Counties have brought change but hurdles remain on devolution path
Delegates at last month’s Third Annual Devolution Conference in Meru County. PHOTO | FILE
When the new Constitution was signed in 2010, what excited Kenyans most was the anticipation of the establishment of counties.
With definite budgetary allocations from the Exchequer and local empowerment, Kenyans correctly expected the counties to jump-start the “sleeping” potential of the rural Kenya. They still maintain this faith, which is a valuable asset for the future of devolution.
After three years of devolution, there is visible evidence of transformation in the counties, as the socio-economic center-of-gravity gradually shifts from the capital city towards rural Kenya.
However, the pace and quality of devolution has been slowed down by numerous hurdles which I will discuss later.
It is an acknowledged fact that since the counties arrived in 2013, the media in general has abundantly highlighted the goings-on in the counties.
This has kept the public fairly well informed, enabling them to form correct opinions on the state of counties. The media has also provided an effective forum for counties to learn from each other, and possibly motivate competition for improved performance.
My observation so far is that the most significant economic achievements in the counties have been driven by the private enterprises, which indeed is the way it should be.
Even before the counties were officially in place in 2013, many enterprising Kenyans had already made up plans to invest in the counties. The private capital has since continued to flow to the counties to harness numerous investment opportunities.
Private sector service providers have expanded to the counties to support all shades of investments which include tourism, agriculture, property and resort developments, supermarkets, and training institutions, among others.
And more jobs are being created while raising rural per capita incomes. Skills transfer and enterprise development is visibly taking place as more economic activities arrive in the counties.
Best proof of the ongoing economic growth in the counties is land values which continue to escalate as speculative and genuine demands for land grow.
Another new feature are the long queues of vehicles routinely snaking out of the city to the counties, an indication of the pull the counties have on the city folks. Reverse urban migration is gradually taking place from Nairobi to rural towns.
However, it is in the areas of county governance that less beautiful stories have been coming from. Although devolution is essentially a political process, there has been a bit too much disruptive politics and conflicts in many counties.
The conflicts have mostly been between county executives and the representatives (MCAs) and this has adversely impacted service delivery. For meaningful county governance and public trust this should be corrected.
The other crippling challenge has been the obvious “bad blood” between national and county governments apparently triggered by competition for political influence and resources.
This is entirely unnecessary and avoidable. This conflict is harming both the counties and national government, as the two are mutually accountable for the success of devolution and national development targets.
Generally and across the board there is certainly less for the counties to show for the huge amounts of cash already disbursed from the Exchequer, and this varies from county to county.
Differentiation in county development and services delivery performance is clearly defined by the quality of budgetary decisions; project and programme prioritisation; and of course financial management and accountability.
Going forward, excellence in these governance areas shall be the defining success factor in the counties.
Yes over the past three years the counties have implemented a number of “quick wins” which have included office accommodation, hospital upgrades, ambulances, gravelling rural access roads, subsidised fertilisers, grade cows, milk coolers, markets and motor bike sheds, among others.
Going forward, the counties will now need to embark on longer term strategic planning for development programmes and projects to deliver wider impacts.
And the areas that have the widest impact include the empowerment of the farmer and the pastoralist through modernisation and effective marketing systems. It is agriculture and animal husbandry that hold the largest capacity for creating jobs and improving incomes.
Synergies and co-operation among neighbouring counties with similar productive features should always be pursued if this can enhance economies of scale.
As anticipated, a third line of county financing is already opening up. Donors and development partners have shown firm interest to work in partnership with counties to improve lives.
The counties that shall benefit most from the donor funding are those that have put in place strong governance and financial systems.
Also the counties with strategic development plans that rhyme with the donor funding objectives shall be ahead in the donor funding queue.
Partnerships between counties and local/international investors, is another obvious source of development funding. A good and current example is the Baringo abattoir for donkey meat exports.
This is a perfect example of value addition for pastoralists and dollar earner for the country.
Finally we need to develop uniform metrics to measure and compare county development and governance performance.
These should include budgetary performance, produce outputs and values, health service metrics, crime incidence, and infrastructure improvement.
These metrics should form a framework for future annual state of counties presentations and recognitions.
