planning to do or not do to address those needs; and 3) where the team has elected not to incorporate an environmental activity or approach, what is their rationale for that decision.
SO 1: Sustainable reforms and accountable governance strengthened to improve the balance of power among the institutions of governance.
SO 1 has been developed to address USAID Global goals in Democracy and Governance, and has no explicit environmentally-focused activities or approaches included. Overall improvements in governance and civil society participation in Kenya can only impact positively upon the country’s environmental resources base, both in relation to USAID/Kenya programs and more broadly. However, significant reforms in public sector environmental management are needed, as is shown repeatedly in the Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment: USAID/Kenya Strategy, of which this Annex is part. The natural resources results that the Mission is pursuing have evolved to emphasize community involvement as key to decision-making about resource use. Communities are learning to devise win-win strategies that is, compromises which have been a thorny problem for political forces at a national level. Pursuit of these results will continue to engage local citizens groups in hands-on training in democratic decision-making.
The NRM sector is one of the most highly politicized in Kenya. Large-scale depredations of forest resources have been permitted, even facilitated, by the regime as a form of preferentialism and local patronage. Since ownership and regulation of many natural resources in Kenya is under the control of the local authorities e.g., forests, fisheries, and minerals of low value (such as sand) the results the Mission will pursue in SO 4 could be jeopardized by unresponsive local governments, providing them with information, lobbying constructively for relevant by-laws.
Therefore SO 1 and SO 4 plan to build linkages to environmental sustainability in Kenya and possible synergies with the proposed environment programs as noted below:
IR 1.1: CSOs effectively demand reforms and monitor government activities. This result is very pertinent to an IR 4.4 in the new natural resources management program, SO 4: Environmental advocacy strengthened, which aims to strengthen the ability of concerned stakeholders to affect change in their access and rights to manage natural resources. SO Team leaders plan to assess whether and to what extent the respective target stakeholders and organizations they aim to support in this effort are similar or complementary to those in SO 4, IR 4, and how both might achieve synergistic and mutually-valued results for both D/G and NRM objectives, with more focused and efficient use of USAID Mission resources.
IR 1.1 may also be important in the aim to mitigate conflict; many conflicts in Kenya today are over competition for primary natural resources and the benefits there from. The Mission will seek out examples of these to address through the D/G program, such as community-based organizations working to resolve conflicts over access to water, pastoral land, and/or high potential agricultural zones.
IR 4.2 Encroachment and subdivision reduced and a host of sub-IRs regarding environmental management, land-use and forest policy and the national biodiversity strategy, all will benefit by enhanced accountability of public institutions, especially the Parliament, which SO 1 IR 1.2 (Increased independence of selected government institutions) and 1.4 (better informed public and political actors) intends to promote. The new SO 1 will develop new implementation mechanisms, into which environmental review and compliance elements will be incorporated.
The SO 1 team has decided, at least at the outset, not to address explicit needs in environmental sustainability in this strategy, because (a) the host-country political and bureaucratic context is not highly conducive to productive investment in strong cross-sectoral programming involving NRM; (b) the need for basic democratic reforms is extremely pressing, (c) an environmental focus is not in SO 1 comparative advantage, and (d) funds are limited. However, opportunities will be sought to identify and foster cross-sectoral synergies which would bolster the sustainability of the program overall.
Kara PagePage 4810/23/2006