Resilience to Environmental Challenges and the National Disaster Insurance Program in Kenya

Abstract

Kenya’s economy and ecological system are fragile and vulnerable to climate change. The country’s key poverty-environment challenges are related to soil degradation, deforestation, loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, land, air and water pollution, environmental health concerns due to malnutrition, pollution, environmental migrations, vulnerability to natural disasters, lack of secured land, and unreliable access to food and water. At the outset, Kenya’s economy is highly dependent on natural resources, whose exploitation may generate large economic benefits. However, their unsustainable use increases environmental degradation and decreases economic growth and livelihood opportunities. Over the last decades, Kenya has put in place a number of laws, strategies, and policy frameworks to support sustainable development and the green economy. In 2006, with the support of donor agencies, the country implemented its first index-based national disaster insurance program. The scheme targeted 5 million transiently food-insecure people, who, due to drought and climate change, faced food insecurity and hunger. This target group threatened to become chronically food-insecure if they did not receive timely support during drought conditions, as they could be forced to resort to negative coping strategies such as forced migrations, violence or the sale of productive assets. These populations were also beneficiaries of the Productive Safety Net Program. Building on the 2006 experience, development stakeholders further expanded the concept in 2007 by designing a comprehensive drought risk management framework that included risk financing. Using theoretical, analytical and quantitative survey methods, this chapter shows that changing climate patterns are undermining Kenya’s resilience of poorer communities; and that the lack of functioning safety nets to help the country absorbs loss and recovers from environmental challenges could lead to populations adopting negative coping strategies that aggravate vulnerability to climate risk exposure. The chapter argues that, through the release of adequate funds to vulnerable groups in Kenya, drought index insurance was of great importance and made the Productive Safety Net Program effective and manageable in the country. Referring to prospective policy and strategy measures, the chapter reveals the prevailing gaps between the environmental commitments made and the actual implementation to improve development outcomes. Weak capacity in environmental management and enforcement is in striking deficits. Indeed, Kenya’s growing population requires more fuelwood and more agricultural production, which increases demands for new farmland, accelerates deforestation, and forest degradation. It is estimated that, unless action is taken to change the traditional development path, an area of 9 million hectares might be deforested between 2010 and 2030. Over the same period, annual fuelwood consumption will rise by 65% with large effects on Kenya’s forest degradation. In the end, it is contended that Kenya still faces deficits in terms of corruption, strategic and operational planning, lack of human and financial capacity, green technology, and know-how. Indeed, environmental governance needs to be improved at all levels. Weak capacity in environmental management, insufficient law enforcement and monitoring are shortcomings that need to be addressed in order to meet MDG targets (especially MDG 7 on environmental sustainability) to move the country towards green growth.