renewa le energy and de entralization (read kenya
TRANSCRIPT
RENEWABLE ENERGY AND
DECENTRALIZATION (READ)
KENYA STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT,
NAKURU COUNTY
Project EP/L002469/1, 2013-2015
24 April 2014, Merica Hotel, Nakuru County, Kenya
Primary authors – Wairimu Ngugi and Tameezan wa Gathui
2
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
READ, Renewable Energy and Decentralisation, is an 18 month project of the Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council (EPSRC, UK), the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the UK Department for
Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Led by Loughborough University (UK) in partnership with Gamos Ltd (UK) and
Practical Action Consulting in Eastern Africa (PAC-EA), it began in October 2013 and is being implemented in Kenya and
Rwanda. A key highlight of READ activities was the one day stakeholder’s forum organised by PAC-EA on April 24 2014
to identify issues and develop a common understanding on decentralized energy with respect to decentralised
governance among relevant actors in energy governance in Nakuru county of Kenya. The 26 workshop participants
were drawn from local and central government actors engaged in energy, water, health, agriculture, as well as targeted
market actors including entrepreneurs, financial service providers and non-governmental organisations involved in
decentralised energy issues.
The workshop was opened by Sammy Ngige Kimani, County Director of the Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources,
Energy and Water, Nakuru County. Workshop objectives were (1) To identify the local governance of energy issues in
Kenya generally and Nakuru specifically (2) To identify the nature of decentralization processes in Kenya and their
actual and potential impacts on a range of different issues relating to energy (3) To assess the levels of understanding
about decentralised energy amongst key stakeholders (4) To map key stakeholders and (5) To work together with
stakeholders to identify key issues and suggest ways in which to move forward
On energy access participants acknowledged that majority of the population is dependent on biomass with 65% of the
population lacking access to electricity and efficient technologies for cooking and heating. There is lack of clear
understanding of the roles, responsibilities and authority of key stakeholders including county government following
recent changes in Kenya to a new decentralised political system. Lack of county government control over large scale
energy generation; the high cost of production from installation of geothermal energy resources; socio-cultural issues
associated with energy production from human waste; lack of capacity and standards/quality control and high
installation costs of biogas systems; high costs of equipment, lack of quality control and lack of awareness about the
potential of solar energy; lack of awareness, limited distribution and lack of quality control in the Improved Cook Stove
(ICS) sector are some of the key constraints that affect energy access in the county. Despite the above constraints,
national energy policies and implementation plans indicate political will towards decentralization of authority,
resources and capacities as well as increasing effort towards increasing energy access through decentralised energy
options.
On the way forward stakeholders agreed on the need for the following actions they would take forward, some of which
could be the basis for READ intervention: (i) Create awareness amongst and build the capacity on decentralized energy
access at the county level, share information and replicate similar workshops, assess knowledge, identify challenges
and develop sustainable technologies; (ii) Collaborate with the Nakuru county government to expand the briquetting
sector for improved livelihoods of low income communities; (iii) Lobby the UK government to provide energy
awareness training in Kenya; (iv) On technology development stakeholders will focus on learning more about
geothermal production; up- scaling biogas; joint fund-raising; creating dialogue and county level collaboration on green
energy; liaising with National and County governments on Renewable energy issues, decentralization and capacity
building; developing RE training material; influencing County government on renewable energy laws / policies;
compiling / sharing RE case studies, among other strategies.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 2
2 ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................................................... 4
3 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 5
3.1 WORKSHOP BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2 WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTPUTS ..................................................................................................... 5
3.3 OPENING SPEECH ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
3.4 THE READ PROJECT – AN OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 6
3.5 HIGHLIGHTS FROM PLENARY DISCUSSIONS ON THE READ PROJECT OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 7
4 EXPERIENCES IN DECENTRALISATION AND GOVERNANCE ................................................................... 7
4.1 LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND ENERGY GOVERNANCE: SOME CASE STUDIES ................................................................................ 7
4.2 WORKING WITH THE NAKURU COUNTY GOVERNMENT – EXPERIENCES FROM SCODE ............................................................ 9
4.3 MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF URBAN SANITATION AND RENEWABLE ENERGY: BIO-CENTRES IN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS ............ 10
4.4 HIGHLIGHTS FROM PLENARY DISCUSSIONS ON EXPERIENCES IN DECENTRALISATION AND GOVERNANCE .................................... 11
5 DECENTRALISATION AND ENERGY ISSUES IN NAKURU ...................................................................... 12
5.1 DECENTRALISATION ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY READ ........................................................................................................... 12
5.2 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ON DECENTRALIZATION ISSUES IN NAKURU ................................................................................. 13
5.3 STAKEHOLDER MAPPING ........................................................................................................................................... 13
5.4 ENERGY LITERACY: DO WE KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT ENERGY? ............................................................................................ 15
5.5 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ON ENERGY LITERACY IN NAKURU ............................................................................................. 16
6 STRENGTHENING COUNTY GOVERNANCE ........................................................................................ 18
6.1 CAPACITY BUILDING FOR COUNTY GOVERNANCE ............................................................................................................ 18
6.2 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ON CAPACITY BUILDING NEEDS AND REQUIRED ACTION ................................................................ 19
6.3 FURTHER ACTIONS IDENTIFIED BY STAKEHOLDERS ............................................................................................................ 19
7 OVERVIEW OF PARTICIPATORY MARKET MAPPING .......................................................................... 20
8 WAY FORWARD – ACTION PLANS .................................................................................................... 21
9 CLOSING REMARKS AND WORKSHOP EVALUATION .......................................................................... 22
9.1 CLOSING REMARKS ................................................................................................................................................... 22
9.2 VOTE OF THANKS ..................................................................................................................................................... 22
9.3 WORKSHOP EVALUATION .......................................................................................................................................... 23
10 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 25
10.1 APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS – READ NAKURU STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP .............................................................. 25
10.2 APPENDIX 2: AGENDA – READ STAKEHOLDERS’ WORKSHOP, NAKURU COUNTY, KENYA (APRIL 24, 2014) ............................. 26
4
2 ACRONYMS
CBO Community Based Organisation CSO Civil Society Organisation EPSRC Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council ESCOs Energy Service Companies GDC Geothermal Development Company ICS Improved Cook Stoves ICTs Information and Communication Technologies INGOS International Non-governmental Organisations KENFAP Kenya National Federation of Agricultural Producers KENGEN Kenya Electricity Generation Company KENTRACO Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Ltd KFS Kenya Forest Service K-REP Kenya Rural Enterprise Programme KWS Kenya Wildlife Service LGED Local Government Engineering Department MCA Member of County Assembly MOALF Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries MOEP Ministry of Energy and Petroleum NARUWASCO Nakuru Water and Sewerage Company NAWASCO Naivasha Water and Sewerage Company NGO Non-governmental Organisation PAC-EA Practical Action Consulting in Eastern Africa PMM Participatory Market Mapping PMSD Participatory Market System Development REA Rural Electrification Authority SACCO Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies SCODE Ltd Sustainable Community Development Services Ltd SMEs Small and Medium Enterprises UK United Kingdom UNDP United Nations Development Programme WRMA Water Resources Management Authority WASREB Water Services Regulatory Board
5
3 INTRODUCTION
3.1 WORKSHOP BACKGROUND
READ is implemented through a partnership between Loughborough University (UK), PAC - EA, and Gamos Ltd. (UK).
The READ project began in October 2013 is an 18 month project of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research
Council (EPSRC, UK), the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the UK Department for Energy and
Climate Change (DECC). The overall goal of the project is: Increased adoption of clean energy services among low
income communities in Africa, which in turn will benefit communities by strengthening livelihoods, encouraging
economic growth, improving health and protecting the environment.
The READ Project is driven by the following objectives:
To assess the roles and responsibilities of local authorities in relation to energy issues across African states.
To examine how the roles and responsibilities of local authorities in relation to energy issues have already
been affected by the transfer of powers and budgets under decentralization initiatives.
To analyse the implications for local authorities in relation to energy issues of further, more profound,
transformations that would see further transfer of powers and budgets under decentralization initiatives
Understand what kind of capacity local authorities need in order to play the potentially crucial role of
integrating clean energy transitions into local development planning and how those capacities are being
enhanced.
Target beneficiaries of the project include local, national and international stakeholders (in and beyond the specific
countries of study) in decentralised energy governance comprising market actors especially local government and
national government as well as academia; donor agencies; communities; the private sector including finance
institutions; national utilities; Energy Service Companies (ESCOs); Civil Society Organisations (CSOs); Non-governmental
Organisations (NGOs) and International Non-governmental Organisations (INGOs). At a national level the feedback from
the research findings will enable some specific actors to enhance or redirect their interventions, possibly to engage
local authorities or to begin programmes of awareness building.
As part of the activities of READ project, a one-day stakeholder’s workshop was organised on April 24 2014, to enable
project partners and stakeholders develop a better understanding of decentralized energy in the current context of the
newly decentralised county government in Nakuru, Kenya.
3.2 WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTPUTS
Objectives
The workshop objectives were as follows:
To find out about the local governance of energy issues in Kenya generally and Nakuru specifically
To find out about the nature of decentralization processes in Kenya and their actual and potential impacts on a
range of different issues relating to energy
To assess the levels of understanding of decentralised energy amongst key stakeholders
To map key stakeholders
To work together with participants to identify key issues and suggest ways forward together (identifying
capacity building needs, funding sources, next steps etc.)
6
Participants and Outputs
The 26 workshop participants, a list of whom is shown on Appendix 1, were drawn from local and central government
actors engaged in energy, as well as targeted market actors involved in decentralised energy issues. Workshop outputs
included: development of a common understanding of decentralised energy and decentralised governance; improved
understanding of energy in the context of County Governance; key issues/gaps identified including capacity building
needs.
3.3 OPENING SPEECH
(Sammy Ngige Kimani, Director, Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources, Energy and Water)
Mr. Kimani who is the Director of the Nakuru County Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources, Energy and Water
said that county governance is a newly constituted structure in Kenya. He explained that it is important as we build this
structure to consider those who will benefit and who will assist us. The Ministry appreciates those who are supporting
the process of developing these structures. “We have a long association with Practical Action and have worked
together on issues of energy and environmental management and protection of our resources,” noted Mr. Kimani.
Elaborating on the workshop theme Mr. Kimani said: “Energy is key to development and there is nothing we can do
without it, in education, health, and other areas. Energy cuts across and in this county we have various energy
resources whose utilisation involves collaboration with other sectors. There are several devolved functions that have
been devolved to the county level that support the interests and roles of the national government. He added: “We have
relied largely on grid electricity but realise there are areas far from the grid that also need access to energy. The
national energy bill is going through a second reading and the county is yet to get home grown solutions. Nakuru
County has geothermal resources in Menengai and in Olkaria which the national government controls, and we need
policies that will enable us benefit from our own ecosystem, as a county. We also champion other options. For instance,
a private company is assembling solar panels in Naivasha, and we use our biomass energy resources and other
recyclable material to produce charcoal. We welcome the opportunity for further collaboration.”
3.4 THE READ PROJECT – AN OVERVIEW
Dr Ed Brown, National Co-Coordinator, UK Low Carbon Energy for Development Network and Senior Lecturer in Human
Geography, Loughborough University provided an overview of the READ project. READ aims to address two challenges:
(a) Energy challenges - energy access, climate change, energy security and energy decentralization; (b) Challenges
facing local authorities in the context of decentralization - increasing demands, limited resources and limited capacity.
Very little research or activity connecting these two sets of challenges in decentralized energy has been carried out - a
2009 study by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the only significant study connecting the two areas.
The study explored decentralization policy in over 60 countries and found explicit mention of energy issues in only four
cases. READ project’s review activities have so far found very little further work in this area since the UNDP study was
published.
Underlying the project’s aims is the question of what kind of capacity local authorities need in order to play the
potentially crucial role of integrating clean energy transitions into local development planning and how those capacities
might be enhanced. Hence the final objective of exploring how local authorities relate to energy issues in two very
different country contexts. The project has planned interviews and workshops in Kenya and Rwanda with the aim of
developing a programme for further work in this area. The project is also developing working papers and undertaking
interviews with project developers and NGOs among other interest groups in the UK. A project website
www.thereadproject.co.uk has also been launched along with networking and awareness -raising to convince key
stakeholders of the importance of investing in local government capacity in this area.
7
The project is developing the following Working Papers (WP):
WP 1: Governance, Decentralization and Energy: A Critical Review of the Key Issues
WP 2: Decentralization in Sub-Saharan Africa: prevalence, scope and challenges
WP 3: Energy Proficiency
WP 4: Mini-grids: questions of scale, governance and community
WP 5: Capacity Building Tools for Local Government
3.5 HIGHLIGHTS FROM PLENARY DISCUSSIONS ON THE READ PROJECT OVERVIEW
Stakeholders expressed great interest to learn from experiences in Rwanda where decentralisation has been
implemented for 10 years.
Participants described both the project and the workshop as timely since there is little knowledge on
decentralisation. They cited the need to learn from each other, to work together and to take the lessons forward.
Participants said the workshop was in line with government energy initiatives within the context of RE and newly
established county government structure – this presents opportunity to explore what areas to concentrate on with
regards to local needs.
The stakeholders identified the need to look at gender issues during identification of decentralisation issues since
the energy needs of men and women are different and planners tend to forget this aspect. The broad needs of
people are not usually addressed so the project should explore ways of influencing the process to ensure it
addresses gender issues.
4 EXPERIENCES IN DECENTRALISATION AND GOVERNANCE
4.1 LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND ENERGY GOVERNANCE: SOME CASE STUDIES
(Ed Brown) 1
There is lack of attention to local governance in most approaches towards addressing sustainable energy access. The
key themes tend to either be about national ministries and/or large-scale private companies or NGOs, SMEs and
households. At the same time, local governments frequently don’t have specific policies/budgets for addressing energy
issues, yet local Government can be a major player.
“Local authorities construct, operate and maintain economic, social and environmental infrastructure, oversee planning
processes, establish local environmental policies and regulations, and assist in implementing national and sub-national
environmental policies. As the level of governance closest to the people, they play a vital role in educating, mobilizing
and responding to the public to promote sustainable development” (UN, 1992).
Local government has played a major role in the development of the electricity infrastructure in many Northern
countries. In the UK for example, local government agencies supplied about one third and two thirds respectively of gas
and electricity consumption in 1945 prior to nationalization (Byrne, 2000:22). In the US, municipal and state provision
(and cooperative provision in rural areas) was the rule rather than the exception for much of the twentieth century.
1 Case Studies by: Ed Brown (Loughborough University) and Simon Batchelor (Gamos Ltd).
8
However, the role of local government in this context is not just a Northern phenomenon, nor is it just historical. There
are several examples of electrification schemes (grid and off-grid) where local authorities have played a major role to
illustrate the role of local authorities. In South Africa electrification projects were linked to integrated regional
development plans. Municipalities have responsibility for implementing Free Basic Alternative Energy Policy. Other
examples include Brazil and India. Mozambique and Burkina Faso have also both assigned power over electricity
generation to sub-national governments – however they are often unable to operate inherited capacity let alone invest
in new projects.
Examples of successful schemes also exist and these seem to depend upon: i) Sufficient local/regional control of
budgets; ii) Capacity Building for local institutions; iii) Multi-level collaborations with clearly defined roles. The very
successful micro-hydro programme (UNDP funded Rural Energy Development Programme) from Nepal presents an
interesting example. The programme is responsible for management and delivery of decentralised energy services to
communities under the oversight of local authorities, and village/district development committees with well-defined
roles (UNDP 2007a, EC 2007). Long-term capacity building underlay the successful outcomes of this initiative – a large
portion of overall project costs went into capacity building of local government and district committees, among other
components.
Where no national programmes have been organized, some municipalities have taken the initiative and run their own
programmes. In the North there is growing movement for local governments to take a leadership role in promoting
decentralized energy (e.g. Freiberg and UK Municipalities). But it is not just important in Europe - there are other
examples of local energy programmes run by or supported via individual local governments, for example waste to
energy schemes in Nicaragua.
Not all local authorities have the capacity (or the resources) to develop their own generation projects. However there
are plenty of examples of other actions that individual local authorities have engaged in which have made a difference.
Some local authorities have played important roles in ascertaining
the types of needs that communities and local businesses express in
relation to energy and how they rank those needs against other
necessities and desires. These consultation processes can feed into
improving overall national energy policy management, the targeting
of particular schemes or identification of capacity building needs
(not just about electricity).
Other important roles for local authorities include:
(i) Ensuring that NGO/private sector energy initiatives are
connected adequately into local and regional development
strategies and local programmes in water, education, health etc.;
(ii) Provision of information and training about energy issues (for
example about specific technologies, how to use energy for
livelihood enhancement, contacts for companies operating in
particular fields, funding possibilities etc.); (iii) A ‘demonstrator role’ in promoting new technologies or approaches in
the delivery of services to local citizens – e.g. the use of new technologies in powering municipal buildings, the adoption
of energy conservation measures, the development of active policies regarding the use of municipal waste in energy
generation or policies promoting the use of biofuels in official transport, etc. Other roles include collaborative action;
establishing energy cities; global municipal collaboration; establishing centralised energy services (for example
municipalities are working together in Central America to promote awareness of Renewable Energy RE and its role in
expanding access in rural areas); the role of national organizations (for example Local Government Engineering
Department/LGED in Bangladesh) in supporting activities of individual municipalities – radio campaigns, pledges etc.
Figure 4-1 Example of a mapping exercise during
stakeholder consultation process.
9
4.2 WORKING WITH THE NAKURU COUNTY GOVERNMENT – EXPERIENCES FROM SCODE
(Samuel Kisangi, SCODE)
Sustainable Community Development Services Limited (SCODE Ltd) is a private company limited by shares,
incorporated in April, 2008 in accordance to the Companies Act (Cap 486) of the laws of Kenya. It is an offshoot of
SCODE the NGO, which has vast experience in formulation and implementation of community based RE and energy
efficiency projects. SCODE has a Head Office and a community-training and resource centre in Nakuru County and field
offices in Nyandarua, Laikipia and Nyeri counties. SCODE offers various services including biogas, solar drying
technology, improved cook stoves (ICS), solar home systems, consultancy services and institutional cook stoves.
SCODE has established the following partnerships:
Ministry of Co-operative Development: In August 2013, Stove Producers in Murang’a County were assisted by SCODE
in partnership with the Ministry of Cooperative Development in registering the Green-step SACCO which has 54 active
members. SCODE has been partnering with the Ministry in training SACCOS on strategic and business planning, as well
as good management practices
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Livestock, MoAFL: SCODE has been working closely with MoAFL through the
Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme in Nyandarua County to provide agro forestry training and
awareness creation in ICS to local communities. It has partnered with the Ministry in Mogotio to train local people on
stoves installation, dissemination and on women outreach programmes. SCODE has been participating in MoAFL events
such as exhibitions and field days
Registrar of Societies, Nakuru County: SCODE supported the registration and drafting of by-laws for tree nursery
entrepreneurs in Nakuru County as stipulated by the County Government. This has led to the formation of Nakuru
County Tree Nursery Association.
Kenya Forest Service (KFS) and Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS): Both
organizations have supported the disseminating of ICS and tree
seedlings and trainings for entrepreneurs. They have also brought
SCODE on board to participate in their field days and exhibitions.
Some of the governance-related challenges experienced by SCODE
during programme implementation are: (a) Increased levies/charges by
the county governments; (b) Lack of clarity on the proper channel for
Figure 4-2 Some of the solutions offered by SCODE Ltd (left-right): biogas, solar drying, ICS and basket cookers
Figure 4-3 An entrepreneur supported by KFS.
10
people to direct their issues at the County level; (c) Role overlap between County and National government.
There are various opportunities for successful partnerships at the county level including: (a) Partnership with county
government on awareness creation and dissemination of green energy solutions; (b) Co-promotion of environmentally
friendly technologies that address climate change issues;
(c) Dedicated focus on high impact community development projects; (d) Project tendering for government institutions;
(e) Engagement and involvement in energy consultation by key stakeholders.
4.3 MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF URBAN SANITATION AND RENEWABLE ENERGY: BIO-
CENTRES IN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS
(Peter Kagwimi, Umande Trust)
Sanitation poses many challenges in people’s lives. In Nairobi for example, about 60% of residents live in informal
settlements, which occupy less than 6% of the city's residential land. People living in these settlements face many
challenges, including poor sanitation, lack of access to information on basic services. Millions of residents lack access to
affordable, safe and decent sanitation. The sanitation challenge is addressed by a host of players including Government,
CSOs, CBOs and UN agencies, among others.
Umande Trust, a local NGO, champions the construction of bio-centres in informal settlements of Kenya. Bio-centres
offer affordable, decent and dignified sanitation services; provide opportunities for income generation to the
community as well as address effects of climate change by providing green energy. A bio-centre is a central sanitation
facility that incorporates a bio-digester in its design. It is fed by urine, faeces and a little water from communal toilets
connected via channels. Inside the digester, a section of which is shown on the figure below, anaerobic digestion takes
place, producing methane (biogas) and sludge that can be used as fertilizer.
Bio-centres convert human waste into bio-gas and organic fertilizer. Communities cook using the bio gas, a green
energy. The bio-slurry from the Bio-centre is rich in nutrients and a good fertilizer for urban greening.
Figure 4-4 A schematic of a bio-digester (left) and one
under construction (above).
11
The Bio-centre stimulates economic development by providing goods services through small enterprise (profit
centres). It demonstrates a successful business model which incorporates sanitation and provides other socio-economic
benefits to the community:
Profit centres: incorporate halls, offices for hire; a
video library; water point; biogas kitchen; salon;
barber shop. Profit centres can also include mobile
banking services, such as M-pesa and bank agencies,
that enable the community to access services that
would otherwise not be available in their proximity.
Bathrooms: Each Bio-centre has 4-8 bathroom
cubicles.
Toilets: Each Bio-centre has 8-10 toilet cubicles.
Accessing the services: Each Bio-centre serves an
average of 350 users per day, which translates to
over 500,000 users per month.
To date, Umande Trust has built 65 Bio-centres in Nairobi,
Kisumu, Homa Bay and 1 in Nakuru. A Bio centre is more
than a sanitation facility – it serves as a nucleus for
Sustainable Development by providing access to water
and sanitation; contributing to community health and
well-being; local livelihoods; proper drainage; solid waste
management and urban greening/energy. In terms of social benefits the bio-centre is easy to use and maintain; it is a
community asset that brings dignity, privacy, comfort and convenience, less embarrassment for visitors and safety –
especially for women and children.
4.4 HIGHLIGHTS FROM PLENARY DISCUSSIONS ON EXPERIENCES IN DECENTRALISATION AND
GOVERNANCE
People’s energy needs: The challenge in decentralization is to think about the different energy needs of people at the
local level, e.g. household and institutional cooking and lighting needs, and not only large scale electricity generation
programmes and projects
Electricity tariffs: In South Africa, local government buys the electricity from the producer and sells to local people on a
graduated system which depends on amount of energy used – the less the cheaper. In Kenya the tariffs are also
graduated, however, those using more electricity (e.g. industrial consumers) pay lower tariffs. Consumers do not have a
voice in negotiating electricity tariffs. We need to see how people or households with low incomes can benefit from
lower tariffs.
Efficiency of the system and cost of electricity: Since the national grid provides electricity whether it is in use or not, so
there is wastage. Consumers are encouraged to use less yet electricity generation, transmission and distribution is
continuous - even if it is not being consumed it still has to be paid for. This escalates costs, which are passed on to the
consumer.
Alternative sources of energy: The central government is trying to address how to produce electricity from different
sources e.g. wind and solar, and how best to utilise this energy.
Figure 4-5 M-pesa and Equity Bank Agents at Kochoto Bio- Centre
in Korogocho, Nairobi.
12
5 DECENTRALISATION AND ENERGY ISSUES IN NAKURU
5.1 DECENTRALISATION ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY READ
(Simon Batchelor, Gamos Ltd.)
There are two movements toward decentralisation: political decentralization and decentralised energy systems. Can
these two work together and enhance each other? In practice, political decentralisation means: (a) Reorganisation of
activity from a national to a sub-national level; (b) Delegation, de-concentration, devolution. Kenya has recent
experience in decentralisation that seeks openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness, coherency and ‘civic
peace’. As illustrated in the figure below, centralised energy is an ‘old concept’ (yesterday) while decentralised energy
systems are an ‘old concept’, one which is becoming popular again with the current emphasis on clean, local energy
(tomorrow) – (Wilson, 2002). World Energy Outlook (IEA, 2010) emphasises the ‘energy trilemma’ - energy security,
climate change and energy poverty. Biomass is a naturally decentralised system.
Energy poverty is the point at which people are using the bare minimum energy needed to sustain a healthy life. Energy
poverty relates not just to limitations on the quantities of energy used and required by households but ease of access,
quality, availability and appropriateness of that energy. Referring to the resultant energy revolution, Research indicates
that: “As *the decentralization of the Internet+ took over a decade ago and is on-going, the process of energy
democratization will also take a long time. We will not start to see large impacts on the energy market for some time
yet. At present, the democratization of energy is in a phase that is the equivalent of *the internet in+ 1996 … Yet, we are
Figure 5-1 Centralised and Decentralized Energy Systems
13
cognizant of the potential of this trend in a way that users and developers of the Internet in 1996 were simply
not.” (Pike Research, 2012).
5.2 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ON DECENTRALIZATION ISSUES IN NAKURU
Based on the decentralisation and governance issues outlined above, workshop participants engaged in group
discussions to address the question: How can political decentralisation help?
Group discussions and reporting were guided by the following additional questions:
Are the identified issues true in the case of Nakuru County?
What are the roles and responsibilities of the county government in energy access?
How has this role been affected by the transfer of powers and budgets under decentralisation?
What are the levels of stakeholder authority and interest?
5.3 STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
The plenary split into two groups and were assigned the
following tasks:
List the various stakeholders
Discuss what is working or not working e.g.
communication between the stakeholders
Identify issues of energy access vs. transfer of
power
Groups were constituted to ensure that each group had
at least two representatives from government, NGOs and
the private sector. Feedback from group reports provided
critical information to enable further discussions on
decentralization in Nakuru County and ultimately to
contribute to READ project’s work.
5.3.1 DECENTRALISATION ISSUES IN NAKURU – STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK
Relevance of identified issues to Nakuru County
The stakeholders acknowledged that the identified issues are true in the case of Nakuru. They also noted major issues
of energy access in the County:
No access to electricity for 65% of the county population
High dependency on biomass for cooking and heating
Lack of adequate efficient technologies for cooking and heating
Roles and responsibilities of the county government in energy access
The groups noted that some of the roles in energy access are still very national, for example hydropower and
geothermal. However, local level interventions, often led by non-government actors particularly on renewable energy,
are increasingly being recognised and supported by national and county governments. Stakeholders identified and
highlighted the following issues:
Figure 5-2 A section of participants during stakeholder mapping exercise
at the READ Workshop in Nakuru County.
14
There is need for clarity on roles and responsibilities regarding energy resources development
Development of geothermal resources in the county is managed by national government – clear benefits for
county government are yet to be established. Geothermal power development is usually carried out in
remote areas where there is little or no infrastructure. It is expensive to develop and its environmental impact
should be a key consideration e.g. the location Olkaria geothermal stations in the vicinity of Lake Naivasha and
the National park.
The available energy resources in Nakuru county are not yet known and there is need for a county level
assessment
Nakuru county does not have a strategy on energy provision yet
Financing for service providers is a challenge
There is minimal collaborative action between different actors
Taxation on energy products and services is a major challenge.
Stakeholders’ Authority and Interest
Table 1 below is a summary of key stakeholders in the energy sector in Nakuru County, showing stakeholders’ level of
authority and interest in decentralised energy.
Table 5-1 Stakeholders, Authority and Interest
Stakeholders in Nakuru County in the energy sector Stakeholders’ level of authority and interest in decentralised energy
County Authorities and local leaders
• County government • Nakuru Water and Sewerage Company
(NARUWASCO) • Naivasha Water and Sewerage Company (NAWASCO) • Members of County Assembly MCA • Ward Manager
High interest, High Authority
National government line ministries and other public institutions
• Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, MoEP (national)
• Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources , Water and Energy (Nakuru county)
• Kenya Forest Service KFS • Ministry of Health MOH • MoAFL • Home Economics
Department MoAFL
• Geothermal Development Company GDC
• KENGEN • Rural Electrification
Agency REA • Kenya Power and Lighting
Company • Rift Valley Water Service
Board • Ministry of Agriculture • Water Resources
Management Authority WRMA
High interest, High Authority
Universities and other research institutions
• Egerton University
High interest, low level of authority
Local community • Community leaders • Nakuru residents • Opinion leaders • Street children
Little or no interest, low level of authority
Development • World Bank • WSUP High interest, low level of
15
agencies and local initiatives
• GDC • KENFAP • WASREB • Orr Power Naivasha (IPP) • GIZ • UMANDE Trust • SCODE Ltd. • World Vision • SNV • Practical Action
• CDN • Suburb Sacco • TEMBWA • SNV • Waste Mingi • ImanzaN • BOTTO Solar Ltd. • Nakuruling • Kaa la Moto • IMALIZA
authority
Business community • Family Bank • Equity Bank • K-Rep Bank • Petroleum retailers • KENTRACO
• Charcoal dealers, vendors and transporters
• China Wu Yi Ltd. • Davis and Shirtliff Ltd.
High interest, low level of authority
Local media • Citizen Television • Nation Television • Kenya News Agency • Kenya Television Network
Relatively low interest, no authority
5.4 ENERGY LITERACY: DO WE KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT ENERGY?
(Simon Batchelor)
‘Energy literacy’ is the degree to which local authority officials are fluent with the nature and role of decentralised
energy and can obtain, process, understand, evaluate and act on energy information to provide sustainable and
efficient energy for their communities. Energy literacy includes knowledge on:
Energy flows, systems, and sources both within their control and within their influence
Sustainable and renewable energy
Units of measure for energy use
Impact of individual and societal decision on energy development and use
Impact of energy on development and economy
General trends and initiatives in decentralised energy
Basic scientific facts related to energy.
Knowledge gives skills to local authorities and other stakeholders to:
Assess the credibility of information about energy
Communicate about energy and energy use in meaningful ways, both to peer colleagues and to wider citizens
Make informed energy decisions based on an understanding of impacts and consequences
Obtain, evaluate, and utilise energy information from a variety of sources
Identify energy aspects of personal and community concerns
Reframe energy concerns where necessary to go beyond centralised delivery.
Awareness creation and engagement with actor networks is a key aspect of the decentralisation process and can
result in a wide range of outcomes such as:
Awareness/concern with respect to global energy issues
Positive attitudes and values for sustainable energy
Assumption of personal responsibility for implementing sustainable energy
16
Civic orientation (concern that knowledge benefits all and is distributed equally)
Creation of space for dialogue within the local authority
Creation of linkages to actors outside authority concerned with energy (locally and nationally)
Creation of space for dialogue with citizens and citizen organisations
Awareness of the influences of ‘others’, and discernment of vested interests.
Decentralization calls for changes in local authorities, which include:
Awareness of resources available for ‘energy’ – within the institution, locally and nationally
Willingness to reassess resource allocation for energy concerns
Developing capacity within organisations to allow them to understand and respond to energy issues
Influencing strategy within own and other organisations to allow them to understand and respond to energy issues
Influencing strategy for citizens to allow them to understand and respond to energy issues.
Others are changes in behaviour so that decentralized governance:
Communicates information about energy issues not only as a personal concern but also as a problem affecting the
larger community
Implements and evaluates effective policies and projects
Encourages others to implement effective policies
Shares information and learning.
5.5 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ON ENERGY LITERACY IN NAKURU
Workshop participant groups reconstituted to deliberate and report on energy literacy issues in Nakuru, focussing on
specific energy technologies and documenting the findings from group discussions in exercise one. Discussions were
based on the following key questions
Are the issues identified in the above section true in the case of Nakuru County?
Will action on the level of awareness of local authorities in terms of energy knowledge be likely to affect long term
development plans for clean energy?
5.5.1 RELEVANCE OF IDENTIFIED ISSUES TO NAKURU COUNTY
Yes, the issues are true in the case of Nakuru County, for example in the context of what needs to be done to enhance
development of energy resources and technologies.
Geothermal: Resource management is at the national level; the high cost of putting up geothermal power
stations is prohibitive; resource is often found on private land, which means people are displaced for its
development
Solid waste: Although solid waste offers a good opportunity for energy production, its use is inhibited due to
socio-cultural issues – negative attitudes associated with using human waste
Biogas: Installation is costly; there is limited of capacity to construct and control quality of installation; private
ownership of land could be a hindrance particularly for the development of centralised systems. On a positive
note, however, the Nakuru county government is already embracing the technology
Solar Home Systems: High initial cost of installation hinders uptake; installation standards not maintained;
there is lack of awareness on potential for solar energy and lack of quality control on equipment
17
Improved Cook Stoves ICS: Low levels of public awareness amongst households and institutions, there is
limited distribution of ICS across the county, and quality control of locally manufactured ICS remains a key
concern.
5.5.2 ENERGY LITERACY ISSUES AND CONSTRAINTS
Stakeholders outlined the energy literacy issues and constraints and what can be achieved through transfer of power
aimed at addressing these issues and constraints (Table 5-2).
Table 5-2 Energy Literacy: Issues/constraints – what can be done?
Energy literacy: issues/constraints What can be done? (Transfer of power)
Policy environment • No clear county level policy on renewable energy • County data-base on energy resources required • Lack of capacity to enforce standards
• Advocacy for renewable energy • Champion adoption of green energy • Liberalize • Target the right county department • Develop and disseminate regulations, guidelines
Entrepreneurship/technology • Few actors • Costly equipment and installation • Limited distribution • Limited awareness by county on biogas technology
and land for bio-centres • Lack of quality control of products in the market • Centralised control of geothermal resources • Limited capacity of existing entrepreneurs • Lack of coordination, promotion and marketing • High cost of solar equipment • High cost of technologies/energy services and
products • Lack of good marketing strategy • Capacity needs for county officers/need to identify
capacity gaps • Lack of middle level colleges for training on
technology
• Prioritize the issues • Develop action plans • Have clear deliverables/outputs/goals • Appropriate financing for alternative energy
projects • Enact new laws and by-laws for county • Ensure quality control for all products and
services • Elicit/support private sector participation • Establish clear management and appraisal
processes • Create a conducive environment for improving
energy access
Implementation process • Top-down approach • Low level of community participation • Lack of awareness on usage cost • Need for lobby groups to have a voice • Cultural perceptions on issues such as use of bio-
slurry • Lack of technical skills • Corruption • Inadequate information/access for community • Community perception of government • Lack of resource centres • Community need/want immediate benefits
• Create dialogue between community and government
• Community participation in projects and processes
• Bring services closer to people • Community empowerment • Create public awareness on renewable energy • Enable easy access to county officers • Community participation in decision making
processes
18
6 STRENGTHENING COUNTY GOVERNANCE
6.1 CAPACITY BUILDING FOR COUNTY GOVERNANCE
(Simon Batchelor)
Capacity building is important for providing general skills to county governments and enables them to:
Enhance public participation - ensuring and coordinating the participation of communities
Pass by-laws – local laws and regulations about any of the functions they are responsible for
Approve budgets and development plans
Impose rates and other taxes: including property tax, income tax, and sales tax, among others.
Provide essential services – e.g. health facilities, schools, polytechnics, water, sewage and sanitation; agricultural
extension services - crop and animal husbandry; livestock sale; abattoirs; plant and animal disease control etc.
Strategies for capacity building include traditional training, mentoring and coaching, change management, toolkits and
manuals; workshops and meetings, ICT and e-tools, audio visual aids, exposure visits and scholarship programmes.
Community consultation and planning is important in assisting local authorities in the assessment of the changing
energy behaviour, for example changes in the local environment as depicted in the illustrations below. The process of
community consultation and planning is rooted in an understanding of community development.
19
6.2 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ON CAPACITY BUILDING NEEDS AND REQUIRED ACTION
Participants groups reconstituted to deliberate on capacity building needs and required actions in Nakuru Count. The
following were guiding questions for the discussions:
Are the capacity building tools helpful in the case of Nakuru County?
What are the capacity development needs of county governments and how will this affect long term
development plans for clean energy?
What are the actions that are required to improve capacity?
Below is a summary of group feedback on capacity building needs and required action.
6.2.1 CAPACITY BUILDING NEEDS FOR THE COUNTY
Identification of energy needs and potential
Development of an energy strategy for the county
Involvement of MCAs in discussions on green energy
Provision of technical support to carry out energy audits
Exposure to successful community energy access projects stories (e.g. biogas) to the community and county
government
Joint resource mobilisation for project implementation
Joint lobbying for allocation of resources for energy from the central government
Demonstration on the use of alternative sources of energy for industries, e.g. briquettes
Support for local entrepreneurs to deliver energy services
6.2.2 ACTIONS REQUIRED TO IMPROVE CAPACITY
Lobbying for clean and renewable energy resources
Involving the county government to identify issues related to energy and climate change
Getting firm commitments and action plans to implement energy projects
Giving information on clean energy
Engagement of county government at all stages of programme design, development and implementation by
market actors
Involving the national government where issues such as energy have been partly devolved
Providing advice to the county government on how to develop the required technical expertise
Providing input during formulation and review of legislation
Development of renewable energy standards where none exist
6.3 FURTHER ACTIONS IDENTIFIED BY STAKEHOLDERS
The following additional points were raised during the plenary discussions that called for action not only from the
county government but also from other energy stakeholders in the county:
20
Individual farmers can also gain from building their knowledge and capacity on different energy technologies. For
instance, some farmers have excess biogas but can be innovative and supply gas to neighbours, as has been done
by innovative entrepreneurs elsewhere in the country
Briquette making is a technology has been around in Nakuru County for some time now. However, entrepreneurs
have not made use of this knowledge, and need to grasp this opportunity by learn about its potential for income
generation, and turn it into successful business ventures
Many opportunities are available for information sharing and we need to find innovative ways if we are to succeed
in spreading information from this workshop and on decentralised energy in general. For instance we need to learn
how youth communicate in order to empower them and to ensure their participation at all levels.
7 OVERVIEW OF PARTICIPATORY MARKET MAPPING
(Tameezan wa Gathui, PAC-EA)
Participatory Market System Development PMSD is an approach developed by
Practical Action for incorporating small businesses into market systems and
connecting marginalised market actors to viable markets. PMSD uses existing
market actors’ capabilities and encourages development practitioners to
partner with and build upon what is being offered by the market actors
themselves in terms of products and services.
PMSD empowers marginalised market actors, such as small-scale producers
and retailers of ICS, to effectively participate alongside other actors and
players in the market system. One of the tools used in the PMSD approach is
Participatory Market Mapping (PMM). In PMM market actors come together
to jointly assess their market and develop a market map and joint action plan.
The market map defines the three layers of the market system as shown in the
adjacent diagram:
a. Value chain actors, e.g. producers, distributors, retailers and
consumer
b. Service providers or ‘supporters’ e.g. testing facilities, promotional
and marketing teams and financiers
c. Enabling environment or ‘influencers’, e.g. policy, legislation, taxation, standards, research.
The PMM process includes various steps which are: (1) Conducting
background research about the sector e.g. ICS; (2) Developing a preliminary
market map; (3) Bringing together the range of market actors ensuring
representation from all the levels in the market system; (4) Facilitating the
market game. The process helps market actors to understand how the
market works, helps strengthen relationships between market actors and
identifies gaps in a participatory manner enabling dialogue and joint action.
PMSD can be a very useful tool in bringing together policy makers and
value chain actors to solve problems in renewable energy market systems
Figure 6-1 The 3 layers of a Market Map
Figure 7-2 Participants at a PMM workshop
21
such as solar, biogas briquettes, wood fuel, charcoal etc., in Nakuru County.
8 WAY FORWARD – ACTION PLANS
Each participant wrote down two or three actions they plan to take as follow-up to the stakeholders’ workshop. The
individual steps include implementation of new ideas, follow-up on on-going activities or enhanced activities based on
the lessons from the workshop. Following is a synthesis of participants’ action plans.
1. Awareness creation and capacity building
Engage with the county government and the community through sharing information.
Brief the MOEP Cabinet Secretary to influence county level meetings on decentralised energy issues.
Brief NAWASCO Managing Director and preach the gospel of RE by starting various activities.
Share lessons learned with the K-REP Bank management and brief them on the discussions and the importance of
green energy.
Replicate this workshop in Kajiado County.
Re-assess knowledge and identify the challenges of each RE technology in order to come up with sustainable
technology.
Write more on RE and the connection between clean energy and health especially for children who suffer
respiratory diseases.
Disseminate the workshop report to other County governments and lobby partners in the UK to provide energy
awareness training to county governments.
2. Networking and collaboration
Explore potential collaboration with the Nakuru county government to expand the briquetting sector and improved
livelihoods based on on-going activities.
Start interacting with other people doing briquetting and learn from them.
3. Lobby and advocacy
Lobby the UK government to provide some energy awareness training in the county and share the report of our
work with County governments.
4. Technology development
Find out the technical details of geothermal production since many have said it is relatively clean but can only be
done on a large scale.
Try to see how we can raise more funds for other activities on clean energy e.g. biogas for use in engines. To
upscale biogas has been the main problem but we shall keep on trying.
Allocate part of the budget on awareness creation for RE and dialogue with stakeholders so that they can work
together and engage in green energy initiatives.
Liaise with local government on RE issues, develop a training manual and training modules; target the county
government to influence laws / policies on RE.
Conduct capacity building and develop a joint proposal on RE; move to another county after succeeding in this
process.
Collect information and write / disseminate case studies for awareness creation.
Dialogue with County and National governments on capacity building on decentralised energy as a major
development issue.
22
Organise a forum to educate the stakeholders on RE technologies and their benefits; create awareness at
institutional and community levels on waste management and use the research on polythene bags to explore ways
of recycling to produce energy.
Create wide awareness about the Kaptembwa bio-digester (Nakuru County) and how it provides essential services
as well as business opportunities
9 CLOSING REMARKS AND WORKSHOP EVALUATION
9.1 CLOSING REMARKS
(Ed Brown)
The READ project will continue to share information wherever possible and to contribute towards supporting the
county and national governments to achieve what needs to be done. The following key issues have emerged as
important.
It is immensely important to understand where authority resides – i.e. the legal responsibilities of different
institutions.
Change is still not well understood since the sources of authority in Kenya have changed but we are yet to grasp
what these changes mean.
Communication and forms of communication need to be clear – how do you access those sources of authority and
how do you listen to what the people are telling you? How does the county access views not yet accessed?
If we are going to develop effective forms of communication what forums are we going to use to do that? The
channels do not exist so we need to know what we can do about this.
The sources of authority differ – we talked about capacity and capacity building.
There is need to identify how the citizens can assist in the process of decentralisation.
Power resides in certain people so we need to learn how we can motivate them to go through the process of
change.
Concluding his remarks, Ed Brown, on behalf of READ thanked all the participants, PAC-EA, Nakuru County government
and other stakeholders for their support which had contributed immensely towards the workshop’s success.
9.2 VOTE OF THANKS
On behalf of the County Government Mr. Wilson Nge’no (MoAFL) thanked the stakeholders for their input and Practical
Action for organising the workshop. He said the process was an eye opener on policy, energy governance and at the
individual level; it was a job well done and participants had learned and shared a lot. He thanked the team from the UK
for sharing experiences from elsewhere, and participants for coming and for totally engaging in the workshop and
sharing a lot of information that is useful for future planning. “Let us have an action line so that we can continue from
here. Thank you everybody,” said Mr. Nge’no. Mr. R. Gakuo, a community member and briquette entrepreneur,
thanked Practical Action for organising the workshop and bringing the visitors, Mr. Brown and Mr. Batchelor. “Your
intervention in bringing them is very important for us and the County government,” said Mr. Gakuo. He observed that
some of the issues discussed are very new to the stakeholders and the energy agenda is largely unknown. Concluded
23
Mr. Gakuo: “We need this type of interaction in order to understand the issues and to find ways of addressing them. I
have worked with Practical Action, from bone recycling to other activities. They have created employment for others in
the value chain. We urge you to continue the good work. Thank you.”
Engineer Peter Murigi of Practical Action thanked the READ team and all participants for their participation and keen
input on energy issues. The workshop was closed by Mr. Jack Barno, from the Josekap Environment Project leading
participants in a thanksgiving prayer.
9.3 WORKSHOP EVALUATION
At the end of the workshop participants were issued a brief questionnaire and requested to comment on the workshop
based on key themes, a synthesis of which is presented below. A total of 16 participants responded to the evaluation
questionnaire.
a) What were the major lessons from the workshop?
There is keen interest from different stakeholders to support communities in learning about energy.
We need to elaborate on energy issues in different ways.
The workshop has brought out the importance of RE and the benefits of decentralised energy at the county and
national levels.
The government has a very difficult task and as they wrestle with various responsibilities. Energy is not yet high in
their agenda.
A lot of awareness creation on green energy is needed at both the county level and among Nakuru residents.
There is need for creation of a platform for engaging other stakeholders.
Using RE is important for Nakuru County.
It is important that county policy be enhanced and revised to embrace the use of green energy.
There is need for collaboration/partnerships with other actors in the energy sector and to identify gaps in linkages
between Civil Society Organisations CSOs, and the county government.
Nakuru County has high energy potential with renewable energy being the most important option that is cheap
and easily available.
The County government does not have an energy policy and there is need for sensitisation to address this gap.
b) What went well?
The profile of energy issues in the county was raised.
Key issues in decentralisation were well addressed.
Facilitation and participation by stakeholders.
Group discussions and mapping of stakeholders and how they are supposed to improve the use of RE were helpful
Everything went well and the discussions were impressive.
Citing of relevant local examples and those from elsewhere were very useful in illustrating the issues
c) What did not go well?
The first group exercise should have been done one question at a time.
24
Workshop schedule was very tight.
d) What other information on energy issues would participants like to get / learn?
The road map of the County government on how to proceed with energy issues from local authority to
communities.
How research institutions, e.g. Universities, can be involved in developing ideas on energy technologies.
Research findings on the energy sector.
More information on the use of biogas to generate electricity in Nakuru County.
More information of the use of solar power.
Information on how people in other counties are managing the energy projects
Fundraising skills for energy development.
The role of youth in dissemination and adoption of clean energy.
A stakeholder forum with an energy newsletter would be useful at the county level.
25
10 APPENDICES
10.1 APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS – READ NAKURU STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP
Name Organization 1. Anne Njoroge Practical Action 2. Beatrice Chepngweno Temboro Cleaning Services
3. Dr. Ed Brown Loughborough University, UK 4. Esther Nyambura Njuguna GDC 5. Francis M. Wanyoro NAWASCCO Ltd 6. Gladys W. Maina Practical Action
7. H. Obed K-Rep Bank 8. Hannah Wanjiru PAC EA 9. Joel K. Barno Josekap Environment Project 10. Lydia Muchiri Practical Action 11. Christopher Momanyi Practical Action 12. Monica Wanjau SCODE Ltd. 13. Peter Kagweru Umande Trust 14. Peter Murigi Practical Action 15. R. M. Gakuo Local Initiatives 16. Rose Nyarecha Kerubo Enterprenuer 17. Sammy Ngige MENREW 18. Samuel Kingori MoH 19. Samuel Kisangi SCODE Ltd. 20. Serah Kiarie SCODE Ltd. 21. Simon Batchelor Gamos Ltd., UK 22. Tameezan wa Gathui PAC EA 23. Veronica Bosibori Media 24. Vivienne Kigondu Practical Action 25. Wairimu Ngugi PAC EA (Associate) 26. Wilson K. Ngenoh MoAFL
26
10.2 APPENDIX 2: AGENDA – READ STAKEHOLDERS’ WORKSHOP, NAKURU COUNTY, KENYA
(APRIL 24, 2014)
Time Session Presenter Facilitator
8.00 : 8.30 Participant Registration Hannah Wanjiru Ann Njoroge
8.30 : 8.45 Welcome
Opening speech
Sammy N. Kimani, Director of Environment, Natural Resources, Energy & Water
Peter Murigi
8.45 : 9.00 Introductions Self-introductions Peter Murigi
9.00 : 9.15 READ project overview and the emerging role of decentralised energy, and governance
Ed Brown
Peter Murigi
9.15: 9.45 Introduction to Participatory Market Mapping
Tameezan wa Gathui
Peter Murigi
9.45 : 10.30
Case studies on working together with local governments to improve energy access
SCODE
Umande Trust
Ed Brown/Simon Batchelor
Peter Murigi
10.30 : 10. TEA BREAK
10.45 : 11.05 Decentralisation issues identified by READ Simon Batchelor Tameezan wa Gathui
11.05 : 12.00 Group discussion 1: Are the identified issues true in the case of Nakuru county? What are the roles and responsibilities of the county government in energy access? How has this role been affected by the transfer of powers and budgets under decentralisation?
Tameezan wa Gathui
12.00 : 12.30 Presentations from Group Discussion 1 and Plenary Discussion Tameezan wa Gathui
12.30 : 12.45 Energy Literacy issues identified by READ Simon Batchelor Tameezan wa Gathui
12.45 : 1.15 Group discussion 2: Are the identified issues true in the case of Nakuru County? Will action on the level of awareness of local authorities in terms of energy literacy be likely to affect long term development plans for clean energy?
Simon Bachelor
1.15 : 1.30 Presentations from Group Discussion 2 and Plenary Discussion Tameezan wa Gathui
1.30 : 2.15 LUNCH 2.15 : 2.35 Capacity Building Tools identified by READ Simon Batchelor Tameezan wa
Gathui 2.35 : 3.30
Group discussion 3: Are the capacity building tools helpful in the case of Nakuru County? What are the capacity development needs of county governments and how will this affect long term development plans for clean energy? What are the actions that are required to improve capacity?
Simon Bachelor
3.30 : 4.00 Presentations from Group Discussion 3 and Plenary Discussion Tameezan wa Gathui
4.00 : 4.30 Workshop Summary and next steps
Vote of thanks
Workshop evaluation
Ed Brown
Participants
Hannah Wanjiru
Peter Murigi
4.30 : 5.00 TEA & END OF WORKSHOP