40
VOICES FOR WETLANDS AND WATER: CASE STUDIES ON WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT & WASH IN KENYA
Devolution, Challenges and Opportunities for Water Governance
The five-year Watershed Programme was implemented in Laikipia and Kajiado Counties of Kenya starting 2016 in the backdrop of the Kenya Water Act of 2016. This new legislation was aimed at aligning water governance from the previous Water Act of 2012 to a new national constitution devolving executive authority to county or regional governments (KEWASNET, 2018). Programme inception coincided with confusion in the sector as newly formed county governments grappled with their new (or presumed) responsibilities. Notably, county governments like Kajiado wanted to own and sell the water within their jurisdiction to less resourced counties. But this was at variance with the new Act which explicitly defined water as a national resource to curb inter-county conflicts where the resource is both scarce and transboundary. Counties were instead only tasked with water service delivery. A keen appraisal of the five-year Watershed Programme raises two key questions: One, is the policy and legal framework as provided in the Kenya Water Act (2016) sufficient to manage and navigate water governance under devolution? And two, do national government agencies, county entities and community organisations have the institutional capacity to execute their mandates with respect to water governance? On policy and legal framework, field visits and interviews with stakeholders revealed several issues, among them policy gaps that create duplication, conflicts and confusion within stakeholder institutions which undermine enforcement of regulations and expose the water resource to degradation. A case in point is the Kimana Swamp in Kajiado, which is undergoing severe degradation despite five well-established government institutions having some form of responsibility or oversight
role over the resource. There was unanimity, therefore, that laws and policies governing water resources management and the institutions charged with this task need to be reviewed, strengthened and harmonised. Poor enforcement of regulations was particularly attributed to weak institutional capacity within national agencies, county governments and local water user associations. Unfortunately, the nascent county governments had and still have limited resources and a multiplicity of needs. Equally, political (and other) considerations rarely prioritise water issues, even in water- stressed counties like Kajiado and Laikipia. Nonetheless, there exist legal opportunities for enforcement of regulations within county government structures and the provincial administration that have not been tapped. While the water users associations are, on the other hand, closest to the resource and mandated by law to protect catchments and water sources, they are voluntary, undersubscribed, under-resourced and lack the capacity to carry out stipulated functions. Downstream WRUAs, in the case of Kajiado and Laikipia, are the most affected because of marginalisation and geographical challenges. Watershed helped bridge these gaps through capacity strengthening interventions including training and mentorship. The more resourceful and better resourced WRUAs have, as a result, used lobbying and advocacy to their advantage, seeking out donors to implement their activities and challenging county governments to budget for water governance projects and activities. To this end, County budgets for water-related issues have improved considerably and several County Bills related to the environment, climate change and water governance have been discussed and await passage into law.
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online