Kenya 239
action plans, are the typical tools used by duty bearers to hold private economic
interests accountable for minimising risks to local communities. But there is
potentially a greater role for monitoring by local citizens who might be better
placed to identify changes in their local communities and environment.
Weighing risks and benefits
The distribution of risks among powerful and marginalised stakeholders affects
how these risks are weighed against benefits during decision- making processes
around certain actions (or inaction). In the geothermal sector, the financial
benefits accruing to private companies or government from the sale of electricity, along with the political benefit of ensuring reliable power from a clean
energy source for the middle and elite classes, appear to have much more weight
than the concern over the livelihoods of a few local communities with little
influence. But with devolution and the prospect of greater benefit sharing, more
weight may be given to those local concerns by the county government.
In the charcoal sector, meeting the growing household energy demand of an
increasing urban and peri- urban population appears to hold more weight than
concerns over degradation and deforestation in distant locations as a result of
unregulated production of charcoal. In the past, more weight has been given to
financing demand- side measures to reducing charcoal consumption, such as
adoption of efficient cooking technologies. Supply- side measures that potentially have more impact on forest cover and GHG emissions are only recently
gaining political attention.
The ways in which risks and benefits are weighed in decisions around geothermal power development and sustainable charcoal production and trade
differ depending on the perspective of the stakeholder. And clearly the risk/
benefit perspective of those stakeholders who are both more removed from the
local landscape, where geothermal power generation and charcoal production
activities occur, and more closely connected to where profits from these activities accrue have more influence in decision- making processes. Addressing these
spatial and equity dimensions should be of serious concern for those seeking to
ensure that Kenya’s low- carbon, climate- resilient development pathways benefit
all citizens of the country. More transparent and participatory dialogue between
private economic interests, duty bearers and rights holders is one way in which
the balance could be shifted as Kenya pursues its future development pathways.
Conclusions
In this chapter, we explored the implementation and consequential risks associated with scaling up geothermal power development and sustainable charcoal
production, both of which are widely considered core elements of Kenya’s lowcarbon and climate- resilient development ambitions.
Our research shows that optimism around the potential for greater geothermal power development needs to be tempered with serious action to mitigate
action plans, are the typical tools used by duty bearers to hold private economic
interests accountable for minimising risks to local communities. But there is
potentially a greater role for monitoring by local citizens who might be better
placed to identify changes in their local communities and environment.
Weighing risks and benefits
The distribution of risks among powerful and marginalised stakeholders affects
how these risks are weighed against benefits during decision- making processes
around certain actions (or inaction). In the geothermal sector, the financial
benefits accruing to private companies or government from the sale of electricity, along with the political benefit of ensuring reliable power from a clean
energy source for the middle and elite classes, appear to have much more weight
than the concern over the livelihoods of a few local communities with little
influence. But with devolution and the prospect of greater benefit sharing, more
weight may be given to those local concerns by the county government.
In the charcoal sector, meeting the growing household energy demand of an
increasing urban and peri- urban population appears to hold more weight than
concerns over degradation and deforestation in distant locations as a result of
unregulated production of charcoal. In the past, more weight has been given to
financing demand- side measures to reducing charcoal consumption, such as
adoption of efficient cooking technologies. Supply- side measures that potentially have more impact on forest cover and GHG emissions are only recently
gaining political attention.
The ways in which risks and benefits are weighed in decisions around geothermal power development and sustainable charcoal production and trade
differ depending on the perspective of the stakeholder. And clearly the risk/
benefit perspective of those stakeholders who are both more removed from the
local landscape, where geothermal power generation and charcoal production
activities occur, and more closely connected to where profits from these activities accrue have more influence in decision- making processes. Addressing these
spatial and equity dimensions should be of serious concern for those seeking to
ensure that Kenya’s low- carbon, climate- resilient development pathways benefit
all citizens of the country. More transparent and participatory dialogue between
private economic interests, duty bearers and rights holders is one way in which
the balance could be shifted as Kenya pursues its future development pathways.
Conclusions
In this chapter, we explored the implementation and consequential risks associated with scaling up geothermal power development and sustainable charcoal
production, both of which are widely considered core elements of Kenya’s lowcarbon and climate- resilient development ambitions.
Our research shows that optimism around the potential for greater geothermal power development needs to be tempered with serious action to mitigate