Kenya is facing unprecedented drought episodes, with an increased frequency of occurrence and intensity. In the past ten years, Kenya has experienced three extremely severe droughts (2010-2011, 2016-2017 and 2020-2022). The recent drought (2020–2022) was the most severe and prolonged, with extensive livelihood losses and significant displacement for households living in arid areas. Drought has a detrimental impact on a wide variety of household welfare factors in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) including access to clean water, food security, livelihoods and income, health and sanitation, education, displacement, psychological and emotional well-being.
The National Drought Management Authority (NDMA) reported increased livestock mortality in arid and semi-arid counties following the drought spell witnessed between 2020 and 2022. In March 2023, over 2.6 million heads of livestock deaths were recorded across 23 ASAL counties. Marsabit, Kajiado, Isiolo, Samburu, Turkana, Wajir and Mandera recorded above-normal livestock mortality rates. At the same time, below-average livestock market prices were recorded due to reduced stock-carrying capacity. Low market prices for livestock negatively affect the income status of households. Nearly 4.4 million people required assistance, 970,214 under-5 children and 142,179 pregnant and breastfeeding mothers were at risk of acute malnutrition as of February 2023 in the affected counties. The negative impacts of drought on household welfare necessitate interventions from government and non-governmental institutions to cushion the households.
To cushion households from drought effects, various interventions have been initiated, including early warning systems, anticipatory action, water conservation and irrigation systems, drought-resistant crops, social protection schemes, food aid and emergency relief, market linkages, and livestock insurance. Despite the existence of these interventions, households in arid areas continue to suffer from the effects of drought. There was an estimated loss of 2.6 million heads of livestock to drought across ASALs’ counties as of February 2023. This brings to question the effectiveness of the interventions put in place to cushion households from the negative effects of drought.
Drought Management and the Missing Links
Early warning systems
Early warning systems are a crucial tool for cushioning households from drought through early response. The information from the early warning system enables decision-makers and communities to take preventive and mitigation actions. NDMA, the Kenya Meteorological Department (KMD), the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) and the ASAL Humanitarian Network (AHN) have platforms and networks that provide early warning information. Local and indigenous knowledge has also been integrated into formal early warning systems. During the onset of the drought in 2019, the Kenya Red Cross Society used early drought predictions from the FEWS NET and NDMA’s early warning bulletins to register households and transferred cash to 25,000 people for four months during peak drought.
The NDMA Early Warning Bulletin primarily uses the vegetation condition index (VCI) to assess the quality of vegetation as a predictive indicator of herd health. Given that some vegetations are resistant to drought and not palatable by livestock, the VCI data may give inaccurate results about the actual conditions of pastures. The VCI only measures vegetation conditions and does not consider other factors that may affect food security and livelihoods.
Anticipatory action
The use of anticipatory action is still a new concept among stakeholders in drought management and response. The stakeholders prefer crisis response and reactive approaches to climate-induced disasters. The National Drought Contingency Fund (DCF) managed by NDMA is an anticipatory action intervention which provides flexible funding for pre-agreed drought contingency plans at the county level. The funds for anticipatory action are not always available when needed and are released after situations have deteriorated. For example, the response to the 2021-22 drought in several counties in Kenya came after several people lost lives and the situation worsened, despite an early warning from FEWS NET.
Social protection programme
The Hunger Safety Net Programme (HSNP) is a social protection programme targeted at pastoralist households living in chronic poverty in eight counties, namely Turkana, Wajir, Mandera, Marsabit, Garissa, Tana River, Isiolo, and Samburu. The programme includes providing shock-responsive cash transfers during drought situations as predicted by NDMA using the Vegetation Condition Index (VCI), a component of the early warning systems. The government and development partners from time to time provide food aid and emergency relief as a measure to cushion households from drought. The development partners who have previously provided emergency relief and food aid in drought-affected areas of Kenya include the World Food Programme, World Bank, United Nations organizations and the United States of America.
While evidence suggests that HSNP has achieved a reduction in multidimensional poverty and food security, there are concerns about the coverage and reliability of the programme. The emergency payments provided by HSNP are less reliable and unpredictable, making it difficult for households to plan for future expenses. This gap is further compounded by the fact that recipient households are likely to have more pressing immediate needs during a drought shock.
Livestock insurance programmes
Livestock is a valuable resource for communities living in ASALs. The loss of livestock during drought periods impacts negatively on the people’s welfare. Several livestock insurance plans have been put in place in Kenya’s ASALs to reduce these risks. These insurance programmes include Kenya Livestock Insurance Programme (KLIP), Index-Based Livestock Insurance (IBLI), and livestock insurance programmes by Old Mutual and Takaful insurance companies. However, cultural beliefs curtail the uptake of livestock insurance among pastoralists. Some pastoralists view insurance as a Western concept that does not align with their traditional way of life. They may prefer to rely on traditional coping mechanisms, such as selling or trading livestock during times of hardship, rather than paying premiums for insurance. Additionally, some pastoralists believe that insurance goes against their religious beliefs.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Kenya has a comprehensive mix of interventions to address drought emergencies and cushion households against the effects of drought. However, some of these interventions have not achieved the objectives for which they are intended to achieve. To improve the effectiveness of the interventions, the following recommendations are important.
- Early warning systems can be improved by integrating more localized and contextual data into the drought management models by strengthening data collection and analysis at all levels. The communication of early warnings and findings can be done more regularly and clearly to decision-makers and communities.
- The Ministry in charge of Social Protection could work towards improving the reliability and predictability of HSNP emergency payments and consider increasing the amount of funding available for the programme to enable households receive sufficient support during times of crisis.
- To increase the uptake of livestock insurance among pastoralists, it is important to work with local communities to develop insurance products that are culturally appropriate and meet local community needs for improved uptake. It is important to understand cultural beliefs and enhance community participation, awareness and capacity development in the design and implementation of interventions. Climate-smart agriculture requires more locally appropriate responses in policies, extension services and development interventions that are designed for the ASALs.
By Mr Elvis Kiptoo, Young Professional, Productive Sector Department
Image: Courtesy of Kenya News Agency
