Towards a strategic environment assessment framework in Kenya

Abstract

PurposeThis paper sets out to assess and analyses the key pillars of the SEA framework in Kenya, highlighting aspects that should be considered for further scrutiny and review, aiming at evolving a suitable context‐specific Kenyan SEA.Design/methodology/approachContent analysis of the SEA framework was done through desktop research. This was supplemented by a two‐month internship at the National Environmental Management Authority in Kenya. The key documents prescribing and describing SEA in Kenya (legal documents, guidelines) formed a basis for interpretative analysis. International literature on SEA frameworks also formed a basis for analysis.FindingsAlthough the SEA framework is relatively complete, there are certain elements that are incomplete, e.g. environmental and sustainability standards have not been formally established. Some provisions are unclear or reveal internal incoherency within the framework. For example, the definitions of policies, plans, programmes and projects are not clearly differentiated for the purpose of the SEA framework. The framework is premised on “an early SEA” yet the key exercises of public participation and the triggering of the SEA exercise are both carried out late. There is need for SEA‐EIA tiering and SEA definitions and purposes to be harmonized within the various documents of the framework. Sector‐level SEA guidelines offer the most appropriate opportunity to address most of the substantive shortcomings of the framework.Practical implicationsThe results provide a baseline for departure towards further scrutiny and research in order to evolve a more homegrown SEA, as opposed to merely copyng what other countries have done. The highlighted areas are expounded on, with some suggestions given; in some instances no clear remedy is immediately obvious.Originality/valueThe paper is a seminal instigator of interest into the Kenyan SEA framework, which is still very young and devoid of experience and tradition. It brings to light and questions some key issues that seem to have the potential to reduce the benefits and instrumentality of the SEA tool in meeting Kenya's interest.

Trends in consultation and public participation within environmental impact assessment in Kenya

“…EIA in Kenya was developed following the domestication of international environmental law (Angwenyi 2004), and its application to development programmes has increased with time (Onyango and Schmidt 2007, Okello et al 2009, Marara et al 2011. Overall, public participation within EIA remained relatively low, with the highest score of 1.65 in 2010, out of a possible score of 5.…”

“…Specifically, Marara et al (2011) emphasize the importance of the socio-economic and political situation of a country to the effectiveness of EIA, while Kimani (2010) suggests that citizen participation is viewed as an administrative formality. Okello et al (2009) presented the barriers that impede effective public participation during EIA, while Onyango and Schmidt (2007) analysed the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) framework in Kenya, including public participation. Angwenyi (2004) highlighted environmental legislation in Kenya and the domestication of international environmental law, while Kameri-Mbote (2000) analysed the legal and institutional frameworks for public involvement in EIA.…”

Internationalisation and standardisation of European Environmental Assessment. Relevance to India

“…• Developing countries, such as Kenya (Onyango and Schmidt 2007). • Banks such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (Aschemann 2002).…”

SEA, Urban Plans and Solid Waste Management in Kenya: Participation and Learning for Sustainable Cities

“…Two innovative features of SEA participation in Kenya are a required education component in the public participation process to raise awareness about SEA (NEMA, 2012), and the prioritisation of "the cultural and social principles traditionally applied by any community in Kenya for the management of the environment or natural resources" (EMCA, 2015, 3(5) (b)). Scholarly studies generally agree that the legislative framework for SEA in Kenya is quite strong and that public participation is gradually becoming more open, inclusive and thorough in bringing citizens and communities into higher-level PPP processes (Okello et al, 2009;Onyango and Schmidt, 2007;Mutui et al, 2013;Walker et al, 2016). However, these studies also highlight significant barriers in practice, such as weak accountability (e.g.…”

“…However, these studies also highlight significant barriers in practice, such as weak accountability (e.g. showing how participant feedback is used in decision-making) (Mutui et al, 2013), late timing of participation in the SEA process (Onyango and Schmidt, 2007;Walker et al, 2016), and inadequate participant notice, access to information, and poor communication and follow up (Walker et al, 2014).…”