Kenya Resilience Factsheet

More Info

Seventy percent of disasters in Kenya are climate-related, including drought and floods. Other shocks and stresses are also common, including political unrest and disease outbreaks. Drought accounts for an 8 percent loss of gross domestic product (GDP) every five years, while floods account for 5.5 percent every seven years The COVID-19 pandemic and climate-induced desert locust invasion in most arid and semi-arid land (ASAL) counties have worsened Kenya’s ability to support vulnerable communities. Frequent, human-induced disasters, such as civil and ethnic resource-based conflicts, terrorism and violent extremism compound the situation.

Since 2013, USAID has invested over $400 million in development and humanitarian assistance in the ASALs. This support to the Government of Kenya (GOK), the National Drought Management Authority and the local communities has led to significant progress in strengthening institutions, systems and community capacity to address shocks. This support saved lives that would have been lost due to disasters; secured livelihoods, resources and other assets; and ensured better preparedness and mitigation against disasters. Despite the investment, humanitarian needs in Kenya’s ASALs continue to require support due to the persistent and increasing disasters affecting the country and on-going inefficiencies in local response systems.

Program Strategies

USAID’s resilience strategy in Kenya reduces humanitarian needs in chronically vulnerable communities by strengthening human capital and well-being, protecting livelihoods and increasing the capacity of households, institutions and systems to plan for, respond to and recover from shocks and stresses.The strategy aligns with GOK’s efforts to strengthen resilience in areas of recurrent crises and corresponds to Development Objective in USAID’s Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) 2020–2025: Resilience of Vulnerable Populations and Environments Improved. The strategy takes a multisectoral approach, layering, sequencing and integrating various funding streams and technical sectors, including agriculture; biodiversity; water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH); humanitarian assistance; countering violent extremism; climate adaptation; health; education; and peace-building activities. USAID advances program coherence and reduces humanitarian needs, particularly in the ASALs through this strategy.

Activities and Strategic Partnerships

USAID and GOK co-create, invest, implement and monitor a portfolio of activities that reduce acute malnutrition and child stunting; promote inclusion and access to quality health, WASH, education and financial services; and promote diversified livelihoods and incomes through better markets. Activities also focus on sustainable use and protection of biodiversity and communal land through community conservancies and pro-poor policies and investments by the GOK. USAID applies a collective action and impact approach to facilitate the convergence of services, collaboration, learning and adaptive management with national and county-based partners.

At the national level, there is strong coordination with the State Department for Development of the ASALs and other technical line ministries. At the county level, USAID coordinates with the respective county governments. USAID’s Partnership for Resilience and Economic Growth (PREG) in northern Kenya ASAL counties and southeast Kenya (SEK) coordination platforms bring together humanitarian and development partners to build resilience in vulnerable pastoralist communities.

Activities that contribute to USAID’s resilience strategy in PREG counties include the Kenya Livestock Market Systems activity, Expanding and Diversifying Viable Economic Opportunities, USAID Kuza,Accelerating Institutional and Food Systems Development (AIFSD), Resilience Learning Activity, CORE Group Polio Project, Empowered Youth, Global Refugee Forum —Tusameheane Tujenge Nchi, Groundwater Mapping Project, Health Policy Project, Kenya Electoral Conflicts Mitigation and Civic/Voter Education Support Program, Kenya Investment Mechanism, Northern Landscape Program, Strengthening Electoral Accountability and Inclusivity Program, Mulika Initiative, USAID Imarisha Jamii,Tusome Early Grade Reading, Kenya Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs)-Strathmore, and Tujenge Jamii Activity. In addition, the Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance has activities in the PREG zone and elsewhere that support building resilience through cash and in-kind transfers to meet food consumption gaps, build climate-resilient assets, set up financial inclusion models, address persistent acute malnutrition and engage youth in agribusinesses.

SEK coordination platform activities include AIFSD, Health Policy Project, Kenya Crops and Dairy Market Systems activity, Kenya Investment Mechanism, Program Management and Healthcare Waste Management, SBDCs- Strathmore, Resilience Learning Activity, Strengthening Electoral Accountability and Inclusivity Program,Tusome Early Grade Reading, 4BetterHealth Program, Stawisha Pwani, and Yetu Initiatives Global Development Alliance. Additional information on resilience activities is available on the Kenya Fact Sheets.

Evaluation and Learning

PREG has commissioned an evaluation to measure the impact of activities implemented under the program on household resilience and well-being outcomes in the face of shocks and stressors. The study will provide insight into the extent to which layering, sequencing and integrating activities improves resilience outcomes and strengthens resilience capacities of food-insecure households in nine northern Kenya ASAL counties. The Resilience Learning Activity also assists regional, national and local institutions with resilience analysis aimed at capacity strengthening for knowledge management, communications and adaptive management.

Evidence suggests that Kenya was substantially more resilient in 2017 than in 2011, when the country experienced several consecutive severe droughts. A comparison of food insecurity and assistance expenditures during the 2011 drought and the 2016–2017 drought shows that although similar numbers of households experienced food insecurity, the depth and cost in 2016– 2017 was less than expected, given the severity of the drought.