How much are Kenyans ready to save their future?

Solid waste problem.
Photo by Benard Ochieng.

For many decades, environmental concerns have received great attention all over the world. Many nations are getting cautious with their actions in order to secure livelihood for their future generations. However, this may not be the case in Kenya. We have experienced situations indicating how fully aware we are of what is happening to our resources but with less concern. Lack of commitment has been demonstrated by all stakeholders i.e., the government, citizens and business owners. As a result, most of our resources have been degraded beyond measure. Think of Nairobi river, Dandora dump site, Lake Nakuru, Lake Victoria and all the tropical forests.

As we reflect on our failures to manage environmental resources effectively, we need to appreciate the little efforts that have been put by various individuals and institutions. I accept that Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) 1999 offers a neat framework to alleviate most of the today’s environmental issues dogging the country. In addition to this, we have had individuals with great passion for conserving the resources such as Prof. Wangari Maathai. However, these efforts are in most cases not coordinated and supported. Perhaps this is because of the skewed perception most leaders have about the environment. Just to remind ourselves, I guess we still remember when our present vice president (Hon. Kalonzo Musyoka) was assigned new duties as the environment minister from the foreign affairs ministry. There were talks all over with a common understanding that Hon. Kalonzo Musyoka was “demoted.” This suggested how most Kenyans place very little value on environment matters. This has been reflected in the manner in which we handle our businesses and has also influenced our decisions. Again, remember the fiasco between the current Public Health Minister (Hon. Beth Mugo) and the environment officials from National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA). Whereas the NEMA officials found it fit to close down the slaughter houses in Nairobi on account of not meeting the minimal required standards hence a threat to the environment, the minister defended the slaughter houses operators without necessarily asking them to make some corrections.

Land degradation.
Photo by Benard Ochieng.

Several examples illustrating how our leaders have failed to take charge can be cited including the implementation of EMCA 1999 itself. Just to let you know and perhaps arouse your interest, the Act specifies qualifications for individuals who should run different offices in institutions created by the Act. Perhaps you may want to access the Act and find out if all the officers occupying those offices are meeting the stipulated criteria. In addition to this, the need for conducting Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Environmental Audits (EAs) has almost lost its originally intended purpose. I claim this because some of these studies have failed to improve environmental performance. Reasons for this failure could be diverse and you can be sure that all players ranging from the proponents, auditors and the government officials have contributed in different ways.

Therefore, my appeal is that all stakeholders take an active role in reversing the current trend of systematic environmental degradation. One way of doing this as has been done in some countries is to voluntarily adopt Environmental Management Systems (EMSs). EMS is a set of activities incorporated in the operations of businesses, organisations etc in order to prevent or minimize adverse impacts to the environment. They normally help businesses, organisations and institutions to identify their environmental concerns, set objectives, plan, execute, monitor and review environmental performance. There exist numerous EMSs such that each type of business, institution, organisation, farm, etc can have one appropriate for its operations. Examples of these EMSs are ISO 14001, The Natural Step (TNS), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Cleaner Production, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Rainforest Alliance Certification and Green Globe among others. These voluntary EMSs may not achieve sustainability but will definitely improve environmental performance.

Wetland destruction.
Photo by Benard Ochieng.

For the sake of achieving sustainability in our operations, all stakeholders will have to work together. For example, the responsible government institutions must ensure that the set legislations and standards in various sectors are adhered to without compromise, the citizens must learn to demand for a quality environment as well as promoting it and the businesses owners including institutions' and organisations' managers must commit toward corporate social responsibility.
In attempting to achieve this, all parties must be wary of the cost implications. For example, the citizens may have to pay a little more for the goods and services that are produced from environmentally sound practices, the businesses owners will have to redesign their products and services and also meet the expenses of monitoring environmental performance, and the government must be willing to train and hire qualified staff to help in managing its environment.

Finally, I wish to state that while incorporating environmental concerns may seem to be an increase of the capital resource, many businesses have experienced immediate benefits and are aiming at doing more in environmental conservation. I challenge our local authorities to be the first in adopting these EMSs as they are entrusted with the management of our resources. Finally, may I recognise the efforts of Unilever tea farms for adopting Rainforest Alliance Certification and all other organisations that are already doing the same.