240 Oliver W. Johnson et al.
against potential social and political risks. Geothermal development in Kenya
has largely focused on nurturing a new industry and building technical expertise. But as the sector has grown, so too have the challenges it faces, placing
increased pressure on both the government and the private sector to pursue
further development in a responsible manner, to ensure the benefits of geothermal development are shared equitably. In the sustainable charcoal sector, barriers to greater adoption of efficient and sustainable forest management, charcoal
production, and charcoal consumption practices require co- ordinated efforts to
strengthen the capacity of the implementing entities and charcoal producer
associations, and to ensure that the enforcing agencies speak to each other in
order to address any concerns that may be raised by the market chain actors. In
the long term, other cleaner and more sustainable fuels may replace charcoal
but, in the short and medium term, investments in the sustainability of this
important urban fuel are imperative to ensure that Kenya’s natural forest
resources are responsibly managed.
Our analysis of implementation and consequential risks associated with pursuit
of greater geothermal power development and more widespread adoption of sustainable charcoal production and trade identified a clear distribution of risks across
spatial and equity dimensions. The risks and benefits accruing to those marginalised stakeholders located close to natural resource landscapes, and who were often
the poorest of all stakeholders, tended to be given less weight than the risks and
benefits accrued by those in positions of relative economic and political power.
Indeed, our analysis could benefit from action research following how risks and
benefits are really weighed by different stakeholders and how that affects decision
making in practice. We also advocate further research on the political and social
dimensions of low- carbon and climate- resilient energy pathways in Kenya to
better understand how these pathways might be realised in an equitable manner.
Notes
1 See https://data.worldbank.org.
2 MtCO 2 e = million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
3 See www.mtp3.go.ke/.
4 For example, a number of plans under Vision 2030 – such as electrification of the new
Mombasa–Nairobi railroad, establishment of the hi- tech Konza City, and development
of industrial parks close to geothermal sites – have so far failed to materialise.
5 See equator- principles.com.
6 See https://data.worldbank.org.
References
Bailis, R. (2009). Modeling climate change mitigation from alternative methods of charcoal production in Kenya. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 1491–1502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biombioe.2009.07.001.
Bailis, R., Wang, Y., Drigo, R., Ghilardi, A., Masera, O. (2017). Getting the numbers
right: revisiting woodfuel sustainability in the developing world. Environ. Res. Lett. 12,
115002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa83ed.
against potential social and political risks. Geothermal development in Kenya
has largely focused on nurturing a new industry and building technical expertise. But as the sector has grown, so too have the challenges it faces, placing
increased pressure on both the government and the private sector to pursue
further development in a responsible manner, to ensure the benefits of geothermal development are shared equitably. In the sustainable charcoal sector, barriers to greater adoption of efficient and sustainable forest management, charcoal
production, and charcoal consumption practices require co- ordinated efforts to
strengthen the capacity of the implementing entities and charcoal producer
associations, and to ensure that the enforcing agencies speak to each other in
order to address any concerns that may be raised by the market chain actors. In
the long term, other cleaner and more sustainable fuels may replace charcoal
but, in the short and medium term, investments in the sustainability of this
important urban fuel are imperative to ensure that Kenya’s natural forest
resources are responsibly managed.
Our analysis of implementation and consequential risks associated with pursuit
of greater geothermal power development and more widespread adoption of sustainable charcoal production and trade identified a clear distribution of risks across
spatial and equity dimensions. The risks and benefits accruing to those marginalised stakeholders located close to natural resource landscapes, and who were often
the poorest of all stakeholders, tended to be given less weight than the risks and
benefits accrued by those in positions of relative economic and political power.
Indeed, our analysis could benefit from action research following how risks and
benefits are really weighed by different stakeholders and how that affects decision
making in practice. We also advocate further research on the political and social
dimensions of low- carbon and climate- resilient energy pathways in Kenya to
better understand how these pathways might be realised in an equitable manner.
Notes
1 See https://data.worldbank.org.
2 MtCO 2 e = million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
3 See www.mtp3.go.ke/.
4 For example, a number of plans under Vision 2030 – such as electrification of the new
Mombasa–Nairobi railroad, establishment of the hi- tech Konza City, and development
of industrial parks close to geothermal sites – have so far failed to materialise.
5 See equator- principles.com.
6 See https://data.worldbank.org.
References
Bailis, R. (2009). Modeling climate change mitigation from alternative methods of charcoal production in Kenya. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 1491–1502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biombioe.2009.07.001.
Bailis, R., Wang, Y., Drigo, R., Ghilardi, A., Masera, O. (2017). Getting the numbers
right: revisiting woodfuel sustainability in the developing world. Environ. Res. Lett. 12,
115002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa83ed.