A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF KENYA

KENYAS
WATER, SANITATION AND
SEWERAGE FRAMEWORK

INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS (IEA)

June 2007

A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF KENYA

KENYAS
WATER, SANITATION AND
SEWERAGE FRAMEWORK

INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS (IEA)

June 2007

Published by:
Institute of Economic Affairs
th
5 Flr. ACK Garden House, 1st Ngong Avenue
P O BOX 53989 00200
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 254 020 2717402, 2721262
Fax: 254 020 2716231
E-mail: admin@ieakenya.or.ke
Website: www.ieakenya.or.ke

Institute of Economic Affairs 2007

First Published 2007

ISBN: 9966-7183-1-1

With funding from Heinrich Bll Foundation

Regional Office East and Horn of Africa
P.O. Box 10799-00100 GPO
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 020-3744227/3750329
Fax: 020-3749132
Website: www.hbfha.com

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1

Background

Government - The Service Provider, Implementer, Policy Maker, Regulator and Financier
The first Water Act in Kenya was the Water Ordinance, 1929 which was then repealed by the
Water Act Cap 372, published in May 1952, it was revised in 1962, and once again in 1972
with minor changes. Under this Water Act, Ministry of Water Resources Management and
Development (MWRMD), National Water Pipeline Conservation, Ministry of Agriculture
(MoA), Ministry of Local Government (MoLG) and Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries
(MoLF) were all responsible for policy formulation, regulation and service provision. This
made several Government organs the policy formulators, regulators and service providers,
causing confusion and overlapping of roles (A diagram indicating the responsibility lines of
these ministries is shown in Annex 1).
In 1974, a National Water Master Plan Initiative was launched. The primary aim of the
Initiative was to ensure availability of potable water within reasonable distance to all
households by 2000. The initiative bore the slogan, Water for all by the year 2000 which
was to be achieved through the development of water supply schemes. Until 1974, water was
managed by the Department of Water Development (DWD) which was housed in various
ministries including Public Works, Natural Resources and Agriculture. In line with the 1974
Initiative, the Government upgraded the Ministry of Agricultures Department of Water
Development into a Ministry of Water. This new Ministry embarked on an ambitious water
supply development program. Unfortunately soon after in the 1980s, Government began
experiencing budget constraints which curtailed its desire to provide safe water and expand
water and sewerage systems. Priority was therefore given to the rehabilitation of existing
schemes and construction of a number of huge water projects that included the Baricho and
Kilimanjaro water schemes.
Handing over to Communities
Despite these efforts and investments, the goal was far from being achieved. The Government
soon realized that on its own, it could not deliver water to all Kenyans by 2000 as promised.
Therefore, there was a need to revisit the slogan and develop a strategy on how best to
increase water access and coverage in the rural and urban areas. Attention therefore turned to
finding ways of involving players other than the Government in providing water and
sewerage services, a process that came to be known as handing over.
There was general agreement over the need to hand over Government water supply systems
but not the aspects of what was to be handed over. In 1997, the Government published a
national guideline on how to hand over rural water supply systems to communities (Ministry
of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development, 1997). The Manual stated that
at the moment the Ministry is only transferring the management (not the assets) of the water
supply schemes. The communities will act as custodians of the water supply schemes,

including the assets, when they take over the responsibility for operating and maintaining
them.
The community felt that to ensure good management and ownership, the handing over should
have included all associated assets. The criteria for handing over included (i) a communitys
capacity to take over (ii) ability to pay (iii) capacity to operate and maintain the system (iv)
involvement of women in management and (v) ability and willingness of communities to
constitute legal entities to manage the water schemes.
Creation of a National Water Policy
Building on the above experience, the Government developed a National Water Policy which
was adopted by Parliament as Sessional Paper No 1 of 1999 in April, 1999. It was officially
launched in August, 1999 for implementation. The 1999 policy justified a management hand
over, arguing that ownership of a water facility encouraged proper operation and maintenance
and that those facilities should, therefore, be handed over to those responsible for their
operation and maintenance. The Policy stated that the Government would hand over urban
water systems to autonomous departments within local authorities, and the rural water
supplies, to communities. In a nutshell, the Policy moved Government away from direct
service provision and restricted it to regulatory functions. Service provision was left to
municipalities, private sector and communities. More about the policy is contained in Annex
2.
The Policy also stated that the Water Act, Chapter 372, would be reviewed and updated to
transfer water facilities to other service providers. Regulations would be introduced to give
other institutions the legal mandate to provide water services and regulation mechanisms.
Water Coverage as of Year 2000
By 2000, the Department of Water Development (DWD) had developed and was managing
73 piped urban water systems serving 1.4 million people, and 555 piped rural water supply
systems serving 4.7 million people. The NWCPC was operating piped water supply systems
in 21 urban centres for 2.3 million people and 14 large rural water supply systems for 1.5
million people. However this investment in water systems still fell short of the targets and
water for all by year 2000. Therefore alongside the DWD and the NWCPC, large
municipalities were licensed to supply water in their areas of jurisdiction, and by 2000, ten
municipalities supplied 3.9 million urban dwellers with water. Some municipalities that
established a water and sewage department were Nyeri, Nairobi, Kericho, Eldoret, Thika,
Nyahururu, Kitale, Nanyuki, Meru and Nakuru. Additionally, about 2.3 million people were
receiving some level of service from systems operated by self-help (community) groups who
had built systems often with donor funding and technical support from district officers of the
DWD. Those who were not served under any of the above arrangements i.e. DWD, NCWPC
or a municipal, served themselves. Typically, this was done by collecting water directly from
a water course or some other water source on a daily basis.
In terms of access to safe water supply and sanitation, the figures were relatively low. Access
to safe water supply stood at 57% in urban areas and 42% in rural in 2000. The urban
sanitation coverage was 95%, and rural coverage, 82%, averaging 87%. (These data are
shown in Annex 3). It should be noted that this refers mainly to the existence of facilities.
These figures on water and sanitation coverage differ from source to source and depend on

the criteria and definition used. The current national coverage figures, as given elsewhere in
this report, are 68% in urban and 49% in rural areas for water supply and less than 50% for
sanitation.
By 2002, only 10 of the 555 schemes serving about 85,000 people had been handed over to
community based organisations. This was a very small number.
Repealing Water Act Cap 372
While developing the National Water Policy, the Government also established a National
Task Force to review the Water Act, Cap 372, and draft amendments. The Water Bill 2002
was published on 15 March, 2002, and passed by Parliament on 18 July, 2002. It was
gazetted in October 2002 and came into effect in 2003. The Water Act 2002 was a key
instrument and tool to implement the policy. The Act would operate concurrently with the
Water Act Cap 372 until completely repealed.
1.2

Purpose of this Study

This research assesses the design and implementation of Water Act 2002. More specifically,
it (i) highlights strengths and weaknesses of Kenyas water, sanitation and sewerage
framework as per Water Act 2002 and (ii) ways in which the identified strengths can be built
and the weaknesses reduced. The objective of the study is to inform policy makers,
implementing agencies, service providers and development partners of the status of the water
reforms, and suggest some ways forward. The study can also be used to enlighten public
sector reform design in Kenya.
1.3

Scope of the Study

The scope of the study is as follows:

Overview of the current water, sanitation and sewerage framework;
A comparison of the framework with those used in other nations; and
Recommendations.
1.4

Principles of the Study

A framework is a support structure established to act as a means for meeting a given need. It
consists of people, entities, rules and systems. It can be said that the elements of a good
framework are (i) clear roles and relationships between actors (ii) rules of operation and
adherence to the rules and (iii) accountability to a higher authority. This framework should
then ultimately, act as a means to achieve intended policy outcomes. It is these principles that
form the basis for this rapid assessment of the Kenya water, sanitation and sewerage
framework.
1.5

Methodology

The study has applied the following methods and strategies to undertake the assignment:
Desk research;
Field work;
Key informant interviews of staff in various institutions;
Peer review; and
Discussions with key policy makers and stakeholders.

The study commenced in February 2006 and was peer reviewed twice by water stakeholders
from different parts of Kenya, in Nairobi, in May 2006. The comments made on the study
were incorporated and shared with the Ministry of Water and Irrigation at Maji House,
Nairobi, in November 2006. The comments made on the study were incorporated and then
shared with Members of Parliament at the IEA Annual Legislative Conference in Mombasa,
in December 2006. The study was revised over the period of January to May 2007, and was
shared with relevant Ministries in May 2007. The final document will then be launched to
stakeholders, donors and the general public in June 2007.

CHAPTER TWO
KENYAS WATER, SANITATION AND SEWERAGE FRAMEWORK
2.1

General Overview of Water Act 2002

The Water Act 2002 provides for three main aspects; (i) the management, conservation, use
and control of water resources (ii) the acquisition and regulation of rights to use water, and
(iii) the regulation and management of water supply and sewerage services. It creates various
institutions with separate functions/ mandates and starts by first, removing Government from
service provision.
The institutional framework as spelt out in the new Water Act 2002 is pyramidal. At the apex
are the Water Appeals Board and the Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MW&I). The
functions of the Ministry of Water and Irrigation are reduced to policy making. More
specifically, its functions are to develop and formulate Water Resources Management Policy,
Water and Sanitation Services Policy, Water Quality and Pollution Control Policy, Flood
Control and Land Reclamation Policy, Waste Water Treatment and Disposal Policy, National
Irrigation Policy and a policy on Water Schemes and Community Water Projects. 1 The Water
Services Regulatory Board (WSRB) and Water Appeals Board (WAB) are independent
institutions to regulate and deal with disputes respectively.
The Water Act 2002 provides for a Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA) to
manage water in an integrated way. WRMA is charged with responsibility for managing,
regulating, protecting, apportioning and conserving water resources naturally, including
transboundary waters.
In the case of water supply and sewerage, the Act gives responsibility for service delivery to
seven Water Services Boards, who in turn, retain service provider(s) such as water
companies, NGOs, institutions and community owned schemes, to provide day-to-day service
within their areas of responsibilities. Seven service boards on a regional basis have been
established and are operational. These Boards are to be regulated by the Water Services
Regulatory Board.
While the Regulatory Board has been gazetted, it is yet to be fully functional (this is
discussed in Chapter Three). The Water Appeals Board (WAB) has also been established but
is not fully operational (this is discussed in Chapter Three). The water reforms are in
atransitional period and the work of WAB will become more pronounced once these reform
institutions are fully operational and meeting their mandates. The Water and River Users
Associations (WRUAs) are entities created to give the consumer a voice. However, not all
WRUAs are in place as envisaged. This new set up is depicted in chart 1.

Official Website, Ministry of Water and Irrigation http://www.water.go.ke

Chart 1: New Water Act 2002 Institutional Framework

Water Appeals
Board
WAB

Water Sector
Reform Steering
Committee WSRSC
Nation
al level

Water Sector
Reform
Secretariat

Local
level

Policy
Formul
ation

MoWI
Water
Resources
Management
Authority
WRMA

Regio
nal
level

Water Services
Trust Fund
WSTF

Catchment
Areas Advisory
Committees
CAACs

Regional
Office
WRMA

Water Resources
User Associations
WRUAs

Water
Services
Regulatory
Board
WSRB

Water
Services
Boards
WSBs
Water Services
Providers
WSPs

Consumers, Users

Regula
tion

Servic
es
Provisi
on

Consu
mption,
Use

Source Water Sector Reform Secretariat

Each of these institutions is discussed in more detail throughout this paper.
2.2

National Strategies

Sections 49 and 50 of the Water Act 2002 define the National Water Services Strategy. The
strategy objectives are to make arrangements to ensure that at all times there is in every area a
person capable of providing water, and to design a program that progressively extends
sewerage to every centre of population. The national strategy describes the process of
ensuring that every area has adequate water and sewerage services and that there is a service
provider. The Transfer Plan, which was subjected to public hearing in 2005, is under
implementation. It is expected that Water Services Strategy will soon be subjected to public
consultations as required under section 49 of the Act 2002.
In the case of water services, resource management and supply, as well as sewerage, the
National Water Resources Management Strategy and National Water Supply and Sewerage
Strategy have been drafted. The strategies suggest guidelines on the hows and whys of water
management and supply in the country. As per section 11 of the Act, the strategies cannot be
gazetted by the Minister in charge of Water Affairs until public consultation has been held.
Public consultations on the National Water Resources Strategy are still ongoing and are to be
gazetted by end of the year.

2.3

Implementation of New Water Framework

The 2002 Act was gazetted in 2003 and implementation began in 2004. During 2004 to 2005,
new institutions were established and given legal mandates according to the Act. These
include the WSRB, WSBs, WSTF, WRMA and some WSPs. The transfer plan was approved
in July, 2005. During 2006, the Ministry of Water and Irrigation would focus on
consolidation of commercialization of WSPs, WRUAs etc and development of Business
Plans for new institutions. In the same period, Ministry would also focus on its core business
by embracing the SWAP and sector investment plan.
Table 1: Implementation Status of Framework
Status
Phase One (2004)
Staffing of new institutions is still ongoing after
Establishment and staffing of new
institutions, situation analysis of all water gazettement of the transfer plan. About 600
staff mostly technical from Ministry of Water
supplies and water resources under
respective WSBs, and public
and NWCPC, have been transferred to WSBs.
consultations of Transfer Plan.
Situation analysis of all existing water supplies,
sewerage and water resources has not been
done. Public consultations of Transfer Plan
have taken place.
Phase Two (2005)
Status
Gazettement of the Transfer Plan and the The process for the transfer of these services is
transfer of services to the Water Services outlined in The Plan for Transfer of
Boards and water resources to the Water management and operation of water services to
Resources Management Authority. Note water services boards 2004. The plan has been
that after the transfer of services gazetted and is being implemented. All water
previously undertaken by DWD and supplies previously managed by MW&I and
NWCPC to WSBs, the DWD would be NWCPC have been transferred to WSBs with a
appointed as interim WSP for one year.
legally binding transfer agreement. In turn
WSBs have appointed WSPs like Nairobi Water
and Sewerage company.
Phase Three (2006)
Status
Ensuring effective implementation of
All new institutions have been established and 7
new institutions and enhancing
WSBs have been licensed by the WRSB and
institutional capacities.
transfer of staff from MW&I and NWCPC and
recruitment effected. Some of the Ministry and
Corporation staff at districts not absorbed by
WSBs has been attached to community
projects. WSBs and other new institutions have
developed strategic business plans and action
plans to implement their mandates. Capacity
building has been incorporated in plans and
training is outsourced.
Source: WSRS - Table indicating planned stages in implementation of reforms
The Ministry of Water and Irrigation has already handed over all water supply utilities to the
new institutions. Management teams have been appointed and placed on performance
contracts. Staffing of the institutions, which is the final milestone in the transfer process was
effected from 1 July, 2005, with 7,200 civil servants working in the Ministry of Water and

Irrigation and 1,300 in the National Water Conservation and Pipeline Corporation (NWCPC)
being systematically deployed to the new institutions according to their staffing needs. At the
district level, all the ministry staff, including those currently undertaking Projects/Program
and the NWCPC personnel in regional offices, have moved directly to their respective
Boards. Likewise, the water supply infrastructure previously under the Ministry and the
Water Corporation went to the Boards. Those serving at the provincial headquarters as water
development staff were retained to provide support for coordination, supervision, monitoring
and evaluation in consultation with the regional bodies (WSB and WRMA) head offices.
However those serving in planning, design, operations, maintenance and water resource
management moved to the relevant institutions.
At the NWCPC head office, those performing functions that have been delegated were
deployed appropriately and the rest retained. The Corporation now serves as the construction
arm of the Ministry and, therefore, all Ministry staff engaged in water conservation and
drilling report to the Managing Director of the NWCPC for deployment.
2.4

Gender Issues in New Framework

The issue of gender is critical and features in all sectors at both the management and
development levels. However, in majority of cases, gender concerns are often given low
attention and in many cases left out. The major hindrance has been the lack of a National
Gender Policy and, in turn, a legal framework to implement the policy.
A National Commission on Gender and Development has been established by an act of
parliament in December, 2003, to coordinate implementation and facilitate gender
mainstreaming in water and sanitation program and to give advice. The commission is
recruiting staff to strengthen its capacity to address gender issues. Efforts have however, been
made by the Government to develop a gender policy, though not enacted, and gender desk
officers have been posted to ministries. The desk officers lack the guiding policy that could
be used to push gender agenda through various programs undertaken by ministries and
government departments.
An attempt is being made to mainstream gender into the new framework by appointing
women representatives to the boards/institutions and in management. It is a requirement to
have female representation in water boards and water service providers. Although progress
has been made in the community water and sanitation committees and women groups dealing
with water and sanitation, the number of female representation is generally low.
2.5

Other Key Institutions

For the water sector to operate effectively there are institutions outside the Water Act 2002
which play a critical role in water resource management, sanitation and sewerage. They
include National Environmental Management Authority, Ministry of Lands, Ministry of
Local Government, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Planning and National Development,
Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries. It is important to note that the
Ministry of Gender, Culture, Sports and Social Services should play a major role in water
supply and sanitation as majority of support agencies have insisted on incorporation of
gender and other cross-cutting issues like poverty alleviation and HIV/Aids in water and
sanitation development and management.

CHAPTER THREE
WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
3.1

The Framework

Kenya is classified as a water-scarce country with per capita water being below the global
benchmark of 1,000 cubic metres. In 2005, the estimated per capita was about 612 cubic
metres for all uses. This scarcity is expected to worsen by 2025 when per capita is projected
to be about 235 cubic metres. This poses a serious threat to socio-economic development and
the integrity of national ecosystems.
Kenya has a new management approach called Integrated Water Resources Management
(IWRM). This is a process which promotes the coordinated development and management of
water, land and related resources to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an
equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems (as defined by
Global Water Partnership, 2001). The IWRM planning process in Kenya started with a
historic meeting in Mbagathi, Nairobi, in March, 2002. The main objective was to discuss
priority water management issues and challenges in Kenya. The outcome was a National
Water Resources Management Campaign based on the following action platforms; treating
and managing water as a scarce resource with social and economic value, entrenching the
right to water and protection of the resource in the Constitution to guarantee the peoples
right and to safeguard this vital resource, setting appropriate levels of budgets to support
ongoing water resource management reforms and investment needs and recognizing that
there are many stakeholders with different interests, values and concerns about water
utilization, protection and conservation, and that it is essential to work jointly to address the
national needs.
This management approach is essentially about building capacity and institutions at different
levels for integrated and direct management of sectoral and aggregate water demand. The
IWRM package included a combination of the following instruments:
A National Water Policy so that there is a cohesive, well-understood normative
framework to guide all decision makers in the sector
A water law and regulatory framework for coordinated action for sustainable water
management
Recognition of the river basin as the unit of water and land resource planning and
management and creation of River Basin Organizations in place of
territorial/functional departments to improve basin level water productivity
Treating water as an economic good by pricing water resource as well as services,
especially outside life-line uses, to reflect its scarcity value so that it is efficiently
used and allocated to high value uses
Creation of water rights by instituting a system of withdrawal permits
Participatory resource management with involvement of women so that water
becomes everybodys business
The IWRM plan will develop and use suitable indicators that provide a means of measuring
progress towards the national aspirations as contained in the National Water Resources
Management Strategy, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Johannesburg
Plan of Implementation (JPOI) among other international commitments. This government

will, through this process, set up a reporting mechanism on the progress of implementing the
plan. Specifically the JPOI calls for development of country IWRM plans by 2005. Towards
this, Kenya has drafted a Water Resource Management strategy which will be presented to
stakeholders this year. Kenya has also made progress on some aspects of the IWRM package,
but little on others. An assessment of Kenyas progress is discussed throughout the paper.
As the custodian of the national water resources, the Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI),
seeks to ensure sound, sustainable and efficient water resource management for the country.
In this regard the Government has established the Water Resources Management Authority
(WRMA), among other water sector institutions, in line with the provisions in Water Act
2002.
Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA)
The Authority is responsible for managing, protecting, apportioning and conserving water
resources naturally, including trans-boundary water. For this to be achieved, the country is
divided into the following six regions:
Lake Victoria North Catchment;
Lake Victoria South Catchment;
Rift Valley Catchment;
Athi Catchment;
Tana Catchment; and
Ewaso Nyiro North Catchment.
Regional Managers have already been appointed and taken office. The Authority is charged
with:
Developing principles, guidelines and procedures for allocating water resources;
Monitoring and reassessing a national water resources management strategy;
Receiving and determining applications for permit for water use;
Monitoring and enforcing conditions attached to permits;
Regulating and protecting water resources quality from adverse impacts;
Managing and protecting water catchments;
Determining charges to be imposed for use of water from any water resource;
Gathering and maintaining information on water resources and publishing forecasts,
projections and information on water resources;
Liaising with other bodies for better regulation and management of water resources;
and
Advising government on any matter in connection with water resources.
Catchment Area Advisory Committees (CAACs)
CAACs have been established in the respective catchment areas and are currently being
implemented. The CAACs work is to help the WRMA in water and environmental
conservation activities through the regional managers.
Under the regional offices, WRMA have established sub-regional offices to work in close
liaison with the WRUAs and the CAACs. However, it is necessary to hasten the staff
recruitment process for the WRMA to be fully operational up to the sub - regional level. All
the staff previously working in the Department of Water Resources of the Ministry of Water

and Irrigation have been transferred to the WRMA under the transitional transfer plan
arrangement. The expected responsibilities of CAACs are to:

Provide detailed information and advice on water resources as relates to Water

Resources Assessment within their areas;
Develop guidelines and advisory services for permitting use;
Advise implementing agencies on catchment protection and conservation;
Advise on siting, catchment characteristics and utilization of facilities as relates to
increasing storage capacity;
Advise on trans-boundary water resource management;
Provide advice and advocacy on resources use, conflict resolution, water quality and
pollution control;
Support the Water River Users Associations (WRUAs);
Visit community hotspots (conflict prone flash areas) and motivate them to coalesce
into WRUAs; and
Identify sources of conflicts and solutions.

Water River Users Associations (WRUAs)

The (WRUAs) are at the basin level and their main work is to harmonize water with
agriculture and other competing uses and upstream and downstream users to avoid conflicts
over water. This means that some base flows have to be maintained for sustenance of the
ecological systems downstream. Since Water Act 2002 has taken the management of water
resources down to the communities, it is expected that communities will act as policing
agents within their areas and be active participants in water resource management.
3.2

The Current Situation

Catchments
Kenyas major water towers include Mt. Kenya, the Aberdares, the Mau Complex, Mt. Elgon
and Cherangani hills (Map 1). These towers support all major sectors of the Kenyan
economy. The Mau Forest Complex is the source of the Rivers Mara and Sondu. The former
river supports the Masai Mara Game Reserve and hence is key to the survival of wildlife in
the Maasai Mara Game Reserve and the Serengeti National Park of Tanzania. The Sondu
River has a hydropower complex (supported by the Japanese Government) expected to
contribute about 60 MW to the national grid. The Njoro River, flowing from the Mau Forest
Complex, drains into, and is the principal source of Lake Nakuru. The Mt. Kenya ecosystem
is the source of the Tana River, which is the foundation of hydropower generation in Kenya
with five (5) hydro power dams. It also supports agricultural development along the Tana
Basin. The numerous streams and springs that support commercial and subsistence farming
on the lower slopes of Mt. Kenya owe their flow to the Mt Kenya catchment area.
Finally, the Nzoia River, which drains into Lake Victoria, originates from Mt. Elgon.

Map 1: The Five Catchment Basins in Kenya

Source: Ministry of Water and Irrigation.

Activities that affect the quantity, timing and quality of water emerging from these water
towers, such as the proposed excisions of forests, poor land-use practices and encroachment
into recharge areas, have the potential to adversely affect the performance of major sectors of
the economy.
Water Sources
The water sources for 130 out of 141 urban centres, and 283 out of the 295 large-scale rural
water supply schemes are summarized in the table below:
Table 2: Water Supply Schemes and their sources
Water
Surface Water
Ground Water
Supply
River Lake Off take Sub- Borehole
Spring
Schemes
from
total /Shallow
pipeline
Well
Urban
70
2
11
83
40
7
WSS
Rural
133
17
0
150
91
40
WSS
Total
203
19
11
233
131
47
Source: JICA Field Survey Results in 1998 and MWR Operation
1997

Total
Rock
SubCatchme total
nt
0
47

130

283

133

2
180
413
and Maintenance report,

Surface Water Abstraction

The main sources of piped water in Kenya are the surface waters of the rivers and
groundwater. Surface water source facilities can be grouped as river intakes, large dams and
reservoirs having storage capacity enough to regulate the river runoff throughout the year and
pumping off take facilities on lakes, rivers and small dam/pans.
As a legal requirement, an abstraction permit is a document providing permission to abstract
water from a surface or ground water source for domestic, irrigation or industrial use. In
Kenya, water supply schemes managed by the Department of Water, NWCPC,
municipalities, self-help groups, a large number of farms, industrial firms, institutions and
others, abstract surface water for domestic, industrial and irrigation use. One is not supposed
to abstract river water in excess 60% of the water body. The permits previously issued by
Water Apportionment Board and currently by WRMA, ensure equitable apportionment,
regulation and allocation of available water for purposes intended. The Department of Water
Resources as part of its mandate has maintained a database for water abstraction permits for
many years including pre-independent period. Though the data may not be up to date due to
problems associated with irregular gauging, illegal abstraction, infrastructure neglect and
staffing, the present database is useful and is used to estimate the amount of water abstracted
from surface water sources for domestic, industrial, livestock, irrigation and other uses. The
database requires immediate updating as some of the rivers have been over-abstracted.
Rivers
Kenyas rivers are of two main types; perennial (mostly found in the Central, Western and
Coastal areas of the country), and seasonal (commonly known as Lagas), mainly found in
semi-arid and arid areas. Floods occur intermittently. An attempt has been made to draw up a
chronology of flood events from reports, survey interviews and field reconnaissance as well
as interpretations of water level records at gauging stations. According to this information,
the 1961 floods were the most severe over the last 33 years. Other severe floods occurred in
1963/64, 1968, 1977/78, 1982, 1985, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1997. Most of these
floods usually affect the Lake Victoria and coastal basins. The floods inundated the Kano
plains, Yala swamps and other low-lying areas around Lake Victoria. They also hit the lower
Tana reaches.
Ground Water Potential
Generally, depths of aquifers vary and in volcanic regions, several aquifers can exist on top
of one another. In Kenya, ground water exists in deep aquifers up to over 300 metres. An
example is Nairobi area which is a huge aquifer. Average depth of aquifers is about 150
metres for all regions. Kenyas hydro-geological regions (or units) are the most important
determinants of ground water. The aquifer depth of Kenyas hydro-geological regions is as
follows:
1. Ground water in the volcanic regions occurs at varying depths and several aquifers
may exist on top of one another. The aquifers in these areas are confined and the
depths to the aquifers and piezometric levels within them vary widely. The average
yields are approximately 7.5 m3/hr. The average aquifers depth is 94 m.
2. The aquifers in the basement area are mainly semi-confined. The yield depth of
aquifers and static water levels vary within the rocks. Sample statistics give an
average yield of 4.5 m3/hr, and average depth of the main aquifer of 55 m.

3. The sedimentary rocks cover approximately 55% of the surface area of Kenya. The
yields in these aquifers range from 8.0 m3/hr to 3 m3/hr. The depths of aquifers vary
widely.
Deep ground water abstraction is expensive and therefore these depths of aquifers and
expected yield returns are useful data for planning and investment. The costs of such
development need to be compared with other alternative water sources.
Irrigation
Kenyas irrigation potential was estimated at 200,000 ha in 1974, 250,000 ha in 1977 and
540,000 ha in 1979. The potential for land reclamation by drainage and flood protection is
estimated at approximately 600,000 ha, located mainly in Western, Nyanza and Coast
provinces. The total irrigated land is now estimated at over 36,000 ha (IDRP, 1987)2.
Unlike Egypt and other countries, Kenya does not have a long history of irrigation
development. However, traditional irrigation may have been practiced as far back as 400
years ago (IDRP, 1987). Flood irrigation, which is still being practised by the Pokomo along
lower Tana, may have started centuries ago. Records of the early European settlers in the late
19th century gave the impression of indigenous irrigation in Elgeyo Marakwet, West Pokot
and Baringo Districts. Traditional irrigation is still continuing in the same areas, for example,
around Tot and Marigat.
Several irrigation schemes were established at the height of the Mau Mau Emergency. These
include Perkerra, Mwea, Yatta Furrow, Tana River and Ishiara. Post independence irrigation
development saw the establishment of a National Irrigation Board (NIB) in 1966 to
administer the national irrigation schemes. Private large-scale irrigation is now confined to
coffee in the rainfall deficit agro-ecological zones, pineapples and other horticulture. There
are also a lot of small-scale irrigation schemes which concentrate on horticultural crops.
Since 1977, small-scale irrigation development in both the medium and low potential areas
has been slow but steady. The Ministry of Water Development (MoWD), has the broad
responsibility of developing the national water resources in this country. It has overall
responsibility for the allocation of water for irrigation and any other use through the Water
Apportionment Board, and is engaged in detailed investigation and planning for water
development on a national scale. The MoWD maintains an 'Irrigation and Reclamation
Section,' no doubt having its roots from times when the water section moved from one
department/ministry (Public Works, Natural Resources, Agriculture) to another, until it
settled as a Ministry of Water Development in 1974. In establishing the pre-independent
national irrigation schemes, the Department of Public Works (Hydraulic Engineers) was
responsible for engineering aspects, the Department of Agriculture for production, and the
Provincial Administration for labour and settlement matters. All these functions were
transferred to the NIB on establishment in 1966.
The above-mentioned irrigation schemes, like Mwea, Yatta Furrow, Kano Plains and smallscale individual ones vary in size from 1 ha to more than 20,000 ha. About 60% of the total
number of schemes have an area of less than 100 ha. Most of the irrigation methods used in
the country are basin, furrow and sprinkler or drip. Most of the major irrigation systems like
the Yatta canal and the Mwea Rice Irrigation scheme were established during the colonial
2

IDRP, 1987 a study on Irrigation potential in Kenya

days. The major constraints encountered in irrigation schemes are; inadequacy of source of
water, high cost of irrigation inputs, lack of proper technical knowledge, high relief intensity,
sodic and saline soils, salt affected water and the absence of a market for irrigated produce.
There is an urgent need to implement an irrigation policy to address these major constraints.
In an effort to accelerate the revival of stalled irrigation projects, the Ministry of Water and
Irrigation has rebranded the irrigation strategies, approach and objectives and a draft policy
has been formulated.
Drainage System
The national drainage system is determined by the Great Rift Valley which runs
approximately north-south. From its flanks, water flows westwards to Lake Victoria and
eastwards to the Indian Ocean. Kenya's drainage system is subdivided into five drainage areas
(basins) consisting of 192 subdivisions. The five drainage areas are Lake Victoria, Rift
Valley, Athi/Sabaki River, the Tana River and the Ewaso Nyiro River. More details of the
basin size and drainage direction are listed under Annex 4. Toksoz (1981) estimated about
600,000 ha as the total agricultural land that requires drainage improvements or flood
protection, while the Inter-Ministerial Task Force estimates the land to be 208,000 ha. The
reclaimed land is only about 2,000 ha.
Shared Water Resources/ International Waters
Kenya has a fair proportion of shared water resources with Tanzania, Uganda, Somalia and
Ethiopia. There are 18 international drainage basins relevant to Kenya. So far no major
conflicts have emerged between the riparian countries concerning the utilization of water in
these rivers, however, as more projects are proposed and developed in future, conflicts may
arise as a result of over-utilization of water from rivers with low flows. Simmering conflicts
have been noted especially on the use of Lake Victoria waters due to old treaties.
3.3

Challenges

Kenya is chronically water, scarce: The combined surface and ground water potential is
estimated at 20,619 million cubic metres a year. From this water resource potential and due
to a rapid population growth over the last 30 years, our water per capita decreased from 1,853
cubic metres in 1969 to 704 cubic metres in 2000, to the current estimate of 647 cubic metres
thus going below the global benchmark of 1,000 cubic metres per person a year.
Globally, a country is categorized as water stressed if its annual renewable freshwater
supplies are between 1,000 and 1,700 cubic metres per capita, and water scarce if its
renewable freshwater supplies are less than 1,000 cubic metres per capita. About 8.3% of the
countries are classified as water scarce, while 9.8% are considered as water stressed.
Kenya is in the category of water scarce countries.
In comparison, Kenyas neighbours, Uganda and Tanzania have respective annual per capita
renewable fresh water supplies of 2,940 and 2,696 cubic metres per capita a year. The
availability of water is often a key factor in determining the patterns of human settlement and
socio-economic development. Within the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASAL) that form about
80% of Kenya, there is limited endowment of water resources. This imposes an added
financial burden on the population compared with other countries. The burden is even greater
because of the countrys vulnerability to rainfall variability. Under these circumstances, water

should be treated and managed as a scarce resource with real economic, social, ecological,
and political values.
The graph below shows that by 2025, Kenyas per capita water availability will be in the
danger zone of 235 cubic metres. Unless serious conservation and afforestation measures are
taken at policy level to increase forest cover from the current 1.7% to 10%, Kenya could face
more water scarcity and uncertainty in water resources.
Graph 1: Per Capita Water Availability, Kenya, 1969-2010

P er C ap ita W ater A vailability

20 00
15 00

Volume (m per person)

25 00

10 00
5 00
0
1 969

197 9

1989

19 99

201 0

Y ear

Source: Ministry of Water and Irrigation

Conflict: The most noticeable breakdown of water resources in Kenya can be seen from
conflict in and between communities over water resources or where water resource
availability has threatened basic livelihoods. According to a Horn of Africa (Djibouti,
Ethiopia, Kenya, & Somalia) Complex Emergency Situation Report #10 (FY 2006) by
USAID, inter-clan and cross-border resource-based conflict has risen in Kenya, Somalia,
and Ethiopia, due to the depletion of water, food, and forage supplies during the long dry
season. Conflict prone areas include the upper Ewaso Ngiro North River Basin, West Mt.
Kenya, Narumoru River, Molo River, Njoro River and parts of Machakos, Kitui and Makueni
districts.
Limited CACCs: Whereas the Water Act, 2002 establishes a very elaborate and clear
management structure (comprising of numerous institutions) for water supply, the oversight
of the water catchment areas (or water resource in general) is left to the Catchment Areas
Advisory Committees (CAACs) which have no direct authority over the WRMA regional
managers who oversee the allocation and use of water. In other words, the WRMA regional
managers are not obliged to take the advice and views of the CAACs.
Poor oversight of water rights: In the past each water right application was considered
individually rather than based on an overall allocation plan. This has created a situation
where there is very little information on abstraction on a catchment basis. Currently, three
types of illegal abstraction behaviour are observed; (1) those that are authorized but have no

permit and abstract in accordance with the quantities specified in the authorization (2) those
that have authorization or a permit but abstract without regard to the limits allowed and (3)
those with no application, authorization or permit.
Confusing permits: The existing water permits were granted under the old Water Act Cap
372, and some still have several years of life remaining. Yet the terms and conditions under
which some of them were granted are in conflict with the Water Act 2002. The new user fees,
regulations and rules developed by WRMA under provisions of Water Act 2002 have not
been gazetted and the Water Act Cap 372 is still being applied. Once the new rules and
regulations are gazetted by the Minister, then the provisions of Water Act 372 will be
repealed. This is an area of conflict which can delay progress of the reform agenda.
Poor water pollution control: Recently, National Environmental Management Authority
(NEMA) established waste and effluent discharge charges to river bodies. However, the
effluent discharge standards are not specified and the fees are different to those of the
WRMA. Additionally, there is non-point source pollution from poor land-husbandry,
sanitation, and liquid and solid waste-disposal practices. For example, studies carried out on
pollution in Nairobi River found that sewage, nutrients, toxic metals, human waste, solid
waste dumping, industrial and agricultural chemicals are main pollutants, and that due to poor
enforcement, the river may not support aquatic life (UNEP Pollution Assessment Report
2000). Political, economic, social and environmental issues are all facets that need attention
if the Nairobi River Basin is to be managed in a sustainable manner and Nairobi Dam
revived.
The above examples show that the regulatory framework over the use and management of
water resources is seriously wanting and involvement and coordination of key stakeholders is
crucial for sustainable management of water resources.
3.4

Recommendations

Establish Water Users Associations to mediate and minimize conflicts over water use and
compel WRMA to act: This will ensure that there is equitable allocation of water resources
and reduce related conflicts.
Better water rights management: This can be done by enacting and implementing the River
Basin Authorities to manage Kenya's water resources. These authorities can then lend support
to the WRMA. Updating abstraction data to identify who is abstracting and the amount
abstracted as well as enforcing conditions of permits including borehole master meters,
storage, conservation measures in the catchment and riparian environments and functionality
of the off-take structures will also assist rights management, by way of providing information
to resource managers and minimizing abuse and over-abstractions. Lastly, finalizing and
implementing criteria for water allocation for different uses and using these criteria to resolve
conflicts of earlier permit terms under Water Act Cap 372 and conditions with the Water Act
2002 is critical.
Develop a financing system that supports WRM activities that are multi-sectoral by nature:
Multi sectoral activities include hydro electric dams for electricity, irrigation and
conservation in catchment area. This should include licensing for raw water use and charging
appropriate levies at the economic value of water, conservation measures and reduction of
pollution levels. New rules, regulations and fees developed by WRMA need to be gazetted
and operationalized.

Upgrade infrastructure as a matter of urgency: One of the responsibilities of WRMA is to

conserve and apportion water resources. To ensure accurate and updated data for use in
issuance of abstraction permits and for purposes of development planning, the dilapidated
gauging stations, weirs, storage dams need to be rehabilitated and new ones constructed.
Enforce pollution control: The implementation of Environmental Management and
Coordination Act needs to be harmonized with Water Act 2002 in areas of conflict.
Additionally, appointment of a manager to oversee a water pollution control mechanism is
critical, and pollution control measures should include culture change.

CHAPTER FOUR
WATER SERVICES
4.1

The Framework

The Water Act 2002 provides for regulation of water and sewerage service provision and has
given the Water Services Regulatory Board (WSRB) this mandate. The regulatory role of the
WSRB includes issuing licences, setting service standards and guidelines for tariffs as well as
providing mechanisms for handling complaints. The responsibility for providing water and
sewerage services is vested in the seven (7) Water Service Boards (WSB) spread regionally
across the country.
Water Services Boards (WSBs)
These Boards have been established at the regional level and delineated on the basis of
catchments, administrative boundaries and economic viability. They are responsible for
efficient and economical water and sewerage service provision in their areas of jurisdiction.
To support their role, they are to maintain and acquire assets, plan, develop and manage the
systems in their areas. The Boards are to effect their mandate by contracting the Water
Service Providers (WSPs) as agents for this purpose. They are to monitor and enforce
provision agreements (SPAs) with the WSPs in accordance with the licence requirements.

WATER SERVICES BOARDS WSB

RESPONSIBILITIES
WSB are the sole licensees Water & Sanitation Services provision

Regulator
Manager and Operator
Developer
WSBs

Assets Holder
Appoints WSP
WSP of Last resort

As sole licensee of WSRB it shall ensure that service

standards and guidelines set by WSRB are observed,
maintained and adhered to by its agents the WSP

WSB has responsibility over the overall organization

supervision and administration of the water services sub
sector within its area of jurisdiction

WSB is responsible to ensure that existing

facilities are properly maintained rehabilitated and
expanded and new assets established
WSB is expressly required to be new owner (custodian) of
Government WSS facilities/equipment, land and premises

WSB appoints/contracts WSPs to operate and manage

facilities and provide services in a given area
WSB can only do so in certain circumstances with authority
of WSRB

Source: Water Service Board

Table 3:
Water Services Boards
Water Services Board
No. of districts
Athi
6
Coast
7
Tana
13
Rift Valley
8
Northern
9
Lake Victoria North
11
Lake Victoria South
16
70
Source: Water Sector Reform Secretariat

Area km2
40,130
82,816
52,777
113,771
244,864
16,977
20,340
571,675

1999 Population
5,617,000
2,487,000
5,032,000
2,999,000
1,703,000
5,135,000
5,730,000
28,703,000

Note that the number of districts has increased to over 100 in the recent past.

Table 4: A summary of WSBs officials and coverage area

Water
Board Chair CEO
Location of
Services
Head
Board
Office
Nairobi
Athi
Mr. Patrick
Eng.
Kinyori
Lawrence
Mwangi
Coast
Mr. Jonathan Eng. Iddi
Mombasa
Mturi
Mwasina
Tana

Mr. Haron
Wachira

Mr. Samuel
Muchai

Nyeri

Rift Valley

Prof Ezra
Maritim

Northern

Mr.
Mohamed
Sheikhow

Eng.
Nakuru
Robinson
Gaita
Garissa
Mr.
Mohammend
Shurie

Lake Victoria Mr. Joseph

North
Murunga

Eng. Diru
Magomere

Kakamega

Lake Victoria Mr. John

South
Juma

Eng. Patrick
Ombogo

Kisumu

Coverage area

Nairobi, Kajiado, Thika,

Machakos, Kiambu and
Makueni districts
Districts of Tana River,
Lamu, Malindi, Kilifi,
Taita Taveta and Kwale
Nyandarua, Nyeri, Meru
Central, Meru North,
Nithi, Kirinyaga, Embu,
Mbeere, Mwingi and Kitui
Districts
Nakuru, Turkana, West
Pokot, Marakwet and
Narok Districts
Samburu, Laikipia,
Garissa, Wajir, Isiolo,
Marsabit and Mandera
Districts
Teso, Bungoma, Trans
Nzoia, Keiyo, Uasin
Gishu, Nandi, Kakamega,
Mt Elgon and Vihiga
Districts
Kisumu, Siaya, Homa Bay,
Kuria, Bomet, Bondo,
Migori, Karachuonyo,
Suba, Kericho, Nandi and
Buret Districts

Source: Water Sector Reforms Secreatariat, 2004

Nairobi and the Central Water Services Boards have been renamed as Athi and Tana Water
Services Boards to be in line with the River Basins. In 2005, new districts were created and
carved out of existing districts for easier administration. It should be noted that none of the
Chairs of the Boards or the CEOs are women and hence the gender inequality discussed
elsewhere in this report.
The WSB is prohibited by the Act from engaging in direct service provision but is required to
identify another entity, a Water Service Provider (WSP), to provide water services as its
agent. The WSB can only provide water services directly in situations where it has not been
able to identify a WSP able and willing to provide the water services.
Water Service Providers (WSPs)
WSPs are commercial organizations with the sole mandate of retailing water and sewerage
services to consumers. They can be any entity providing 20,000 litres a day and must operate
under a licence. Most WSPs are owned by local authorities, though set up as independent

entities under the Companies Act. The Water Act defines an WSP as a company, nongovernmental organization or other person providing water services under and in accordance
with an agreement with a licensee (the water services board). The key responsibilities of the
WSP are:
Bidding for service provision;
Operating and maintaining facilities;
Complying with quality standards and service levels; and
Billing and revenue collection.
The Water Services Trust Fund (WSTF
WSTF is mandated to help finance the provision of water in areas without adequate water
supply. It is supposed to mobilize funds from the Exchequer or donors. The Fund will help
finance provision in marginalized and poor areas and thus increase access.
Water Services Regulatory Board (WSRB)
The Regulatory Board provides general oversight of service provision. The Board
additionally develops guidelines for fixing tariffs and other charges on water services in
accordance with the national strategy. At the national level, the WSRB is responsible for
implementing government policies and strategies on WSS. It is also responsible for issuing
licenses to Water Services Boards, determining service standards, advising the Ministry on
sector policies and providing a mechanism for handling complaints. Major complaints and
disputes will be handled by WAB.
Established in 2003, WSRB has so far issued interim licenses to the seven WSBs in the
country with Nairobi and Rift Valley Water Services Boards having a five-year licence, while
the Lake Victoria North, Lake Victoria South, Central, Northern and Coast Water Services
Boards have one-year licenses which are due for renewal this year.
Water Appeals Board (WAB)
This body is at the top of M&WI triangle and is independent. It is to solve disputes and
conflicts that may not be solved by WRMA and WSRB defined above. The Water Appeals
Board shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes. The Appeals Board provides a
mechanism for resolving conflicts in the water sector. It will be manned by a judicial officer.
The board has been gazetted, however it has yet to become fully operational.
National Water Conservation & Pipeline Corporation (NWCPC)
Under Water Act 2002, the functions of NWCPC include production and supply of bulk
water and development of state schemes for water conservation. The NWCPC is to serve as a
link between management and service provision through bulk water supply and development,
enhancing storage capacity and conservation. The NWCPC has since been reorganized as a
government contractor in borehole drilling and construction of water conservation structures.
As with the DWDs, the NWCPC managed schemes have been transferred to the respective
WSBs who, in turn, appoint WSPs.

This framework is depicted below:

National Water Services Strategy

The national strategy describes the process of ensuring that every area has adequate water and
sewerage services and that there is a service provider. The strategy objectives are to make
arrangements to ensure that at all times there is in every area in Kenya a person capable of
providing water, and, to design a program that progressively extends sewerage services to
every centre of population. The National Water Services Strategy contains details of existing
water services, the number and location of persons who are not being provided with basic

water supply and sewerage, plans for the extension of water services to underserved areas, the
timeframe for the plan, and the investment program. The overall principles underlying the
strategy are the:
1. Separation of policy and regulatory functions from service provision;
2. Decentralization of responsibilities and decision making applying the principle of
subsidiary for water services in accordance with the Water Act 2002;
3. Conceptualization of water as a social and economic good;
4. Establishment of a cost-recovery principle, taking into account a pro-poor pricing
policy that meets equity, economic and financial and environmental concerns;
5. Acceptable standards of service delivery;
6. Private sector participation;
7. Linkage between water supply and sewerage management and development;
8. Linkage between water services and the economy; and
9. Environmentally friendly operations.
4.2

The Current Situation

Overall water coverage has been declining in terms of quality, quantity and reliability due to
the aging of existing infrastructure. Most of Kenyas population lives in rural areas (24
million), while 9 million live in urban areas out of which more than half live in informal
settlements. Access to safe water is estimated at 68% in urban areas and only 49% in rural
areas.
According to a study carried out in 1998, urban per capita water consumption almost doubled
that of rural areas. This is shown in the figures below;

Table 5: Water Consumption

Service Area
Total Population (1995)

Per Capita Consumption

Litres per Capita per
Day(lpcd)
Urban Centre
5,280,000
143
Rural Areas
22,240,000
78
Total/Average
27,520,000
100
Source: The JICA Aftercare Study Final Report and Water Master Plan, 1998. The data are
useful for the design of water systems.
As of 2005, the ratio of served to unserved population is 30:70. This translates to only 30% of
the population being served which is far below acceptable standards. In addition, there are
regional inequalities in water supplies. Rift Valley has the highest percentage of unserved at
80%, followed by Lake Victoria South, at 79 per cent. The most well served region is Athi
(Nairobi) with 41% of the population mostly in urban being served.

Table 6: Summary of Urban and Rural Water Supplies

Rural
Board area Urban
Water
Population
Population
Services Population
Served
Served
Board
Athi
Lake
Victoria
South
Lake
Victoria
North
Tana

North
Rift
Valley
Coast

Total
Population
Served

Total
Unserved

5,617,220

2,098,316

275,727

2,374,043

3,243,177

5,730,956

422,723

716,591

1,139,314

4,591,642

5,135,894

589,205

350,797

940,002

4,195,892

5,012,208

511,078

2,217,023

2,728,101

2,284,107

1,703,695

204,008

533,807

737,815

965,880

2,999,370

344,500

206,453

550,953

2,448,417

2,487,264

314,593

109,951

424,544

2,062,720

8,894,772

19,791,835

Total
28,686,607
4,484,423
4,410,349
Source: Ministry of Water & Irrigation SWAp (2005)
Water Supply Schemes

The main providers of water services in the past were the Director of Water Development
under the Ministry of Water and Irrigation (M&WI), the National Water Conservation and
Pipeline Corporation (NWCPC), some local authorities, NGOs, community based
organisations and self-help schemes. Other actors include local communities, various
institutions, churches and NGOs who operate and maintain their own water supply systems.
Table 7: Number of Water Supply Facilities (1994) and Population Served
Provider/Supplier
No.
Pop served (millions)
Director of Water under MOWI
579
5.6
National Water Conservation and Pipeline 188
3.7
Corporation
Community
339
Non-Government Organizations
266
4.8
Self-help Schemes
243
Local Authorities
164
3.9
Total
1,779
18
Source: JICA Aftercare Study, Final Report 1998

Water supply schemes can be classified as urban and rural water supplies. The most typical
schemes in Kenya are:
1. Urban schemes that mainly cover urban centres and their peripheral areas;
2. Community based rural water supply schemes that mainly serve the rural
communities;
3. Regional water supply schemes that cover several urban and rural areas
simultaneously; and
4. Many other small schemes constructed in urban centres.
Urban Water Supply Schemes: Each urban centre is usually served by one scheme. In 1998
there were 73 government-run urban water schemes serving 69 districts with total population
of 28.7 million people. Only 17% of the total population were served by the schemes. This
indicates that the remaining 83% are served by informal sources of water, community water
supplies, institutional supplies or other sources.3
Rural Water Supply Schemes: By 1998, there were 295 large-scale rural water supply
schemes serving approximately 4.2 million people. The small scale rural water supply
schemes were serving approximately 5.5 million people. In general, it was observed that
these schemes served about 43% of the rural population. The rest of the population got water
from other non registered sources like rivers, wells, springs and dam.
Water Tariffs
The water tariffs were set centrally by the Ministry of Water under provisions of Water Act
Cap 372 (the former Water Act). Water undertakers had to apply to the Ministry for authority
to adjust tariffs, except local authorities, which had some flexibility. The regulation and tariff
setting is the responsibility of the newly established WSRB. Due to public and political
pressure, the tariffs have remained static over the last several years (for example, refer to case
study of Zambia where the tariff was increased by 100% before 2002 general elections in
Annex 6. This needs to change to reflect actual water costs including production costs.
The table below shows the current tariff structure in selected urban water schemes.

Status of urban water and sewerage services provision in Kenya (1998).

Table 8: Water Tariff and Water Undertakers by District

Cate
gory

Dom
estic

Gov/
Inst

Com/
Ind

Vol

Cubic
Metres
0-10
11 20

NUK

NWCP
.

MW&
I

NRB
.

KSM

ELD
.

NYR
..

KRO

NKU
...

KTL
.

1997/8
9
10

1997/9
12
18

1997/9
12
18

1997/8
12
18

1996/7
18
20

1996/7
9.7
19.3

1996/7
14
19.6

1996/7
22
22.5

1995/6
11.5
12

1994/5
10
9

21-40
41-60
Over
60
0-10

15
20

23
53

23
53

27.5
34

23
26

25.7
25.7

22.4
25.2

24
24

16.65
16.65

9
9

25
15

45
12

45
12

34.5
12

33
20

38.6
9.7

28
21

26
22

26.7
44

10
10

11-20

20

18

15

18

22

19.3

26.6

22.5

43.5

21-40
41-60
Over
60
0-10
11-20

25
30

23
53

23
35

27.5
34.5

25
30

25.7
38.6

30.8
35

24
26

38
16.2

9
10

40
15
20

45
12
18

45
12
15

34.5
12
18

37
20
24

48.3
23.2
34

42
21
26.6

28
88.85
30

16.2
44.1
38

15
14
16

25
30

23
53

23
35

27.5
34.5

28
32

34.8
48.3

30.8
35

30
32

38
16.2

18
22

40

45

45

34.5

39

54.1

42

32

16.2

22

21-40
41-60
Over
60

Source: Water Sector Reforms Secretariat

Inst= Institution, Com= commercial, Ind= Industrial
Various local authorities have formed companies to provide water services on behalf of the
WSBs in their regions. These companies have applied for and obtained licenses to operate as
WSPs under the Water Act 2002. During this period of transition, the companies have had to
restructure their operations. Changes have been made in a number of areas including
organizational structures, service delivery, billing and customer care. The effects of the
changes are beginning to be felt by consumers in various regions. Some of these companies
have undertaken technical audits and training needs assessment as a way of restructuring their
operations and in recognition of the fact that they are now accountable to the consumers.
However, these companies continue to face numerous challenges and these are discussed
below.
4.3

Challenges

Slow community integration in service provision: While there is notable progress in the
appointment of water service providers in urban areas, appointment of community water
service providers in rural set-ups has not gone at same pace and few community-based
companies have signed service provision agreements (SPAs).

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

27

Unaccounted for water: Most water supply schemes in Kenya source water directly from
rivers; and intake structures are constructed as source points with mains leading to treatment
works or storage tanks or direct to distribution systems. Other water schemes source water
from ground water which requires minimal treatment. These systems are either gravity or
pumping systems, the latter having higher operational costs. Unaccounted for water is a
common challenge in the water supply systems. This has been estimated at an average of 60
per cent of water produced lost. Factors contributing to the high levels of unaccounted for
water are illegal connections, technical losses, un-metered connections (flat-rate billing), poor
maintenance of the infrastructure, poor management of the systems, especially inconsistent
billing; and the extended life of intake and distribution infrastructure. Urgent rehabilitation is
required in almost all supply systems. The Kitale, Webuye and Bungoma systems in
particular are in dire need of rehabilitation.
Unmet water demand: Seventy per cent of the nation is un-served and these figures are higher
in Rift Valley and Lake Victoria South. This is further complicated by changing
demographics, such as unplanned urban movements and settlement patterns.
High pumping costs: Pumping costs are relatively high and these costs increase tariffs which
are, in turn, transferred to the consumer.
Lack of/non functioning meters: Most water connections are not metered, and for those that
are, over half are non functional. This frustrates commercialization efforts.
Low public and government understanding of the framework: A communication strategy on
the reforms has been developed but has not yet reached the district level effectively. On top
of this, staff have been seconded to WSBs and the WRMA, but some staff continue to play
the original role they played at the MW&I. Furthermore, some WSBs are seconding the staff
to the WSPs where there are gaps. The staff now has to re-orient themselves to their new
tasks. Additionally, the existence of many players on the scene means that the public is not
sure of who their service provider is.
Transfer of assets: Communities are apprehensive about the transfer of assets to the
respective boards and as a result, some groups were reluctant to give up their self developed
assets. The communication on how the boards will handle the community projects remains
unclear for many. The community based organizations who have developed their water
supplies through self help or donor support feel that there is need to have a say in the use and
management of assets.
Capacity constraints: WSBs have limited capacity to fulfil their roles. An attempt to address
this challenge was made by entering arrangements with Support Organizations (SOs) and
Quality Control Agents (QCAs). The SOs were to support the communities in preparing
good project proposals while the QCAs would monitor the SOs activities. However, the
process of engaging the SO and QCA services was difficult for the WSBs. The approach was
not clear to all and as a result, varied responses were received which were extremely difficult
to evaluate in terms of capability and scope of works. This process is still ongoing and is
causing delay in implementing phase 3 of the reform program. While WSBs rely mostly on

funds promised by donors, in the long run, WSBs need to develop mechanisms for raising
funds for operations and development of infrastructure. More competence and financial
record keeping, especially in the case of local government and community providers, is also
required.
Uncertainty amongst staff: Cadres of staff have been redeployed from the Ministry of Water
and Irrigation and NWCPC and some are unsure of their future. They are uneasy about what
will happen when their one year of service ends in July 2006. To say the least, there is a huge
gap in service delivery as most staff are in a wait and see state and others would have felt
safer at the Ministry. There are cases where some staff are waiting for retirement. Donors
and support agents on the other hand would like to see a realistic conclusion of the transfer
plan.
Vulnerable and unreliable infrastructure: Unreliable power, roads and telephone
infrastructure, old and obsolete water supply facilities and non-functional systems and
prolonged droughts and heavy floods frustrate water supply efforts. The cost of rebuilding
these devastated works is enormous.
Inaccurate and Unreliable sector data: While some progress has been made in data,
collection and management, through the effort of current reforms, the data on coverage,
access, functionality of water and sewerage systems and water resources vary depending on
source. Most of the data used in the reforms are from the1998 JICA after care study. The
after care study objectives were:
To review development plans of water supply and sewerage proposed in the National
Water Master Plan (NWMP) of 1992 and establish new implementation program;.
To make recommendations on strengthening of legislation, organization and
institution of project implementation and improvement of management and
operation and maintenance of projects/program; and
To transfer the technology of planning of water supply and sewerage development
through the study.
The challenge identified is that of periodic review of the national water master plan to
provide accurate and up to date sector information.
4.4

Recommendations

Expand and/or rationalize existing systems: Small uneconomical systems can be merged with
other systems to enhance economies of scale in operations. Clusters of small water supplies
could be established and appropriate technology options installed for efficiency service
delivery.
Shift from pumping to gravity-operated systems: This will reduce operational costs. Dams can
also be constructed to boost water supply. Inappropriate technologies need to be expunged
and install efficient and affordable water systems.
Adjust tariffs: Zambias water tariff adjustments are linked to sustainability of the systems
and performance of providers. Thus the Zambia National Water and Sanitation Council
(NWASCO) ensures that consumers are cushioned from inefficiencies by service providers.
In a country where more than half the population is poor, NWASCO has successfully

developed guidelines on mandatory WSS service provision to the peri-urban areas, which
account for almost 30 per cent of the urban population. The guidelines are complete with
service standards and tariff setting guidelines. A similar exercise on tariffs like that done in
Zambia, needs to be undertaken by WRSB in Kenya.
Update National Water Master Plans: The current sector information developed in the
implementation of policy and water act 2002, should feed into the review of the 1998 JICA
After care study and with the sector trends changing in demands, water use and availability,
there is immediate need to update the water master plan. It is recommended that 1998 JICA
After care study +10 (2008) study be undertaken to support the reforms.

CHAPTER FIVE
SANITATION
5.1

The Framework

The Government has made significant progress in developing an Environmental Sanitation

and Hygiene Policy that mandates the Ministry of Health to spearhead such activities. The
Ministry of Health is expected to provide leadership to all concerned agencies such as the
ministries of Local Government, Water and Irrigation and Environment as well as Non
Governmental Organizations (NGOs) among others in the sector. The policy recognizes the
need for a people-centred and national participatory approach to sanitation. The policy has
outlined the following instruments in promoting hygiene; the use of participatory approaches
or methodologies, communication approaches that incorporate tested household health
education messages, development of training tools and promotional materials, conducting
campaigns and exhibitions, partnerships with media, a national sanitation week or day in line
with the WASH Dakar Road map that proposes the celebration of a sanitation week as an
action-oriented program to raise the political profile of sanitation, and information on a range
of safe sanitation options, with clear implications for aiding household choices.
School sanitation is a top priority within the Policy which has committed to ensuring that
every school has separate boys and girls sanitary facilities by 2010. It affirms childrens right
to basic facilities, such as toilets, safe drinking water, clean surroundings and information on
hygiene. If these conditions are created, children go to school, enjoy learning, and take
concepts and practices on sanitation and hygiene back to their families. Children can become
agents of change at home and in the community.
People learn about sanitation technologies mostly from their neighbours, public health
workers, public meetings and community workers. Some implemented strategies include the
creation of health awareness and training of community leaders, construction of
demonstration facilities, provision of construction materials and equipment and enforcement
of the Public Health Act and the Chiefs Act in the event of epidemics. These have been
successful to some extent.
Wastewater Treatment, Recycling and Reuse
The Government through the National Environmental Management and Coordination Act
(EMCA) promotes recycling and reuse as a policy response to waste water as well as
reduction, recycling and reuse of solid wastes. Urban agriculture that aims to maximize use of
wastewater for food production is at pilot stage. Recycling is limited by the availability of
industry to receive and process recycled materials.
Dumping
The Government would like to stop open dumping sites especially in urban areas. It is well
known that leachates from dump-sites lead to contamination of both surface and underground
water reserves. The MoLG has also continued to encourage the 3 Rs principle throughout its
awareness campaign to reduce, recycle or reuse solid waste.

Financing
Water, sanitation and sewerage services receive money from government, donors and the
private sector. To support rural pockets inhabited by poor communities who are under
serviced by water service providers, the Water Act 2002 created the Water Services Trust
Fund (WSTF). The WSTF is mandated to mobiliZ,e resources from donors, governments, the
Exchequer, and private sector for marginalized poor and serves as a funding basket. Twenty
(20%) per cent of funds provided for support to water projects are to go to sanitation. Since
the start of operationalization of Water Act 2002 in March 2003, development partners have
supported the new institutions and currently about Kshs. 20 billion has been committed by
donors. Some of the donors include SIDA, ADB and DANIDA (supporting WSTF), KfW,
GTZ, JICA, BADEA, World Bank, AFD and GoK among others. These donor funds are
committed in areas that donors wish to support and in agreement with the government.
5.2

The Current Situation

The World Health Organization4 reports that the economic costs of avoidable disease are
staggeringly high and that societies with a heavy disease burden tend to experience severe
impediments to economic progress. Approximately 60% of Kenyas hospital attendance is
due to preventable disease. About 50% of these illnesses are related to poor sanitation,
hygiene and water. Sanitation and hygiene are indicators of the countrys poverty status.
The 1999 population and housing census showed access to sanitation facilities to be 82%.
However, the Ministry of Health puts the national coverage of adequate sanitation at below
50%, mainly because the ministrys classification does not consider pit latrines in urban areas
as coverage.
Sanitation falls into two broad categories; (i) onsite, mainly pit latrines and (ii) offsite or
waterborne. Onsite sanitation is the common mode of human waste disposal in rural, suburban and unplanned settlement areas. The waterborne sewerage systems, which are
prevalent in cities and larger municipalities, are under the Ministry of Water and Irrigation,
while promotion of onsite sanitation is in the Ministry of Healths docket.
The simple pit latrine was introduced in Kenya by the colonial administration and
missionaries almost 100 years ago. The main purpose was to prevent outbreaks of diseases
such as cholera. Construction of household pit latrines was done through the Public Health
Act, which was enforced by the Chief. The pit latrine has been a very successful waste
disposal facility in Kenya, with about 73% of the population having access to it. The
ventilated improved pit (VIP), introduced in the late 80s, did not expand much beyond the
pilot areas. Most VIPs were abandoned after filling as they were made of concrete elements
that could not be moved or re-used. They were also more expensive than the traditional pit
latrines built using the locally available materials. The communities especially in the rural
areas were unable to replicate project VIPs simply because they were too expensive. Some
individuals often use open spaces to defecate or dispose of human waste.
Increased community awareness and sub-division and ownership of land in the densely
populated areas have reduced this practice. Factors contributing to better sanitation in the past
and present have been captured by a WSP-AF field note. This information is indicated in
Table 9.

WHO - JMP Report

Table 9: Historical and Current Factors on Sanitation

Historical
Demand for Sanitation
Present
Facilities
Chiefs orders
during disease
outbreaks
Enforcement of
the Public
Health Act
Influence of
missionaries and
early settlers

Chiefs orders influenced 56%

of demand by households to
construct and own a sanitation
facility
Enforcement by public health
officers influenced 36% of
demand to construct sanitation
facilities
Missionaries and their
influence and contribution to
health matters led to 28%
contribution of demand

Health awareness
and education

Land sub-division,
desertification and
need for privacy
Prevention of
water borne
diseases
Project assistancedonor and
government
support

Demand for
Sanitation
facilities
Hygiene education
and awareness have
contributed to 86%
of demand
Small land and lack
of bushes have
contributed 72% of
demand
Initiatives on
preventive has led to
62% of demand
Support to projects
addressing aspects
on hygiene and
sanitation have led
to 52% of demand

Source: WSP Field Note, June 2004

5.3

Challenges

Un-enacted Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene Policy: Government is yet to enact the
Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene Policy. Additionally, there are inadequate national
sanitation promotion and development programs to make the policy operational. Furthermore,
although efforts to develop sanitation are ongoing especially outside the public sector,
information availability is low and progress monitoring and impact evaluation is weak.
Limited onsite sanitation: Onsite sanitation is limited due to lack of resources amidst other
competing needs, lack of awareness of sanitation and hygiene, lack of knowledge on how to
construct and maintain household pit latrines, adverse geo-hydrological conditions and
cultural practices. Geo-hydrological conditions such as weak soil structures lead to the
collapse of latrines especially during the rainy seasons or where water tables are high, or pits
are shallow or impossible to dig. This can lead to surface and ground water pollution. In
places with high basement rock, pits are shallow and when there is flooding which is often
the case in low-lying areas, pits fill and overflow. When facilities collapse, re-building
becomes expensive and some families prefer to use the bush. Cultural constraints can be
exemplified by nomadic pastoralism. This way of life creates little demand for excreta
disposal facilities because people are always moving with animals in search of new pastures
and water. Other cultural practices that can limit latrine access include the prohibition of
sharing sanitary facilities between adults and children, men and women and in-laws and
outsiders. Fortunately, such cultural barriers are dying.

Although the Water Act 2002 states that WSBs and WSPs mandates cover water, sewerage
and sanitation, many of them ignore the sewerage and sanitation aspects. Subsequently, the
need to meet sanitation and sewerage needs has been left mainly to communities or individual
households. It should also be pointed that under the Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene
Policy, Ministry of Health is charged with overall supervision whilst the entities charged with
actual provision i.e., WSBs and WSPs fall under M&WI.
Un-covered informal settlements: The heavily and densely populated informal urban
settlements require adequate coverage. This need is complicated by problems of non legal
tenure, and the ad hoc expansion of such settlements. The Government has made some
progress by establishing the Local Authority Service Delivery Action Plan (LASDAP) and
the Local Authority Transfer Fund (LATF) to respond to planning and infrastructure demands
for the urban poor. Although the model is ideal, measures to strengthen functioning,
transparency and accountability are necessary.
Underutilization of the role of women: Efforts to promote hygiene often overlook the power
of women to influence hygiene practices in their homes and families. Women can play a key
role in hygiene promotion as majority of them are the ones who fetch and use water for
various purposes especially in rural areas.
Absence of a Public Private Partnership Framework: Certain private firms have contributed
to providing alternative designs for human waste disposal technology. It is therefore critical
that Kenya finds an appropriate role for private sector in the sanitation market. Small scale
independent sanitation service providers (SSIP) require encouragement through legal
recognition and supervision. Private sector builders and operators of sanitation facilities
require training and support to improve viability of businesses.
Outdated sewerage systems: Out of Kenyas 215 urban centres, only 30 have modern
sewerage systems. Achieving the MDGs will require a combination of on site as well as
sewer systems and sewage treatment works, with the former being the most appropriate for
rural communities. Policy solutions for reaching pastoralist communities with adequate
sanitation need to be further explored.
Cumbersome recycling procedures: Solid waste disposal and management is currently not a
responsibility of a WSP and is currently addressed through EMCA and department of
environment within municipalities. Solid waste management (SWM) problems are not unique
to Kenya5 and therefore inadequate solid waste management practices may be severely
affecting the quality of the environment and public health of residents in many urban centres
in Kenya. For example, it was estimated that about 1,450 tons of solid waste was being
generated daily in 1990s and this translated to 245 kgs/person per day (JICA Master Plan of
Nairobi, 1997). Solid waste management and recycling waste paper is possible only when
there is a paper mill or a waste factory within a reasonable distance. The difficulty in
recycling is a constraint on improving solid waste management and policies on waste pickers,
informal sector recycling, community based SWM service, and stakeholder participation in
key decision making have been lacking although the situation is gradually changing.

5 Kenya Urban Solid Waste Management: A Rapid country environmental analysis concept
note ( CEA), 2005

5.4

Recommendations

Enact a national environment sanitation and hygiene policy and develop a national
sanitation development strategy and action plan to serve as a blue-print for achieving the
MDGs: By 1980 Lesotho had a national water supply program. After it was realized that
there were gaps in sanitation, initially in urban infrastructure and subsequently in the rural
areas, a series of technical studies were carried out and in the early 1980s, the Lesotho
government started a two-part national improvement program covering both rural and urban
areas. More about the Lesotho program is contained in Annex 7.
Make a deliberate attempt to provide girl friendly sanitation facilities: This is particularly
necessary in schools as most girls drop out of school due to the lack of private facilities with
privacy as they are often intimidated by the boys.
Investigate why the provision of sanitation and sewerage service is being ignored and act on
the findings: Additionally, as regulation of sewerage is within the mandate of M&WI and
sanitation is a docket within the Ministry of Health, there should be communication between
the two Ministries. Where M&WI gets donor support or any assistance for sanitation
improvement, this support should feed into MOH for coordination purposes and where
appropriate an agreement of understanding drawn between the two parties to avoid overlaps
and duplication.
Provide recycling incentives: This can be done through tax rebates on plastics that can be
recycled or increasing the price to consumers on non reusable plastic bags (as is done in
South Africa) and should be replicated by other countries. This measure can be supported by
having more recycling centres particularly close to industrial areas and involving local
communities. Some economic instruments should be put in place in Kenyas waste
management practice like user charges, import duty waivers on recycling and collection
equipment and instruments that motivate public cooperation in solid waste management.

CHAPTER SIX
SEWERAGE
6.1

The Framework

Sessional Paper Number 1 of 1999 on the National Water Policy on Water Resources
Management and Development provides direction on ensuring safe wastewater disposal for
environmental protection. There are also policies on sewerage systems and sewage disposal
under the ministries of Local Government and Health. However, the policy is not
comprehensively stated under the Water Act 2002. The national policy on water resource
management and development recognizes that one cannot separate wastewater (sewage)
management from water supply. Development of water supplies in urban areas will therefore
have to be accompanied by corresponding sewerage development to handle the wastewater to
protect public health and water resources. Currently, the operation and maintenance of
sewerage services are mandated to the Water Service Boards and delegated to the Water
Service Providers.
6.2

The Current Situation

Domestic sewage and industrial effluent are the main sources of pollution to our water
resources. Raw or partially treated sewage, when discharged into water bodies or the
environment may pollute water resources and harm public health. In 2001, raw sewage
discharge from a sewage treatment works in Embu into a nearby river killed several people
who used the water downstream for domestic purpose (source daily newspaper).
The current treatment methods or technologies for sewage/ domestic wastewater treatment
are either oxidation ditches, aerated lagoons, trickling filters, stabilization ponds, wetlands
and trickling filters combined with stabilization ponds. The predominant type of treatment
facilities is the pond system. These are shallow man-made basins into which wastewater or
sewage flows in and comes out naturally treated. They are simple and cost-efficient to
construct and easy to operate and maintain. The efficiency of the ponds depends on whether
the industrial effluent is pre-treated before it is mixed with domestic sewage. The ponds
depend on natural reactions of micro-organisms to biologically degrade the waste. Mixing
industrial effluent and domestic sewage in mixed sewer system in urban areas is responsible
for poor performance of the pond treatment system (e.g. Dandora waste stabilization ponds)
due to toxicity to micro-organisms from the industrial effluent, which is not pre-treated.
In general, there is poor sewerage service delivery in Kenya and where facilities exist, their
standards of operation are low and many experience severe operation and maintenance
problems resulting in poor service delivery. Investment over the years has tended to favour
water development and operation, leaving little attention to sewerage.
A number of Government institutions operate their own sewerage systems. At present,
sewerage operation and maintenance facilities are the responsibility of newly formed water
and sanitation companies (though a number are unaware of this). The coverage is however
very low compared with water supply coverage. Sewerage services cover only 14% of urban
centres, and local authorities are the main urban sewerage service providers. In Nairobi, for
example, the water supply coverage is 55%, while the population served with sewerage
facilities is only 35%. The table below is a summary of the sewerage facilities.

Table 10: Urban Centres with Sewerage Facilities

Population range Number
of
Urban Number of Urban Centres
Total
(in thousands)
Centres with Sewerage
without Sewerage
Greater than 300
2
0
2
100 300
8
0
8
20 100
16
8
24
Below 20
4
177
181
Total
30
185
215
Source: JICA After Care Study of the National Water Master Plan, 1998
6.3

Challenges

Deteriorated facilities: Most existing water supply and sewage collection treatment and
disposal systems were constructed 20 to 40 years ago. With inadequate maintenance, the
facilities have deteriorated and fail to meet increasing demand.
Limited sewerage: Kenya has a mixed sewer system which receives both domestic sewage
and industrial effluent. Urban sewerage has not been expanded to cope with rapidly
increasing demand. This has contributed to frequent sewer bursts or leakages due to
overloading.
Non pre treatment of industrial effluent: It is a requirement that all industrial waste waters
must be pre-treated before being discharged into the municipal sewer systems and lack of
adherence is punishable by law. However, the enforcement of various legislations has been
lacking. Studies have shown that industrial effluent is a major cause of pollution of water
bodies and environment. Where industrial waste is not pre-treated, this leads to sewer bursts
due to blockages from suspended solids, corrosive effluent and secondary reactions of
effluent in the sewer line.
6.4

Recommendations

Promote public private partnerships to urgently fill the gaps in sewerage management: Only
14% of Kenyas urban towns have sewerage systems and disposal facilities and this calls for
a paradigm shift. Since there is strong link between sewerage, sanitation and hygiene, the
implementation of environmental sanitation and hygiene policy will enhance filling the gaps.
A framework for public private partnership is crucial in tapping the private sector especially
for onsite sanitation and appropriate technologies in informal settlements.
Adopt low-cost facilities in the short term: Such facilities can include pit-latrines and
ecosanitation, as conventional sewerage may be too expensive for many to afford. Many view
sewerage and sewage disposal as service without returns unlike water.
Expand sewerage systems and sewage treatment plants: This can be done by allocating
adequate resources to sewerage and sewage treatment plants. Resources should also cater for
operations and maintenance of these facilities.
Upgrade existing treatment plants: This can be done with advanced treatment technologies
such as chemical coagulation and sedimentation, wetlands, filtration and/or chlorinating
systems for effluent to meet discharge standards.

Enact and enforce appropriate and comprehensive policy and legal instruments on sewerage
and sewage disposal: The policy must assign roles and functions and recognize the
importance of mechanisms and coordination. The key actors here are the ministries of Water
and Irrigation, Health, Local Government, WRMA and NEMA.
Compel industries to pre-treat waste: Industrial waste is often more toxic than domestic
sewage as it contains higher concentrations of metals, chemicals and complex organic
pollutants. Removing toxic elements of any industrial effluent in the form of pre-treatment is
essential to safeguard water supply sources, sewerage and sewage treatment plants. Non
adherence to pre-treatment of industrial wastes will lead to a near irreversible situation like
the Nairobi River.
Formulate strict regulations and standards for sewage treatment plants and enforce these by
fining polluters: This is critical as a deterrent measure, and can also act as a way of financing
sewerage development and management through the enforcement of polluter pays principle.
Encourage sewer usage and proper disposal of wastewater: This can be done through public
education and awareness of good kitchen practice for example.
Disposal of industrial sewage containing heavy metals and other substances should be
conducted away from public and ground water systems: This will help avoid contamination.

CHAPTER SEVEN
CAN KENYA ACHIEVE THE MDGs?
7.1

Population Trends

Kenyas population is predominantly rural. By 2000, 67% of the population (20 million) was
living in rural areas and 33% (9.96 million) in urban areas. Although rural population will
still dominate by 2015, strong population growth in urban centres (4.2% per year) compared
to rural areas (0.2% per year) means that the share of rural population will go down by
between 14% to 53 per cent. In the same period, the share of the urban population, in Nairobi,
will go up 10%. Nairobis population growth (4.3%) will be stronger than that of other urban
centres (4.2%).
7.2
Status of Access to Improved Water Source and Sanitation Services6
Access to an improved water source refers to the percentage of the population with
reasonable access to adequate water from an improved source, such as a household
connection, a public standpipe, a borehole, a protected well or spring, and rainwater
collection. Unimproved sources include vendors, tanker trucks and unprotected wells and
springs. Reasonable access is defined as the availability of at least 20 litres person a day
from a source within one kilometre of the dwelling.7 Access to improved sanitation facilities
refers to the percentage of the population with adequate waste disposal facilities (private or
shared, but not public) that can effectively prevent human, animal and insect contact with
excreta. Improved facilities range from simple but protected pit latrines, to flush toilets with a
sewer connection. To be effective, facilities must be correctly constructed and properly
maintained.8
By 2000 only 31% of the rural populations had access to improved water sources compared
with 86% for urban populations. On improved sanitation facilities, 81% of rural populations
had access, against 96% for urban populations. In absolute numbers, this means that out of a
population of 30 million people in 2000, 15.2 million had no access to improved water
supply, 91.5% of them (13.9 million) in rural areas. Some 4.2 million had no access to
improved sanitation, the great majority (3.8 million, or 91%) of them in rural areas.
Using 1990 as a base year, the MDGs on water supply and sanitation, data from the 2000
WHO-UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) were used to calculate global and regional
MDGs to provide a baseline for the country desk reviews. By 2015, access to safe water is
expected to be 70%, with intermediate targets of 54% for 2005 and 61% for 2010. Access to
improved sanitation is expected to be at 92% by the year 2015, with intermediate targets of
86% for the year 2005 and 88% for the year 2010.

2000 WHO Unicef JMP

http://www.developmentgoals.org/Definitions_Sources.htm
8
World Health Organisation and United Nations Children's Fund, Global Water Supply and Sanitation
Assessment 2000 Report
7

If Kenya achieves the MDG targets for water, it will still be below the average for SubSaharan Africa. Regarding sanitation, the table below shows that by the year 2000 Kenya had
already reached its monitoring target for the year to 2005, which is 86% in terms of facilities.
Kenyas progress on MDG targets for water and sanitation are shown in the table below.
Table 11: Access to Water Supply and Sanitation

Sanitation Water

2000
Pop
Access Access
.. .
(m)
(m)
(%)
Rural 20.1
Urban 9.9

GAP (2000-2015)
2015 MDG
Pop Access Access Investment

Added
(m)
(m)
(%)
(m) (US$/yr)

6.2

31%

20.8

8.5

86%

18.4

Total 30.0
Rural 20.1

14.7

49%

39.2

16.3

81%

20.8

Urban 9.9

9.5

96%

18.4

27.4

70%

12.7

Total 30.0
25.8
86%
39.2
36.0
92%
Source: WHO- Unicef 2000 Joint Monitoring Program (JMP)
7.3

$35m

10.2

Relationship Between MDGs on Water and Sanitation, and Gender Equity

Achieving the MDG target on safe water and adequate sanitation will take Kenya closer to
achieving other MDG targets on gender equity and reduced poverty. Water has been
recognized as having both social and economic value and is a major catalyst for economic
growth and wealth creation. Studies have shown that where gender concerns are
mainstreamed in water and sanitation, there is generally improved level of service. Provision
of safe water and adequate sanitation reduces water borne diseases and also improves child
attendance to schools and hence contributing to meeting partially other MDGs.
Table 12: Access to Water and Sanitation in Kenya and MDG Targets
Historical data
Targets
Baseline
Reference Intermediate
Monitoring
1990
2000
2005
2010
Kenya
Access to safe drinking water
(ASDW)
Access to improved sanitation
Population (Millions)
Sub-Saharan Africa, ASDW

MDGs
2015

40%

49%

54%

61%

70%

84%
23.55
49%

86%
30.08
55%

86%
33.09
-

88%
36.23
-

92%
39.23
74%

Sources: MDG web-page. except years ASDW 2005 and 2010 and sanitation 2005, 2010,
2015 which are estimated targets. The population figures are taken from the WHO-UNICEF
assessment 2000 and United Nations Population Division.
With effort, access to water can also improve. At a population growth rate of 1.9% per year,
it is estimated that in year 2015, the population will be 39 million. Therefore, between 2000

and 2015, an additional 24 million will need access to safe drinking water, and an additional
13 million, to sanitation.
7.5

Investment Required to Meet MDGs on Water and Sanitation

Between 1997 and 2002, less than 500 small towns and rural water facilities had been
constructed each year, at an expenditure of about US$35 million a year from various
financiers including government, development partners, NGOs and communities. To achieve
the MDGs, it is estimated that the total investments required between 2000 and 2015 amounts
to US$1,800 million.
Table 13: Construction Cost Estimates for Water Supply and Sewerage Development to
Year 2015
2005-15
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Total
244,219 14,206 14,493 14,790 15,721 18,030
Rural
135,471
6,860
6,985
7,115
7,709
9,312
Water
83,056
5,149
5,230
5,313
5,597
6,317
Supply
Rehabilitation
52,965
4,308
4,366
4,425
4,498
4,612
Extension
30,091
841
864
888
1,099
1,705
Sewerage
52,415
1,711
1,756
1,802
2,112
2,995
Rehabilitation
21,120
1,284
1,314
1,344
1,392
1,492
Extension
31,294
427
442
458
720
1,503
Urban
108,748
7,346
7,508
7,676
8,012
8,718
Water
32,473
2,353
2,403
2,455
2,544
2,712
Supply
Rehabilitation
22,529
1,882
1,915
1,949
1,986
2,031
Extension
9,944
471
489
507
558
681
Sewerage
76,276
4,992
5,104
5,220
5,468
6,006
Rehabilitation
48,879
3,957
4,029
4,103
4,188
4,302
Extension
27,397
1,036
1,076
1,117
1,280
1,704
Source: Ministry of Water and Irrigation calculations, 2004

2010
21,937
12,073
7,536

2011
26,332
15,164
8,898

2012
29,518
17,340
9,866

2013
31,237
18,426
10,366

2014
31,213
18,232
10,314

2015
26,743
16,256
8,471

4,794
2,741
4,537
1,683
2,854
9,864
2,975

5,051
3,847
6,266
1,969
4,297
11,168
3,273

5,352
4,514
7,474
2,313
5,161
12,178
3,508

5,665
4,700
8,060
2,672
5,388
12,812
3,663

5,956
4,358
7,918
3,000
4,917
12,981
3,719

3,939
4,532
7,785
2,657
5,128
10,487
2,867

2,090
885
6,889
4,464
2,425

2,164
1,108
7,896
4,678
3,217

2,248
1,259
8,670
4,928
3,742

2,337
1,326
9,149
5,191
3,957

2,423
1,296
9,261
5,446
3,816

1,504
1,363
7,620
3,594
4,026

With the assumption that the rehabilitation of water supplies and sewerage systems program
will be finalized by 2014, funding requirements for the sector drop significantly and full cost
coverage can be achieved by 2025. To achieve full cost recovery (including depreciation and
financing costs) by 2015, considerable tariff adjustments are necessary. This should then be
combined with targeted pro-poor strategies to make water available and accessible to all
groups of Kenyan society.
Given that this Government allocates in water budget provisions approximately Kshs.5
billion per year and a similar amount comes from external sources, Kenya has an estimated
shortfall of Kshs. 235 billion between now and 2015 to enable it to meet the MDGs. As
witnessed in the budget for fiscal year 2005/06, Kenya has increased its financing to the
water and sanitation sector and this includes Kshs.1.5 billion has been allocated to arid and
semi arid districts for domestic and livestock water.

CHAPTER EIGHT
CROSS CUTTING RECOMMENDATIONS
Provision of adequate safe water and sanitation is vital to improving life. It promotes health,
educational advancement, gender equity, income equality and environmental sustainability.
Approximately 60% of Kenyas hospital attendance is due to preventable diseases. About
50% of these illnesses are related to sanitation, hygiene and water. Studies demonstrate that
girls enrolment in school increases with the provision of latrines in schools and other gender
considerations, while easy access to safe water sources frees women from spending hours
every day drawing and carrying water from and over long distances. As much as a quarter of
household time in rural Africa is estimated to be spent on fetching water. Statistics show that
the majority of those who fetch water are women and children. Hence there is need to pay
special attention to gender mainstreaming in water service provision.
Safe water and sanitation also underpin economic growth and environmental sustainability.
Income benefits (for both households and the government) may result from a reduction in the
costs of health treatment, and gains in productivity. Productivity gains stem from time saved
from collecting water, availability of water as an input to the productive sector, and a decline
in water and sanitation related illnesses. Threats to water sustainability are both qualitative
and quantitative.
For this socially and economically critical sector to improve and contribute to national
development, we recommend seven areas of strategic intervention; institution building,
capacity development, awareness and information sharing, community and user integration,
gender mainstreaming, regulation and financing.
8.1

Institution Building

Harmonize legislations touching on water, sewerage and sanitation with the Water Act 2002
to minimize conflicts: These include the Lands Act, the Agriculture Act, the Public Health
Act, the Forests Act and the Local Government Act among others touching on water. Land
ownership allows one with a title deed to have access and activities up to the river bank. The
Agriculture Act spells out the farming distance from the river bank but this is always ignored
and farmers cultivate to the river. NEMA deals with pollution and effluent discharges under
Environmental Management and Coordination Act (1999) while WRMA deals with pollution
and the polluter pays principle under the Water Act 2002. Today, some aspects of the Water
Act, Cap 372 are still in force e.g. the water rights provisions. There is urgent need to bring
all operations into the new dispensation under the Water Act, 2002.
Review and harmonize the water, sanitation and sewerage management: NEMA and WRMA
operate under different legislations though both dealing with pollution. Coordination between
these two institutions could reduce duplication and overlaps. However, despite the presence
of legal authority, enforcement is inadequate.
Improve governance at the local level: Local institutions need to understand and support the
new framework. There is need to engage local level actors through series of awareness
campaigns and education on the new framework and where appropriate simplification of
framework undertaken.

8.2

Capacity Development

Staff new institutions adequately: The personnel transfer plan must adhere to the set time
table and periodically review the need for new skills.
Build competence of WSBs: Training will help WSBs evaluate work done by the Support
Organizations (SOs) and Quality Control Agents (QCAs). The WSBs also need to understand
their roles and begin to plan for it. It is with these plans in mind that they can guide the SOs
and QCAs.
Rehabilitate water supply and sewerage systems urgently: The Kitale, Webuye and
Bungoma, Homabay, and Nor Turesh water and sewerage systems, in particular, are in dire
need of rehabilitation and augmentation.
Open performance contracts to public scrutiny: Institutions mandated to provide water and
sewerage services are now required to be accountable to the public through performance
contracts with set targets. Since the contracts are currently secret or confidential documents,
the consumers and stakeholders may not be aware of what the performance targets are. In the
absence of scrutiny, the consumers may not adequately evaluate the holders. Performance
contracts should be made open for public consultation and review, and applied to lower levels
including community water service providers and made to include incentives for
improvement and innovativeness. Overall performance contracts, increase accountability for
results and targets and reduce confusion or misunderstanding from multiplicity of objectives
and presumes an employment contract between employee and employer. Therefore a citizen
report card on these set targets and a transparent performance evaluation arrangement would
be useful interrogation of the process between the user and the implementer.
Increase research and development: This will save time, money and personnel resources in
efforts to meet water, sanitation and sewerage needs. Experience from the past has shown
that this country has tended to depend more on foreign technologies. As a part of the
implementation of water policy on technology, continuous research should be undertaken on
old and new appropriate technologies which are friendly, acceptable, and affordable, and
which use local materials as much as possible. Emphasis should be made on action or applied
research where these technologies are tested on water and sanitation facilities on pilot basis
and lessons learnt documented for replication elsewhere.
8.3

Awareness and Information Sharing

Monitor and document the status of reforms: This information should also be shared with
stakeholders so that they know which body is responsible for what task.
Provide clear guidelines on service fees to public projects: Constituency development
committees and other stakeholders appear to be unclear on whether Ministry of Water is
supposed to provide technical assistance for public projects e.g., surveys for CDF projects, at
no cost. CDF should factor in technical costs for investigations and designs including
borehole siting in their budgets. Where government experts are not available, CDF
management needs to outsource these services from the market.

Inform CSOs of the framework and how it should function: The intention to use Support
Organisations (SOs) for this exercise will succeed only if there is adequate guidance and
supervision from the respective Water Service Boards.
District offices should coordinate sector activities: There are several players such as donors,
private, faith based, government and development partners in this sector. Therefore there is
an urgent need for information sharing and coordination of ongoing and planned activities to
avoid unnecessary replication and inefficient resource allocation.
8.4

Community and User Integration

Have clear compensation criteria and procedures: Communities need to be considered for
their contributions to schemes currently operated and managed by M&WI/ NWCPC to be
handed over or have been handed over to water services boards. Mechanisms for getting
access to water supplies owned by local authorities and community/NGO schemes should be
made clear as plans are being put in place to appoint them as WSPs.
Encourage communities to fill service gaps and enable them to do so in a regulated manner:
Communities in Kenya have contributed immensely in water development and management
in kind, cash and labour. In many cases their contribution is under estimated or not costed all
together. Communities can contribute land for construction of water and sanitation facilities.
Urge users to monitor and evaluate services: This can be done through tools such as the
Citizens Report Card (CRC) or Community Score Cards (CSC) to obtain feedback on service
level that is then used to improve service delivery.
8.5

Gender Mainstreaming

Gender issues are often misrepresented and misunderstood. In the 1990s, support agencies
and water actors insisted on involving women in management of water and sanitation
facilities (committees). Many water supply projects got support by forming women groups.
Though this strategy worked well in financing water projects, it caused conflict in families
where cultural beliefs preponderated. Gender equity can be achieved through a number of
ways, including gender mainstreaming. To mainstream gender:
Enact and implement the 2000 Policy on Gender and Development National Gender: The
policy spells out an approach to gender and empowerment and the sessional paper provides a
framework for gender mainstreaming in policy, planning and programming.
Provide budgetary support to programs to reduce gender inequalities: Studies have shown
that lack of a policy and effective strategies to implement it has contributed to increased
gender disparities in Kenya. With policy in place, budget provisions will reduce gender
inequalities through gender mainstreaming and funding of gender friendly projects.
Strengthen and empower the National Commission on Gender and Development to
adequately monitor gender parity and ensure gender mainstreaming in water, sanitation and
sewerage projects and programs: The new gender policy calls for elevation of current gender
desk officers in Ministries to fully pledged gender divisions.
Set up a Training Needs Assessment (TNA) system for gender mainstreaming to enable an
effective capacity building program: This well help gender mainstreaming experts from the

sector to develop local packages for training, advocacy, data collection, analysis and
monitoring.
Ensure that there is more female representation in the framework: This is required by the
Water Act, 2002. Greater representation of women in water and sanitation committees at
local and national levels may also facilitate gender mainstreaming in WATSAN.
8.6

Regulation

Base resource allocation to public entities on performance evaluation and make performance
a criterion for renewing service licences: This will assist in ensuring that set goals and targets
are achieved.
Establish rules for cost recovery: This can be done by developing appropriate service
provision tariffs.
Establish rules for the specification of geographical jurisdiction of water utilities: This will
help utilities achieve the desired economies of scale by licensing and monitoring small scale
service providers and eliminating middlemen or unauthorized vendors who may increase the
cost of water to the final beneficiaries. Likewise support for water and sewerage services in
marginalized areas should be based on geographical classification and index of level of
needs.
Enforce the polluter pays policy: The national pricing or costing policy for domestic sewage
or industrial effluent discharged into the public sewers only takes into account the volume
discharged. The polluter pays principle ensures that industries discharging beyond the
recommended standards are charged according to quality or biological/chemical load of
effluent.
Enforce discharge standards: There are two discharge standards. One for discharge from the
sewage treatment plants into the aquatic environment, and the other for discharge into the
sewers. Although the standards can be considered relatively stringent for environmental
protection, enforcement has generally been lacking.
8.7

Financing

Harmonize and prioritize use of funds: The water sector receives significant funding,
particularly from non-state actors, but resources are not always directed to priority need. Re
thinking the mode of resource allocation is, therefore, critical to avoid waste and inefficiency.
This will require information sharing and coordination between the water sector stakeholders.
Tap into the money market: Funds can be raised through bonds or commercial loans, e.g.,
micro-finance schemes. Commercialization also plays an important role in facilitating
funding from this source because financiers and lenders want to be assured that their money
will be paid back.
Make polluters pay for waste discharge: The policy requires those who discharge effluent
into river bodies or municipal sewers to meet the cost of pre-treating their effluent and of
repairing the consequences to the environment. Unfortunately, it is yet to be enforced.

Involve private sector: Private companies bring in management expertise, technical skills
and credit standing to finance investments. Partnerships can be fulfilled in different forms,
such as service, management and lease contracts, concessions, joint ownership or
commercialization.
Develop appropriate tariffs: The low tariffs for both urban and rural domestic water supplies
do not promote efficient utilization of water, environmental conservation and preservation.
With the increasing pressures on the water resources the need to have a different view on
pricing becomes urgent. Water should be seen as an economic and social good that has a cost.
Water should be priced at rates that meet full operation and maintenance costs, and partial
investment costs especially in rural areas. In urban set ups, tariffs should cover full cost but
with due consideration to informal settlements. At the same time, water as a basic right
should have a tariff that favors the poor and marginalized people, and governments through
social responsibility can support this by way of targeted subsidies for vulnerable groups. This
can include a life-line tariff for a fixed volume of water to meet the basic needs of poor urban
consumers (based on South African model of free water for first 6,000 litres of water per
capital per month but localized to Kenya financial situation).
Introduce utility specific pricing: This option embraces the principle of cost recovery where
the price covers maintenance, operation and capital cost recoveries and sector self-financing
to cover all water services. This strategy reflects the true user pays principle and embodies
the marginal pricing concept that is key to implementing an economic approach to water
pricing. In this option every scheme is priced separately due to its technical, commercial and
operational nature.
Encourage private households to finance their own sanitation facilities through microfinance schemes and merry-go-round arrangements: Communities need to be assisted with
appropriate sanitation facility designs that use local materials as much as possible. Registered
community health clubs that promote improved sanitation and hygiene practices may access
micro finance for construction of facilities and other income generating activities.

CHAPTER NINE
SUMMARY
In developing Kenyas water policy and the review of legislation, study tours were made in
South Africa, Zambia, Uganda and other countries. Subsequently, Kenya adopted to some
extent the Zambian and South African frameworks approach on water supply, water
resources, sewerage and sanitation management with local adjustments. This has helped
create a more sound institutional design.
The Water Act 2002 recognises water as a basic right. Unlike Kenya, South Africa entrenches
this right in the constitution. Every South African has a right to receive free water and
receives the first 6,000 litres of water free every month. However, the water consumed above
this amount must be paid for. Kenya may not be in a position to provide free water due to
huge finances required. In order to make safe water accessible to most Kenyans, a tariff
policy that favors the poor need to be put in place. However, those who use water for
commercial/industrial and other huge income generating purposes should be made to pay for
water at the user pays tariff.
Kenyas water and sanitation sector has undergone major structural reforms aimed at
improving the service. The purpose of this research paper is to inform policy makers,
stakeholders, service providers and implementers of the ongoing reforms in the water sector;
the successes, constraints, challenges and way forward. This is because adequate water in
quantity and quality is a basic requirement for economic growth and performance.
Towards this, the study has briefly outlined the history of the water, sanitation and sewerage
framework in Kenya prior to recent reforms. It then discussed the current framework, the
challenges and made suggestions on the way forward. The discussion was based on selected
principles of a good framework as clear roles and relationships between actors, rules of
operation and adherence to the rules, and accountability to a higher authority. This
framework should then ultimately, act as a means to achieve a policy.
The study finds that the water sector reforms initiated by the Water Act 2002 are beneficial
and on track. However, as mentioned in this study, there are emerging challenges and gaps
that need to be addressed to accelerate the achievement of MDGs. The roles and relationships
between all players in the framework are not well understood. Secondly, rules of operation in
the form of strategies are yet to be put in place but are fortunately, in the advanced draft stage
awaiting public and stakeholder consultations before gazettement and adaptation. Rules in the
form of pollution and abstraction regulation measures do exist but are not being complied
with. Lastly, the new framework does call for accountability from the players at least within
the policies and draft strategies, however, where stakeholder and consumer awareness is low,
accountability will be difficult to enforce.
It is recommended that water, as a key catalyst to economic growth, be given a higher priority
in national development. More specifically, this paper has identified seven areas of strategic
intervention. These are institution building, capacity development, awareness and
information sharing, community and user integration, gender mainstreaming, regulation
and financing . If adopted, these recommendations can facilitate efficient policy realization.
This will then translate into quality and accessible water, sanitation and sewerage service, and
therefore better lives for Kenyans including businesses.

CHAPTER TEN
CONCLUSION
Kenya has made substantial progress in broadening water coverage. Kenya has also
developed a policy in the area of sanitation, and strategies for water resource management,
supply, and sewerage. This study shows that water, sanitation and sewerage sector reforms
are underway, beneficial and encouraging. It should be said that public sector reforms can
benefit from non state support in service provision, infrastructure development and financial
support, and this has been shown in this paper. This study assessment and recommendations
should be used to improve the design and implementation of the water institutional
framework to meet the needs of Kenya in terms of better water, sanitation and sewerage
services now and in future. With continued effort and efficient inclusion of stakeholders,
reforms in this area should yield positive results that we can all be proud of.

REFERENCES
Government of Kenya, Chiefs Act, Pre Independence Act
Government of Kenya, Public Health Act, Cap 245
Government of Kenya, Water Act 2002, October 2002
Government of Kenya, Water Act Cap 372, Commencement date, 7 May, 1952
Government of Kenya, Local Government Act (Cap 265)
Harper Collins, Encyclopaedia, 1996
Ministry of Agriculture, IDRP Study on Irrigation Potential in Kenya, 1987
Ministry of Finance, Government of Kenya, Budget Strategy Paper 2006/7
Ministry of Health, Draft Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene Policy (ESHP), 2005
Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional Development and Water Development, National
Guidelines on hand over of rural water supplies to communities, 1997
Ministry of Planning and National Development, Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth
and Employment Creation (2003-2007)
Ministry of Planning and National Development, National Development Plan 2002-2008,
dated 2001
Ministry of Sports, Gender, Culture and Social Services, Draft National Policy on Gender and
Development Sessional Paper, 2006
Ministry of Water and Irrigation, The National Water Resources Management Strategy
(WRMS), 2004
Ministry of Water and Irrigation, The National Water Services Strategy (NWSS), 2005-2007,
December, 2004.
Ministry of Water and Irrigation: www.water.go.ke
Ministry of Water Resources, National Policy on Water Resources Management and
Development, April 1999
Ministry of Water Resources/JICA. The Aftercare Study on the National Water Master Plan
in the Republic of Kenya, November, 1998
Ministry of Water and Irrigation/Water and Sanitation Donor Coordination Group - Sector
Wide Approach to Planning (SWAp), NETWAS library and Water Sector Reforms
Secretariat, 2005

Mumma A. (2005). Kenyas New Water Law: An Analysis of the Implications for the Rural
Poor. A Paper Presented at the International Workshop on African Water Laws: Plural
Legislative Frameworks For Rural Water Management In Africa, 26-28 January 2005,
Johannesburg, South Africa
U.S. Agency for International Development, Bureau For Democracy, Conflict, and
Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA) Office Of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Horn
of Africa (Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, & Somalia) Complex Emergency Situation Report
#10 (FY 2006), 2 May 2006
Wambua S and Mwarania S. (2005) Study on Operationalization of Water Act 2002 in Rural
Water and Sanitation in Kenya, NETWAS/CAS
Wikipedia, a free-content encyclopedia on the Internet www.wikipedia.org
World Health Organisation (WHO)/UNICEF, Joint Monitoring Program Report, 2000
World Bank, Water and Sanitation Program (WSP -AF), Case study Zambia, Water Tariff,
Kisima Publication, July 2005
World Summit on sustainable Development, Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI),
2002
Water Sanitation Program Africa Region. Field notes on Small Scale Independent Service
Providers ( SSISPs), 2004

Annex I: Conflict and Overlapping Roles of Key Public Institutions under the Old
Water Act Cap 372

Conflict and overlapping roles of key public

institutions caused by old Water Act Cap 372
Conflict, duplication and overlapping leading to poor services
MWRMD

MoLG

SHG/NGOs

Policy
Formulation

MoLF

MoA

Irrigation

Livestock
water

Poor Water Supply & Sanitation Services

Local Authorities
WSRS

This old act cap 372 is repealed by Water Act 2002 (refer to chart 1 on page 14)

Conflicts on checks
and balances

Conflicts on checks
and balances

LAs*

Conflicts on allocation
of resources

Service
Provision

Regulation

Conflicts on checks
and balances

Many Institutions Making Policy Separately & in Un coordinated Manner

*
Source:

NWCPC

Annex 2: Objectives of the National Water Policy On Water Resources Management

and Development
The Policy has four broad objectives:
Water supply and sewerage provision;
Water resources management;
Legislative framework; and
Financing mechanisms.

Sessional Paper Number 1 of 1999 on National Water Policy on Water Resources

Management and Development provides the policy direction to overcome the above
mentioned broad objectives and challenges. The policy directions include:
Preservation, conservation and protection of available water resources
Sustainable, rational and economical allocation and apportionment of water resources
Supplying adequate amounts of quality water meeting acceptable standards for the
various needs

Establishment of an efficient and effective institutional, policy and legal framework to

achieve systematic development and management;

Ensuring safe wastewater disposal for environmental protection and safeguard

ecological processes

Developing a sound and sustainable financial system for effective water resources
management, water supply and water borne sewage collection, treatment and disposal
Source: Water Sector Reforms Secretariat/Draft National Water Services Strategy, 2004

Annex 3:
The table below shows access to safe water and sanitation in selected African countries as
reported in the WHO-UNICEF JMP 2000, and country PRSPs. PRSP data on water and
sanitation are not available in a number of countries and are indicated with a nil (-) in the
row/column.
Access to Water and Sanitation: Status and Reporting in PRSPs
Country
Access to Safe Water Supply and Sanitation (% of Population)
2000
JMP
Data
As Reported in the Country
PRSP
Total Urban
Rural
Total Urban
Rural
Water Supply
52
76
62
55
74
1. Benin
63
58
90
37
66
2. Burkina Faso 42
24
72
36
12
81
24
3. Ethiopia
30
70
50
42
88
57
4. Kenya
66
44
95
57
5. Malawi
35
40
34
37
6. Mauritania
12
44
41
81
7. Mozambique 57
44
60
52
40
60
41
8. Rwanda
83
93
88
65
92
78
9. Senegal
49
68
57
90
68
10. Tanzania
52
60
47
80
52
11. Uganda
37
89
48
88
64
12. Zambia
Sanitation
1. Benin
2. Burkina Faso
3. Ethiopia
4. Kenya
5. Malawi
6. Mauritania
7. Mozambique
8. Rwanda
9. Senegal
10. Tanzania
11. Uganda
12. Zambia

23
29
12
87
76
33
43
8
70
90
79
78

46
39
33
95
96
44
69
12
91
99
93
99

6
27
7
82
70
19
26
8
48
86
77
64

30
29
81
15
-

37
73

10
85
68

Note: Not reported

Source: WHO- UNICEF JMP on Water and Sanitation (www.wssinfo.org) and PRSP
documentation for each country, www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies)

Annex 4: Kenyas Drainage system

The national drainage system is determined by the Great Rift Valley which runs
approximately north-south. From its flanks, water flows westwards to Lake Victoria and
eastwards to the Indian Ocean. Kenya's drainage system is subdivided into five drainage areas
(basins) consisting of 192 subdivisions. The five drainage areas are as follows:
1. Lake Victoria basin (46,229 km2) composed of the whole of the area west of the Rift
Valley that drains into Lake Victoria.
2. The Rift Valley (130,452 Km2) is an area of internal drainage discharging into Lake
Turkana in the north and Lake Natron in the south.
3. The Tana River area (126,026 km2) drains the eastern slopes of the Aberdare ranges,
the southern and eastern slopes of Mt. Kenya and the Nyambene ranges and
discharges into the Indian Ocean. The Tana is Kenyas largest river.
4. The Athi/Sabaki River area (66,837 km2) comprises the southern part of the country
east of the Rift Valley. It drains the southern slopes of the Aberdare ranges and flanks
of the Rift Valley south of the Athi River. Athi is the Kenyas second largest river.
5. The Ewaso Nyiro North River area (210,226 km2) comprises the northern part of
Kenya and drains the northern slopes of the Aberdare ranges and western Mt. Kenya
into the Indian Ocean.

288,540

514,897
151,887
307,126

238,780
480,184
155,666
299,930

Homa Day

Migori
Kuria
Rachuonyo

Bondo
Siaya
Suba
Nyando

876,491

Bungoma
Malakisi
Kimilili
Webuye

Siaya

Migori

NWCPC
DWD
DWD
DWD

NWCPC

DWD

Kisumu
MC
DWD

Kisumu
Homa Bay

NWCPC

Nairobi
CC
DWD

Water
UnderTaker

Kisii

Nyamira

Nairobi

Name of
Scheme

40
45

18

40

180

25

540

Area
Covered
In Km2

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

Bungoma

491,786
460,939
504,359

Kisii
Gucha
Kisumu

Western

498,102

Nyamira

Nyanza

2,143,254

Nairobi

Nairobi

District
Pop.

District

27

90
43

34

9.5

1.5

112

138.5

77

4,000.00

Total Mains
Length in
Km

3,027
500
1,167
1,552

1,389

450

1,498

13,653

3,078

802

142,206

Metered
Consumers

Annex 5: Status of Gazetted Urban Water and Sewerage Services Provision in Kenya (1998)

Province

30
400
1,090
554

319

380

10

620

296

7,358

Unmetered
Consumers

3,057
900
2,257
2,106

1,708

830

1,508

13,653

3,698

1,098

149,564

Total
Registered
Consumers

370,608
498,883

Busia
Kaimosi

DWD
DWD

3
4

9
30

744,010

645,713
457,105

348,304

387,969

Thika
Kirinyaga

Muranga

Maragua

215,920
181,491
135,033

Lugari
Teso
Mt. Elgon

Kiambu

476,928

Butere
Mumias

Kiambu
MC
DWD
DWD
Thika MC
DWD
DWD
NWCPC
NWCPC
DWD

Kiambu

Kerugoya
Kandara
Kangema
Muranga

Kikuyu
Ruiru
Thika
Sagana

DWD

DWD

Limuru

Mumias

NWCPC

DWD

4
5

4
1

8
2
80
5

10

50

1.5

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

Central

603,422

Kakamega

Maseno
Luanda
Kakamega

61

1.1

13
2.5

3.2
0.5
82
16.1

21.5

24

31

Annex 5: Status of Gazetted Urban Water and Sewerage Services Provision in Kenya (1998)

Busia
Vihiga

615
2,672

1,851
740

662

1,181
650

1,580

537

869

5,453

899

1,947
450

165

656

130

36

1,000

277
900

780
2,672

1,851
740

667

1,181
650

1,580

1,193

999

5,489

1,899

2,224
1,350

661,156

Nyeri
Karatina

DWD

37 15.3

278,196

100,861
515,422
303,828
906,644

771,545

121,478

53,479

498,880

604,050

205,451

Embu

Isiolo
Kitui
Mwingi
Machakos

Makueni

Marsabit

Moyale

Meru
Central

Meru North

Nithi (Meru
South)

Mavoko MC
NWCPC

Athi River
Machakos

DWD
DWD

Meru
Chuka

Marsabit

DWD

Community

Uaani-Tawa

Embu
Isiolo
Kitui

12

25

35

10
18
10

10
20
15

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

Eastern

NWCPC
Nyeri MC
Runyenjes
MC
NWCPC
DWD
DWD

Othaya
Nyeri
Runyenjes

14

62

7.3

7.5

22.5

16

73.7
32.2
21.2

12.6
100.2
10.5

655

2,247

643

2,950

1,200

4,695
2,771
1,472

5,009
5,848
4,852

1,356

Annex 5: Status of Gazetted Urban Water and Sewerage Services Provision in Kenya (1998)

479,902

Nyandarua

272

37

844

250

840

4,137

655

2,519

680

2,950

1,200

844

4,695
2,771
1,722

9,146
5,848
5,692

1,356

170,953

Mbeere

392,510

250,372

319,261
406,054

468,493

316,882

382,794
170,591

322,187

1,187,039

365,750
575,662

Garissa

Mandera

Wajir
Kajiado

Kericho

Buret

Bomet
Trans Mara

Laikipia

Nakuru

Narok
Trans Nzoia

NWCPC
DWD
Kericho MC

Loitokitok
Namanga
Kericho

DWD
NWCPC
NWCPC
Narok MC
DWD

Elburgon
Gilgil
Narok
Kitale

Nyahururu
MC
Nanyuki MC

Nakuru

Nanyuki

Nyahururu

NWCPC

NWCPC

Kajiado

Sotik

Community

DWD

DWD

Ngong

Mandera

Garisa

1
2
3

44.1

4.8

10

25
12
66

50

19

35

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

Rift Valley

North
Eastern

63

76

11.8

218.4

60

17.9

8.1
8.5
100

27.7

Annex 5: Status of Gazetted Urban Water and Sewerage Services Provision in Kenya (1998)

100,992

Tharaka

702
525
913
1,920

17,317

2,250

875

1,435
57
4,757

755

300

958

840
660
114
194

2,973

32

473
-

1,776

1,600

1,909

1,542
1,185
1,027
2,114

20,290

2,282

875

1,435
530
4,757

755

2,076

1,600

2,867

622,705
264,978

Eldoret
Kabarnet

Eldoret MC
NWCPC

150
3

477

143,865
578,751
143,547

450,860

308,086
140,629

544,303

281,552

496,133

72,686

665,018

246,671

180,901

Keiyo
Nandi
Samburu

Turkana

West Pokot
Elgeyo
Marakwet
Kilifi

Malindi

Kwale

Lamu

Mombasa

Taita Taveta

Tana River

NWCPC
NWCPC
DWD

Voi
Wundanyi

NWCPC

Taveta

Mombasa

DWD

NWCPC

Msambweni
Lamu

NWCPC

NWCPC

Watamu
Kwale

NWCPC
NWCPC
NWCPC

DWD

9
12

12

30

120
30
5

25

DWD
DWD
NWCPC
DWD

10

NWCPC

Kilifi
Mariakani
Malindi

Kapenguria

Lodwar

Eldama
Ravine
Mogotio
Iten
Kapsabet

16
17.5

30

13

60

45

241
108
100

3,210
1,057

756

20,040

1,315

1,200

655

1,250

2,450
1,009
4,450

93

1,652

580
572
950

496

8,776
700

536

25

37
30

1,645

1,029
170

3,210
1,057

756

20,040

1,315

1,200

655

1,250

2,450
1,009
4,450

629

1,677

580
609
980

2,141

9,805
870

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

64

These are gazetted urban water supplies run by DWD, NWCPC and Municipalities. Note that some districts at that time, may have had no urban water supply
run by either MOWR or NWCPC like Suba. The mains cover pipelines lager than 80mm and some sources may be boreholes.

Coast

138,163

Koibatek

Annex 5: Status of Gazetted Urban Water and Sewerage Services Provision in Kenya (1998)

Uasin Gishu
Baringo

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

Source: JICA 1998 After Care Study.

65

Annex 6: Case Study 1, Water Tariff In Zambia (courtesy of KISIMA)

Water tariff adjustments in Zambia are linked to sustainability of the systems and to the
performance of the providers. In so doing, the Zambia National Water and Sanitation Council
(NWASCO) ensures that social interests are taken into account and that consumers do not
pay for the inefficiencies of the service providers.
In a country where more than half the population is poor, NWASCO has successfully
developed guidelines on mandatory WSS service provision to the peri-urban areas which
account for almost 30 percent of the urban population. The guidelines are complete with
service standards and tariff setting guidelines.
Together with this has been the establishment of the regulator-supported Water Watch
Groups (WWGs) which provide a platform for addressing complaints between consumers
and providers on the one hand, and represent the regulator on the ground, on the other hand.
The WWGs are made up of volunteers who represent different community groups. In
addition to playing watchdog, the WWGs sensitize customers on their responsibilities in the
sector. Within the regulatory body itself, consumer interests are well represented.
NWASCOs 16-member-board is nominated by the Minister for Energy and Water
Development, and comprises a mix of Government, consumer and private sector
representation. The Ministry of Local Government and Housing supervises the local
authorities to ensure WSS provision through commercial utilities.
The representation of a large number of stakeholders in the Board ensures that the risk of
capture is kept at a minimum and a high level of transparency is secured. NWASCOs
autonomy was demonstrated by the Boards approval of a 100 per cent tariff hike just before
Zambias 2002 general election. Though maintaining a Board of such composition ensures
high transparency, it is costly to run and nomination of members is time consuming.
NWASCO is financed by commercial utilities, which pay one per cent of their turnover as
licence fees to the regulator.
Financing the Board through levying the commercial utilities gives NWASCO considerable
financial autonomy, an approach that the regulator adopted from the beginning, since
Government funds were only available during the start-off period. Sector information sharing
is another key achievement precipitated by regulating the sector. Information on service
provision is generated nationwide and yearly reports issued. The information also compares
the providers by using benchmarks and is accessible to all interested groups. Unfortunately,
not all state institutions recognise the legal authority given to NWASCO. Consequently,
when the providers are instructed by NWASCO, the instructions are often perceived as
interfering with the powers of the ministries even when the objective of the action is well
shared. Besides, NWASCO has come under scrutiny several times since the regulators role
of advocating for the poor, promoting low-cost technology and harmonizing low-cost
investment is seen as a conflict of interest to the water sector reforms commercialization
objective.

A Rapid Assessment of Kenyas Water, Sanitation and Sewerage Framework

27

Annex 7: Case Study 2 Lesotho - An Example of a Successful Sanitation Program

Lesothos national sanitation program shows how consistent policies can achieve long-term
results in sanitation. By 1980 Lesotho had a national water supply program. But the
professionals working in the sector identified a sanitation gap initially in urban infrastructure
and subsequently in the rural areas. After a series of technical studies by various
international organizations, in the early 1980s the government started a two-part national
improvement program covering both the rural and urban areas.
From the onset, this program was carried out by government organizations, specifically by
the two Urban and Rural Sanitation Improvement Teams. The teams were designed to create
the minimum necessary number of permanent government posts, complemented by a larger
number of short-term donor-funded posts to start the program and engage and train the
private sector. By the late 1990s the donor funding had tampered out as planned, and the local
private sector organisations continued to sustainably implement sanitation improvement
activities.
Lesotho rural sanitation program adopted a consistent set of principles. It ensured a proper
institutional arrangement at national and district levels, involved communities in planning
and management, and gave priority to the governments education and promotion efforts. It
insisted on full cost recovery from the users the government did not subsidize latrine costs.
It promoted the use of the small-scale private sector to build latrines and trained the builders.
Regarding technology, the program adopted the ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine, which
is suitably adapted to local conditions, construction techniques and preferences.
Each of these principles is well known to professionals in the sanitation sector. The important
point about Lesotho is that these efforts have all been put into practice together, consistently
and for a long time.
The government of Lesotho put most of its own effort to promoting sanitation and the
training of sanitation professionals. The media used for promotion included printed matter,
radio, tape-slide presentation and videos. A quarter of the trained latrine builders in Lesotho
are women.
While there is a success story in the case of Lesotho in promoting sanitation, South Africa is
far ahead in meeting the MDG targets on water supply but far behind in meeting sanitation
targets. In Kenya there is no stand alone sanitation policy. Sanitation is best addressed at the
household and personal levels.

GLOSSARY
Abstract n.

Drain to remove water, waste water and sewage

Aquifer n.

An underground impervious layer of rock and sand that contains water

Catchment n.

Any device or structure that captures water

Intake n.

A structure constructed e.g. a weir or bank, where water flows above

the structure, but at the side there is a sort of intake box where water
enters, and goes to your pipe or channel

Manage v.

To succeed in doing; be in charge of; administer, handle or control;

cope with financial difficulties

Management n.

Administration or organization

Permit n.

Document giving permission to do something

Resource n.

Thing resorted to for support, sources of economic wealth; stock that

can be drawn on

Wastewater n.

Any water that has been adversely affected in quality by anthropogenic

influence. It comprises liquid waste discharged by domestic residences,
commercial properties, industry, and/or agriculture and can encompass
a wide range of potential contaminants and concentrations. In the most
common usage, it refers to the municipal wastewater that contains a
broad spectrum of contaminants resulting from the mixing of
wastewaters from different sources

Sewage n.

The subset of wastewater that is contaminated with faeces or urine;

waste matter or excrement carried away in sewers

Sewer n.

Drain to remove wastewater and sewage

Sewerage n.

System of sewers

Supply v.

Provide with something required; make available

Sanitary adj.

Promoting health by getting rid of dirt and germs

Sanitation n.

Sanitary measures, especially onsite sanitary systems

Taken from the Collins Gem English Dictionary, HarperCollins, 1996 and Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopaedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wik