KLMC Advocacy Plan

SNV V4CP Inception report –October 2016

Kenya Resilience – Advocacy plan

Advocacy planThe Resilience Thematic Group’s Advocacy Plan outlines the engagement strategy, the activities and the monitoring and evaluation framework that will be used in the project to advocate for climate change issues affecting pastoralists. This is elaborated in visual format followed by a detailed narrative which explains the inter-relations between the visually presented strategies, outputs, outcomes and impact.

1. Problem description

The policy environment in Kenya is robust with Climate Change laws and institutional frameworks newly established to build economic, social and environmental resilience of communities and individuals to climate change shocks. The policy frameworks are however devoid of a strong pastoralist agenda which leaves pastoralists and their mainstay livestock economic system vulnerable.

Appropriate policies are a key component of stabilising the livelihoods of pastoral systems especially those that are geared towards climate change mitigation. Policies that are well formulated and are adaptive to the needs of pastoral communities, incorporating indigenous knowledge and recognising the role of customary institutions will foster a robust business environment that supports businesses and investments in pastoral systems resulting in communities with enhanced ability to cope with climate change. Civil society participation in platforms and policy frameworks will open (legal) avenues to comprehensively address economic, political, social and environmental issues affecting vulnerability of pastoralist communities to climate change.

2. Goal

The long term goal of this project is to achieve climate resilient pastoralists’ communities with strengthened voice and participation in climate change policy making processes in Kenya. This goal will be attained by realization of the project’s long term outcomes such as enactment and implementation of inclusive legal frameworks (county livestock policies, sales yard bills, county integrated development plans, county climate change bills and CMMs) and Integration of pastoralists’ representatives in structures and processes of climate change decision making (county steering groups and county climate planning committee).The resulting improved environment will promotegreater allocation of national and county resources addressing climate change with specific recognition to reduce the burden on pastoralist communities and women and encourage growth of business and private financial investment in products and services (insurance, credit facilities) for pastoralists.

3. Context analysis

Pastoralism is the dominant economic sector in ASALs. The pastoral economy and community livelihood strategies in drylands are heavily dependent on natural resources. Climate Change acts on these natural resources that are important to the survival of pastoralists making them vulnerable. A number of factors influence the vulnerability of Pastoralists to climate shocks and are summarized in the table below.

• Lack of political goodwill with regard to pastoralists’ issues
• Lack of adequate involvement of the Pastoral communities in the policy formulation process

• Inadequate market structures for livestock trade
• Limited access to export market opportunities
• Limited access to affordable credit facilities for livestock traders and producers
• Inefficiency in the livestock marketing chain because of too many brokers and middlemen

• Inter-community conflicts over limited resources (Pasture and Water)
• Extra burden on women in caring for their families and small livestock in the face of limited water and pasture

• Lack of capacity to adopt new breeding technologies
• Poor mobile network coverage in pastoral areas to support financial transactions
• Poor livestock market prices as a result of the absence of a fully functional Livestock Market Information Management System

• Floods increasing the spread of livestock diseases
• Deforestation and degradation of land used by pastoralists

• Conflicting legislations within the sector

In order to achieve its overall goal, the project will engage with relevant actors and institutions. More specifically, the project will partner with the county governments (department of climate change, livestock , environment and natural resources management and water); national government (relevant ministries, National Drought Management Authority, National Environment Management Authority, Kenya Meteorological Services, Kenya national bureau of statistics); private sector (financial institutions, marketing associations, and investors); research institutions ( IFPRI, Kenya Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis, The University of Nairobi, ILRI); Civil Society Organizations (League of Pastoralist Women of Kenya, Kenya climate working group, Adaptation consortium, Merti Integrated Development Program, Ward Adaptation planning committee, Dedha); and International Agencies (USAID, EU, CORDAID, OXFAM, CARE).

1

SNV V4CP Inception report –October 2016

Kenya Resilience – Advocacy plan

4. Contextualized Theory of Change

STRATEGIESOUTPUTSSHORT-TERM OUTCOMES MID-TERM OUTCOMES LONG-TERM OUTCOMES IMPACT

1

SNV V4CP Inception report –October 2016

Kenya Resilience – Advocacy plan

5. Monitoring &Evaluation

Our PME approach supports learning, steering as well as accountability, and monitoring is an ongoing practise throughout the duration of the project. To allow for project-wide reporting, learning and comparison between countries and themes, a harmonised Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework has been developed by SNV Corporate. The harmonised M&E framework contains harmonised outcomes, outputs, indicators and monitoring methods that all country themes apply.

The below M&E framework is based on our theme-specific Theory of Change (ToC). For each result in the ToC we have defined indicators and methods of measurement. To the extent possible we have made use of harmonised indicators and methods of measurement; these are complemented with new theme-specific indicators and methods of measurement.

Recognising that our project develops over time as the context changes and lessons are learned, we value regular reflection on which project elements we are (not) going to plan and why (not) based on collected data on progress. SNV and the CSOs will organize regular opportunities to reflect on the progress of the project and where needed our theory of change, strategies, and targets will be updated. The method, outcome harvesting will be used to guide these learning processes in 2017 and further.

Detailed information about the harmonised M&E framework, including the various standardised monitoring methods, can be found in the document Harmonised PME framework.

1

SNV V4CP Inception report –October 2016

Kenya Resilience – Advocacy plan

6. Engagement strategy

• Absence of inclusive policies to enhance climate adaptation and improve livestock markets management
• Lack of political will to enhance pastoralists participation in climate related discussions
• Resource related community conflicts in the ASAL counties

• Seamless partnership between the livestock producers/traders and county governments in livestock markets management
• Improve political orientation in climate resilience and adaptation

• Livestock contributes 12 % of the National GDP and adverse climate shocks is a major threat to this
• Policy formulation processes exclude the input of pastoral communities

• lack of synergy and common advocacy platform

• Inadequate information sharing platforms/mechanisms
• Insufficient investment in climate change and pastoralism

• Improved partnerships with other stakeholders

• Increased flow of climate information and financial support to pastoralists’ resilience to climate change

• There is need for coordinated efforts towards climate change resilience
• Insufficient investment in climate resilience increases pastoralist vulnerability

• lack of synergy and common advocacy platform
• Inadequate advocacy capacity to undertake multi stakeholders policy discussions

• Inadequate information sharing platforms/mechanisms

• Informed CSOs with the capacity to effectively engage policy makers in climate change dialogues
• Improved partnerships between CSOs and other partners
• Increased flow of climate information and financial support to pastoralists’ resilience to climate change

• There is need for coordinated efforts towards climate change resilience
• There is need for collaborative advocacy strategies on climate change policies addressing pastoralists’ concerns

• Lack of understanding of pastoralists way of life

• Poor flow of climate related information to the public

• Enhanced partnership between research institutions and local CSOs
• Increased research in pastoral climate resilience field

• Lack of evidence hinders the formulation of inclusive policies related to climate change

• Lack of understanding of pastoralists way of life
• Insecurity in pastoral areas
• Lack of financial institutions in pastoral towns

• Seamless partnership between the private sector and livestock producers/traders
• livestock producers/traders in livestock markets management

• Increase investment by Private Sector in pastoral resilience initiatives

• Investment in livestock farming and related productionactivities is a viable venture

7. Activity and resource planning

7.1 Activities and resource planning for 2017

1. The gaps and opportunities in the legal frameworks for promotion of pastoralists voice (factoring gender and inclusivity) in climate change
2. The importance of the role of pastoralists’ traditional/cultural institutions in climate change resilience
3. How co-management improves the resilience and sustainability of markets
4. Trends of Budget allocation and utilisation in Livestock sector in ASAL Counties (focusing on investments in climate change resilience)

• Improved political will at national and county levels in addressing climate change and change in public attitude towards pastoralism (Outcome H)
• Inclusive policies, regulations and frameworks developed, adopted and implemented or detrimental policies prevented (Including Customary Bills, , County Emergency Bills, County Climate Change Adaptation Fund Bill, Co-management policy, salesyards bills, NLMP, CC Strategy, Action Plan, NCAct 2016) (Outcome K)

• Appropriate allocation of national and county resources addressing climate change, with the burden on pastoralist communities and women given specific recognition (Outcome J)

• Increased CSO visibility and buy-in on promoting pastoralists voice in climate change policy processes

• Evidence based knowledge/research products shared and discussed with National and County government policy technocrats

• Workshops, hearings, public debates, round tables, commissions, discussions, etc.

• Presentations, comments on statements/ documents, asking for clarifications, briefings, etc.

• Increased CSO interactions with key stakeholders in government and/or the private sector
• Increased opportunity availed for CSOs to highlight pastoralists’ climate change issues and influence key stakeholders in government and/or the private sector

• CSO’sinterests are ‘put on the agenda’ and are discussed among stakeholders in government and/or the private sector

• Workshops, hearings, public debates, round tables, commissions, discussions, etc.
• Presentations, comments on statements/ documents, asking for clarifications, briefings, etc.

• Formation of coalitions and alliances
• Joint planning between CSOs, government and private sector
• Signed MoUs

• Formal and informal meetings
• Structured engagements and interactions between CSOs, government and private sector

1