Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Devolution in Kenya: Likely Impacts on Conservation Biodiversity in Local Forests By Andrew Kiplagat Department of Agroforestry and Rural Development University.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Devolution in Kenya: Likely Impacts on Conservation Biodiversity in Local Forests By Andrew Kiplagat Department of Agroforestry and Rural Development University."— Presentation transcript:

1 Devolution in Kenya: Likely Impacts on Conservation Biodiversity in Local Forests By Andrew Kiplagat Department of Agroforestry and Rural Development University of Kabianga P.O. Box Kericho, Kenya Reflecting Biodiversity – Holistic approaches and regional adaptation 12 – 15 September 2014, Bonn 5/3/20151

2 Presentation Outline 1.Introduction: Devolution in Kenya 2.Devolved Functions 3.Devolution and NRM in Kenya 4.Existent NRM Institutional Arrangements 5.Challenges in Forest Management 6.Reflections from Literature 7.Conclusions 5/3/20152

3 3 1. Introduction:Devolution in Kenya  In 2010, Kenya promulgated a new Constitution  This was a culmination of struggles that started in the early 1990s  These struggles aimed at expanding democratic space and promoting equitable distribution of national resources  Among the key highlights in the new Constitution of Kenya is Devolution

4 Objectives of Devolution  Devolution aimed at delivering the following objectives: Promoting democratic and accountable exercise of power Fostering national unity Giving powers of self-governance to the people and enhancing their participation in the exercise of the powers of the State and in decision-making 4

5 Continued... Objectives of Devolution Recognizing the right of communities to manage their own affairs and to further their development Protecting and promoting the interests and rights of minorities and marginalized communities Promoting social and economic development Ensuring equitable sharing of national and local resources Facilitating the decentralization of State organs, their functions and services Enhancing checks and balances and the separation of powers. 5

6 2. Devolved functions  The functions devolved to the county are: 1.Agriculture 2.County health services, including, in particular 3.Control of air pollution, noise pollution, other public nuisances and outdoor advertising. 4.Cultural activities, public entertainment and public amenities 5.County transport 6

7 Continued... Devolved functions 6.Animal control and welfare 7.Trade development and regulations 8.County planning and development 9.Pre-primary education, village polytechnics, home craft centres and childcare facilities. 10.Implementation of specific national government policies on natural resources and environmental conservation Soil and water conservation and Forestry. 7

8 Continued... Devolved functions 11.County public works and services 12.Fire station services and disaster management. 13.Control of drugs and pornography 14.Ensuring and coordinating the participation of communities and locations in governance at the local level 8

9 Structure of County Governments 9

10 3. Devolution and NRM  Article 62 [3]) states that all natural resources are the control of the National Government  These natural resources include government forests, minerals and water among others  The Constitution therefore vests the role of protection of the environment and natural resources with the National Government (4 th Schedule Part 1 Art. 22) 10

11 Continued...  This role is geared at delivering a durable and sustainable system of development  The same Constitution (4 th Schedule Part 2 Art. 10) however gives the responsibility of implementation of specific national government policies on natural resources and environmental conservation on the County Governments  It is not clear however what these ‘specific‘ national policies on natural resources are  It is not also clear how the County Governments are to discharge this function 11

12 4. Existent NRM Institutional Arrangements  Management of Forests in Kenya is guided by Forest Policy 2014 and the Forest Act 2005  The Forest Policy 2014 states that Kenya Forest Service - a state agency created by Forest Act will focus on the management of forests on public land (Held in Trust by National Government)  The role of the County governments is implementing national policies and County forest programmes including the delivery of forest extension services to communities, farmers and private land owners 12

13 5. Challenges in Forest Management  As seen earlier, the Constitution is not clear what is meant by ‘national policies on environment‘ as it is not clearly defined  The potential challenge with this is that National and County Government Leaders and Civil Servants will continue reading from the different scripts, duplicating activities  It may also be a watershed for conflicts between the national and county governments 13

14 Reflections from Literature  Review of literature reveals that the above scenario in Kenya is not totally unexpected  Campell (2005) notes, for example, that control over natural resources is linked to issues of power/good governance  It is assumed that devolution of NRM will lead to greater participation in decision-making wgich is itself a positive good that enhances good governance in NRM 14

15 Continued...  The other assumption is that NR will be looked at better and more efficiciently if it is managed at the local level by communities or local government  Using the example of Uganda, Owino (2013) points out devolution of Forest Mangement never works in most cases  The main reason is that the devolved units usually lack technical and financial resources to effectively manage forests 15

16 Continued...  He further notes that without national government support (e.g., technical expertise and funding to consistently pay salaries), the devolved unit forest staff can be easily manipulated by powerful local level leaders  All these can make forests open to plunder  The lessons given is that forest management can quickly disintegrate if devolution is introduced in the absence of enabling policy and policy frameworks 16

17 Conclusion  It is clear therefore that if devolution of NRM should work, then it not only needs appropriate enabling policy but national government support over time  Unfortunately, it has been pointed out that despite the rhetoric of devolution, National Authorities continue to drive the NRM agenda  It therefore implies that the contadiction and confusion such as in the Kenyan case is not totally unexpected 17

18 The end Ahsante sana! 18

19 References  Campell, T. (2006). Devolved NRM as a Means of Empowering the Poor. Rhetoric or Reality?Trocaire Development Review, Canada.  Kenya, Republic of. (2014). Revised National Forest Policy Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources. Government Printers, Nairobi.  Kenya, Republic of. (2010). The Kenya Constitution Government Press, Nairobi.  Kenya, Republic of. (2005). Forest Act Government Press, Nairobi.  Owino, F. (2013). How will Devolved Governance Wildlife and Natural Resource Conservation in Kenya? EAWLS SWARA Magazine, Nairobi.  Yatich, T., Awiti, A., Nyukuri, E., Mutua, J., Kyalo, A., Tanui, J. And Catacutan, D. (2007). Policy and Institutional Context of NRM in Kenya. Challenges and Opportunities for Landcare. ICRAF Working Paper No. 43. World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi. 19


Download ppt "Devolution in Kenya: Likely Impacts on Conservation Biodiversity in Local Forests By Andrew Kiplagat Department of Agroforestry and Rural Development University."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google