paper No. 10 of 1965,

which recognized the need to conservenatural resources for future generations. Theconcern to balance conservation of theresources with the need to exploit wasincorporated in the national developmentplan. Subsequently the governmentestablished the National EnvironmentSecretariat which spurred this policy intodevelopment planning. Subsequently, theUnited Nations Conference on HumanEnvironment (UNCHE) facilitated thelocation of the United NationsEnvironment Programme in Kenya in 1973.

In the 20-year period, natural resourcesmanagement and environmental protectionenjoyed unprecedented political goodwilland support form the highest office in theland. Resource conservation was part of thepolitical agenda. This enabled technocratsto introduce some meaningful changeswithin the sectoral polices and internationalprotocols. This was reflected in an upsurgein the development of environment andnatural resources institutions, and schools ofwildlife management and environmentalstudies. The question of appropriatetechnology took center stage in thedevelopment process.

Overall, excision of forests was slower.However, wildlife went through the mostdramatic loss especially between 1975 and1983 when ‘politically correct poachers’nearly decimated the large herbivores in thecountry. The wildlife saga was actually thefirst impact of high-level corruption. Soilerosion worsened until about 1975 wheneconomic realities and good extensionpackages in NSWCP reversed the trend.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 63

The emerging trends64


3.3 The dark age

The period between 1983 and 2001 couldbe considered in this country as the age ofironies and contradictions. Sectoral policies,legal and institutional reforms were at anadvanced stage. The application ofappropriate technology was brought withinthe policy environment to influencesustainable utilization of the naturalresources.

In addition, rational programmes emergedin response to international protocols andcooperation. In 1996, six East Africancountries decided to pool resources underthe auspices of IGADD to fight naturalresource degradation. In 1987 thegovernment took practical steps to integratedevelopment and environment on asustainable basis following the provisions ofthe report "Our Common Future" by theBrutland Commission. In 1989, thegovernment in response to the UNEPGeneral Assembly and the United NationsConference of Environment andDevelopment (UNCED) placed highpriority on integrating financial, scientificand technological resources in the nationalprogrammes to reduce the degradation ofnatural resources.

Despite all the gains at technical and policylevel, there was no political will to supportconservation of natural resources. Someindividuals and private citizens destroyedforests, wildlife and wetland areas withimpunity because of the short-term politicalsurvival interests, and high-level corruptionin the power structures and government

system. All the policies, laws andinstitutions charged with sustainableutilization of the natural resources wereignored. Forests were excised and convertedinto private land without regard of their roleas a public good. The internationalcommunity has pumped billions of shillingsinto the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) toprotect wildlife resources. Although theRamsar sites have been officially declared,there still are cases of individuals acquiringbeach plots along Lake Naivasha asevidenced by the spirited resistance of theNaivasha Riparian Owners Association. TheExport Promotion Zones in the industrialarea of Nakuru also discharge waste intoLake Nakuru.

Water and wetland resources, however, haveborne the brunt of decline during thisperiod. Despite significant awarenesscreation in the development andconservation of water resources, pollutionsteadily increased.

Shifts in policy, legislation and

institutional land-use practices have over

the years brought about changes in

the way land-based resources have been

used in space and time. Such changes

can roughly be grouped in three periods

each with unique landmark changes.

These periods include the age of hegemony

during the colonial period;

the benevolence age immediately after

independence and the dark ages today.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 64


65

4.1 Justification

It is clear from the above that the currenttrend of using land will lead to a gloomyfuture if the status quo is maintained.Pollution will continue; destruction of watercatchments will increase leading to cessationof flow of major rivers and limiting waterand power supplies; land-use conflicts overarable land; water and pastures will escalate;the savannahs and grasslands will besubjected to severe desertification due toexpanding agricultural activity, overgrazingand the search for fuelwood. Loss ofbiodiversity will accelerate the collapse ofthe life-supporting ecosystems.

The Kenya Land Alliance (KLA) formed in1999 is advocating for formulation andimplementation of a National Land Policyand a review of land laws. The initiative tocreate an institutional framework for landlaws and land policy advocacy in Kenya wasnecessitated by the realization that thepolicy, legal and institutional frameworkcreated in 1950s is inappropriate because ofthe many changes in the social, political,economic and cultural fronts in the countrytoday. The increase in population hasresulted into a heightened competition foraccess to land and natural resources. Inaddition the changes in the globalenvironment have combined to create asignificantly different reality. It is in the faceof this reality that KLA has consolidated all

efforts towards effective advocacy for landpolicy and land law reforms in Kenya, as acontribution to the constitutional reviewprocess.

4.2 The choices to bemade

The possible future scenarios regarding thenatural resources available for use in Kenyarevolve around three key areas: i) Thenational land-use patterns; ii) the evolvingpolicies and legislation with respect tonatural resources in particular; iii) therelated sectoral policies and how they affectthe entire economy, and the effects oftechnological innovations and other globalchanges.

Scenario 1Maintaining the status quo

This scenario involves maintaining thestatus quo characterized by an increasingpopulation, and the projected trends of thecurrent land-use practices worseningfollowing the search for additional land. Thesituation could accelerate migration intoASAL areas as a large proportion of thegrowing labour force find affordablesettlements but to the detriment of forestsand rangelands. Pollution and technologyabuse will continue unchecked. There willbe little improvement in governance becauseof little political goodwill in enforcing

Chapter FourTowards a national land-use policy

Towards a national land-use policy

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 65

Towards a national land-use policy66


policies and legislation. Corruption in everysector of the economy continues.

The consequences of this scenario will besevere particularly in the area of wildlifeconservation and the environmentalprotection. Continuation of the currenttrends in land use implies that the areaunder crop production is likely to increase

to approximately 15.0 million ha by the year2005, with a corresponding decrease inforest and woodlands. There will be moreencroachment on forests and rangelands,increased settlements and cultivation inASAL that would lead to environmental degradation and destruction of watercatchments. Agricultural expansion into theASAL will be uneconomic in the long rundue to the ecologically fragile state of theregion. Expansion of large scale agricultureinto wildlife and pastoral areas andcommercial ranching, and smallholderagriculture will increase. The expected land-use changes are shown in figure 11.

Continued land-use conflicts are expectedamong such activities as smallholderirrigated agriculture, rainfed agriculture,pastoralism and wildlife, coastal tourismand exploitation of the wetlands in districtssuch as Tana River.

There will continue to be less room forroaming wildlife. The stock of wildlife inboth reserves and national parks will reduceleading to possible decline in the volume ofboth local and international tourists. Therewill be increased pressure on wildlifeconservation and protected areas to beopened up for settlement and agriculture.The pressure to allow access to parks fordry-season grazing is already on the increaseespecially in Narok and Taita Tavetadistricts. The communities claim that theparks were their ancestral lands andtherefore have grazing rights, as they neverreceive any tangible gains from tourism.

Figure 11. Projected land-use trends

Pop

ulat

ion

(in m

illio

ns)

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Period1991 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Source: Institute of Economic Affairs, 1999

Cultivation

Forests/woodlands

Pastrolism

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 66

Towards a national land-use policy 67


There will be increased loss of biodiversityto unplanned human activities leading to abreakdown in the life supporting systems.Destruction of catchment areas will lead tocessation of river flow and affect the watersources and supply systems, loss of scenicbeauty and irrigation potential. Uncheckedincrease in pollution and destruction of thenatural resources will inevitably occurwithout good political will, sound policiesand laws.

Scenario 2Instituting a rational national land-useprogram by chance

This scenario assumes that the goodwill ofindividual citizens and donors and sectoralreform will at some foreseeable future leadto rational use of land in the country.

Under this scenario the land resources mayundergo positive gains. Such gains may bein the form of increased open-canopy forestson private lands and the reduced rate atwhich land is converted for cultivation.Land-use intensification will continue (asemphasized in Sessional Paper No. 2 of1994 on National Food Policy). A draw

back to this scenario is the high costsinvolved and lack of political will. This willslow down the implementation process.High capital investment for the develop-ment of agricultural innovations, buildingfarmer capacity through training, andcreating public awareness will remain adream. There will be no strict land-usecontrol system to ensure that proper land-use practices are established in all places inaccordance with appropriate zoning ideals.

The best that one can expect from relianceon a goodwill scenario is the intensificationin use which lessens the pressure on land.Forest destruction may be reduced by about1.5% annually. It also implies that a total of11.5 million ha will be saved fromconversion to agriculture by the year 2020(table 28).

If implemented, intensification ofagricultural land will have tremendouspositive effects on the overall status ofnatural resources particularly availing moreland for other land uses such as pastoralism,water catchment, conservation, wildlife andsettlement.

Land use Land requirement (million ha)

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Status quo (current agriculture) 10.6 11.8 13.1 14.3 15.5 16.7Intensification of agriculture 10.6 11.8 10.5 11.5 12.4 13.4Land made available by intensification 0 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.3

Remaining forest and rangelands

i) Status quo 42.9 41.4 40.0 38.6 37.1 35.6ii) With agriculture intensification 42.9 41.4 42.6 41.4 40.2 38.8

Source: Institute of Economic Affairs, 1999

Table 28. Changes in land use and projected requirement

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 67



To attain the scenario, high capital invest-ment to develop appropriate technology andmanpower will be necessary to sustain thechanges. It will also require a stronggovernment input, strategy reinforcementand goodwill for promotion of productivepractices, especially the wider use ofimproved seeds, fertilizer and disease andpest control; promotion of increasedintercropping and multicropping; provisionof efficient support services includingextension, research and storage andhandling services in the agricultural sector;restructuring various institutions chargedwith the management of all the sets ofnatural resources in question; transforma-tion of most of the policies and legislationrelated to sets of natural resources to levelsthat are compatible with the socio-economic, political, environmental andecological realities.

The worst occurrence would be negativeloss through de-gazzettment of the remain-ing important forest areas, grabbing of plotsby some unscrupulous people, minor levelof poaching, minor forest losses through fireand wood poaching, and loss of soilsthrough soil erosion.

Scenario 3Instituting rational land-use by choice

Scenario three will depend on the followingassumptions.

• Population pressure is minimized as a result ofthe economic realities of the time. Policies andlaws would have been strengthened and theinstitutions harmonized.

• That corruption will be eliminated whengovernment embraces the principles of goodgovernance and the entire population’s ethicschange against corruption. In addition,increased economic burden would rise to thelevel that people reject the status quo.

• It is further assumed that new economicopportunities would emerge alongsideinnovation and use of technologies thatutilize natural resources at optimal levels.

• Introduction of multiple land use willdepend on formulation of a national land-use policy enacted and enforced to guideand harmonize land-use planning activities.Though majority of the population willcontinue to depend on land for theireconomic welfare, they will be supported topractice the best economic andenvironmentally least harmful land-usepractices based on land potential and locallevel land-use management plans with theactive participation of local communities insetting out areas for specific and appropriateuses. The local people will be encouragedand supported to participate in land-usedecisions and in the conservation of wildlifeand biodiversity in the wider sense. Localcommunities would gain more fromwildlife conservation than from alternativeland uses.

The possible impacts of this scenarioinclude more efficient use of the availablenatural resources, and an increase in theoverall balance of natural resources. Therewill be an increase in biodiversity, wildlifepopulation, rational use of ASAL andincreased land equivalent ratio.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 68



Introduction of multiple land-use systemsalongside agricultural intensificationtherefore has tremendous impact on Kenya’snatural resources conservation andenvironments. More land will be availed foruse. There will be reduced destruction ofnatural resources and environmentdegradation. The welfare of landowners willbe guaranteed through diversification oftheir economic base and production strategyespecially in the ASAL where climaticconditions are unpredictable.

Two major conclusions can be drawn fromthe three scenarios.

The best option is Scenario 3: Institutingrational land-use by choice, where adeliberate effort is made by all sections ofthe Kenyan society to institute a rationalland-use programme. This requires commit-ment, goodwill and a change in attitudeamongst the peoples of Kenya. It willrequire a facilitative environment(technological innovations including use oftraditional skills and indigenous knowledge,rational policy, legal and institutionalframework as well as collective bargaining).

Scenario 1 is probably the worst option.Unfortunately it is the easiest to achievesince one ends there by doing nothing.Scenario 2 will introduce half-heartedmeasures through reforms driven byinternational protocols and donor pressure.The desired results will most likely happenby chance as the process relies on externalinitiatives and the goodwill of the populace.The current externally-driven reforms willperhaps lead to a rational land use by chancebut over a long period of time. It is therefore

reasonable to suppose that everybody, notgovernment alone, is responsible forinstituting a rational land-use plannationally and each person should play theirpart in putting in place the transformationrequired for the realization of scenario 3.

4.3 The key elements ofa national land-usepolicy

To review and put in place an appropriatenational land-use policy, principles to guidethe process should be enforced.

a) The guiding principles

The principles are aimed at guiding themanner and conditions under whichappropriate use of land can be achieved. Theappropriate land-use system must involvemaking decisions, choosing betweenoptions, accommodating diverse interestsand presenting them as guidelines whoseimplementation must cater for the bestinterests of people individually, communallyand as a nation. To achieve this, the systemmust be based on some mutually agreeablerationale that guides the decision-makingprocess and the institutions in charge of theadministration of land resources. Thefollowing are core guiding principles:

• The cultural integrity of the various peoplesin Kenya relating to perceptions, rights,tenure systems, community institutions,conflict resolution among other valuesystems, must be respected and recognizedas the basis for making decisions on landuse and therefore superseding short-term

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 69



political interests. People resident in a givenarea should have first priority indetermining access to land resources andproviding time-tested conflict resolutionmechanisms.

• Whereas it is important to meet theobjectives of the people and those fornational development when zoning landuse, an equilibrium must be maintained fora suitable environment. Satisfying humanneeds should be balanced with the needs ofother organisms in order to maintain theecological linkages that sustain life.

• The State must ensure equity amongst thevarious categories of resource users, theirproduction systems and ecosystemprotection. The land-user rights and accessby all citizens must be treated equally. Therights of access by future generations mustnot be compromised by the presentgeneration.

• Access to, use and conservation of landresources must be based on a nationalsystem of resource allocation where variousstakeholders, including the general public,participate in decision-making andadministration through a forum whereconsensus is reached after compromises andconcessions are voluntarily made.

• The ‘Abuser Pays’ principle needs to beembraced as a preventive measure. Liabilityfor resource abuse should never be passedon but rather, the abuser of naturalresources should be forced to meet the costsof rehabilitation.

b) The National Land-use Plan

For a national land-use plan to providecoherent, rational and coordinated guidanceon the use of land resources in Kenya, itmust be comprehensive and integrated andshould aim to:

• Rationalize the use of land resources in linewith the principles of appropriate use andsustainable development.

• Harmonize initiatives in the use of landresources so as to achieve an integrated andsustainable strategy for managing naturalresources.

• Consolidate the inventory of landresources, and create a platform of strategicinformation for national land-use planning,resource allocation and resourcemanagement programmes.

• Provide a suitable institutional arrangementfor a national early warning system thatwould alert the relevant policy andimplementing agencies of the current andemerging threats to ecological andeconomic sustainability of the resources.

• Establish the guidelines that control anddirect land-use and production systems,and technological choices for differentecological and social differences.

A national land-use plan can be developedusing a national land-use planning processthat entails the following.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 70



c) Continuous land-use planningprocess

Since land is used for different purposes, itis important to select the appropriatepurpose for a particular area that best servesthe interests of all those involved. Differentland uses such as pastoralism and sedentaryfarming in ASALs compete. The peopleliving in a specific area usually consist ofdifferent groups with divergent interests inland and its resources.

Land-use planning therefore is a process ofmitigating competing land uses and thediverse interests of people. The processbalances three objectives:

• to maximize the use of scarce naturalresources to meet socio-economic, politicaland cultural obligations of people.

• to ensure equity or fairness in thedistribution of costs and benefits from theuse of the resources among groupsregardless of social background.

• to add value to natural resources. Land-useplanning is therefore directed at the "best"use of the land.

The end result of the land-use planningprocess is a national land-use plan in whichthe country is zoned into areas suitable forvarious uses such as agriculture, conserva-tion, cultural groves, industry etc. Thedevelopment of the national land-use planwill spell out the responsibilities at thenational, meso and local levels.

Land-use planning is a continuous processnecessitated by the need for change; or aris-ing from the development of national

objectives. The process can also be triggeredby national development plans such as thecurrent focus on poverty eradication. Twoprocesses should be undertakensimultaneously. Land evaluation to re-examine the suitability of land for the useand undertake what is commonly referredto as farming systems analysis to gauge thesocio-economic constraints. In Kenya, suchdata exist in national institutes such as theKenya Agricultural Research Institute andKenya Forestry Research Institute, and withinternational non-government organiza-tions such as The African Medical andResearch Foundation and OXFAM.

Land evaluation is a critical step when carryingout a land-use planning process. It is theprocess of assessing the suitability of land foralternative uses. The process includes theidentification, selection and description ofland-use types relevant to the area. A suitabilityanalysis is then conducted to determine thebest use by matching the various landpotentials and the positive as well as negativeconsequences of each land-use type. One of thekey considerations is the level of current andfuture investment in terms of technology,which will alter the suitability ratings. The landevaluation process supplies the land-useplanning process with alternatives for landresource use.

d) Environmental impactassessment

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) isthe integration of the science ofenvironmental analysis with the politics ofresource management. It is a process ofenvironmental planning and monitoringthat ensures resource management is

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 71



sustainable. It is an action-oriented policystatement providing for a mandatory andpublic environmental impact statement overany development activity.

Environmental impact assessment focuseson the unpredicted costs of developmentprogrammes. For example water reservoirsmay lead to diseases, weed problems,eutrophication and seismic effects. Healthprogrammes may lead to drug resistance,water pollution or population increase.Irrigation projects may trigger diseases,water pollution, salinization or waterlogging. Increased agricultural productioncan pollute the soil, acidify it or lead togenetic loss.

It is therefore mandatory that landearmarked as suitable for one form of landuse undergo thorough environmentalimpact assessment before implementing theprogramme and projects.

The newly enacted EnvironmentManagement and Coordination Actprovides for Environment ImpactAssessment before any major developmentsare undertaken that have a bearing onnatural resources and the environment.Once the legislation is fully in force and theinstitutional framework for its enforcementis fully operational it should be possible forthe environmental impact of majorenvironment projects to be established andcorrective and mitigation actions taken.However, as with every legislation, thegreatest challenge is in the enforcement.

e) Incentives and penalties

Incentives and penalties need to be welldefined to protect the natural resources andalso the welfare of the people who dependon these resources for their livelihoods.Sanctions are best developed through aparticipatory process with stakeholders sothat a compromise is reached betweendifferent parties.

Such sanctions will involve clearly definingthe values to be protected. For example:human health safety and life support mediasuch as water, soils, flora, fauna; use of amixture of criminal, civic andadministrative statutes to allow flexibility inadministering incentives and penalties; aclear statement and an un-ambiguous list ofcrimes perceived as land resource abuse.They may include:• Damage and permanent injury to the

ecosystem• Pollution which injures another human

being• Contributing to risk of injury to the

environment• Contributing to the risk of death or

injury to human beings and otheranimals

The crime list would include:• Released pollutant into the environment• Operated a hazardous installation• Handled toxic materials• Contributed to damage of ecosystems• Supplied false information on monitor-

ing or• Tampered with monitoring equipment

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 72



Incentives could involve a wide range ofawards and tax exemptions for industrialistsand other land users who use technology topreserve resources; the individuals whocontribute immensely to knowledge onappropriate use of the land resources; clubsand groups who volunteer time, knowledgeand resources to lobby for specific land-useissues need to be recognized by society andlisted in the national heroes medal awardsscheme.

f) A rational land-tenure system

Arable land in Kenya comprises 19.2% oftotal land, of which 2.2% is covered byforest. The remaining 82% is arid or semi-arid. About 24 million Kenyans live off17% of the country’s arable land majority ofwhom own tiny pieces of land or arelandless. In Nyanza, Western and CentralProvinces, the average land size droppedfrom 2 to 1.6 ha between 1982 and 1992(Ogendo and Kosura, 1995). Over the sameperiod 15–25% of the 5 million householdsin Kenya were virtually landless with noguaranteed access to land.

This situation has resulted from the suitablebut scarce land being hoarded by the middleclass in the high-value highlands andmunicipalities. There are also problems ofgender where widows and youth have beendispossessed especially in trustlandsinheritance process. This skewed access anddistribution of land inevitably translatesinto sharp social differences leading toincreased poverty, political marginalizationof citizens because some are squatters.

The National Land-use Plan therefore needsto be supported by a national land-tenurepolicy which ensures fairness and equity inaccess and control of land and its resources;facilitates just and fast administration; hasfair conflict-resolution mechanisms; spellsout fair compensation mechanisms; andfacilitates and protects informal leaseholdsespecially the landless who have farmingskills but no purchasing power to own land.

g) Institutional re-arrangement

A national land-use policy with a well-articulated national land-use plan willrequire an apex, umbrella organization tointegrate all the concerns in land resourcesand take the responsibility of implementingand enforcing the provisions of the policy.A suitable institution would be a permanentnational land-use commission. Thecommission would enforce the nationalland-use policy and implement the nationalland-use plan. It will stipulate the mannerunder which land resources can be accessedand used. The commission will take intoaccount what cannot be compromised, therights of the people, and the principles ofconservation.

4.4 The assets to build on

a) The National EnvironmentAction Plan (NEAP)

The NEAP was adopted in June 1994. TheNEAP Report addresses environmentalissues in an integrated cross-sectoralmanner. The NEAP provides not only astrategy for achieving sustainable develop-ment in Kenya, but is a basis for translating

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 73



Agenda 21—the Global Programme ofAction on Environment andDevelopment—into an action plan. Itshows the government’s continued commit-ment to conservation and sustainable use ofnatural resources, as stated in the nationaldevelopment plans and policies. Theenactment of an umbrella law for themanagement of environment (EMCA) in1999, and the development of the NationalPoverty Reduction Strategy are key achieve-ments of the NEAP.

b) The National EnvironmentalManagement and CoordinationAct (EMCA) (1999)

This is an Act of Parliament that establishesan appropriate legal and institutionalframework for the management of theenvironment in Kenya. The Act stipulatesthat there is need to improve the legal andadministrative coordination of diverseinitiatives in order to improve the nationalcapacity for the management of theenvironment. The Act also provides that theenvironment constitutes the foundation inthe national economic, social, cultural andspiritual advancement.

The general principle of the Act is that everyperson in Kenya is entitled to a clean andhealthy environment and has a duty tosafeguard and enhance the environment.The Act enforces the principles ofsustainable development, namely; • The principle of public participation • The cultural and social principles

traditionally applied by any community inKenya for the management of theenvironment or natural resources

• The principle of international cooperationin the management of environmentalresources shared by two or more States

• Intergenerational and intergenerationalequity

• The polluter-pays principle• The precautionary principle• An effective administrative structure that

consist of the following organs—

c) The National EnvironmentalManagement Authority (NEMA)

NEMA’s main object and purpose is toexercise general supervision and coordina-tion of all matters relating to the environ-ment and to be the principle instrument ofgovernment in the implementation of allpolicies relating to the environment. Themain responsibility is monitoring the stateof the environment; advising theGovernment on issues of environmentpolicy legislation; coordinating andharmonizing integration of environmentalconcerns during development planning;overseeing compliance with environmentallaws, regulations, impact assessments andstandards; and promoting environmentaleducation and awareness.

d) The external goodwill

Over the last three decades there have beenconcerted efforts globally to direct attentionto the management of the environment andnatural resources and its linkages with socialand economic development. Internationalattention on natural resource managementin Kenya picked up in 1972 after the UnitedNational Conference on HumanEnvironment (UNCHE) which attempted

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 74



to integrate development and environmentconservation as a way of stemming naturalresource degradation.

According to the register of internationaltreaties and agreements, Kenya ratified 36out of the 152 instruments beforeindependence in 1963. Most of the treatiesdate back to 1921. Between 1963 and 1973—Kenya’s first decade of independence—the country adopted 35 conventions.Between 1973 and 1983 forcefularticulation and development of policies onenvironment and natural resourcemanagement was evident in Kenyaparticularly following the UNCHE and theBrutland Commission that generated thepolitical will by locating UNEP in thecountry.

In 1977, UNEP initiated an action plan"Global system for combatingdesertification" which triggered Kenya tostart preparing a national action plan ofnatural resource management. In 1980, theWorld Conservation Strategy was launchedin Kenya with support from TheInternational Union for conservation(IUCN), the Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations (FAO),and UNEP specifically to initiate a nationalapproach to stop the environmentalproblems and diminishing naturalresources. This was the precursor to themuch-publicized National ConservationStrategy that yielded the NationalEnvironment Action Plan (NEAP).

In 1986, six East African countries resolvedto pool resources to fight natural resourcesdegradation under the auspices of the Inter-

Governmental Authority on Drought andDesertification (IGADD). In 1987 thegovernment started practical steps tointegrate development and environment ona sustainable basis following the provisionsof the report "Our Common Future" by theBrutland Commission. In 1989, thegovernment in response to UNEP GeneralAssembly and the United NationsConference on Environment and Develop-ment (UNCED) started putting highpriority on financial, scientific andtechnological resources into its nationalprogrammes to reduce the degradation ofnatural resources.

After the Rio Summit in 1992, virtually allthe government programmes within thepublic investment programmes were basedon the provision of Agenda 21. Theimmediate products have been the NEAPand the Environment and Management Actof 1999 that proposed the NationalEnvironment Management Authority[NEMA]).

The protocols come with financial andtechnical provisions that countries from thedeveloping world could use to effectivelymanage their environment. Overall, Kenyahas accepted 29 out of 54 conventions onenvironmental management. Trendsbetween 1993–2003 show poor implemen-tation of principles enshrined within theinternational protocols. It appears thepolitical establishment does not supportsome specific provisions in the agreements.Also, the competence of professionals tomanage such conventions has drasticallybeen compromised. In addition, parliamenthas never been a key party to the treaty

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 75



provisions and therefore broad-basedpolitics may be uncertain.

e) Traditional laws, skills, practicesand institutions

The Loita Maasai, a sub group of the Masaipastoralists, inhabit the southern part ofNarok District. Under the guidance of thecultural and spiritual leaders known asO'Loibon they have since colonial times,consistently and successfully resistedmodern land tenure systems and naturalresources management. Their cousins, thePurko Maasai inhabiting the northern partof the same district rapidly embracedmodern land tenure systems and resourcemanagement. This, unfortunately, hasresulted in a rapidly degradingenvironment. Conflicts arising fromlandlessness and lack of pasture emerged aslarge chunks of the grazing land were soldoff to the wealthy who then converted theminto wheat farms.

The Loita Maasai on the other handenjoyed a healthy and well-managedenvironment. Their indigenous resourcemanagement systems continuously shieldedthem from drought.

Lpinguan Ranch has changed handsseverally. First the Laikipia Maasai wrestledit from the Samburu. Later the Whitemanappropriated it after the 1911 MaasaiAgreement and developed it into alivestock-breeding ranch under the nameP&D Ranch.

Fifteen years after independence, theownership reverted to the governmentunder the Department of Settlements in theMinistry of Lands. The Samburu who hadbeen squatting on the land made a claim tothe ranch to which government verballyacceded. Taking the promise seriously,Samburu pastoralists from the largerSamburu District, together with a few Pokotand Turkana herdsmen, started occupyingthe ranch bringing with them large herds oflivestock.

In four years, the productivity of thepastures declined from 6 t to 0.3 t perhectare due to overgrazing. The exposure ofthe topsoil accelerated soil erosion reachinglosses of about 50 t per hectare per year. Thewater dams shrunk in volume or dried up.With the help of the Laikipia WildlifeForum the old men sought security oftenure from the government so that theycould invest their money, time and labour.

They worked on a management plan thatwould revive the productivity of theirpastures. An immediate step in the plan wasto secure tenure but to use the land to getthe highest returns, through tourism. Theranch was not subdivided but individualplots would be issued to form the basis forbuying shares from the limited companythat would run the tourism facility. A smallenclosed part of the ranch would hostcritical infrastructure tha would include aveterinary diagnostic laboratory, a livestockauction yard, a small stock-fattening facility,and grounds for grazing during drought.

landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 76

Conclusion

The land-use problems facing Kenyatoday are due to the lack of anappropriate national land-use policy.

The air is increasingly being polluted; watersystems are diminishing in volume anddeteriorating in quality. The land is threatenedby desertification. The soils are being erodedand deposited in the ocean and lakes. Theforests are being cut with impunity thusdestroying the water catchments and thesavannahs and grasslands are undergoing de-vegetation through overgrazing, charcoalburning and other inappropriate land-usepractices.

The underlying causes of the deteriorationof the life support systems (air, water andland) is a result of unsustainable land-useactivities notably deforestation, badirrigation techniques, overgrazing, fuelwoodharvesting and charcoal burning. Others arepollution from industries, harmfulagricultural practices and impropermanagement of solid and liquid urbanwastes. The ever-increasing populationexerts pressure on the natural resources anddrives the misuse of the resources; it isworsened by the cyclic occurrence of naturaldisasters such as droughts and floods.

The impacts of unsustainable land use aremany. The decline in the supply of pasturesand potable water fuels conflicts amongpastoralists and between small and large-scale irrigation farmers. Poor quality of airand water increases disease risks in humanbeings and extinction of other life forms.Destruction of water catchments causesshortage of water and electricity supplynecessitating rationing. Desertificationreduces the productivity of land leading tofood insecurity, reduced income and non-accumulation of economic assets.Eventually millions of families end up livingbelow the poverty line. Currently, over 5million households are unable to accessbasic needs such as food, medical care, andeducation and to meet other socialobligations.

The current trend of deterioration will leadto a gloomy future for Kenya if the statusquo is maintained. However, the entireKenyan society can opt for rational land usethrough the application of wise-useprinciples. Striking a balance betweensatisfying the human livelihood needs andwise use of resources to ensure conservationfor future generations is the biggestchallenge.

Conclusion 77


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 77

Anyimba A.M. (1993): ‘Borehole Site Investigations inFractured Hard-rock, Aquifers in Gachoka Division’Proceedings of the Fifth conference on the Geology ofKenya, UoN.

Bestow, T. T. (1958): Water Resources of Malindi,Public works Dept., Nairobi.

CBS (1995): Statistical Abstract, Government Printer

CNRM (2001): Unpublished, Assessment of MaizeProduction in Western Kenya

Dindi, E. W. (1995): Mineral Extraction in Kenya,Unpublished Paper, University of Nairobi

DRDRS (1994): Wildlife and Livestock Data SummeryReport: 1977–1994.

Ermerton, L. (1996): Valuing the Environment: Casestudies from Kenya. Africa Wildlife Foundation

EAWS/KFWG (2001): Forest Excision in Kenya andtheir impacts: UNEP.

FAO (1991): Statistical yearbook

Gaciri S. J. & Davis (1993): ‘The occurrence and Geo-chemistry of Fluoride in Natural Waters in Kenya’.Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 143, p. 395–412.

Githaiga, J. (1998): Recent wildlife Population Trendsin Kenya, KWS.

Government of Kenya (1992): Development Policy forASAL. Ministry of Reclamation and Development ofArid and Semi-arid Lands and Wastelands.

Government of Kenya (1999): The Forestry Master Planfor Kenya. Ministry of Environment and NaturalResources.

Government of Kenya (1986): Kenya: The land ofcontrast. Ministry of information and Broadcasting.

Government of Kenya / UNEP (1997): National landdegradation and natural resources mapping in Kenya.

Government of Kenya / UNEP (2001): DevastatingDrought in Kenya: Environmental Impacts andresponses.

GoK (1969): Mineral Development Policy in the1969–1973 National Development Plan.Government Printers.

GoK (1974): Mineral Development Policy in the1974–1978 National Development PlanGovernment Printers.

GoK (1979): Mineral Development Policy in the1979–1983 National Development Plan GovernmentPrinters.

GoK (1984): Mineral Development Policy in the1984–1988 National Development Plan.Government Printers.

GoK (1989): Mineral Development Policy in the1989–1993 National Development Plan.Government Printers

GoK (1989): Wildlife (Conservation andManagement–Amendment Act). Kenya Gazette supp.No. 95.

GoK (1994): National Development Plan: 1994–1996(Outlined policy for the Development ASAL).

GoK (1997): Africa Country Facts Book, 1997

Gomez, A.A.& (1938): Multiple Cropping in theHumid Tropics of Asia, IDRC, Canada

Grootenhuis, J. G. (1997): Wildlife use and the Aridand Semi-Arid Lands Programme in Kenya assupported by the Government of the Netherlands.

Groundwater (1988): Well Site for Low Supplies (WellSiting Guide) World Bank UNDP

Hamilton I. D. et al (1992): African ElephantDatabase, 1992. European Commission AfricanElephant Survey and conservation Programme.

Jaetzol R and H Schimdt (1982): Farm ManagementHandbook of Kenya. Ministry of Agriculture.

Jacobs, A. H. (1997): Reports on Populations Dynamicsin Kenya’s Rangelands (1969–1979), submitted byWinrock international in August 1984 to the Directorof Research, Ministry of Agriculture and LivestockDevelopment.

JICA (1998): A study on solid waste management in thecity of Nairobi in Republic of Kenya. CTIEngineering Company Limited.

Kimpei, M. (1991): Subdivision of Group Ranches inKajiado district

KSS (1989): Soil Erosion Mapping in Kenya. KenyaSoil Survey: Miscellaneous paper No. 36.

KWS (1991): Policy Framework and Development Plan

KWS (1993): Conservation of Biodiversity ResourceAreas (COBRA) Project.

References

References78


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 78

Introduction 79

KWS (1994): Operational Summary: Policy andGuidelines for Revenue Sharing and the WildlifeDevelopment Fund.

KWS (1994): Wildlife Human Conflicts in Kenya. Fiveperson Review Report.

KWS (1998): KWS, Wildlife Population Trends interimReport

KWS & Forestry Dep. (1991): Memorandum ofUnderstanding for the Joint Management of SelectedForests.

Lake Naivasha Riparian Association (1999): LakeNaivasha Riparian Association News, Feb. 1999.

Masibo, M. N. (1993): Environmental Impactassessment: A Case Study in the Nairobi Area.Proceedings of the Fifth conference on the Geology ofKenya.

Meadows R.F. (2001): Casual linkages between povertyand Environment in Kenya. Natural ResourcesInstitute. Catham, UK.

Ministry of Energy (1988): Rural Energy HouseholdSurvey. Government of Kenya.

Mwichabe, S., M.K. Gitau and D. Lekupe (2000): Theland tenure (and use) Change scenario study forimproved productivity and environmental conservationof P&D Ranch, Rumuruti Division, Laikipia District.Laikipia Wildlife Forum.

Mwichabe, S. and B. Wafukho (1999): The NaturalResources in Kenya. A description of the picture ofnow and the key driving forces. Scenarios for acommon ground to shape the future of Kenya. inInstitute of Economic Affairs.

Mwichabe, S. (1997): The options for sustainablelivelihoods of small holder mixed farms in LaikipiaDistrict of Kenya: Laikipia ASAL DevelopmentProgram, Nanyuki.

Mwichabe, S. (1996): Nomadic pastoralism andenvironmental legislation in Kenya. KENGO

Mwichabe, S. (1996): A proposal for a national land andland-use policy in Kenya. In: People, Land, Laws andEnvironment, KENGO/UNEP.

Ogendo and Kosura (1995) Land Tenure and AgriculturalDevelopment in Kenya: Ministry of Agriculture,Livestock Development and Marketing.

Opiyo-Akech, N (1993): Proceedings of the FifthConference on the Geology of Kenya.

Owuor, C. O. (1993): Environmental Degradation Dueto Groundwater Abstraction in

Malindi. Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on theGeology of Kenya

Shaw, R. and W. Gatheru (1998): Our problems oursolutions. An economic and public policy agenda forKenya. Institute of Economic Affairs

The World of Information (1998): Africa Review, 21stEdition, 1998, Walden information PublishingLimited. UK.

UNDP (1998): Human Development Report for Kenya.UNoN

UNEP / UNDP (1999): Development andharmonization of environmental standards in EastAfrica.

UNEP/UNDP (1999): The legal and institutional issuesin lake Victoria basin.

UNEP/UNDP (1999): Industries and enforcement ofenvironmental law in Africa.

University of Berne (1995): A conceptual approach tosustainable management of natural resources in thecontext of development. Development andEnvironment Reports No. 14.

World Resources (1999) Environmental change andhuman health.


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 79

References80


landUse4.1 2/22/02 10:31 AM Page 80

land use in kenya

Documents