MainDBDraft: Supporting Counties in Kenya to Mainstream Climate Change in Development and Access Climate Finance, Kenya: The Isiolo County Climate Change Fund
Title:
Supporting Counties in Kenya to Mainstream Climate Change in Development and Access Climate Finance, Kenya: The Isiolo County Climate Change Fund
Geographic region:
Africa
Target group:
Communities; Policy makers; Private sector
Purpose:
Activities:
Expected outcome:
Indicators of achievement:
Date of submission:
06/07/2021
Further information:
https://www.iied.org/eba-evidence-policy-kenya
NWPPartner:
International Institute for Environment and Development
NWPPartners:
Other action pledges:
NWPCountryItem:
NWPUpdate:
NWPContentType:
Geographic scope:
National; Subregional
Adaptation element:
Adaptation planning and practices
Adaptation sector/theme:
Biodiversity; Ecosystem-based adaptation; Ecosystems
Climate hazard:
Drought
Implementing partners:
Ada Consortium, Kenyan National Drought Management Authority
NWPOrganizationName:
Abbreviation:
Weblink:
Type of organization:
Civil society
NWPUserTitle:
NWPName:
NWPSurname:
Job title:
NWPStreet:
NWPZip:
Country:
Isiolo County, Kenya
NWPTel:
NWPPrimaryEmail:
NWPSecendaryEmail:
NWPGPLL:
- Community participation is fundamental throughout design and implementation and formalized in management structures and decision-making processes. Participatory livelihood and local economy resilience assessments helped identify possible investments. Supporting Ward Climate Change Planning Committees’ customary range management institutions (dedhas) is an integral part of the Isiolo County Climate Change Fund (ICCCF), and local knowledge is also prioritized. - Effective rangeland management requires jurisdiction over large areas, but administrative boundaries and the imposition of different tenure and land-use systems can disrupt pastoralist mobility and livestock management. Catchment-level planning is therefore important to ensure pastoralist access to water in this dry area and therefore requires landscape-level management approaches. -Measuring returns on investment is difficult because people are highly mobile, and many benefits are difficult to quantify. Pastoral production systems have historically been undervalued as a land-use choice. Quantifying the broader economic benefits of ecosystem services and pastoral production systems is harder than quantifying the immediate direct benefits. - Key challenges include the historical mismanagement of water and grazing resources; poor coordination and communication by the central planning systems and a disconnect between communities and formal governance systems; limited capacity to track the impact of adaptation interventions at the county level; and difficulty securing county-level government support and multi-sectoral coordination. - A national commitment to devolution has also provided opportunities to enhance community participation in decision-making and support community land ownership, both of which are cornerstones of ICCCF effectiveness. Several social, institutional and political opportunities have supported ICCCF implementation in Isiolo.
References NWP:
Year of publication:
NWPTypeOfKnowledge:
Technical document/report
Description:
The Adaptation Consortium aims to prepare county governments to access global climate finance to support adaptation and climate-resilient development. It mainstreams mechanisms that allow communities to prioritize investments in public goods that build their climate resilience.
Outcome:
- ICCCF investments have helped build local resilience to climate change while providing a number of co-benefits that promote well-being of people in poor and marginalized households. - Pastoralists and agro-pastoralists particularly benefit, which is important as livestock is the dominant economic sector in Isiolo County and supports the majority of the population. Women benefit no less than men. - ICCCF disbursements have supported projects that have improved ecosystem resilience and services provision. Investments in traditional rangeland governance and management systems slow land deterioration and have led to rangeland regeneration. - Having a strong financial rationale makes ICCCF investments cost effective for both community and external investors. The investments in strengthening dedha in four Isiolo wards over the 2014 long dry season, resulted in a ratio of 402:1 of local community benefits to ICCCF investment. The ratio of benefits for local and non-local community members was 1,635:1. - Dedha members contributed their own money to dedha management, and the ratio of returns on their investment was high. The costs of establishing the ICCCF was 28% greater than the total value of the investments delivered by the first round of disbursements, but these costs are likely to drop dramatically in subsequent rounds. - The ICCCF running costs compare favourably with similar mechanisms and indicate that no other land uses would provide better returns. Effectiveness was evaluated using a methodology described in Reid et al. 2018 and Reid et al. 2017.
NWPInformationType:
Case study
NWPStatus:
Processed
NWPRelevantWeblinks:
Created at 06/07/2021 13:15 by
Last modified at 06/07/2021 13:16 by crmmocservices
Go back to list
Home(NWPStaging)